The 7th International Symposium of Journal Antropologi Indonesia panel’s are:
[click the title to open/close the panel abstract]
Nowhere else in Indonesia is diversity so discernable as in its metropolitan centers. There, diversity is manifested in socio-economic, educational, political, ethnic, gender, and religious difference. Diversity, in the urban context, poses a challenge not least since the rise of digital technologies and freedom of expression facilitated the permeation of divergence into the everyday life of ordinary urbanites. It is not without a reason that some of the most elaborated argumentations for tolerance (toleransi) and peace (perdamaian) have emerged from the educated circles of urban centers, like Yogyakarta or the capital city of Jakarta. Yet, encompassing concepts, like the national motto Bhinneka Tunggal Ika, do not offer practical, enduring solutions to the oftentimes practical challenges of diversity. The panel invites papers that discuss diversity from the perspective of creative and sustainable practices in urban centers. They shall be able to portray how different agents in the city positions themselves with regard to diversity, starting from individuals, to activist groups, including private and government institutions. Papers submitted to this panel shall discuss not only emerging awareness of frictions related to difference but also the historical conditions that shaped urban realities that are both cosmopolitan and entrenched in local ethnic structures. Papers are welcome to discuss the presence or absence of practical solutions that deal with diversity as well as the challenges related to them, such as community contestation on horizontal as well as vertical levels; multiple, overlapping networks of collaboration; uneven distribution and occupation of public space; inconsistent mediation of difference online and offline; lacking representation of divergent/minority groups; etc. Papers are encouraged to present ethnographic case studies as well as results of on-going research projects.
The panel is concerned with the role of the Hadhrami community in mediating Islam in contemporary Indonesia. For centuries, scholars and preachers of Hadhrami descent have been influential figures in the religious life of Indonesian Muslims. In the late colonial and post-colonial periods, internal divisions as well as external contestations from other Muslim actors and communities have led to an unprecedented fragmentation of Hadhrami religious authority and their Islamic institutions. Against this historical backdrop, the panel investigates more recent developments of Hadhrami religiosity in its relation to Indonesia’s transforming Islamic field. In particular, it considers expressions of Islamic piety embedded in everyday practices, as well as the use of social media and new communication technologies. It asks how Islamic authority is mediated today by Indonesian Hadhramis within their community and in Indonesia’s wider public. How do Hadhrami Islamic figures reposition themselves in relation to Indonesia’s dynamic mediascape? To which new forms of Islamic sociality do they (have to) adapt, to become or remain influential among Indonesia’s younger generations of Muslims? How do they balance offline and online presence? How do they deal with the transformations of scholar/preacher-follower relationships that one can observe in Indonesia today? What role do they play in the changing fields of Islamic finance and charity work? The panel welcomes contributions that can relate to these or to similar questions concerned with Islamic authority and religiosity among Hadhramis in contemporary Indonesia.
In a public lecture given after 27 years of being banned from entering Indonesia, Ben Anderson in 1999 argued strongly that Indonesia should be seen as a common project. From the perspective of current developments, Indonesia seems to be moving away from the idea of Indonesia as a common project in which inclusiveness should be the norm underpinning healthy social relationships and wellbeing among all citizens. Various groups in society have been subjected to increasing marginalization that reflects a process of disintegration from within and the sign of failure in upholding Indonesia as a common project. Inspired by Anderson’s idea of Indonesia as a common project, this panel is an attempt to gather studies and research findings as well as reflections concerning the predicaments of marginal groups in Indonesia, such as women, labourers, LGBT, ethnic and religious minorities, and others. It is expected that the panel could not only contribute to vigorous academic debate and a deeper understanding of social, economic, historical and political processes, such as the various forms of populism that have characterised different eras of Indonesia’s history, but also provide recommendations for policy and wider social impact that could help to mitigate the threat of disintegration from within and the failure of Indonesia as a common project.
Recently, there has been debate on fake news (or it is known as ‘hoax’) and how it causes horizontal conflicts in society. To encounter, special task forces are established either by government or civil society. In short, hoax is one of serious issues today. This may become more serious when 2019 election comes. In parallel with technical solution to block hoax, I urge to seriously thinking about how people easily believe on it without careful attention. It is known in academic that such information should be traced and verified prior to use it as reference. However, ordinary people may not do this. It does not say that they have to learn thoroughly about specific methodologies in scientific manner but at least there are alternatives to educate people on how to accept and to use information wisely. Given the present-day of Indonesian online society context, information spreads freely along with increased use of Internet as one of information resources. In this context, some people may use Internet for disseminating hated and provocations. At the same time, Internet users consume this without verification. To prevent misunderstanding and conflicts, anthropologists may purpose digital ethnography approach (DE). As an approach, DE enables people to triangulate such information in order to verify whether the information is valid or not. The panel of DE will consist of researches, practices and innovations under DE rubrics in attempts to encounter hoax. Furthermore, this panel welcomes people with various backgrounds such as from information technology (IT), social researchers, policy makers and academia. The overall objective of this panel is to disseminate DE as alternative solution encountering hoax.
In this panel, we take up the concept of dependence to explore new or unexpected relationships that emerge through forms of displacement. We take displacement not just as the process of supplanting physically but consider the kinds of cultural, economic, environmental and political displacements that often, but not always, accompany the displacement of individuals, families, or peoples. In linking dependency to displacement, we highlight the social asymmetries frequently associated with these modes of displacement, leaving open the possibility for mutable arrangements of these asymmetries. In this panel, we are particularly interested in the causes and consequences of international Indonesian migration, as well as immigration to and emigration from Indonesia. The panel understands these different mobilities as related and articulating phenomena, contributing to cascades of displacement that, ultimately, exceed the boundaries of nation and state. However, we also consider the relationship between dependencies and displacements occurring ‘in place,’ including those related to addiction or cybermedia. Papers in this panel might, for example, explore such questions as: How does this moment of widespread access to technologies of communicability and real-time interconnectedness shade a contemporary analysis of displacement and what it means to be displaced? Drawing on Maussian concepts of reciprocity and indebtedness, what theoretical possibilities might dependency – and the temporality of dependence – open in rethinking marginality or precarity? And, if an attention to displacements typically focuses ethnographic attention on movement or change, how, instead, might the lens of displacement be useful in bringing concurrent stasis or continuity into greater relief?
Various ethnic groups in Indonesia-ranging from Aceh to Papua- has a drinking culture. Drinking culture present as adaptation mechanism to the cold and windy weathers, social function (togetherness), or as part of religious rituals. Nowadays, the drinking culture get some negative stigma in society and the government. Even today, the Indonesian government is preparing a regulation draft for banning alcoholic beverages. This policy can cause serious socio-cultural problems in the society, conflicts, or even disintegration discourse. This panel will discuss about the existence and function of traditional alcoholic beverages as well as shifting value of it. Keywords: drinking culture, traditional alcoholic beverages, shifting values
The democratic reforms that followed the stepping down of the authoritarian New Order regime, faces a rapidly shrinking space for religious diversity, sexual difference, and critical social movements. The morality of nationhood, epitomized by Indonesia’s national slogan of ‘unity in diversity’, historically refers to a respect for difference within the principle of inclusion. At the moment, however, diversity is increasingly becoming a scapegoat for political and social evils. the anti-LGBT movement, the criminalization of social movements and the religious fatwa against liberalism, secularism and religious minority groups are recent examples of social and political exclusion for the sake of ‘saving the nation’ or for ‘purifying religion’. In order to understand these dynamics, in this panel we will examine the issue of moral politics and the process of exclusion in Indonesia. “Unity” and “diversity” are both concepts that need to be examined critically since within diverse power structures these terms may be used for different purposes. Unity is an overarching rhetoric for solidarity and togetherness, but it may also involve the disregard of different claims and rights to justice. Diversity, on the other hand symbolizes the culture of difference, variations in values, but at the same time involves processes of boundary making and placing individuals or groups in particular boxes. The purpose of this panel is not to look at which term best suits our perception regarding cultural and societal ideals but more to examine the dynamics behind the cultural politics of unity or diversity and the consequences these have on different groups in society
The intervention of modern medical system has been brought by the Europeans, mostly by the Dutch, to the Nusantara Archipelago, generally in Java since at least in the 17th century. The elite groups, especially the royal families of the kingdoms in Java were the first to be introduced by the European medical system. Since the 16th century. The Europeans, especially the Dutch, were also interested in studying the various traditional medical systems of the Nusantara Archipelago. The efforts were flourishing during the Dutch colonialism period and further in the period of independence of the Republic of Indonesia. The first embryo of modern medical school in Java in the middle of 19th century was followed by the establishment of School tot Opleiding van Inlandsche Artsen (STOVIA), a medical institution for teaching local Indonesian doctors (dokter-dokter pribumi). STOVIA was seen as a milestone for the early modern medical system services for the people in the country. It was also the early stage of the interaction between the modern medical system (European or western medical system) and the various traditional medical systems in the country during the Dutch colonial period. After more than three centuries, the dynamic interaction between the modern and traditional medical systems has been developed, ranging from the prevention, diagnoses, curing of various diseases and rehabilitation, in contemporary activities at various medical centers in the National Health Systems. In contemporary medical programs, however, there are evidence that achieving harmonious collaboration programs between the modern and traditional medical systems have not been fully successful due to new and sometimes false medical concepts which prevent the successful collaboration of health care programs of the two systems, in term of prevention, promoting and curative aspects, and rehabilitation. These often damaged the previous good interaction of the two medical systems. The wide spectrum of health care programs provide a huge interest for studying contemporary health care activities, to be used for the national health care system. Therefore more information should be collected, not only on the general issues but also on the new health care programs, including the scientific exploration of ethnomedicine, and the various issues of contemporary physical and mental health, as well as various narrative aspect of health care programs introduced by the government and NGO institutions, such as the BPJS and health insurance programs. The development and improvement of contemporary health care programs needs data from various research findings concerning scientific cooperation of health care experts of different fields, such as between medical anthropologists, psychologists, community health scientists and psychiatrists. Therefore the panel invites scientists to discuss their research findings on various contestation, cooperation, collaboration efforts concerning the modern and traditional medical systems, to reveal the medical knowledge of the ethnic groups in Indonesia, local wisdom in medical practices, collaboration, challenges, continuity and changes on medical belief and practices, to reach contemporary understanding of the dynamic interaction of the modern and medical systems in Indonesia. Various challenges and solution on the problems of health care programs are needed to promote a better implementation of national health care service which provides harmonious collaboration and social justice for the Indonesian people. Keywords: modern medical system, traditional medical system, folk wisdom, cultural knowledge.
Indonesian citizen has a great opportunity to play roles in the policy-making process and the possibility to organize the government at the local level as a result of the democratization brought about by the Regional Government Law No. 22 of 1999. Followed by Law No. 4 of 2009, the regional government at the district level received a large portion of policy making for natural resource management. District level is the level of government closest to citizens in various regions that have abundant natural resources. With decentralized system, they get opportunities for vertical political mobilization. Head of the districts and their officials as well as and the members of the district parliaments were almost all of them local. Unfortunately, corruption and environmental damage due to bad management changes the good picture. Decentralization at the district level has in many cases resulted in a small portion of the local elite being upheld. The severity of their behavior is corrupt and enriching themselves becomes a common trend. It is often reported in the news that some district leaders and local parliaments members must end their careers in prison. On the other hand, the damage of the natural environment is uncontrolled. Wild encroachment is increasing in higher number. Departing from this concern, the state revised the Regional Government Law. This new law, which is the Regional Government Law No. 23 of 2014, particularly in the article 14-15, has a recentralization idea of power delegation in natural resource management. The newer law issued as the Regional Government Law No. 2 of 2015 has reinforce the idea. They attracted delegates to district authority in several natural resource extractions to the provincial level; some of them are directly handled by the central government. This panel will exercise the processes that occur at the bureaucracy and community levels after the enactment of the Regional Government Law which has recentralized the authority of natural resource management. In particular, papers on bureaucratic adjustments due to changes to the Law; dynamics between actors at the regional level; the impact on the management of natural resources at the community level; and various other possibilities related to the recentralization will be presented. Ethnographic findings and anthropological analysis will be directed at efforts to answer what is the best explanation for this phenomenon and how we can provide solutions to this arised problems.
This panel aims to engage with recent discourse in the anthropological theory of values to understand how people in Indonesian archipelago organize their lives and manage inter-group interactions within a diverse cultural landscape and in relation to the transformation of broader political-economic arrangement. Inter-societies order and conflict, we believe, are profoundly influenced by valuation practices. Insights provided by anthropologists had established that value, as a category, is pivotal in social life as it prompts people to rank and structure their experience. Cultural differences are not simply marked by variations of the categories people use to organise their lived experiences but also the diverging ways they consider the importance of certain actions. Comparisons and competitions of the people’s own values with “the Other,” furthermore, constantly accompany cultural differences. Across different time and places, then, it is only natural that social dynamics between different groups revolve around realisation, contradiction, adjustment, and accommodation of their values. The dynamics become even more complicated as capitalism order of values influences inter-society relations across the archipelago and perpetuated through intertwinement with decades of states’ socio-economic interventions to Indonesian societies. By addressing the role values plays within various Indonesian locales, we expect to produce a more compelling explanation of social dynamics stemmed from a diverse and changing cultural landscape, which had been perpetually addressed by the country’s prominent social scientists, as well as contributing to the anthropological theory of value, which, arguably, still lacking the insight from inquiries on inter-societies relationship. The topics, or cases, explored by this panel include but not limited to religious polarisation and conflict, inter-ethnic relation, myth, ritual and changing socio-economic order, the role of intermediaries ethnic groups migration (Hoakian, Fuchow, Javanese, Banjar, Bugis, Buton, Bajau, etc.), upland-lowland socio-political relationship, and the perpetual conflict between state, capitalism and indigenous minority.
This panel seeks to reflect on the state of educational anthropology in Indonesia and offer new theoretical and methodological approaches through the discussion of four projects focused on different facets of contemporary educational issues. Upon a brief discussion of the state of the field, Jenny Zhang (University of California-Berkeley) will first discuss her comparative study on the practices, developmental processes, and outcomes of an influential childhood literacy campaign, Literacy Boost, in Kabupaten Belu, NTT, and in Jakarta Utara, DKI Jakarta. Drawing on ethnographic research, discourse analysis, and language socialization frameworks, Zhang will share her findings on the intended and unintended outcomes of the literacy intervention, which include how literacy was framed and assessed in classroom practice; the power dynamics and democratic practices at participating schools; and discipline and constructions of authority, both in classrooms and among adult stakeholders of the program. Second, Askuri Ibn Chamim (Indonesian Consortium for Religious Studies) and Joel Kuipers (George Washington University) will discuss their ongoing study on science education in Islamic schools at the junior high school level. Askuri and Kuipers will describe the unique ethnographic approaches they take to understand processes of student learning, and more specifically how religious motivation links to motivation in learning science. Third, Jessica Peng (University of Pennsylvania) will discuss her research on the “pedagogical labor” that goes into developing an outer island youth labor force under the current administration’s goal of “developing Indonesia from the margins” [membangun Indonesia dari pinggiran]. Through this presentation, Peng will offer ideas about how to approach a study on education outside of schools, drawing on theories of semiotics and social learning. Finally, Valentina Utari (SMERU Research Institute) will present on the RISE Indonesia’s ongoing study on pre-service teacher education program. Through engaging with teacher journaling, this team seeks to follow student teachers over the course of two years to understand what shapes teacher identities.
In Indonesia, like elsewhere, ethnography works have increasingly been inseparable from global connectedness which influences people’s way of thinking regarding their relationships with their surroundings (Appadurai 1996, Tsing 2004). At the same time, the so-called reflexive turn in anthropology (Clifford and Marcus, 1986) has called into question the often taken-for-granted positionality among the anthropologist. More than four decades have passed since legal anthropologist Laura Nader (1972) first called for anthropologists to ‘study up’, which calls into question the often taken-for-granted power relation between anthropologists and the people they research about (or rather, the people they do research with). Since then, Nader’s question has been taken up, and even challenged by anthropologists working with those who hold ‘more power’. Nader, herself, has further clarified her position that her call to ‘study up’ did not mean for the anthropologist to stop ‘study down’, but to study ‘up, down, and sideways simultaneously’ (2008). Anthropologists have discussed the challenges of doing ‘anthropology at home’/’native anthropology’, ‘reverse anthropology’, and other ethical dilemmas of doing ethnographic research. This panel invites abstracts that address the methodological dilemma anthropologists face in their search for ‘anthropological knowledge’, whether based on research in Indonesia and outside. The panel’s learning objectives are as followed: – to share the methodological reflection in anthropological research in responding to increasing threat to diversity; – to learn about the methodological innovation in anthropology to document diversity; – to understand how anthropologists, negotiate consent in research; – to discuss the ways, one’s positionality as a researcher define or limit our choice of methodology; and finally – to discuss the ways anthropologists (re)define research methodology in the era of ‘dis’-integration.
The collective violence has become the reccurance phenomenon in the post colonial history of Indonesia. A different pattern of collective violence took place in different regime of government. Unlike Soekarno era that deployed military to fight against pogroms and rebellions, the regime of New Order under Soeharto used state apparatuses to perpetrate violence toward civil societies for creating stability. After the extermination of communist party sympathisers in 1965-1966, Soeharto oppressed people or groups that challenged his power such as Islam fundamentalism. People who opposed to the government plan were also forced to agree unless they were intimidated or executed. Moreover, the regime also put the deliberation of issues on ethnicity, race and religion under their control to prevent the intergroup conflicts. However, when the authoritarian regime of New Order begin to weak followed by the resignation of from his presidency in 1998, the ethno-religious violence erupted in several areas. Starting the riot in Situbondo which attacked the religious buildings, the violence wide spread in other cities such as Banyuwangi, Kebumen, Tasikmalaya, Lampung, Surakarta, Jakarta and Medan. Not only Chinese descent who were attacked or harassed, other ethno-religious groups and minorities drag and became victim of the violent conflicts. Some conflicts were resolved by the chase fire or peace accord with the intervention of the central government, some others were left ended without reconciliation. This panel is going to discuss the contribution of anthropological studies in the discourse of violent conflict and peace building approaches. We hope that we can learn and update new research and theoretical framework as well as methodological aspects in the study of violent conflict and peace.
Whilst Indonesia was founded on the principle of Bhinneka Tunggal Ika, the politics of difference has not prevailed as the governing principle in law, society and polity. Instead domination of the powerful has claimed of assuming the right to govern. During the Suharto’s New Order, the military dictatorship dominated Indonesia for more than three decades with complete impunity whereas in the post-reformasi era, majority-minority paradigm seems to rule the country. In both contexts, the rule of law has never been the top priority. Rather, the state of exception, as Carl Schmitt coins, governs and even condones the majority-minority paradigm. As result the Indonesia’s diversity in ethnicity, religion and class has been subjected to the domination of the majority and its narrative. The element of class and its vested interests, however, has been overlooked in the discussion of politics of difference in Indonesia. Inspired by Christian Fuchs who delves into the nexus between class and social movement, this panel will rethink the power struggle between ethnicity, religion and class that underpins the politics of difference. The panel is interested in addressing the following questions: • To what extent the class background of power players play a key role in the political contests that have used ethnicity and religions to support their claim for domination? • How does the power struggle between ethnicity, religion and class shape and re-shape the politics of difference in Indonesia’s future? • Does economic deprivation remain the main source of public protests and social mobilization? To what extent does it pose threats to the politics of difference? • To what extent is the relevance of Fuchs’ assumption about “the emergence of ‘postmaterial’ values [such as peace, gender inequality, ecological sustainability, sexuality, race and right-wing extremism, etc.] as well as the emergence of an ‘immaterial labour class’ in relation to the changing patterns of protest?
As a subject of anthropology, tourism had its dynamic perspective, from interest in culture contact (Smith, 1989), form of imperialism (Nash, 1989), into representation problem (Urry, 2002). Through its dynamic, the host-tourist relation seems could not escape from its dilemma, which the two groups are likely to encounter and the less natural they are likely to act. As Theodossopoulos (in Salazar, 2014) described, the situation led to exoticization, “limiting vision of indigenous host as passive recipient of tourism imagination; appreciate the agency of host in renegotiating their self-identity during tourism encounter”. Exoticization often co-exist in parallel in the tourist imagination, producing contradictions that set in motion the imagination of local host. The local is constructed in contradictory ways and has always been, at least in part, the product of outside influences (Appadurai, 1996:178–199), yet the exchange of values happens in this relations. In contemporary Indonesia, the tourism is imaged as instrument of beneficiary. Since Jokowi’s era, Indonesia’s tourism boom considered positive for the economy as can be seen in the flood of overseas visitor, massive investment, and acceleration of tourism infrastructures. In that situation, this panel wants to elaborate and present cases on the Indonesia’s tourism acceleration and its impact. This panel want to discuss how the host and guest relations in tourism at the time of Indonesia’s booming tourism? How and what kind of values exchange that happened in contemporary Indonesia, present and future? And also, how we reflecting the stranger at the tourism, in which we could not simply as socio-economy scape, but also correspondence on the nature and things that ironically a source for tourism industry itself.
The 7th International Symposium of Journal Antropologi Indonesia