Democracy

Economy

Education

Development

Global Issues

Research

Begun in 1974 in southern European countries such as Spain, Greece and Portugal, the wind of change toward democracy then flew to Latin American countries in the early 1980s.  Military governments in Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, Peru, Chile, Mexico and other Latin American countries commencing to move in a democratic direction.  Today, practically only Cuba in Latin American remains untouched by this democratic wave.

From mid 1980s through the late of 1990s, democratization swept Asian countries.  It started in Philippines in 1986 when the dictatorship Marcos regime was overthrown by people power, elevating the new democratic government led by Aquino.  The spirit of democracy then moved to South Korea, Thailand, Pakistan and Bangladesh where authoritarian military leaders were replaced by civil leaders through relatively fair elections.

Democratization also occurred in the Middle East countries.  Turkey shifted to democracy in the early 1980s and some democratic movement, such as the election of parliament, occurred in Jordan.  In Africa, apartheid government ended in South Africa, Algeria conducted an open and fair election in 1991 and other African countries, such as Nigeria and Kenya, have shown signs of movement toward a democratic direction.

The most dramatic event is perhaps the collapse of communist regime in the late 1980s in the former Soviet Union and other East-Central European nations.  This subsequently was replaced by democratic systems. Some view that the China’s new membership in the World Trade Organization is a gateway to a democratic political system.  And the latest shocking wave in the closing of the 20^th century is the fall of the authoritarian regime in Indonesia in 1997. All these facts clearly show that democracy has been an inevitable phenomenon. In international relations today, democracy yields recognition and prestige while dictatorships and military states suffer from a weak level of respect.

From Economy to Democracy

What causes the shift toward democracy?  There are at least three major causes where two of them are rooted in economic domain.  The first is related to economic performance.  Interestingly, either good or bad economic performances contributed to the development of democracy.  The worldwide stagnation in the early 1970s, partly due to oil shock, caused many authoritarian regimes, especially in southern European countries, to lose legitimacy as a result of poor economic performance. 

The same situation also occurred in Latin American countries.  The high inflation rates and the negative rates of economic growth forced military governments in the region to surrender to the democratic wave, while incredible economic performance in Asia produced the economic and social bases for the introduction of democratic systems.  Clearly, nations with better-educated, more literate and substantial middle classes people had promoted their societies and government to a more democratic direction.

Secondly, the introducing of economic liberalization in 1980s that widely promoted by the IMF and the World Bank.  The liberalization itself did not instantly create sound fundamental economies in many countries.  However, it has successfully manifested the importance of economic freedom as reflected in the greater role of market and decreasing role of the state in the economy.  As an economy evolves toward a market economy, power, although relatively slow, is transferred from the state to society.  Thus, the decreasing control of the state over society and the increasing control of society over the state have promoted democracy.

The most important cause is arguably the internationalization trend that has been occurred since the post War World II.  The revolution in science and technology not only has made the world we live forever a smaller place, but also significantly advanced human civilization. A more civilized nation is characterized by better human right conditions of its people.  And this is exactly the essence of democracy.

As people in other countries follow this situation, the demand for democracy will emerge, forcing the authoritarian leaders to move in a democratic direction. Samuel Huntington (1992) calls this process as the demonstration effect or snowballing phenomenon.  This brings a clear message to every nation that any efforts to swing the pendulum back to authoritarian regime, although it is not impossible, will render an enormous cost.

However, although democracy seems inevitable as it promotes people’s freedom and rights, its realization and advancement require laborious efforts.  The question is, how can we enhance our still-infant democracy amidst all elements that may intervene and change the course of its development, including disintegration threat, violence and fragile national leadership?

To answer the question, we need to examine the role of five elements that affect the enhancement of democracy.  The first is related to our main task, economic recovery and development.  The economic liberalization and recovery efforts that seriously conducted by the new government have to be aimed at promoting more economic freedom and enhancing the living standard of our people.  Basic human needs approach that emphasizes the importance of people in development must be the main strategy of our economic policy and thus it should bring some fundamental implications in our economic plan (see an article Putting people first in the development program, the Jakarta Post, November 15, 1999).

The top priority of the new economic plan unveiled recently by the government is to obtain sound macroeconomic indicators.  This is necessary but not sufficient.  There is no yet clear exposition and targets on human development issues such as education, income distribution and unemployment included in the plan.  The ultimate value of economic development is to foster political freedom by enhancing economic participation of our people. And this can only be achieved if our development program is based upon people-based plan, not sound macroeconomic-based plan. 

An elementary economic textbook suggests that any efforts to obtain low inflation rates, at five to nine percent as the government has targeted, will boost unemployment rates. This is known as the short-run tradeoff of inflation and unemployment discovered by British economist, Arthur Phillips.  Using data released by Central Bureau of Statistics, range from 1979 to 1997, the writer finds that the tradeoff does occur in Indonesia.  It implies that we will soon anticipate a higher unemployment rate as a result of policy reducing inflation rates.

Ironically, a high unemployment rate is widely believed as the major cause of violence spreading now across the country.  Last year, an open unemployment rate was more than 20 percent (including labor force working less than 20 hours peer week).  Total population living under poverty line of 97 thousand rupiah, or US$14, per month is 50 million (CBS, 1998). An unstable social economic condition, driven by high unemployment rate, not only will impede the development of democracy, but also will likely pull back the nation to authoritarianism. 

A seemingly ambitious target of 3,5 percent of economic growth this year does not contribute much to the development of democracy as long as the economy is built on a still- rootless foundation.  Widely known that Gross Domestic Product (GDP), and thus GDP growth or economic growth, is a misleading indicator.  It takes no account of income distribution nor includes the non-market economy of household and community.  In addition, it ignores the drawbacks of living on foreign assets as government and private sectors increase their spending by borrowing from abroad. 

National policy makers need to recast our development planning strategy.  The measurement of poverty profiles and delineation of policy action to increase the productivity of the poor have to be as important as planning the standard goal: economic growth.  Rather than stressing on the growth target, the government should give emphasis to how many new jobs they can create and how many small-scale businesses they can help to advance.  Only by achieving these goals, we can improve our people’s social and economic conditions and promote our democracy

Therefore, to enhance our democracy requires a reorientation in our development strategy.

The Role of Social Institutions

A people-based development strategy will give a strong foundation on the advancement of democracy.  However, that strategy would work if only supported by the real actors in the field, business people and press, and protected by a reliable justice system.

In other words, democracy needs a high level of professionalism within the businesses, press, police and criminal justice system to minimize personal enrichment at the expense of the whole nation such as corruption and collusion practices.  Professionalism dictates that any activities should be conducted in the line of duty and bound to ethics and rule of law.  The primary duty of businesses, press, police and criminal justice system is to serve society, not the other way around. 

Businesses that serve only their own interests, by increasing their monopoly power or market share through unfair competition or bribery activities, will undermine the development of democracy.  Press that only focus their priorities on the freedom of speech principle and profit motive, without bound to national integration and social responsibilities, will be a counterproductive to the enhancement of democracy.  Police and criminal justice system that fail to establish justice and security will only raise skepticism toward democracy.  The lack of security has raised doubt about the essence of democracy.  Many people have misunderstood democracy as demo-crazy.

The enhancement of democracy also demands social and cultural development, which facilitate the link between economic and political development and the advancement of democracy.  The route is simple.  Democracy is about value and way of life.  The ways people live and associate, the traditions and customs they carry forward and the values attached to social and cultural relationship matter alongside political and economic freedom.  This implies the enhancement of democracy in society must be begun from two important institutions that have been long ignored: school and family. 

Democratic values embody the ideals that the demand for freedom is as important as the willingness to listen and respect others, that to preserve social harmony is superior than to create social disorder and that fairness is the key to a social harmony.  They all should be introduced and taught from the elementary to high school level.  The important task for department of education is to incorporate democratic values into curriculum.  The moral Pancasila course has obviously failed to elevate morality of our young generation.  The course is regarded as a part of indoctrination efforts by the New Order regime.  

Family institution also plays important role. Family should be the front-runner institution in introducing and enhancing democratic values.  Parents, in teaching their children with religious values, should stress that The Supreme God did not create the world in a boring homogeneous setting. The beauty of the world is unequivocally laid in the heterogeneity of its creatures.  Most important from all, God blesses human beings with freedom. Any movement to destroy heterogeneity and freedom is absolutely against the will of The Supreme God.

In addition, they must also introduce universal principles of humanity to their kids. It means they should teach their children that people with different religion, races, ethnic groups or economic achievement, should not be viewed as enemies but rather as friends to develop and growth together.

Ultimately, the future of our nation, and thus our democracy, is determined by the quality of our young generation. Thirty years of New Order regime not only has created corrupt politics and economy, but also bequeathed a poor morality to the young generation. Many young generations today have been actively involved in the so-called bootlicking activity.  They rely not on their skills and capabilities, but on their propinquity to high level bureaucrats or military officers.  Their minds are preoccupied by short-term rather than long-term advantages.  Their goals are more individualistic rather than social oriented.  They are liabilities rather assets for our future.  This type of generation will undermine the development of democracy.

Fortunately, we still have good young generations that believe work hard and competence are superior and more beneficial than ingratiatory activity. This type is asset for our future. The enhancement of our democracy, therefore, will be determined how our society is able to distinguish between them and construct an appreciation system that encourages the latter and discourages the former.  And last but not least is the leader factor.  Due to the paternalistic nature of our culture, a clear national vision of leaders, from political to religious leaders, constitute a powerful motivation to promote democratic values in our society.

This suggests that all leaders should have deep compassion on democratic values and humanity issues regardless their backgrounds.  They have to be the leaders in eliminating the most fundamental obstacle in enhancing democracy: our national fear and paranoia about religion, race and ethnicity issues.  We undoubtedly lack leaders like Muhammad Hatta and T.B. Simatupang who not only kept their faith as personal matter, but also stood for humanity beyond anything, including their careers. 

A wonderful line says, "Leaders are not to be served, but to serve.”  Serving people both in words and actions is the only people's expectation that has been longingly waited from our leaders.  

Your comment

Back to top