Since the 2017 DKI Jakarta gubernatorial election, identity politics has become a hot topic in any political discussion. On social media, identity politics is narrated as an effort to win elections by glorifying one’s identity, mostly related to religion and race. More often than not, the label of “playing the identity card” is put on Anies Baswedan, currently on the run for the 2024 presidential election.
Very recently, identity politics became a hot issue on social media again after Governor Anies signed a political contract with a board of Muslim religious leaders/preachers. Many people on social media fear that the contract threatens the safety of non-Muslims if Governor Anies is elected as president. People also claimed that this goes against Indonesia’s basic value of Bhinneka Tunggal Ika (various but together as one).
On the contrary, I think that electoral politics IS identity politics. People hold control over the country (re: government) and in which direction the policies should go by having representatives both in the executive and legislative bodies who will process the voices into policies. Both bodies are openly elected and people are allowed to choose literally whoever they like to have as a representation.
There are many ways that people can feel represented. One might feel represented by someone sharing similar ideas, someone who shares similar values, similar background, religion, race, or any other part of their life that may be. All of which can count as an identity.
A DPR member from Central Java, for example, should be representing the people in Central Java in a way that he understands the issues and troubles that the people are facing so that he can push the government to come up with a solution and fix the issues. So, would it be wrong for the Javanese people to be represented by their fellow Javanese?
The Kong Hu Chu community, for example, needs to find a representation in DPR to say that they need A B C so that they can practice their beliefs more easily. So, would it be wrong for the Kong Hu Chu believers to be represented by someone within their community?
I think a lot of the narratives so far have been something like “We should not be voting for X just because he/she is a Muslim”. It is already given that religion and beliefs play a huge part in the Indonesian society. It is only natural, then, for the people to feel more relatable and represented by the candidates of the same religion. So then, what can we say about it? Are we supposed to stop the voters to choose based on their preferences? In turn, I think it is not wrong for the candidates to show that they are the embodiment of the potential voters and that they are the ones that people can relate with.
If we take the identity politics issue further than just religion, Indonesian politics have been relying a lot on race and ethnicity. The independence proclamation was done by Soekarno AND Hatta. With all due respect to Hatta’s contribution to the independence struggle, Hatta who came from Western Sumatra was there to represent the people from the non-Javanese. In other words, he was there in the hope of winning non-Javanese hearts plus showing that the independence was not only about the Javanese. That in itself is an identity politics.
Throughout the years, especially from 2004 onwards, the vice presidential tickets have also been given to non-Javanese to send a similar message and to win votes outside of Java. Jusuf Kalla who ran in 2004 and 2014 is Bugis, while Sandiaga Uno who ran in 2019 is Minang. Again, this is also a form of identity politics.
“Well, in that case, those that have the majority will always win, right? How would that be fair to the minority groups?”, some may say. As difficult as it sounds, I think this is the risk/consequence of having electoral politics. Anyone eligible, no matter who they are, equally have one vote. The one that has the most votes wins. With that, it is important to find a candidate that commits to advocating for them even though probably they did not originate from within the community.
One thing that we all need to remember is to have respect for each other regardless of our background. Indonesia is a unique country as the society consists of many different groups of religions & beliefs, races, ethnicities, and language speakers. By nature, there will be groups that have more people and become a majority. Whilst the needs of the majority group may be fulfilled more easily under the “public interest” flag, the word public is inclusive of those in the minority groups and it is not one to oversee.
A similar principle applies to the candidates. They may win the elections by getting the votes from a specific group. When they assume office/seats, though, they also work for the good of the rest of the voters. There is more to democracy than just the election. Democracy will only be truly achieved when the voices of the society are heard and is being reflected in policies.
Yet again, electoral politics is identity politics. Perhaps one can also say it is the consequence of electoral politics. The candidates are free to appeal to whichever group of voters they like and be as relatable as possible to win their votes. Likewise, as voters, we hold the power to shape our government, choosing representatives who resonate with our values, backgrounds, and aspirations. As much as identity politics can be a divisive force, to think about it, it is also the embodiment of Indonesia’s diverse society which we should embrace with open heart and respect.
