https://www.insideindonesia.org/moral-politics-of-nationhood


Moral politics of nationhoodWritten by ANNEMARIE SAMUELS & RATNA SAPTARI
 Print
<https://www.insideindonesia.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3545:moral-politics-of-nationhood&catid=236&Itemid=129&tmpl=component&print=1&layout=default&page=>

The Movement of Indonesian Council Edict Supporters (GNPF MUI) stage a
massive rally in protest of former Jakarta Governor Basuki “Ahok” Tjahaja
Purnama’s allegedly blasphemous remarks in Jakarta on4 Nov. 2016.
(Antara/Akbar Nugroho Gumay)
Category:Edition 138: Oct-Dec 2019
<https://www.insideindonesia.org/edition-138-sep-dec-2019>
Published:Dec 03, 2019
Tagged under

   - Identity Politics
   <https://www.insideindonesia.org/reviews/31-identity-politics/tag>
   - Justice System
   <https://www.insideindonesia.org/topics/55-justice-system/tag>
   - Human Rights
   <https://www.insideindonesia.org/human-rights/107-human-rights/tag>

Annemarie Samuels and Ratna Saptari

Twenty years after the start of reformasi, Indonesia faces a shrinking
space for religious diversity, sexual difference and critical social
movements. Indonesia’s national slogan of ‘Unity in Diversity’ historically
refers to a respect for difference within the principle of inclusion. At
the moment, however, diversity is increasingly becoming a scapegoat for
political and social evils. The anti-LGBT movement, the criminalisation of
social movements and the religious fatwa against liberalism, secularism and
religious minority groups are recent examples of social and political
exclusion for the sake of ‘saving the nation’ or ‘purifying religion’.

These processes raise various questions such as: which groups are involved
in the politics of exclusion and which groups are the targets, both now and
under various historical circumstances? What socio-political instruments
and perspectives are currently deployed to create an atmosphere of
prejudice and social vigilance? And what are the strategies of the
marginalised groups for resisting or surviving these efforts of
marginalisation and criminalisation?

The essays in this issue show the diverse modes of interaction between
those who are involved in the process of ‘shaming and blaming’ and those
who represent the groups that are marginalised. They thereby examine the
process in which state actors, corporate capital, NGOs and communities
interact at the local level and utilise dominant discourses circulating at
the national or international level in such interactions.

This issue is divided into three parts. The first three essays focus on the
political and economic dimensions of marginalisation, involving state and
corporate actors vis-à-vis local communities with their covert and overt
responses. Herlambang Wiratraman’s
<https://www.insideindonesia.org/criminalising-justice> essay focuses on
state responses to local protests against goldmining operations in
Banyuwangi that were causing environmental destruction. One of the
protesters, Heri Budiawan (locally known as Budi Pego) was accused of
spreading communism during the demonstrations, because a banner with the
hammer and sickle logo had been displayed. The case was brought to court
with the argument that he had not stopped the raising of the banner. The
outcome was sealed by the authorities’ use of the ‘communist stigma’ in the
judicial process. Under the 1999 Penal Code, Budi Pego was sentenced to
five and a half months imprisonment.

The essay by Anton Novenanto
<https://www.insideindonesia.org/reframing-the-demon> highlights the public
response of a local community to the continuous mud-flow considered to be
caused by the natural gas drilling activities of PT Lapindo Brantas, an
Indonesian oil and gas exploration company. Invoking a character from a
Balinese ritual, the community dressed and epitomised an effigy of one of
the main stakeholders of the company, Aburizal Bakrie, as the ‘Yellow
Ogre’. They then ritually drowned it to symbolically cleanse the village
from evil spirits and bad luck. This essay shows how by reframing classic
narratives through creative art, this local community criticised the
political actors that they considered to be endangering their present and
future lives.

Highlighting the more covert survival strategies of victims of the 1965
genocide and other forms of violence, Grace Leksana
<https://www.insideindonesia.org/a-complex-relationship> examines
individual interactions at the village level shaped by the post-1965
political landscape in East Java. Leksana narrates her encounters with two
men who represented opposite positions during the 1965 mass violence. Their
individual stories reveal the complexity of individual positions during
this period, and the material, physical, social and psychological
consequences of the structural acts of violence. She shows that silence is
not only a result of direct repression but also of the negotiation of
collective memory for social survival in communities.

The second part of this issue highlights how sexual moralities shape the
politics of nationhood. Dédé Oetomo
<https://www.insideindonesia.org/reformasi-s-broken-promises> reflects on
how the reform period brought opportunities for sexual minorities to
conduct various public events, to increasingly organise themselves, and to
access support services. Yet, in the last decade, this positive development
has been increasingly countered by attacks on public events, ensuing
rhetoric condemning ‘LGBT’, and acts of violence against sexual minorities,
leading to further marginalisation. However, this has not extinguished the
spirit of solidarity among sexual minorities or within their broader
networks, although it has somewhat changed their strategies in going
public. Sylvia Tidey
<https://www.insideindonesia.org/aids-as-an-entry-point-for-lgbt-rights-discourse>
delves
deeper in the struggle for LGBT rights in the post-reformasi decades by
showing how HIV/AIDS and, more broadly, sexual and reproductive health and
rights (SRHR) became an ‘entry point’ for the wider topics of gender and
sexuality. At the same time, the choice to use the SRHR framework as a
strategy to obtain human rights recognition limits the focus of attention
on those young and sexually active gay men, waria and men who have sex with
men who may pose a threat to the health of ‘innocent’ women, possibly to
the exclusion of other sexual minorities.

The third part includes essays from Fanny Alam
<https://www.insideindonesia.org/bandung-city-of-human-rights> and Yunantyo
Adi Setyawan
<https://www.insideindonesia.org/safeguarding-tolerance-in-semarang> who
sketch the growing climate of intolerance towards religious minorities, and
at the same time recount attempts by local activists, sometimes together
with the police and municipalities, to safeguard the religious and social
space of these minority groups. This is illustrated by the organisation and
preparations leading to the commemoration of Asyura in Bandung and Semarang
by the Syiah Muslim community. In the Bandung case described by Fanny Alam,
protesters framed their objections against the Asyura festival through the
rhetoric of ‘blasphemy against pure Islamic teaching.’ Describing this
controversy in the light of Bandung’s claim to be a ‘city of human rights’,
Fanny Alam discusses how minority religious groups, which see themselves as
Muslims, could obtain protection for their public events, when the acts of
intolerance come from radical Islamic groups.

In the Semarang case illustrated by Yunantyo Adi Setyawan, the protests
against the Asyura commemoration were framed within not only an anti-Syiah
discourse, but also ‘anti-communist/PKI’ rhetoric. Protesters intended to
use this rhetoric to justify their demonstrations, drawing on the New Order
regime’s legacy of demonising communism/the PKI as a useful label to
criminalise fellow citizens. As in Bandung, assistance and support were
provided by interfaith and social networks and, finally, also by the local
police, though this may not prevent similar challenges from occurring in
the future.

Ultimately the essays in this issue invite us to reflect on the
implications of these processes of exclusion for the discussion and
enactment of diversity, multiculturalism and nationhood, as well as for
Indonesia’s democratic future.

*Annemarie Samuels ([email protected]
<[email protected]>) and Ratna Saptari
([email protected] <[email protected]>) are both
assistant professors at the Institute of Cultural Anthropology and
Development Sociology, Leiden University.*
Inside Indonesia 138: Oct-Dec 2019

Kirim email ke