kalau istilahnya andika, we have to know a little bit in everything )

explain the definition of good governance in your opinion and give one state as example.

sebenernya jurusan ini sebagai pelarian aja berhubung ga bisa ngitung. awalnya pilihan pertama gw multimedia, eh ditolak.. ya terpaksa harus belajar banyak cara basa basi ala anak HI. hihihihihii..

anyway, ini tuh soal ujian?? apa tugas kuliah??
hahahahahahahaha..

well, i’m impressed. tiba-tiba gua ngerasa pgn nyoba sekali aja ngerjain ujian anak HI.. gak butuh kalkulator, gak butuh textbook, gak butuh rumus, gak butuh diagram fasa, gak butuh data kesetimbangan uap cair, gak butuh data fisik dan kimia.. but still, untuk menjawabnya membutuhkan pandangan dan pengetahuan yang amattt luas.. salute!

Anyway, interesting point in your comment there, it’s pretty interesting to compare the policy done by Malaysia and Indonesia. Malaysia, in contrarty to Indonesia, does not discourage their chinese people to speak Chinese eh? Malaysia’s policy was good though it also putting Chinese into subject of racism, if I’m not mistaken, they are politically marginalized aren’t they?

Despite the javanization, Soeharto has successfully making Chinese people here being indifferent, and I appreciate what he has done, though it would have been so much better if we still could speak Chinese.

I don’t know what Soeharto thought since he only spoke two languages (Indonesia, Javanese, and pidgin english), he probably didn’t like people who speak two or three more languages, he didn’t see languages are assets, that’s why he erased Dutch, Japanese, and Mandarin from curriculum.

And look what happened now from that moronic policy, while Indonesia had been potential place for people with multingualism, it would never happen because Soeharto has cut off the chain and the language succession.

I swear my late grandmother could speak at least three languages naturally: Chinese, Dutch, and Japanese, and most of us probably could speak these languages as well if only Soeharto hadn’t changed the curriculum. The irony is just too great isn’t it?

I think language loss is the most severe loss from his policy, because it took us longer to study it gramatically.

according to my reading, i just know a lot about good governance as Tun Mahatir’s point of view. and also the recent one, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi a.k.a Pak Lah. hahahahahha. kaco deh! anyway.. mereka ngambil bbrpa caharateristic dari UN. such as accountability and transparancy. Tun Mahatir himself divided it into INTERNAL and GLOBAL. the internal conducted with some sort of domestic governing procees, sbnrnya ada 7 elements on it, shit, forgot it! in the global they are having like UN reform or something like that.

in addition, all of -well owkay most of them-Malaysian Chinese here they have another name like english name. Eg:Charlene, Caroline, etc. and its just for another race. haha funny isnt it?

on my studycase about Anti-Chinese violence in Indonesia, i explain how the government did the recism. like what youve wrote, they started to let the minority Chinese changed their name into general Indonesian name. and how the Indonesian Chinese could no even speak Chinese at all. beacuse the rule didnt courage them to practice their ow culture. it was really interesting, when i read the cultural policy made by Soekarno i personally think that it such a ridiculous.

However, im taking NAtionality and ethnic conflict, and came up with with my own idea. Nation can not be built if its multiracial people didnt gave up their own culture. if that so, ethnic conflict will always occured.

Well..culture-related behavior might worth an analysis in Indonesia’s case. But having relatively unsuccessful government lead by Javanese does not mean that good governance in Indonesia is failing because of it. This is what I referred to as a fallacy of composition, Vin..

Although, I agree with you on one point. I guess it is quite fair to say that good governance in Indonesia is halted by this ethnic-based sentiment…

Anyway, I do realize this post is too much oversimplifying everything. To be honest, I’m sceptical whether there is a country that could be modeled as ideal government at all.

Three that crossed my mind when I wrote this article are: Finnish, German, and American (the fact they are being inclusive government is pretty undeniable fact, just look at Obama)

I dont’t know any good example whether communism and socialism actually succeed practicing these characteristics. If you happen to know one I’m of course, would be glad to be informed. This is not my speciality after all.

About three syllables… well, I dunno, this is just a subjective opinion after all, there are some who don’t really care losing their ancestors’ culture through Javanization.

I myself, has been oblvious my identity as Chinese, I consider myself as Indonesian. But how could I not to complain when I acknowledge and read that Indonesian-Chinese people are subject to racism? You will begin to be critical about who you are and what your ethnicity of course.

Under Soeharto’s repressive government, we know the slogan of Bhinneka Tunggal Ika, “Unity in Differences” or “Unite, and don’t be different”? If we are not different than other, why treating us different? Why SKBRI? Why changing name? Why forbid and discourage the usage of our ancestor’s language?

For these who do not experience it, they would probably think it as no problem, it’s ok.

I know my complain sounds something simple, something insignificant, nevertheless, I still would like to point out that there might be other people who like me, confused about who they are, what their ethnicity are.

Identity as Indonesian is enough to create your identity in international community, but not in the domestic context I’m afraid.

“but this country has been too long governed by Javanese centric government.”

it’s a fact, but putting “the-ethnic-factor” into consideration will make everything sillier than ever. hehehe.. i wonder what is the best way to deal with that.

“Must Chinese Indonesia change their name because it only consists of three syllables?”

hahahaha.. yes, WHY??? is there something wrong with three-syllabled name?? singapore and malaysia are fine with that. what’s wrong with this country.. hehe..

anyway, do those characteristics of a good governance reflect all kind of ideology? what about communism and socialism? or maybe monarchy? what if they succeed without having any of the characteristics? do they still considered as good governors?

masih kuliah apa dah lulus, vin?