Promoting democracy in a transitional society

Promoting democracy in a transitional society

By Mochtar Buchori

JAKARTA (JP): In a recent discussion about democracy the
participants heatedly debated the best methodology and approach
to the topic.

The following question ultimately divided the participants
into two opposing groups: What is the best way of promoting
democracy at this stage of our political development?

The first group argued that within the present political
conditions democracy can best be promoted by creating an
atmosphere which shows to the public that the process of
democratization is not yet dead in this country.

This can be done by organizing seminars in which respectable
and trustworthy personalities are invited to discuss conditions
which still hamper the national efforts toward a fuller and more
mature democracy. Events like this will stimulate the entire
society, from top to bottom, to actively promote democracy.

The other group said the country needs the strengthening of
those groups which seek to promote real practices of democracy at
the grassroots level. Members of this group defended their
position by arguing that the ultimate test concerning the success
of our efforts to promote democracy is whether or not we are
capable of implementing principles of democracy in our daily
lives, and not whether or not we are capable of delivering moving
rhetoric about democracy.

System

They argued that democracy is not a system that can be handed
down from the top. It is a system that can be acquired only by
collective efforts to change ourselves.

In elaborating their position, the first group argued that
what the country needs at the moment is a feeling among the
public that the archipelago is indeed still moving toward a more
democratic way of life; that the obstacles toward true democracy
that have persisted thus far in our society can be defeated.

In short we have to instill the feeling among the public that
democracy still has hope in this country. Without this feeling
the majority of the public will be apathetic towards any call to
strengthen democracy.

On the other hand, the second group pointed out that thus far
we have been unable to defeat the anti-democratic forces that
have been working within our society. Democratic principles have
been twisted by these forces, and we are not capable of stopping
the political manipulation that leads to this twisting. The
result is that democracy has become a mere formalism in our
society.

Proponents of the second approach do not believe that the
situation can be remedied simply by oratory about democracy.

I did not participate in this discussion. I was informed about
this discussion by one of the participants. According to this
person, the opinion among the participants was still divided up
to the end of the discussion. She came to me for a "neutral"
opinion which she hoped she will be able to use in the next round
of the discussion.

She also informed me that somehow this deadlock must be
broken. It is important that the group reaches a compromise, and
that it moves into real actions that will genuinely strengthen
democracy in our society.

"So, what is your advice, Bapak?"

"I am not sure if I can give you any advice in this case. I am
not a political guru. I am not even sure that I can give you a
"neutral" opinion. I will try to give you my personal opinion,
but I doubt if you can call it a `neutral' opinion."

Concept

In my view, promoting democracy is essentially an act of
continuously stimulating the process of transformation of value
systems. Democracy is ultimately a concept concerning a way of
life, including a way of treating other persons in our life. The
extent to which a person upholds democracy can be seen from the
way he or she treats the household maids, his or her driver, and
so forth. The way a professor treats his or her students is also
indicative of his or her belief in democracy.

When this republic was born, feudalism was still the accepted
way of life. Even Bung Karno (the nation's first president,
Sukarno) with his credo of democracy still acted like a feudal
lord in many ways. This was and is an inevitable situation.

We must admit, however, that during the period from 1945 to
now, democracy as a way life has made many strides in our
society. It is true that this is not the case in every aspect of
our lives. But the progress is there for all of us to see.

If we feel now, at this moment, that this transformation
process has come to a halt, then we should first inquire as to
what the primary force is that is slowing down or stopping this
process. Then, depending upon our understanding concerning the
nature of this primary force, we should select a strategy --
including approach and methodology -- that is capable of taming
this blocking force.

I think that the present slowing down of this transformation
toward democracy is basically caused by our misunderstanding
concerning the nature of democracy.

Most of us still think that democracy and democratization are
concepts which are applicable only to political life. Most of us
still think that democracy and democratization are merely
problems of procedure.

Few among us really understand that democratization is
essentially a matter of revising our personal and collective
views of life, which in practice consists of abandoning certain
traditional values, modifying other values, and taking over and
adapting new values.

Combination

It is the combination of these three steps that evolves a new
value system.

How do you keep these processes alive? By constantly examining
the relevance of existing values vis-a-vis new situations that
arise in our society.

Seen in this way, I think that among the forces that have
blocked our democratization process essentially, is the
unwillingness among some of us to examine our existing values and
value system.

The question becomes then: How do you persuade these people to
become more open-minded, to become less defensive in confronting
new situations?

I do not think that this question can be resolved by
operations or activities at the upper layer or operations at the
lower layer of our society.

I think that the answer lies in identifying groups of persons
in our society that can be considered critical in spreading the
democratic view among the overall public. It is these groups that
should be the target of these activities. This approach should
involve a combination of groups that operate at the top, in the
middle, and at the bottom of our society.

Dr. Mochtar Buchori is former deputy chairman of the
Indonesian Institute of Sciences and now rector of the
Muhammadiyah University.