A
decree to end discrimination
Yeremia Lalisang ; The
writer, who is pursuing his PhD at Xiamen University, China, is a member of
the teaching staff at the international relations department of
the
University of Indonesia
|
JAKARTA
POST, 26 Maret 2014
Various
opinions arise over the issuance of Presidential Decree No. 12/2014 that
regulates the use of terminology referring to the People’s Republic of China
and Indonesians of Chinese descent.
Those
who strongly support the policy say the decree indicates the Indonesian
government’s commitment to the eradication of racial and ethnic
discrimination and protection for minority groups. Others, while not
rejecting the government’s move, believe such a decree is unnecessary because
contemporary Indonesian society already has the capacity to behave maturely
in the issue of intergroup relations.
It
should be noted as well that certain small minority groups are suspicious of
the government’s move. They suspect the decree is merely a political ploy,
given the fact that it was issued only just ahead of the legislative election
and the end of the current administration’s tenure.
The
President claimed the decree was signed to put a halt to discriminative
conduct targeting Chinese Indonesians, which are illustrated by the use of
the word “Cina” in reference to the ethnic group.
Linguistics
as a science provides helpful insights into such a matter. According to
Ferdinand de Saussure, a well-known linguist, a word can have a different
meaning to different users, as it might signify dissimilar concepts. The way
a word is related to the concept it signifies is arbitrary, rather than
given.
It is
human agents who create signifier-signified relations that compose a word,
while using the word in social interaction. “Democracy”, for example is
understood differently, as it signifies dissimilar concepts, and thus, is
practiced differently by various regimes around the world. Indonesia’s
experience in practicing democracy is illustrative. It seems that we have had
a relentless commitment to democracy since 1945, but it is clear that
democracy was practiced differently in different eras, as the meaning of the
word was viewed differently by each regime in power.
In this
regard the decree can therefore only regulate the use of a signifier, not the
concept it signifies. We surely would note the absence of the word “Cina” on
paper, but not necessarily the concept it has signified thus far.
Considering
the arbitrary relationship between signifier and signified that composes a word,
the decree cannot on its own prevent the conduct of using another signifier
to signify the discriminative concept that the word “Cina” previously
implied. In other words, this decree clearly is incapable of guaranteeing
that the use of the suggested preferable word “Tionghoa” will not be used in
a discriminative manner to perform acts of discrimination.
Moreover,
it is in public life, not on paper, that people can clearly see and directly
feel discriminatory practices through the use of words. The decree plays only
a limited role in regulating the use of words beyond governmental
bureaucracies. Consequently, this decree has a limited capacity to eradicate
discrimination within society.
It is
true that in issuing the decree, the state — not only President Susilo
Bambang Yudhoyono’s administration — displays its commitment to the
protection of minorities and the eradication of racial discrimination,
although it still has so many things to do. In this regard, the government’s
action should be welcomed.
However,
as I said, the decree only has limited capacity to affect the dynamics within
society. It is therefore the people themselves who must do more. This is
surely the challenge for Indonesian society.
The
upholders of the decree have to translate their support into relentless
promotion of the ideal aim of the decree, namely an end to racial
discrimination in Indonesia. Those who remain unconvinced actually have to
prove how discrimination can possibly be ended without regulating the use of
words.
Despite
the disagreement, both groups have the same objective, which is the end of
discrimination against the ethnic Chinese in Indonesia. Their efforts to
achieve such an aim could converge into the movement to educate the people,
as it is society that uses the word and defines the relationship between the
word and the concept it signifies.
The
presidential decree has done its part to show the state’s commitment to
relentlessly preserving Indonesian unity, amid its diversity. It is now
Indonesian society’s turn to act to show its commitment to unity regardless
of racial and ethnic differences.
Theoretically
the synergy between both the state and society can lead to a better result.
However, theoretical postulates can never be easily implemented. That is why
this task is the lifelong duty of all Indonesians. As long as we still uphold
the commitment to national unity, which considers the ethnic Chinese as an
inseparable part of this nation, no form of discrimination should materialize
in the first place, as our founding fathers envisioned. ●
|
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar