OPINION: Seeing red: 'Imlek' and the politics of recognition
The Jakarta Post, 2 February 2006.
Often people identify the physical cultural symbols of others as a measurements of their level of identity. Less often, people go beyond symbols and seek actions, processes and outcomes. Imlek (Chinese New Year) may well be the annual climax of Chinese Indonesian identity expression -- regardless of who expresses it. I've been seeing red here and there, gold there and here. Gongxi Facai calligraphy, oriental ornaments, cheongsam in boutiques, barongsai dances, and many other things. It seems that Imlek gets increasingly festive with each passing year.
Reactions to this are manifold, despite it being obvious that it is mainly the commercial sector that is providing the festive regalia. Money, perhaps, has no identity card. At one extreme, some claim that Imlek manifests the "Rise (or Victory) of the Chinese Indonesian".
At the other extreme, "resinification" is the word. The latter is a result of a rigid and dichotomous perspective of identity when juxtaposed to nationhood. The merrier Imlek is, the worse it is for Indonesia. The first is a result of either melodrama or complacency. The merrier, the better.
Employing Imlek as the main measurement for the achievements of the Chinese Indonesian in the politics of recognition could be misleading. It serves a symbolic purpose only visible on the surface.
To say that Imlek is a backlash is questionable. It undermines the essence of freedom of expression that prompted such self-actualization efforts from the beginning. It also strengthens the fallacy that misconstrues identity as an inflexible zero-sum-game.
Could wearing cheongsam, instead of, say, a kebaya, make a woman less Indonesian, despite the fact that she advocates for Aceh reconstruction? Could learning Mandarin and Chinese politics, instead of, say, Indonesian politics, make a woman more loyal to mainland China -- despite the fact that cultivating adequate knowledge of China could enable Indonesia to benefit from the rise of China?
To say that Imlek reflects the "victory" of the Chinese Indonesian in gaining recognition, as some figures have been quoted saying in various media, is also questionable. Is it good enough that we have barongsai dancing here and there, while the ethnic relations bill in the parliament's National Legislation Program risks further compartmentalization of ethnic groups in Indonesia? Is it fulfilling enough that President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono celebrates Imlek at a festive gala dinner, while there are still reports of numerous poor Chinese Indonesians being denied access to birth certificates or identification cards?
What more is there apart from Imlek?
Weeks prior to Imlek, some Chinese Indonesian individuals and/or institutions were involved in advocating bills in the House that bear direct impact on the livelihoods of Chinese Indonesians, namely the Citizenship Bill and the Anti Racial and Ethnic Discrimination Bill.
Generally speaking, with all of the different perspectives and approaches taken (Chinese Indonesians are heterogeneous, really), it is encouraging to see how some of these Chinese Indonesian representatives have long attempted to synchronize their perspectives and strategies with other groups' (women's groups, mixed marriage groups, adat groups, etc.) under the principle of equal respect and equal worth.
Engagement with different groups with different backgrounds and interests have created dialogical negotiations that attempt to balance the notion of national identity (universal) and of groups' identities (particular -- ethnic, gender, etc.).
However, such participation is still very small in terms of the number of human resources involved.
On one particular occasion, a representative from a women's group commented that some Chinese Indonesian representatives sometimes missed principal arguments and strategic options, while complaining thoroughly about processes of discrimination. In another commentator's words, Chinese Indonesian representatives complained, but could not offer alternative solutions.
So then, where is the "victory" exactly?
We cannot deny and must give credit to the fact that there has been encouraging progress in the efforts to improve the quality of Chinese Indonesian participation. Equally important, we must not be complacent when symbols dominate the scene without any substance.
We should be grateful that Imlek has been recognized and indeed be proud that it has enriched the cultural heritage of Indonesia. Imlek must be cultivated as a celebration of Indonesian pluralism. It should be a reminder of things we often take for granted that actually make us a great nation. Imlek must garner inspiration at least amongst the Chinese Indonesians to continue improving the quality of their participation in various spheres of society.
Xīnnián kuàilè, wǒguó yìnní guāngróng! Imlek's Rejoice, Our Country Indonesia's Glory! 新年快乐，我国印尼光荣！
 |
| Chinese ornaments on sale in Glodok ahead of Chinese New Year. |
Reactions to this are manifold, despite it being obvious that it is mainly the commercial sector that is providing the festive regalia. Money, perhaps, has no identity card. At one extreme, some claim that Imlek manifests the "Rise (or Victory) of the Chinese Indonesian".
At the other extreme, "resinification" is the word. The latter is a result of a rigid and dichotomous perspective of identity when juxtaposed to nationhood. The merrier Imlek is, the worse it is for Indonesia. The first is a result of either melodrama or complacency. The merrier, the better.
Employing Imlek as the main measurement for the achievements of the Chinese Indonesian in the politics of recognition could be misleading. It serves a symbolic purpose only visible on the surface.
To say that Imlek is a backlash is questionable. It undermines the essence of freedom of expression that prompted such self-actualization efforts from the beginning. It also strengthens the fallacy that misconstrues identity as an inflexible zero-sum-game.
Could wearing cheongsam, instead of, say, a kebaya, make a woman less Indonesian, despite the fact that she advocates for Aceh reconstruction? Could learning Mandarin and Chinese politics, instead of, say, Indonesian politics, make a woman more loyal to mainland China -- despite the fact that cultivating adequate knowledge of China could enable Indonesia to benefit from the rise of China?
To say that Imlek reflects the "victory" of the Chinese Indonesian in gaining recognition, as some figures have been quoted saying in various media, is also questionable. Is it good enough that we have barongsai dancing here and there, while the ethnic relations bill in the parliament's National Legislation Program risks further compartmentalization of ethnic groups in Indonesia? Is it fulfilling enough that President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono celebrates Imlek at a festive gala dinner, while there are still reports of numerous poor Chinese Indonesians being denied access to birth certificates or identification cards?
What more is there apart from Imlek?
Weeks prior to Imlek, some Chinese Indonesian individuals and/or institutions were involved in advocating bills in the House that bear direct impact on the livelihoods of Chinese Indonesians, namely the Citizenship Bill and the Anti Racial and Ethnic Discrimination Bill.
Generally speaking, with all of the different perspectives and approaches taken (Chinese Indonesians are heterogeneous, really), it is encouraging to see how some of these Chinese Indonesian representatives have long attempted to synchronize their perspectives and strategies with other groups' (women's groups, mixed marriage groups, adat groups, etc.) under the principle of equal respect and equal worth.
Engagement with different groups with different backgrounds and interests have created dialogical negotiations that attempt to balance the notion of national identity (universal) and of groups' identities (particular -- ethnic, gender, etc.).
However, such participation is still very small in terms of the number of human resources involved.
On one particular occasion, a representative from a women's group commented that some Chinese Indonesian representatives sometimes missed principal arguments and strategic options, while complaining thoroughly about processes of discrimination. In another commentator's words, Chinese Indonesian representatives complained, but could not offer alternative solutions.
So then, where is the "victory" exactly?
We cannot deny and must give credit to the fact that there has been encouraging progress in the efforts to improve the quality of Chinese Indonesian participation. Equally important, we must not be complacent when symbols dominate the scene without any substance.
We should be grateful that Imlek has been recognized and indeed be proud that it has enriched the cultural heritage of Indonesia. Imlek must be cultivated as a celebration of Indonesian pluralism. It should be a reminder of things we often take for granted that actually make us a great nation. Imlek must garner inspiration at least amongst the Chinese Indonesians to continue improving the quality of their participation in various spheres of society.
Xīnnián kuàilè, wǒguó yìnní guāngróng! Imlek's Rejoice, Our Country Indonesia's Glory! 新年快乐，我国印尼光荣！
Komentar
Posting Komentar