Dealing with the communist legacy

Dealing with the communist legacy

The fear of communism has resurfaced in Indonesia, as
reflected in recent remarks made by a number of top government
officials. Among them was Armed Forces Commander Gen. Feisal
Tanjung, who told his subordinates last month to be alert to the
danger of "communist activities." Scholar Franz Magnis-Suseno
explores the issue.

JAKARTA (JP): Since the crushing of the coup attempt of the
"September 30 Movement" on Oct. 1, 1965, appeals for vigilance
against communism have become part of the official vocabulary of
the New Order.

Indeed, for all we know the Indonesian Communist Party had a
massive involvement in that coup -- which, with hindsight, would
not really come as such a surprise. Tensions were already high.
All through 1964 and 1965 communist influence had been growing
steadily. The top cadres of the communist party were serious
Marxist-Leninists. They were out for the dictatorship of the
proletariat, meaning the dictatorship of the party.

As a consequence, the communist party was banned and the
spreading of Marxism and Leninism forbidden. Since then, anything
smelling even remotely of communism has been resolutely
suppressed. It should be noted that this uncompromising anti-
communism represented a fundamental consensus of practically the
whole non-communist spectrum of Indonesian political society.

Under these circumstances, appeals for vigilance were
appropriate. But now, thirty years later, after Indonesia, under
the leadership of President Soeharto, has been transformed into a
stable, self-confident and economically solid country, the
question arises whether such appeals are not in danger of
becoming counter-productive.

Not that we should ease up on communism. The totalitarian,
anti-religious ideology of Marxism-Leninism definitely has no
place in a Pancasila state. And, probably, there are still some
old communist cadres around that survived the holocaust. But is
there still a serious danger that they could stage a comeback?

It is generally agreed that any kind of physical comeback is
out of the question. But what about communist ideology? Couldn't
it be spread clandestinely and slowly subvert the minds and
hearts of the people?

An ideology is not some kind of a mascot you can take out of
the closet at will. In order to become a motivating power, an
ideology must offer something, must be future-oriented. It has to
look young and invincible. But has communism any chance of
looking like that again?

Globally, communism has long lost out. Even before the
collapse of the Soviet empire it had lost its spell. During the
past 15 years, not one of the many new revolutionary movements
entered world stage under the banner of communism or Marxism. The
few surviving communist regimes in eastern Asia look more like
something out of Jurassic Park than possible models for the
future. The ideological forces that are now driving movements,
civil wars or terrorist brotherhoods are no longer Marxist in
nature, but are of an ethnic or religious orientation.

In Indonesia, too, communism seems to have been thoroughly
discredited. Not only have 30 years of official anti-communism
had their effect. The decisive point is that, in the eyes of the
people, the communist party proved a paper tiger, or, in the
language of the wayang shadow play, a self-proclaimed ratu adil,
or "righteous king," who brought only death and destruction on
the country. Communism appeared to be a charm without magical
powers that could not save the faithful. At the same time,
Indonesia achieved its impressive progress only after it rejected
communism.

Our concern here is the younger generation. That generation is
critical, often fed up with everything "official," and, of
course, they have no experience of the communist threat in
Indonesia. They are extremely skeptical toward all official talk,
including talk about communism.

I myself often meet students who are genuinely astonished when
I tell them that there was indeed once a communist danger and
that at that time I, myself, was quite concerned about a possible
communist takeover. Some of these students believe that the whole
communism issue has been invented by the government, even though
they have all been through at least three Pancasila ideology
courses.

This means nothing else than that there is a dangerous
credibility gap between the generations. Now this gap cannot be
closed by putting them through yet another Pancasila course.

There is something else. Since communism is outlawed, students
really do not know a thing about it. But precisely because of
that, and probably because the government says it is a bad thing,
some of them become attracted to or idealize Marxist concepts.

This is a serious situation. Repeating the old admonitions
again and again could make young people curious to find out for
themselves what kind of creature is so much feared by the older
generation. Not more talk is needed from us. Rather, honesty is
called for.

Thus, for instance, we have to stop the despicable habit of
accusing individuals or NGOs who defend human rights, sympathize
with workers or come to the assistance of farmers in land
disputes, as being "infected" with communism. If we don't want
our youngsters to become communist sympathizers, then let us stop
giving them the impression that communism means solidarity with
the victims of injustice.

We also should do what is expressly provided for in decree
number 25/MPRS/1966: Allow the scientific study of the theories
of Marxism and Communism. Why should we be afraid to let our
young intellectuals find out for themselves?

Dr. Franz Magnis-Suseno SJ teaches social philosophy at the
Driyarkara School of Philosophy in Jakarta.