Social and Economics Development
3. Ethnic Revivalism: A Strategy for Grassroots Political Culture
Hutchinson and Smith (1996:6-7) in Baumann (2004) explain that ethnicity is defined in terms of six main features:
a common proper name to identify and express the essence of the community,
the idea of common ancestry that includes the idea of common origin,
shared historical memories,
one or more elements of common culture, Regency/City Coalition of
PDI-P
Coalition of Golkar Party
Coalition of PAN
Coalition of Demokrat Party
Bandar Lampung *
Metro *
Tanggamus *
Central Lampung *
West Lampung *
Tulang Bawag *
South Lampung *
West Tulang Bawang
*
North Lampung *
Way Kanan *
Pringsewu *
Mesuji *
South Pesisir*) *
Pesawaran *
East Lampung *
S u s ta iN 2 0 1 3
Page | 133
a link to a homeland, and
a sense of solidarity on the part of at least some sections of the ethnic population.
Regrettably, ethnicity, political clans and vote-buying in Pilkada lead to a deterioration in the quality of local democracy throughout Indonesia. My research in Lampung shows that it is impossible to be elected as Major or Regent without spending a lot of money during the campaign. People whom I have interviewed confirm that it costs more than 10 billion rupiah for each candidate if they want to be elected as Major or Regent. As a result, Pilkada tends to be more a contest of popularity than a contest of electing a capable major, regent or governor.
The roles of money in any Pilkada are unavoidable. Every candidate needs a lot of capital for the campaign and for employing political machinery of success team and witnesses in voting booths. He/she even needs money for legal process, should there be any one preceding or following election day once even when she/he elected. The difference with stable democracy is that money in stable democracy was collected and disbursed in legally legitimate way, while in the case of Pilkada in Indonesia, money was usually collected and disbursed in illegal and illegitimate way. The roles of money in Pilkada are therefore unavoidable yet disturbing. The case will be worse when only limited families have the access to power and money; formal democracy (in this case Pilkada) will not lead to substantive democracy (in the form of people’s welfare) but to poverty since leaders will concern more on paying back the debt than concentrating in promoting public welfare.
According to the Central Statistic Bureau in 2012, Lampung population is 7,608,405. Based on the latest survey which was also conducted by Central Statistic Bureau, the ethnic people of Lampung constitute only 16% of the total population. Native Lampungnese are a minority in their own land because Lampung has attracted many migrants for centuries. In the Soeharto era, no single Lampungnese was ever appointed as governor; the central government had their own candidate. The relations between local and central government made it possible for Soeharto to strengthen his power by exploiting ethnic sentiment. As a result, the ethnicity and daily local politics in Lampung reflect migration activities in the Dutch Colonial and in the New Order eras.
According to Benoit (1989) in Yuhki Tajima (2008), migration was a policy to relieve poverty on the overcrowded island of Java by subsidizing the move from Java to less populated islands. It began in the early twentieth century through the Dutch Kolonisatie program, which continued after independence through the Transmigrasi program.
Recently, Lampungnese have formed political coalitions with Javanese people to win Pilkada. The popular terminology in Indonesian politics is Jawa and Non Jawa. It seems hard to believe, but it is a fact— in the Pilkada in Lampung, coalition politics work!
Table (b) below shows the statistical data of coalition between candidates who won the Pilkada from 2005 to 2012.
Table (b). City Majors and Regents Elected in 2005
No. The Couple Region Ethnicity of Major/Regent Elected
1 2 3 4 5 6
Tamanuri-Bustami Edy Sutrisno-Kherlani Zulkifli Anwar-Wendy Melfa Lukman Hakim-Djohan Satono-Noverisman Subing Andi Achmad-Mudyanto
Way Kanan
City of Bandar Lampung South Lampung
City of Metro East Lampung Central Lampung
Lampungese-Lampungese Javanese-Lampungese Palembangnese-Lampungese Javanese-Lampungese Javanese-Lampungese Lampungese-Javanese
In the East Lampung Regency, and in the cities of Bandar Lampung and Metro, the Javanese candidates obtained the Regent and City Major positions while the Lampungnese candidate took the vice-regency and Deputy City Major positions. In the South Lampung Regency, the coalition between Palembangnese and Lampungese won. In short, Lampungese and Javanese coalitions attracted support from other voters and won the majority of Pilkada in 2005.
Overall, in Pilkada in 2005, the political coalition between Lampungnese and Javanese dominated the polls.
Table (c) below shows data from two years later in 2007.
S u s ta iN 2 0 1 3
Page | 134 Table (c). City Majors and Regents Elected in 2007
No The Couple Region Ethnicity of Major/Regent Elected
1 2 3 4
Abdurahman Sarbini-Agus Martowardojo Bambang Kurniawan-Sujadi Sadat Zainal Abidin-Rohimat
Mukhlis Basri-Dimyati
Tulang Bawang Tanggamus North Lampung West Lampung
Lampungese-Javanese
Lampungese-Javanese Lampungese-Lampungese
Lampungese-Javanese
In 2007, Abdurahman Sarbini (Lampungese) and Agus Martowardojo (Javanese) together won the Pilkada in Tulang Bawang. In Tanggamus, a similar Lampungese and Javanese coalition (Bambang Kurniawan and Sujadi Sadat) won the Pilkada, and in West Lampung, Mukhlis Basri and Dimyati did the same. In North Lampung the whole Lampungese coalition of Zainal Abidin and Rohimat won the Pilkada.
Moving on to 2008, look at Table (d), and compare it with Table (e) two years later in 2012.
Table (d). Governor Elected in 2008
No The Couple Region Ethnicity of Major/Regent Elected
1 Sjahroedin ZP-Djoko Umar Said- LampungProvince Lampungese-Javanese
The Lampungese-Javanese coalition (Sjahroeddin and Djoko Umar Said) won the Governorship in 2008.
Furthermore, nearly all the candidates represented a Lampungese and Javanese coalition. The partnerships seemed to act fairly in 2008. Andy Achmad who is Lampungese obtained the vice-regency from the Javanese H.M Supardjo.
Muhajir Utomo who is Javanese installed the Lampungese Andi Arif as his vice governor.
The pattern repeated itself in 2010 (Table (e) Table (e). City Majors and Regents Elected in 2010
No. The Couple Region Ethnicity of Major/Regent Elected
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Rycko Menoza-Eki Setyanto Lukman Hakim-Saleh Candra Herman HN-Tobroni
Bustami Zainuddin-Raden Nasution Satono-Erwin Arifin
Arisandi-Musiran Pairin-Mustafa
South Lampung City of Metro
City of Bandar Lampung Way Kanan
East Lampung Pesawaran Central Lampung
Lampungese-Javanese Javanese-Lampungese Lampungese-Palembangnese Lampungese-Lampungese Javanese-Lampungese Lampungese-Javanese Javanese-Lampungese
Table (e) shows the result of Pilkada in 2010, Overall, from a total of seven, a Lampungese-Javanese coalition won five, and the other two went to a wholly Lampungese coalition (Bustami Zainuddin and Raden Nasution) and to a Lampungese-Palembangnese team in Bandar. It is fair to say that Lampungese and Javanese coalitions again dominated the Pilkada in 2010.
Now see Table (f), for 2011.
Table (f). City Majors and Regents Elected in 2011
No The Couple Region Ethnicity of Major/Regent Elected
1 2 3
Sujadi-Handitya Bachtiar-U mar
Khamamik-Ismail Ishak
Pringsewu
West Tulang Bawang Mesuji
Javanese-Lampungese Lampungese-Lampungese Javanese-Palembangese
S u s ta iN 2 0 1 3
Page | 135 In 2011 two out of three pilkada were won by coalitions between Lampungese and Javanese, and the third by a Javanese-Palembangese team.
The most up-to-date results at the time of writing appear in Table (g) – 2012 Table (g) . City Majors and Regents Elected in 2012
No. The Couple Region Ethnicity of Major/Regent Elected
1 2 3
Hanan Rozak-Heri Wardoyo Bambang Kurniawan-Syamsul Hadi Mukhlis Basri- Azhari Makmur
Tulang Bawang Tanggamus West Lampung
Lampungese-Javanese Lampungese-Javanese Lampungese-Lampungnese
Table (g) shows a clean sweep by the Lampungese-Javanese and/or Lampungnese partners in three regions (Tulang Bawang Regency, Tanggamus Regency and West Lampung Regency).
Although Lampungese are a minority in their homeland, they control the power. Overall, Lampungese-Javanese candidates dominate the Pilkada from 2005 to 2012. The candidates believe that ethnic symbols, puppets and so on will attract Javanese votes. Our research in Bandar Lampung in 2011 suggests that ethnic sentiment is not really significant in influencing voters. It’s the money. Pilkada applies the concept of majority rule. The candidate who wants to win the election must obtain support from the majority of voters. The Javanese outnumber others in Lampung,so non-Javanese must get support from ethnic Javanese to win the Pilkada. Candidates may adopt symbols such as blankon (the traditional hat), or quote Javanese proverbs or sentences such as Piye-Piye Wonge Dewe (“Somehow he is our own people”) to attract support. Even traditional Javanese puppets may be pressed into service to woo the Javanese.
According to Hidayat (2009) the pattern of money politics varies, but in general it can be grouped into two main categories: “direct” and “indirect”. Direct money is generally in the form of cash payments given by candidates to individuals or institutions. Indirect money involves gifts, particularly those possessing high use value as well as high exchange value; familiarly known as the “nine basic needs” such as rice, sugar, cooking oil, salt, flour, salted fish, kerosene, cassava and corn (or local interpretations). Lampung is not unique: generally in other parts of Indonesia, money politics trumps ethnic sentiment.
4. Conclusions
Obviously in the current local politics in Indonesia particularly in Lampung, Ethnicity and clan ties play an important role in attracting support for politicians, particularly in Lampung. Moreover, The Candidates use ethnic sentiment and symbols as part of their campaigns. The Ethnic coalitions between Lampungese and Javanese are only a strategy for winning in Pilkada—it is not a grass-roots political culture. Finally, The clan and ethnic sentiment strategies in local politics prevents development of a robust democracy.
Acknowledgements
We thank our institution, The Faculty of Social and Political Science at the University of Lampung, as well as the Directorate General of Higher Education, for supporting our journey to the 4th Sustain Conference at Kyoto University.
We also thank the many people in our faculty for their assistance and for productive discussion on the topics of clans and ethnicity and their influence on local democracy in Lampung.
References
1. Aspinal, Edward and Greg Fealy. Local Power and Politics in Indonesia. ISEAS Singapore;2003 2. Baumann, Timothy. Defining Ethnicity. SAA Archeological Record. September;2004
3. BPS. Lampung dalam Angka 2010. Lampung.Badan Pusat Statistik. 2011
4. Collin, Ashley.Clan Politics And Regime Transition In Central Asia. New York: Cambridge University Press;2006
5. Buehler, Michael. Rise Of The Clans: Direct Elections In South Sulawesi Show That A New Breed Of Political Godfathers Is Coming To Power In Indonesia’s Regions. Parties Are Increasingly Irrelevant, But Electoral Competition Is Real ;2007: Inside Indonesia Vol. 90
(November–December)
6. Haris, Syamsudin. Kecederungan Pencalonan dan Koalisi Partai dalam Pilkada. Paper Not Published;2006
7. Hidayat, Syarif. Pilkada, Money Politics and The Danger of Informal Governance Practices in Deepening Democracy in Indonesia, edited by Maribeth Erb and Priyambudi Sulistiyanto. ISEAS, Singapore;2009
8. Magenda, Burhan. East Kalimantan, the Decline of Commercial Aristocracy. Cornell Modern Indonesia Project (Monograph Series Number 70). 1991.
S u s ta iN 2 0 1 3
Page | 136
9. Migdal, Joel. S. Strong Societies And Weak States: State-Society Relations And State Capabilities In The Third World. New Jersey, Princeton University Press;1988
10. Sidel, John. Capital, coercion, and crime: bossism in the Philippines. Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, USA;1998
11. Sidel, John. Bossism and Democracy in the Philippines, Thailand, and Indonesia: Towards anAlternative Framework for the Study of ‘Local Strongmen’. In John Harris; 2005
12. Sutherland, Heather. Terbentuknya Sebuah Elit Birokrasi (the Making of a Bureaucratic Elite). Jakarta: Sinar harapan. 1983
13. Tajima, Yuhki. Explaining Ethnic Violence in Indonesia: Demilitarizing Domestic Security. Journal of East Asian Studies Vol.8 No.3, 2008, 451-472. Proquest Research Library.
14. Tornquist, Olle . Popular Development and Democracy. Case Studies with rural dimensions in Phillipines, Indonesia and Kerala, Oslo: Center for Development and the Environment, University of Oslo; 2002
Regulations
Law NO.22/1999 (First Local Government Regulation) Law NO.32/2004 (Second Local Government Regulation)
S u s ta iN 2 0 1 3
Page | 137
4th International Conference on Sustainable Future for Human Security, SustaiN 2013
The Conservation of Temuan Indigenous Cultural Heritage at Kampong Charik, Johol, Kuala Pilah, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia.
Salbiah Abd Rahman
Faculty of Hospitality and Tourism Management, UNITAR International University, Level 11, Tierra Crest, 47301, Kelana Jaya, Selangor Malaysia
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to explore the conservation of cultural heritage among the Temuan indigenous tribe that inhabits the southern part of peninsula Malaysia since 2,500 BC. According to a statistical survey, most indigenous tribe communities are one of the poor income group populations in the country. To reduce this disparity, community base tourism and cultural tourism product development is considered as one of the means to upgrade the living standard of these communities. Developing cultural tourism product development is part of our Tenths Malaysian Plan (2010-2015). A primary research is done among the Temuan tribe of Kuala Pilah, Negeri Sembilan. Exploratory and qualitative research study was conducted in Kampong Charik, Johol through in situ baseline observation fieldwork for two weeks. The research finding shows that the community is still strongly upholding their cultural heritage tradition even though there is an onslaught of media modernization and rural project development.
©2013. The Authors.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the SustaiN conference committee and supported by Kyoto University; (RISH), (OPIR), (GCOE-ARS) and (GSS) as co-hosts.
Keywords: Conservation; Indigenous; Cultural Heritage and Community,
1. Introduction
Cultural Heritage tourism is fast becoming one of the leading tourism sub-sectors in South East Asia especially Malaysia. In 2012 Malaysia received 25.3 million tourists and fifty six percent (56%) was from cultural tourist visitors that contributed to sixty (60.6) million Ringgit in Malaysian GDP (www.tourismmalaysia.gov.my). It was also revealed in many research studies that foreign tourist visited Malaysia for its culture and tradition of its local people. [1]
According to People and Bailey cited by Brumann, culture is the socially transmitted knowledge and behaviour shared by some group of people. The culture of any society consist of the sum total of ideas, conditioned emotional responses, and patterns of habitual behaviour which the members of the society have acquired through instruction or imitation and which they share to a greater or less degree[2]. Cultures include the art and literatures as well as lifestyles, value systems, creativity, knowledge systems, traditions and belief [3].
In West Malaysia there are 178,197 indigenous populations comprising three dominant tribes of Negrito, Senoi and Proto Malays. Senoi tribe is having the largest populations of 55% followed by proto Malays at 42.3% and Negrito at 0.03%.According to survey statistic done in 2011the poor income group among these communities are at 7% of the total indigenous population. These data is high compared to other ethnic group such as Malay, Chinese and Indian communities in Malaysia. The issue of indigenous communities having poor income group is because of illiteracy and poor education background among their adults population. Beside these issues the indigenous tribe received little skilled training since independence in 1956.To reduce these variance in income group the tenth government plan is developing cultural tourism product development among poor country villages and indigenous tribe as part of their community income.
Kuala Pilah district is a sub district of Negeri Sembilan located on the South of Selangor and North of Melaka state.
The district is situated between Bahau and Seremban the capital of Negeri Sembilan with land area of 109,039.58 hectares. The district consisted of Terachi, Langkap, Seri Menanti, Juasseh, Johol, Ampang Tinggi, Bandar Pilah, Pilah, Kepis and Ulu Muar. Negeri Sembilan state is the only state that practise “Matrilineal kinship” societal system, where the mother lineage is rightful owner of property inheritance or community title called “Adat Pepatih”for Malays or
“Mepatih” for indigenous tribes. This “Adat Pepatih” societal system tradition has been practised since 1700 AD when the state is proclaimed. The state adopted this societal system through the Minang kabau tribe in Indonesia. The
“Minangkabau” tribe was named after a fight of a buffalo (Malay word “kabau”) that won the chieftain fight.
S u s ta iN 2 0 1 3
Page | 138 Situational Analysis
Resource Analysis
Summary of resource analysis
Identification of Cultural Heritage Tourism Conservation
Community Analysis Site Analysis
Cultural Resource Analysis
According to Jabatan Hal Orang Asli (Department of indigenous affairs) the district has twenty (20) indigenous villages community recorded around Kuala Pilah and Johol area. The Johol sub district has the highest numbers of indigenous Temuan villages. The village consisted of Kampong Tering, Kampong Senibai, Kampong Ayer Pulasan, Kampong Air Lerek, Kampong Air Runtuh, Kampong Simpang Tering, Kampong Bari, Kampong Kelapi and Kampong Carik. Kampong Charik Johol was chosen for the research area because they are from the Proto Malays group descendant and its accessibility in location.
1.1 Study Area
Negeri Sembilan is one of the 13 states that constitute Malaysia as a nation; it is situated between Selangor, Johor and Melaka state. Seremban city is the capital of the state that can be easily accessible by road or rail from Kuala Lumpur and Johor Baru or city of Singapore. It is 50 kilometers or about an hour drive by car from Kuala Lumpur. The research study conducted is focusing on Kampong Charik, Johol a sub district of Kuala Pilah. Kampong Charik is one of the ten Temuan tribe villages of Johol district that is approximately 25 kilometers away from Kuala Pilah town.
1.2 Research Issues
Conservation is an important issue in Cultural Heritage preservation of a community or tribe. This is because the Temuan tribe is one of oldest communities living in southern part of peninsula Malaysia or Malaya during the British colonial occupation from 1784 till 1955. Significant uniqueness of this research is that Temuan tribe practices “Adat Mematih”or “Mematih” tradition that is similar to the practices of Minangkabau clan of Negeri Sembilan that practice matrilineal kinship in their daily community lives.
1.3 Research Objective
This study was conducted to explore the possibilities of conserving the culture heritage and tradition among the older and younger generation of Temuan in their daily lives. The objective is:
1) To explore Temuan cultural heritage assets and traditional practice among the community 2) To explore the community lifestyle of Kampong Charik Johol.
1.4 Research Framework
Research Process is illustrated into four phases as below in Figure 1
The research framework is divided as follows:
1) Situational Analysis 2) Resource Analysis
3) Summary of resource analysis
4) Identification of cultural heritage tourism conservation
S u s ta iN 2 0 1 3
Page | 139 2. Literature Review
2.1 Understanding Cultural Heritage
Culture is defined broadly as quoted in Meethan as a set of practices, based on forms of knowledge, which encapsulate common values and act as general guiding principles [4]. It is through this form of knowledge that distinctions are created and maintained, for example one culture is marked off as different from another.
Prentis defined the term “heritage” as not only landscapes, natural history, building, artefacts cultural tradition and the like that are literally or metaphorically passed on from one generation to the other, but those among these which can be promoted as tourism product he also suggested that heritage sites should be differentiated in terms of types of heritage;
built, natural and cultural heritage [5].
Furthermore, United Nation Education Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has emphasized heritage in two categories: tangible and intangible cultures. Tangible heritage culture includes buildings and historic places, monuments, artefacts which are considered worthy of preservation for the future. These include objects significant to the archaeology, architecture, science or technology of certain culture (www.unesco.org).UNESCO cultural committee ICOMOS defines intangible heritage as the practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills as well as the instruments, object, artefacts and cultural spaces associated there with that communities, group and in some cases, individuals recognize as part of their cultural heritage[6].
2.2 Conservation of Indigenous Cultural Heritage
Conservation of indigenous cultural heritage is clearly described in article 9 (Nara document of authenticity 1994) stating that all conservation of cultural heritage in all its forms and historical period rooted in the values attributed to the heritage. It further stated that that it is our ability to understand these values depends in part, on the degree to which information sources about these values may be understood as credible or truthful. Knowledge and understanding of these sources of information in relation to original and subsequent characteristics of the culture heritage, and their meaning, is a requisite basis for assessing all aspect of authenticity.
According to Butler and Hinch indigenous cultures have become a powerful attraction for tourist and as such they have drawn the attention of tourism entrepreneur, government agencies and academic. Indigenous tourism represents an opportunity for indigenous people to gain economic independence and cultural rejuvenation [7]. The integration of indigenous people into a global culture on one hand while encouraging indigenous communities to protect and enhance local advantages on the other may give them a competitive advantage in this global economy .[8]