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.