Otoritarianisme-birokratik orde baru, krisis ekonomi dan politik, dan demokrasi formal masa reformasi

B. Rajab
{"title":"Otoritarianisme-birokratik orde baru, krisis ekonomi dan politik, dan demokrasi formal masa reformasi","authors":"B. Rajab","doi":"10.20473/jpi.v8i1.21817","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since Indonesia’s new order led by Suharto rose to power, many countries have expressed admiration for the New Order (1966 – 1997), including developed countries, as an efficient and effective government, which was able to drastically reduce inflation and maintain economic growth. Previously, during the Old Order (1956-1965), the Indonesian economy stagnated, with very high inflation, even leading to bankruptcy, as well as conflicts between communists and military institutions. With the military institution winning the conflict, the New Order reversed the way of managing the state which in the Old Order era emphasized excessive political interference, so that economic development was neglected. The New Order state tried to build an economy with a capitalist system whose financing relied heavily on foreign debt and investment. foreign. Economic development is bearing fruit, poverty is reduced, education and health of the Indonesian people are better, but the political sector was controlled by the New Order State in a bureaucratic-authoritarian manner, the masses were demobilized strictly and repressively, even coercively. However, three decades later, the New Order regime was faced with an economic crisis in the mid-1990s and civil society movements and other civil groups demanding democratization of the political system. The community movement succeeded in overthrowing the New Order regime and replaced it with a reform regime. Economic development remains a priority of this reform regime in a capitalistic manner, but the democratic political system it develops is still conventional, procedural democracy, not participatory democracy, which means that although it no longer governs repressively, conventional state institutions remain strong, such as the executive, legislative, and the judiciary, while civil society groups are somewhat neglected.","PeriodicalId":177356,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Politik indonesia (Indonesian Journal of Politics)","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Politik indonesia (Indonesian Journal of Politics)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20473/jpi.v8i1.21817","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Since Indonesia’s new order led by Suharto rose to power, many countries have expressed admiration for the New Order (1966 – 1997), including developed countries, as an efficient and effective government, which was able to drastically reduce inflation and maintain economic growth. Previously, during the Old Order (1956-1965), the Indonesian economy stagnated, with very high inflation, even leading to bankruptcy, as well as conflicts between communists and military institutions. With the military institution winning the conflict, the New Order reversed the way of managing the state which in the Old Order era emphasized excessive political interference, so that economic development was neglected. The New Order state tried to build an economy with a capitalist system whose financing relied heavily on foreign debt and investment. foreign. Economic development is bearing fruit, poverty is reduced, education and health of the Indonesian people are better, but the political sector was controlled by the New Order State in a bureaucratic-authoritarian manner, the masses were demobilized strictly and repressively, even coercively. However, three decades later, the New Order regime was faced with an economic crisis in the mid-1990s and civil society movements and other civil groups demanding democratization of the political system. The community movement succeeded in overthrowing the New Order regime and replaced it with a reform regime. Economic development remains a priority of this reform regime in a capitalistic manner, but the democratic political system it develops is still conventional, procedural democracy, not participatory democracy, which means that although it no longer governs repressively, conventional state institutions remain strong, such as the executive, legislative, and the judiciary, while civil society groups are somewhat neglected.
威权新秩序、经济和政治危机以及正式的民主改革时期
自苏哈托领导的印尼新秩序上台以来,包括发达国家在内的许多国家都对印尼新秩序(1966 - 1997)表示钦佩,认为这是一个高效有效的政府,能够大幅降低通货膨胀,保持经济增长。以前,在旧秩序(1956-1965)期间,印度尼西亚经济停滞不前,通货膨胀非常高,甚至导致破产,以及共产党人和军事机构之间的冲突。随着军事机构在冲突中获胜,新秩序扭转了旧秩序时代强调过度政治干预的国家管理方式,从而忽视了经济发展。新秩序国家试图建立一个资本主义体系的经济,其融资严重依赖于外债和投资。外国人。经济发展正在取得成果,贫困减少了,印度尼西亚人民的教育和健康有所改善,但政治部门受到新秩序国家以官僚专制方式的控制,群众被严格和压制,甚至是强制遣散。然而,30年后的20世纪90年代中期,新秩序政权面临着经济危机和要求政治体制民主化的市民社会运动等市民团体。社区运动成功地推翻了新秩序政权,代之以改革政权。以资本主义的方式,经济发展仍然是这个改革体制的优先事项,但它发展的民主政治制度仍然是传统的、程序性的民主,而不是参与性的民主,这意味着尽管它不再进行压制性的治理,传统的国家机构仍然强大,如行政、立法和司法,而公民社会团体在某种程度上被忽视了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信