Indonesia's patchwork quilt<\/p>\n
By Todd Gregory<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): Not so long ago, liberals and relativists could
\npoint to Indonesia as a country that exemplified the very best of
\n\"multiculturalism\", a neo-liberal concept that has gained
\nwidespread currency in the west.<\/p>\n
As opposed to the old conservative -- some might say
\nreactionary -- doctrine of E Pluribus Unum (out of the many, the
\none), the heterogeneous cultural makeup of formerly peaceful
\nIndonesia gave liberals cause to rejoice in the apparent triumph
\nof their particular ideology. Radically different cultures could
\npeacefully co-exist side by side, said the liberals, and
\nIndonesia had proven it.<\/p>\n
Alas, the Indonesian motto of \"Unity in Diversity\" has much in
\ncommon with E Pluribus Unum. Unity in diversity emphasizes
\nassimilation into the common melting pot. More specifically,
\nindividual cultural identities are submerged or muted as the
\ndominant common culture brings the people together in unity.<\/p>\n
The melting pot scenario does not celebrate competing dogmas
\nand the ascendancy of individual cultural identities under the
\nsame national roof. One way in which unity manifests itself is in
\nthe sharing of one common language.<\/p>\n
Western liberals, especially those in government, academia and
\nthe mass media, have rejected the melting pot paradigm for the
\n\"Patchwork Quilt\" paradigm.<\/p>\n
In the Patchwork Quilt, assimilation into a common dominant
\nculture is anathema, akin to cultural suicide. Advocates of the
\npatchwork quilt say that individual sub-cultures should resist
\nassimilation and aggressively agitate for power in pursuit of
\ntheir own agenda.<\/p>\n
The interests of the state, of compromise and the common good,
\nare subordinated to the interests of individual sub-cultures in
\nthe patchwork quilt scenario. Accommodation of individuals and
\nindividual groups is sought at all times, no matter the cost to
\nsociety at large. Competing ideologies replace compromise and
\ncooperation.<\/p>\n
Patchwork quilts tend to fray at the edges and ultimately
\ndisintegrate. Witness the hodgepodge of African states,
\nhopelessly divided, economically dysfunctional, forever at war.
\nThe former Soviet Union, like Indonesia under Soeharto, was a
\nbrutally repressive regime that enforced unity through tactics of
\nfear and terror.<\/p>\n
When these leftist regimes collapsed (Soeharto's practices had
\nfar more in common with Stalinist Communism than American-style
\nDemocracy), the result was merely the hideously deformed
\noffspring of leftist governance -- namely, widespread
\nlawlessness, anarchy and national disintegration.<\/p>\n
Paradoxically, in attempting to honor diversity by
\naccentuating group differences rather than highlighting
\nsimilarities, the unintended result is a heightening of tensions
\nbetween groups. A polarized hierarchy suddenly emerges in which
\neach group within the pecking order seeks primacy at the expense
\nof the others.<\/p>\n
Some are more equal than others. Therein lies the fallacy of
\nthe western notion of multiculturalism as a noble social
\nexperiment. Contrary to its motto, Indonesia was not in fact
\nunited by its diversity.<\/p>\n
Lacking meaningful laws and Democratic institutions, the
\nbulwark and glue of a civil society, Indonesia was only able to
\nachieve unity in common fear of Soeharto and his murderous
\nregime.<\/p>\n
Tragically, the Indonesian melting pot was achieved by the
\nwrong means and ultimately discarded in favor of the patchwork
\nquilt. The unsurprising result has been the undoing of Indonesia
\nand the rise of competing religious, racial, ethnic and cultural
\ngroups who all assume an oppositional stance, asserting their own
\ncultural supremacy and insisting that all adhere to their world
\nview. Perpetual conflict is the only logical result for such a
\nsociety.<\/p>\n
Western liberals, aghast at the failure in practice of their
\nparadigmatic model (remember the old adage about Communism: \"Good
\nin theory, but not in practice\"), have begun clutching at
\nrelativistic straws, reverting to old arguments about economic
\nimbalances and vague, ill-defined notions like \"the aspirations
\nof the people.\"<\/p>\n
The economic imbalance theory holds no water and is not by
\nitself a credible explanation for national disintegration.
\nWitness Rome, whose collapse of civilization came amidst great
\nriches, where even the poorest of society had a high standard of
\nliving vis a vis the time period.<\/p>\n
Modern America -- saturated by several decades of liberal
\nprograms preferential to particular groups and which enforce
\nparity of outcome rather than neutrality and equality of
\nopportunity -- has for years been experiencing a measure of
\nsocial upheaval during a period of unparalleled economic growth.<\/p>\n
Moreover, crime and lawlessness in America were at an all-time
\nlow during the darkest days of the worldwide economic depression
\nof the 1930s. Why didn't the grievances of individuals and groups
\ncome to the fore at that time?<\/p>\n
America, at that time, exemplified the melting pot.
\nIndividuals, while free to celebrate the unique qualities of
\nindividual cultures in festivals, cultural events and the like,
\ndid not seek to politicize their individual cultures and
\nlegislate their individual agendas.<\/p>\n
Assimilation into a common melting pot, not by force but by
\nchoice, was what kept the American social fabric strong and
\nunited, if imperfect, even in the direst of circumstances.<\/p>\n
Indonesia has many of the best qualities of the melting pot: A
\ncommon language that unites, a vibrant young populace with
\nprogressive, original thinkers and the embryonic beginnings of
\ndemocracy.<\/p>\n
But the voices of reason who advocate a common Indonesian
\nculture to be shared equally by all Indonesians have been drowned
\nout by the shrill cacophony of individual groups with their
\nlitany of demands and individual grievances.<\/p>\n
Indonesia has opted for the well-intentioned but fatally
\nflawed patchwork quilt that celebrates and indeed seeks to
\npoliticize cultural differences among society.<\/p>\n
Nobody advocates a return to paternalistic colonialism, which
\nis rightly viewed as morally bankrupt. But Indonesia's wholesale
\nadoption of neo-liberal western political models, which has
\nresulted in the creation of over 100 new countries since World
\nWar II and further fragmented humankind, is exacerbating rather
\nthan alleviating the national disintegration of Indonesia.<\/p>\n
The writer is a visiting American freelance writer and
\nIndonesian observer.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/indonesias-patchwork-quilt-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}