Stories from Cananga Tree (22)

"After the briefing with their manager, the employees walked to their respective rooms. One employee asked another, 'Why did the boss' son get promoted?'

'Because he brought new meaning to 'keeping it in the family',' said his colleague.

'What did the boss say when accused of nepotism?' the employees wanted to know.

The one who was asked replied, 'He said, 'I prefer to call it family planning!'

'And why don't nepotism jokes get laughs at the office?' the man asked again.

'Because everyone who would laugh is already promoted!' answered the other."

"Once, the New York Times told us in an article discussing Arnold Schwarzenegger's tenure as governor, the daily newspaper mentioned that Schwarzenegger refused to take the $175,000 annual salary. The Guardian reported that Schwarzenegger waived his gubernatorial salary throughout his term, emphasizing his commitment to public service. An article from ABC News highlighted Schwarzenegger's decision to forgo his salary, underscoring his focus on addressing the state's budget crisis without financial compensation.

Schwarzenegger’s decision not to accept his salary as the Governor of California is well-documented during his tenure from 2003 to 2011. In an interview, Schwarzenegger reflected on the highs and lows of his governorship and discussed how it was impossible to prepare for the role. During his first appearance on Meet the Press, he shared how his acting experience helped him lead the state. You can also watch his election victory speech as the governor-elect of California in 2003, where he appeals to the people to unite and rebuild the state together. These sources provide confirmation of Schwarzenegger's decision to serve as governor without accepting the standard salary.

Schwarzenegger chose not to accept his salary during his time as the Governor of California. When he took office in 2003, he declined the annual salary of $175,000 [another source mentioned $187,000], stating that he did not need the money and wanted to serve the state without compensation. Instead, Schwarzenegger focused on his duties and aimed to address California's financial issues and various other state challenges during his tenure as governor. His inspiring move demonstrated his commitment to public service and the well-being of others," said Cananga while opening a book titled 'Obat Dungu, Resep Akal Sehat: Filsafat untuk Republik Kuat (Remedy for Stupidity, Prescriptions for Common Sense: Philosophy for the Robust Republic)', a work of a 'philosopher', as mentioned in the foreword, but I prefer to call him a 'thought-expert', Bung 'Rocky Gerung'. The book contains some views that invite our thinking about the current situation in Indonesia.

"Before we go on with Schwarzenegger, allow me to tell you about Rocky Gerung's 'Obat Dungu'. In his work, our philosopher conveys many interesting ideas. Among others about 'Waiting for a New Leader' in Indonesia, he writes, 'Indeed, this country is waiting for a new leader. The political condition describes this desire, meaning that hope for change is still alive in society. However, we also experience political fatigue. Indications are that the level of political participation in some regional elections tends to decline. In general, people call it a political symptom of abstention in election voting. How then to explain a passion for change alongside a decline in political participation? The two issues might be related: political fatigue is not apathy towards the situation, but rather a protest against the hindrance of opportunities for change.'

Political fatigue Bang Rocky mentioned, also known as voter fatigue or political apathy, refers to a state of disinterest or disengagement that individuals or groups may experience towards political activities and processes. This can manifest in various ways, such as reduced voter turnout, lack of participation in political discussions, or general indifference towards political events and issues. Political fatigue can be caused by several factors and can have significant implications for democratic processes and governance.

What causes Political Fatigue? The 24/7 news cycle and the ubiquity of political content on social media can lead to information overload, causing people to tune out. Lengthy and intense election campaigns can exhaust the electorate, especially if there are frequent elections. The 24/7 news cycle refers to the continuous and non-stop reporting of news and information, enabled by advancements in technology and media. Unlike traditional news cycles, which were based around specific times (e.g., morning and evening news broadcasts or daily newspapers), the 24/7 news cycle provides constant updates throughout the day and night.

The 24/7 news cycle represents a significant shift in how news is produced, disseminated, and consumed. While it has the advantage of providing constant access to information, it also presents challenges such as information overload, pressure on journalists, and potential impacts on public perception and political polarization. As consumers of news, it is important to be mindful of these dynamics and seek diverse and reliable sources to stay informed.

Extreme political polarization can also make political discourse more contentious and less constructive, leading to frustration and disengagement. The prevalence of negative ads and smear campaigns can turn people off from participating in politics.

When individuals feel that their vote or participation does not make a difference, they may become apathetic as well. Consistent failure of elected officials to fulfill campaign promises can lead to cynicism and disillusionment.

The complexity of political issues and policies can be overwhelming, making it difficult for people to engage meaningfully. Contradictory information and misinformation can create confusion and reduce trust in political processes.

Financial instability and economic concerns can shift focus away from political engagement. Lack of community and social support can reduce political participation.

There are some common symptoms associated with political fatigue:

• Apathy and Disengagement. People experiencing political fatigue may become disinterested in political processes, elections, and civic engagement. They might avoid discussions about politics altogether.
• Cynicism and Distrust. A sense of disillusionment can lead to increased cynicism and distrust toward political institutions, leaders, and the system as a whole. Individuals may believe that their participation won’t make a difference.
• Emotional Exhaustion. Following political news, debates, and conflicts can be emotionally draining. Constant exposure to negativity, polarization, and contentious issues can contribute to fatigue.
• Reduced Tolerance for Political Differences. Political fatigue may lead to less patience when encountering opposing viewpoints. People might become more polarized and less willing to engage in constructive dialogue.
• Physical Symptoms. Chronic stress related to political events can impact physical health. Headaches, sleep disturbances, and fatigue are common symptoms.
• Avoidance Behavior. Some individuals may actively avoid political discussions, news, or social media to protect their mental well-being.
• Decreased trust in Media. Political fatigue can erode trust in media sources, making it challenging to discern reliable information from misinformation.

What then are the effects of Political Fatigue? Political fatigue often leads to lower voter turnout in elections, which can affect the legitimacy of elected officials and the democratic process. Beyond voting, political fatigue can decrease participation in civic activities such as attending town hall meetings, participating in protests, or joining political organizations. A disengaged electorate can lead to weaker democratic institutions and processes, as fewer people are involved in holding leaders accountable and advocating for change. Lower participation by the general public can result in more influence for extreme and fringe groups who remain actively engaged. A lack of public pressure can lead to stagnation in policy development and implementation, as politicians may feel less compelled to address the needs and concerns of an apathetic populace.

How to address Political Fatigue? Improving Political Education by enhancing civic education can help people understand the political process and the impact of their participation. Transparency in government actions and decision-making can also build trust and reduce cynicism. Promoting positive and constructive political discourse can counteract the negativity and polarization that contribute to political fatigue.

Making it easier to participate in political processes, such as simplifying voter registration and providing accessible voting options, can help reduce barriers to engagement. Strengthening community networks and support systems can increase social cohesion and encourage political participation as well.

About the intellectuals, culture, and politics in Indonesia, Bung Rocky put it this way, 'The transmission of world culture has been accelerated by information technology. The implication for us should be to use these facilities to strengthen the initial basis of democracy, i.e. rationality and plurality. But at the same time, in this kind of agenda, reinforcing local identities (local truths) is becoming a turning tide of global culture. This means that there is a dialectical challenge by the current global ideological crisis, which will be a crucial factor for all obsessions that want to bring intellectuals back into the world of politics. Today's pessimism about the fate of democracy does not lie in our historical dependence on intellectuals but rather in the inability of leaders to nurture the early seeds of democracy itself.

Perhaps, this idea aligns with our topic of Schwarzenegger. Well, let's get back to talking about him.

Despite his controversies such as 'Gropegate' sexual harassment allegations; alleged affair and hush money; budget crisis and controversial decisions; his governorship remains a mix of both positive and negative moments, leaving a lasting impression on California’s political landscape, Schwarzenegger’s decision to decline his gubernatorial salary highlights the values of commitment to public service, fiscal responsibility, high ethical standards, the importance of public perception, and the power of personal sacrifice. These lessons serve as valuable principles for leaders in any field, demonstrating that true leadership often involves prioritizing the needs of others and setting a positive example.

It wasn't only Arnold Schwarzenegger who did it. José Mujica, who served as President of Uruguay from 2010 to 2015, was known for his austere lifestyle and dedication to public service. Mujica donated around 90% of his presidential salary to charity and initiatives that support the poor and small entrepreneurs. He lived on a modest farm and drove an old Volkswagen Beetle. John F. Kennedy, the 35th President of the United States, came from a wealthy family and had significant personal wealth. Kennedy donated his presidential salary to charity during his time in office. Before his presidency, he also donated his salary as a U.S. Congressman and Senator. Michael Bloomberg, the billionaire businessman, and former Mayor of New York City, is another example of a public official who chose to forgo a traditional salary. Former British Prime Minister David Cameron made a symbolic reduction in his salary during his tenure. In 2010, Cameron announced that he and other senior ministers would take a 5% pay cut as a gesture of solidarity with public sector workers facing austerity measures.

These examples illustrate that leaders around the world have sometimes chosen to forgo their salaries or reduce their compensation as a gesture of solidarity, ethical commitment, and public service. These actions often serve to build trust, demonstrate integrity, and highlight a focus on the greater good. The decision to forgo or to reduce their salaries as 'public officials' offers several lessons and insights that can be applied broadly.

• It's a commitment to Public Service. By declining their salaries, they demonstrated a commitment to serving the public without personal financial gain. This act underscores the importance of prioritizing the welfare of the community over personal benefit. Their decisions set a powerful example ('Leadership by Example') for other public officials and citizens, showing that public service is about contributing to society rather than personal enrichment.
• Fiscal Responsibility. In a state facing significant financial challenges, forgoing their salaries was a symbolic gesture of solidarity with the citizens and a recognition of the state's fiscal issues. It highlights the importance of fiscal responsibility and making sacrifices for the greater good ('budget awareness'). Although the impact on the overall budget was small, this act emphasized the importance of looking for ways to reduce costs and manage public funds efficiently ('cost saving measures').
• Ethical Standards. These leaders' actions reinforced the idea that leaders should adhere to high ethical standards. By not taking a salary, they avoided any appearance of conflict of interest or questions about their financial motivations ('integrity and transparency'). Such gestures can build trust with the public, showing that a leader’s primary concern is the welfare of the state and its people ('trust building').
• Public Perception and Morale. During difficult times, symbolic acts of sacrifice by leaders can boost public morale and solidarity. It can encourage citizens to rally together and support necessary, albeit challenging, policies and measures (to boost 'Public Morale'). It enhanced his credibility and legitimacy as a leader who was willing to share in the hardships and sacrifices required of the population ('credibility').
• Inspiration and Role Modeling. Leaders who make personal sacrifices can 'inspire others' in their organization or community to do the same, fostering a culture of service and dedication. As public figures, their actions served as 'role models' for aspiring politicians and public servants, showing that true leadership often involves personal sacrifice. Sometimes, symbolic gestures have a profound impact. By refusing their salary, they sent a powerful message about their dedication to public service. Such gestures can resonate far beyond their immediate context. Accepting a high salary isn’t inherently wrong, but their humility in declining it reflects a deeper understanding of leadership. Humble leaders prioritize the collective good over personal gain, and not just going in and out of the sewers.
• Focus on Long-Term Goals. By not focusing on immediate personal financial benefits, these leaders could keep their attention on long-term goals (or long-term vision) for the state’s improvement and recovery. It underscores the importance of focusing on long-term public interest rather than short-term personal gains.

Their decision to forgo or decline their salary highlights the values of commitment to public service, fiscal responsibility, high ethical standards, the importance of public perception, and the power of personal sacrifice. While symbolic, such gestures can inspire broader societal changes and foster a culture of solidarity and philanthropy.

Critics may argue that while such gestures are symbolic, they do not address deeper systemic issues. Real change requires comprehensive policy reforms and structural adjustments. There is sometimes skepticism about whether these actions are genuine or primarily for public relations. Maintaining transparency and consistency in behavior is crucial to counteract such doubts. While positive, these actions can also set high expectations for future leaders, potentially creating pressure to conform to similar standards regardless of personal circumstances.

These values ​​do not matter whether the system is Presidential or Parliamentary. but these lessons serve as valuable principles for leaders in any field, demonstrating that true leadership often involves prioritizing the needs of others and setting a positive example. Like 'Pillars of the community', these true leaders as sturdy pillars that support a building, they provide essential support and stability, often unseen but crucial for the collective well-being. Or as 'Gardens that nourish all', they provide sustenance for the whole community, these leaders nurture and care for others, often at the expense of their resources. Or 'Phoenix rising from the ashes', they often endure significant personal sacrifices or hardships, yet emerge stronger and more resilient, inspiring others to persevere and thrive.

Our discussion this time will be a reference for moving on to the topic of the risks of building coalitions which, according to Dan Slater, may lead to 'Oversized Coalitions'. Biidhnillah."

Then, Cananga read a poem,

Tilik-menilik ... Sidik-menyidik

[Peeking at each other... Investigating each other]

Utak-atik ... Makar di tiang listrik

[Tinkering... Trickery on the power pole]

Pejabat nyentrik ... Kartu elektrik

[Eccentric public officials...Electric cards]

Meja hijau pelik ... Hakim bisik-bisik

[Confusing trial... Judges whispering to each other]

Pembela usak-usik ... di tempat umum aromanya kecut

[Defenders harass each other... in a public place, the smell is sour] Palu ... tarik-menarik *)

[The gavel ... pulling each other]

Citations & References:

- Rocky Gerung, Obat Dungu, Resep Akal Sehat: Filsafat untuk Republik Kuat, 2024, Komunitas Bambu

- Harold D' Lasswell, Politics: Who Gets What, When, How, 2018, Papamoa Press

- Colin Hay, Why We Hate Politics, 2007, Polity Press

- Pippa Norris, Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Governance, 1999, Oxford University Press

- Peter Ferdinand (Ed.), The Internet, Democracy and Democratization, 2004, Routledge

*) "Njentit" written by Syahriannur Khaidir

[Episode 23]

[Episode 21]

Bahasa

Stories from Cananga Tree (21)

"An octopus asks his friend, 'What do you like least about being an octopus?'

'Washing my hands before dinner,' says his colleague."

"In general, 'opposition' refers to strong disagreement or resistance expressed through action or argument. In sports, opposition refers to the team or person being played against in a sports competition. In physics, opposition refers to the resistance encountered by an object moving through a medium. In mathematics, opposition can be seen in inverse relationships. In economics, opposition can be related to externalities, and unintended effects of economic activities that affect third parties. In political systems, the term opposition specifically refers to the elected politicians who belong to the largest party that does not form the government," Cananga then continued while looking at a black-and-white portrait of a man, delivering his speech. Sutomo (3 October 1920–7 October 1981), also known as 'Bung Tomo' was an Indonesian freedom fighter, and is best known for his role as an Indonesian military leader during the Indonesian National Revolution against the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. He played a central role in the Battle of Surabaya when the British attacked the city in October and November 1945.

"The concept of opposition can vary depending on the context, whether it’s related to disagreement in general understanding, sports, or politics, and often involves contrasting forces, such as in physics, economics, or symbolism or metaphors.

Opposition may also refer to the action of opposing or resisting something. It can involve expressing disagreement, criticism, or protest through actions or arguments. Disapproval and antagonism characterize opposition. When individuals or groups hold opposing views, they may act in ways that express their disagreement. Opposition can also denote a contrast or antithesis between two things. For example, the concept of 'nature-culture opposition' highlights the differences between natural and human-made elements. In astronomy, opposition occurs when two celestial bodies (e.g., planets) are directly opposite each other in the sky as seen from Earth. In astrology, it represents an aspect of 180° between planets, often associated with confrontation or revelation.

In logic, opposition describes the relationship between two propositions with the same subject and predicate but differing in quality, quantity, or both. In linguistics, it refers to the relationship between alternative units within a linguistic system (e.g., distinct phonemes).

Metaphors play a fascinating role in our thought processes and language. Our understanding may enriched by bridging seemingly disparate ideas. They allow us to explore complex concepts through vivid comparisons! According to Conceptual Metaphor Theory, people 'speak in metaphors' because they 'think in metaphors.' Metaphor is both a linguistic mechanism of semantic innovation and a cognitive mechanism. It establishes connections between different elements by pointing out similarities and creating new knowledge. Metaphor shows 'the similarities in the dissimilar', allowing us to understand abstract concepts through concrete comparisons.

The phrase 'the similarities in the dissimilar' encapsulates a profound insight into the nature of love and its ability to bring unity and understanding to seemingly disparate elements of life. Theodor Adorno, a German philosopher and sociologist, once said, 'Love is the power to see similarity in the dissimilar.' This quote suggests that love allows us to perceive connections and similarities even amidst apparent differences and diversities that exist around us. At its core, Adorno’s quote posits that love has the remarkable ability to bridge gaps between what may seem incompatible or contradictory. It encourages us to look beyond surface-level dissimilarities and appreciate the underlying similarities that bind us all together. Love invites us to recognize the shared humanity within each individual, regardless of external trappings such as race, religion, or social status. It serves as an antidote to divisions and conflicts in our world. By seeing the similarity in the dissimilar, love challenges our tendency to categorize and separate ourselves from others. It fosters empathy, compassion, and unity, disrupting prevailing hierarchies and divisions within society. Importantly, love’s ability to see similarities in the dissimilar does not mean ignoring differences altogether. Instead, it celebrates diversity and encourages meaningful dialogue with those who hold opposing viewpoints. this concept reminds us that love transcends apparent disparities, allowing us to appreciate the interconnectedness of all human experiences.

Empathy plays a crucial role in shaping our approach to opposing viewpoints. Empathy allows us to step into someone else’s shoes and see the world from their perspective. When encountering opposing viewpoints, we can listen actively and seek to understand the underlying motivations, fears, and experiences that inform those views. Instead of dismissing differing opinions outright, empathy encourages us to ask questions like, 'Why does this person believe what they do?' or 'What life experiences have shaped their perspective?'

Empathy humanizes individuals with opposing viewpoints. It reminds us that behind every opinion lies a person with feelings, hopes, and struggles. When we recognize the humanity in others, we are less likely to demonize or stereotype them. Empathy fosters a sense of shared humanity, even when we disagree. In today’s polarized world, empathy acts as a counterbalance. It helps reduce hostility and promotes civil discourse. When we approach opposing viewpoints with empathy, we are more likely to engage in respectful conversations rather than heated arguments. We seek common ground and shared values.

Empathy encourages us to question our own biases. It prompts us to consider whether our beliefs are based on evidence or simply reinforce what we already think. By actively seeking out diverse perspectives, we challenge confirmation bias and open ourselves to growth. Empathy builds bridges between people. It allows us to find commonalities even within disagreement. For example, two individuals with opposing political views may both care deeply about education or environmental conservation. Empathy helps us find those shared concerns and work toward solutions.

Empathy is a key component of emotional intelligence. It enables us to manage our emotions and respond thoughtfully rather than reactively. When faced with opposition, empathy helps us stay calm, listen actively, and find constructive ways to communicate. Empathy invites us to approach opposing viewpoints with an open heart and a willingness to learn. It enriches our understanding, fosters connection, and contributes to a more compassionate and informed society.

The concept of 'the similarities in the dissimilar' and the concept of opposition may seem unrelated at first glance, but they share intriguing connections. 'The similarities in the dissimilar' suggests that even when faced with apparent differences or contradictions, we can find common ground or shared aspects. Love, empathy, and understanding allow us to see beyond surface-level disparities. Similarly, in the realm of opposition, recognizing shared goals or underlying values can bridge gaps. Political opponents, for instance, may find common ground on certain issues despite their ideological differences. By focusing on shared interests, they can work together for positive change.

Opposition often arises from differing viewpoints, conflicting interests, or contrasting ideologies. It can be seen as a form of intellectual or political diversity. When handled constructively, opposition becomes an opportunity for dialogue. By engaging with opposing perspectives, we can uncover commonalities and explore areas of agreement. Just as love seeks to find similarities, political discourse benefits from seeking common ground. Debates, negotiations, and compromise all involve navigating opposition while aiming for productive outcomes.

In philosophical ideas, cognition, and language, the law of opposites is present. It stems from the Western philosophical tradition, which often distinguishes between the subject (man) and the object (world). This dichotomy emphasizes the contrast between opposing elements, such as light and darkness, good and evil, or conflicting forces.

Nietzsche challenged the traditional view that metaphor emerges from the transportation of concepts. Instead, he revealed the metaphorical genesis of concepts. Concepts, rather than being the basis for metaphor, stiffen from metaphors. In other words, metaphor is logically and chronologically before the concept itself.

The phrase 'the opposition in trade' metaphorically refers to competition. It implies that competition reduces the cost of supplies and living. Just as opposing forces compete, trade opposition can lead to beneficial outcomes.

It’s fascinating how this 'opposition' concept weaves through various aspects of our lives!

Literature and opposition are multifaceted and richly explored in various contexts. Literature and opposition intersect in myriad ways, fostering critical thinking, empathy, and dialogue. Literary works provide a lens through which we explore the complexities of human experience and the struggle for change. Literature often portrays characters or groups in oppositional roles. Literary works explore themes of resistance, dissent, and conflict. Many literary works engage with political opposition. Novels plays, and poems depict characters challenging authority, advocating for change, or questioning established power structures. Examples include George Orwell’s 1984, which critiques totalitarianism, and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, which exposes the harsh realities of Soviet labor camps.

Literature serves as a platform for social critique. Writers use their works to address societal issues, inequality, and injustice. By portraying oppositional characters or situations, literature encourages readers to reflect on their own beliefs and values. Literary movements often emerge in opposition to prevailing norms. The Romantic movement, for instance, rebelled against Enlightenment rationalism and celebrated individualism, emotion, and nature. Similarly, the Beat Generation opposed materialism and conformity in post-World War II America.

Some works intentionally challenge authority or dominant ideologies. Writers participate in literary activism by using their craft to advocate for change. Poets, essayists, and novelists contribute to social movements, human rights causes, and political debates. Literature wields the power of language. Metaphors, symbols, and imagery convey oppositional messages. Writers use language to challenge dominant narratives and create alternative perspectives.

Metaphors that enrich our understanding by bridging seemingly disparate ideas, allow us to explore complex concepts through vivid comparisons. Satire, which often relies on irony and exaggeration, can playfully expose the absurdities within the opposition. Comedians use satire to reveal the contradictions and hypocrisies of political opponents. Comedians wield the power of satire to dissect and lampoon political issues, often with sharp wit and humor. To address opposition and politics, comedians use satire to highlight absurdities in political discourse. By exaggerating or distorting real-world situations, they reveal the inherent contradictions, hypocrisy, and irrationality of political systems. For example, Jon Stewart (host of The Daily Show) and Stephen Colbert (host of The Colbert Report) masterfully exposed the absurdities of news media, politicians, and partisan bickering. Their shows blurred the line between comedy and news, making viewers question the status quo.

Satirical comedians challenge authority figures, including politicians, by mocking their actions and questioning their decisions. They provide a counter-narrative to official statements. Comedians create parodies of political figures, events, and ideologies. These satirical imitations expose the foibles and idiosyncrasies of politicians.

Think of Alec Baldwin’s portrayal of Donald Trump on Saturday Night Live. Through exaggerated mannerisms and witty lines, Baldwin captured the essence of Trump’s persona, providing both entertainment and commentary.

Satire thrives on irony and hyperbole. Comedians employ these tools to emphasize contradictions and highlight the gap between rhetoric and reality. Satire can 'humanize politicians' by showing their flaws, vulnerabilities, and everyday struggles. It reminds us that they are fallible individuals navigating a complex world. Trevor Noah, who succeeded Jon Stewart on The Daily Show, brings a global perspective and often uses his own experiences (growing up in apartheid-era South Africa) to shed light on political absurdities.

Satirical comedy encourages viewers to 'think critically' about political issues. It prompts questions like, 'Why do we accept certain norms?' or 'What if things were different?' Comedians use satire as a powerful tool to entertain, provoke thought, and hold politicians accountable. Through humor, they navigate the complexities of opposition and politics, reminding us that 'laughter' can be a catalyst 'for change'. In doing so, they highlight the shared human flaws and vulnerabilities that exist across the political spectrum. By laughing at these flaws, we recognize our collective humanity.

Both 'the similarities in the dissimilar' and 'opposition' concepts challenge binary thinking. Binary thinking is a cognitive framework that simplifies complex situations or concepts by reducing them to only two opposing categories or perspectives. It is also known as dichotomous thinking. Binary thinking helps us feel a sense of certainty, but it may also result in dualistic thinking or polarization. Binary thinking allows us to see the major advantages and disadvantages of a situation, but we may miss the finer details or the gray area in the middle.

An example of binary thinking is when someone views a situation or action as either completely right or completely wrong. Another example of binary thinking is when someone categorizes people, ideas, or situations as either good or bad without room for anything in between. Binary thinking can also occur when someone evaluates another person’s level of intelligence as either smart or dumb. Binary thinking can also be seen when success and failure are viewed as absolute, black-and-white categories. Binary thinking can also manifest as a 'Us vs. Them' mentality, where people categorize themselves and others into in-group and out-group categories. Binary thinking can be seen when people categorize behaviors or traits as either normal or abnormal, without considering the vast spectrum of human experiences. Binary thinking can manifest itself when someone views perfection as the ultimate goal and anything less than perfect as unworthy or unacceptable. Binary thinking can also occur when people view complex issues like personality development as either entirely nature or entirely nurture-related, ignoring the interaction between both factors in shaping individuals. It is common for people to overlook nuanced details in favor of simplified big-picture narratives in all aspects of life from politics to art critiques. If we’re too focused on the big picture, we miss the important details. If we focus too much on the details, we may get waylaid and miss the big picture. A person with a balanced perspective will be able to view a situation from both perspectives and multiple angles and avoid fitting completely into one of these perspectives or the other.

'The similarities in the dissimilar' encourages us to move beyond black-and-white distinctions, recognizing shades of gray. Opposition, too, need not be absolute. It can be nuanced, with varying degrees of agreement and disagreement. Acknowledging this complexity allows for more productive discussions. While seemingly different, both concepts invite us to look beyond surface-level differences, find commonalities, and engage with opposing viewpoints in ways that foster understanding and progress.

In politics, opposition refers to the major political party that opposes the party in power. It seeks to replace the ruling party through elections. There are differences between opposition in parliamentary systems and opposition in presidential systems are significant and shape the functioning of democratic governments. In a parliamentary system, there is a close relationship between the legislative and executive branches. The head of the executive, often called the prime minister, is also a leader in the legislative branch (usually a member of parliament). The prime minister’s power depends on the support of the majority party or coalition in the parliament. The prime minister is directly accountable to the parliament. If the majority party loses confidence in the prime minister, they can be removed through a vote of no confidence. The majority party or coalition in the parliament forms the government. The prime minister is usually the leader of this majority. Parliamentary systems tend to be more flexible. Governments can change without new elections (e.g., through a vote of no confidence). However, this flexibility can lead to frequent changes in leadership.

The opposition plays an active role in holding the government accountable. It scrutinizes policies, proposes alternatives, and participates in debates. Coalition governments are common in parliamentary systems. The opposition may form alliances to challenge the ruling coalition.

In a presidential system, there is a much stronger separation of powers between the legislative and the executive. The head of the executive, often called the president, has only a limited role in the legislative process. The president is elected independently of the legislature and does not rely on legislative support for their position. The president is independent of the legislature, they are not directly accountable to the parliament and cannot be easily removed by a vote of no confidence. The president is elected separately from the legislature. The government is formed independently of legislative majorities.

Presidential systems provide more stability. The president’s fixed term ensures continuity, but it can also lead to gridlock if the president and legislature are from different parties. Coalitions are less common. The opposition tends to be more fragmented. The opposition’s role is less defined constitutionally. It often focuses on public messaging, criticizing the president’s decisions, and using legislative tools.

For example In Indonesia, the president is not directly accountable to the House of Representatives (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat (DPR)) in the same way as in a parliamentary system. In a parliamentary system, the prime minister (head of government) is directly accountable to the parliament. The prime minister’s position depends on the support of the majority party or coalition in the parliament. If the majority party loses confidence in the prime minister, they can be removed through a vote of no confidence.

In Indonesia’s presidential system, the president is independent of the DPR, so, the president is not directly accountable to the DPR. The president is elected separately from the legislature and does not rely on legislative support for their position. While the DPR has oversight powers and can pass laws and budgets together with the president, the president is not directly accountable to the DPR in the same way as a prime minister in a parliamentary system.

In the context of a presidential system, a complex challenge arises due to the distinct sources of legitimacy for both the president and the legislature, the issue of 'Dual Legitimacy' may arise. In a presidential system, the president is directly elected by the people, granting them a separate democratic legitimacy from that of legislators. Meanwhile, the legislature (such as the parliament or congress) derives its legitimacy from the representative function—it is composed of elected representatives. The issue of dual legitimacy automatically arises because, particularly in times of crisis, both the president and the legislature can claim 'to speak in the name of the people'. Fixed-term elections mean that in a presidential system, the president’s legitimacy remains intact regardless of changes in the legislature’s composition.

When the president and the legislature have opposing views or priorities, they may both assert their democratic legitimacy. This can lead to tensions and gridlock. During crises (such as emergencies, constitutional disputes, or political instability), the dual legitimacy issue becomes particularly nettlesome. Both branches of government may vie for authority, creating uncertainty. While dual legitimacy ensures a system of checks and balances, it can also hinder decisive action. The president’s executive power may clash with legislative decisions. Presidential systems must navigate this delicate balance between the president’s direct mandate and the legislature’s representative role. Striking the right equilibrium is essential for effective governance. Dual legitimacy in presidential systems poses challenges related to authority, decision-making, and democratic representation. It underscores the need for clear constitutional frameworks and mechanisms to resolve conflicts between the executive and legislative branches.

In democratic systems, opposition is intrinsic to democracy. Opposition parties challenge the ruling party. They provide alternative policies, critique government decisions, and hold the ruling party accountable. Party-based opposition is widely considered the most effective form of opposition. In many autocracies, regime leaders divide the political opposition into a systemic component (allowed to participate in official politics) and a non-systemic component (excluded from elections and policymaking). Political opposition is essential for maintaining democratic accountability and ensuring a healthy political system. Whether in presidential or parliamentary systems, opposition parties contribute to the checks and balances necessary for a well-functioning democracy.

Opposition parties in presidential systems encounter several challenges that can impact their effectiveness and ability to hold the government accountable. Presidential terms have fixed durations (e.g., four or five years). Unlike parliamentary systems, where elections can be called earlier, presidential elections occur at predetermined intervals. This rigidity can limit the opposition’s ability to time their political strategies effectively. Presidential systems often exhibit 'winner-takes-all dynamics'. The candidate with the most votes wins the presidency, and their party gains significant power. This majoritarian approach can marginalize opposition parties, especially if they fail to win the presidency. They may struggle to influence policy decisions or secure legislative majorities.

While party support for the president varies, a presidential system allows for flexibility and encourages cooperation across party lines. In a presidential system, it is indeed possible for various parties to support the president. In a presidential system, the president is elected independently of the legislature (unlike a parliamentary system where the executive emerges from the legislature). Since the president does not rely on a specific party to form a government, they have the flexibility to build coalitions across party lines. These coalitions can be formal (such as forming a coalition government) or informal (where parties cooperate on specific issues without a formal agreement). If the president’s party lacks a majority, they can seek support from other parties to pass bills, approve appointments, or ratify treaties. If the president’s party is in the minority, they must collaborate with other parties. Opposition parties may support the president’s initiatives if they align with their own policy goals or if there are compromises. The president can negotiate with individual legislators or party leaders to secure their backing. For example, in the United States, presidents often work with both parties to achieve their goals. In other countries, such as Brazil or India, presidents have formed coalitions with multiple parties to govern effectively.

There are of course the 'pros' and 'cons'. Broader support can lead to more stable governance. Cross-party collaboration fosters consensus and reduces polarization. However, balancing diverse interests can be complex. Ideological differences may hinder cooperation. Some parties may prioritize opposing the president over policy outcomes.

Coalition-building in politics can be both advantageous and challenging. We'll explore the risks associated with relying on coalitions in the next episode, biidhnillah."

Citations & References:

- Amy L. Atchison, Political Science is For Everybody: An Introduction to Political Science, 2021, University of Toronto Press

- Stefana Garello, The Enigma of Metaphor: Philosophy, Pragmatics, Cognitive Science, 2024, Springer

- Richard Eldrige (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy and Literature, 2009, Oxford University Press

- Kliph Nesteroff, Drunks, Thieves, Scoundrels and the History of American Comedy, 2015, Grove Press

- Theodor Adorno, Walter Benjamin, Ernst Bloch, Bertolt Brecht & Georg Lukács, Aesthetics and Politics, 2007, Verso

- Jonathan Herron, Comedy-Driven Leadership: Think Like a Comedian, Move Forward Like a Leader, 2014, First Punch Press

- Matthew Soberg Shugart & John M. Carey, Presidents and Assemblies, 1992, Cambridge University Press.

[Episode 22]

[Episode 20]

Bahasa

Stories from Cananga Tree (20)

"A farmer asks another farmer, 'Why did the scarecrow win an award?'

'Because he was outstanding in his field!' his companion replies."

"Why should humans cooperate? Is it because we're all pulling in the same direction where everyone is working toward a common goal and collaborating in unity? Or are we all cogs in a machine where each one plays a specific role, contributing to the smooth functioning of the whole? In general, answers to this question can take a normative ('what should be') or positive ('what is') perspective," Cananga proceeded to look at The Berlin Wall Memorial. Once separating East and West Berlin during the Cold War, the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 marked a triumph of friendship over division.

"Many human behaviors are cultural in that they are socially learned by observation and interaction in a social group—social learning can then be understood as the foundational capacity that underpins what is typically glossed as 'culture.' All culturally acquired behaviors, beliefs, preferences, strategies, and practices are also genetic in the sense that their acquisition requires brain machinery that allows for substantial amounts of complex, high-fidelity social learning.

More generally, although limited social learning abilities are found elsewhere in nature, social learning in our species is high fidelity, frequent, internally motivated, often unconscious, and broadly applicable, with humans learning everything from motor patterns to goals and affective responses, in domains ranging from toolmaking and food preferences to altruism and spatial cognition. If other animals are ‘‘cultural,’’ then we are a hypercultural species.

"Cooperative (or prosocial) behaviors refers to cases in which an individual pays a personal cost to provide a benefit to another individual or group of individuals. Cost is broadly defined, by considering a wide range of potential costs including time and effort, resources and money, and physical harm. In most of the cases that are considered, the cost of cooperation is smaller than the benefit it creates, making cooperation productive: pairs or groups of individuals who can successfully cooperate are better off than those who cannot. Because of the benefits cooperation creates, many people consider there to be a moral obligation to cooperate.

What does it mean to be moral? Traditionally, philosophers have focused on normative answers to this question, whereas psychologists, evolutionary biologists, and social scientists have focused on the positive aspects of morality: How and why did our sense of morality evolve? What psychological processes contribute to our moral judgments? Which moral rules are universal, and which vary across cultures?

All around us, we see people contributing to the welfare of others, even when it is not convenient and may be costly in terms of time or money, or may affect their personal or professional relationships. We see so much of this sort of altruism in daily life that we usually don’t notice it or stop to question why people are bothering to help others, or how such seemingly ubiquitous generosity might be explained. When people are asked why they help others, a common reply is that doing so is ‘the right thing to do’ and that people ‘should' help one another. Some of us have merely accepted such acts as part of being human, without endeavoring to question why we help sometimes, but not at other times, or why different societies seem to provide help to differing degrees and in different domains. In fact, not only are there times that we don’t help when we know we could have, but there are many times when we don’t even perceive an opportunity for helping when, in fact, one exists.

Cooperation is ubiquitous in the world around us, at a large scale with humanitarian organizations such as the Red Cross to conservation groups such as the World Wildlife Fund, and on a small scale with people choosing to cover shifts for sick co-workers or to help friends move from one apartment to another. Although a gene’s-eye view of evolution can explain cooperation among relatives, cooperation between unrelated individuals poses a puzzle from both the perspective of natural selection and that of rational self-interest. Why should individuals make sacrifices to help potential competitors succeed? What motivates such prosocial behavior?

Research shows that if cooperation actually pays off, evolution and rational self-interest can both favor cooperating. Perhaps the most important mechanism for most human interactions is direct reciprocity: individuals interact repeatedly and condition their cooperative behavior on the cooperation of their partners.

For direct reciprocity to work, both sides have to be repeatedly in contact so that there is an opportunity to repay one act of kindness to another. They might live in the same road or village. Perhaps they work together. Or they may encounter each other every Friday in the Masjid. In this way, they can form a 'contract' based on helping each other.

One way to determine which examples of direct reciprocity are real is to think about the qualities that are necessary for this mechanism to work. The evolution of cooperation by direct reciprocity requires that players recognize their present partner and remember the outcome of previous encounters with him or her. They need some memory to remember what another creature has done to them, and a little bit of brainpower to figure out whether to reciprocate. In other words, direct reciprocity requires reasonably advanced cognitive abilities.

Direct reciprocity can make cooperation between pairs of individuals advantageous. But what about cooperation at a larger scale than dyadic interactions? This question is answered in part by indirect reciprocity, whereby 'my actions toward you depend on your previous actions toward others'. Under indirect reciprocity, people earn good reputations when they cooperate with others and thus can expect increased cooperation from future partners.

Kindness will elicit kindness. In this way, circles of humanity, tolerance, and understanding can loop through and around our society. Either way, it is a powerful form of cooperation, and its implications are huge, shaping how we behave, how we communicate, and how we think.

While direct reciprocity relies on your own experience of another person, indirect reciprocity also takes into account the experience of other people. Exploring the indirect form of reciprocity is important because it is critical for society. Direct reciprocity—'I’ll scratch your back and you scratch mine'—operates well within small groups of people, or in villages where there is a tight-knit community where it would be hard to get away with cheating one another.

Societies could more easily evolve to become larger, more complex, and interconnected if their citizens depended on economic exchanges that relied on indirect reciprocity. Today, this is central to the way we conduct our affairs and cooperate. With the help of gossip, chat, and banter we are able to gauge the reputation of other people, sizing them up, or marking them down, to decide how to deal with them. This sheds light on both the proliferation of charity and of glossy celebrity gossip magazines.

Thanks to the power of reputation, we think nothing of paying one stranger for a gift and then waiting to receive delivery from another stranger, thanks also to the efforts of various other people whom we have never met and will never meet—from the person who packs our gift to the one who checks our credit rating. In our vast society, it is a case of: 'I scratch your back and someone else will scratch mine.' We all depend on third parties to ensure that those who scratch backs will have theirs scratched eventually.

Under the influence of indirect reciprocity, our society is not only larger than ever but also more intricate. The increasing size of modern communities can now support a greater subdivision of physical and cognitive labor. People can specialize when networks of indirect reciprocity enable a person to establish a reputation for being skilled at a particular job. By the power of reputation, great collections of mutually dependent people in a society can now sustain individuals who are specialized to an extraordinary degree, so that some of its denizens can spend much of their time thinking about how to capture the quintessence of cooperation in mathematical terms while others are paid to think about how to express mathematical terms about cooperation. It’s amazing.

Social norms within a community specify standards for acceptable behavior, and information about individuals’ behavior is spread through gossip. Successful social norms often assign good reputations to those who cooperate with others with good reputations and defect with those who have bad reputations. Thus, individuals with good reputations are then rewarded because they are more likely to be the recipients of cooperative behavior.

There are two distinct reasons why one might preferentially cooperate with individuals who are known to be cooperative. One might reason that individuals who are known to be cooperative are more likely to reciprocate cooperative behavior. Thus, individuals may discriminate based on reputation as a way to select desirable interaction partners. Alternatively, one might cooperate with other cooperators merely to maintain a good reputation and thus receive more cooperation in the future. Rather than using a partner’s previous behavior as a signal about her future behavior, the partner’s previous behavior stipulates what you must do to maintain a good reputation yourself.

Experimental work confirms the theorized importance of reputation in promoting human cooperation: people playing economic games learn to cooperate when it is sufficiently likely that others will know about their previous actions. Furthermore, evidence suggests that humans are so highly attuned to their reputations that even subtle images of eyespots can increase cooperation by unconsciously priming the sense of being watched. Reputation systems have also been shown to promote cooperation outside the laboratory: blood donation and giving to charity increase when donors’ names are published, and people are three times as likely to sign up for an energy blackout reduction program when sign-ups are observable.

Scaling up even further, institutions provide an important tool for maintaining cooperation in large groups. Humans often explicitly design institutions to incentivize good behavior. For example, governments create criminal justice systems, often employing police and courts, to prevent anti-social behaviors such as theft and assault. Such legal institutions have a long history in human societies. Smaller organizations also employ formal codes of conduct and often designate specific individuals to enforce the rules.

Institutions may also refer to social structures that create infrastructure for cooperative exchanges, like markets. Markets provide a regulated environment for strangers to engage in productive trades of goods and services. In general, institutions can promote cooperation both by deterring bad behavior and by promoting trust that others will cooperate. The role of institutions in human cooperation has received much less attention among experimentalists using economic games than direct and indirect reciprocity.

The suggestion that cooperation is only about maximizing long-term payoffs does not match well with our daily life experiences. A brief moment of introspection indicates that all cooperative behavior does not result from conscious calculations of expected returns. We are surrounded by examples of people who seem to help because they genuinely care for others. Almost all of us have acted altruistically at one time or another without considering future returns, only motivated by our notions of morality and ethical behavior.

Why people cooperate can be explained by outlining how cooperation pays off in the long run. Outlining the motivations, emotions, and cognitions that lead to cooperation at the moment, can explain how people cooperate. Empathy is one of the most important explanations for motivating cooperative behavior. Empathetic concern is a human emotional response to taking the perspective of another person in need. Empathetic concern motivates humans to see what needs relieving, often through cooperative helping. A large body of studies has shown that experimentally manipulating empathic concern increases cooperative behaviors and cooperation with the target in economic games. Furthermore, evidence suggests that empathic individuals experience positive mood changes when they see a need get relieved, even if another agent caused the relief—suggesting that empathic concern reflects genuine care for others.

As social beings who live and work together and who share and compete for limited resources, we constantly encounter, and sometimes create cooperation problems. At times we cooperate out of habit, without even realizing it. Other times, lacking a social norm, we miss opportunities for cooperation. The scale of the problem can range from one involving two people that can easily be solved with reciprocity, to a global problem involving every person on the planet that can be solved only with regulations, carefully constructed incentive structures, monitoring, and enforcement, and the evolution of appropriate social norms.

The most obvious cooperation problems are those involving the use and protection of the environment and natural resources. Everyone uses and is affected by the environment. The effects of the actions of any one individual are insignificant, and the cumulative effects of the actions of many individuals are enormous. All people use environmental resources, and some environmental resources, such as air, are used by every person on earth. When billions of people are all using the same common resource, a cooperative dilemma is created that can only be solved if leaders step forward and organize, regulate, or inspire people to cooperate. Because so many people use the same resources, many individuals believe that they should not control their use of the resource because other people aren’t controlling their use. If one person limits his use, but others do not, then he will be incurring an individual cost even though the benefit of his regulated behavior will have no effect on the overall sustainability or health of the resource so long as everyone else in the world continues to use the resource unabated.

Cooperation problems can occur wherever more than one person is interacting, such as in the workplace. Anyone who works outside the home is familiar with the problem of employees coming to work when they are sick. There are many reasons why you may go to work sick, even though you risk infecting others. Among the reasons: using up sick days that could be saved for times when you’re even sicker or that could be used to take a day off (why waste a sick day on staying home sick when you can use it to take a long weekend?); losing income, in the form of wages, lost sales, or business; or falling behind in work that still needs to get done. When you stay home because of sickness, you may incur costs, but your coworkers benefit by continuing to enjoy a healthy workplace. However, the workplace retains a healthy environment only if people stay home when they’re sick. If one person defects and comes to work ill, then the healthy status of the workplace declines. Other people may decide that they too will come to work sick because the workplace is already unhealthy, so there’s no reason to stay home, or because they don’t want to incur the costs of staying home when other people aren’t willing to do the same. Workplaces develop a culture or set of norms about coming to work when sick. Though some offices can maintain their healthy status, other workplaces accept that people may come to work sick.

Cooperation with unrelated individuals is a hallmark of humankind despite the temptation to behave selfishly. Mechanisms that create future consequences for present actions can make cooperation pay off in the longer term and allow cooperation to arise and be maintained.

Intrinsic motivations for cooperative behavior arise as a result of extrinsic incentives that make cooperation advantageous. Intrinsic motivation is defined as the motivation to engage in a behavior because of the inherent satisfaction of the activity rather than the desire for a reward or specific outcome. Intrinsic motivation occurs when we act without any obvious external rewards: 'We simply enjoy an activity or see it as an opportunity to explore, learn, and actualize our potential.' The three main elements of intrinsic motivation are autonomy, purpose, and mastery. People are intrinsically motivated when they can act independently, feel that their efforts matter, and gain satisfaction from becoming more skilled. Emotions like empathy promote cooperative behavior.

Intrinsic motivation can be contrasted with extrinsic motivation, which involves engaging in a behavior to earn external rewards or avoid punishment. Internal motivation arises from within, while external motivation comes from outside forces. Extrinsic motivation is a motivation that is driven by external rewards. These can be tangible, such as money or grades, or intangible, such as praise or fame. Unlike intrinsic motivation, which arises from within the individual, extrinsic motivation is focused purely on outside rewards. People who are extrinsically motivated will continue to perform a task even though it might not be in and of itself rewarding. For example, they will do something at their job that they don't find enjoyable to earn a wage. Extrinsic motivation is involved in operant conditioning, which is when someone or something is conditioned to behave a certain way due to a reward or consequence.

Extrinsic incentives can also crowd out, or undermine, intrinsic motivation. People attend to and monitor the cooperative behaviors of others. Individuals respond to cooperative (and noncooperative) behavior both when the behavior has directly affected them (as second parties) and when it has not (as third parties).

So now, let's imagine that somewhere, there are people who want to move a large table into the middle of a room. Of course, we call the people who lift the table the people who cooperate. But are they working together? Then, what about those who were there but didn't lift the table? Perhaps our naughty minds will mutter that they are just people watching, indifferent, and don't care.

But what if those who didn't lift the table, gave some signal or warning to those who lifted the table so that they slightly moved to the right because they were moving to the left or vice versa? So how do we evaluate those who don't lift the table, but are willing to give directions without being paid or rewarded compared to those who lift the table with a fee or reward? Probably, without someone giving a signal or warning, the target of placing the table in the middle of the room will not work.

'We’re all pieces of a puzzle'. Each of us is a unique puzzle piece with our color. Each piece plays a specific role, and together, they complete the task or project to get the big picture. And a good picture emerges when you combine technical skills with a thoughtful POV. Our perspective is unique. Don’t settle for the first angle you see, change your POV. A good picture goes beyond technical correctness. It engages viewers, evokes emotions, and tells a story. It has unique perspectives, the elements in our scene, focal points, and of course, leading lines, natural lines to lead the viewer’s eye into the frame.

We'll go on with our discussion on the next episode, biidhnillah."

Citations & References:

- Jean Decety & Thalia Wheatley (Eds.), The Moral Brain: A Multidisciplinary Perspective, 2015, The MIT Press

- Natalie Henrich & Joseph Henrich, Why Humans Cooperate: A Cultural and Evolutionary Explanation, 2007, Oxford University Press

- Carol Sansone & Judith M, Harackiewicz, Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation: The Search for Optimal Motivation and Performance, 2000, Academic Press

- Martin A. Nowak & Roger Highfield, SuperCooperators: Altruism, Evolution, and Why We Need Each Other to Succeed, 2011, Free Press

[Episode 21]

[Episode 19]

Bahasa

Stories from Cananga Tree (19)

"A veterinarian asked his assistant, 'Why did the chicken cross the road?'

His assistant replied, 'To get to the other side.'"

"The world is dynamic and ever-changing. Change is inevitable, but our ability to navigate it defines our future. We remain part of a dynamic, interconnected world—one where adaptation and progress go hand in hand. Our ability to adapt to change is crucial. Whether it’s economic shifts, geopolitical tensions, or environmental challenges, our resilience matters.

We are all citizens of the world in addition to being citizens of our immediate society. We have opportunities to elect governments that make decisions involving war and peace, economic development, human rights, our welfare, and our relationships with other peoples. We do not want these matters, which are of increasing importance, to be outside our competence," Cananga went on while looking at a large clock at Abraj Al Bait.

"Our interconnectedness is getting stronger. The social and political behaviour of others is the social and political environment of each system. Our behaviour as one part of a society affects the behaviour of others. The values, expectations, sympathies and hostilities of people in one place are transmitted throughout the whole of societies, and world society. Movements of independence and social reform, affect behaviour in others. Furthermore, increased interdependence, which is the consequence of increased specialization, industrialization and trade, leads to change everywhere when there is change anywhere. Whatever our occupation or interests, each of us needs to be informed about our wider environment, how we affect it, and how we are affected by it. In particular, we need to have insights into changes that are likely to occur, such as population growth, technological change, social and political change and market changes, so that we can anticipate them, and plan our individual and collective lives accordingly.

The press, television, scholars who write books, teachers who teach history, and people generally create the political climate in which formal decisions are taken, John W. Burton wrote. Each of us at some stage lives and works in communities and organizations through which we seek security, harmonious social relationships, freedoms of many kinds, and self-fulfilment generally. For this to be possible, we, as members, need to understand and to be able to influence the internal processes of our particular community or organization. But this by itself does not guarantee success. Every individual, every group—small or large—every organization or institution exists within a wider environment. It must be able to control this environment or be able to adjust to it and change in it. This interaction between a system and its environment is ignored all too often. Businesses sometimes fail, not necessarily because they are inefficient internally, but because there have been false predictions about changes in foreign markets, about technological developments, or about future political conditions. States find themselves involved in war, not necessarily because of an aggressive intent, but merely because they misjudged or were unaware of the longer-term responses of others to their policies. The press, television, scholars who write books, teachers who teach history and people generally create the political climate in which formal decisions are taken. But even when advisers and others have solved a problem, there is still a need for consensual support. Fluoridization of drinking water could be regarded as a solution to some dental problems, but there still must be agreement on a policy to implement this finding. Scholars could find that some defensive strategies were self-defeating, but there still would have to be a widespread consensus in favour of some radical change. Prejudice, fear and tradition are as powerful in influencing the way people think as are vested interests. Some vested interests can be eliminated by revolution and structural change; but prejudice, fear and tradition are removed only by educational processes that are slow to show results.

Some changes occur in the structure of world society due to population growth, discovery, invention, political developments, improvements in communications, education and social organization. There is also the environment of scholarship. Knowledge and techniques in one area, such as economics, psychology and engineering, provide insights and methods that are relevant to other areas, such as education and international relations. Innovation and thinking in any one field promote innovation and thinking in many others, with the result that in all disciplines the rate of discovery is an ever-increasing one.

It is important to adopt the widest possible perspective. We learn to find our way about a town by looking at a map of the whole, and finding where we are concerning the whole. We find our way in and out of complex buildings by having an image or a map of the whole, and our present position about it—or following notices provided by someone with such an image.

Recent research by the McKinsey Global Institute (MGI) reveals that while tangible flows of goods have levelled off, other critical flows—such as knowledge, services, and data—are accelerating. Flows of data, for instance, have grown by over 40 per cent annually in the past decade. Globalization isn’t disappearing; it’s transforming. This changing world shows us, on one side, a rising global population (expected to reach 8 billion by 2030), and we face the challenge of providing a high quality of life while minimizing our impact on the planet. Globally, there are some issues we must address: poverty, climate change, food insecurity and refugee rights. The World Bank is updating the International Poverty Line from $1.90 to $2.15. Extreme poverty remains a challenge, and 62% of the global population lives on less than $10/day. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)’s sixth report highlights near-term, mid-term, and long-term risks of climate change. Mitigation is crucial to prevent major health issues, premature deaths, and risks to ecosystems and humans. The 2022 Global Report on Food Crises reveals that close to 193 million people experienced acute food insecurity in 2021, an 80% increase since 2016. Economic shocks and weather-related disasters contribute to this crisis. The war in Ukraine has sparked the fastest-growing refugee crisis since WWII, according to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). These challenges require urgent attention and collaborative efforts to create a better world.

Misinformation and disinformation, climate-related threats, war and conflict, and economic uncertainty are some of the recent pressing issues in global politics. The World Economic Forum’s Global Risks Report 2024 highlights misinformation and disinformation as the most severe short-term threat. With AI potentially amplifying false narratives, foreign and domestic actors may exploit these tactics to widen societal and political divides. In the longer term, climate-related risks dominate the top 10 global risks. The ever-increasing impacts of a changing climate pose significant challenges to our world order. Ongoing conflicts and polarized politics continue to destabilize the global order. For instance, the crisis in Ukraine faces a significant refugee crisis due to the war. A continuing cost-of-living crisis adds to global instability, affecting people across regions and creating economic Uncertainty. These challenges demand collaborative efforts and strategic solutions to create a more stable and sustainable world.

Meanwhile, steady but slow growth, inflation challenges, structural frictions, and dimmer prospects for emerging markets (and China) are some of the recent pressing issues in global economics. The 2024 World Economic Outlook by the IMF forecasts global growth to continue at 3.2% during 2024 and 2025. While advanced economies are expected to accelerate slightly, emerging markets and developing economies face a modest slowdown. Declining growth prospects in China and other large emerging market economies may weigh on trading partners. Persistent structural frictions hinder capital and labor mobility to productive firms, impacting output per person growth in the medium term.

Global inflation is forecast to decline steadily, from 6.8% in 2023 to 5.9% in 2024 and 4.5% in 2025. Advanced economies are returning to their inflation targets sooner than emerging market economies. A decrease in the general price level of goods and services refers to deflation. It is one of the most feared terms in economics. During deflation, the unemployment rate tends to rise. As prices decrease, producers often cut costs by laying off employees. Reduced demand for goods and services leads to production cutbacks, which further exacerbate unemployment. So, deflation can bring an increase in unemployment.

Deflation is associated with an increase in interest rates. When prices fall, the real value of debt becomes higher. Consumers and businesses find it more challenging to repay existing debts, leading to financial strain. Initially, deflation can increase a consumer’s purchasing power because prices are lower. However, prolonged deflation can lead to deferred spending as people expect prices to continue falling. This demand reduction can further contribute to an economic slowdown. Companies face difficulties when they are unable to sell products due to deflation. Revenue decreases, leading to cost-cutting measures such as closing stores, plants, and warehouses, and laying off workers. Workers, in turn, reduce their spending, creating a cycle of less demand and more deflation. In extreme cases, deflation can even push an economy into a recession or a depression.

On the contrary, a broad rise in the prices of goods and services across the economy over time refers to Inflation. Inflation, always and everywhere, is primarily caused by an increase in the supply of money and credit. Inflation is the increase in the supply of money and credit, says Henry Hazlitt. Inflation is indeed a topic of concern in economics. Inflation is a gradual loss of purchasing power, reflected in a broad rise in prices for goods and services over time. It erodes the purchasing power of both consumers and businesses. Essentially, your dollar (or any currency) won’t go as far today as it did yesterday. Example: let's say that in 1970, an average cup of coffee in your country cost 25 cents; by 2019, it had climbed to $1.59. So, for $5, you could buy about three cups of coffee in 2019, compared to 20 cups in 1970. Inflation affects our daily life. High inflation rates are reflected in bills—from groceries to utilities to mortgage payments. Executives and corporate leaders face the effects of inflation, balancing margins while paying more for raw materials.

In a healthy economy, annual inflation around 2% stimulates spending and boosts demand and productivity during economic slowdowns. In this cas, inflation ai stimulating deman and has moderation positive effect. But when inflation surpasses wage growth, it signals a struggling economy. It's a warning sign.

Hyperinflation is a rare but extreme form of inflation, characterized by rapid and out-of-control price increases in an economy. It can have severe consequences for individuals, businesses, and the overall economy. When a country’s central bank prints money without a corresponding increase in goods and services, it dilutes the value of each monetary unit. Essentially, too much money chases too few goods, leading to skyrocketing prices. Confidence is crucial for any currency’s stability. If people lose faith in their currency due to economic instability, political turmoil, or other factors, they may rush to exchange it for other assets (e.g., foreign currencies, gold, or real estate). This loss of confidence can exacerbate hyperinflation. Sometimes, governments finance their expenditures by printing money rather than borrowing or raising taxes. When deficit spending becomes excessive, it floods the economy with money, contributing to hyperinflation. Wars, revolutions, and political upheavals disrupt economic stability. In such situations, governments often resort to printing money to fund war efforts or maintain power, leading to hyperinflation.

Inflation has ripple effects, posing threats to financial stability. It also correlates with increased financial crime rates. While moderate inflation can be beneficial, excessive or prolonged inflation can harm economies and individuals. Policymakers need to strike the right balance, to maintain the temperature of the economics machine so that it doesn't break because it's too hot, or freeze because it's too cold.

On the other side, we have to face some resource constraints, declining resources, and also what economists call 'externalities', forcing us to adapt. We must find sustainable ways to thrive. Externalities (or sometimes, 'third-party effects' or 'spillover effects') arise whenever the value of a production function or a consumption function depends directly upon the activity of others. Externalities refer to costs or benefits incurred or received by a third party who has no control over how those costs or benefits were created. They can be either positive or negative. Negative externality occurs when one party imposes an indirect cost on another. For example, pollution caused by commuting to work or a chemical spill due to improperly stored waste. If one party receives an indirect benefit as a result of actions taken by another, it is a positive externality. To address negative externalities, governments may use taxation and regulation to curb their impact.

There are significant externalities with practical implications. Global warming affects the entire planet, and damage to the ozone layer impacts climate stability and human health. he consumption of large cars, such as SUVs, produces several negative externalities. Larger cars wear down roads more, leading to increased maintenance costs for governments. The contribution of driving to global warming is directly proportional to the amount of fossil fuel a vehicle requires to travel a mile. SUV drivers use more gas, increasing fossil fuel emissions. Externalities play a crucial role in economics, affecting both individuals and society as a whole.

Culture is dynamic as well. It evolves, adapts, and responds to shifts in society. Yet, it maintains a sense of coherence—a thread connecting past, present, and future. Progress in technology accelerates technological advancements, including AI, reshaping our world. These changes affect everything from climate action to political systems.

The digital age has ushered in significant cultural shifts, transforming the way we perceive, create, and interact with culture. Now, we have an abundance of information at our fingertips. Online spaces, social media, and virtual experiences are seamlessly integrated into our daily lives. Web presence and social media platforms allow individuals to share their thoughts, experiences, and creations globally. The distinction between reality and virtuality has become less clear. People curate their digital personas, blurring the lines between who they are offline and who they present themselves to be online. Online identity is a prime example. Digital technologies empower individual expression. The exposure of personal information has become commonplace. People can tailor their experiences, preferences, and content consumption. The digital revolution has reversed the scarcity of information. The intellectualisation of our environment—cognification—is a trend. AI, algorithms, and smart systems enhance our lives. In the past, knowledge was limited and controlled. The way we produce and transmit culture has fundamentally changed, impacting everything from language evolution to social norms. So, organisations and societies must adapt to these shifts. Change management strategies should focus on cultural transformation beyond technology. Engaging leaders, promoting new values, encouraging dialogue, and measuring progress are essential steps. The digital age has revolutionized culture by blurring boundaries, democratizing information, and empowering individuals. As we navigate this dynamic landscape, understanding these shifts is crucial for both personal growth and societal progress.

We are continuing our discussion on the topic of the Islamic Calendar, biidhnillah."

Then Cananga rhymed,

Si pedagang terpana, di pikiran nakalnya berkata

[The merchant was stunned, in his naughty mind said]

Kelak, bisa saja rakyat diekspor besar-besaran ke Malaysia,

ke Brunei dan Singapura,

[In the future, people could be exported on a large scale to Malaysia,

to Brunei and Singapore,]

Ke Hongkong, Taiwan dan Timur Tengah tentu saja

[To Hong Kong, Taiwan and the Middle East of course]

Maka, rumah-rumah jadi kosong, tanah-tanah jadi lapang

[So, the houses became empty, the land became open]

Lalu berdatanganlah orang-orang jangkung berkulit warna udang

[Then came tall people with shrimp-colored skin]

Berbondong-bondonglah orang-orang berkulit warna mentega

[Butter-colored skinned people flocked]

Hingga penuh sesak udara, oleh napas-napas busuk dari negeri tetangga

[Until the air is filled with suffocation, by the foul breath from neighboring countries]

Hingga #2030, kita bakal ternganga *)

[Until #2030, we will be agape]

Citations & References:

- John W. Burton, World Society, 1972, Cambridge University Press

- Chris Farrell, Deflation: What Happens When Prices Fall, 2004, HarperCollins

- Henry Hazlitt, What You Should Know About Inflation, 1964, D. Van Nostrand Company

- Philip Haslam & Russel Lamberti, When Money Destroys Nations, 2014, Penguin Group

- Steven A. Y. Lin, Theory and Measurement of Economic Externalities, 1976, Academic Press

- Richard Cornes, The Theory of Externalities, Public Goods, and Club Goods, 1996, Cambridge University Press

*) "Ganti Presiden" written by Hasan Bisri BFC

[Episode 20]

[Episode 18]

Bahasa