PDI rift reveals political vexation

By Ignas Kleden

JAKARTA (JP): The Indonesian Democratic Party's internal conflict and its unexpected aftermath is a reflection of both political dissatisfaction and political aspiration.

Last month's government-backed Medan congress has turned out to a trigger, which has unleashed nationwide demonstrations and a denunciation of the legitimacy of elected party chief Soerjadi.

Besides this, since embattled party chief Megawati Soekarnoputri decided to file lawsuits against certain government officials and against Soerjadi, support from Indonesian lawyers has poured in, stating their readiness to defend Megawati in her legal battle.

If one looks at the rally held at the Indonesian Democratic Party (PDI) headquarters in Jakarta and if one takes into account the intensifying support for Megawati, as reported by the press, one cannot help asking: How is it possible that demonstrations and statements of support increase from day to day despite the official prohibition of political demonstrations?

This is all the more striking if take note of Megawati's statement that PDI undertakes nothing to receive such wide support, which she and her people in fact had not reckoned with. There are, it seems to me, two main things at stake.

First, there is a widening dissatisfaction with the decisions of the Medan congress for both legal and political reasons. Second, it seems that a political aspiration towards something which is not yet clear has come to birth.

The legal dispute is still going on among the professional lawyers as to whether or not the congress was legal.

Some lawyers point out that the ambiguity of certain clauses in the PDI constitution has given rise to the contending interpretations of the legality and authority of a national assembly and congress.

However, the political dissatisfaction has something to do with the fact that an internal conflict within a political party has become an opportunity for intervention from outside.

This has gone so far as to give the impression that an internal conflict, unless it is tackled by means of interference either from outside or from above, will remain unsettled.

On a more concrete level, the staging of the Medan congress has wounded the public's sensibilities, whereby many people feel that it was a measure which did not do justice to the then- incumbent leader of the party.

However, one can raise the question as to whether the dethroning of Megawati is the cause, or whether it is simply an opportunity in which dissatisfaction is voiced. That is to say, the case of Megawati is rather an epiphenomenon of public response to the present political system.

Political dissatisfaction is but one side of a coin, the other side of which is inability of the political system to adjust itself to the ongoing political changes.

A political system, just like a linguistic system, can only survive as long as it can manage to absorb new developments in political behavior, or linguistic behavior, and provide them with a place to function in.

A political system's capacity can be measured by its flexibility in adjusting to the changes taking place, whereas the lack of capacity is shown by the rigidity with which it excludes the new patterns of thinking and behavior as unusual, abnormal, improper, or even pathological.

An effective political system takes into account, adopts and makes use of new patterns of political behavior and new perspectives in political thinking; whereas a rigid political system tends to secure and to salvage itself in the face of many new developments which occur outside the system leading to its gradual petrification.

In doing so, it alienates itself from political realities, whereby its correspondence with the real political aspirations are being weakened, ignoring the emergence of new patterns of political behavior and new views in political thinking, which it cannot afford to accommodate.

In this connection, Megawati seems to be a rallying point for those whose political behavior and political thinking are often overlooked by those within the system, either by labeling them as discontented dissenters, a free-thinking minority, outspoken liberals or uncompromising human rights fighters. Their number may only be few but they are said to be skillful enough to speak on behalf of an allegedly major pressure group.

In fact, the strategy of trivializing is very common in realpolitik, because by so doing one expects to lessen the demonstrating effect of a political or social movement.

However, this strategy does not help very much if one is faced with a massive support as it is in the case of Megawati's supporters. The most likely way out is to look into the causes of dissatisfactions which bring those people together.

In other words, the case of Megawati is a test case for the present political system in dealing with widening dissatisfaction, as well as an early warning signal about the flexibility of the present political system in accommodating new development in political behavior and political thinking.

On the other side, however, those who continue to stick by Megawati should not be considered as people simply trying to get rid of a certain situation but should also been seen as people aspiring to something they perceive as different or even better than the present condition.

There are, that is to say, new political demands which are not sufficiently met within the existing political system.

The question is: Do the people support Megawati simply because they are politically discontented or because they are also in search of political ideals or even political programs which can meet their political demand?

Solving the political dissatisfaction is the job of the present political system but meeting the new political demand is another task which is to be attributed to everybody who is concerned about the political life in this country.

I would argue for the time being and capitalizing on the present momentum, that this is a task which should be assumed by Megawati and her people. In the long run, nobody can rely only on one's dissatisfaction. People need something which can respond to their political aspirations and meet their political demands.

In that sense, there is an objective necessity for Megawati, or anyone else who feels responsible towards the people, to figure out a political program which corresponds to the new aspirations. A program which in one way or another can ensure that the rising expectations are more than just a political seductive mirage but something legitimate which can be realized.

This is a political challenge for Megawati and for people within and outside the government. It becomes a political ground for competition between contending political visions and operations, in which, analogically speaking, political goods are to be exhibited to would-be buyers, whereby only those who can offer the best quality with the lowest possible price have the biggest chance to win most buyers, which provide political profit.

In that sense, success or failure depends very much on some level of the economy of political production as well as political marketing.

On the first level, the questions are: what is to be produced? Which political visions and political programs can be brought up and offered as a political supply? Do they correspond to the actual political needs of the people?

If one looks at the present development, there are some political needs which tend to push for economic, social and political tradeoffs.

Contending interest in various sectors is emerging. This is visible in areas of growth and employment; wealth and justice; security and freedom of expression; capital and morality; symbolic religious piety and a real search for religious truth; the scope of intellectual movement and the force of intellectual inquiry; exposure to globalization and new need for security within local boundaries; integration to the international market and the need to salvage cultural identity; physical construction; and adventurous imagination.

If one can figure out some of the new needs and is able to translate them into workable political programs, there is a real possibility to win the sympathy, support and even political enthusiasm of the people.

However, the programs can only be established if one has in mind what kind of society the country is to head for. In that sense, it is very important to provide the people with some political visions, whereby the ideal society is figured out and the way towards that envisaged society is shown.

Political marketing will also play an important role. How do we convince the people that the programs at hand are worth accepting and, with their support, worth realizing?

Political rhetorics seems to become a necessity in that connection. In a situation where even language has been bureaucratized, rhetoric tends to stand for a bad meaning.

It is usually understood as a verbose statement which lacks, or at least distorts, the message conveyed. However, rhetoric is basically a practical discourse, a stylistic packaging of a political message in order to provide it not only with explanatory but also with persuasive power.

At that level, there are many possibilities which can be pursued because there seem to be many possible tradeoffs as well. Those are the choices between apparently sophisticated obscurity and simple clarity; between the propensity to cover up bitter realities and the courage to call a spade a spade; and between coward euphemism and courageous straightforwardness.

Fortunately, by her nature, Megawati seems to be endowed with some of the important features which might be brought up as alternatives to the dominant political practices.

Her simple mind, heart and words are in contrast to the hullabaloo of political jargon, her low profile to high politics, her ethical attitude vis-a-vis political calculation and smart opportunity-seeking.

Of course, the people around Megawati have to work harder in order to be able to provide her with political views that can meet the rising political demand of her followers.

After all, people live not by protests and demonstrations alone but also by ideals which articulate some of their aspirations, which otherwise remain unspoken and even repressed into unconscious and unintended oblivion.

The writer is a sociologist now working with the SPES Research Foundation, Jakarta.