Stuck in Politics
Daniel Lev (1933-2006), an Indonesianist from America, in his thesis acknowledged intricacies and complexity as inherent elements of this nation\'s society.
In terms of sociocultural politics, according to Lev, Indonesia is one of the most complex countries in the world (B. Tulus Wardaya, Pembangunan Republik, 2017).
Two questions raised by Lev are how to regulate such complexity without losing the basic social building being agreed upon and who benefits most from that condition.
In the latest context, the dispute over the election results is a factual narrative of the undeniable complexity of “Indonesianness” (Kompas, 14/6/2019). I am not interested in the litigation. What is much more crucial is how the sociological residues left behind by the celebration of democracy in the past have left gaping social wounds.
Several relevant examples can be found randomly. A hamlet on the slopes of Mount Merapi, which had frantically proclaimed itself as the area of a particular candidate pair, now looks inferior. They almost went as far as to divide the graves exclusively and joined in rejecting newcomers who were not part of the accepted sect in the hamlet. Small children in other areas, who were excited to watch the March campaign, shouted the words "infidel" and "puppet" to certain party groups. Division expressed itself fiercely in daily group games afterwards.
Other cases are certainly not difficult to find. One or two people reportedly struggled to get a promotion at work because structural strategic posts were controlled by people supporting other parties.
Original sin
The process of reconciliation in the bureaucracy always seems more difficult than at the grassroots level. Legal disputes did not only occur in this post-election period but already five years ago. The conflict among the political elites turned out to be far more lasting than that at the lower level.
It may even be concluded from decades of experience, that, perhaps, the ones who like commotion are people of the political elite rather than the general public. The general public, let\'s call it the masses, is "only" used as a tool in the ideological battles of the political elite.
Meanwhile, the permanent ideology that lives in the general community at the grassroots level is social harmony.
What is often called a political battle is actually nothing more than a battle of political elites utilizing the masses, banging them against each other for their ideologies. Meanwhile, the permanent ideology that lives in the general community at the grassroots level is social harmony.
As for the people on the slopes of Merapi, once the election was over, they did not have the chance to engage in fierce or prolonged arguments, because they had to conduct the nyadran (a ceremony to clean the cemetery ahead of the fasting month of Ramadan). This tradition is very effective in uniting people and restoring the sense of togetherness after a divisive political choice.
Similar little stories certainly also unfolded in other places, in different forms and intensity. What is certain is that there is an original sin in each structural chair, so that what should bring public benefit ultimately becomes a source of constant social problems. In the name of politics, there is always a combination of philosophy and fulusofi (fulus means money) between ideology and capital.
Returning to Lev\'s question about who benefits, it turns out that those shouting in the front row are the most disadvantaged. Meanwhile, the parties that moved massively and systematically were the ones that benefited the most. It seems clear which party is just "being used" and which party is "riding the wave".
The political calculation of who benefits is only one aspect of the multidimensional benefits obtained by Indonesianness. It is clear that the last election was the most intense celebration of democracy so far. Identity politics was dominant, causing a severe degree of anxiety.
Feelings of being part of an extended family are still effective as the syntax of Indonesianness.
However, Indonesian society on the other hand becomes an original blessing, so that the threat of national disintegration does not materialize. Feelings of being part of an extended family are still effective as the syntax of Indonesianness.
Political crime
The sociological damage caused in the form of social residues must indeed be acknowledged. However, geographical ties as part of our Indonesianness remain undeniable. The physical heterogeneity on Indonesian soil cannot be negated by an emotional bond in the name of primordial exclusivity, even though politics has devastated the building. Politics even seems evil, because it appears as a perfect crime against social cohesion.
Even though the election has caused massive and systematic damage to the notion of Indonesianness, the calculation of profits remains much more complex. At the one end, a primordial group in the name of identity politics benefits from controlling an increasing number of strategic posts at the structural level; at the other end, a diametral ideological advantage as a united brotherhood continues to thrive on its own.
This is owed to the revolving character of Indonesian society. Like a seesaw, when one end is pushed down, the other end must be automatically pushed up.
We already have become Indonesia. What more do we need?
Tulus Sudarto, Pastor at St Maria Lourdes Church, Sumber, Magelang