Legal Literacy - Recently, the public has witnessed many universities initiating joint statements (petitions). Joint statements containing criticism and concern that are currently afflicting Indonesia. Academics consisting of lecturers and students are expressing disagreement and deep sorrow over the behavior and political choices that have been carried out by President Joko Widodo. Disappointment arises when a figure or political figure who was initially known as a reliable political figure is now just a memory.
Academics' Petitions as Part of Political Orchestration Electoral?
Jokowi is showered and flooded with criticisms and responses that consider him to have no ethics. Ethics are considered the main point of the points of the statement conveyed. This condition reflects that democracy has been tried to be expressed in the willingness to think and act democratically. Democracy has taught Indonesian society to live appropriately in realizing its politics. So, is every argument or statement conveyed by academics part of a political orchestration electoral with a specific purpose?
The campus agenda, which can be considered independent and responsible, cannot be immediately considered part of political intrigue. Every statement that is managed and formulated in the joint statement has been sufficiently believed to be based on proven expertise or scientific explanations. However, is that sufficient belief also sufficient to be understood as a rooting of democracy that is trying to be revived so that it can grow and continue to develop?
The many initiatives that have emerged must certainly be appreciated and respected. Every inch of statement or argument revealed in the petition is ammunition for the public to be made aware but not to be argued over. The main problem limit of the 2024 election implementation process is not limited to Jokowi. The aggregate of community interests from all corners of the country is the main capital to continue to be fought for. Petitions should not be limited to reprimanding Jokowi, more than that, inviting every member of society to continue to oversee and maintain the dignity of democracy towards its adulthood.
Democracy that is developing in the reformation era should not target tendentious criticisms dominated by certain figures. The question is whether the political situation in Indonesia is only about figures or certain figures? What about the ideas of these figures, including their commitment? The public should not only look at the visible surface, but also be invited to realize and accept the consequences of the various appearances that have not yet appeared.
Divisions in the Five-Year Politics Should Not Occur
Leading up to the D-day of this five-year political contest, division should not occur. Each candidate has conveyed their vision, mission, ideas, and various actions that have been attempted in each of the five debate sessions that have been held. The debate should be used as one of the indicators that helps and directs the public towards national goals. Debate is a key element to see the capacity and capability of candidates. Political sentiments towards certain figures should no longer occur. The public must create conditions of peace and constructive understanding towards improving the nation and state for the better.
The role of every member of society as an Indonesian citizen, including academics, should not only be encouraged to feel disappointment or sadness. They must understand how democracy can be accepted and appreciated as educational institutions become filters towards a better and more enlightened society. Living together in society and public exchange requires the involvement of educated citizens. Citizens do need to provide input in political communication and interaction before making decisions based on discursive, perspective and reflective arguments. Citizen involvement can also be expressed as preferences and shared values that deliberation models want to support. Petitions submitted by each campus should be based on arguments that are weighed and reviewed transparently. This petition can be a consensual step based on the best arguments by prioritizing the primacy of truth.
To quote the views of Habermas, a German philosopher who places hope in consensus based on the power of sound discourse that can only be achieved through the exchange of objective and valid arguments and prospects. The explanations and explanations that each campus wants to highlight must be considered a common occurrence of academic freedom to voice the main principles of democracy.
Each campus is indeed trying to remind political parties and actors in the political contest to represent critical and rational voters in analyzing each program and vision and mission conveyed. Every academic community that has worn intellectual clothes should not only create certain primordial sentiments and certain interest calculations. Rationality must be above emotion and of course must be realistic and compatible as well as efficient and effective.
The options for actions by the academic community should not be accused of being oriented towards the stigma of innuendo or dealing with certain political interests. The phenomenon of voicing academic platforms that have been petitioned must certainly become a positive virus to strengthen the motivation of political awareness and critical awareness. The collectivity of petitions that have been voiced by the academic community must be a progressive step from civil society. This step has invited all elements to continue to improve, and politics in Indonesia must be directed at political discussions that are not just about transparency and certain moralities. The choices available after this phenomenon occurs are whether to become a fanatical voter or a rational voter, or to become a militant supporter or a critical supporter?
Comments (0)
Write a comment