Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Transmigration Continues... 4 Million to be Moved by 2019...

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Transmigration Continues... 4 Million to be Moved by 2019...

    I thought Transmigration ended with the fall of the New Order, but it seems that I was mistaken. What are your thoughts on this? The article below seems to only mention the positive aspects of Transmigration. It even speaks of "maintaining the program's current popularity". Somehow I suspect that there are people who have rather different opinions of Transmigration. What say you?

    http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2...on-people.html
    This space is available for rent.

  • #2
    Yeah, the positivism seems to be a very Javanese/Muslim opinion; communities on other islands and of different religions are not that enthousiastic at all.

    And I think that India/Pakistan and Eastern Europe have proven that transmigration brings huge issues which can lead to progroms, and even civil war.
    [FONT=arial black]
    [/FONT]

    Comment


    • #3
      I believe the Dyaks had a problem with it, sorted it by chopping off a few heads, rumour was 3000, don't really know too much about it, but shown some photos of heads blocking a road

      Comment


      • #4
        "Transmigration is proven to be effective in strengthening national unity," he said.

        Sure it is, buddy. Easy to strengthen that national unity when you're speeding up the process of ethnic cleansing. I understand the concept of making better use of the land, but the twin perils of ecological collapse combined with elimination of ethnic minorities as the majority in their homelands makes it unsustainable. It's not the "United States of Indonesia;" peoples in Indonesia have unique identities that should be protected at the expense of nationalist drivel designed to Javanize the whole of Nusantara.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by DanInAceh View Post
          "Transmigration is proven to be effective in strengthening national unity," he said.

          Sure it is, buddy. Easy to strengthen that national unity when you're speeding up the process of ethnic cleansing. I understand the concept of making better use of the land, but the twin perils of ecological collapse combined with elimination of ethnic minorities as the majority in their homelands makes it unsustainable. It's not the "United States of Indonesia;" peoples in Indonesia have unique identities that should be protected at the expense of nationalist drivel designed to Javanize the whole of Nusantara.

          Nicely put,

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by DanInAceh View Post
            "Transmigration is proven to be effective in strengthening national unity," he said.

            Sure it is, buddy. Easy to strengthen that national unity when you're speeding up the process of ethnic cleansing. I understand the concept of making better use of the land, but the twin perils of ecological collapse combined with elimination of ethnic minorities as the majority in their homelands makes it unsustainable. It's not the "United States of Indonesia;" peoples in Indonesia have unique identities that should be protected at the expense of nationalist drivel designed to Javanize the whole of Nusantara.
            If I do not misunderstand your words, what you are saying transmigration is basically Javanizing other areas and cleansing the minority. In my opinion, transmigration is very effective to spread population as everyone in Indonesia since the proclamation day is trying to move to java. My family is part of "transmigration' project by Soeharto, it worked very well, none of local culture is demolished and it taught the locals to easily accept other race. But, since some 'bule sok tahu' advising that it may be part of Soeharto plan to Javanize the whole Nusantara.. well .. maybe the locals will start to think that way.. exactly how the dutch divided the whole nusantara.

            Like those dayak people.. if there is no transmigration, how can we unite all different races here and teach them how to accept differences? Also with transmigration programs, usually come together the project of irrigation, road work, electricity, schools etc..

            Comment


            • #7
              Yep, Suharto was a gentle person who made sure all Indonesians lived in peace and accepted each other for what they were. A visionary leader, who thought Jakarta could be like South California, who has done everything he could to fight corruption and who knew you just can't trust the Chinese.

              It's also kind of amazing you compare some bule with a Dutch commercial enterprise who applied a divide and conquer between different Javanese kingdoms and sultanates.

              There are many worldwide examples of people successfully accepting other (ethnic) groups and working together without forcing them to move btw.
              Last edited by jstar; 08-06-15, 21:14.
              [FONT=arial black]
              [/FONT]

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by jstar View Post

                It's also kind of amazing you compare some bule with a Dutch commercial enterprise who applied a divide and conquer between different Javanese kingdoms and sultanates.

                There are many worldwide examples of people successfully accepting other (ethnic) groups and working together without forcing them to move btw.
                Isn't what Dan mentioned similar to how the dutch advising their local allies ... pssst .. they don't mean good.. they want to take over your culture, your land .. and so so.. ....

                Soeharto was not gentle, maybe that what we need it that time.. a dictator who told everyone to be nice to their neighbour regardless the differences.. Too bad he is gone..

                Comment


                • #9
                  Ya, if you want to make an omelette, you have to break some eggs, right? Or half a million or so.
                  [FONT=arial black]
                  [/FONT]

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Actually I've often wondered if many developing countries, Indonesia included, is truly ready for unbridled democracy.

                    As to transmigration, one thing I didn't like about it is that it segregates the newcomers from the locals. This to me creates a lot of the cultural problems, and not just in this case but in immigrations issues across the world. When the newcomers are few, they're welcomed with open arms, often as guests and soon family. But when 2 things happen: 1. the number of newcomers become many AND 2. the newcomers practice their "old" culture even when it's out of place in the new location, this is when "THEM" and "US" start to become an issue.

                    There is a way for migration (forced transmigration, immigration, etc) to work and to allow everyone to embrace and respect each other. Now, I grant you that there will always be the handful of truly bad people who are racist and bigoted. But with the speed at which news travel (even if it's a provoking tweet), the abundance of negative news where people are fighting each other only strengthen this conflict. In general, any negative stereotype (racism, bigotry, etc) doesn't happen that often to any one individual. Counting 365 days out of the year how many of us living in Indonesia, many Western countries, or generally safe countries experience racism or bigotry more than 50% of the time?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by DanInAceh View Post
                      "Transmigration is proven to be effective in strengthening national unity," he said.

                      Sure it is, buddy. Easy to strengthen that national unity when you're speeding up the process of ethnic cleansing. I understand the concept of making better use of the land, but the twin perils of ecological collapse combined with elimination of ethnic minorities as the majority in their homelands makes it unsustainable. It's not the "United States of Indonesia;" peoples in Indonesia have unique identities that should be protected at the expense of nationalist drivel designed to Javanize the whole of Nusantara.
                      I've been observing closely the development of Indonesian politics since the authoritarian New Order was in power and studying violent conflicts in Indonesia at university. As far as I know, transmigration indeed caused some problems for transmigrants and local people. But was there any blue print that clearly stated that 'transmigration' was aimed at cleansing ethnic groups in troubling regions such as Aceh, Timor and Papua? I doubt it. The program was not solely funded by the government but World Bank too was involved in it. I need to check on how much international organisations did contribute to the program. But 'transmigration' as ethnic cleansing program has been used extensively by exile activists from Papua and Aceh in order to get people attention. But I doubt it if they can quote any convincing evidence to support their claim. One must distinguish the language or term as propaganda from the historical fact. In fact, the arrival of migrants from populated island such as Java on troubling regions can indeed strengthen their sense of primordialism and regionalism. The violent conflict between Maduranese and Dayak people in Kalimantan not long after Suharto stepped down demonstrated how transmigration led to social and cultural tension in the region. If this is the case, the hypothesis of transmigration as a means to wipe out ethnic groups hold no water at all. Nevertheless It's not really surprising that this theory appeals to some know-it-all foreigners who have a little knowledge of the archipelagic country. It is the aim of their campaign to target do-gooders audience with poor knowledge of the country.

                      Migrating people from Java was not exclusively the New Order policy. Under Dutch occupation, many Javanese people were recruited and transferred to Sumatra to work in plantations. It happened in other part of colonies. Pacific islanders were moved to Queensland, or Indians to Fiji.

                      Of course there are stories where migrants could get on well with local people but some didn't.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I see both perspectives presented here, but I still think that my original premise stands; the JP article presented Transmigration as a categorically positive and well-received policy, whereas they omitted any whisper of dissent. For an ostensibly free newspaper in a democracy, this seems to fall below journalistic standards. Even MSNBC and Fox News in America will acknowledge the existence of opposing viewpoints to their reporting.

                        Maybe I am reading too much into this, but it seems like the journalistic equivalent of an election with a 100% - 0% result. 60% - 40% is a clear mandate; 80% - 20% is a landslide; 100% - 0% is highly suspicious.
                        This space is available for rent.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Pony, the fact it was not succesful does not mean it was never an initial goal. I think there can be a big difference between different implementations of ethnic cleansing; it does not necessarily mean they wanted to wipe out local ethnic groups at the time (cf. the Nazis in Russia), but making sure they became a minority and hoping they would be absorbed by the new majority is a rather realistic description. To get a homogenous end result; more unity than diversity. This would also filter out trouble makers. Of course it's a rather simplistic discours that really never worked, it has only lead to tension and chaos. A clear example (among those that you mentioned) are the Moluccas with as result a very active RMS in The Netherlands and a negative image of Indonesia in the west.

                          If you look at the previous transmigrations under the Dutch, they can be compared to Italians moving to Western Europe to work in the mines. They simply did not have enough laborers and there were enough people interested. It was purely commercial and there was no hidden agenda to influence the local situation. Still, we all agree spontaneous transmigration can generate many issues as well (cf. Moroccan and Turkish youth in big European cities, Puerto Ricans in the sixties in New York, etc. etc.). And the current interpretation of Bhinneka Tunggal Ika seems to be a rather Javanese dream which is even reminiscent of some Japanese WWII propaganda for an Asian empire.

                          Wasn't there a museum of transmigration in Lampung?
                          Last edited by jstar; 08-06-15, 22:15.
                          [FONT=arial black]
                          [/FONT]

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            But result is .. And it is a fact.. It is not a Javanese culture that made it to the locals.. But the Javanese transmigrants's that losing their culture blend into the locals culture. When there is a big clash between the two locals and transmigrants, usually comes from the jealousy of the social economy status. The thing that locals don't realize, that the immigrants work twice harder than they are ..Of course we can not deny that in Soeharto time almost all the regional leaders were Javanese and from the military.. Because of course he couldn't afford a coup as we know so many independent movements every where .. Not only Papua and Aceh.. Maluku, Kalimantan, Kartasura etc..

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I spend most of my time in Indonesia in remote areas of Sumatra all of these areas have an original local population with their own traditions and I'm fairly certain there is people in these areas from the transmigration program as there is actual villages of Javanese and even Balinese, but I've also noticed there is a natural migration of people from Java and bigger Sumatran citys such as Padang and Medan and then there is a constant flow of the original people moving from these remote areas to bigger Sumatran citys and Jakarta mostly in search of work or a better life.

                              Maybe its there but I've never come across tension or attitudes between the people but it does seem most of the time it is those that have moved in from elsewhere that do have the businesses.

                              I think even without the program its something that will naturally continue, its just a different world these days even in Indonesia people are more on the move than in the past looking for different opportunities and not just going from remote areas to cities but going from cities to remote areas as they see opportunities to start business or just can afford land and build a nice house etc in the cites.

                              There is also other factors for moving like they might just go to a city for further schooling or a job for a while but then years latter they often move back with their new partner, who then sometimes bring their sister or brother or older parent, I've come across this situation quite a lot.
                              Last edited by mick mentawai; 09-06-15, 13:48.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X