DEMOCRACY IN INDONESIA

DEMOCRACY IN INDONESIA

Democracy is a word that is very often said. However, therefore many of which are discussed increasingly feels very difficult to find examples of countries that meet the democratic order perfectly. In our beloved country, Indonesia, the search for democracy is still always held, both in terms of the level of practice of the political system or academic studies. In the academic level, a number of papers were discussed thoroughly in various seminars held. In addition, a number of books or speech articles by experts and politicians have also been published in scientific journals, newspapers and magazines. However, it is different from in other developing countries. With the lively discussion about where the system in which democracy in Indonesia is not because the nation or the government in this country no longer knows the name of the democratic system. On the contrary, the nation in Indonesia at the level of implementation of the political system also understands many variants of democracy in the world. some of them have even been tested for this country such as liberal democracy, parliamentary democracy and Pancasila democracy. However, we need to know that various variants of democracy have also failed to provide a state and state life that is based on democratic values ​​and principles into their true meaning. When the reform era developed into the political order of life in Indonesian politics, the majority of the people hoped for the birth of a truly democratic political system and system. However, after nearly five years of running, in the practices of politics and life of a democratic nation and state, the direction of reform has not yet appeared. Democracy is then questioned and also sued When a number of political practices in the name of democracy often show paradox and irony. This lawsuit against democracy also actually has a strong relevance in the historical roots and political sociology of the Indonesian nation. In that context, this paper wants to see how the journey of democracy in this negation, which will later be analyzed in order to read the prospects for democracy in Indonesia in the future by taking the example on the electoral case as well as the elections. ORLA PERIOD The problems surrounding democracy are not something that is natural in nature and can also grow on its own in diverse life. However, as said in Apter (1963), the problem of democracy is that which is solely human creation, which reflects on the one hand the limitations and objective harmony outside of oneself to humans. Moving on from the spirit and also the framework of the proposition above, then by melting it with a democratic and egalitarian style as a true ideal with Indonesian culture is strongly influenced by social, economic and political developments found in Indonesia. Can be taken as an example of the case When the process of transferring the transfer and also the Dutch beantenstaal power and into the hands of the Republic, apparently it did not also bring changes that are also meaningful. (Feith, 1871). Changes and things that occur more move from the aesthetic-symbolic ranking than from the ethical-substantive. The egalitarian spirit of democratic culture which is also engraved in the delusion of society has vanished, after the statement of independence was tried to realize the Indonesian Democracy. From Period to Time (Hartuti Purwaneni) politics into the form of election in liberal and parliamentary democracy, and economically in the form of choices for the creation of a strong indigenous middle class (Bulkin, 1984). This obsession with political and economic choices is

the formation of an economic and capitalist system capable of mounting upright in a different society (civil society). If this can be realized, it is hoped that democracy will manifest itself in reality. But it is unfortunate, that the requirements to be realized, which mainly exist only in the middle class who have the power as a central actor to support democracy, and not found. The universal development launched by President Soekarno was only to transform the colonial economy into a national economy that was more socialist in nature and proved to be a total failure, as a result not only in terms of political structure and which was established and democratic. The middle class that is capable of being born is also difficult to find. The failure of the practice of purifying liberal and parliamentary democracy and then reduced as a failure of the adoption of Western-style democracy that is contrary to the fingers of the self and also the culture of the Indonesian nation, but not intentionally ignored the fact that the failure on the adoption of Western-style democracy is actually more due to the fragility of the building of the apolitical system on the ground to the cultural ideology and the economic system at that time. Therefore, Sukarno tried a guided democratic system, which he said became from a typical Indonesian democracy. Even though Sukarno said that his government adhered to the system of a Democracy, but from that the widespread practice in the life of the nation and also the state was precisely the centralized (centralistic) power of Soekarno. Bung Karno as the President even demonstrated the dictatorial government which dissolved kostutuante, Psi, and also the Masjumi and marginalized critical political opponents. The anti-democratic authoritarian power of the Old Order finally collapsed in 1965. ORBA PERIOD Along with the earth’s failure during the Old Order, elements outside the community gradually grew and developed into a vehicle for the growth of logic and new translation and the Indonesian nation. The New Pad Order, is represented that political culture and elaborated in such a way that the state acts as a single and central act The logic of placing the state as a single actor is accumulated through explicit and absolute endorsement of the centrality of the state and with all its bureaucratic and military instruments in the interests of economic and political development. It was here that the process of removing the egalitarian and democratic forms of Indonesian culture was replaced by the feudalistic style, which was possible because of two main points. The first is through integration, cleansing and uniting the state bureaucracy and also the military under one command. This effort paved the way for the elaboration and delivery of new logic in a period of cultural feudalism for the Indonesian people in a real and also operational manner. Jabaran and this new logic that is increasingly finding its momentumn associated with the reality in a society that is facing extremely severe economic difficulties on the one hand, and also the obsession of the state to develop economic growth as a basis for eradicating poverty on the other. Second, the influence of the state of the state is also carried out through efforts to get rid of mass politics. Political participation that is too broad and uncontrolled, is considered to endanger political stability which is a conditio sine qua non for the ongoing economic development. Therefore, state limitations through bureaucratic and military apparatuses are validated so that they reach all aspects of society’s superiority. Stability in economic development is then identified with stability at the national level. Gradually the concept on national stability was expanded into an anti-criticism and anti-concept logic. Like the rhetoric of anti-criticism, national stability is associated with security issues and many functions to help maintain the mechanism of state power. As with anti-concept logic, national stability is associated with issues of legitimacy and has a lot of function to support the art of managing the authority of state power. What followed was the centralization of the role of the state personified through Suharto, the MPR, the Parliament, the Press, Political Parties, Mass Organizations and almost all state social political institutions systematically put under Suharto’s control and state control. Who was born in

such situation is artificial democracy, imitation democracy. This democracy paradox eventually collapsed on May 21, 1998. ERA OF REFORM During the reform period, Aspinall (2004) said that Indonesia was experiencing a time of democracy. Political initiatives initiated by Amien Rais encourage reform to continue. The reform that is always rousy provides a glimmer of hope for the emergence of a truly democratic life system, which is marked by a booming emergence of many new political parties, freedom of association, freedom of opinion, freedom of the press, and so on, and Indonesian Democracy, From the times to the Period (Hartuti Purwaneni) which is a hallmark of democracy that arises from the guidelines for political reform from an optimism that has improved implementation and also democracy. However, behind the dynamic of reform that is full of high acceleration, it seems that there are still not many social forces from politics that really have the determination to roll for democracy. Even though various democratic building institutions have now been formed, it is here and there that the paradox of democracy has an institutional procedural nature rather than a democracy that refers to values. How is the paradox that is still developing in the reform era that often makes us think that for the sake of raising the Christian question that whether this transition period can be passed well so that the formation of consolidated democracy or we fail in passing so that what appears is the consolidated anarchy that can accompany us back into authoritarian and militaristic systems. PHENOMENON OF ELECTIONS In the context of the political life of democracy in Indonesia, direct elections and regional elections (pilkada) are one of the means to realize democratic political life. elections especially just to be held in 2004, and also direct elections that will begin in 2005 to choose which gurbernur, regent or walikato has a strategic meaning, not only because of the nature that is different from the previous pilkada, but more important is that with the 2004 elections and the direct local elections that is the mass of the Indonesian political front is at stake. We can almost be certain that in a period of clarifying the existence of elections and situaasi elections and political conditions are often colored by the presence of various competition and conflict between political forces, the problem is how we can manage and control competition and the possibility of conflicts that will occur between political forces existing so as not to raise a situation of anarchism and also political violence. Can we hope for a reminder of the rules of the election and also the elections as a milestone in the development of the political process towards a democratic transition. This is what needs to be observed also in this condition is the possibility of the defeat of the reform movement by the armed forces and the power of the productive resources of society. Based on that, an additional question arises as to how much opportunity we have to use an election as well as an election as a vehicle to prevent the possibility of reform from going backwards and also to the return of authoritarianism in our political system in the formation of which is new. We can almost be certain that in each case, it is clear that an election and election situation and political conditions are often characterized by competition and also conflict between political forces. The problem is that as we can manage and also control the competition and the possibility of conflict and that will occur between the forces of politics that are so that they will not bring the situation to anarchism and also violence to politics, we can face an enforcement of the rules of the game. elections and elections as well as historical milestones and the development of processes to lead to the transition to democracy. Things we need to know also observed into this condition is the possibility of the defeat of the Movement on

reform with its armed and armed forces and the power of the authorities in productive resources and also society. Based on that, it arises to the additional question of how much of an opportunity we have and also to use it for elections and elections as a vehicle to prevent the possibility of reform and walk backwards to lead to the return of authoritarianism with our political system into the new landscape. To answer all these questions, we must understand as well the competition and conflict of politics since the collapse of the Suharto regime. That understanding will eventually take turns at least demanding a more specific understanding of the three things that we really need. After we passed the General Election in 1999, which as large as the community, not only nationally but also internationally, which is recognized as the most democratic election in Indonesia, among us as if we are developing new hopes that in our country this will soon build democratic consolidation, which then followed by a truly democratic political system. The hope that seems to be a dream in broad daylight. What happens is not the consolidation of democracy but rather the development towards what we call frozen democracy, which is characterized by the development of ethnic conflict, the rise of collective political violence, and also excessive political locality. The transition period for democracy is a crucial point that makes us all part of the society Turner calls liminality, a society that is described as not being there and not being here. Or with its sociological language as an anomalous society and that is a society that no longer has the handling of values. The development of liminality or anomaly on the one hand is because those who become anti-structure, and on the other hand the community will no longer be able to see and also find an example, role model, or also security-experience both from the political structure and also the behavior of the political elite that is very friendly. suitable as a model and reference in their daily lives. In such conditions our willingness to submit us into all the political processes in a series of procedures and rules that we agreed upon together becomes quite troublesome. Moreover, many people witnessed political elites who carried out various violations of the rules of the game and also the procedures agreed upon. What we witnessed later were various deviations carried out collectively, both within the political and economic level. During this period of transition, we will also witness inherent conflicts that also occur simultaneously on two fronts. On the first front between opponents and also defenders from authoritarian forces, and on the second front between the proto forces for democracy who win the best positions in the competition to obtain the allocation of authoritative values ​​below and the democratic system. Yet as democracy consolidation ideally happens When a conflict that occurs on the first front will succeed in building democratic institutions as the only foundation where the arena of political conflict happens to the second front, when no one political actor has the opportunity for us acting outside democratic institutions, and when one of the Acts that will be taken by all forces that suffer defeat in political competition is to prepare themselves for victory in the coming round of political competition. RIDING THE TIGER Faced with the phenomenon of dynamics and also the political reality as described above, the presence of the Pilkada which will be started and carried out in 2005 is interesting to observe. Isn’t it impossible that the 2005 local election which would directly elect around 176 regents and mayors across Indonesia likened all of us to being in the condition of riding the tiger, in a situation where we were faced with problematic conditions. And if the election fails to create a consolidated democracy, fears of a return to authoritarianism that is increasingly wide open, and likewise if it is successfully implemented, optimism for the creation of consolidation

democracy is also still in doubt. Some things that can cause us as if in the potential conditions of riding the tiger can be explained as follows. First, the presence of a judicial foundation in the form of Local Government Law No. 32/2004 as revised Law No. 22/1999, still leaves various Public Administration Journals, Vol 3, No 2, 2004 problems When organic rules and their articles do not provide guarantees for the continuation pilgrims and overflowing elections. The various weaknesses in the Regional Government Law may encourage the return and emergence of political party authoritarianism. As we all know that in the Law political parties occupy a position that is so powerful in a process of recruiting public candidates. Secondly, the presence of Law No. 32 on Regional Government of 2004 on the one hand has provided new opportunities for the process of democratization, especially at the level of local politics, but on the other hand it also invites very many problems with many grammatical problems and the formulation of various articles. For example in the article which shows the problem of requirements. The formulation of the article has a grammatical error which causes it to not have a very clear meaning. Thirdly, polarization between flow-based political forces or pro-reform political forces as well as the status quo provides an opportunity for the development of political splits so that horizontal conflicts will flourish. Political split concerns so that horizontal conflicts will flourish within. Concern over the return of political power to the hegemonic New Order regime model on the one hand, and on the other hand the existence of political misgivings with the beginning of the revival of the golkar party which can be read as a representation of the political power of the New Order which makes doubts for political analysis and also at the same time warning that the democratic elections, or also Back to the Fourth Authoritarianism, in addition to the existence of conceptual issues relating to the KPU and also the Election Commission, the Institute is also being confronted not only with an operational technical problem, but also being challenged with various efforts to carry out a political delimitation well at the level institutional as well as individual capabilities. The various issues related to financial support in various regency / city governments have at least made the Election Commission in various regions ill-fitting. In addition, the presence of the KPUD is sometimes very impressed only as a technical implementer and also the central KPU election, so that in many areas appear confusion and often they are seen as a bumper of a political fallacy conducted by the Central KPU. Fifth, the problem in the KPU and also the Election Commission has given an implication on various strategic issues that should be done to the KPU and also the Election Commission. The problem of the jiducual review of Law No. 32/2004, for example, on the one hand the KPU asked for a revision of the Act, but on the other hand the Election Commission said that there was no need for a review. Conflicts between the KPU and the Election Commission on the one hand, while on the other side also with the government has created confusion as many people do not understand with not only the rules of the game, but also the electoral system itself. If this mass confusion continues, it can be expected that this will trigger or ammunition for old political forces to mock the incompetence of the new government in dealing with the current democratic party. BUILDING DEMOCRACY Building democratic institutions is an important prerequisite for laying down a democratic political system. Likewise, the direct elections that will begin in 2005 are a strategic political process towards democratic political life. Equally important is our effort to develop new political ethics and morality, especially among elites and political figures, which are in line with the demands of the democratic political system. Important prerequisites needed to meet these demands are the building of democratic political culture and personality which, according to Gould (1998), includes elements: rational political initiative, political politeness, disposition of reciprocal tolerance, flexibility and open mindness, commitment, honesty, and finally openness. Thus it means that the building of democratic ethics and morality with democratic values ​​is a prerequisite that cannot be negotiated. In the sociology of Indonesian society which is thickly characterized by a culture of paternalism and feudalism, the task of realizing all the above demands will surely again become

the task for the elite and political figures to articulate it. Unfortunately the political behavior of the leaders and political elites at this time still seems to be far from what is explained by Gould. It is too difficult to find political elites who have morality and political ethics that reflect politeness, honesty, fairness and tolerance in daily political life. Considering the sociological style of our society which is still thickly colored by paternalism, in the implementation of polite, tolerant, honest and civilized behavior, the elite and political figures will be seen from the building of a political community called Suharso (2000) as followership. Followership is explained here as a description of the character who has a willingness to cooperate, the ability to control his ego, as well as political efficacy with the style of an active, participatory, critical, open, tolerant political community and remains abiding by the rules of the game. Without followership, a free atmosphere in democracy is just a place to free each other and free to tackle each other. Freedom in democracy is then interpreted as being free to constantly fight for the seat of power. If the configuration of the behavior of elite and political figures is able to realize the above demands as well as creating a positive public opinion that in the struggle for the allocation of authoritative values ​​carried out on the principles of ethics and morality of democratic politics, we can be more secure in welcoming the direct elections of 2005. Conversely if failed, it is very possible that people will experience fear, anxiety and political anxiety. Direct elections that are considered as a party of democracy that should be able to encourage pleasure and enthusiasm, can turn into a scary political terror as well as creating a political phobia of the people. Then at the level of political culture also needed efforts to build community autonomy. How to make the community, both elite and laity show an independent mentality as known in civil society is an urgent agenda that needs to be considered. If democracy also includes cultural attitudes and not just political arrangements that are only implemented in political texts, then political empowerment is also an important prerequisite in building democracy. In other words, to enter the climate of a true and good democracy requires maturity, because to establish (a system of) democracy does not only require freedom of association. Not only is the quality of the press free, but also the quality of the responsiveness of its readers. Not only freedom of speech or freedom of speech alone, but also the maturity of the conversation. Do not only appear demands for improving the quality of the legislature that can voice the conscience of the people, but also the quality of the executive in order to capture the voice of people’s conscience. Without understanding and maturity, democracy will turn into a demo-crazy and will only confuse the people as described by Pudjo Suharso in his poem as I quoted at the beginning of this article. Last but not least, behind all the theoretical debates about democracy, as well as behind all the guidelines for democratization of this country that come from all directions, it does not seem enough to emerge a fundamental awareness that democracy is actually a process that should proceed from the individual level, and not simply a visible institutional process. The motto of a democrat is “I may not agree with your opinion, but I will fight to the death so that you can voice that opinion”. This motto can never be present in our society. If the essence of democracy at the individual level can be internalized by every political actor and communist, then efforts to uphold democracy in both structural and cultural currents will find fertile nurseries. Are we all ready in that direction? God knows the natural world.