Criticism and Democracy

The results of several recent surveys show record-high levels of public satisfaction over the performance of the President Joko Widodo-Vice President Ma'ruf Amin government.

This phenomenon is interesting amidst widespread public criticism of the government. In addition, the democracy index for Indonesia increased in 2021 after experiencing a period of continuos decline since 2016. Contributions to democratic progress came from the quality of the Constitutional Court ruling regarding the Job Creation Law and the President's adaptive attitude as regards critical voices in the public.

Here, we see the hidden connection between public criticism and democracy. Democracy is born from criticism against the power elite and democracy has grown upon the existence of the tradition of criticism. It is impossible to have a democracy without criticism (Kwant, 1962:80-84). Criticism in a democracy is a manifestation of the sovereignty of people who realize that they are the ones that lends power to the government.

Anatomy of criticism

Even though democracy has grown stronger, officials' resistance to criticism still follows the old paradigm. Criticism should be constructive, not degrading (dignity), and must provide solutions: no human being (including officials) is perfect. Officials also perceive criticism targeting their shortcomings as a vilifying act. Articles of the law on defamation are eventually used to serve the interests of the powerful.

In the digital era, criticism is easily capitalized beyond reasonable limits.

Criticism does not come from an ideal of perfection. The target of criticism is the social reality of human products (institutions) that could be better and, in connection with this, there are parties that are accountable for not doing what they should or for doing what they shouldn't. The targets of criticism are poorly planned (hurriedly issued) public policies, maladministration and covert corruption.

In the digital era, criticism is easily capitalized beyond reasonable limits. A group of people can target any government plan or action in their criticism, be overly critical, use harsh language, or damage the reputation of officials. However, pro-government resistance is capitalized on the grounds that criticism must also be appreciative. A group of people can desperately defend the government's policies until they have lost their critical power. In fact, criticism from those who distance themselves from power (not oppose it) is very important.

Polarization among the public has divided civil society. The government tends to proceed as “business as usual” with its policies and falls into political pragmatism. Legislation on sensitive matters are rushed. They are more concerned with procedure (rather than substance). If the legislative products are low quality, they will be fixed later.

The government with a “father knows best” style feels that it knows what is best for the people and does not need to absorb the aspirations of civil society. The instruments of state power also move to suppress the critical voices advocating for the people.

Anatomy of democracy

Leaders born of the democratic process are not always consistent and effective in realizing their campaign promises. They made these promises before assuming power, but then act differently after they have been elected. The state is not only a matter of the leader’s good intentions or plans, but also whether they are good in the field. Therefore, the execution of power still needs to be controlled from planning to implementation.

However, building democracy in modern times is not simple. The problems of a nation as regards the law, domestic and foreign politics, national defense, natural resource management, commerce and so on, are extremely complex. It takes special knowledge and insight for criticism to be on target.

Also read:

> Liberal Democracy Returns

> The Hyperpolitics of Our Digital Democracy

People only know that they are complaining about queuing for cooking oil, but there is the House of Representatives that ideally understands about better governance and should pressure the executive to solve the cooking oil crisis. However, legislative control can be ineffective when the majority of House members actually stand behind the executive.

In the case of cooking oil, some lawmakers have even exploited the crisis to win the hearts of the people by distributing the commodity, which is something that is not within their main duty and function (tupoksi).

The ineffectiveness of the legislature’s critical function is the result of the President having an absolute majority in the House (DPR). Executives become overconfident. A recent example is Manpower Ministerial Regulation No. 2/2022 on the Disbursement of Pension Fund (JHT). Prior to that, it caused nationwide controversies over the Corruption Eradication Commission Bill and the Job Creation Bill.

Therefore, democratization of democracy is necessary to achieve the ultimate goal of the state (Giddens, 1999). There is a paradoxical phenomenon in the West, where democracy is so well established that very few people exercise their right to vote.

Disappointed with a conventional democracy filled with partisan political agendas, some people rely more on their daily affairs to form interest groups over a single issue (fighting for the abolition of the right to own firearms, anti-abortion, animal rights, immigrant rights, environmental issues, and so on). These groups have tried to influence public opinion through political lobbies and have been successful.

Also read:

> Criticism Saves Development

> Mirage of Power

The substance of democracy is to strengthen the people’s bargaining power so they can prosper in the face of power which, if it is not controlled, can tend towards ve (over-criminalization). In the era of globalization, it is also important to strengthen people's bargaining power in the face of transnational capitalism, which can even kill democracy itself (Hertz, 2003).

All people have the right to enjoy fair distribution of the country's wealth, which is the state’s raison d'etre. Therefore, it is necessary to pay attention to the potential affairs of the authorities with (trans)national businessmen that could give birth to political pragmatism, especially with the presence of many big businessmen in the Cabinet’s ranks. More than two decades ago, our country almost went bankrupt because of a multidimensional crisis stemming from collusion, corruption and nepotism.

The behavior of our political elite these days does not demonstrate a sense of crisis. In fact, we have not emerged from the Covid-19 health emergency and now, are overshadowed by the food and energy crisis. In fact, the crisis was used as an opening for corruption, including by those who had just come to power. The people have also been helpless in seeing the country being controlled by political adventurers.

KOMPAS/HERU SRI KUMORO

Yonky Karman

Yonky Karman, Lecturer, Jakarta Theological Seminary

This article was translated by Kurniawan Siswo.