Kegagalan Tiga Demokrasi di Indonesia
Kegagalan Tiga Demokrasi
di Indonesia
Referensi: Dr. Daniel Dhakidae,”The Long
and Winding Road: Constraints to Democracy
in Indonesia, dalam R. William Liddle, ed.,
Crafting Indonesian Democracy, Bandung:
PPW-LIPI, The Ford Foundation and Mizan,
2001, hlm. 67-74
Characteristic of Constitutional
Democracy (Herbert Feith)
1. Civilian played a dominant role;
2. Parties were of great importance;
3. The contenders for power showed respect for
“rules of the game” which were closely related
to the existing constitution;
4. Most members of political elite had some sort
of commitment to symbols connected with
constitutional democracy;
5. Civil liberties were rarely infringed;
6. Government used coercion sparingly.
Six examples where the
constitutional democracy fails
1. Natsir
cabinet was too short-lived (from september 1950 to
July 1953);
2. The split of the army brought the country to the brink of
civil war;
3. Consensus on the purposes of the state was undermined
with the president appearing as a partisan opponent of
Islam due to the direct confrontation between Soekarno
and the islamic leader Isa Anshary;
4. A long election campaign split the country into
socioreligious and ethnic conflict;
5. Election interests of PNI allowed economic policies that
brought the country into high inflation; politicization of the
bureaucracy;
6. Challenge of the commanders of the regions to Jakarta
leadership.
The failure of the Liberal
Democracy as the result of:
The Idealist camp see the failure as the result of the
lack of sufficient institutional backup for
democracy:
• Lack of education;
• Lack of democratic culture;
• Insufficient economic base for democracy.
According to realists camp: Liberal democracy did
not fail, it was killed. If there is a failure, then it
is a logical consequence of a power game
between the army and the presidential office vis
a vis the social forces within the civil society.
Kegagalan Demokrasi Terpimpin
What had been achieved by Guided Democracy
was the growing power of President Soekarno
and the growing political strength of the Army.
“The systemic and planned democracy” failed to
achieve a healthy economic system.Indonesian
economy broke down. The murder of six army
generals capped the whole political and
economic chaos and the whole process led to
the Army coup d’etat in March of 1966 to bring
Sukarno and the whole Guided Democracy
down. It marks the end of the whole process
since 1956.
Kegagalan Demokrasi Pancasila
• One of the easiest ways of looking at the New Order is
to conceive it as the alliance of bureaucrats, the middle
class, or the bourgeoisie in general, and the military of all
ranks, especially its hundreds of Generals. All are united
in doing business of some sort. It comes to such a
degree that only two hundred of the conglomerates are
responsible for 58% of the GDP.
• All end up in encapsulating the New Order as a regime,
in and for itself, requiring no legitimacy. The only source
of legitimacy is the development success and it has no
need of any hetero-legitimacy coming from the society.
However, once its economy collapses the whole
structure follow suit, leaving not a single stone over
another
Contradiction of the New Order
Power Bloc
• A few instances:
1. A head-on clash with the NGOs managers; the
best example on the big dam project of
Kedung Ombo;
2. The Party Crisis- the Indonesian Democratic
Party (PDI)
3. Political Communication Crisis when
prestigious news magazines like Tempo,
Editor, and DeTik were closed down;
4. Despite their deprivation in the 1970s and
1980s Islam emerged as a competing power to
the New Order.
di Indonesia
Referensi: Dr. Daniel Dhakidae,”The Long
and Winding Road: Constraints to Democracy
in Indonesia, dalam R. William Liddle, ed.,
Crafting Indonesian Democracy, Bandung:
PPW-LIPI, The Ford Foundation and Mizan,
2001, hlm. 67-74
Characteristic of Constitutional
Democracy (Herbert Feith)
1. Civilian played a dominant role;
2. Parties were of great importance;
3. The contenders for power showed respect for
“rules of the game” which were closely related
to the existing constitution;
4. Most members of political elite had some sort
of commitment to symbols connected with
constitutional democracy;
5. Civil liberties were rarely infringed;
6. Government used coercion sparingly.
Six examples where the
constitutional democracy fails
1. Natsir
cabinet was too short-lived (from september 1950 to
July 1953);
2. The split of the army brought the country to the brink of
civil war;
3. Consensus on the purposes of the state was undermined
with the president appearing as a partisan opponent of
Islam due to the direct confrontation between Soekarno
and the islamic leader Isa Anshary;
4. A long election campaign split the country into
socioreligious and ethnic conflict;
5. Election interests of PNI allowed economic policies that
brought the country into high inflation; politicization of the
bureaucracy;
6. Challenge of the commanders of the regions to Jakarta
leadership.
The failure of the Liberal
Democracy as the result of:
The Idealist camp see the failure as the result of the
lack of sufficient institutional backup for
democracy:
• Lack of education;
• Lack of democratic culture;
• Insufficient economic base for democracy.
According to realists camp: Liberal democracy did
not fail, it was killed. If there is a failure, then it
is a logical consequence of a power game
between the army and the presidential office vis
a vis the social forces within the civil society.
Kegagalan Demokrasi Terpimpin
What had been achieved by Guided Democracy
was the growing power of President Soekarno
and the growing political strength of the Army.
“The systemic and planned democracy” failed to
achieve a healthy economic system.Indonesian
economy broke down. The murder of six army
generals capped the whole political and
economic chaos and the whole process led to
the Army coup d’etat in March of 1966 to bring
Sukarno and the whole Guided Democracy
down. It marks the end of the whole process
since 1956.
Kegagalan Demokrasi Pancasila
• One of the easiest ways of looking at the New Order is
to conceive it as the alliance of bureaucrats, the middle
class, or the bourgeoisie in general, and the military of all
ranks, especially its hundreds of Generals. All are united
in doing business of some sort. It comes to such a
degree that only two hundred of the conglomerates are
responsible for 58% of the GDP.
• All end up in encapsulating the New Order as a regime,
in and for itself, requiring no legitimacy. The only source
of legitimacy is the development success and it has no
need of any hetero-legitimacy coming from the society.
However, once its economy collapses the whole
structure follow suit, leaving not a single stone over
another
Contradiction of the New Order
Power Bloc
• A few instances:
1. A head-on clash with the NGOs managers; the
best example on the big dam project of
Kedung Ombo;
2. The Party Crisis- the Indonesian Democratic
Party (PDI)
3. Political Communication Crisis when
prestigious news magazines like Tempo,
Editor, and DeTik were closed down;
4. Despite their deprivation in the 1970s and
1980s Islam emerged as a competing power to
the New Order.