The essence of moral conduct

The essence of moral conduct

By Mochtar Buchori

JAKARTA (JP): Three disturbing events took place in Indonesia
within a relatively short time span: the rioting of July 27; the
riot at Senayan stadium started by supporters of Surabaya's Mitra
soccer team and during their Surabaya-Jakarta-Surabaya train
trips; and the riot in Situbondo, East Java, on Oct. 10, in which
five people were killed, an unknown number of people were injured
and 27 buildings and seven cars were burned or destroyed.

These unpleasant events left me wondering about the present
condition of our society. What is it in our society today that
make us so jittery, short tempered and plunged easily into the
collective act of destruction?

House Speaker Wahono, looking at these riots in a historical
perspective, said in his speech on Oct. 18 that "destructiveness
and violence, the phenomenon of moral decadence, are signs that
we have been going astray from the ideals fomented when the
republic was founded." He went on to say: "It is not wise for us
to place blame only on certain parties. Before God, our history
and our forefathers, we are all responsible." He urged all of us
to examine the roots of all these riots, including "social
discontent".

Three hypotheses have been suggested concerning the cause of
these riots. The most widely held hypothesis is one which holds
that all these riots were caused by the big gap that exists
between the haves and the have-nots. Thus it is more or less
jealousy at the root of all these riots. In case of the Situbondo
riot, it is hypothesized that religious feelings were the main
reason. Still another hypothesis suggests that these riots were
products of political manipulations.

Whichever hypothesis may prove right, I think the ultimate
meaning of all these riots is that our society is in a very
precarious situation. If it is true that all three riots were
products of political manipulations, then it means we are a very
manipulable people without enough capability to think for
ourselves. If, on the other hand, it is true that these riots
were spontaneous expressions of deep-rooted discontent borne of
jealousy, then it means that we have failed to bring about the
principle of social justice and equity in our society. And if it
is true that religious fanaticism played an important role in
these affairs, then it means that we are failing miserably in
observing the principle of peaceful coexistence among followers
of all religions.

House Speaker Wahono is right. We are all responsible for all
these incidents. No one has the moral right to put the blame on
others and claim their hands are entirely clean in this respect.
We are all responsible for the moral decadence that, according to
House Speaker Wahono, lies behind all these recent riots. We are
all responsible for society straying from the ideals laid down by
our founding fathers. Moral decadence anywhere and at anytime in
history can never be attributed to just one person's misconduct.
The violation of norms, the manipulation of norms that ultimately
lead to moral decadence may be started by one tyrant, but in the
end every member of society is involved in the degeneration that
ensues. No morally responsible citizen can claim that he or she
has no part in this process.

The question we have to answer at this juncture is how riots
can be prevented in the future. We can answer this question only
if we have a clear idea of the ultimate cause of all these riots.

In my view, at the very basic level this repeated collective
destructive behavior is the consequence of two cultural
conditions that have long existed in our society. First, our
emphasis on avoiding conflict and our neglect of learning how to
manage conflict; and second, our inability to uphold and abide by
existing norms of social conduct. Because of these shortcomings
we very often consider any disagreement as a hostile situation,
and we hastily respond to this perceived hostility with violence.
All violence resulting from unsolved conflict is usually marked
by lack of empathy and a lack of personal commitment to norms.

The immediate cause of all riots is of course the presence of
conflicts of interest or opinion coupled with disregard toward
existing norms of social conduct. But no matter how great
conflict or tension may be at any given moment, if the parties
involved know how to solve differences peacefully, and if both
parties are equally committed to respecting existing norms, then
no violence should take place and a peaceful solution should
somehow be found. What we call civility is just the result of
interaction among these three foundations: empathy, respect for
norms, and a repertoire of peaceful manners for settling
differences.

Increasing our capability in conflict management is not only a
matter of learning how to negotiate, it is in the first place a
matter of learning to listen to the other side, and a willingness
to try to understand the other side. In the words of Philip H.
Phenix, it is a matter of learning how to live in "existential
intersubjectivity". And learning to uphold, respect and obey
norms of social conduct is not only a matter of learning how to
understand cognitively the existing norms, it is primarily a
matter of learning to develop our personal moral knowledge and
strengthening our ability to act morally correct on the basis of
our own "voluntary and deliberate" choice.

In the long run, preventing riots in the future will be
educational for the young generation in that it will strengthen
their feeling of empathy, their tolerance of different views, and
their personal commitment to norms. This can be done only if we
inject into the curriculum a sufficient dose of learning material
that helps them grow in the fields of personal knowledge which is
the basis of empathy and tolerance; moral knowledge which is the
basis of personal commitment to norms; and conflict management
which is the basis of the ability to find peaceful solutions to
existing conflict.

The writer is an observer of social and cultural affairs.