Yellow policy colors public domain
The Central Java government's one-year old policy of painting public properties yellow, the color of the ruling Golkar party, has sparked protests from Union Development Party (PPP) activists in Surakarta. They attacked the so-called "yellowization" policy by whitewashing property. Head of the Center of Cultural and Social Changes Research of Yogyakarta's Gadjah Mada University Syafri Sairin shares his view with The Jakarta Post.
Question: How do you perceive the situation?
Answer: There is a difference of perception about the so- called public sphere. The local mayor considers Surakarta his authoritative area, while the people see the city as a public domain. As such, any change to the city should be done through public deliberation.
The local members of PPP feel they are being deprived of something by force, something which rightly belongs to them. As it was impossible to turn the color into green which is PPP's party color, they painted it white, its original color.
Q: Is it a kind of counterattack?
A: I don't think so. They were just putting it back into the public's domain. It was the easiest action to take by powerless people. It's a kind of "weapon of the weak".
Q: Some see it as a new phenomenon. What do you think?
A: I don't think so. Such a thing could have happened in the past. The explanation is simple. Whenever the public domain is treated only in favor of a particular party instead of the whole community, protest will emerge. Public spheres can be either abstract or concrete. They may take the form of space or ideas.
An anthropologist named Foster introduced the so-called "idea of limited goods". If a person is richer than others, the person's wealth will automatically be thought of as a part of the community's wealth as well.
This explains the old belief that rich people have to give public charity as a "repayment" to the community. We cannot deny that such a thinking exists in our community. It exists everywhere.
To prevent the idea of limited goods causing conflict in society, norms and values are created. Besides this, cooperation and communication are also needed to create a sound environment. Something which is considered no longer fit for the present situation can be discussed for a change or solution.
Q: Do you think the Surakarta incident went beyond the system?
A: The question is whether they have an agreed system. If it is considered beyond the system, which system are they referring to? As far as I am concerned, they are referring to the local government system. That's why PPP's action is considered beyond the system. It's not clear to me which regulation they are applying. "Yellowization" seems to be more a local government officials' "creativity" rather than a Central Java government regulation. Such an incident hasn't unfolded in other provinces, including the nearby province of Yogyakarta.
Q: Why is this?
A: Again, it's because of the different perception of what constitutes a public sphere between Central Java government officials and Yogyakarta. But, of course, the explanation is not that simple. There must be other reasons, including political ones, behind the "yellowization" incident.
Q: But what if there is a disharmony between norms and values?
A: Let's put it this way. The highest value we respect is that derived from the collective society. This value is then spelled out into norms. The problem is there are written norms and unwritten ones. If they are written, are they in line with our governmental system and have they passed deliberation in the House of Representatives? I don't see such a deliberation in the Surakarta case.
Q: Some also see the case as a manifestation of a grassroots movement. What do you think?
A: We have the tendency to contradict the grassroots and the upper level of the community. Nevertheless, I don't think it's necessary to do so in this case. It's obvious. If something is done properly, people will react. We can see this throughout the generations.
Should people think that such an incident was not possible in the past, it's not because the present generation are more courageous than their predecessors. The authority in the past did not pose such an opposition to the public as they do today.
This also explains why such an incident took place only in Central Java. The "yellowization" mania in Central Java has been so absurd that the local people were not able to tolerate it any longer.
It's an understandable reaction given the road marks which, according to international convention, are black and white were also painted yellow. It was even rumored the suitcases of pilgrims to Mecca will also be made yellow. The Golkar chairman Harmoko himself said it had gone too far.
Q: How can the problem be solved?
A: The elite really have to examine the problem. How does the yellow policy's clear promotion of Golkar affect society? A modern society has to be ready to evaluate this problem. There's no need to be stubborn. Stubbornness is dangerous. That's why I'm supporting those who suggest that a court settlement is the best way to cool it down. (swa)
Syafri Sairin is lecturer of anthropology at Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta.