Towards an assertive community

By Adrianus Meliala

JAKARTA (JP): Nowadays, an assertive person has a chance to be superior to those who do not possess that quality. An assertive person has bigger opportunities to succeed in persuading other people, in gaining information or in changing other people's perceptions. If this ability is applied to certain practical purposes, the assertive person will also be superior in conducting business lobbies, in accomplishing a study, or in leading an organization, to name a few.

As a concept, assertiveness can be linked to an individual's capability to express feelings and attitudes without being too outspoken, direct or even arrogant so as to spoil the situation and to hurt other people's feelings. Psychology in this case believes that an assertive personality is not hereditary. In other words, this capability can be practiced and developed. In short, assertiveness is one of the modern personality characteristics that is very much needed.

Psychology has so far given a formulation for the change of appearance of many individuals. A person that was previously always in doubt to express an opinion, changes into a spontaneous one. A person that tends to be wanting in his external locus (convinced that it is other people who influence his life and not he himself who influences it) can also be modified, so as to raise his internal dimensions. Also, a person with changing opinions can become somebody with solid convictions.

But, when can all Indonesians be developed into assertive persons?

It seems we can agree that an individual approach by psychological means is not fast enough and is very limited in keeping up with the needs to supplement the Indonesian community with various superior characteristics. Apart from assertiveness, the will to compete, determination to study and not to despair belong to the category of superior characteristics which need to be developed by all Indonesians now, in order to keep pace with progress in economy, as well as progress in other fields.

It is a challenging question whether as a community, we possess a high, or low assertiveness. On many occasions Indonesians find it difficult to say when something is wrong. Should they have the courage to do so, the way of expressing it is often circumspect. The culture to put seniority on a pedestal, the culture of reluctance in being outspoken, are things that hamper assertiveness in the community.

In other matters, however, there is an impression that people now tend to be more expressive, which is shown by the high number of demonstrations in the streets, despite threats continuously uttered by security enforcers to arrest the demonstrators if they are considered to be disturbing public order.

In short, there are many factors which show that Indonesians are often inhibited from appearing as they are. The inhibition may come from cultural or local values, as well as universal influences; likewise restraints due to religion, customs and rules which are special, such as regulations at work, or public in character, as in the law and ethical codes. All this consistently provide beacons for the individual to act in accordance with the community's expectations.

So, on the one hand, people are inhibited by things external in character. On the other hand, the community itself is automatically, intentionally or not, an inhibitor of its members' behavior not to deviate. Assertiveness at the community level, in the form of a statement of opinion, an exhibition of tendentious art, a press release, a demonstration, a petition, a strike, a self-sacrifice, or a vote casting, etc., will become a behavior that any moment could be construed as deviating.

If the word "inhibition" is used, it means the relation between the community and those external factors is already negative in character. The strengths, or even the weaknesses, of the external factors always result in the worsening of the people's ability to appear as they are. The community then becomes easier to engineer. If the community wishes to develop, in general it is by making use of marginal methods (like taking shortcuts in all fields).

Under that condition also, characteristics such as spontaneity, expression and creativity in opinion and behavior, become things which are hard to be accepted, let alone carried out. Not, in the first place, because they are not allowed, but because the ambience for it is non-existent. Creativity and spontaneity also tend to be treated as indicators of the people's lack of discipline. At that point, discipline is no longer a positive thing because its meaning is "uniformity of the community".

A danger will arise when spontaneity, or the wish to express oneself, develops and cannot be halted. At that time, a mass behavior may occur, with a tendency to destroy.

In a nearly similar situation, as in assertiveness training at individual level, people also need certain conditions to become assertive.

The first condition is that there must be clarity as to the limits of the dynamics of external influences. It is thereby meant that the community knows well that religion, politics, basic rights, ethical codes, etc., will reject (and may possibly penalize) if the community commits various acts which are considered negative by each institution. The assertiveness of the group can then be constantly targeted to the substances rejected and accepted.

Especially in politics, there are many things which are intentionally and continuously left alone in a not very clear state. Then, many people become the victim of their own assertiveness because they have touched on subjects which prove to be banned but which have only been put in the gray area. The recent hot issues concerning political permits, by the government, can be seen in that perspective.

The second condition is the consistent availability of rewards each time an assertive behavior occurs, whatever the quality. The objective is that somebody gets the reinforcement to continue to do so. On an individual level, it is very easy to do this; the situation is far more complex for giving a reward to a community's assertiveness.

To serve as an example, confusion often arises about whether it is prohibited to demonstrate in the streets. Sometimes, security forces seem to approve of a demonstration, but at other times they round up the demonstrators. Inconstancy is also often shown in the execution of functional controls. The complaint is often heard, "People say criticism is appreciated, but in reality the critics are ostracized."

The spirit to launch openness in various fields is actually in line with the spirit of assertiveness. It is so said, considering that this principle enables all people to know what is happening and, at the same time, to take a stance and decide what to do. It is ironical that amid the spirit of openness, people maintain the same level or have a lower level of assertiveness.

The third condition is the availability of a patron or role model. With a concrete model on assertive personality and behavior, people can more easily imitate. In that context we should be grateful that there are always one or two community members who are not willing to follow the mainstream in attitude and public opinion. These members of the community are capable of seeing through situations clearly, and, at the same time, stating their attitude in a vocal, or assertive way.

The writer is a criminologist at the School of Social and Political Sciences at the University of Indonesia.