B. Herry-Priyono
With the buzz of the elections still in the air, there is a need to be less political about politics.
At least two signs are presenting themselves.
One is the bizarre symptom of mental disorders that have befallen several losing candidates in the wake of the legislative elections. On this account, there is nothing to say except that it's only common sense that politics is not meant for lunatics.
The other is no less crazy, but will have more far-reaching consequences for the future of political life in Indonesia. It is the widespread aspiration to be elected into public office based on the belief that it is a cash cow.
In the cash-cow business, the main concern is the highest pecuniary return. Of course, this is not to discount the presence of commitment to the public cause, an element that is assumed to be part and parcel of civilizing politics. It is indeed not improbable to find an occupation - political office included - in which the elements of pecuniary pursuit, self-expression and commitment to public causes are merging into a happy mixture.
Despite this possibility, however, we should not lose sight of the fact that politics is meant to be less of a job than a calling. The fact that it is a tall order does not disprove the point. Of course, to see it as a calling presumes that we expect political office to be a civilizing force. In this sense, political office refers to those rare skills by which its holder exercises their authority for the advancement of the common good. Otherwise, political office simply means self-indulgence that its holder may get from an exercise of sheer personal whim or from turning the office into a source of rents.
This is what seems to have been rampant on many levels of political office, and, it's why, instead of being the guardian of public representation, the House of Representatives has quickly become a chamber of rent-seekers. This is true not only for those assembling themselves in Senayan, but also for their lower counterparts at the provincial and district levels. Again, all this is not to forget that some are more committed than others in their dedication to public causes. But the persistent rent-seeking and corruption cases that have been perpetrated by legislative members at all levels over the past several years attest to a virulent symptom of what happens when the administration degenerates into a cash cow. The other two wings of political office - executive and judiciary - are not exempt.
But, isn't it the case that political office as a cash cow is the rule rather than an exception in most developing countries? It is indeed an unpleasant fact that in many developing countries political office is appealing for reasons of aggrandizement rather than that of commitment to public causes. What is it in political office that is so appealing? It is the lure of administrative-regulatory power. While the lure of power does not entirely explain the point, it is true that there is always pleasure in holding political power. The problem is that pleasure is a consequence rather than a cause. In the end, the heart of the matter lies in the potential of administrative-regulatory power to be easily converted into a source of rents and pecuniary rewards.
It is here that political office becomes a market and ceases to be a regulatory office. Or rather, the administrative-regulatory power vested in political office mutates into a commodity to be transacted with those whose interests require sanctions from the very administrative-regulatory office. It matters little whether the transactional initiatives come from the office holders or external parties. In economic terms, the power vested in political office is not only a supply in search of demand; it has itself become a demand in pursuit of supply. Either way, the end result is the same: How to corrupt public life by capturing the state's regulatory power.
Soon enough politics is besieged by the most intractable problem: The electoral process will install rent-seekers into political office, and rent-seeking politicians will treat the public office as a cash cow. Politics then rots, and rotten politics corrupts the electoral process further, which in turn breeds more rotten politics. Gone is the idea of politics as that noblest profession for advancing progressive alternatives to whatever is lacking in our shared life.
This endemic problem besetting Indonesia is not going to disappear soon. As is widely known, the first concern after these rent-seeking politicians are installed is to recover the costs they have spent on their election. After reaching some break-even point, they will start their next exploits for further pecuniary gain.
Does this mean that political office is better reserved for those whose concern is no longer confined to pecuniary survival? This tendency is indeed looming, and this is what makes politics so prone to plutocracy, or government by the wealthy. But once politics is turned into the prerogative of the wealthy, it degenerates into a cave-prison of self-perpetuating oligarchy. In this predicament, solution is a form of luxury, and the most intractable problem for reform comes from an unpalatable fact that political parties are comfortable with this practice precisely because it has been an ingrained habit.
It is amidst this impasse that I am reminded of two statesmen Indonesia has produced, i.e., Mohammad Hatta and Sutan Sjahrir, rather than Sukarno. From the start of the founding of this Republic, these two insisted that cadre formation is key to the future of political life. The reason is plain, in that politics is the affair for conviction politicians and not a business for demagogues and rent-seekers. Political parties will have beneficial and civilizing effects on Indonesian political life only if they dare to assume the task of educating their political cadres.
Thus political cadres may come from either poor or wealthy families, since wealth and poverty are not to prevent them from becoming principled politicians. Some will of course be corrupted, but many others will more likely understand what they are there for, and that hard work merits remuneration but remuneration is not the cause but a by-product of commitment to public causes.
Otherwise, as it is now, political office is little more than a rent-seeking exploit, if not a stage for snobbery and hoopla.
With the buzz of the elections still in the air, there is a need to be less political about politics.
At least two signs are presenting themselves.
One is the bizarre symptom of mental disorders that have befallen several losing candidates in the wake of the legislative elections. On this account, there is nothing to say except that it's only common sense that politics is not meant for lunatics.
The other is no less crazy, but will have more far-reaching consequences for the future of political life in Indonesia. It is the widespread aspiration to be elected into public office based on the belief that it is a cash cow.
In the cash-cow business, the main concern is the highest pecuniary return. Of course, this is not to discount the presence of commitment to the public cause, an element that is assumed to be part and parcel of civilizing politics. It is indeed not improbable to find an occupation - political office included - in which the elements of pecuniary pursuit, self-expression and commitment to public causes are merging into a happy mixture.
Despite this possibility, however, we should not lose sight of the fact that politics is meant to be less of a job than a calling. The fact that it is a tall order does not disprove the point. Of course, to see it as a calling presumes that we expect political office to be a civilizing force. In this sense, political office refers to those rare skills by which its holder exercises their authority for the advancement of the common good. Otherwise, political office simply means self-indulgence that its holder may get from an exercise of sheer personal whim or from turning the office into a source of rents.
This is what seems to have been rampant on many levels of political office, and, it's why, instead of being the guardian of public representation, the House of Representatives has quickly become a chamber of rent-seekers. This is true not only for those assembling themselves in Senayan, but also for their lower counterparts at the provincial and district levels. Again, all this is not to forget that some are more committed than others in their dedication to public causes. But the persistent rent-seeking and corruption cases that have been perpetrated by legislative members at all levels over the past several years attest to a virulent symptom of what happens when the administration degenerates into a cash cow. The other two wings of political office - executive and judiciary - are not exempt.
But, isn't it the case that political office as a cash cow is the rule rather than an exception in most developing countries? It is indeed an unpleasant fact that in many developing countries political office is appealing for reasons of aggrandizement rather than that of commitment to public causes. What is it in political office that is so appealing? It is the lure of administrative-regulatory power. While the lure of power does not entirely explain the point, it is true that there is always pleasure in holding political power. The problem is that pleasure is a consequence rather than a cause. In the end, the heart of the matter lies in the potential of administrative-regulatory power to be easily converted into a source of rents and pecuniary rewards.
It is here that political office becomes a market and ceases to be a regulatory office. Or rather, the administrative-regulatory power vested in political office mutates into a commodity to be transacted with those whose interests require sanctions from the very administrative-regulatory office. It matters little whether the transactional initiatives come from the office holders or external parties. In economic terms, the power vested in political office is not only a supply in search of demand; it has itself become a demand in pursuit of supply. Either way, the end result is the same: How to corrupt public life by capturing the state's regulatory power.
Soon enough politics is besieged by the most intractable problem: The electoral process will install rent-seekers into political office, and rent-seeking politicians will treat the public office as a cash cow. Politics then rots, and rotten politics corrupts the electoral process further, which in turn breeds more rotten politics. Gone is the idea of politics as that noblest profession for advancing progressive alternatives to whatever is lacking in our shared life.
This endemic problem besetting Indonesia is not going to disappear soon. As is widely known, the first concern after these rent-seeking politicians are installed is to recover the costs they have spent on their election. After reaching some break-even point, they will start their next exploits for further pecuniary gain.
Does this mean that political office is better reserved for those whose concern is no longer confined to pecuniary survival? This tendency is indeed looming, and this is what makes politics so prone to plutocracy, or government by the wealthy. But once politics is turned into the prerogative of the wealthy, it degenerates into a cave-prison of self-perpetuating oligarchy. In this predicament, solution is a form of luxury, and the most intractable problem for reform comes from an unpalatable fact that political parties are comfortable with this practice precisely because it has been an ingrained habit.
It is amidst this impasse that I am reminded of two statesmen Indonesia has produced, i.e., Mohammad Hatta and Sutan Sjahrir, rather than Sukarno. From the start of the founding of this Republic, these two insisted that cadre formation is key to the future of political life. The reason is plain, in that politics is the affair for conviction politicians and not a business for demagogues and rent-seekers. Political parties will have beneficial and civilizing effects on Indonesian political life only if they dare to assume the task of educating their political cadres.
Thus political cadres may come from either poor or wealthy families, since wealth and poverty are not to prevent them from becoming principled politicians. Some will of course be corrupted, but many others will more likely understand what they are there for, and that hard work merits remuneration but remuneration is not the cause but a by-product of commitment to public causes.
Otherwise, as it is now, political office is little more than a rent-seeking exploit, if not a stage for snobbery and hoopla.
No comments:
Post a Comment