Questions loom on norms in political life

Questions loom on norms in political life

By Mochtar Buchori

JAKARTA (JP): When observing the behavior of our political
leaders during this political and economic crisis, I cannot help
comparing them with their predecessors in 1945 and the ensuing 10
years in our early existence as an independent state.

What I see leaves me feeling dejected. To me, the most
striking difference between the two generations is the glaring
absence of a sense of personal honor, political decency and
respect for the political sovereignty of the public,
characteristics which were so strongly demonstrated by our former
political leaders.

When I discussed my impression with several friends, most of
them agreed with me. Our discussions usually revolve around two
questions: What has caused this change? And what must be done to
make possible the advent of new generations of political elite,
which will cherish values as noble or nobler than those upheld by
the 1945 generation?

I believe this phenomenon of intergenerational decline in
political leadership has been caused by a host of factors. Two
elements played an important role; the decline in the quality of
our formal education system, and the transformation of our
collective value systems which proceeded beyond our understanding
and control.

Let us discuss the educational factor first. Our older
political elite had generally enjoyed formal education of very
high quality before they entered politics. Their education had
given them various competencies for intellectual endeavors:
languages, intellectual curiosity, general knowledge and mastery
of learning techniques.

In addition, they were also trained to respect values related
to intellectual pursuits, including common sense, honesty, open-
mindedness, tolerance toward different opinions, the ability to
defend one's opinion in a sincere and fair manner, and readiness
to abandon opinions proven wrong. With this kind of intellectual
and moral preparation, they matured quickly in their political
careers.

Our present generation of political leaders did not enjoy this
kind of formal schooling. Most of them had their formal education
in Indonesia during a time when our school system started to
decline qualitatively. A minority of our present political elite
has studied abroad at educational institutions of high
intellectual and pedagogical standards.

The inadequacy of the intellectual and moral basis of most of
our present political leaders is reflected in low intellectual
capability, their narrower and lower general knowledge, poor
language proficiency and lack of competence in formulating,
analyzing and solving problems in a systematic manner.

In addition, our impoverished educational system has also
failed to implant and cultivate seeds for moral actions in their
minds. In moral education, our system still relies on
indoctrination, supervision and blind loyalty.

There has been no attempt in our system to prepare students in
voluntary commitment to values as the essence of personal moral
acts.

With these educational defects, most members of our present
political elite entered politics not with the determination to
absolve our society from its present ills, but with the intention
to join a bandwagon which would hopefully carry them into the
power system. The result is a generation of political leaders
indifferent toward the sensitivities of the public.

The changes in our collective value system plays an even
greater role, in my opinion, in bringing about a generation of
political leaders lacking in political and moral conscience. Our
older political leaders lived in an environment where there was
no contradiction in ethical standards between the home and the
school on the one hand, and the workplace and the society on the
other.

In addition, the spirit of nationalism, patriotism, sacrifice,
social solidarity and heroism pervaded the entire society. Values
and norms had clear meaning. There was no ambiguity or
ambivalence in moral, ethical or legal standards. Cheating was
morally unacceptable, and no amount of political speeches and
indoctrination could make corruption a morally justifiable act.

Our present political leaders live in a time where distortion
and manipulation of concepts and norms are commonplace and
considered the norm. There is more than one meaning to the word
"Constitution" and "constitutional", for instance. Democracy
without opposition is an absurdity in any other country, but
imposed as a "normal" thing in our land. In short, our political
leaders live in a time of great intellectual and moral confusion.

In this kind of social and cultural atmosphere, solid
intellectual and moral basis is a conditio sine qua non for any
political leader to be morally clear and consistent, trustworthy
and capable of acting as a guiding light for the public. Without
such a base, nobody can be a true leader in the eyes of the
people. And without such an intellectual and moral force,
political leaders can easily become chameleons of principle and
mere talking puppets.

This change in the social and cultural climate is a clear
indication that our collective value system has been changing.
This process has been going on for a long time, and has
accelerated since our independence. The question is whether it
has to proceed in a negative way, and end up in a value system
which is confusing and laden with inconsistencies and
contradictions.

Of course not. Our value system has become involuted and
confusing because we have treated it as a cultural inheritance
which must be preserved, and not as a living cultural device
which must be constantly revised and renewed. With this attitude,
we have been primarily interested in knowing our value system
textually, and not in the actual implementation of those values
within the reality of our society.

We also perceive values originating from other cultures as a
cultural threat, and not as an opportunity to reexamine our own
values.

In short, we have failed to recognize the difference that has
emerged gradually in our society between the textual value
system, which is static, and the actual value system, which is
dynamic. In this way, we have not been able to influence the
process of transformation within our value system. We have
allowed our value system to be carried away by opportunism and
superficial modernism.

What, then, must we do to facilitate the reemergence of a
political elite which will be the true conscience of the nation?
The answer is clear and simple: Improve our system of formal
education, and end our indifference toward transgressions of our
value system.