Democracy in Indonesia, Paper, History, Types Liberal Democracy, Parliamentary, Guided, Pancasila - In political science, there are two kinds of understanding of democracy: understanding normative and empirical understanding. For understanding the latter also known as procedural democracy. In a normative understanding, democracy is something that should idiil carried or held by a country, such as the expression of US President Lincoln in his speech "Government of the people, by the people and for the people". The normative expression, usually translated in the constitution of each country, such as the Act of 1945 for the Government of the Republic of Indonesia. (Democracy in Indonesia)
Understanding Democracy in Indonesia
"Sovereignty is in the people, and carried out entirely by the People's Consultative Assembly" (Article 1, paragraph 2).
"Freedom of association and assembly, of expression with oral and writing and so on, are set by law" (Article 28).
Quote chapters and verses Act of 1945 above the normative definition of democracy. But what is normative is not necessarily can be seen in the context of day-to-day political life of a country. Therefore it is very necessary look at the meaning of democracy empirically, that is democracy in its manifestations in practical political life.
Political scientists have formulated a definition of democracy empirically using a number of specific indicators. Deliar (in Mahfud MD, 2000: 19) considers democracy as the basis of statehood gives the sense that the final level of the people providing the provisions of the key issues affecting their lives, including in assessing the state policy, because the policy determines people's lives. The understanding of democracy in a context such as this allow us to observe: whether in a political system of the government to provide sufficient space for their peoples to participation in order to formulate their political preferences through the existing political organizations (Gaffar, 2004: 5).
Democracy can be understood as a "polity" in which all citizens enjoy freedom of speech, freedom of association, have the same rights before the law, and the freedom to practice a religion that is embraced (Sundaussen in Murod, 1999: 59).
While Robert Dahl (in Murod, 1999: 60) argues that in order to achieve the democratic ideal, at least five things must be fulfilled. First, in making a decision that is both collective and binding, privilege every citizen should be considered equally in determining the final decision. Second, in the whole process of collective decision-making, then every citizen should have equal opportunity to express their political rights. Third, the disclosure of truth. Here every citizen should have the same opportunities to assess the logical order to achieve the desired results.
Fourth, the final control of the agenda. Here, people should also have the executive power to determine which ones should and should not be decided through a process that meets three of the above. This is to avoid any decisions that are made in ways that are not democratic. Fifth, the inclusion of all elements of society which includes all adults in connection with law enforcement.
Gaffar (2004: 7-9) suggested some indicators of whether an order is a political system that is democratic or not, namely: First Accountability, in a democracy every office holders elected by the people must be accountable for the policy to be and have been taken. Not only that, it also must be accountable for speech or words. And no less important is the behavior in everyday life. The second rotation of power, in democracies the opportunity to be the rotation of power must exist, and carried out regularly and peacefully. So it's not just one person who has always held the post, while the chances of others closed altogether. The third political recruitment that is open, to allow for rotation of power, needed an open system of political recruitment. That is, any qualified person to fill a political office elected by the people have the same opportunities in conducting a competition for the post.
The fourth general election, in a democracy, elections are regularly held. Every adult citizen has the right to vote and are free to use their rights in accordance with the will of his conscience. Fifth enjoy basic rights in a democratic country, every citizen can enjoy basic rights them freely, including the right to express opinions (freedom of expression), the right to assemble and beserikat (freedom of assembly) and the right to enjoy a free press (freedom of the press).
According to Urofsky (2001: 2-5), there are 11 prinsif who have known and believed to be the key to understanding how democracy is flourishing, namely:
Prinsif government based on the Constitution: the process of making laws to do with any particular rules; there must be a way that has been agreed for the manufacture and conversion of legislation, and specific areas are referred to as individual rights that can not be touched by the will of the majority. The Constitution is a legal product, but at the same time it should be more than that. He is an organic document of the government, which regulates the power of the pillars of different government once the reference limit government authority.
Democratic Election: no matter how good a government designed, it can not be considered democratic unless the officials who led the government freely elected by the citizens in a way that is open and honest to all.
Federalism, State and Local Government: a federal state has a uniqueness, where power and authority are divided and run by the local government, state, and national levels. However, if this model is not suitable for a country, there are still lessons to be learned. The farther a government of the people, then he is getting less effective and more lack of confidence.
Making the law: The key law-making (legislation) that is democratic does not lie in the procedure or how or even forums where regulation was produced, but on the nature of the openness of the process to the population and the need for an understanding of the expectations of the people.
An independent judicial system: Court can be very powerful in a democracy, and in many ways it is the hand that interprets and enforces the rules that exist in the constitution.
The power of the presidency: All modern societies must have a chief executive who is able to bear the responsibility of government, ranging from the simple administration of a program to mobilize the armed forces to defend the country during the war.
The role of free media: That is closely linked to the public's right to know is a free media newspapers, radio and television networks that could investigate the running of the government and report it without fear of prosecution.
The role of interest groups: The government must pay attention to and empower the groups that exist in society both political parties and civic organizations in order to convey the will and demands of the people.
The public's right to know: In a democracy, the government should be open, meaning that ideas and decisions must be open for public testing carefully. Of course, not all government measures should be published, but the people have a right to know how their tax money is spent, whether efficient and effective law enforcement, and whether their elected representatives to act responsibly.
Protecting minority rights: If "democracy" is defined as the will of the majority, then one of the big problems is how minorities are treated. Minorities are not defined as people who choose an opponent from the party that won the elections, but in those that are clearly different from the majority for reasons of race, religion, or to-etnisan.
Civilian control over the military: In a democracy, the military must not only be under the control of civilian authorities fully, but he also must have a culture that affirms that the army's role is as a servant rather than the public authorities.
Democracy in Indonesia
In the political history of Indonesia, we know at least four kinds of democracy: government of the revolution democratic, parliamentary democracy (repsentatif democracy), democracy guided (guided democracy), and democracy Pancasila (Pancasila democracy) (Gaffar, 2004: 10).
a. Liberal democracy (government of the revolution) (1945-1949)
The organizers state in the early period of independence has a very large commitment in realizing the political democracy in Indonesia. The revolution of democracy reign lasted from 1945 to 1949, there are some things that fundemental which is the foundation for democracy in Indonesia this period, namely:
Political thorough franchise. The forming state, already from the beginning committed greatly to democracy, so when independence was taken, all citizens who are considered adults have political rights are equal, without any discrimination that comes from race, religion, ethnicity, and regionalism.
President who constitutionally is likely to be a dictator, his power is limited when the Central Indonesian National Committee (KNIP) was formed to replace the parliamentary.
By edict Vice President, then it is possible the formation of a political party, which later became the foundation stone for the party system in Indonesia for the later period in our political history
b.Parliamentary democracy
The second period of government of Indonesia is 1950 to 1959, using the Constitution Temporary (Provisional Constitution) as a constitutional basis. During this period of government called parliamentary government, because at this time is the triumph of the parliament in the political history of Indonesia before the Reformation. That period may be referred to as "Representative / Participatory Democracy".
The period of Parliamentary Democracy was the era of democracy in Indonesia, almost all of the elements of democracy can be found in its manifestations in political life in Indonesia.
people's representative assembly or parliament plays a role that is very high in the political process running. Embodiments of parliamentary power is shown by the number of vote of no confidence to the government that led to the cabinet must resign.
accountability of office holders and politicians in general is very high. This can happen because the functioning of parliament and also a number of mass media as a means of social control.
the life of the party can be said to obtain a significant opportunity to develop optimally. In this period, Indonesia embraced multi-party system (Multy patry system). There are nearly 40 political parties formed with a very high degree of autonomy in the recruitment process, either officials or party leaders and supporters.
Election though only executed one time in 1955, but the General Election is actually implemented with democratic principles.
society in general can feel that their basic rights are not reduced at all, though not all citizens can exploit to the maximum.
during the reign of parlemeter, regions gained considerable autonomy, even the broadest autonomy with the principle of decentralization as a cornerstone to stand in regulating the relations of power between central government and regional governments.
c. Guided Democracy (1959-1965)
Since the end of the elections of 1955, the President has shown symptoms of displeasure to political parties. It happened because the political parties are very oriented toward the interests of its own ideology and less attention to the overall interests of national politics.
Guided democracy is a total reversal of the political processes that are running at the time of parliamentary democracy. The so-called democracy is nothing but a manifestation of the will of the president in order to place himself as the only one of the most powerful institution in Indonesia. The main characteristics of politics in the era of Guided Democracy is:
A blurring of the party system. The presence of political parties, not to prepare within the framework of political contestation to fill political positions in government (since the General Election was never executed), but more of a supporting element of the pull anatara the President, the Army and the Communist Party of Indonesia.
With the DPR-GR is formed, the role of the legislature in the national political system becomes increasingly weaker. For DPR-GR then more a political instrument of the President.
Basic human rights became very weak. Soekarno easily get rid of political opponents are not in accordance with the policies or have the courage to oppose it.
Guided Democracy is the peak period of the spirit of anti-freedom of the press. A number of newspapers and magazines were banned by Sukarno.
Centralization of power increasingly dominant in the relationship between the central government to local government. The regions have limited autonomy.
Understanding Democracy in Indonesia
d. Pancasila democracy (democracy in the New Order administration)
A new era in government began after a short transition period, ie between 1965 samapai 1968, when General Suharto was elected President of the Republic of Indonesia. Later known as the era of the New Order.
New Order gave new hope, especially with regard to political changes, from authoritarian to the period under Sukarno's Guided Democracy becomes more democratic. But the reality is not as expected, substitute authoritarian president turned out to be an authoritarian, too.
There are several indicators of democracy which is used during labeled Pancasila democracy, namely:
Rotation of executive power is virtually almost never happens. Except as contained in the lower ranks, such as governors, regents / mayors, district and village heads. Even if there is a change, during the New Order government only occurred in the vice president, while the government has essentially remained the same.
Political recruitment closed. Political recruitment is the process of filling political positions in the misappropriation of state government. This includes executive positions (President accompanied by cabinet ministers), legislative (MPR, DPR, DPRD, Level I, Level II DPRD), and other institutions of higher positions.
General elections. In the reign of the New Order, the General Election has been held six times, with regular frequency, ie every five years. However, if we observe the quality of general elections in Indonesia can be summed up very far from the spirit of democracy.
Basic human rights. This issue is also still a very complicated thing. It's not a secret anymore, that the international community is often closely related to the political highlight implementation issues of human rights. As a matter of freedom of the press and freedom of expression.
Showing posts with label education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label education. Show all posts
Friday, December 11, 2015
Definition of Political Communication, Papers, Theory According to the Experts Nimmo
Definition of Political Communication - By definition, there are several views of political scholars, including Nimmo (2000: 8) defines politics as the activity of the collective governing their actions in the conditions of social conflict. In many ways people differ from each other - physically, talents, emotions, needs, goals, initiatives, behaviors, and so on. Furthermore Nimmo explained, sometimes these differences stimulating arguments, disputes and squabbles. If they consider it a serious dispute, their attention by introducing conflicting issues, and complete; This is political activity.
For Lasswell (in Varma, 1995: 258), political science is the science of power. In contrast to David Easton in Sumarno (1989: 8), defines politics as follows:
"Political as a process Reviews those developmental processes through the which persons acquire political orientation and patterns of behavior"
David Easton in this definition emphasizes that politics as a process in which the development of the process a person receives a certain political orientation and behavior patterns.
If the definition of communication and the definition of politics that we associate with political communication, there will be a formula as follows: Political communication is communication that is aimed to achieve an effect such that the issues discussed by the type of communication activities, can be binding on all citizens through a sanctions are determined jointly by political institutions (Astrid S. Susanto, 1980: 2).
Regarding political communication (political communication) Kantaprawira (1983: 25) to focus on their role, which is to connect the political mind living in the community, both intra-class mind, institution, association, or sectors of the political life of the society with the government's political life sector.
Thus all patterns of thoughts, ideas or efforts to achieve the effect, only with communication can achieve everything expected, because essentially any thoughts or ideas and policies (policy) must exist that deliver and there received it, the process is a process of communication.
Viewed from a political goal "an sich", the essence of political communication is a group effort of man who has the orientation of political thought or a particular ideology in order to master or gain power, by which the power of the purpose of political thought and ideology can be realized.
Lasswell (in Varma, 1995: 258) considers the orientation of political communication has made two things very clear: first, that political communication is always oriented to the value or trying to reach the goal; values and objectives established itself in and by the behavior of the actual process is a part; and secondly, that aims to reach a political komunikai future and are anticipating and dealing with the past and always pay attention to past events.
In this case, R.S. Sigel (in Sumarno, 1989: 10) gave the following views:
"Political socialization Refers to the learning process, by the which the political norms and behavior acceptable to an ongoing political system are transmitted from generation to generation."
Sigel of limitation shows that political socialization is not just focused on acceptance of political norms and behaviors on the ongoing political system, but also how merwariskan or transfer values from one generation the next state.
a. Political communicator
According to Nimmo, one feature of the communication is that people rarely can avoid and keturutsertaan. Only attended and taken into account by one else has the value of the message. In the most general sense we all are communicators, as well as anyone in the political setting is a political communicator (2000: 28). While recognizing that every person is able to communicate about politics, we recognize that relatively few are doing so, at least to do so as well as permanent and continuous. They were relatively few are not only exchanging political message; they are opinion leaders in the process. This political communicators, compared to citizens in general, were taken more seriously when they speak and act.
As a supporter of a greater understanding of the role of political communicators in the opinion process, Leonard W. Dood in Nimmo (2000: 30) suggest the kinds of things that should be known about them: "Communicator can be analyzed as himself. His attitude to the potential audience, which gave them dignity as a human being, can affect the resulting communication; so if he thought they were stupid, he would adjust the tone of the message with the same level low. He himself thinking about certain abilities that can be conceptualized according to the ability of his wits, his experience as a communicator with audience similar or dissimilar, and the role played in his personality by the motive for berkomukasi.
Based on the recommendation Doob, it is clear that komukator or communicators should be identified and their position in society should be established. For this purpose Nimmo (2000: 30) identifies three categories of politicians, namely that acts as a communicator pilitik, professional communicators in politics, and activists or communicator part-time (part time)
b. Politicians as a communicator Politics
The first group are those who aspire to hold public office and hold government should communicate about politics and called the politicians, no matter whether they are elected, appointed, or career positions, both positions the executive, legislative or judicial. Their work is a major aspect aspect in this activity. Although politicians serve various purposes to communicate, there are two things that stand out. Daniel Katz (in Nimmo, 2000: 30) suggests that political leaders directing influence in two directions, that affects the allocation of rewards and change the existing social structure or prevent such changes.
In the first politician's authority to communicate as a representative of the group; messages politician was filed and protect the political interests of the destination, meaning that political communicator to represent the interests of the group. Conversely, politicians who act as ideology is not so concentrated attention to the demands pushing the group, he busied himself over to set the broader policy objectives, pursue reforms and even supporting revolutionary change.
Included in this group, politicians who do not hold positions in the government, they are also political communicator on issues of national and international scope, the problem of multiple and narrow its scope.
So many kinds of politicians who act as political communicator, but for simplicity we classify them as a politician (1) is located inside or outside the office of the government, (2) holds a national or sub-national, and (3) dealt with the issue of multiple or single issues ,
Definition of Political Communication
c. Professionals as a political communicator
Professional communicators are a relatively new social role, a byproduct of the communications revolution that has at least two main dimensions: the advent of the mass media that crosses the boundaries of race, ethnicity, occupation, region, and classes to raise awareness of national identity; and development necessarily special media that creates a new public to be consumers of information and entertainment (Nimmo, 2002: 33).
A professional communicator, according to James Carey (in Nimmo, 2000: 33) is a realtor symbol, people who translate the attitudes, knowledge, and interest in a language community in terms of other linguistic communities and different but interesting and understandable. Professional communicators linking elites in organizations or any kominitas with the public; horizontally it connects two language communities that are differentiated on the same level of social structure.
However, since becoming a professional communicator, not a politician, a professional who communicates sets itself apart from the types of other political communicator, especially political activists.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)