Constructive New Normal

KOMPAS/HERU SRI KUMORO

A male rider passes a mural with an invitation to build solidarity in the fight against Covid-19 on the wall of a building in Pondok Aren, South Tangerang, Banten, Sunday (10/5/2020).

A pandemic is like an X-ray. It photographs all the organs of the political, economic and community institutions that have not been exposed in a country.

Lately, in many parts of the world, experts have predicted the emergence of a “new normal” after the coronavirus pandemic. This new normal is marked by a new system of relations among political, economic and community institutions at the national and international level.

This new normal is different in each country because of differences in the linkage of institutional relations in dealing with the coronavirus pandemic. How does this institutional linkage respond to the coronavirus pandemic and what is the new normal trajectory in Indonesia?

Institutional drift

The coronavirus pandemic, like previous pandemics and major crises, has brought a tremendous shock to the balance of institutional ties. This shock reveals the strengths and weaknesses of political, economic and community institutions, many of which have not been exposed before. Therefore, the pandemic is like an X-ray that photographs all the internal organs of a country. Certain institutional organs or components, just like cells and genetics, play an important role in the pandemic and mutate into new forms afterwards.

This institutional component mutation is called institutional drift by Acemoglu and Robinson (2012). This component has also often been referred to as a strategic group because of its small size, but it plays an important role during and after the pandemic. The role of this group is different in each country because it can damage or otherwise be a driving force for a constructive change. That is why a pandemic is seen as critical juncture, a decisive moment towards the new normalcy of a country and even the world.

Constructive and destructive

Pandemics, disasters and major crises clearly reveal the depth and breadth of human suffering; cooperation and conflict among communities, political leaders, bureaucrats and entrepreneurs; and evil conspiracies among leaders; and the ability of leaders to deal with these great problems.

The 1918 flu pandemic gave birth to a group of United States military doctors who discovered a flu vaccine. They investigated the flu viruses that infected US soldiers and their allies in Europe who were battling against German soldiers in World War I. After the pandemic, there was a medical education revolution in the US, which has not changed significantly for more than a century (Barry, 2004).

Also read : The Pandemic and Institutional Investment

In 1942, in the midst of the World War II, a group of British politicians compiled the Beveridge Report, a white paper that was the forerunner to the emergence of a welfare state in England after the war (Acemoglu, 2020). Early this century, the tsunami disaster in Aceh led a group of Indonesian political leaders to end the civil war against the Free Aceh Movement.

All of these events marked the emergence of a constructive strategic group that brought a new, better normal to a political, economic and community order. On the contrary, the Greek economic crisis, as part of the 2009 European economic crisis, was accompanied by the emergence of destructive strategic groups, further damaging the country\'s economy through corruption.

That is why Greece suffered the longest crisis in Europe, lasting for 10 years.

Three tendencies

Three main tendencies need to be observed in studying the new normal after the pandemic in Indonesia. First, will the country\'s institutional linkage be increasingly fragile or robust in dealing with possible future disasters? The valuable lesson from the coronavirus pandemic is the institutional failure of strategic groups within the state at the beginning of Indonesia\'s efforts to stem the coronavirus.

This group lacks two important capabilities, namely utilizing knowledge and building cooperation among state, private and community institutions in the fight against the coronavirus. Therefore, a number of groups have emerged suggesting the importance of leaders who trust science and are able to mobilize disaster mitigation agencies effectively in the future. The new post-pandemic norm will be colored by the tendency of domination between the fragility of state institutions and the distrust of science with institutional robustness and the liveliness of science in formulating public policies.

Read also: Watch out for Second Wave of Pandemic

Second, will the political system be more exclusive or inclusive? The former, which tends to dominate the public arena, is marked by the shrinking and even disappearance of the opposition parties in the political arena during the pandemic in Indonesia. As a result, the political arena becomes the dominant alliance of political elites and economic elites while non-elite groups become peripheral forces.

AP PHOTO/ERIC GAY

A man passes a painted mural walled in a Texas shop cover on Monday, April 27, 2020.

The two elites have broad autonomy, are capable of ignoring the demands of the general public and have a tendency to prioritize their own interests. The marriage of these two types of elite is the beginning of the emergence of a plutocratic political system (Milanisevic, 2019). Or conversely, what may dominate is an inclusive political system characterized by the role of strategic groups that can inhibit the rate of development of plutocratic forces while encouraging the development of peripheral political forces.

Third, will the role of the community be getting smaller or bigger? The tendency of community groups to comply with large-scale social restrictions (PSBB) and distribute of social assistance marks the high and low social solidarity among them and their trust in state institutions. The lower the social solidarity and trust in state institutions, the smaller the role of the community in social and state life. If this trend continues, the plutocratic political system will increasingly have its influence. The success of South Korea, Taiwan and Vietnam is not only determined by the reliability of state institutions but also the social solidarity of the people and their confidence in the seriousness and speed of these institutions in fighting the coronavirus.

Two scenarios

Indonesia\'s new normal will be determined by the level of sluggishness or speed of political institutions in winning the war against the coronavirus. The longer this war lasts, the more destructive the new normal that will appear will be, as characterized by the dominance of plutocratic forces, the declining quality of state institutions and, most worryingly, the disappearance of society in the public arena. This new normal may be characterized by increasingly high unemployment rates and prolonged economic stagnation. These two factors can trigger the emergence of extreme political leaders. The emergence of Hitler, the fascist leader, as chancellor of Germany in 1933, was a result of a prolonged economic crisis and the widespread unemployment that had plagued the country since 1931 (Straumann, 2019).

ARSIP FISIP UI

Rochman Achwan

On the other hand, if the war against the coronavirus can be won quickly, constructive new normal opportunities will emerge, promising a better future for Indonesia. This new normal is marked by the development of inclusive institutional links, providing relatively equal opportunities for all levels of society to develop politically and economically. The pandemic has revealed all kinds of institutional problems that have not been exposed. A wise leader will realize and recognize all these problems and turn them into a driving force for political, economic and community progress after the pandemic.

Rochman Achwan, Professor of Economic Sociology at the School of Social and Political Sciences (FISIP), University of Indonesia.