Idealist leader Budiman values consistency

Idealist leader Budiman values consistency

By Yudha Kartohadiprodjo

JAKARTA (JP): At a quick glance, Budiman Soedjatmiko, 29 years
old, could be mistaken for a compliant yuppie waiting for the
next business deal or a young university lecturer waiting to
teach.

Bespectacled and usually dressed in a light colored, short-
sleeved shirt, he displays a calm composure while warmly greeting
friends.

But compliant he is not.

Budiman, chairman of Democratic People's Party (PRD), refused
to make a deal with the government. Mostly he talks on behalf of
laborers and farmers.

Quick with answers, Budiman's tone is dominated by his
idealistic spirit.

Budiman quit Gadjah Mada University's School of Economics
after his third semester and decided to dedicate his life to
politics at time when the New Order was at its peak.

Back in 1994, he and PRD demanded the introduction of a
multiparty system, the elimination of the military's dual
function and amendments to the Constitution. The same demands
were later echoed by many other reformists.

The ideology he believes in, social democracy, caused him and
his friends to be branded communists at a time when an Army
general claimed to be able to sniff a communist "from a rhyme
sang across the wall".

The price they had to pay then, and are still paying, was
being blamed for instigating riots on July 27, 1996 near the
Indonesian Democratic Party's (PDI) headquarters in Menteng,
Central Jakarta.

He was arrested three weeks later. His friends were either
kidnapped or went underground.

Currently Budiman being is detained with other six party
leaders, serving sentences ranging from four to 13 years --
Budiman is serving the longest term. All of them have rejected an
offer of clemency by President BJ Habibie, saying that all
political prisoners in Indonesia must be released.

Now, from the bare visiting hall behind the walls of Cipinang
Prison, Budiman controls his party. Sitting on shabby brown
benches, Budiman holds political forums with visiting party
members during prison visiting hours.

Among visitors on the day this interview was Dita Indah Sari,
a party cadre who was recently released from Tangerang Women's
Prison.

Despite his militancy, softer sides of him were evident as he
spoke about literature and music. His readings range from Bung
Karno's Di Bawah Bendera Revolusi (Underneath the Flag of
Revolution) to poems by Pablo Neruda.

If given the chance to change the education system, Budiman
says he would introduce literature at elementary level so that
"through such exposure, I wish to raise our humanistic senses".

The following is an excerpt of his interview with The Jakarta
Post:

Question: Being detained in prison, are you aware of the
problems outside?

Answer: Well, I receive weekly reports from other party
leaders and other activist friends, who visit me regularly. We
hold discussions and forums here (indicating the prison's
visiting hall). Being inside enables me to see issues in a bigger
picture. In contrast, while I was outside I had to make decisions
on the spot.

Q: You rejected the offer of clemency from Habibie, stating that
release is not everything without exoneration. What is the reason
behind this?

A: In seeking justice, I am also demanding freedom for all
political prisoners. For me this is also a humanistic struggle. A
struggle to uphold human dignity, with freedom as a main
component.

I am not saying that being free is bad. Everybody needs
freedom, yet freedom without justice is nothing

Q: Do you surmise that politically your views are more likely to
be heard while you are still imprisoned?

A: For me, the release of other political prisoner is also
important.

If we do not voice our demands now, and from outside, the
demands will barely be heard.

We place ourselves as people who are interested in being
released as well as people who fight for others' release.

Q: You have a party called Democratic People's Party. Yet it only
gained 70,000 votes, less than some newly established parties.
Where are your people?

A: Parties like Masyumi or PNI (Indonesian National Party) are
based on existing political thoughts, while others relied on our
culture that relies on polarized thinking. So, they already have
a captive market.

As a party, we are based on a new social paradigm. We have
been consolidating our members since our declaration in 1994. In
1996 many of our bases were destroyed and many of our leaders
were arrested.

In short, when we were still building our foundation, the
party was repressed by the New Order regime. Being able to
survive repression, however, shows that we have a longer track
record than others and have been tested by history.

Q: And it seems the repression you've experienced has not
stopped. How do you view the incident in front of the General
Elections Committee's headquarters last week?

A: I suspect it was a panic reaction from the status quo that is
still in power. We have demonstrated without any incidents
lately, yet something suddenly happened when we strongly demanded
that Golkar be disqualified.

Q: You were among the first people to demand a multiparty system.
Yet, the chaos outside the General Elections Committee's office
somehow reflected how a misinterpretation of democracy led to
protracted vote-counting...

A: Well the question is: what do these people want from being on
the committee or by holding the election. Is it merely to get
electoral seats or financial reward?

I think the PRD is beyond all this. We declared ourselves long
before such a committee was possible and we have stayed
consistent in our struggle.

What we stress the need for is honesty and for the process of
democracy, not merely to get a quick result. A dictatorial system
might be efficient, yet it is undemocratic.

Q: So what is next for your party?

A: First, we do not endorse those parties asking for "free" seats
in the legislature.

Although we want the allegations of electoral fraud to be
followed up, we feel that asking for a seat without gaining
enough votes is undemocratic.

We will maintain our struggle as an extra-legislative force
and carry on with our agenda.

Meanwhile, we will continue to develop our organization
through political and rights education and push for our
participation in the next election in five years.

Q: One of your criteria for a good leader is consistency. Do you
see Megawati as having this trait?

A: Actually, Megawati is quite consistent. She carries on her
struggle, although at times she seems to be quite unresponsive.

A good party leader does not have to know every minute problem
in society, yet he or she has to be aware that those problems
exist.

Q: Before the incident in 1996, why were you trying to
disseminate your views through the press, even though you knew
the press at the time was not as open as it is now?

A: The irony is that we learned that the government was coming
down hard on us through the media.

For three days prior to the incident Angkatan Bersenjata daily
condemned our activities in its headlines, and at certain places
the newspaper was distributed free.

We were trying to anticipate a worst-case scenario, by
broadcasting our real intention. Unfortunately, we were not fast
enough.

Q: What kind of society are you looking for and how can we attain
it?

A: The change that we want focuses not on the formal sense, but
in terms of society.

What we want is a total transformation of how society conducts
itself. A change in culture, not in institutions. To achieve this
we ask for amendments to the Constitution, to the law and suggest
increasing the level of education of the people.

In short, the transformation should be a cultural movement.

Q: What was an early experience that influenced you the most?

A: I lived with my grandparents during my adolescence in the
small town of Cilacap, Central Java. All the kids I played with
came from the lower class, from the son of a barber to the son of
a farmer.

From the interaction, I felt the social injustice and what
life in the lower class is like, which touched my senses.

On the other hand, my grandfather had a big influence on me.
As an independence fighter and local politician he told me heroic
tales and stories about politics.

He had a room full of political books and at times I sneaked
into this room and read some of them.

I was more fortunate than my peers were, to have a grandfather
who gave me political education. From him, I learned how to
dedicate my life to other people's needs, for my surroundings.

Q: Nevertheless, why through politics?

A: Because I learned from history, that politics is one of the
most effective agents to make a change in a society. Most of our
founding fathers were politicians.

A non-governmental organization can be a place for struggle,
but in the end, a struggle is more effective and optimal only
through politics.

Q: Then why did you choose Yogyakarta, not Jakarta to jump-start
your political career?

A: There is a pun among young activists that Yogyakarta is the
place for ideas while Bandung and Jakarta are for politicking.

By the time I had to enroll in university, a solid network for
a student movement in Yogyakarta already existed.

I also applied to the University of Indonesia, yet upon
visiting the campus I felt that it was somehow quite tame then.
It would be a nearly impossible task for me to start a student
movement from that campus alone.

So I went back to Gadjah Mada and joined my friends there.

Q: You talk about political education, yet you dealt with people
with a low educational background. What is your approach?

A: I saw how powerful the grassroots movement could be. While I
was still freshman, a friend took me to see the resistance
movement in Kedung Ombo and I saw with my own eyes how strong,
and yet simple, these people were.

It would be hard if we did it through a cognitive approach; so
it has to be done through be psychomotor approach, which
eventually will increase people's awareness.

Our goal is not merely to build their political vocabulary,
but toward building political awareness among them, on the
problems they face daily. A farmer should know what his daily
problem is, what his rights are, as should a laborer.

At the very least, I want them to be able to defend their
rights so they will not become political objects again. What we
are trying to do is to disseminate information on and popularize
politics, to bring politics down to earth.

Q: A struggle that is close to the struggle of the lower class,
farmers and laborers, is at times branded as a rise of communism
here. Can you explain the origin of social democracy?

A: Social democracy is an ideology that emerged as a resistance
force against the expansion of capitalism in Europe during the
Industrial Revolution. It is a significant thought that
influenced all labor movements in the world.

The revolution brings forward both the dominance of the
bourgeoisie class and the exploitation of the working class
through the control of capital. Social democracy is meant to
defend the working class from this exploitation.

The thought expanded throughout the world and it is actually a
thought outside of communism but closer to socialism.

Three of the strongest European countries: Germany, Great
Britain and France, have been under the leadership of socialistic
parties from time to time.

However, we place ourselves as a social democratic party from
the developing world.

In a society that is still rather undeveloped, in terms of
civilization, PRD sees itself not only as an electoral, political
machine but also as a part of a social movement.

Q: So what would be the distinctive characteristics for this
thought in a less developed country?

A: First, it has to be patriotic. For example, to take a stand
against multinational corporations. With the emergence of
globalization, we are concerned for the fate of the working
class.

Second, a social democrat in the developing world is faced
with a culture that is not fully industrialized. So there is
still village conservatism, where the flavor of rural life still
dominates. Because of that, we focus on resisting the return of
the feudalism that is still reflected through polarization and
communalistic life.

The consolidation of our political base will focus more on the
aspirations of farmers, and not only on laborers as in advance
countries.

At this time when democracy is threatened by an attempt to
maintain the status quo, the two forces can be a strong
fortifying force.

Q: As capitalism reaches a more advance stage -- as in America --
does not the role of the workforce, represented by labor unions,
diminish?

A: We have to remember that this is a social movement. As
capitalism advances, problems in terms of labor, such as working
hours and lay-offs, always emerge.

In my view, Indonesia is still a long way from lessening the
gap between owner and worker. We are still far from the phase
where workers can become part owners through stock options.

Why? Because in Indonesia workers are mostly unskilled, have a
low education and are characterized by collectivism but not
individualism. With this culture, we are still far from what you
would call the aristocracy of labor.

Q: You said that militancy and consistency are closely related.
Why is that?

A: Consistency is how we hold on to our principles without losing
flexibility on how to act, while militancy shows that we are
really consistent with what we are doing. There are things that
we can, and cannot, negotiate.

For example, our stance against the military's dual function.
The minimum requirement for good democracy is the supremacy of
civilians. If we fail to achieve this, we fail to attain other
democratic principles. This can not be compromised.

On the other hand, with our militancy, we have been able to
survive oppression by going underground. Not many political
parties in Indonesia have experienced this.

Q: What are you currently reading?

A: For Whom the Bell Tolls by Earnest Hemingway. Goenawan
Muhammad gave it to me during my trial, but I have not been able
to read it until now.

Q: I learned that one of your early idols was Che Guavara. What
did you learn from him?

A: Well, he was my idol when I was in high school. I had his
poster and books all over my room. What I learned from him was
his consistency. He was faithful to his struggle, yet not afraid
to use force.

Then there was also a human side to him. He was loving and
caring toward children.

Maybe also because he died young before he had the chance to
wither away.

Q: You are not planning to be like, are you?

A: Nope. Yet, through this struggle I've learned many things that
cannot be explained rationally.

For example about love. I didn't have a girlfriend before I
went to jail, and now that I do have one I've learned it is hard
to be apart for so long. It's the same with my longing for my
family.

I cannot explain these things rationally. (In the meantime,
Budiman's girlfriend Catherine patiently waited for him to finish
the interview)

Q: How would you best describe yourself, or how would you like to
be remembered?

A: I am a man who thinks through analysis, reflection and
evaluation and therefore I have to act. I have to act because
truth and justice happen only if we do something about them.