aetherna: (frottage2)
An update to my previous post about the problem in the country's president election. Two names associated with certain religion here made frontal statements regarding their support to the first candidate who is currently "fighting" in court. One said that this candidate is the descendant of God Himself, doing her oration in front of a mass of people. Another encouraged his people to pray to "push" God to support "truth", which he believed lies with this first candidate.

...This is so hopeless. This is why we can hardly move forward. People dwell on unimportant points way too much, and depends on the situation, they start to mix one thing and another creating bigger chaos. Religion and politic can't go together; they are just not made for each other. Acting like this makes things easily offensive, especially with the words from the lawyer team previously. And of ot has touched religion, there is high chance that they will also touch the topic of race and ethnic. Well, Chinese has been disliked since ages ago for whatever reason, being "foreigner".

I really dislike this whole issue. Why do they have to make it so complicated?!
aetherna: (chibi4)
Indonesia has been in uproar lately. So many problems coming in at once. Well, I kind of believe that things have always been like this. I only follow things lately though because I feel the need to update my general knowledge too, so I started to watch TV and news more. And one thing that is being discussed nation-wide at the moment is the issue related to our recent president election.

We had the election on July 9th 2014, around a month ago. There were only two candidates; if I remember correctly we used to have more for this kind of election, but it could be good for us to have it like this because it means we would only need one voting round. One candidate was an ex-soldier with power and experience, whereas the other was the governor of the capital city/province, while My family supported the second candidate because we believed he was open-minded and decisive enough to lead this big nation.

I actually couldn't vote because I was not at the city where I belong to as citizen and I didn't bring any letter from my hometown which could make me vote somewhere else.

What I find "amusing" -- to the point of ridiculously "amusing" -- is that when the committee announced the winner (which was the second candidate), the other candidate chose to bail out of the election and sued the committee for dishonesty. He believed the committee did some tricks to make specific party win. Based on his own quick count, he won slightly above the said winner. His lawyer also mentioned that if they lose this case in the court, they would bring a mass of people and create chaos whatsoever.

I read that paragraph above twice, thrice, to make sure that I wrote it correctly. Yes, I wrote it correctly, and you read it correctly.

Given the situation, the first impression I actually had of this candidate was a childish and non-sportive person. Of course, there is a chance that some people were pulling the strings and might truly did dishonest things back then. However, after watching the analysis of many people from many sides, the issues he raised sound more to the impossible side.

This losing candidate claimed that he did not get ANY vote in many places. However, the results of the voting went through many stages of verification. Witnesses were placed in all voting places. Results were only sent to higher stage (for example, from village to city, from a province to national center) after verified by witnesses. Witnesses were taken from parties of the candidates. So why did "his" witnesses verified the result in the first place? Why complain now? The winner also didn't get any vote in other places, in which he got full votes. Did he complain? No mention of it at all. This mainly happens in remote areas, where culture and social role may become a factor in deciding who to vote. For example, a rather traditional tribe may discuss on the candidates first and decide on one name before going to vote. I found it strange too, but it could happen considering the tradition and culture.

He claimed he had proofs and witnesses of this "structural and massive crime". I really hope this will be shared publicly so everyone can see and judge whether those truly make sense. His actions and words so far actually rubs me off the wrong way so much that it will be very interesting to see how he proves his stance.

But above all, what ticked me off a lot was what his lawyer said about causing chaos. That, regardless of the result of the court, is wrong in every level. Does violence actually ever solve anything? Does he think by causing physical uproar in the country, people will listen to him and give him the president throne? To me, it will only drive people's interest from him even more. A losing president candidate using violence to question the result of the election because he lost does not sound good at all.

This country can be so sickening at times. If someone who wants to be our leader acts THAT way, what will happen to us? People talk and shout about the problem between Israel and Palestine. Hey, look INSIDE. Worry about what happens INSIDE. Please.

P.S.: This is actually my first attempt writing from phone. Yes, after searching for compatible application to use Dreamwidth from mobile, I found this ElJay application. Mainly for LiveJournal, it has expanded its wings to cover other platforms too. I have yet to try if other options are possible, such as changing icon for post, adding tags, adding images, and everything else. At least for now, simple posting really does work.