Jakartass Home thoughts from abroad. Alien thoughts from home.

The success of Homo Sapiens rests primarily with our capacity for empathy and our urge to understand and appreciate others.
fr. review of The Age of Empathy: Nature's Lessons for a Kinder Society by Frans De Waal

In a recent article in the Post, Indonesia’s State of Democracy, Jennie Bev attempted to draw parallels between the 'democracies' of the USA and Indonesia. She also asked what we can do to improve civic participation and people’s deliberation in the election and voting processes. I hope I can offer an answer which goes beyond her analysis.

Regarding Indonesia, Jennie says that "some academics and pundits posit that it is a democracy by form, but not by substance. Others argue that it is an oligarchy and the rest say that it is a young democracy with a dark shadow of historical authoritarianism." I would argue that it is all three, and it is the electoral process which is the key to a working democracy.

The term 'democracy' comes from the Greek language (δημοκρατία) and means "rule by the (simple) people" or as Abraham Lincoln put it, "Government of the people, by the people, for the people."

Most would agree that the form of government adopted in Indonesia is far from that. Those nominated have to be members of political parties, and they have little attachment to their electors who in turn are not expected, or wanted, to contribute to government.
 
Many, if not all, of Indonesia's rulers are a self-perpetuating élite, vestiges of the Suharto era, which awards itself lucrative contracts in order to first pay off debts accrued through the electoral process and to then further enrich themselves. Every four or five years, the electorate is bought with unrealistic promises, an assumed piety and/or minimal cash handouts and T-shirts to attend free dangdut concerts,

Nor can the electorate expect to benefit from any legal certainty. Laws are flouted with seeming impunity by those who are tasked with making the laws while for those at the bottom of the social ladder there are few transparent ways of seeking regress for the wrongs committed against them.

It is not uncommon to read of those charged with minor thefts – such the grandmother charged with stealing 3 cacao pods worth Rp.1,500 – being treated proportionately worse than politicians who steal billions of rupiah from the state.

It seems that the only way for the voices of the rakyat to be heard is through the social media which could, as was recently witnessed in Ambon, have disastrous consequences. An alternative is to rely on NGOs to lobby the lawmakers and bureaucrats. However the NGOs are also facing difficulties in that the much criticized Home Affairs Ministry is, according to its spokesman Reydonnyzar Moenek, currently seeking to replace or revise the 1985 Mass Organization Law so they "can make decisive efforts concerning civil society organizations without having to worry about legal issues."

That's an alarming statement and without a say in the wider issues that effect us, it is small wonder that we are seeing an increasingly fragmented society, one in which individuals strive to meet their own needs and appear to have lost empathy with anyone not in their immediate social or religious circle.

What is sorely needed is a system of people empowerment, one in which individuals can express their concerns and by being part of the process can effect the changes that would not only address the needs of the individual but those of the community s/he is part of. In short, there is an urgent need to return to the good, old-fashioned values which encouraged respect, courtesy and mutual co-operation.

Suharto's drive for rice self-sufficiency in his 'green revolution' in the mid-80's cost many farmers their land and as a consequence much of the community spirit described by Clifford Geertz in his essay Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology (2000) has dissipated. He described rukun (mutual adjustment), gotong royong (joint bearing of burdens) and tolong-menolong (reciprocal assistance) as "an enormous inventory of highly specific and often quite intricate institutions for effecting the cooperation in work, politics, and personal relations alike"

The country is zoned from street level up to the national government, from the rukun tetangga (RT – neighbourhood association), to rukun warga (RW – citizen's association), to kelurahan (village administrative unit), to mayor, governor and finally the Presidential Palace.

The formation of 'citizen councils', which adopted the Javanese values, and those of all the other ethnic groups, utilizing that administrative mechanism, could provide the illusion of a people's democracy, but I suspect that much breath would be wasted.

A change in mindset is needed. In 2007, the UK passed the Sustainable Communities Act.  The then responsible Minister said that the government was "moving away from ‘top down’ working, to ways of working that take the needs and wishes of communities into account and that try to meet those needs with services that are tailored to local circumstances."

Another model which lawmakers could consider is the Participatory Budgeting, pioneered in 1989 by the mayor of Porto Alegre, Brazil, and since adopted in a number of countries. This is a decision-making process through which citizens deliberate and negotiate over the distribution of public resources, thus creating "opportunities for engaging, educating, and empowering citizens, which can foster a more vibrant civil society."

Could either work here? With goodwill from all sides, yes, but given that both models help promote transparency, with the potential to reduce government inefficiencies and corruption, I would not expect the current uncaring lawmakers to even consider them.
……………………………………………………………
Submitted to but not published by the Jakarta Post.
(Read Parts 1, 2 and 3)