•    HOME   
•    NEWS   
•    BUSINESS   
•    INTERNATIONAL   
•    TECH   
•    SPORTS   
•    LIFE & TIMES   
•    OPINION   
•    MY JAKARTA   
•    BLOGS   

I’m a libertarian. That means I don’t like it when other people tell me what to do, especially under the pretext that it’s good for me. I even take objection to unsolicited advice from those who have my best interests at heart. This, by the way, is not a recent trait brought on by advancing age. I’ve been like this since I was very young, and this was often a source of exasperation for my poor mother whose words of wisdom would invariably fall flat on the deaf ears of her know-it-all daughter.

But then I was brought up in an argumentative household, where everybody thought their ideas and opinions were worthier than everyone else’s, and one literally had to shout one’s way through a discussion in order to be heard. Seniority in my family did not count for much. If anything, the older you were, the more you were seen as being somewhat out of touch and ignorant of the ways of the world. Words along the lines of “I am your parent and you should listen to me and do as I say” would be met with derisive laughter not out of disrespect, but because this type of reasoning was not valid.

Most of the time, being the youngest, I would lose an argument on technical grounds, because, for instance, my voice wasn’t loud enough. In order to survive and maintain my ground, I would have to resort to some potent tools that I had developed specifically for the purpose of getting my point across — namely, using the art of sarcasm, the timely raising of the eyebrow and, if things really got tough, feigning indifference or just acting plain deaf.

It was felt that allowing oneself to be ruled by others’ opinions was an affront to one’s intelligence, especially if the method involved coercion. It was also a blow to one’s pride if others could come up with a more convincing argument. However, I would be more than happy to be influenced by someone whose argument was cogent and whose views had a depth and credibility that could override any of my poorly formed and hazy opinions.

Some of my teachers earned my respect this way. But my favorite teachers were those who gave me the freedom to express my views, while they ensured that the same views were based on some analysis and reflection. In other words, views shouldn’t be based on emotion, narrow prejudices and the fear of being told off or going to hell.

The point is, each one of us is equipped with the software that enables us to think for ourselves. Unless one is a sociopath, we can use our intelligence to make our lives easier and more pleasant, which often requires us to be nice to each other. It is the sort of intelligence that can only be fostered through constant discussion, an exchange of ideas and a tolerance for divergent views in an atmosphere devoid of threats and intimidation. After all, a good argument is only as good as its reasoning and how well it can withstand criticism. That is, if we still want to call ourselves a democratic country.

Democracy is a healthy environment in which to nurture this ability to think. The rule of the people is not an end in itself but a means through which the human family can interact freely in order to allow for the evolution of society’s consciousness to a higher level and to attain that ideal state we refer to as civilization.

The fact that there are bound to be views that are rubbish or expressions that are rude is beside the point. I agree that ethical behavior is an important element in social interaction. But ethics cannot be enforced by the state nor can good manners be imposed through ministerial regulations that threaten the existence of social interaction.

An ethical society cannot develop just because the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology decides to control information on the Web. Imposing a culture of fear is not the way to control a culture of lowbrow freedom of expression. Communication Minister Tifatul Sembiring is more effective communicating when he tweets pithy words of wisdom that inspire rather than when he comes up with regulations that are met with stiff resistance, difficult to impose and fan a lot of negative reactions.

Surely the days of banning books and censoring the media are well behind us. It is time for us to evolve into an intelligent society that has the confidence to express itself as thinking individuals. And where this intellectual capacity is still lacking, shutting it down is not the answer.

Tifatul should know this. One cannot teach people by pushing them around and preaching to them what to do or what not to do, as many of those who wield a bit of power like to beilieve. Power lies not in the ability to shut people up but in allowing them to speak.



Desi Anwar is a senior anchor and writer. She can be contacted at www.desianwar.com and www.dailyavocado.net.