NOTHING SHEEPISH ABOUT INDONESIAN VOTERS
Instead of shouting shepherds and barking dogs, the smarter Australian abattoirs use ovine instincts to lead lambs to slaughter.
Trained wethers (castrated rams) or goats, move among the innocents, gain their trust and then lead their placid pals on a journey from paddock to plate.
Known as Judas, the betrayers get rewarded with handfuls of extra food and wear collars to ensure they don’t get their throats slit along with their followers.
Some in the commentariat, often from the West, think this country has a flock mentality, suggesting there are irrefutables regarding next year’s Presidential election. These include claiming voters will trot behind whichever religious leader claims to know how to run a modern nation because they’ve spent their lives studying holy texts.
Which is why much importance has been given to the selection of high-standing cleric Ma’ruf Amin as Joko Widodo’s running mate and shield against abuse from the religious right. It’s assumed the pious will gather at his side and ensure Mr Widodo gets a second term.
Mr Amin has a strong record as an Islamic scholar; whether he remains hostile to pluralism and social issues like homosexuality is another matter. Voters know what he is not - an economist of international standing capable of helping lead the nation out of the fiscal desert and into pastures new.
Electors are also aware that Subianto Prabowo’s VP pick Sandiaga Uno is a former well-heeled banker with a rich past. But he is no Gus Dur, equipped to offer moral guidance to a nation struggling, like all others, to handle a complex world.
To imply that citizens will chose on one criteria alone is a slander.
During second President Soeharto’s 32-year autocracy ballots were held to show the world that ‘democracy’ was alive though it was then well dead and thoroughly decomposed. These staged events were neither free nor fair.
Public servants were expected to vote for Soeharto’s Golkar Party; to ensure all complied, booths were opened in government offices. Witch hunts followed if voting papers were defaced, or backed a rival.
Those days are history and new generations which know nothing of that charade are flexing their opportunities. For them Merdeka! (freedom) is not just a yell on 17 August, but the right to choose partner, job, dress, behavior, faith - and leaders they hope are qualified and altruistic.
Aided by better education and the most open media in Asia, they hear the multiple voices bellowing in the marketplace of ideas and then decide for themselves. They can spot hypocrites wearing religious garb at their court sentencing. They know who owns the partisan TV stations.
There’s little privacy in Indonesia where petty officials have access to residents’ personal information, including their religion and marriage details. But the polling booth remains off limits, a sanctuary where faith and state can be separated.
Whatever T-shirt the voter wears, once the curtain is drawn she or he can push a hole through the candidate of their choice and none will know. Even if the elector tells to keep sweet with family and neighbors, it doesn’t follow that’s the truth.
The suggestion that millions will back Mr Widodo because he has a theologian at his side, or go for Mr Prabowo because he has Mr Uno’s wallet to hand, insults all. It implies Indonesians are not independent, thinking individuals.
The story of Abdullah Gymnastiar is a sober reminder that people are not blinkered followers of religious leaders. Better known as Aa Gym the popular TV preacher had a well-rewarded career and millions of admirers. He seemed untouchable, but in 2006 lust ruled and he took another wife; although allowed under Islam, this didn’t stop the outrage. His support melted like ice in the sun.
Then there’s the case of the 1999 East Timor Referendum when observers confidently stated that the locals were happy with their lot and would vote accordingly. Instead 80 per cent chose separation when soldiers and spies were kept away from voting stations.
The prescient British author George Orwell imagined a future where groupthink ruled. That’s come to pass in China and North Korea, though who knows what the people would decide if cameras and guns were absent.
It’s certainly not this Republic where political debate is so lively it shames all ASEAN member states where despots, the military and royalty rule and suppress.
With seven months to go before the elections there’s ample time for citizens to hear all the competing claims and make up their own minds.
This country is often tagged by outsiders as an ‘evolving’ or ‘developing’ democracy. Those labels are flawed. Indonesia is well advanced and an example to the world. The electorate has matured.
No democracy is perfect - Britain with Brexit, the US with Donald Trump and Australia with unstable leadership show how the system can get tangled.
Whatever Indonesia’s difficulties now or ahead, most will judge candidates on their merits. The voters will bleat about their problems, but they are not sheep.
##
First published in The Jakarta Post, Saturday 13 October)
No comments:
Post a Comment