Transkrip diambil dari YouTube. Klik timestamp biru untuk melompat ke posisi tersebut di pemutar.
0:03 TV. In the name of Allah, the Most 0:09 Gracious, the Most Merciful. Brothers 0:11 and sisters, we are now connected with 0:14 an observer of the nation, who is also 0:17 an economic and political analyst. We 0:21 have Dr. Toni Rosid on the line. Peace 0:25 be upon you, Bang Toni. 0:29 And peace be upon you too, Mas Agus. 0:32 How are you, Bang Toni? I hope you're 0:33 well, Bang Toni. 0:34 Praise be to God, I am healthy and well 0:36 . 0:39 Right, today Bang Toni, as usual, we 0:42 will have a dialogue and hear your 0:44 analysis regarding the current 0:47 situation and conditions that will 0:50 unfold in the next few days. The public 0:55 is, well, there is a lot of news on 0:58 social media and national media that 1:02 tomorrow, August 27th, there will be a 1:05 massive demonstration. The focus is, 1:09 well, they will be in front of the DPR/ 1:11 MPR building. There are several demands 1:15 that we have highlighted. Among them is 1:19 the Asset Forfeiture Bill for 1:21 corruptors. Not only that, the 1:26 demonstration that will take place 1:30 tomorrow also involves an alliance of 1:34 the public, as well as students and 1:37 other mass organizations. Now, amidst 1:43 these conditions, there is pressure for 1:45 anti-corruption efforts to be 1:47 strengthened, for assets from crimes to 1:50 be seized, and of course, for the KPK 1:52 or the Corruption Eradication 1:54 Commission to be strengthened once 1:56 again. Now, Bang Toni, looking at this 2:01 condition, and also knowing that the 2:05 country's debt is continuously 2:09 increasing. This is also a highlight 2:12 and concern for the participants of 2:14 tomorrow's rally. How do we view what 2:18 will happen, or what is your analysis 2:21 regarding the events of the last few 2:24 days? Bang Toni. Well, thank you Mas 2:30 Agus and all Rasil listeners everywhere 2:33 regarding the issue of the large 2:35 demonstration. 2:37 Which is then reinforced by the issue 2:40 of the blocking of funds around 2:42 billions of rupiah. 2:45 By a bank, as it has already been 2:47 mentioned in the media, Bank Mandiri. 2:51 At the request of. 2:54 Well, the security authorities, related 2:57 to the planned demonstration, which 2:59 also led to news that buses that had 3:02 been booked were cancelled because they 3:05 couldn't be paid off. The factor is 3:10 that those funds were blocked in bank 3:15 accounts, you see. Demonstrations are 3:22 something natural and common to happen. 3:26 So, in an era of democracy or a country 3:31 that adheres to a democratic system, 3:35 not every state policy satisfies 3:38 everyone, but on the other hand, it 3:42 must be realized that these policies 3:46 should not be considered absolutely 3:50 correct; so room for criticism must be 3:55 provided. This demonstration is part of 4:00 an effort to provide stronger, more 4:03 systematic criticism, and criticism 4:06 that can become pressure to be heard by 4:10 the party being criticized. That is 4:14 essentially the point. Therefore, this 4:18 should be considered something natural. 4:25 It should be seen as a consequence of 4:28 us choosing democracy to be part of our 4:31 constitutional system. So, Mas Agus, it 4:38 then develops into how big the 4:41 demonstration actually is, right? If I 4:46 look at it, not in terms of...what... 4:54 ideally, we don't need to look at the 4:57 size of the demonstration, but the 5:00 substance conveyed in the demo that we 5:03 see and read on various social media 5:06 and the media, as Mas Agus mentioned 5:09 earlier, is asset forfeiture. 5:13 Correct. This is homework for this 5:15 country, Bang Toni. 5:16 And that has been the case for a long 5:17 time. Why did the bill appear, what... 5:22 the idea of an asset forfeiture bill 5:25 that then drags on and isn't executed, 5:28 right? Yeah. 5:30 Yes, this isn't a new issue, this is an 5:32 old issue, right? Now, why is it not 5:35 executed, right? And then this issue 5:38 first appeared as an idea so that...an 5:43 asset forfeiture law would be created 5:46 because in Indonesia... 5:49 there is extraordinary economic 5:51 inequality. There is an upper class, a 5:53 lower class, and the upper class is 5:55 really, really high. And this isn't all 6:00 purely the result of normal, normative 6:05 efforts, but it's assumed that the 6:10 proceeds of corruption are abundant, 6:15 leading to the collection of assets, 6:20 especially among officials. Yes. 6:27 So, if one becomes an official, their 6:29 lifestyle changes. Why does their life 6:33 change? Because they have status, not 6:36 just social status that rises, right? 6:39 Yes. Political status which then 6:41 influences rising social status, but 6:43 economic status also rises, and it 6:44 rises drastically. 6:46 Yeah. 6:46 The question is, where does it come 6:47 from? Where can that indicator be seen 6:50 from those caught? Officials getting 6:53 caught happens every month. 6:55 Yes. 6:56 And their wealth is extraordinary, you 6:58 know. 6:58 Yeah. 6:59 He is an echelon two, he is an echelon 7:01 one official. His salary is in the 7:03 millions, under 50 million rupiah. But 7:07 why does he have assets worth hundreds 7:09 of billions, you know? 7:11 Yeah. 7:13 And those caught aren't just 1, 2, or 3 7:15 people, not dozens of people, but even 7:17 hundreds whose wealth is, wow. I see 7:22 that Bang Toni, wait, these people 7:26 mostly sitting in the seats of power, 7:30 in those offices, were once activists 7:34 who also shouted about the nation's 7:38 problem being corruption. But why, when 7:43 they are inside, do they get trapped by 7:45 the pleasure of that power, Bang? Are 7:48 they not aware? They should be 7:50 overseeing it, right, Bang? 7:52 Yes. So, Mas Agus, there is a term by 7:58 Edwin Sutherland, he has a theory 8:02 called the differential association 8:07 theory. 8:08 Yeah. 8:09 Yes. He says in that theory that crime 8:13 is not. So criminality, law-breaking, 8:16 including corruption, is something that 8:19 is learned. It explains there that 8:21 there are nine propositions, yes. First 8:25 of all, people, what do you call it, 8:28 see that it is learned from social 8:32 interaction. The social interaction 8:34 comes from those closest to them. They 8:37 don't just learn the techniques of 8:39 stealing, robbing, or corruption, but 8:40 also learn the motives behind them. 8:44 When they associate with people who 8:45 encourage the idea that breaking the 8:47 law is a normal thing. Like Hitler once 8:51 said, that a lie, er, truth is a lie 8:53 repeated a thousand times; because it's 8:55 habitual, then they learn that it 8:57 becomes truth. Even if they come from 9:01 an activist background, or as MD says, 9:03 even if they come, er, from a community 9:05 of angels, if they get an official 9:06 position, Mahfud MD often says, they 9:08 might not stay righteous either. But, 9:12 er, that anecdote is extreme, it's 9:16 meant to make us, er, realize how bad 9:20 our system really is, right? It says 9:26 something like, "A bad system will 9:30 corrupt a good person every day." A bad 9:36 system will swallow up, er, good people 9:39 every single day, you know. So our 9:43 system is indeed...so. Corruption is 9:48 not an issue of individual morals, 9:51 personal morals, but it is already 9:54 structured, it is already systemic, 9:56 part of our culture, system, and social 9:59 life structure. So the way to change it 10:04 is not through, er, personal planning, 10:07 not by bringing in religious scholars 10:09 to give lectures, right? I 10:12 It's not individual training, 10:14 individual engineering. This is a 10:18 social problem, and social problems 10:20 must be solved with, er, what? Planning 10:24 , social planning. Now, we are often 10:27 wrong, as if bringing in a million 10:28 preachers would solve it, it doesn't, 10:31 right? This is not an issue of 10:33 individual morals, yeah. It is a 10:36 problem of the system. Ah, this is, 10:41 this is what must be solved. So if 10:45 someone has a headache, give them a 10:47 painkiller, don't give them, er, 10:49 stomach medicine instead. Now, our 10:53 therapy is often mismatched, the 10:54 illness is one thing, the medicine is 10:56 another, it doesn't connect. 10:58 Like that. Ah, back again to the issue 11:00 of. 11:02 What was it again? Positions that then 11:06 encourage someone or a group of people 11:09 to enrich themselves excessively 11:12 through corruption. And that is where 11:17 the vast assets owned by them become 11:21 the motivation for civil society to. To 11:28 solve it in a systemic way. What is the 11:30 way? There must be an asset forfeiture 11:34 law to handle them. Er, this has been 11:36 around for a long time, right, but 11:37 until now it hasn't happened. Why? Er, 11:40 this is the question of why it isn't 11:42 executed, it's because the officials 11:43 themselves don't want it. 11:46 There is this expression, like this. 11:48 Yes, but this is as an analogy, this is 11:49 Max's saying, not mine, okay. 11:52 Er, to be an analysis of the conditions 11:54 in Indonesia. It says, "No monkey would 11:59 saw off the tree branch it’s sitting 12:01 on, you know." 12:03 Yeah. 12:05 Those who are corrupt wouldn't possibly 12:10 , you know, cut off their own source of 12:15 power by passing an asset forfeiture 12:20 law, right? It’s bound to face 12:23 opposition. The Quran itself says, you 12:26 know, as quoted by Ustaz Rasil, it says 12:35 , "I will not send a reformer to change 12:39 the old system without the people who 12:43 benefit from that old system putting up 12:47 a fight." So, they must be pressured. 12:52 They will resist, but they must be 12:54 pushed, sir, through demonstrations. 12:57 Apparently, small protests and academic 13:00 strategies haven’t succeeded. Then 13:03 small demonstrations didn't work. It 13:05 seems like there’s going to be a 13:06 massive protest for that asset law. 13:08 Will it be successful or not? Well, 13:10 I’m sure it won't be easy. Not easy. 13:13 As I said, no one saws off their own 13:17 fate through legislation when they have 13:20 the authority to do otherwise. That’s 13:24 one thing. 13:26 Now, moving on, who is driving this? Of 13:30 course, in any protest, there are 13:32 always idealist citizens or activists, 13:34 right? Idealistic people always emerge, 13:39 whose pure goal is to push for this 13:41 nation to become better. Be grateful, 13:45 that those running the country have 13:48 citizens, activists, and community 13:51 groups who care enough about this 13:53 nation to save it and secure its future 13:56 , you know. But is it ever sterile? 14:00 There is no such thing as a sterile 14:01 demonstration. 14:02 Hm. 14:04 Yes, these community groups are 14:05 idealistic. Right. But there will 14:08 always be parties who take advantage of 14:10 these waves of people; it’s always 14:12 like that. 14:14 Yeah. 14:15 This is a momentum, the state just 14:17 needs to— 14:19 right. Idealistic groups always appear 14:23 to give warnings to the state when it 14:26 goes astray, when it slips up, when it 14:29 adopts policies that don't align with 14:32 the nation's vision and ideals. And 14:36 those ideals of independence will 14:37 always be born. So, those idealistic 14:40 activist demonstrators are the 14:43 offspring of the state's failings. 14:46 Whenever the state goes astray, those 14:48 offspring will be born. That is a law 14:50 of nature. But every demonstration also 14:53 has other offspring, has grandchildren 14:55 —who are they? Yes, they are the ones 14:59 who then exploit the momentum for group 15:01 interests, for their own agendas. 15:04 Exactly. So, they must be separated. So 15:07 , every time the state implements 15:10 policies that aren't in line with the 15:13 nation's direction and ideals of 15:15 independence, it will automatically 15:18 give birth to groups that protest. 15:21 Every act of tyranny will give birth to 15:24 angels, something like that, right? 15:27 Angels in human form to set things 15:29 straight. But that momentum will be 15:34 exploited by parties with their own 15:35 interests who happen to be outside of 15:37 power. The momentum is there, mass 15:42 mobilization will join in to then, uh, 15:45 take advantage of the situation. Well, 15:49 then riots emerge. So, genuine 15:52 protesters do not cause riots. As for 15:55 the riots, those are automatically 15:57 infiltrators who are skilled at doing 15:58 such things. So there will always be 16:02 opposition, moderate opposition and 16:04 extreme opposition, yes. When moderate 16:09 and extreme opposition unite to 16:11 overthrow, that is what happens. But 16:14 the moderate opposition is always wise. 16:17 Is this power already severe or not? If 16:21 it is already severe, they just 16:22 criticize it. But if it is not yet, if 16:25 it is not severe, they just criticize 16:26 it so that improvements can be made. 16:28 However, if it is already severe, they 16:30 can compromise with the extreme 16:31 opposition who indeed have an interest 16:33 in overthrowing and taking over. And 16:37 this is something very theoretical and 16:39 can be proven in the field. It depends 16:42 on the circumstances and conditions, 16:44 yes. There we can learn about coup 16:48 theory, revolution theory, then CR 16:50 theory, e, COP theory, and so on. There 16:54 are many theories that are presented 16:56 for analysis. But do the facts on the 16:59 ground align with which theory? That is 17:02 the issue, isn't it? So, which theory 17:04 does tomorrow's protest align with? Is 17:06 it my theory? It could be, yes, if...if 17:10 the military turns out to be 17:11 pro-protest and then the military joins 17:13 in, right? It is roughly like this: 17:17 does it align with, uh, what is it, the 17:19 idea of reform or revolution? Yes, if 17:24 it is a model of revolution, uh, 17:26 Jonathan Turner's model or Smelser's 17:29 model or other models, it can be read 17:32 based on the data in the field. So, 17:37 there is no need to be allergic, right. 17:41 Now, if we map it out, I have already 17:43 written that there are four forces 17:45 outside the palace. There is the force 17:50 of, uh, what is it, Solo, then there is 17:52 the force of Anies Baswedan, there is 17:55 the red force of PDIP, there is the 17:58 force modeled after, uh, what is their 18:00 name? Democrat. These forces have 18:05 different characters. Of course, they 18:08 will have different patterns. They will 18:11 exploit the situation according to 18:13 their differing needs. I have already 18:17 laid that out for awareness, uh, like 18:19 that. Ah, how the dynamics in the field 18:24 will unfold depends on the supply of 18:27 data provided or the factual supply 18:30 provided by the field. Whatever the 18:33 field conditions are, those forces will 18:36 play their part. This includes the fact 18:38 that we haven't counted the forces 18:39 within the internal circles. As in my 18:42 previous writing, I revealed internal 18:45 forces, internal conflicts, and they 18:47 have their own powers that I don't need 18:50 to name—who those internal forces are 18:52 —and these forces can shift according 18:55 to, uh, the situation, Mas Agus. Will 19:00 tomorrow's protest go peacefully, or 19:02 how is the government anticipating, uh, 19:06 the big protest on the 27th, Bang Toni? 19:12 Since August 1st, early August, there 19:14 was already a state of high alert, 19:17 troops in the regions had been pulled 19:19 into Jakarta, and this was an alert for 19:22 both the police and the military. 19:25 Already on alert. What does that mean? 19:28 The authorities 'intelligence had 19:30 already read the situation. They had 19:33 already gauged how many pure 19:35 demonstrators there were and their 19:36 scale. They had also assessed other 19:41 forces that had a vested interest, so 19:45 we cannot simply decide what happens on 19:49 the ground. Especially if we use the 19:53 Marsis model analysis. In the Marsis 19:56 model, there is something called 19:58 situational maturity, and that 19:59 situational maturity is unpredictable; 20:01 it cannot be predicted. Uh 20:03 but it can be anticipated, even if we 20:06 cannot predict what will often happen; 20:08 is it really predictable? Just like 20:11 last year, for example, in August. He 20:13 he. 20:14 Who predicted it? At that time, I was 20:17 camping in Puncak. I saw that 20:21 information and immediately received 20:23 many calls; who predicted that? It was 20:27 unpredictable. Take an example, for 20:29 instance. Take for example, what, a 20:33 barracuda hitting a... 20:36 a barracuda 20:37 hitting a Gojek driver. Heh 20:38 and then they died. 20:40 Yes. 20:40 Who predicted that would happen? 20:42 It wasn't intentional, was it? 20:43 Yes. 20:44 It was definitely not intentional. Not 20:45 intentional. Then it just happened, 20:48 right? Now, for example, it is 20:49 anticipated that there might be players 20:51 , or someone might be shot dead; that 20:53 is already anticipated. Suddenly, an 20:56 incident occurs, what do you call it? 21:00 According to Smelser, Neil Joseph 21:03 Smelser, it is called a "precipitating 21:07 factor". Or an action, there is a 21:13 participating action called a trigger, 21:16 and it can arrive quite suddenly. 21:19 Uh 21:21 if the situation is just linear, the 21:24 state is very strong in anticipating it 21:26 ; it has security instruments, it has 21:29 quite complete power instruments, and 21:32 it has information instruments through 21:35 intelligence, so everything can be 21:38 anticipated. But not all moves are 21:43 informed or detected; suddenly A 21:45 appears, suddenly B appears, suddenly C 21:49 appears. Those are things planned but 21:53 not detected. And there are things that 21:56 are unplanned. Automatically not 21:59 detected, like that barracuda hitting 22:01 the Gojek driver; that becomes an 22:03 explosion. 22:06 And that, and that, it's like a game of 22:10 chess; if Mas Agus and I are playing 22:13 chess, I have strategies that Mas Agus 22:17 knows, and I have strategies that Mas 22:20 Agus doesn't know, right? 22:23 Yes. 22:26 And then, for example, there is a 22:29 situation where Mas Agus gets a message 22:32 , a message from family, saying a 22:34 relative of yours has passed away. 22:38 You wouldn't be focused, right? Yes. 22:40 Or if there's something else where you 22:43 aren't focused, I do two or three 22:46 things. One, what I am about to do, Mas 22:49 Agus knows. Second, what I do, Mas Agus 22:52 does not know. Third, there are 22:55 accidents that are sudden, which then 22:58 change the whole constellation. That is 23:01 what happens during demonstrations. 23:03 Yeah. When there is a huge 23:05 demonstration, anything can happen. 23:08 Some are predictable, some are 23:10 unpredictable. There are situations 23:12 that arise from events in the moment 23:15 which are sudden in nature. 23:17 Yeah. 23:17 You know, Mas Agus, right? A Hitler 23:21 would never be born if, at that time, 23:23 the situation didn't provide the 23:25 momentum. So, it's the marriage between 23:28 , what should I call it? Preparation 23:30 and momentum, which then forms things. 23:32 There is a saying, a 19 th-century 23:39 British Prime Minister said, "Success 23:46 is to be ready when your opportunity 23:53 arrives." So, the secret to success is 24:00 preparing yourself, meeting all the 24:05 requirements, when the opportunity 24:10 comes. So, the opportunity is always 24:15 seized by those who prepare themselves. 24:18 Who are those who prepare themselves? 24:20 In the context of power, it is the 24:22 elite. That's why there's the term " 24:26 circulation of elites" by Pareto. So if 24:29 Mas Agus asks what will happen, I don't 24:32 know. 24:33 Yeah. 24:34 If you're asking about Mr. Jokowi, why 24:37 ask me? That's it, Mas Agus. So don't 24:43 think that there are no free riders. 24:47 There are always free riders. Free 24:50 riders are people who just enjoy the 24:53 results, what you call... 24:57 There is a term called free riders. 25:03 Yeah. 25:04 Yes, free riders. 25:06 Free riders can be... 25:09 Even if the free riders are people who 25:11 stay quiet and just enjoy the benefits. 25:13 I mentioned this in my previous book. 25:14 But there are Indonesian-style free 25:16 riders, and I think that's politics 25:18 everywhere. Every momentum is utilized 25:22 for group goals or personal goals. 25:26 Those are the free riders of a demo. 25:29 And there will always be; there has 25:31 never been a demo without free riders. 25:34 But whether those free riders gain 25:36 momentum or not is another matter. 25:38 Yeah. But don't generalize that this 25:41 demonstration is, what you call it, 25:43 being ridden by others. Not all of them 25:46 are ridden. Yeah. But there are many 25:49 that are pure, you see. 25:50 Yeah. 25:52 But if we say no, everything is pure, 25:55 that's not true either. I once joined a 25:58 demonstration, and I was doing research 26:01 because I wanted to know what it was 26:04 like; I conducted that research. So 26:07 these protesters are smart. They say 26:09 they know there are free riders, but 26:11 that's their business. Our business 26:13 must be finished. They demonstrate, 26:15 these students demonstrate, being 26:17 mobile, then say, "Hey, don't join, 26:20 it's not your time yet.""Your time is 26:23 later, in the evening, when you start 26:25 the fires." Then, when it was time for 26:28 them to go home, they were well aware 26:29 of the opportunists and all their 26:31 agendas, but they chose not to get 26:32 involved because their goals were 26:33 different. Their goals were only A, B, 26:37 C, D, while the opportunists' goal was 26:40 E. They dispersed and said, "That's 26:42 your business for later, not right now. 26:44 ""Let us demonstrate.""We're going home 26:48 , let's keep ourselves safe, right?" 26:51 They know, and I am sure those 26:53 idealistic activist friends held the 26:55 demonstration demanding it better 27:00 through the asset forfeiture law, that 27:03 was pure, right? Pure, but something 27:06 people agree on regarding asset 27:09 forfeiture, except for those who have 27:11 become suspects, right? Suspects of 27:14 assets, not suspects 27:17 social suspects, they have already been 27:19 branded socially, so only those who 27:21 don't like it, but the people as a 27:23 whole who are not social suspects, I 27:25 think, want that. But this wave could 27:29 be a momentum for parties who could 27:31 exploit it, right, Mas Agus? 27:33 Alright, brother, we are now at the end 27:36 of our dialogue. Is there a message 27:38 from brother Toni for the people of 27:40 Indonesia through this Silaturahim 27:42 radio? 27:44 Well, look, we must not lose hope and 27:46 must always remain optimistic despite 27:49 the chaotic situation right now—the 27:51 political situation, democracy, and the 27:54 economic situation. Uh 28:03 Yes. in the context of providing 28:05 actions. But one thing that must also 28:09 be remembered is that resistance will 28:11 never be massive if these authorities, 28:13 these officials, are on track in 28:15 carrying out the people's mandate as 28:17 best they can. Yes, if that is done, 28:21 then public support will be significant 28:24 and that will strengthen the 28:26 positioning of the authorities. Whoever 28:28 opposes the authorities, the people 28:30 will stand behind the government. But 28:32 conversely, when the people do not get 28:35 hope, then they will not give support 28:38 and could turn to provide support to 28:41 the parties opposing the authorities. 28:44 That's how it is, Mas. 28:45 Alright, thank you, brother Toni, for 28:47 our dialogue this morning. 28:49 Assalamu'alaikum warahmatullahi 28:50 wabarakatuh, brother Toni. 28:52 Wa'alaikumussalam warahmatullahi 28:53 wabarakatuh. 28:54 Brothers and sisters. That was our 28:56 dialogue earlier with Dr. Tony Rasyid, 28:58 an observer of the nation. Yeah. 
