Religious, racial and ethnic pluralities have also posed major problems for democracy in Indonesia. The existence of these basic social differences has made it even more compelling for Indonesia to adopt a democratic system of government where the rights of every component of society will be protected. Yet in the past it had been argued that Indonesia's heterogenous population could only be kept at peace with each other through the use of force, and by strictly forbidding any open discussion about differences in ethnicity, religion, race, and social-economic classes. The outbreak of bloody conflicts among different ethnic and religious groups in various parts of the country after Suharto's resignation and the relaxation of government control is a major cause of concern for Indonesia's future stability. It is generally recognized that the outbreak of social conflicts has mostly been due to the past policy of repression when people were not free to express their dissatisfaction against the government or against perceived favoritism towards one group over another.
Democratization is seen as an important step towards controlling the potential processes.
Yet, democracy also has the potential for exacerbating differences as politicians try to attract votes among particular ethnic or religious groups by emphasizing their differences with the others. Regional dissatisfaction with the centralization of power in the capital, which in certain areas has led to armed insurgencies and demands for independence, has also been a major problem in Indonesia since the transition to democracy took place. The lifting of the strong hand of the central government has emboldened secessionist rebels in Aceh and led to demands for a referendum in both Aceh and Irian Jaya, particularly after East Timor was allowed to exercise its right of self determination. The fall of constitutional democracy in Indonesia after a brief experiment in the 1950's, and the imposition of an increasingly authoritarian rule dominated by the military since 1959 until Suharto's resignation, had largely been justified by the argument that this form of government was necessary to keep the country united and politically stable. The constant changes of government under the parliamentary system in the 1950's had directly contributed to a series of regional rebellions.