As Indonesia gears up for the 2024 election, the nation is witnessing a surge in political scrutiny, mainly directed at presidential and vice-presidential candidates.
Beyond campaign promises, public discourse has shifted to scrutinizing these political figures’ attitudes, behaviors, and movements.
A discussion on the culture of shame within Indonesia’s democratic ethics was ignited during UGM’s Pemikiran Bulaksumur #28 series, exploring the theme “Shame Culture: Moral Ethics of Democracy?” on Thursday (Nov. 30).
UGM, as a bastion of national values and culture, has been at the forefront of upholding the ethos of shame within the democratic framework. The significance of virtuous speech, actions, and ethical conduct is emphasized, particularly within politics.
As leaders are evaluated, society scrutinizes the moral fabric of those aspiring to steer the nation’s democracy.
“UGM, as a university, is committed to restoring the essence of democracy, moving beyond procedural democracy. I believe the university must contribute to the restoration of democracy, aligning with the ideals of the proclamation to build a prosperous and dignified society,” asserted Dr. RR. Sri Murtiningsih, Dean of the UGM Faculty of Philosophy.
In democratic societies, ethics is sometimes perceived as detached from individuals or society, lacking a robust foundation akin to the explicit grounding of law in the constitution. While law is based on legal norms, ethics is occasionally perceived as an uncertain guide for individual actions.
“The public often misconstrues ethics. Its robust binding basis is questioned as it lacks positive norms akin to law. However, without morality, the law becomes oppressive and arbitrary,” she opined.
“The moral element acts as a yardstick for obedience to the law. The question arises: whose morality serves as the legal foundation?”
The culture of shame within a democratic society manifests uniquely, distinct from other societal norms. Born free, individuals become tethered by their surroundings. The culture of shame thrives as an intrinsic element of societal trust.
Diverse societies exhibit varying shame cultures, influenced not only by nationality but also by factors such as ethnicity, race, religion, and other community affiliations.
The digital era, fostering extensive information exchange, has allowed these cultures to intermingle, eroding some aspects of shame through culture, laws, and norms.
The dean contended that guilt serves as the most apt compass for the character of Indonesia’s democratic society. Shame, in this context, typically arises only when guilt is substantiated.
In a culture of guilt, individual conduct isn’t circumscribed solely by societal expectations but is guided by an internal moral compass.
Presently, society exerts robust influence over the culture of shame. Instances where officials, public figures, or politicians exhibit unethical or immoral behavior, are met with swift public condemnation.
“When formal greetings are trivialized, and humility is not synonymous with a lowly position, the ability to humble oneself can morph into a formal competence that ultimately transforms into arrogance,” noted Professor Faruk Tripoli from the Faculty of Cultural Sciences.
“The formalization of laws or norms can also strip away feelings of shame. Laws rooted solely in formal evidence, bereft of a sense of justice and ethics, lead to a lack of shame.”
He highlighted numerous instances where politicians seemed impervious to shame until proven guilty by the law. Acknowledging guilt is often tethered to procedural law, sidelining prevailing ethics and norms.
Applying the culture of shame within the political and public domain invites critique, prompting a reevaluation of Indonesia’s democratic ethics. The weakening grip of public oversight on those in power and the perceived insensitivity of leaders contribute to the erosion of the culture of shame.
However, as custodians of authority, leaders are tasked with setting an exemplary standard for their constituents.
Author: Tasya