Affirmative Action and Car Racing October 13, 2009
Posted by Ross McLeod in Essays and Comments.Tags: elections, Indonesia, politics
trackback
Last week the Indonesia Project ran its 27th Indonesia Update conference, on the topic Democracy in Practice. A most enjoyable and informative event—a credit to the organisers and convenors. But by Sunday I felt the need to relax, so I watched the telecast of Australia’s biggest car race for the year—the Bathurst 1000. Somewhat surprisingly, there was an interesting connection between these two quite disparate events.
One of the conference sessions was about women in Indonesian politics—or the lack thereof. The basic message of both speakers was that there were not enough women in politics, that democracy would work better if there were more, that the idea of a 30% minimum quota for women was a good one, and that there was a need to find better ways to make this quota more effective.
It was noted that only 18% of DPR members, very few heads of local governments, and no provincial governors will be women following the most recent round of elections. And it was strongly implied that these outcomes were ‘wrong’.
In the Bathurst 1000 the same problem was apparent. The 32 racing teams were made up of 63 men and only one woman. And yet there seemed to be no suggestion that this outcome was ‘wrong’, much less that it required a change in the rules so as to ensure that there were more women drivers.
There are only two types of car in the Bathurst 1000: Fords and Holdens. Besides the manufacturers, each team is also sponsored by other companies, whose names and logos are prominently displayed. The manufacturers and these other sponsors invest a lot of money—and stand to gain a great deal if their team wins. It follows that the selection of drivers is very important to them. If only one woman is selected, there is presumably a good reason.
I can think of only two explanations. It may be that men are inherently better drivers, but I find that implausible. It seems more likely that there are far fewer women than men to choose from. My guess is that relatively few women see car racing as an attractive career option, for whatever reason. In other words, it seems more realistic to see women excluding themselves than to imagine that the sponsors would exclude them for no reason other than their gender.
Which brings us back to politics. Political parties are like profit-oriented enterprises. They are in the business of gauging voter sentiment, selecting candidates for election in accordance with their judgement as to which candidates are most likely to commend themselves to voters, and providing the necessary support to the selected candidates to give them a strong chance of winning. In other words, their role is exactly analogous to the firms that supply vehicles and other support to teams of drivers in car races.
If they misread voters, or make bad candidate selections, they will fail to gain representation in Parliament, which will reduce their chances of attracting good candidates in the future. Persistent electoral failure will see them wither and die.
So why don’t they have more female candidates? It may be that men are inherently more capable as politicians, but again I find that implausible. It seems more likely that there are far fewer women than men to choose from. My guess is that relatively few women see politics as an attractive career option, for whatever reason. In other words, it seems more realistic to see women excluding themselves than to imagine that the political parties would exclude them for no reason other than their gender.
The example of PDI-P choosing Megawati Soekarnoputri several times over as its candidate for president, because of her perceived electability, supports this view. At the same time, parties that have argued on (religious) principle against Indonesia having a female president have been largely shunned by voters, most of whom do not share this view.
Neither of the speakers at the conference even mentioned the possibility that relatively few women try to gain party pre-selection. Presumably such data would be hard to obtain, but without them the accusation that political parties consistently discriminate against women seems empty.
If this argument is correct, the seemingly inescapable conclusion is that the idea of imposing a minimum quota for female representation in parliaments is fundamentally anti-democratic. What it amounts to is reducing voters’ freedom of choice over candidates—since, for any total number of candidates, this would necessarily reduce the number of male candidates, replacing some of them with female candidates who, in the judgement of the political parties, are likely to be less attractive to the voters.
When commentators from the intelligentsia put pressure on governments to impose their own ideas about what is the ‘right’ proportion of female candidates for election, democracy is in peril. It came as a surprise to this participant, therefore, that in a conference grounded in an apparently unanimous belief in the inherent desirability of democracy, no dissenting opinion on this particular issue was heard.
Women can contribute to their country’s development in many areas. Being in politics, in business, in academia or in her own house are legitimate options.There are trade-offs in whatever roles they choose.
The question is whether the political career is a better choice compared with other career paths. Political career is the most complex, and yet may not be the most contributing roles to be in. A woman may end up being trapped into a vicious circle in politics, while she can actually do something more productive somewhere else.
A woman has to be very brave, intelligent, capable and strong to be able to make a difference in politics. Affirmative actions to encourage more women into politics can be done, but we should make sure that we attract qualified women candidates. It should be an evolutionary process. Once a woman is ready, she will be very determined to contribute to democratic transitions in her country.
I believe Indonesia is moving into that direction.