Indonesia's patchwork quilt

Indonesia's patchwork quilt

By Todd Gregory

JAKARTA (JP): Not so long ago, liberals and relativists could
point to Indonesia as a country that exemplified the very best of
"multiculturalism", a neo-liberal concept that has gained
widespread currency in the west.

As opposed to the old conservative -- some might say
reactionary -- doctrine of E Pluribus Unum (out of the many, the
one), the heterogeneous cultural makeup of formerly peaceful
Indonesia gave liberals cause to rejoice in the apparent triumph
of their particular ideology. Radically different cultures could
peacefully co-exist side by side, said the liberals, and
Indonesia had proven it.

Alas, the Indonesian motto of "Unity in Diversity" has much in
common with E Pluribus Unum. Unity in diversity emphasizes
assimilation into the common melting pot. More specifically,
individual cultural identities are submerged or muted as the
dominant common culture brings the people together in unity.

The melting pot scenario does not celebrate competing dogmas
and the ascendancy of individual cultural identities under the
same national roof. One way in which unity manifests itself is in
the sharing of one common language.

Western liberals, especially those in government, academia and
the mass media, have rejected the melting pot paradigm for the
"Patchwork Quilt" paradigm.

In the Patchwork Quilt, assimilation into a common dominant
culture is anathema, akin to cultural suicide. Advocates of the
patchwork quilt say that individual sub-cultures should resist
assimilation and aggressively agitate for power in pursuit of
their own agenda.

The interests of the state, of compromise and the common good,
are subordinated to the interests of individual sub-cultures in
the patchwork quilt scenario. Accommodation of individuals and
individual groups is sought at all times, no matter the cost to
society at large. Competing ideologies replace compromise and
cooperation.

Patchwork quilts tend to fray at the edges and ultimately
disintegrate. Witness the hodgepodge of African states,
hopelessly divided, economically dysfunctional, forever at war.
The former Soviet Union, like Indonesia under Soeharto, was a
brutally repressive regime that enforced unity through tactics of
fear and terror.

When these leftist regimes collapsed (Soeharto's practices had
far more in common with Stalinist Communism than American-style
Democracy), the result was merely the hideously deformed
offspring of leftist governance -- namely, widespread
lawlessness, anarchy and national disintegration.

Paradoxically, in attempting to honor diversity by
accentuating group differences rather than highlighting
similarities, the unintended result is a heightening of tensions
between groups. A polarized hierarchy suddenly emerges in which
each group within the pecking order seeks primacy at the expense
of the others.

Some are more equal than others. Therein lies the fallacy of
the western notion of multiculturalism as a noble social
experiment. Contrary to its motto, Indonesia was not in fact
united by its diversity.

Lacking meaningful laws and Democratic institutions, the
bulwark and glue of a civil society, Indonesia was only able to
achieve unity in common fear of Soeharto and his murderous
regime.

Tragically, the Indonesian melting pot was achieved by the
wrong means and ultimately discarded in favor of the patchwork
quilt. The unsurprising result has been the undoing of Indonesia
and the rise of competing religious, racial, ethnic and cultural
groups who all assume an oppositional stance, asserting their own
cultural supremacy and insisting that all adhere to their world
view. Perpetual conflict is the only logical result for such a
society.

Western liberals, aghast at the failure in practice of their
paradigmatic model (remember the old adage about Communism: "Good
in theory, but not in practice"), have begun clutching at
relativistic straws, reverting to old arguments about economic
imbalances and vague, ill-defined notions like "the aspirations
of the people."

The economic imbalance theory holds no water and is not by
itself a credible explanation for national disintegration.
Witness Rome, whose collapse of civilization came amidst great
riches, where even the poorest of society had a high standard of
living vis a vis the time period.

Modern America -- saturated by several decades of liberal
programs preferential to particular groups and which enforce
parity of outcome rather than neutrality and equality of
opportunity -- has for years been experiencing a measure of
social upheaval during a period of unparalleled economic growth.

Moreover, crime and lawlessness in America were at an all-time
low during the darkest days of the worldwide economic depression
of the 1930s. Why didn't the grievances of individuals and groups
come to the fore at that time?

America, at that time, exemplified the melting pot.
Individuals, while free to celebrate the unique qualities of
individual cultures in festivals, cultural events and the like,
did not seek to politicize their individual cultures and
legislate their individual agendas.

Assimilation into a common melting pot, not by force but by
choice, was what kept the American social fabric strong and
united, if imperfect, even in the direst of circumstances.

Indonesia has many of the best qualities of the melting pot: A
common language that unites, a vibrant young populace with
progressive, original thinkers and the embryonic beginnings of
democracy.

But the voices of reason who advocate a common Indonesian
culture to be shared equally by all Indonesians have been drowned
out by the shrill cacophony of individual groups with their
litany of demands and individual grievances.

Indonesia has opted for the well-intentioned but fatally
flawed patchwork quilt that celebrates and indeed seeks to
politicize cultural differences among society.

Nobody advocates a return to paternalistic colonialism, which
is rightly viewed as morally bankrupt. But Indonesia's wholesale
adoption of neo-liberal western political models, which has
resulted in the creation of over 100 new countries since World
War II and further fragmented humankind, is exacerbating rather
than alleviating the national disintegration of Indonesia.

The writer is a visiting American freelance writer and
Indonesian observer.