Dreaming of and Leading To Success

After 77 years of an independent Indonesia, what kind of perspective is appropriate in assessing its achievements and prospects?

If we are dreaming of a triumphant Indonesia, the indicative benchmark can start with Ray Dalio's assumptions in Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order (2021). Through examining the rise and fall of a number of past superpowers (major empires and dynasties), he concludes that their life span from their formation, to consolidation to the peak of their glory (and the beginning of their fall), lasts around 250 years.

Also read:

> Bearing Burdens Together

> Unachievable Independence

The necessary process to become a superpower in the past could last hundreds of years. Take, for example, the achievements of the United States. Almost a century after gaining independence in 1776, the US is still plagued with the integration issues that culminated in the Civil War (1861-1865). It wasn't until the next century that the US could gradually take off to achieve superpower status. However, thanks to the development of new technology-based globalization facilitating the transfer of knowledge and experience between nations, some countries like China could quickly attain superpower status in just a few decades.

However, compared to China, which was established only in 1949, Indonesia's lags far behind in its achievements.

Compared to the US’ trajectory, Indonesia's development pace so far is not bad. For the largest archipelagic country in the world with all the diverse and complex lives of its people, being able to quickly knit national integration without a massive and devastating civil war is a proud achievement. However, compared to China, which was established only in 1949, Indonesia's lags far behind in its achievements.

However, we cannot simply compare our nation’s speed of progress with that of other nations, given the different starting points in relation to historical background, sociocultural factors, environmental conditions, and resource potential. More importantly, does Indonesia meet the requisites to become a glorious country? For this reason, we must pay attention to the universally applicable formula for success in achieving national glory.

Psychocultural development

First, it needs a strong and capable leadership that pays attention to the development of quality human beings, in order to produce superior citizens who are highly capable and function effectively, with education as the main vehicle. Based on international experience, quality education is the passport to success.

Good education not only teaches knowledge and skills, but also strong character, civility, and work ethics, which are developed at school, in the family and in the community.

In this way, education can create healthy respect for laws and regulations, an ordered society, which leads to low corruption, a willingness to work together in diversity to increase productivity. This environment can encourage change from activities to produce basic products to an economy based on innovation and technology.

As the basis of success, education must cultivate value in knowing (knowledge), making (skills), and doing (character). Education in Indonesia has placed too much emphasis on cognitive learning so far.

Even in that aspect, when viewed from Benjamin S. Bloom's taxonomy, learning practices are generally still at the most basic level: memorization (remembering) is still far from reaching the highest level of creation (creating). Not surprisingly, the nation's cognitive capacity, as reflected in the level of literacy, numeracy, and problem solving, has fallen to the lowest level, even compared to neighboring countries.

With respect to the ability to create innovatively, this nation is also far behind, as can be seen from the indicators related to the level of innovation and efforts to advance knowledge-based (economy) resources. From a score of 0-10, Indonesia's score has declined gradually from 3.68 in 1995 to 3.11 in 2012. Indonesia's current ranking is still 100th out of 147 countries.

The Indonesian Democracy Index since 2017 has shown a backward movement in variables related to social cohesion.

In terms of excellence in doing (character), Indonesia is still fortunate that it has inherited the remnants of strong social capital: a multicultural nation that is united with the values of Pancasila with the spirit of Bhinneka Tunggal Ika (Unity in Diversity). In the latest developments, the level of civic competence has begun to show a declining trend. The Indonesian Democracy Index since 2017 has shown a backward movement in variables related to social cohesion.

The biggest challenge in developing civic competence in a pluralistic nation is the concurrent ability to appreciate plurality while finding similarities and working together amid the differences. As a result, what must be treated here is a healthy threshold of “schismogenesis” in the sense of anthropologist Gregory Bateson, namely a tendency to define oneself (one's group) by looking at the aspects that differentiates it from others.

To some extent, schismogenesis is needed as a source of self-discovery and self-value as a source of pride and healthy competition with others. Korea, for example, defines itself differently from Japan, being proud of ginseng and its own cultural characteristics, while at the same time taking Japan an arch-mimesis (model for imitation) to match.

In fact, Bateson concludes that if there is such a thing as a “national character”, it is nothing but the product of schismogenesis: the character of the English nation is formed because it should be as different as possible from France; France is different from Germany, and so on.

Anthropologist Marcel Mauss, in explaining the formation of “cultural areas”, concludes that diverse societies generally have many cultural similarities through borrowing cultural elements from each other, but tend to define themselves by emphasizing their differences.

This tendency can apply to both external (international) and internal relations between the nation's pluralistic elements. As a result, it is natural that inter-ethnic, intergroup, interreligious, even interdenominational relations among religion, within the extended family of the Indonesian nation, still maintain different identities, as far as the perception of the difference remains within the corridor of civil order while still respecting the existence of other identities as a source of self-discovery and motivation for achievements.

In fact, identity politics is not always bad, as long as the project for emancipation is healthy, as expressed by the feminist movement, the green identity movement, and various other marginal movements.

Instead of preventing the sources of marginalization caused by the dominance of predatory oligarchs, it sacrifices innocent citizens.

The problem is, the tendency of schismogenesis in the life of the nation today indicates a tendency to cross the corridor towards polarization that negates each other (mutual mistrust). With this tendency, the growing tendency of identity politics does not see emancipation as its project. It has actually slipped into discriminatory politics. Instead of preventing the sources of marginalization caused by the dominance of predatory oligarchs, it sacrifices innocent citizens.

Weakening literacy, empathy and social ethics has led this nation to experience a weakening of actuarial intelligence in the sense of anthropologist Christopher Boehm, which is a kind of conscious ability to reflect and measure the consequences are for oneself (individual) and another person (other individual) if on does something or does nothing.

We have also made many changes to the Constitution, regulatory frameworks, policies and institutional design without rational and long-term considerations, which can lead to social divisions and stumbling blocks for the nation in many domains.

Institutional-political

The realm of sociopolitical institutions and governance is an enabler for psychocultural and economic-welfare development. No country is bad; it is simply lacking in superpower or resources. A failed state is generally due to mismanagement.

Governing the state as a shared house requires balance between the roles of the state, the market and the people. Raghuram Rajan pointed out (2019) that if the state is too weak, the nation's life becomes full of fear, anarchism and apathy. If the market is too weak, the nation becomes unproductive. If the people are too weak, the nation tends towarsd an oligarchy (crony capitalism). On the other hand, if the state is too strong, the life of the nation is shackled by authoritarianism. If the market is too strong, the nation becomes unfair. If the people are too strong, the nation becomes static.

The three pillars can work together and carry out their roles according to their functions and capacities. The public is more appropriate as a shepherd of values (psychocultural); the state is more appropriate as a guardian of the governance of political and governmental institutions; the market is more appropriate as a vehicle for prosperity. Indonesia's problem today is that public watchdogs neglect to cultivate values; state administrators neglect to improve state governance; the market (business world) is busy enriching individuals by depleting natural resources, ignoring national justice and prosperity.

The state, as the administrator of governance in distributing roles and resources, does not work effectively because the market is too strong, with capital accumulation based on an extractive economy (not a knowledge economy) that relies on state licenses.

A massive amount of political funds flow from corporations and financial institutions to finance and direct politics and public policy for their own interests.

The interest of corporate investors in controlling state policies, which Robert Reich calls supercapitalism, illustrates the increasing competition in the business world for business opportunities and consumers, which then penetrates the political world. A massive amount of political funds flow from corporations and financial institutions to finance and direct politics and public policy for their own interests.

Even the big investors translate their financial strength directly into political power through the establishment of political parties. Political parties, which should be a vehicle for collective aspirations and action as instruments in the public interest, are being privatized. In other words, capitalism has invaded democracy. A crisis of democracy arises when investor interests win and when public values and aspirations lack effective means of self-expression.

State governance under private control paralyzes its teleological vision. Politics becomes trapped in short-term orientation, limited to welcoming the elections to gain power for the sake of power. In fact, Indonesia cannot avoid new influences on a global scale that will have a major impact on national life.

These global development trends include high levels of automation, streamlining “fat governments”, climate change, green energy use, pandemics, and widening social inequalities. All this should make us move away from the short-term politics towards visionary politics, which is more anticipatory and has a long-term orientation.

Welfare economy

In the economic field, the trajectory to progress requires alignment between the efforts to overcome social inequality and to increase welfare. The former can be done through the praxis of justice in distributing wealth, opportunities and social privilege through appropriate regulatory, redistribution, affirmative and welfare state instruments.

The latter can be done by lifting Indonesia's status from the middle-income trap through consistent economic transformation, from an extractive economy (resource-based) to an innovative economy (knowledge-based economy).

The policy direction for transforming into a knowledge economy can be learned from other nations, but it does not need to be the same. We can prioritize the development of science and technology that can add value to Indonesia's comparative advantage (unique potential).

There is no breakthrough to publicize research results or stimulate research activities in the hearts of the market or the public. In fact, innovative research must arrive and be able to meet the needs of the market and the people.

In addition, the links between research activities and the business world also need to be strengthened. It must be realized that the main obstacle to promoting research and innovation in Indonesia is that it is too centralized and relies on state initiatives and encouragement. There is no breakthrough to publicize research results or stimulate research activities in the hearts of the market or the public. In fact, innovative research must arrive and be able to meet the needs of the market and the people.

The best legacy of the founding fathers is the politics of hope. Although national development still has many shortcomings, we must not lose optimism. However, this optimism should be realistic, with a willingness to admit weaknesses while trying to improve.

Independence Day is the best time to self-reflect. "The spirit of the [Independence] Proclamation," said founding father Bung Karno, "is the spirit of being willing to fight, to fight to the death full of idealism. The spirit of the Proclamation is the spirit of unity, of absolute unity without excluding any group or layer. The spirit of the Proclamation is the spirit of building the country. And when now there are signs of weakening and degeneration, wipe clean all the germs of weakening and revive the spirit of Proclamation!”

KOMPAS/WAWAN H PRABOWO

Yudi Latif

Yudi Latif,Member of the Indonesian Academy of Sciences

(This article was translated by Kurniawan Siswo)