One step at a time toward democracy in RI

One step at a time toward democracy in RI

By Aleksius Jemadu

BANDUNG (JP): For those who did not experience suffering under
colonial rule, it might be difficult to grasp the meaning of
independence. It might be taken for granted.

In its broadest sense, however, independence is not just the
absence of foreign colonial rule. It is a nation's endless
struggle to fulfill some noble objectives.

As clearly stipulated in the preamble of our constitution, our
national objectives include protection of the motherland, social
and economic welfare for the people, the enlightenment of
national life and the promotion of world peace.

The new challenges for national independence today are no
easier to deal with than the ones we faced during colonial rule.
Indeed, the nation-state is confronting serious constraints in
this era of globalization.

Developing countries, in particular, have to deal with
democratic movements that get strong support from governments of
industrial countries and international human rights groups.

The establishment of a democratic government based on the
state ideology, Pancasila, and the 1945 Constitution is one of
the noble ideals to flow from the proclamation of independence.
Surely, we still have a long way to go before we can realize this
ideal.

Many agree that the careless adoption of Western liberal
democracy by our political system would not work. However, this
cannot be used as a justification for the perpetuation of the
status quo which serves the political and economic interests of a
privileged few.

What is important is the real commitment of the ruling power
to improve the quality of our "democratic" institutions. Without
such a commitment people would not believe that we are still on
the right track and heading toward a democratic and prosperous
society.

The antithesis of democratic government in many developing
societies is the phenomenon of political elitism. This refers to
a situation in which the political dynamics of a state do not
reflect the demands the people but rather the interests and
values of the elite.

Changes and innovations in the political system are a result
of the elite redefining their own values. Elitism may not
necessarily mean that public policy will be against mass welfare,
only that the responsibility for this rests upon the shoulders of
the elite not the masses. Another characteristic of elitism is
that it views the masses as largely passive, apathetic and ill-
informed.

Indeed it can be said that governments in developing
countries, such as Indonesia, are always tempted to dominate the
whole political and economic processes in society because such an
opportunity exists. The bureaucracy in developing societies is
known to be the main agent of social change. However, from a
democratic point of view, there is a limit to the dominance of
the political elite in social life. As good seeds cannot grow on
infertile soil, so democracy cannot flourish in a deprived
society.

It is often argued that people in developing societies are not
prepared for democracy. Political participation by the people in
the policy-making process should be restricted so that they do
not destabilize the whole system. Too much and too early,
political participation can be dangerous for national unity.
While there is some truth in this argument it is also necessary
to discuss the preparedness or willingness of those in power to
create a democratic state.

While there are no easy answers for a political leader
planning to initiate a democratic process, there are some
suggestions to guarantee a gradual and peaceful change in a
political system.

First, a political leader must be open and honest to ensure
people do not become suspicious of his or her political actions
and inactions. An honest leader will be respected by the people.
Political honesty can also be very effective in preventing the
spread of nonsensical gossip about a political leader.
Conversely, a blocked communication between a leader and the
people can lead to unnecessary suspicion and feelings of
insecurity.

Second, political leaders in developing countries do have the
capacity and opportunity to activate the political system and
encourage it to endorse a democratic movement from above.
Democracy always assumes the presence of two inseparable
conditions: people's participation in political life and the
willingness of the government to ensure this participation is for
the benefit of all. However, the biggest constraint to a
government's initiatives in managing a democratic movement is its
own preference to perpetuate the establishment.

Third, a political leader should get rid of opportunistic
subordinates. The presence of opportunists in a political system
can be very counterproductive to the growth of democracy. The
reason is that they can be loyal to their superior but repressive
and undemocratic toward their own subordinates. These officials
always tend to seek favor with their superior while neglecting
their main task as public servants. And they will use their
privileged position to accumulate political and economic benefits
for themselves.

During the last three decades, economic development has become
the main agenda of the New Order government. We have to admit
that, notwithstanding all its shortcomings, the government has
succeeded in emancipating the Indonesian people from economic
backwardness.

In addition to economic emancipation, however, we have to
create more opportunities for political emancipation. To achieve
these two aspects of human freedom is part of our never-ending
struggle to change the feudalistic colonial structure of our
society. We have gained independence from colonial rule and now
must substantiate it.

In the final analysis, independence is what we make it.

The writer is a lecturer at the School of Social and Political
Sciences at the Catholic University of Parahyangan, Bandung.