Borrowed words

Borrowed words

Imprecision of terms is an elementary flaw in Indonesia's
sociopolitical discourse. It is, for example, simply
counterproductive to borrow a word but ditch half the meaning in
the process. It is also characteristic of the Indonesian
ideology's reluctance to undertake rigorous analyses. Ghalib
didn't do it. "Anarchist", "communist" and "secular" are words
with complex meanings and longish histories. It is distressing to
see them rendered respectively as something like a "lunatic who
smashes and burns," "lunatic who smashes and burns when the
party tells him to", and "the anti-Allah".

I'll elaborate on one -- anarchism. Anarchism has -- to speak
indefensibly, simplistically -- two forms: left wing and right
wing. Those with an actual and theoretical knowledge of left
anarchism know its exponents to be, generally, disciplined and
educated people. An article of Noam Chomsky's recently graced
your paper -- he's a left anarchist.

Conversely, I suggest that Indonesia got where it is today by
dint of a philosophy of a somewhat right-anarchist nature. Right
anarchism, in its guises -- such as (anarcho) capitalism, is
deeply antisocial, and antisocial is what is going on here. (Yes,
capitalism is anarchic). Right anarchism is the rich blocking
public streets with their vehicles; it is the disdain of public
health shown by the indicative male legions of Indonesian
smokers; it is doing something not because it is right or wrong,
but because you can do it. Sound familiar?

MARK BLAIR

Jakarta