Democracy is worst form of government, indeed
The late Suharto has become something of a poster boy for leadership as the nation searches for a president who can effectively deliver the goods.
PHOTOS of a smiling Suharto, who ruled Indonesia between 19661998, with the caption in Javanese “piye kabare? sih uenak dijamanku toh?” (How are you, better in my era, wasn’t it?) have been going viral since the 2014 election.
Suharto was a dictator, though his supporters would claim that he was a noble one. But the posters’ message is that Indonesia had a leader who delivered the goods, something that no other president since then has been able to match, so his supporters claim.
Suharto, who ruled with an iron fist, did deliver justice, security and welfare, but it is debatable whether his successors have fared better or worse. Ruling the country for 32 years, he was bound to have delivered something, while his successors have been subject to periodic democratic elections and limited to ruling for no more than two fiveyear terms.
The bigger question, as discussed at the recent Bali Civil Society and Media Forum, is whether democracy can deliver justice, security and welfare to all the people.
Indonesia makes a good case study to answer this question.
The track record of Indonesia since 1998 has arguably not been bad. The economy has improved significantly, in terms of overall GDP and per-capita-income growth, and the government today provides many services such as free health care, 12-year compulsory free education and cash aid for the poor.
Indonesia has a growing middle class, reflected by the number of cellphones, cars and and a growing appetite for holidays, both at home or abroad.
And there is freedom, all kinds of freedom, something that distinguishes today’s era from that of Suharto’s.
Why then, do some people still feel that they miss Suharto?
Perhaps they don’t really miss him, but they miss the certainty, the swift way decisions were made and the security he provided. They miss the effectiveness and efficiency that an authoritarian regime can deliver.
Democracy, unfortunately, is almost anything but.
Decisions are made through an arduous and cumbersome process, and the government is often mired in stagnation. Every single major decision has to undergo the democratic processes, meaning noisy public debates and endless deliberation by legislators.
We also have legislators who are good at grandstanding but ineffective in producing laws that reflect the aspirations of the people. In many ways, Suharto’s regime produced some better laws because they did not go through the lengthy debates we see today.
On security, Indonesia faces challenges in ensuring protection for people who are attacked or persecuted because of their faith, race, sexual orientation or even ideological leanings.
The forced closures of places of worship, the recent attacks against people because of their leftist ideological leanings, and the return of anti-Chinese sentiments, reflect that freedom are being denied to some.
Suharto would not have tolerated any of this, but then, he would not have tolerated a lot of other things, including dissent and differences of opinion.
Populism, the hallmark of democracy and one way of getting elected, also means leaders avoiding unpopular but fundamental problems.
These failings of democracy in Indonesia may have revived our memory of the good old days of Suharto (while forgetting the worse aspects of his regime), but they should not be used as a pretext for a return to authoritarianism.
Democracy in Indonesia is still a work in progress – the republic has been in this game for only 20 years.
Democracy, as the popular saying goes, is the worst form of government, except for all the others. The alternative, an authoritarian regime, may be swift and efficient. But if authoritarianism comes at the cost of freedom, an absence of checks and balances and endemic corruption, then yes, give us democracy any time.
We just have to work harder, through the democratic process, to fix these problems. — The Jakarta Post/Asia News Network