Questions loom on norms in political life<\/p>\n
By Mochtar Buchori<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): When observing the behavior of our political
\nleaders during this political and economic crisis, I cannot help
\ncomparing them with their predecessors in 1945 and the ensuing 10
\nyears in our early existence as an independent state.<\/p>\n
What I see leaves me feeling dejected. To me, the most
\nstriking difference between the two generations is the glaring
\nabsence of a sense of personal honor, political decency and
\nrespect for the political sovereignty of the public,
\ncharacteristics which were so strongly demonstrated by our former
\npolitical leaders.<\/p>\n
When I discussed my impression with several friends, most of
\nthem agreed with me. Our discussions usually revolve around two
\nquestions: What has caused this change? And what must be done to
\nmake possible the advent of new generations of political elite,
\nwhich will cherish values as noble or nobler than those upheld by
\nthe 1945 generation?<\/p>\n
I believe this phenomenon of intergenerational decline in
\npolitical leadership has been caused by a host of factors. Two
\nelements played an important role; the decline in the quality of
\nour formal education system, and the transformation of our
\ncollective value systems which proceeded beyond our understanding
\nand control.<\/p>\n
Let us discuss the educational factor first. Our older
\npolitical elite had generally enjoyed formal education of very
\nhigh quality before they entered politics. Their education had
\ngiven them various competencies for intellectual endeavors:
\nlanguages, intellectual curiosity, general knowledge and mastery
\nof learning techniques.<\/p>\n
In addition, they were also trained to respect values related
\nto intellectual pursuits, including common sense, honesty, open-
\nmindedness, tolerance toward different opinions, the ability to
\ndefend one's opinion in a sincere and fair manner, and readiness
\nto abandon opinions proven wrong. With this kind of intellectual
\nand moral preparation, they matured quickly in their political
\ncareers.<\/p>\n
Our present generation of political leaders did not enjoy this
\nkind of formal schooling. Most of them had their formal education
\nin Indonesia during a time when our school system started to
\ndecline qualitatively. A minority of our present political elite
\nhas studied abroad at educational institutions of high
\nintellectual and pedagogical standards.<\/p>\n
The inadequacy of the intellectual and moral basis of most of
\nour present political leaders is reflected in low intellectual
\ncapability, their narrower and lower general knowledge, poor
\nlanguage proficiency and lack of competence in formulating,
\nanalyzing and solving problems in a systematic manner.<\/p>\n
In addition, our impoverished educational system has also
\nfailed to implant and cultivate seeds for moral actions in their
\nminds. In moral education, our system still relies on
\nindoctrination, supervision and blind loyalty.<\/p>\n
There has been no attempt in our system to prepare students in
\nvoluntary commitment to values as the essence of personal moral
\nacts.<\/p>\n
With these educational defects, most members of our present
\npolitical elite entered politics not with the determination to
\nabsolve our society from its present ills, but with the intention
\nto join a bandwagon which would hopefully carry them into the
\npower system. The result is a generation of political leaders
\nindifferent toward the sensitivities of the public.<\/p>\n
The changes in our collective value system plays an even
\ngreater role, in my opinion, in bringing about a generation of
\npolitical leaders lacking in political and moral conscience. Our
\nolder political leaders lived in an environment where there was
\nno contradiction in ethical standards between the home and the
\nschool on the one hand, and the workplace and the society on the
\nother.<\/p>\n
In addition, the spirit of nationalism, patriotism, sacrifice,
\nsocial solidarity and heroism pervaded the entire society. Values
\nand norms had clear meaning. There was no ambiguity or
\nambivalence in moral, ethical or legal standards. Cheating was
\nmorally unacceptable, and no amount of political speeches and
\nindoctrination could make corruption a morally justifiable act.<\/p>\n
Our present political leaders live in a time where distortion
\nand manipulation of concepts and norms are commonplace and
\nconsidered the norm. There is more than one meaning to the word
\n\"Constitution\" and \"constitutional\", for instance. Democracy
\nwithout opposition is an absurdity in any other country, but
\nimposed as a \"normal\" thing in our land. In short, our political
\nleaders live in a time of great intellectual and moral confusion.<\/p>\n
In this kind of social and cultural atmosphere, solid
\nintellectual and moral basis is a conditio sine qua non for any
\npolitical leader to be morally clear and consistent, trustworthy
\nand capable of acting as a guiding light for the public. Without
\nsuch a base, nobody can be a true leader in the eyes of the
\npeople. And without such an intellectual and moral force,
\npolitical leaders can easily become chameleons of principle and
\nmere talking puppets.<\/p>\n
This change in the social and cultural climate is a clear
\nindication that our collective value system has been changing.
\nThis process has been going on for a long time, and has
\naccelerated since our independence. The question is whether it
\nhas to proceed in a negative way, and end up in a value system
\nwhich is confusing and laden with inconsistencies and
\ncontradictions.<\/p>\n
Of course not. Our value system has become involuted and
\nconfusing because we have treated it as a cultural inheritance
\nwhich must be preserved, and not as a living cultural device
\nwhich must be constantly revised and renewed. With this attitude,
\nwe have been primarily interested in knowing our value system
\ntextually, and not in the actual implementation of those values
\nwithin the reality of our society.<\/p>\n
We also perceive values originating from other cultures as a
\ncultural threat, and not as an opportunity to reexamine our own
\nvalues.<\/p>\n
In short, we have failed to recognize the difference that has
\nemerged gradually in our society between the textual value
\nsystem, which is static, and the actual value system, which is
\ndynamic. In this way, we have not been able to influence the
\nprocess of transformation within our value system. We have
\nallowed our value system to be carried away by opportunism and
\nsuperficial modernism.<\/p>\n
What, then, must we do to facilitate the reemergence of a
\npolitical elite which will be the true conscience of the nation?
\nThe answer is clear and simple: Improve our system of formal
\neducation, and end our indifference toward transgressions of our
\nvalue system.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/questions-loom-on-norms-in-political-life-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}