JP\/6\/MAX<\/p>\n
Age discrimination: Setback
\nin Indonesian politics<\/p>\n
Against \"pemuda\": Generational discrimination in contemporary
\npolitics<\/p>\n
Max Lane
\nVisiting Fellow
\nCenter for Asia Pacific
\nSocial Transformation Studies
\nUniversity of Wollongong
\nNew South Wales
\nAustralia<\/p>\n
First president Sukarno was 27 when he became chairperson of
\nthe Indonesian National Party (PNI) in the 1930s. Mohammad Hatta
\nwas of a similar age when he took over the leadership of the PNI
\na little later. Sukarno and Hatta were the central figures of the
\nindependence movement when they were in their 20s. The mass of
\nIndonesians were ready for them to lead an independent Indonesia
\neven when they were that age.<\/p>\n
Of course, they were older, in their early 40s, when they did
\nassume leadership of an independent Indonesia in 1945. But they
\nwere acceptable as leaders long before that. It was repression by
\nthe Dutch colonial powers exiling Sukarno, Hatta and other
\nfigures that delayed their assumption of the nation's leadership.<\/p>\n
Both before the Aug. 17 1945 proclamation of independence,
\nduring the guerrilla and diplomatic struggle of 1945-1949, and
\nduring the next 16 years of nation building, young people
\nprovided the energy and the spirit (semangat) that ensured
\nadvances in the struggles of the people.<\/p>\n
The word semangat took on a special weight in the new
\npolitical culture. There was a strong consciousness that society
\ncould advance only by struggle, by the mobilization of the
\nenergies of the mass of ordinary people in achieving the goals of
\nindependence and then nation-building.<\/p>\n
The role of youth and spirit was further symbolized when the
\nthen older Sukarno and Hatta were kidnapped by younger members of
\nthe independence movement a few days before the official
\nproclamation of Aug. 17, when Sukarno and Hatta hesitated to
\nproclaim independence.<\/p>\n
Even during the feudal period, it was extremely young figures
\nthat brought major change. Ken Arok was 20 when he overthrew
\nslavery under Tunggul Ametung in Java and confronted the empire
\nof Kediri.<\/p>\n
Thirty years of New Order politics appears, however, to have
\nobliterated any recognition of the energy, vitality and most
\nimportantly, ideas and analysis, that youth can provide in
\npolitical leadership. In fact, the political culture created
\nduring the New Order and still prevailing today seems to turn
\ncompletely against all the best traditions of Indonesian history.<\/p>\n
Today, to stand for the position of President of Indonesia, an
\nindividual must virtually be over 40 years of age. Apart from
\nbeing a clear violation of the democratic rights of any citizen
\nunder the age of 40, this provision eliminates from candidacy
\nsome of the most dynamic figures in Indonesian society and
\npolitics.<\/p>\n
It also rejects any leadership from a sector of the population
\nthat comprises more than 70 percent of the population.
\nFurthermore, it has been this sector of society, especially
\nrepresented by students, that have been motor for change during
\nthe last four decades. Every wave of reform since 1972 has been
\ndriven by the student movement. A prominent figure, such as the
\nlabor leader Dita Sari, who has won international recognition as
\na trade union and women's leader, could not stand as a candidate
\nfor president.<\/p>\n
Even for the position of Governor there is age discrimination.
\nTo be a governor, a candidate must be 30 years of age. One
\nimportant political outcome of the student opposition to the
\nSoeharto regime during the 1990s was the formation of the Peoples
\nDemocratic Party (PRD), a small party, but one that has also won
\nrespect for its consistency on democratic issues. The PRD
\nconsidered putting forward a candidate for the position of
\nJakarta Governor up against former military commander of Jakarta
\nduring the Soeharto period, Sutiyoso. They selected woman student
\nleader, Zelly Ariane, who had led some of the mass actions in
\nSumedang and Bandung against Golkar during the presidency of
\nAbdurrahman Wahid. She was later elected to head the PRD in the
\nJakarta area. But she could not proceed with her registration as
\na candidate; she is only 22.<\/p>\n
The discrimination against age goes beyond the laws on
\ncandidacy for President and Governor. During the New Order the
\nwhole phenomenon of the rebelliousness and energy of youth, of
\nsemangat, was suppressed. Within the repressive, corruption
\ndriven, highly bureaucratized and feudalistic New Order political
\nculture, active young people were patronizingly referred to as
\nchildren. One often hears phrases like: Anak-anak LBH (Legal Aid
\nOffice), anak-anak mahasiswa and so on.<\/p>\n
During the struggle for independence and for nation-building ,
\nactive young people struggling for change were never referred to
\nas anak-anak. Then they were pemuda, which literally means youth,
\nbut inferring that they are at the forefront of struggle and
\nchange. The word pemuda resonated actual political power. The
\nnational revolution is often referred to as the revolusi pemuda.<\/p>\n
Now pemuda are \"children\". Sometimes when these new pemuda,
\nthe student leaders and organizers of the 1990s, gain popularity,
\nthe now over 40 political elite that monopolizes politics, may
\nrefer to them with a phrase like \"good, idealistic children\". But
\nthe inference is always that they are not really mature. In fact,
\nthere is often the implication that maturity means surrendering
\nspirit and idealism.<\/p>\n
Even within pro-democracy circles, among non governmental
\norganizations and so on, this prejudice can exist. Activists
\ndenigrate the PRD, for example, because it is a \"student party\"
\nwith nobody \"of any age\" in its leadership. And generally there
\nis a deference to the more aged political elite even while at the
\nsame time attacking this same elite as being politically and
\nintellectually bankrupt.<\/p>\n
At this time in Indonesian history, if any discrimination is
\nnecessary, it should be against those who are over 40. The
\ncampaign today for democratic and social reform, for reformasi or
\nreformasi total, is almost entirely an effort by people under 40,
\nwith just a few special exceptions. Reformasi is a project of
\nthose sections of society free of the New Order political
\nculture; and this means, more or less, people under 40.<\/p>\n
How can reformasi possibly take place if those who are its
\nenergy are excluded from the top leadership positions of the
\ngovernment and are not the dominant force in the legislature? How
\ncan there possibly be reformasi until at least 70 percent of
\nlegislators are under 40?<\/p>\n
Society should be on the look-out for \"student parties\" or
\nyouth parties, rather than looking down upon them.<\/p>\n
In the end, the formal discrimination against youth is a
\nmeasure to protect the political dominance of the New Order
\ngeneration. Of course, there are people over 40 who fought
\nagainst Soeharto. And there are people under 40 who still have a
\nNew Order mentality. But the reality is that reformasi is an idea
\nfrom the youth, was fought for by the youth, and it was youth
\nthat paid the supreme sacrifice such as at the Trisakti shooting
\nin May 1998.<\/p>\n
The spirit of the youth (semangat pemuda) won the end of the
\nNew Order more than anything else. But it appears that the
\ncurrent political elite, all coming from the New Order political
\nculture, want to make sure that youth spirit plays no part in
\nleading the nation or governing the country.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/jp6max-1447899208",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}