In this occasion of Beijing 2008 Olympics, I'd like to talk a little bit about my view of China. I know that many of you are reviled about China's human rights abuse, and many were adamant about Tibetan freedom (or autonomy), and wish that China would open up, and hopefully in one day will embrace Democratization of its government. I understand that for you who have enjoyed the freedom and benefits of a democracy like the United States', certainly you desire the end of a one party rule in the most populous state on the world. However, me being an Indonesian who has tasted how a democracy works in this third world country of mine, I have to say that perhaps for China, this authoritarian one party-rule is best for them.
I know that it's a very funny thing to write in such a progressive blog like this, but let me humbly offer you the point of view of where I'm standing right below the fold, and why I would say that. Granted, this piece of writing will probably not be a mojo magnet, but perhaps it would give some insights.
Let me start by telling you a little history about the newly formed Indonesian democratic process and how democracy is viewed by many of my colleagues here in Indonesia. We basically ended the dictatorship of Suharto in 1998 and it was replaced by a hodge-podge of multi-party government. Of course, at first people were hopeful. They thought that if they vote for the opposition party, they would have better days ahead. Expectations were high that the ailing economy would be fixed, and corruption would be eradicated. That hope were soon dashed.
First, the Abdurrahman Wahid administration came to power, even though his party didn't win the majority of votes. Through some arcane rule, the winner - PDI-P party which championed Megawati - became the vice president. Wahid turned out to disrespect the parliament (which I thought were rightly so) and so he got sacked and replaced by Megawati. She in turn didn't do anything much in her administration. Not a single corruption charges were made, and we were disillusioned by her and her husband's machinations. And now we have the Yudhoyono administration, who came to the presidency by a majority of popular vote.
In the mean time, the economy was not improving by much. True, the GDP count grew by 5-6% annually, but most of it went to the richest 1% (the monetary crisis of 1998-2000 were the biggest wealth redistribution from the poor to the rich). There are some advances in the fight against corruption, which I give the highest kudos for my president, but it still doesn't stop the culture of corruption There are minimal infrastructure development going on in the provinces, with money mostly gone to the capital to be corrupted. Every other week I read news of main provincial roads damaged from landslides, rain, flood, and so on.
Also, our democratic discourse is not improved at all. Politicians' campaigns are all reduced to really silly and stupid slogans that don't talk about issues. Heck, they don't even talk about characters. To give you an idea of how bad our campaigns are, the current Jakarta's Governor's slogan was "Coblos kumisnya!." Translated, it means "Punch [the ballot in] the mustache!" The campaign really was reduced to putting as much banners with his face (with the mustache) to all the corners of the city. I thought his policies were actually terrible: a continuation of the old governor's one. But of course he won. He came from the most moneyed party, managed to put the most banners, and the people really do remember his simple slogan. Punch his mustache on the ballot! And then, a year later in Surabaya, one of the candidates used the same slogan, but this time in East-Javan dialect. Needless to say, he won too.
And so, amidst all these bleak display of democracy "inaction," many of us were looking at our neighbor up north. We look at China and Vietnam, and see them surpass us in everything - economy, clout, progress, etc. There was a time, back in the 1980s, where our politician could say that China was behind us - that we were more advanced than her. Now, that kind of comparison is not valid. We are now forced to compare ourselves with Vietnam, but even that may be slipping away.
Many of my friends now see China, and they mutter "perhaps WE weren't ready." Many more, businessmen and lay people, were even pining for the days of Suharto. They argue that our people are simply not ready for a democracy - that before it comes, we need to first develop our economy first. And they also believe that if China were to go down the road Indonesia took, they would soon be fractured into stagnation. Deep down inside, I really love the freedom that I have right now. Who knows if I could access Youtube or if blogging would be free if there's a regime like the Suharto. But I can't help but nod in agreement for anyone who says that we should have been like China.
For all the ills of the communist regime, it seems that the leadership has some semblance of wanting to make real progress for its people. Since Deng Xiaoping, the leaders are more technocratic and less like Mao Zedong or Robert Mugabe so far. China seems either to be really lucky to have these kinds of leaders or was well prepared to handle succession. Of course, China is not free from corruption (even with the death penalty!). China's not free from mistakes (Three Gorges Dam? Tibetan Propaganda?). But here's what I see from the authoritarian regime: it has the power to force the implementation of policies if they thought it would advance the majority, even in the expense of the minority.
It sounds terrible, but consider one extreme example that happens in Indonesia. The local Surabaya government has a plan to build a major arterial road to ease traffic. The road was supposed to have three lanes each direction. But smack dab in the middle of the road, one mosque is standing in the way, and the government is powerless to move it unless they want to see the mobs attacking the city hall. So now, the traffic on the road becomes truly terrible as three lanes merge into one to get around the mosque.
But then, am I advocating authoritarianism against democracy? Not so. Democracies have many weaknesses, but among the bad, it probably is the best choice of a government form. I mean, who can guarantee that the Chinese leaders would always be benign? Who's to say that they won't one day turn to the worse? However, I believe that the western world (US and Europe) take their democracies for granted. The United States is among the most fortunate nation in history. It has a group of founding fathers who, although they have their differences, work hard with reason to create a nation that is truly progressive in its day. It has a deep culture of assembly and representation - taken from the Anglican culture of course. It takes many generations, the culture of enlightenment, and some semblance of interest in politics to really have a proper democracy. Like Iraq, you cannot just have a ballot and then hope for democracy to bloom. There are questions of sectarianism, petty dynasties, corruption, and the lack of civic knowledge among the people - most especially in the third world countries.
The examples given to us in the third world countries are stark. In the Philippines, democracy is like a circus, not dissimilar to Indonesian one, or perhaps even worse (a very interesting factoid I always repeat: Philippines was one of the richest Asian nation back in 1945. They go nowhere real fast). Progress in India comes head to head with a divided parliament, with the Communist party practically taking hostage of policies the Congress party want to advance. Pakistan is in shambles, its future still uncertain. In the mean time, one party China just held a truly grand Olympic event; one party Vietnam surpasses our GDP per head count; one party Malaysia "steals" our culture (claiming Kris, Angklung, and even patenting a pattern for Batik) and holding its head up high among emerging nations; and one party Singapore is the richest among the Southeast Asian nation. True, Malaysia and Singapore are nominally democracies, but try to publicize criticism to their governments and it will be apparent that they really aren't. And also, don't be surprised if we start to hear the Iraqis pining for the days of Saddam's cruel rule.
In short, many among us living here see authoritarianism in a different light from many of you in the United States. What you see as the rule of an iron fist, we see as a strong hand guiding a poor and fractured nation. But having said all these, I still believe - or HOPE - that one day Indonesia will truly have a mature democracy. I see small progress everyday: The commission to fight corruption is tackling corruptors left and right; political TV shows start appearing; and debates are more open and informed, although still lacking. Who knows, maybe one day our voters will be better educated about civics and informed about the policies of candidates. Perhaps then we can truly make great progress, maybe even surpassing China. But before that happens, it cannot be helped that many here in Indonesia will see democracy not as a necessity, but a hindrance to their own progress. Frankly speaking, we see many bad examples of democracies, and China offers a terrible alternative that works in appearance. If the idea of spreading democracy is to work, it would be important for democracies to set a good example to us.
Then again, Bush was reelected in 2004. Heh heh, what I really meant to say after this long rant is this: please please oh please don't mess up this time, Americans!!!!