Do Not Allow Social and Political Polarisation to Continue Escalating

Social polarisation must be viewed and understood as a seed that always threatens unity, because from that polarisation there is always the potential for tension and friction between groups in society. Allowing such social division is tantamount to continuously escalating the seeds of social-political problems.

This neglect, sooner or later, will bring significant disruptions to various aspects of communal life, including development.

In addition to the potential for tension and friction between groups in society, today’s social division is increasingly concerning because it has entered the moral zone. Polarisation in the moral zone is marked by the desire of certain groups to openly allow and cover up crimes and ethical violations.

These groups are pitted against other groups that consistently demand impartial law enforcement. They demand that the blade of law enforcement be sharp in all directions; not just sharp downwards but blunt upwards.

Together with other independent groups, they also continue to voice aspirations about the urgency of maintaining the purity of law enforcement. Regarding the moral purity of law enforcement, public disappointment can no longer be concealed, because there are convicts who are deliberately not executed and even allowed to roam free.

Conversely, in other cases, crime victims are declared guilty and made suspects. Yet the victims resisted as an act of self-defence. Examples include robbery cases in Lombok, Lampung, and Serang, as well as several other cases.

This tendency has become a reality in the public sphere, as it so often becomes the subject of debates witnessed by many communities. Because it has become a spectacle, a phenomenon emerges that presents a picture of evil and tyrannical groups facing off against other groups struggling to nurture morals for the common good.

Allowing this phenomenon to persist will demolish the perception of Indonesia as a rule-of-law state, which in turn will damage the image of the nation-state in the eyes of the international community.

Many communities generally understand that social polarisation over the past one or two decades has been caused by residues from general elections (Pemilu), resulting from divided support that then produces disharmony in communal life dynamics. This disharmony is then escalated by spreading hate speech and disinformation (hoaxes) through social media platforms.

The phenomenon of inter-group hatred and the spirit of displaying hostile attitudes is unavoidable. This is what has surfaced in recent days, when all communities must see and feel how the degree of social-political polarisation has reached a very concerning stage. In addition to its increasingly high intensity, this polarisation even feels to be gnawing at the harmony of national and state life.

Moreover, the fruits of this polarisation have already lowered public trust in several government institutions due to the increasing prevalence of corruption, collusion, and nepotism (KKN).

The tendency of this polarisation is then exploited by interest groups to build negative sentiments towards state institutions. From there, demands for the dissolution of state institutions emerge, including the dissolution of the DPR.

There is nothing wrong with the DPR as an institution. If there are rats in the barn, it is the rats that are driven out, not the barn that is burned. It must be understood that the DPR is a fundamental part of the state’s institutional hierarchy, one of whose functions is legislation or designing and making laws. Indonesia’s post-1945 constitutional amendment state system is a democratic presidential one.

The presidential system adopts and implements checks and balances between state institutions because state power applies legislative, executive, and judicial functions. Dissolving the DPR would mean changing the order and leaving the Unitary Republic of Indonesia (NKRI) without a parliament. Dissolving the DPR not only means eliminating the legislative institution but also negating the checks and balances function between state institutions.

Moreover, there are other consequences from eliminating the DPR in Indonesia’s state system, namely the obligation to amend the constitution to renew the system and order. Constitutional amendment itself is a major task that is relatively not easy, because it requires agreement from all elements of the nation.

Therefore, in the context of societal division that has lasted so long, it is necessary to foster collective awareness and concern that the current escalation of polarisation deserves to be understood as a seed that always threatens unity. Because from that polarisation there is always the potential for tension and friction between groups in society.

It would be a communal mistake if this fact is allowed to continue. And from that collective awareness and concern, there should also grow a collective will to end societal polarisation, especially polarisation in the social-political context.

In this context, impetus is needed for all components of the political superstructure and infrastructure to take initiatives together. The political superstructure consists of elites because they are in state institutions such as the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. In addition to having authority, their voices are also heard by the public.

Meanwhile, the political infrastructure typically serves as a home for various elements or community groups, such as political parties, non-governmental organisations, or other interest groups that can influence policy or societal behaviour.

If all components in the political superstructure and infrastructure move and work together to reduce societal polarisation, the results will certainly be significant. This work must be understood as a joint effort to re-tighten the spirit of unity.

Historical notes on the 1928 Youth Pledge agreement and the June 1945 Jakarta Charter document should provide inspiration to all.