TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
One fundamental reason why conflict is unlikely
There is no doubt that Prabowo Subianto is not Joko âJokowiâ Widodo, and vice versa
Change Size
T
here is no doubt that Prabowo Subianto is not Joko 'Jokowi' Widodo, and vice versa. But in order to gain a good perspective, we need to look at the specifics of each of these two major figures.
Probowo has an illustrious family lineage. His grandfather, Margono Djojohadikusumo, was one
of a small elite of Western-educated figures, thanks to the Ethical Policy launched by the Dutch colonial government in 1901, and the founder of Bank Nasional Indonesia (BNI) in 1946.
The achievements of Prabowo's father, Sumitro Djojohadikusumo, also offer impressive credentials. Citing economic-cum-pluralism campaigner M. Dawam Rahardjo, Sumitro ' together with Mohammad Hatta and Sjafruddin Prawiranegara ' was one of the historic groundbreakers of Indonesia's economic policies.
The legacy of their grandfather and father has been extended by Prabowo and his brother, Hashim Djojohadikusumo, with the former becoming an Army general and the latter, a businessman.
Through Hashim's achievements, the solid line that ties the three generations together has managed to accumulate three social strata: priyayi (aristocrat), ksatria (knight) and pengusaha (businessman).
Jokowi, on the other hand, is a commoner, a man of the people. Jokowi was raised in a family of carpenters. His father, Notomiharjo, was once homeless and moved from one place to another in Surakarta (commonly known as Solo) Central Java. The significant moment that changed the family's status was Jokowi's graduation as a 'wood engineer' from the forestry school at Gadjah Mada University (UGM) in Yogyakarta in the late 1980s. After working in Central Aceh for a while, the university degree led Jokowi to set up a furniture business.
Thus, unlike Prabowo's family, Jokowi's family did not boast a status of high socioeconomic standing.
Riding on the wave of his shiny family's sociocultural as well as economic history, by entering Indonesia's presidential race, Prabowo has staked his future political career on the chance of assuming the country's top job. In contrast, Jokowi, whose upbringing was devoid of such a shiny family history, ended up in the presidential race by taking a radically different path.
In other words, through Jokowi ' who ended up being nominated to run for president in the vast nation that is Indonesia ' we are witnessing a radical change in people's political consciousness.
For it is the first time we have seen a member of this country's elite being challenged by a wong cilik (ordinary person) in the pursuit for the nation's leadership.
However, although it has at times been fierce, this 'elite versus commoner' political struggle will not break the nation. It is undeniable that this power struggle has created socioeconomic and political polarization during the presidential campaign period. But it must also be noted that such polarization is merely a reflection of such a political contest.
How should this situation be approached? At this juncture, we could offer the phrase 'exigency', used by sociologist Chalmers Johnson in his work, Revolutionary Change, a reference to which I found in States and Social Revolutions by Theda Skocpol.
In explaining a stable society, Johnson sees the importance of the performance of a 'value coordinated social system'. What he means by this is that the stability of a society will continue as far as the people share fundamental values. It is the adherence to values that keeps a society bound together.
Certainly, within its dynamic development, a society cannot escape from any exigency. But, to the extent that a value-coordinated social system performs well, every exigency that emerges from dynamic development can be accommodated within the system.
Radical social change, including revolution, only happens when the exigencies cannot be accommodated anymore.
In the Indonesian context, I tend to see the five-yearly presidential elections as a regular exigency ' in the sense proposed by Johnson. And, as we have been witnessing during the reformasi period, the nature of exigency created by every presidential election can be safely accommodated in Indonesia's 'value-coordinated social system'.
The question is, what is the concrete form of Indonesia's 'coordinated-value social system' that binds both Prabowo and Jokowi in it?
Other than the election laws, the General Elections Commission (KPU) regulations as well as the law on political parties, there are at least two additional elements that subjectively function as 'the binding point' for these two presidential hopefuls within Indonesia's social system: The nation's specific history and the personal motives behind both Prabowo and Jokowi's ideas and actions during this presidential contest.
In the context of national history, both Prabowo and Jokowi certainly realize that the emergence of an independent Indonesia was the subjective projection of the nation itself. This should be specifically emphasized, for it was quite unimaginable to free Indonesia if it relied solely on objective considerations.
In addition to the mental weakness of Indonesians that was intentionally created by the Dutch colonial rulers for centuries, this objective reality was vividly drawn by looking at the fact that the claim of Dutch sovereignty over the East Indies was internationally endorsed, despite the 1945-1949 National Revolution. Without this nation's subjective determination, it is hard to imagine that Indonesia would finally free itself from the shackles of Western colonial power.
This subjective zeal, which was translated into the spirit of patriotism, is no stranger to Prabowo's family. Prabowo's uncle, Subianto, sacrificed his soul in the fight against colonial power ' for the sake of this subjective determination in 1946.
By looking at this fact, it defies logic if we believe that Prabowo would instigate social conflict at the expense of the nation's stability merely for the sake of winning
the presidency.
The same point can be made about Jokowi. A member of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), Jokowi is fully aware that the party in its modern form is the continuation of the Indonesia National Party (PNI), which was established by Sukarno, a fighter for Indonesia's independence and the country's first president.
It is in this subjective context that we can understand both Prabowo and Jokowi's personal motives for contesting this year's presidential race. The concrete fashion of this presidential contest is, therefore, to quote anthropologist Clifford Geertz, a manifestation of the 'politics of meaning' and a 'struggle for the real', namely the fight for the most authoritative interpreter of the reality of Indonesia. The essence of this contest is, therefore, a cultural struggle that is articulated within the realm of politics.
This, then, is what forms the 'value-coordinated social system', which binds together Prabowo and Jokowi in the presidential election. And it is also the fundamental reason why I believe that conflict and political crisis will not occur after the KPU announces who will be elected president and vice president. What will happen is that the unlucky contestant will congratulate the lucky one, as a patriotic reflection of these two currently dominant figures.
__________________
The writer is cofounder of the Institute for the Study and Advancement of Business Ethics (LSPEU) Indonesia.
