Max Lane: Indonesian Society Has Not Given Birth to Opposition
Translator
Editor
7 January 2024 00:59 WIB
Because Budiman was once an icon of the movement?
Budiman’s services (to the country) before 1998 were numerous. He was sent to prison by Suharto. He didn’t actually participate in the 1998 demonstrations because he was in prison. But clearly, he crossed over. But don’t forget that he joined the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P). And who rehabilitated Prabowo for the first time? The PDI-P. Prabowo was a vice-presidential candidate of Megawati Soekarnoputri. Take a look at the photos of when Joko Widodo was a Jakarta gubernatorial candidate. Who is the person in a checkered shirt lifting Jokowi’s hand? Prabowo. For me, (one of the pairs in this presidential election) is a combination of Prabowo and Jokowi. Maybe officially it’s Prabowo-Gibran. For me, this is a combination of impunity on one side and dynasty on the other. That’s not really a nice combination, is it?
What were the main drivers of activism in the 90s?
First, widespread public disquiet, anger, and dissatisfaction with the developing situation. Second, the formation of a culture of resistance was quite good in the 70s and 80s. There were W.S. Rendra, Goenawan Mohamad, and others who led a (cultural) movement. There were also student movements in Jakarta, Yogyakarta, and Surabaya in the 70s. In the period 1980 to 1981, writings by former political detainee, Pramoedya Ananta Toer, began to circulate widely among the public. It opened the eyes of many youths to the fact that Indonesia’s history was different from what was being taught.
What happened after Suharto’s fall?
The movement subsided. That’s normal. Those who led the movement were faced with a question: what do we do now? Well, those who prioritized social justice for the grassroots, they understood that although the dictatorship was over, social justice issues were not over yet. Many questions emerged and people who were previously united began to go in different directions. Some ventured into mainstream politics, some became active in labor unions or non-governmental organizations, and some became journalists. How to bring change to a country like Indonesia which is controlled by a capitalist elite formed under an unjust structure? No one has the answer even until today. Because the problems are indeed complex. After years of different strategies, nothing has changed. Some gave up. Some, not all, are frustrated. That reflects a very unique situation in Indonesia.
Why didn’t the 1998 Reformasi bring about significant changes?
It is a legacy of 1965, coupled with the political culture built by Suharto for 32 years where the practice of talking, discussing, debating, pondering, and imagining a different future that was normal in every global society was lost. If there is criticism, it is fringe. I taught at the Gadjah Mada University and I asked my students how they imagined Indonesia in 30 to 40 years. They looked blank. Okay, to be frank, it’s the same in Australia, but Australia’s history is different.
Indonesia perhaps is the only nation in the world that has nine parties in the parliament, which is around 90 percent, where a total consensus is reached when voting. Indonesia does not have opposition. Even Russia has. Opposition doesn’t exist in Indonesia not because it is forbidden or people who oppose are imprisoned. Indonesian society has not given birth to the opposition. The intelligentsia who are highly critical don’t go into politics to create a new force so the people can have options.
Several activists have entered politics but why did they fail to drive change?
For the future, there is a dire need for idealism that sprang up in the 90s among young people. I think it is youths below 20 that can be hoped to become the strength of the people of different social strata.
Read the Full Interview in Tempo English Magazine
