27 August 2016

Voting Flaws #2

Wait, brace yourself. I named this post Voting Flaws #2 yet i don't know whether or not the materials are still relevant, but... yeah you know it's my blog, so fuck it aight.

Now, as what i've written in the previous post, as i can recall, i wrote that our ideology is the root of the problem, now i think i'm gonna elaborate that sentence first in this post before i ever try to explain anything about a new system (since i haven't had it anyway).

Okay, intermezzo. I've been trying to build up this post's frame for months, i have discussed it with some people from many perspectives. I hope that i won't go to jail for this. Beside, my laptop has been broken down for perhaps 3 months, hopefully that explained why i didn't write a post last month, and i'm writing this very post (and the last one as well) through my phone, and i don't enjoy it... think these thoughts in my head won't be as great as what i've been thinking when it's written, i might do better with the laptop... but it needs

fuck it

Let's go to the bottom of the hell, or the front door of the jail. I have no idea what the previous sentence means, but i wrote it anyway, cause it's my damn personal blog, and you have the right to both read and not. And now i don't know what i was talking about. To be honest, i feel a little guilty to write about national matters in english... but i already wrote the last post in english... it'll be weird to continue something you've started in a total different way... and it bothers me more than it fucking should... so... that's where the bouncy emotion came from, sorry if i'm being like some of your girlfriends on their period...

So, mmmm i just attended a launching of a book titled "Jati Diri, Doktrin dan Strategi TNI" written by an ex marshall, Teddy Rusdy. I've been thinking about "THE ROOT OF OUR PROBLEM IS OUR IDEOLOGY" stuff long ago before i wrote the last post, and badly enough, i've discussed it with some folks of mine, and most of them agreed. Well that's bad, yeah that's bad, i literally might go to jail for this according to one or more inconsistently written rule(s), and might not in another.

Since i don't know whether people are the ones who totally don't get what Pancasila (Indonesian national ideology) is or it's me who's being totally ignorant about this, so i currently prefer to think that it might be unwise to deem that Pancasila is a total mess as a permanent standing point. Beside, practically, pancasila is a relatively young ideology, maybe some little more time might help. So, what i'll write in this post is my most recent thinking about the ideology, i'll try my best to keep an open mind about this, and i'll try as hard as my head's maximum capacity is able to, to be critical and objective when it's dealing with this ideology regards from now and on. What i'm saying is, my opinions, anything i'm going to write, especially this post, might change.

Aaaannndd, one day, one evening, i was stiting with a friend in the canteen before i sat together with this one dude, one dude i've known for almost a year, who suddenly came and talked about politics and governments. I've known this dude for almost a year, yet i've never had any idea that this dude is a Pancasilaist (person of Pancasilaism). Well we're all Indonesian people might be formally Pancasilaist (since it's against the law to not to) yet deep down i, myself, me, personally deny this country's ideology for some reasons (well of course i am, retard, this post would be a total nonsense if i'm not, nonetheless it's already a nonsense). Well, this one dude knows what he was talking about, that's the good side. He knows why he becomes a Pancasilaist, unlike any other hmmm... MAJORITY who don't give a shit about it at all.

So, he has some different points of views about what went wrong in Indonesia. And, he's not alone. Only by the end of our interesting discussion (i'll mention some important points from our discussion later), he invited me to come to the launching of the book. So bluntly, he threw some interesting stances on our discussion, yet they're not strong enough to shift my opinions regarding the ideology, although some other opinions of mine did change. That's why i think coming to the launching might be interesting, the seminar before the book launching might turn me into a true patriot, at least in the head.

I did really hope that coming to the seminar/book launching might change my opinions about Pancasila, but it didn't.

The seminar, for me, was a deepest gorge of nightmare where i stood alone among the indoctrinated single minded chauvinists. Fuck i'm not kidding the seminar was totally frightening for me. I mean like, i spent the full 3 hours thinking about what would these people do if they found out about a student, who is ideologically inclined toward liberalism or perhaps libertarianism, was standing among them. That's a good plot for a horror movie, guarantee that.

The only good thing about the seminar is, i got free books after the three hours of horror. Yeay.

So, i discussed these matters with a Pancasilaist, went to a launching of a book about historical journey of Indonesian constitution written by a total Pancasilaist with the extreme and radical Pancasilaist speakers (some of them are those who confused between ethnicity and nationality, now you know what kind of horror i was in right?) on the seminar, and yet, nothing changes.

All i haven't done is reading the free books i got yesterday from the launching, and chill, i'm on it, i'll give some update if i changed my mind. But for now....

It's still this way

Our ideology is a fucked up for a living. Yet although it's a super mess, we can never change it whatsoever, unless we want to throw indonesia away. Period.

So, here's a brief explanation why i said the ideology is not a good one. I don't know why the more i try to comprehend Pancasila, the more i think it's not what an ideology supposed to be. It's both too simple and too complex at the same time. Can be flexibly applied in one place, and at the same time rigidly inapplicable at the very same place.

So, one simple example, the first principle or decree or i don't know what to call it in english of Pancasila is "Ketuhanan yang maha esa" or in english it sounds more or less "We accept any monotheist religions, but jew. Well... fuck it. There are too many monotheist beliefs. We only allow 5 religions to be official in this country with 242 millions citizens. They will be Islam, Protestant, Catholic, Budhism, and Hinduism"

We don't accept godlessness very well here in Indonesia, since our ideology told us to do so. Well mmmm... that's still acceptable, yeah i do think that's acceptable for the ideology, but, but, what's unacceptable is the effect. Well some people can do very well with the first principle of Pancasila, but some don't. How? Demanding everyone to have a belief is sometimes wrong and sometimes not. It's okay when people can tolerate others, but it's a fucking mess when fanatics think they're right and others are wrong. This thing is tearing this country apart from the inside.

Well, there's no one to blame here, the fanatics are just trying to do what their beliefs told them to... my opinion about what's wrong is....

First, the ideology has no dick. If you want to have a fundamentalist country, go ahead make it a muslim country, or a catholic country, or any beliefs, at least be consistent so people don't get confused about who's wrong or who's right, at least people know what to do, at least the country and the people are having the same perspectives so they're not fighting each other on the inside and can focus themselves on making a better state of and for themselves since people agreed on the same line about what's good and what's not.

Second, the ideology (or we can say the founding fathers) had no idea it'll be this way 7 decades later. They ought to just simply don't give too much fuck about it, belief is too complex to be written out as a rule... i mean like, can you even prove a faith? It's God's business, leave it alone.

So, these fanatics from the opposite sides who holds each of their rights given from the first decree/principle of Pancasila, are fighting against each other for the rest of the 4 principles/decrees.

As simple as that. I just think that the 5 principles/decrees of Pancasila are irreconcilable. They're not synthesized, they're still in the form thesis and anti-thesis.

Well, that's my brief opinion about what's wrong with Pancasila.

So, back to the dude i've known for almost a year and those scary people in the seminar. These people, these Pancasilaists, absolutely have completely, 180 degree, different opinions regarding our ideology as what i have. And until this very second, i'm still thinking of "okay go ahead i want to listen to your perspectives and try to put myself behind it, i want to be one of yours, i want to understand the beauty of this ideology." That's why i went to the seminar, and still am finishing the book. So these people, they notice nothing wrong with the ideology. What's wrong with this country, for them, is the constitution.

At first i went, okay this is interesting.

So, the founding fathers made the ideology and the constitution as a package, but our constitution has gone through 4 times amendments after the civil revolution in 1998, which have replaced and/or create more or less (i forgot the exact percentage, but i'm absolutely sure they said the amount is more than 75%) 80% parts from the original one. The constitution is "a new constitution" and it's against what our founding fathers was trying to achieve. The new constitution is irrelevant, it's not ourselves, it's not our dream, and it's not what everything's supposed to be. That's the foundation of their arguments.

They said that, every happening bad things, is the result of the new constitution.

Then i thought about it... okay... mmm Pancasila might be a very good and ideal ideology, as what they said and what our founding fathers thought. It simply just has no right instrument to wholy and ideally achieve it.

Then i thought... perhaps, we still have the chance to fix this unfixable condition fundamentally, not by changing the ideology since it's impossible, but through the constitution.

The first thoughts, or maybe contra-arguments for that solution are these.

Well, the little problem about constitution is, the institution who holds the prerogrative to change or to remake the constitution is built from mostly individuals of parties, political parties. Which means, we're going back to the first problem i talked about at the first place, at the first post. The national institution who ought to build the constitution on the basis of society's needs, tend to forget about the genuine intention of why they were gathered.

In a simpler way, public welfares, or rules, or substantial benchmark for being an Indonesian which are made by the institution, sometimes are the results of ego race in the national institution (well not always, but there are parties, and i can't completely believe that it's not always about interests of some group or individual. There must be some of it, there always is) and, since we're using the voting system, the majority (in this case, it'll be the party who holds the most chairs) will always win. Once again, many forgot that they ought to run a country.

And that one dude i've known for almost a year argued that we shall fix this parties problem by making a rule in the constitution, by limiting it. Well, that's the spot of the fine line between democracy and aristocracy dude.

OH OH AND THIS IS ALSO ONE OF THE PROBLEM, DEMOCRACY.

It's almost impossible to run the true democracy in a place where the main value, the ideology is not liberalism. This is the main problem of ours.

Where is our country going?
What is our orientation?
What the fuck does "Demokrasi Pancasila" or "Democracy of Pancasila" mean?

So, shit i'm too tired to write about this Demokrasi Pancasila stuff. The point i plucked after i read some explanation about it is, it sounds like a fucking nepotism practice, this country will be turned into a fucking corrupt dynasty and eventually fall like it did almost 2 decades ago if that's how democracy actually went till now.

Yet, liberalism democracy itself also has one problem when it's dealing with governing. Given example, Switzterland, whom had been running the most complete and most perfect form of democracy than any other countries ever been, sometimes deems that full democracy is stupid. Switzterland has always been doing tens of referendums each year, cause they don't have the institution who has absolute control in making rules. It's fully opted with manhood suffrage, i don't know whether it was each rules or only some, but what i know is, the institution always runs many referendums each year. The institution only gives the direction, and the decision will be people's to make. Now, suffrage indicates that there's a tyranny of majority, it's not always a bad thing, tyranny is not always a bad thing, BUT, but it IS a bad thing, when referendum goes wrong, like Brexit. Because, MAJORITY DOESN'T GIVE THE SLIGHTEST FUCK AND DOESN'T FUCKING UNDERSTAND SHIT ABOUT NATIONAL ISSUES. MAJORITY WON'T GIVE A FUCKING FUCK AS LONG AS IT'S NOT DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO THEIR PERSONAL LIVES. That's the worst place democracy could ever been in. But still, in this kind of world where allies won the world war 2, and liberalism won the cold war, that kind of democracy is much better than any form of facism.

Once again, these thoughts or contra-arguments are what i had in my head, before i read the original constitution. Aaaannndd surpriiiseeeeee, i read it last night.










Now i get no wonder why the institution changed it.

So, for me the problem is still the ideology, nothing else.

The new system about voting? For now fuck that, either change my mind about the ideology or change the ideology.

Ciao.

0 comment(s):

Post a Comment