Moral movements can have great political impacts

Moral movements can have great political impacts

JAKARTA (JP): Controversial Moslem scholar Abdurrahman Wahid
told students yesterday that activism in the name of ethical
issues is often more effective than political activities.

To comfort students complaining about the inferiority of
"moral movements" to "political movements", Abdurrahman said
student movements for democracy or against corruption, for
example, often have a greater impact than they realize.

"Moral movements are better, they are focused more on values
and on what's right and wrong," he said. "Political movements, by
contrast, are more vulnerable to engineering..more prone to be
changed into something which is impure, unfair and dishonest."

Abdurrahman, more popularly known as Gus Dur, told a
discussion with Moslem youths here yesterday that they did not
have to feel inferior.

"Actually, it's a mistake, it's stupid if you try to call
yours a political movement rather than a moral movement. What
counts is the essence and the impact of the movements," he said.

Example

Abdurrahman was explaining how the government pigeonholed
movements according to group in order to better manage them.

"Moral movements have greater political impact," Abdurrahman
said. "By wishing to change yours into a political movement,
you're then trapped" into thinking like the power holders.

Abdurrahman cited the student movement in China, which led to
the Tiananmen Square Massacre, as an example of a moral force
that has had a great political impact.

The discussion was held yesterday by the Indonesian Moslem
Students Association to commemorate Indonesia's 50th anniversary.
Other speakers included political researcher Muhammad A.S. Hikam
and former student leader Sumarno Dipodisastro.

In his speech, Hikam explored questions of empowering the
people, whose feelings of inferiority have led to apathy in the
face of political exploitation.

Quoting President Soeharto's state of the nation speech on
August 16, Hikam pointed out the importance of the people in
economic development efforts.

The issue of people's empowerment, however, is inseparable
from their political position, Hikam said. "By acknowledging the
need to empower the people, we have recognized their inferior
political position," Hikam said.

Hikam, who is a researcher at the Indonesian Institute of
Sciences (LIPI), said the "subordinate position of the people
before the state is the consequence of the early political
strategies of the New Order administration."

A strong state was then considered critical to national
economic development. Otherwise, he said, the state would not be
able to check potential conflicts that could affect stability.

"Under the (early years of the) New Order administration, the
state became strong especially because of the support of
strategic elite factions which used (the administration) as a
venue to fight for and protect their own interests," Hikam said.

"The people, especially those in the lower layers, have been
engineered (in such a way) that they became passive and were
treated as mere objects by the elite groups," he said.

In later development, the people became more "marginalized
politically" and lost their ability and strength to control the
running of the state. Consequently, the state apparatus could
easily penetrate and intervene into areas which were not their
affairs in the first place.

The increasingly narrow space granted to the people will cause
at least two reactions, he said. "The people either become
apathetic or they will become even more vulnerable to politicking
activities launched by external forces." (swe)