JP\/7\/IGNAS<\/p>\n
Politics can't be
\njustified without
\nconcern for public good<\/p>\n
Political parties
\nand political issues in Indonesia<\/p>\n
Ignas Kleden
\nThe Center for East
\nIndonesian Affairs (CEIA)
\nJakarta<\/p>\n
It is an age-old truism that politics has something to do with
\npower. Yet this only half the truth. The fact that someone -- the
\npresident for example -- is entitled to such big power over the
\nothers can only be understood and justified if the power given to
\nhim or her is used for the common good of as many citizens as
\npossible.<\/p>\n
This is why the concern for the common good and public
\ninterest is another constitutive element of politics. Without
\npower entitlement and power wielding, politics cannot be
\nexercised. And without serious concern for public interest and
\ncommon good, politics cannot be justified.<\/p>\n
The situation is somewhat parallel to the fact that the state
\nis entitled to have the monopoly of the use of violence. This
\nentitlement is accepted because it is believed that the violence
\nwhich is at the state's disposal will be used to compel law
\nenforcement by means of forcing people who refuse to behave
\naccording to the law to recognize and to follow legal rules and
\nregulations. Also it is assumed that the violence will be used to
\nprotect the state and the citizens from possible violence
\nconducted by other party or other state.<\/p>\n
Yet the entitlement is often hunted for without sufficient
\nawareness of the concomitant obligation. Power is so enchanting
\nand overwhelming, while the concern for public interest and
\ncommon good is usually neglected and ignored. This is also true
\nfor the army and the police who are often more than aware of
\ntheir right to apply violence and to use weapons while being
\neasily forgetful of the obligation to protect people and to
\nprovide them with security.<\/p>\n
This asymmetric perception of politics is all the more true
\nfor Indonesia. Their agenda and operation shows that their main
\nbusiness and their most important preoccupation is nothing but
\nthe involvement in the attainment, the distribution and the
\nmaximization of power. All political parties, big and small, are
\nengaged in preparation for general election, electoral threshold,
\nthe financing of political campaign, possible political
\ncoalition, and the prospective candidates for the presidency and
\nthe House of Representatives.<\/p>\n
No mention is made of how a political party envisages the
\nrealization of the common good and the public interest and how
\nthis will be done. The Indonesian Party of Struggle (PDI
\nPerjuangan), Golkar, and United Development (PPP) say very little
\nor not even a single word about their determination, strategy and
\nmethod to fight the proliferation of corruption and other
\nmalpractices within bureaucracy, what is to be done to solve the
\nproblem of increasing unemployment, and what are their ideas and
\nplans regarding economic recovery.<\/p>\n
It is really surprising that despite the very striking and
\nthreatening environmental depreciation, there is no imagination
\namong the politically interested people to found a political
\nparty comparable to the Green Party in other more developed
\ncountries.<\/p>\n
Surprisingly though there are a great number of people living
\nbelow the poverty line -- reaching 47.9 million according to the
\n2002 report of the Ministry of Health -- and despite so many
\nminorities there is no serious initiative to establish a
\npolitical party which concentrates on social-democratic programs.<\/p>\n
Yet every political party repeatedly talks about the interest
\nand the progress of the people, without the smallest hint of the
\nwillingness and the ability to translate distinctively people's
\ninterest into priorities in various sectors.<\/p>\n
How is people's interest reflected and represented in housing,
\npublic transportation, schooling, industry, trade, business and
\neconomy or political education? Is it in the interest of the
\npeople if private luxury cars dominate the city's main streets
\ninstead of public transportations? How is public interest made
\nvisible in education if fees are so high that education is
\naffordable only within a limited circle?<\/p>\n
Why are golf courses everywhere while there is hardly space
\nfor playgrounds? Are small industries and various handcrafts are
\ngiven priorities and incentives? Why do industrial goods have
\nfree prices whereas agricultural products are bound to have a
\nfixed price?<\/p>\n
For now there are more than 200 political parties in Indonesia
\n-- which does not necessarily imply that there are more than 200
\nor more groupings interested in the common good. The figure only
\nindicates an increasing number of people participating in power
\nbuilding and power wielding. It's rare to hear substantial
\ndebates among political parties about their plans and programs
\nfor poverty alleviation, about priorities in regional autonomy or
\nabout improvement and reform of national education.<\/p>\n
In more developed democratic countries the competition among
\ncontending political parties is carried out through the
\nintroduction and the promotion of their political programs.
\nPeople vote for parties with political programs that are supposed
\nto correspond best to the needs of the voters.<\/p>\n
In Indonesia it is a sociological enigma, on why and on the
\nbasis of what reasons people vote to one party instead of the
\nother, despite the fact the political programs are not the main
\npriority of most of the parties. What becomes the means of
\npolitical persuasion and political appeal?<\/p>\n
The absence of substantial programs of political parties
\nbecome one of the main reasons why the tendency towards internal
\nfractioning within parties is far greater than the ability to
\nestablish an internal consolidation. What is now happening within
\nIndonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan) occurs
\nalso within the National Awakening Party (PKB), PPP and within
\nthe former ruling party, Golkar.<\/p>\n
The lack of concern about public interest as a common cause
\nfor every party members turns out to become an occasion in which
\neverybody who have some influence within party is tempted to make
\nuse of the party as a means for the pursuit of individual
\ninterest or the interest of a particular faction.<\/p>\n
It can certainly be fruitful if the contending arguments and
\nthe contest of competing discourses are pursued within the scope
\nof a party's mission and within the framework of party's
\nprograms. But often each faction within the party endeavours to
\npursue its own interest instead of getting involved in efforts to
\nfind the best possible way to realize the program of the party.<\/p>\n
This is why political parties here do not as yet represent a
\ncase of institution building in political sector. There are no
\ncommon programs and ideals which function as a cohesive binding
\nforce uniting the party members as a solid grouping, and there
\nare no common values for which the party becomes an institutional
\nembodiment. The programs and the ideals make the commitment of
\nparty members and the devotion of their expertise meaningful,
\nwhereas the underlying common values provide them with a sense of
\npurpose and sense of fulfilment.<\/p>\n
The official number of the registered political parties of
\nIndonesia now is 234, of which 30 are supposedly entitled to
\ncontend in the competition for general election. We have to wait
\nand see whether the smaller parties which do not pass the
\nelectoral threshold are willing and ready to sacrifice their own
\ninterest in order to encourage political institution building in
\nIndonesia by means of joining the bigger ones.<\/p>\n
Yet this is very unlikely because the absence of substantial
\nprograms in many bigger parties would make it very difficult for
\nthe smaller ones to estimate their closeness to one party or
\nanother. The tragedy is that people are inclined to believe that
\npursuing one's own interest is more safe and long-lasting than
\ntrying to push for the common good in which one can happily
\npartake without excluding other people unnecessarily.<\/p>\n
At this point a miserable tragedy is turned into a bad comedy.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/jp7ignas-1447899208", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }