The other side of corruption in Indonesia | Elizabeth Pisani | TEDxUbud

Summary

In a thought-provoking talk, the speaker examines the complexities of corruption in Indonesia, contrasting its historical roots with contemporary practices. Through personal anecdotes and cultural insights, they highlight the significance of familial networks in navigating bureaucratic challenges. The discussion emphasizes the difference between extractive corruption, which benefits only a few, and distributive corruption, which can enhance community welfare. The speaker advocates for a nuanced understanding of corruption, framing it as part of Indonesia's social fabric, and urges a reevaluation of its role in governance and societal relations.

Takeaways

• 😀 The concept of 'kakak' in Indonesian society signifies the importance of family networks and connections in navigating professional opportunities.
• 😀 Corruption in Indonesia is often perceived differently than in Western contexts, where using personal connections for advancement is generally acceptable.
• 😀 Indonesia's colonial history, particularly under Dutch rule, laid the groundwork for current corrupt practices by establishing monopolistic control over local resources.
• 😀 After Indonesia's independence, the military financed itself through both legal and illegal trades, contributing to ongoing corruption.
• 😀 The decentralization of governance has empowered local leaders (bupati) with significant financial control, increasing opportunities for corruption.
• 😀 The speaker distinguishes between 'distributive' corruption, which can benefit local communities, and 'extractive' corruption, which harms the public for personal gain.
• 😀 Local leaders must give back to their constituents, which creates a form of patronage that is seen as socially acceptable in Indonesia.
• 😀 The past administration of Suharto had both effective and detrimental effects on corruption, with initial governance structures providing infrastructure and jobs.
• 😀 Understanding corruption requires a nuanced view that considers its social and cultural context rather than a purely moral perspective.
• 😀 Efforts to combat corruption should recognize the role of social capital in fostering community connections while still addressing harmful practices.

Q & A

What concept does the speaker introduce related to Indonesian culture?

The speaker introduces the concept of 'kakak' and 'corruption' in the context of using family networks for personal advancement, contrasting it with Western notions of corruption.

What historical context does the speaker provide about Indonesia's colonial past?

The speaker explains that Indonesia was not merely a Dutch colony but was initially exploited by the Dutch East India Company, which sought to monopolize trade rather than establish a traditional colony.

How did the Dutch East India Company influence Indonesia's economic structure?

The Dutch East India Company created monopolies in trade, financing wars and building forts, which laid the groundwork for an extractive economy that persisted beyond their bankruptcy.

What role did the military play in the Indonesian economy during the Suharto era?

The military financed itself through illegal and legal trading as the government struggled with hyperinflation, leading to a corrupt system where military leaders gained significant economic power.

What is the significance of decentralization in post-reform Indonesia?

Decentralization led to the creation of approximately 500 local governments, which manage education and health, increasing the chances of corruption but also making governance more responsive to local needs.

What does the speaker mean by 'distributive corruption'?

Distributive corruption refers to the practice of using political power to allocate resources within family or clan networks, which is seen as socially acceptable and beneficial within Indonesian culture.

How does the speaker differentiate between 'extractive' and 'distributive' corruption?

Extractive corruption is viewed negatively as it enriches only a few at the expense of the public, while distributive corruption is tolerated as it provides benefits to broader family networks.

What was the public's reaction to the type of corruption associated with Suharto's children?

The public reacted negatively to the corruption of Suharto's children, viewing it as a betrayal of the earlier system where contracts were used to fund military budgets and social services.

What challenges does the speaker identify regarding efforts to eliminate corruption?

The speaker highlights the challenge of addressing the cultural acceptance of patronage networks and how efforts to eradicate corruption may overlook its role as a form of social capital.

What lesson does the speaker suggest regarding the understanding of corruption in society?

The speaker suggests that understanding corruption requires a nuanced perspective, recognizing its social functions and the benefits it provides to communities, rather than viewing it solely as a negative phenomenon.