Social injustice threatens unity<\/p>\n
________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n
The followings are excerpts from a paper presented at a
\nseminar organized by the Driyarkara School of Philosophy recently
\nin connection with its 25th anniversary. This is the first of a
\ntwo-part article.
\n_________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n
By Franz Magnis-Suseno<\/p>\n
JAKARTA: We have to realize that the seemingly impressive
\nnational unity is not impervious to disintegration. These threats
\nare real, in spite of the fact that some would still consider
\nthem potential. Only if we succeed in overcoming them can
\nIndonesia's national unity be guaranteed.<\/p>\n
Among the many threats and challenges faced by Indonesia,
\nthere are three that require special attention. The potential
\nreaction to the currently prevalent centralism, \"primordialism\"
\n(the centrifugal forces originating from race, ethnic and
\nreligion differences), and the fact that there is not yet true
\nsocial justice here.<\/p>\n
It seems that the potential impact of centralism in decision
\nmaking has not been fully recognized. In the many countries where
\ncentralism is given too much latitude the regions commonly
\nbelieve that they are just objects of the policies of the center.
\nThe policies, perceived as masks for efforts to exploit their
\nresources for the center's interests, have prompted separatism in
\nits many different forms.<\/p>\n
As a matter of fact, we do not have to go far to find
\nexamples. The majority of rebellious movements in the 1950s were
\nmerely reactions against the central approach of the Jakarta
\ngovernment at that time. The concept of regional autonomy, which
\nshould have served as one of the underpinnings of national unity,
\nhas been subject to narrow-minded suspicions ever since the
\nDutch, at the end of their colonial era, tried using it for their
\nown objectives.<\/p>\n
Law No. 5, 1979, on village administration, which stipulates
\nthat the format of Javanese village administration should be
\napplied throughout the country, has long been criticisized by
\nexperts on social science, who call it a disaster. However, there
\nhas been no change whatsoever.<\/p>\n
Today, it seems that bureaucrats in the provincial- and
\ndistrict-level administration are unlike their predecessors in
\nthe 1950s in that they no longer voice the interests of their
\nregions, perhaps because they no longer suffer from a lack of
\nfunds. On the other hand, various incidents surrounding the
\nrecent elections of governors and regents indicate the existence
\nof a strong discontent.<\/p>\n
It has indeed become imperative for us to refer back to the
\ncharacteristics of Indonesian nationalism that is based on unity
\nin diversity. Regional autonomy is not only the quest for
\neconomic and administrative rationality, but ultimately serves as
\nthe benchmark for respect for the independence of the people in
\nthe regions. Once separatism begins, it will be very difficult to
\ncontain.<\/p>\n
The biggest threat to national unity all over the world stems
\nfrom primordialism. The majority of armed conflicts nowadays, as
\nwell as all the conflicts that have broken out in the last three
\nyears, are primordial in character. Examples are found in
\nMyanmar, Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan (in the post-
\nSoviet era), Somalia, Rwanda, Burundi, South Africa (Inkatha vs.
\nANC), Northern Ireland, Spain, Ethiopia, Sudan, Southern
\nPhilippines, as well as in the former Soviet Union and
\nYugoslavia.<\/p>\n
By 'primordialism' I mean emotional attachments or motivations
\nbased on traditional ethnic attachments. It refers to the
\nsituation in which the only loyalty one feels -- besides loyalty
\nto one's family, friends and certain others -- is towards one's
\nnative social reality, such as locale, ethnicity, religion or
\nrace. Religion-based primordialism can be fundamentalistic or
\notherwise.<\/p>\n
Primordialism refers to one's inability to feel attached to
\nsocial units that exceed the boundaries of one's circles, such as
\nnation, humanity, and common brotherhood.<\/p>\n
There are two types of primordialism. The first is
\ncharacteristic of pre-modern societies and is not a significant
\nproblem. These societies are still unexposed to the concepts of
\nnation and universal humanity, not because they reject them but
\nsimply because they have not been exposed to them.<\/p>\n
It is the second variety of primordialism that poses threats
\nto national unity. Not only is it an attitude that emphasizes
\nattachment to one's primary circles, but it is also one that
\nrejects other circles.<\/p>\n
Primordialism is a regressive attitude. It is usually the
\nresult of a situation in which a group of people becomes confused
\nand shocked as he is, or they are, confronted by the changes of
\nvalues and culture that accompany modernization. Primordialism is
\na total, negative reaction against the excesses of modernization.<\/p>\n
One of the signs of secondary primordialism is exclusivity.
\nWhatever does not belong to one's ethnicity, or religion, or
\nlocal customs is rejected, mistrusted, and frequently hated. A
\nprimordial person fails to feel moved when he thinks of his
\nfatherland, he does not have affection for his nation, he feels
\nno solidarity with others belonging to the same nationality but
\nthat have different religions or ethnicities.<\/p>\n
He is closed up as far as appreciation of human dignity is
\nconcerned, since he can only think and feel within the framework
\nof \"us versus them\". The worst aspect of all is that, from the
\nprimordial perspective, virtues such as kindness, the ability to
\nfeel sorry for others, the willingness to forgive, and sense of
\njustice can only be mobilized towards those who belong to \"our
\ngroup\", while those who belong to \"their group\" are subject to
\ndistrust and hatred.<\/p>\n
In extreme cases, criminal actions can be taken against them
\nwithout having to feel guilty, as we see in Yugoslavia.<\/p>\n
In regions where primordialism prevails, nationalism must
\nfade. Nationalism has served as the strongest political force in
\nthe last two centuries. A nationalist feels passion for his
\nnation. His heart is bound to his nation. He is willing to make
\nsacrifices for his compatriots, regardless of where the latter
\ncomes from a different religion or ethnic background.<\/p>\n
Nationalism is the only spiritual force capable of uniting the
\nmajority of states that currently exist in this world. Adhering
\nto primordialism means that one cannot appreciate the value of
\nnational unity. Primordialism also threatens nation building, as
\nit makes social compromises difficult to achieve.<\/p>\n
In Indonesia, which is not primordialistic in nature, a
\nCatholic can always work together with a Moslem, a Javanese with
\nsomeone from Gorontalo, a Protestant from Batak Toba with a
\nBalinese. Overlapping loyalties as a Javanese, a Moslem and an
\nIndonesian balance each other out, and this allows for inclusive
\nattitudes, as they exist within common perception of nationalism,
\na sentiment inherited from our ancestors that is so open and full
\nof tolerance.<\/p>\n
However, the moment one starts subscribing to primordialism,
\none also begins to dissect one's society into \"us against them\",
\nand thereby becomes exclusive. Cooperation within the framework
\nof nationalism perception will become more difficult.<\/p>\n
Dr. Franz Magnis-Suseno is a senior lecturer at Driyarkara
\nSchool of Philosophy in Jakarta.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/social-injustice-threatens-unity-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}