Violence highlights the campaign<\/p>\n
By Arief Budiman<\/p>\n
SALATIGA (JP): The election campaign has been going on for
\nmore than two weeks now. What we see in this campaign is very
\ninteresting. Both government (Golkar) and nongovernment parties
\n(especially PPP) have been hostile toward each other. They
\ndestroy each other's banners. They also show very little respect
\nfor people in the streets. They stop cars and force people to
\ngive the respective party's salute or else they will smash the
\ncar's window and sometimes hurt the people inside. For party
\ncampaigners, everybody has to join them. If you refuse, they will
\nconsider you dissimilar and indifferent, and therefore you are
\nenemies.<\/p>\n
We can identify two characteristics of the present election
\ncampaign: (1) no tolerance for "the other" and (2) violence has
\nbecome the language of present politics. Very little attention is
\npaid to a party's program, namely what the party will do if they
\nwin the election. When leaders of a party talk about this, people
\neasily get bored and leave the rally area. They would prefer some
\nof dangdut's sensual singers or some comedians to entertain them.<\/p>\n
Why is this so?<\/p>\n
First, I think, people do not have any expectations that this
\nelection will change their lives. Everything has been setup
\nneatly by the government: Golkar will win around 70 percent of
\nthe votes and the other two parties will have to divide the rest.
\nAlso the government has made sure that nongovernment parties are
\nnot led by critical leaders, such as Megawati. The present
\ngeneral election is called the "festival of democracy". It is
\nquite clear that the government wants more festival than
\ndemocracy. If there is too much democracy, the government will
\nintervene.<\/p>\n
Secondly, we don't have a strong culture of tolerance. We
\ncan't tolerate differences, especially in political ideas,
\ndespite our national slogan of "unity in diversity". Leaders of
\nthe unrecognized People's Democratic Party (PRD) and the
\nIndonesian Union Democratic Party (PUDI), led by Sri Bintang
\nPamungkas, who tried to introduce different political ideas are
\nall in jail now, accused of contesting the state and committing
\nsubversive activities.<\/p>\n
Let me contrast this situation with one that exists in the
\nWest. A friend of mine who had visited the United States told me
\nthat the most impressive thing he saw there was the tolerance of
\nthe people with different ideas.<\/p>\n
"I was watching TV, and there the president of the United
\nStates announced a political decision on some very important
\nissues. Right after this, a commentator started to criticize his
\ndecision, giving a different perspective. Another hour later, a
\ncomedian started to make fun of the president's decision," he
\nsaid.<\/p>\n
He added that he felt enriched by all these different
\nopinions. Having these different perspectives of the issue, he
\nthen felt compelled to participate in the debate and developed
\nhis own critical opinion.<\/p>\n
People in the U.S., he said, were used to having different
\nopinions on any issue. As a matter of fact, when an issue came
\nup, people automatically sought different opinions. They did not
\nwant to say anything about the issue until he or she had already
\nheard a few other opinions. Different opinions are not only
\ntolerated, but are always sought after. It has become a basic
\nneed of people, just like food.<\/p>\n
Unfortunately, we don't have this kind of culture in
\nIndonesia. As a matter of fact, a culture of tolerating
\ndifferences has been discouraged by the government. What is
\nneeded in Indonesia now, according to the government, is strong
\nunity. Indonesia is a pluralistic society in terms of culture,
\nethnicity, race, religion and economic class.<\/p>\n
These different social groups have to be strongly bound by a
\ncommon ideology and perception of how we are going develop this
\nnation. Usually it is the government, through the People's
\nConsultative Assembly (whose members are mostly appointed by the
\nPresident), that defines this common ideology and perception.<\/p>\n
Interpretations outside this are not only discouraged, but are
\nconsidered as contesting state power, and therefore subversive,
\nas in the case of PRD and PUDI. Thus, Indonesia's political
\nsystem has become monolithic, with very little tolerance to
\ndifferences, especially in political ideas.<\/p>\n
Why is this so? It seems that the military's dominance in the
\npolitical system is an important factor. We all know that the
\norganizational structure of the military is monolithic in nature.
\nThis has something to do with the function of the military,
\nnamely with an emergency situation such as war, in which the
\nuniformity of command is a must so that quick decisions can be
\nmade and obeyed. Being monolithic is the nature of all military
\norganizations in the world.<\/p>\n
Under the concept of "dual function", the military in
\nIndonesia is also involved in nonmilitary affairs, including
\npolitics. In carrying out this function, the military cannot
\navoid using the organizational structure they rely on most, by
\nrunning state affairs through command and obedience, with strong
\ndiscipline in hierarchy and uniformity.<\/p>\n
Not only do they use this monolithic approach, but they also
\nthink that this method is superior to methods used by civilians:
\nproblem-solving through negotiation, treating others as equal and
\ninviting diverse opinions before arriving at a decision. Civilian
\nmethods are considered too slow, in that they create unnecessary
\ncomplexity.<\/p>\n
Unfortunately, this military culture of intolerance has
\ninfluenced civilians. Some civilian leaders are even more rigid
\nin implementing this monolithic culture. The considerations made
\nby the civilian judges in sentencing PRD leaders were strongly
\nbased on these uniform and monolithic ideologies.<\/p>\n
When we talk about militarism dominating Indonesia's political
\nsystem, it is this military culture that has dominated the
\nmilitary and civilians alike. It is this same military culture
\nthat dominates present election campaigners, both government and
\nthe nongovernment parties.<\/p>\n
The culture of tolerance is not only absent in Indonesia
\ntoday, but it is also discouraged by the government. What
\nprevails is the pressure of uniformity, in order to cement the
\nunity of this country.<\/p>\n
Thirdly, the use of violence is the language of politics.
\nAgain, one has to look at the government that cultivates our
\nculture. In the case of Megawati and her PDI, for instance, she
\nhas tried very hard to appeal to the government using principles
\nof ethics and morality, but to no avail.<\/p>\n
She also tried to go through the existing legal system to seek
\njustice, but this has also been limited by the government. The
\ngovernment keeps using its power to deal with problems, and
\nsometimes in a violent way, as was the case on July 27 last year.<\/p>\n
So what is happening now in the election campaign? Violent
\nriots in cities in Java and Kalimantan before the campaign were
\nonly the offspring of the July 27 drama. People have learned that
\nif you want to play politics, you have to use power and violence,
\nnot intellectual arguments.<\/p>\n
This is surely not good news for the future of Indonesia's
\ndemocracy. The basic foundation of democracy, namely the culture
\nof tolerance, is not only absent, but is being hindered by the
\ngovernment itself. The July 27 drama, the sentencing of Mochtar
\nPakpahan, Sri Bintang Pamungkas and PRD leaders, the treatment to
\nMegawati and her PDI, are all good examples for people that, if
\nyou have power and can use violence, you can do anything. Thus,
\nthe election campaign has become a competition of showing one's
\nmuscle, not brain.<\/p>\n
If this culture of intolerance and use of brute power and
\nviolence for political means are sustained, we can easily predict
\nwhich political group will control Indonesia. It is not very
\ndifficult to see that the military has the biggest muscle of all.<\/p>\n
The writer is a sociologist and researcher based in Salatiga.<\/p>\n
Window: The culture of tolerance is not only absent in Indonesia
\ntoday, but it is also discouraged by the government. What
\nprevails is the pressure of uniformity, in order to cement the
\nunity of this country.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/violence-highlights-the-campaign-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}