“Meaningful silences”

In New Order Indonesia terrorism inscribed its effects conspicuously on public life through occasional outbursts of violence, thorough militarisation of all key institutions, and promulgation of martial law-like regulations. But it operated in juxtaposition with the extravagant festivity of the growing tourism industry, an enthusiasm for advanced technology, an unprecedented scope and intensity of global consumerism, and vigorous campaigns for development. Terror is not hidden on the underside of culture as Jameson suggested… It is very much part of its centrepiece, on its surface. But it is never pure, total, nor stable. 

 

-Ariel Heryanto. State Terrorism and Political Identity in Indonesia: Fatally Belonging. (London & NY: Routledge, 2006), 23. 

Before we start…

But the greatest unresolved question of the killings is not “Whodunit?” but “Can it happen again?” Should the Indonesian people be liberated from the spectre of the past, or should they be considered blessed precisely because it stands there as a constant, horrible warning? …Now, too, we have to be alert to the various politics agendas that may be served by the different interpretations of the killings.

-(Robert Cribb, historian, 2002)¹.

Academics – historians – sit behind our desks and pour over our books and try to construct this crafty historical argument and write it lucidly. I need to be aware of the contemporary political landscape at play – and the political parties I may indirectly serve – if I end up arguing a particular point of view.

---

We need to bear in mind that by focusing our attention on the past, crying over the suffering and the loss of the past, including the loss of many lives, we would at the same time forget and sacrifice our future generations. Would we continue to demand vengeance for all wrongdoings in the past, even if justifying it with the slogan of upholding the rule of law and promoting justice but at the cost of our future generations?

-(Soedjati Djiwandono, Senior Analyst, Centre for Strategic and International Studies, Jakarta), (2000).²

Sources suggest that Indonesians today – young, old, victims, perpetrators – have extremely varied attitudes towards revising the past. For some, it’s a taboo and unnecessarily raised topic. For others, digging up the past is a chance to rehabilitate memories that they do not want to fade. What moral imperative does a historian have in this case?

---

1. Cribb, Robert. ‘Unresolved Problems in the Indonesian Killings of 1965-66’. Asian Survey. 42:4 (Jul/Aug 2002). 561.

2. Djiwandono, Soedjati, ‘Turn Over a New Lead for Future Life of Nation’, Jakarta Post, (Dec 21, 2000), accessed via Factiva.

Exciting ISMs ahead!

Oh, when all the research projects come together nicely for you.

I realised how much fun it is to study US/Asia diplomatic history (mainly because it incites a lot of anti-imperialist angst and helps me understand the references in The West Wing more).

So it went down like, “hey, this is fun.” “hey, I have Bahasa skills.” “hey, wasn’t the CIA involved covertly in the G30S movement?” “oh let’s do this”.

And then I brought it up with Prof Quek over dinner one night and she said SHE HAS A STACK OF DOCUMENTS on US/Indonesia relations that she saved onto a CD from that time she was in Houston. So I ‘choped’ (Singlish, I hope I’m using the word correctly) her for an ISM next semester, YAY!

And and and like a few weeks before that Jon mentioned that he was keen on doing an ISM on stereotypes and that Levinas was quite a good fit to read for stereotypes, and I love Levinas, so he suggested a joint-ISM and we’ll see how this works out, but EXCITING!

Perfect timing too, since the philo department’s offerings for conty subjects next semester were a little disappointing.

So that’s two exciting ISMs lined up, plus Peleggi’s memory & heritage course, plus Dr Lo’s gender course. As much as I’m enjoying this semester, I have a feeling ’tis gonna be a brilliant next semester.

Dari nilai gotong-royong menjadi saling membunuh: Cerita PKI 1965-66

Untuk mencapai sebuah bangsa yang bersatu dan maju, Sukarno menganjurkan kombinasi NASAKOM: sebuah kerja-sama antara ide Nasionalisme, Agama dan Komunisme. Tetapi ketegangan yang berada antara pihak “kanan”, yaitu Tentara Indonesia, dan pihak “kiri”, yaitu Partai Komunis Indonesia (PKI), mengakibatkan peninggalan dan dampak mendalam dalam kehidupan penduduk dan masyarakat Indonesia. Ketegangan ini juga mencerminkan divisi yang berada antara dunia kapitalis, khususnya Amerika Serikat, dan dunia komunis pada Perang Dingin yang menyentuh hampir setiap tempat bumi ini. Dalam karangan ini, saya membahas tentang peran Sukarno dan Suharto dalam hal PKI dan dualitas yang berada antara persepsi umum terhadap PKI dan kenyataannya. Meskipun ia jarang dibahas dalam bidang dunia atau bidang umum, sejarah PKI ini adalah sebuah kejadian yang sungguh penting, karena PKI merupakan partai komunis yang paling besar selain Uni Soviet dan Cina Komunis, dan pembunuhan massal 1965-66 adalah salah satu pembunuhan terbesar dalam sejarah dunia kita.