This country needs a visionary leader, not simply a ruler<\/p>\n
Benny Susetyo, Cultural Observer, Malang, East Java<\/p>\n
The 2004 general election is close at hand. With all its ups
\nand downs of late, preparations have been made by the General
\nElections Commission (KPU) for a national event that will be a
\ndecisive moment in this democratic process.<\/p>\n
The level of democratization implicit in the general election,
\nhowever, is itself very much determined by whether or not the
\nelection system is done fairly and orderly.<\/p>\n
Apart from determining a number of items in the national
\nagenda for the future, the general election is deemed important
\nas it will determine who will become the leaders of this country
\nfor the next five years, with the task of pulling Indonesia out
\nof the present crisis. Experience has shown that general
\nelections here have produced only rulers with little or no
\nrespect for the problems that the people are facing. These
\nrulers, instead, have produced a variety of problems for the
\npeople at large. Previous general elections were not able to
\nproduce a leader with the qualities that the nation needs.<\/p>\n
In what respects does a ruler differ from a leader?<\/p>\n
A ruler is a figure who regards power alone as his one and
\nonly goal. He is largely unconcerned with the problems that his
\npeople may be facing, and that is why a ruler will usually side
\nwith a group of people who are economically established in order
\nthat he may retain power.<\/p>\n
A leader, on the other hand, is a wise figure who will
\nendeavor always to side with the majority of the nation, in this
\ncase, the poor. He will always assume a reasonable attitude
\ntoward national problems. He will always be very careful about
\nmaking policies that will have serious social ramifications.<\/p>\n
A ruler only intends to rule, a leader wishes to lead the
\npeople toward a common goal. The Javanese believe that a leader
\nmust adhere to the principles of ing ngarso sung tuladha, ing
\nmadya mangun karso (always set good examples and motivate people
\nby creating positive initiatives) and tut wuri handayani (keeping
\ntrack of the people's progress, giving guidance or direction if
\nnecessary). This is the difference in character between these two
\ntypes of authority figures that is supposed to come out of a
\ndemocratic election.<\/p>\n
Unfortunately, the mentality of most of the political parties
\nparticipating in this election seems restricted only to an
\ninterest in power. They are involved in a rat race to become
\nrulers. Most will make no sincere effort to adopt the good
\ncharacter traits of a leader, which the public desperately yearns
\nfor. Therefore, in the upcoming election, the public needs proof
\nof whether the election will produce an authoritarian ruler or a
\nwise leader!<\/p>\n
A free and fair election is a defining moment for a modern
\ndemocracy. Indonesia, once in the grip of an authoritarian
\nregime, is, in theory, now undergoing a transition to democracy.
\nThe 1999 general election was considered the best of many
\nundemocratic elections in Indonesia's history.<\/p>\n
Unfortunately, the success of the 1999 election did not
\nproduce a truly democratic leadership. That is why it is only
\nproper for us to wonder whether the 2004 election will be able to
\ntake Indonesia further down the path toward genuine democracy.<\/p>\n
On the other hand, we must be aware that we could well remain
\nmired this transition to democracy for some time. The problem is
\nwhether the quality of our democracy today and in the future will
\nbe better than that of the past. Awareness must be raised among
\nthe populace that they are also responsible for what happens
\nduring this transition toward democracy.<\/p>\n
In Indonesia, debate on the transition to democracy has gone
\non since the early 1990s and really began to command attention
\nfor the past three decades. Within that timespan, countries in
\nLatin America, other parts of Asia and Eastern Europe have busied
\nthemselves with political undertakings known as the transition to
\ndemocracy.<\/p>\n
Within this framework of understanding referred to above, the
\npolitical reality in Indonesia today, just before the election,
\namounts to a political undertaking aimed at thoroughly solving
\nthe problems entailed in the transition to democracy. In reality,
\nhowever, the reform movement, and the current "reform era", is
\nstill mostly about empty rhetoric. That is understandable, and
\nmaybe even quite natural, given that in a community in
\ntransition, irregularities are inevitable.<\/p>\n
Sociopolitical development here is really in a messy state, so
\nthe end product is a series of possibilities and uncertainties.
\nThis period is consistent with the theory of abnormality.
\nAccording to this theory, everything is unexpected and possible.
\nThat is why such a situation appears to be chaotic. At certain
\npoints, everybody will think that things used to be better during
\nthe period of "normality" and, as a result, will regret what has
\nnow happened. In fact, the expressions "used to" and "period of
\nnormality" actually refer to a situation in which everything was
\nrotten. It was this rottenness that hastened the demise of this
\n"period of normality."<\/p>\n
Therefore, the main focus for voters in the 2004 election must
\nbe to repair and reconstruct this messy sociopolitical situation
\nby electing wise statesmen and women with real vision for the
\nnation. So, if the participants (voters and candidates),
\nknowingly or otherwise, instead contribute to an absence of calm,
\nthe 2004 general election will be useless as it will simply
\nbecome a meaningless festival that just sort of looks like
\ndemocracy.<\/p>\n
What we hope to gain from the 2004 general election is a
\nleader who can provide protection for the people. This leader
\nmust be able to secure economic empowerment. That should be a key
\npost-election indicator to determine whether the election has
\nbeen successful or not. The 2004 election will have failed if it
\nsimply produces a despotic ruler concerned only with
\nhimself\/herself and his\/her primary supporters. It will also have
\nfailed if it does not produce a leader who can solve national
\nproblems and pull this country out of the protracted
\nsocioeconomic crisis.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/this-country-needs-a-visionary-leader-not-simply-a-ruler-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}