tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18156735.post4235031735541083041..comments2023-10-29T17:43:27.054+07:00Comments on café salemba: New Order's Rerun, NotUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18156735.post-6952781609770570652009-08-31T10:13:29.227+07:002009-08-31T10:13:29.227+07:00.
In fact what I mean by capital/resource ownersh....<br /><br />In fact what I mean by capital/resource ownership is not ownership per se. The uses and who are entitled for the returns are much more important. The shift of ownerships may lead to the shift of uses and welfares, however, it may also end up with the same old pattern rolled by different owners. The later is not favorable. Should politics be the issue, it’s highly relevant, as always, to see how a regime leads us to prosperous and just society.<br /><br />Yes, we now have capital and politics decentralized all right. However, it doesn’t confirm anything. In contrary, the symptoms—such as absolute & relative poverty, disparities among sectors/regions, ineffective policies, inefficient budgets, regional authorities disharmonies, and spreading corruption—remain intimidating. (Bambang PS has his own tone for this published in Kompas, August 18).<br /><br />In the context of politics as vehicle to prosperous and just society, I’m still wondering: have we truly ever had new regime in the first place? Or, is it now RE-formation, RE-configuration, a continuation of the same institution: same soul, somewhat similar rules, different forms, and different actors? If so, it’s no longer about re-run or not to re-run.<br /><br />Besides, what's in a name?<br /><br />.Paul Oppuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11638388592877468828noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18156735.post-53025439240918466472009-08-30T11:33:42.559+07:002009-08-30T11:33:42.559+07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Paul Oppuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11638388592877468828noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18156735.post-91516450602444449712009-08-30T06:44:33.600+07:002009-08-30T06:44:33.600+07:00Paul, on capital configuration. I have no data in ...<b>Paul</b>, on capital configuration. I have no data in hand, but I guess there has been a significant shift of capital ownership. Some old hands might still be able to reorganize their capital power, but much more limited. <br /><br />Or think this way. The money politics in the last election shows that now the powerfuls need to transfer huge amount of capital to wider audience/voters (even without guarantee for the votes in return) just in order to ensure they don't lose the political power. <br /><br />In other words, the link between capital and political power has now been severely cut, in comparison to the New Order era. Capital as well as politics are now much decentralized.Rizalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00173988218021291027noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18156735.post-23406309400800193512009-08-29T11:01:36.534+07:002009-08-29T11:01:36.534+07:00_
How would it be possible that we have political..._<br /><br />How would it be possible that we have political regimes shifting when there are no significant shifts in capital/resource ownerships?<br /><br />At least there are two forces needs to consider in creating true change, I presume: (1) what the power in motion holding as true life for the people; and (2) what the controlling capital/resource owners holding as true benefits for the society. Both act and interact.<br /><br />People may change. Young generations may replace the older. But, it doesn't necessarily mean the same applies with paradigm.<br /><br />Do we see newer ones in each side now? Newer than what we had in the New Order era? <br /><br /><br />NOTE: Indonesia had reformasi a.k.a. reformation. It's not about finding or changing new essence. It's about RE-formation.<br /><br />.Paul Oppuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11638388592877468828noreply@blogger.com