By: Muhammad Adzkia Farirahman
There is nothing more tragic than the hubris of men in politics. Even today, Indonesia is widely considered a patriarchal society. This is evident in the public discourse surrounding the 7th president of the Republic. The 62-year-old male is celebrated as a ‘Father Figure’ of the nation, harking back to feudal times when Indonesia had yet to embrace democracy. Indeed, democracy hasn’t always been a part of Indonesia’s history; it’s relatively recent. The concept of the state as a family unit was only eliminated from the constitution during the 1998 reformation.
Writers like Abdurachman Pratomo suggest that, unlike liberalism, the merging of governmental titles like the presidency with the individuals who hold them, as advocated by the family state ideology, doesn’t restrain power but amplifies it. This lack of constraints creates a dynamic that centralizes management in the hands of a select few1. Supporters of this dynamic argue that it aligns with indigenous values characteristic of Indonesian society. However, upon closer examination, this justification of Indonesian values reveals a double fallacy. Firstly, it is influenced by Chinese Confucian philosophy, which promotes filial piety and hierarchically categorizes roles, placing fathers at the apex, implying absolute authority. This philosophy extends to every father being considered the king in his own family, which is extrapolated to the state in this context2. Secondly, it evokes memories of European medieval times when kings led dynasties that ruled over their kingdoms and subjects. This ideology, then, appears to be a hybrid of Eastern and Western elements, where the centralization of power becomes the defining characteristic of the system. The blending of the title ‘president’ and the individual holding it becomes even more perplexing, especially when considering the presidential term limit of five years, where the former suggests a sense of transcendence.
In line with this concentration of power in the hands of a few, the implications have been observed in the widespread use of the controversial Electronic Information and Transactions Law (UU ITE), particularly its so-called rubber articles that criminalize critical groups and individuals. The 2022 Freedom of Expression Report by the Southeast Asia Freedom of Expression Network (SAFENet) highlights the increasing numbers of civilian criminalization. This year has seen one of the highest prosecutions in the last nine years, totalling about 106 cases, with 97 of them resulting from criminalization. This is nearly three times higher than the previous high in 2021. The identities and backgrounds of the victims further illustrate the suppression of individual freedom of expression: ordinary citizens, activists, and journalists constitute no less than 47.17% of the total victims. In parallel, these individuals face digital threats, with 302 reports in 2022 alone, representing a 54% increase from the previous year3. This trend is expected to worsen as the election year approaches, despite the president acknowledging the need to revise these problematic articles.
Now, let’s delve into the current government’s approach to policies. A prime example is the nationwide project, like the infamous Food Estate, which highlights the flaws in power dynamics. Pantau Food Estate offers a comprehensive view of a policy primarily driven by hubris. From 2020 to 2023, the program disregarded critical environmental groups, academia, and local farmers in terms of the feasibility of peatland agriculture, leading to failed harvests due to flooded fields4. As early as January 2021, local farmers questioned the decision to increase seed planting frequency, resulting in lower-quality yields over time. This attitude, where men’s power can dictate both people and nature, only reinforces the overarching arrogance of the so-called ‘Father Figure.’ It could be assumed that the government knows more about farming than the farmers themselves. This arrogance is vividly reflected in the ambitions of the current administration, which seems to disregard issues like land degradation and deforestation. The Badan Restorasi Gambut dan Mangrove (BRGM) has even stated that the endeavour is too costly for its margins5.
Yet another faction of environmental advocates has voiced apprehensions concerning the activities of the present administration. Wahana Lingkungan Hidup Indonesia (WALHI) has castigated the endorsement of The Job Creation Act (RUU Cipta Kerja) on the grounds of both its procedural and substantive facets. This legislation has garnered the moniker of an “oligarchy triumph over the populace,” as there appears to be a close collaboration between the parliament and the government despite confronting considerable opposition from the public6. A recurring motif emerges in how the administration functions, with ordinary citizens being overpowered on all fronts by the capricious decisions of a privileged few at the apex. From a procedural perspective, the process lacked public engagement, a matter highlighted by WALHI. This approach seemingly favours a top-down strategy over a bottom-up one within the democratic framework. Moreover, in terms of substance, the bill has eroded the capacity of civilians to participate, access information, and seek justice. The government aims to weaken protective environmental mechanisms and documents to cater to business interests.
Another environmental concern emerges from aligning personal business interests with governmental decisions, leading to the rejection of the EU Deforestation Regulation. This rejection undermines efforts to establish a more sustainable future for the industry. Airlangga Hartanto, representing the Indonesian government, is more concerned about how the policy could raise palm oil export prices, making it less competitive within the European Union than other vegetable oils 7 . Richaldo Hariandja noted how biased comments about the EUDR (European Union Delegated Regulation) often arise from palm oil actors who are reluctant to acknowledge the need for strengthening and reforming the palm oil sector to enhance its quality and standards. Meanwhile, there is already experience and understanding of anti-deforestation regulations in the timber sector, which makes them more at ease in dealing with the EUDR. This showcases hubris and curious dualistic thinking, possibly rooted in modern-day neoclassical economic ideology, considering how unnecessary the reactions were. The government’s stance embraces a trade-off mentality, in which the impersonal mechanics of the market predominantly drive business operations. This perspective operates under the assumption that entities pursue their self-interest independently, often leading to a ‘race to the bottom’ scenario. However, this dualistic mode of thinking forces individuals to prioritize one aspect over the other, paralleling the binary treatment of gender.
The Italian equivalent of “gender” is “genere”, which focuses more on categories of things. It could be related to style or genre in musical terms. In reality, it’s more of a compass than a rigid categorical table. If the government were to adopt a feminist view of economics, it could be depicted as a matrix table consisting of positive economic and positive environmental factors on one side and negative economic and harmful ecological factors on the other. However, this is challenging in psychology due to our reliance on mental shortcuts and gender-schematic thinking. This pre-existing, common gender bias influences our thought process. The concept of the ‘Father Figure’ and economic trade-offs are gender-coded, as suggested by Julie Nelson8. The ‘Father Figure’ idea can be understood as an individual serving as the foundation of the entire family unit. Unlike the sentimental associations with mothers, this concept underscores a distinct lack of emotional attachment. It’s presented without reliance on others or particular interests. This portrayal heavily emphasizes culturally associated masculine traits while sidelining considerations linked to femininity. The ideas centred around profit maximization and competition stemming from rigid and gender-skewed thought patterns originating during the Enlightenment have become a complex barrier that entangles our cognitive processes.
Overall, these passages paint a picture of challenges related to governance, environmental policy, and freedom of expression in Indonesia, often attributed to a concentration of power and a lack of inclusivity in decision-making processes. These issues raise important questions about the direction of the country’s policies and their impact on various aspects of society and the environment. A small group at the pinnacle of power exploits the numerous privileges within the democratic system. This exploitation has led the entire nation to regress towards despotism. This is primarily due to certain unquestioned assumptions being accepted without proper identification. I contend that the notion of patriarchal Asian values should be wholly dismantled through education due to its perversion in today’s politics. The family state ideology has become indefensible in the face of today’s environmental and social challenges. It’s time to reject it. No, the ‘Father Figure’ at the top doesn’t always know what’s best. Through its aggressive developmental policies, the government demonstrates its disconnect. A father who doesn’t know how to respect academia and local communities shouldn’t command respect. Indonesia, as we know it today, has its priorities reversed, placing undue emphasis on superficial decorum over the actual destruction of the world.
The entire scenario can be summarized as a complex manifestation of how masculinity exposes its deficiencies, possibly rooted in longstanding cultural traditions, suppressing maternal and non-binary aspects within society. The disregard for care ethics is a significant concern. If only our leaders could embrace all aspects of themselves without shame, beyond their destructive ideologies, we might avert absolute destruction. Local communities affected by flawed policies like the Food Estate are not mere objects to be manipulated; they consist of individuals with limitless potential.
One can’t help but wonder about the endless possibilities. Currently, the Indonesian political climate heavily favours the president and his government. Reflecting on this, it becomes apparent that he remains largely unchallenged, even in the face of some policy failures, indicating potential parliamentary dysfunction. The lack of opposition may explain the rise of civilian critical groups in the public sphere, facing the risk of criminalization, a role that should ideally be fulfilled by the People’s Representative Council of the Republic of Indonesia (DPR- RI) with constitutional protection. However, this is not the case and further underscores the detrimental nature of the existing feedback loop.
Resources:
1. Pratomo, A. S. (2021). Constitutionalizing the Family State Ideology in Southeast Asia: The Case of Indonesia and Singapore.
2. Möller, H.-G. (2009). The moral fool: A case for amorality. Columbia University Press.
3. SAFENet. (2023). The Collapse of Digital Rights.
4. Food estate watch. Food Estate Watch by Pantau Gambut. (n.d.). https://foodestate.pantaugambut.id/en
5. Brgm: Food Estate di Lahan Gambut Berbiaya Tinggi, Tapi Hasilnya Rendah. RCTI+. (n.d.).
https://www.rctiplus.com/news/detail/nasional/2681388/brgm-food-estate-di-lahan-gambut-berbiaya-tinggi-tapi- hasilnya-rendah
6. Omnibus Law Wahyu – Walhi. (n.d.).
https://www.walhi.or.id/uploads/buku/Kertas%20posisi%20UU%20cipta%20kerja.pdf
7. Saturi, S. (2023, February 22). Indonesia-Malaysia Bahas Aturan EUDR, LSM: Saatnya Negara produsen
serius benahi tata kelola. Mongabay.co.id. https://www.mongabay.co.id/2023/02/21/indonesia-malaysia-bahas- aturan-eudr-lsm-saatnya-negara-produsen-serius-benahi-tata-kelola/
8. Nelson, J. A. (2010). Care ethics and markets: A view from Feminist Economics. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1619938
