Sense and nonsense of the communist threat
By J. Soedjati Djiwandono
JAKARTA (JP): For the past 29 years, since the tragedy of the abortive communist coup attempt on Sept. 30, 1965, Indonesians have constantly been warned against the latent communist danger. We have always been reminded to be vigilant.
This essay is not intended to commemorate that tragic event which is known locally by its popular Gestapu acronym. But it is, indeed, to remember that day. When editorializing to remember the "great patriotic war," particularly in reference to the siege of Leningrad, now back to its original name, St.Petersburg, a Soviet newspaper once wrote, "No one is forgotten, nothing is forgotten."
With such an undertone, we can ponder again the meaning and significance of that traumatic experience almost three decades ago. Always to be vigilant against something we don't even know exactly what it is, makes no sense at all.
For one thing, if the latent threat is to be perceived as being externally sourced, then it is no more than a myth. The communist system, and thus the communist ideology, has been discredited, and hence the crumbling of most communist regimes. This has been a severe blow to the prestige of the remaining communist nations, which since then have been preoccupied almost entirely, and each almost alone, with the struggle to survive by muddling through economic and political reforms. Thus rather than venturing to advance that cause of "international communism," which has now been dumped into the dustbin of history, they have been trying to court other nations -- non-communist ones at that -- to get help in promoting the aims of their reforms.
For another, if the so-called latent communist danger is to be perceived as internal in nature, the repeated warning has never had its operational value. Indeed, in practice it has largely meant unfounded suspicion of everyone having the possibility of involvement in the abortive coup, or of being influenced by communism, whatever that means -- hence the longtime practice of requiring everyone applying for a job or membership of an organization to prove their innocence by presenting the necessary but meaningless formal documents to that effect. Needless to say, this is contrary to the principle of the presumption of innocence.
The fact that such a requirement has applied also to young men and women who were small children, perhaps toddlers at the time of the Gestapu affair, or even born since then, has been sheer folly. Fortunately, the practice seems to have died away.
Does communism still have a future in this country? That is the key question. If there is perceived injustice, oppression, exploitation and abuse of power; if the political system is not working; if the state fails to deliver the goods; then the need may still be felt for some sort of an organized political protest. And such an organization of political protest, as a scholar in communist affairs put it, "armed with an emotionally reassuring set of action-based theories," and seen to promise a better alternative to the existing system, it may well subscribe to undemocratic means.
Part of the strength and attraction of Marxism or communist is that, as the same scholar has put it:
"To the poor, the unemployed, and the underprivileged and alienated, Marxism offered an explanation of their plight and a ray of hope for the future. To middle-class intellectuals, it appeared to provide a coherent method of examining social problems, a plausible critique of capitalism, and a blueprint for an efficient,... just and ultimately peaceful world. To those with a taste for political activism, it was an ideology with which to arise and excite the masses."
But what's in a name? The vocabulary of politics is so elastic and imprecise, so that ultimately, he concludes, "What matters,...is how responsive a system is to the need of that individual it is designed to serve, rather than what people choose to call it."
That is our real challenge. By meeting that challenge, we safeguard our Pancasila state against any threat from either the extreme left or extreme right.
The writer is a member of the board of directors at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies.