This chapter discusses the development of institutions of national planning during the Guided Democracy and how it increasingly integrated the state within this structure. Sukarno’s Guided Democracy state wanted to reform the relationship between the old political elite, the new managerial elite and the wider Indonesian society. It wanted to do away with the centralization of power and authority within expert bodies and expand on the participation of both the old political elites and the wider Indonesian society in national, regional and local planning. The problems inherent in such a corporative planning structure came to a head with the failure of the Eight Year Plan of the Guided Democracy. This failure resulted in the recentralization of planning authority within the community of experts in a new planning body that would become central to New Order policy making in the future, the Bappenas. The integration of national, regional and local government into the institution of planning had resulted in the formation of new power relations that placed the military and expert planners in the center of state making policies. These forms of power relations had expanded the managerial state into the lower parts of the Indonesian state and thus opening the way for a more integrated managerial state that wield the ability to coordinate on a deeper level of society. The rise of regional planning coincided with the expansion of the army’s role in regional power politics and administration.
This chapter explores the economic policy making during the Guided Democracy, especially during the late-Guided Democracy period as it neared its end by 1965, and the increasing polarization between expert economists and the communist party. It looks into communist economic ideas that goes in line with Sukarno’s participatory ideas in the economy and how expert economists tried to incorporate socialist models in the economy through researching the economic institutions of East European countries and the Soviet Union. Efforts to integrate liberal economic theories with socialist institutions were discussed in the context of continuing economic deterioration of the first half of the 1960s. A series of economic reform programs designed by Indonesian economists, often working with expert from the US. While initially obtaining support from Sukarno, these economic reforms flounder as a result of communist criticism and Sukarno’s unwavering stance to support a more populist position when under pressure. The period saw the return home of many of New Order’s main economists after graduating from US universities and their positioning into important post in the economic planning and control of the country. It was a period which cemented the rise of American-educated economists as major holder of Indonesian policy making and the subsequent fall of the Indonesian communist model of the economy.
This chapter looks into the development of Indonesia’s postcolonial higher education system and the international technical assistance protocol in developing Indonesia’s new managerial class. It looks into the rapid expansion of higher education and the effort of the Indonesian society to decolonize its education system away from the Dutch model. Because of the swiftness of this process, Indonesianization looked a lot like Americanization. International aid through technical assistance was the primary means through which Western ideas on development planning and expert production through international higher education became cemented. Aid money helped create personal and institutional relationships between Indonesian and American government institutions and universities. In particular, the relationship between experts like the economist Sumitro Djojohadikusumo, Indonesia’s state planning institution, the faculty of economics of the University of Indonesia and UN and usaid technical experts and Western social scientists from American within mit’s Indonesia Project and others. These forms of transnational relationships legitimized the position of Indonesian planning experts within planning institutions that had strong institutional relationship with the West. This pattern would continue throughout much of the twentieth century.
This chapter looks at the shifting ideology and elite production in Indonesia as a result of decolonization. Changing elite identity markers from traditional feudal towards modern education and expertise represented changes in relations between elites and the new postcolonial state. The problem of endowing authority towards the new educated elites was perennial in the history of Indonesian state-society relations and the Guided Democracy period represented a transitional phase in the ideological underpinnings of this authority. The new educated elite had to wait for the creation of an ideological scaffolding that would protect them within a cocoon of authority. This authority had been challenged by the older Republican political elites headed by President Sukarno because they saw the new upstart generation as undermining the elite position of the old political class. The formation of a foundational ideology for the Indonesian state had been a product of compromise and strategies of the old elite to ensconce the new educated managerial class within a state ideology that placed at the center the old political class. This structure would remain after the replacement of that political class with an army elite during the New Order.
This chapter discusses the implementation of scientific management theories in the context of the Guided Democracy’s revolutionary effort to remake the Indonesian person. Studies into the administrative problems in the early 1950s has pointed out the cultural problem of administration. Classes on such themes as leadership strengthened the idea of a cultural pathology rooted in feudal Indonesian culture. Instead, an idealized image of the village with its corporatist values of gotong royong became one of the mainstay in the discussion of Indonesian administration. This would translate in the creation of a series of institution meant to discipline the civil service and wider population. Indoctrination courses, surveillance and retooling were the means to which the behavioral problem of the Indonesian man could be rationalized so as to support development. The support for this behavioral indoctrination came from both scientific management and Indonesian ideas of traditional corporatism. The concept of discipline was bifurcated within the divide between the experts and the rest. Thus, Indonesian behavioral discipline was often a form of re-traditionalization allowing for the expert to take on the authority of tradition. This again highlights the ease with which scientific management was reincarnated to support an Indonesian corporative order that was illiberal and undemocratic.
This chapter looks into the development of the Indonesian military after independence and the doctrinal development of the army that would provide the ideological and strategic foundation of the army’s role in Indonesia’s postcolonial state and society. It looks specifically into the army’s territorial and rapid strike doctrines and its relationship to the rise of education for army officers. The influence of American doctrines of Civic Action and strike doctrines like the Pentomic Doctrine was channeled through the copying of American army officer curriculum in Indonesia’s main army officer school, the Seskoad. American ideas of population capture through rural control and development was mirrored by the Indonesian army’s development of counter-insurgency strategies. This strategy envisioned greater cooperation between the military and social scientists in developing strategies of control and development. It also envisioned the army as community leader and social engineers. Indonesia’s developmental state can only function if the state can capture the population. Indonesia’s counterinsurgency state is thus a central component for the New Order’s developmental state and its roots can be found during the shift in army elite production in the 1950s.
This chapter delves into the import and development of American scientific management for both business management and public administration education in post-independence Indonesia. Indonesian realization of its managerial and administrative limits came from the failure of the country’s first industrialization plan, the Sumitro Plan, published in 1951. The creation of management and administration education was assisted by the consult of American management experts who visited the country in the mid-1950s with usaid money. This process of legitimizing the role of managers and the managerial class was criticized by people like Ernst Utrecht which saw the belief of scientific management as panacea to Indonesia’s administrative woes as unwarranted. The dangers of scientific management and the managerial state ideology it engendered were rooted in its anti-liberal and anti-democratic stance. Scientific management became an ideology that legitimized the creation of a welfare state in which administrative efficiency would trump political rights. It placed administrative efficiency as a paramount goal of the state. America’s managerial ideology was thus instrumental in supporting the rise of the New Order’s corporatist, familial state, whose foundations were developed in the context of Sukarno’s Guided Democracy state. The merging of the corporatist and developmental state was bridged through the ideology of scientific management.