Communication is vital in inter-ethnic relations<\/p>\n
By A.G. Wenats and S.M. Niken Restaty<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): While claiming large numbers of victims, huge
\nlosses and the deep trauma of racism, the May riots still left
\nmany questions unanswered. They are:<\/p>\n
* What actual condition was the main cause of the riots?<\/p>\n
* Was it a mere economic gap or an accumulation of high-level
\npolitical problems?<\/p>\n
* Who were the perpetrators and the instigators of the riots? A
\ngroup of Chinese Indonesians or a group of Indonesians frustrated
\ndue to the economic downturn?<\/p>\n
* Is it true that the riots edged on racism? Or were they
\npolitically motivated by exploiting the sensitive issue of
\nethnicity, religion, racism and intergroup relations?<\/p>\n
Masli Arman tried to provide the answers in an article in The
\nJakarta Post of July 30, 1998. This article attempts to put
\nArman's ideas in a critical light.<\/p>\n
In his first assumption in his article \"Ethnic Chinese at
\nfault for riots\", Arman says that the riots were not the result
\nof economic disparity. He thinks that economic inequity played
\nonly a small role in the outbreak of the riots.<\/p>\n
Arman's second assumption is that the arrogance of ethnic
\nChinese in daily life is the root of the problem, an attitude
\nwhich is even imbued within the community system.<\/p>\n
His third assumption, is that the arrogance of ethnic Chinese
\ndamages and obstructs the process of acculturation and
\nassimilation between the indigenous and non-indigenous. This, he
\nsays, is strikingly apparent in the economic, social and cultural
\nfields and is shattering the communication system in the
\ncommunity.<\/p>\n
\"Exclusivism\" on the part of the ethnic Chinese, Arman says,
\nimpedes the process of social, economic and cultural assimilation
\nwith the indigenous population. The combination of arrogance and
\na discriminative attitude on behalf of the ethnic Chinese in the
\nsocial and economic sectors irritates and angers the indigenous
\npeople. These anger and frustrations are easily vented on the
\nethnic Chinese during riots.<\/p>\n
The people's assumption has been formed irreversibly on the
\narrogance and greed of the ethnic Chinese in the economy and as
\nthe primary cause of the decline of the Indonesian economy. Thus,
\nthe ethnic Chinese are seen as an exclusive, greedy and self-
\nrighteous group, Arman says. It is therefore not surprising that
\nthey have to bear the biggest responsibility in the deterioration
\nof Indonesia's economy.<\/p>\n
In his fourth assumption Arman says that the May riots would
\nnot have happened if the assimilation process had succeeded. The
\nones who should have started the assimilation process are the
\nethnic Chinese. The ethnic Chinese, he says, must work hard in
\nthe assimilation process although the government also needs to
\nimprove its policies of assimilation.<\/p>\n
Arman's four assumptions are interrelated. They constitute a
\nseries of a causality of two cultures that have failed to
\nassimilate. In short, Arman wishes to show that the May riots
\nwere caused by the total failure of the process of cultural
\nassimilation.<\/p>\n
One could perhaps agree with Arman's view on the failure of
\ncultural assimilation in Indonesia. However, why does Arman only
\npoint to the ethnic Chinese as the cause of the failure of
\nassimilation by their excessive arrogance? He does not refer to
\nthe government's assimilation policy or that of the indigenous
\ncommunity.<\/p>\n
Cultural assimilation cannot be demanded from one ethnic group
\nonly. Arman wants to show the importance of a communication
\nculture in the assimilation process, but in his assumptions he is
\nless than communicative.<\/p>\n
The policies on assimilation so far have formed patterns of
\nusage and participation in the mass communication of the
\nindigenous population. Such usage and participation indicates
\nunbalanced cultural characteristics and patterns.<\/p>\n
Unbalanced in the sense that the indigenous communication
\npattern heavily emphasizes the bad aspects of the ethnic Chinese.
\nThis activity contributes to bad communication. The accumulation
\nof unbalanced and disproportionate images has played a part in
\nshaping the resistance of the indigenous community. It is hard
\nfor the indigenous population to communicate openly with ethnic
\nChinese. In its final instance it slows down the ideal
\nassimilation process of the ethnic Chinese in Indonesia.<\/p>\n
Arman does not take into account the New Order's artificial
\npolicy on assimilation. He sees the communication culture process
\namong ethnic groups as too conflicting. In his examples, Arman
\ntakes many factual controversies without going deeper into the
\nfacts. How can inter-ethnic communication be built based on
\ncontroversies and conflicts?<\/p>\n
He wishes to communicate but he shows a conflicting attitude
\nhimself. It is clear that communication is not feasible. The
\nshaping of Arman's conflicting assumptions will form and
\nconsolidate in-groups and out-groups and cause a polarization of
\nconfronting ideologies. If this happens a process of barriers of
\ncommunication will occur and impede the communication process
\namong cultures. It will lead to difficulties in the process of
\nacculturation and assimilation.<\/p>\n
Since Arman takes a conflicting attitude in his approach to
\nthe mid-May riots, the solution he is offering is not clear-cut.
\nIt means that the mentality of the integration is not clear. It
\ncan be said that Arman's offer is naive politically. His approach
\nis far from strategic. Political solutions and social generosity
\ndo not solve the problems. The biggest problem to solve is the
\ncontinuum of acculturation and assimilation.<\/p>\n
The continuum of acculturation and assimilation has to comply
\nwith a number of conditions. The first one is the abolishment of
\na conflicting approach in inter-ethnic communication. The right
\napproach is by participation, that is in the sense that inter-
\nethnic communication involves two or more groups on the same
\nlevel who respect each other. Thus, an inter-ethnic capacity for
\nacculturation and assimilation is opened (in this case the
\nindigenous and the ethnic Chinese).<\/p>\n
The second condition is that open communication is an
\nimportant mechanism to reach the capacity for acculturation and
\nassimilation. The development of the capacity for cultural
\ncommunication will enhance cognitive, affective and behavioral
\ncapacities. A tolerant attitude is an important basis in the
\nacculturation and assimilation process. It will also give rise to
\nopenness in situations of differences and uncertainties among
\ncultures.<\/p>\n
The third condition is the process of interaction among ethnic
\ngroups. The process of acculturation and assimilation is one of
\ninteraction. The indigenous people create and accept the
\nconditioning of ethnic Chinese culture and inversely. The
\nindigenous community should push the cultural conditioning. Arman
\ndoes not take this point into account.<\/p>\n
The above three conditions are the starting point of the
\nacculturation and assimilation process. The ethnic Chinese should
\nindeed develop their sensitivity toward the process of inter-
\nethnic communication. The indigenous community encourages the
\nconditioning and develops a tolerant attitude. The inter-ethnic
\ncommunity, in this case the government can assist the newcomers
\n(meaning the ethnic Chinese) to overcome tensions and
\nuncertainties in their life. If the three initial conditions of
\ncommunication had been accepted by the ethnic Chinese and the
\nindigenous community, the mid-May riots would not have erupted,
\nor at least the ethnic Chinese would not have been made
\nscapegoats.<\/p>\n
In his article Arman has not taken many things into account.
\nHis conflicting approach incorporates strong implications which
\nare not favorable to the clarification of the mid-May riots.
\nThere is another aspect that emerges from his opinion. The inter-
\ncultural communication offered is very simplistic.<\/p>\n
The failure in inter-cultural communication in Indonesia had
\nindeed contributed to the mid-May 1998 riots. It had a complexity
\nof problems. A quiet and clear solution to the problems can be
\nfound by the indigenous community, the ethnic Chinese and the
\ninter-ethnic community (the state) if there is good will to
\ncommunicate continuously.<\/p>\n
A.G. Eka Wenats is on the teaching staff of the Center for
\nEthics Development at Atma Jaya Catholic University in Jakarta.
\nS.M. Niken Restaty lectures business administration at the same
\nuniversity and is a postgraduate communications student at the
\nUniversity of Indonesia.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/communication-is-vital-in-inter-ethnic-relations-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}