"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
