The depiction of ancient Borobudur
Indonesian history is divided into: pre-historic, Hindu-Buddhist, Islam, Colonial, Post-Colonial/Struggle for Independence & Reformasi/modern Indonesia.
The arrival of European to what now Indonesia is not the key defining event or moment which affects the whole Indonesian identity, rather it's just part of history that we had Europeans who initially wanted to conduct trade then showing muscles to conquer, exploit and occupy.
While it's true that without the Dutch probably there would be no Indonesia, but the Dutch didn't exactly mold the identity of their colonized people, rather the whole experience of being colonized by the Dutch is the common denominator of what now we call Indonesian people.
Moreover, we already had the distinct pre-colonial identity long before Portuguese attacked Aceh or Dutch arrival to Java or to the Spice Island Moluccas. When the Dutch arrived in west Java they didn't find barren, empty land with few people around, they saw a whole establishment with people who embraced specific culture and religion with their own customs and heritage.
Consequently we don't need to give extra credits to our former colonizers nor we need to blame everything to the Dutch for our own shortcomings. While I don't necessarily agree with the premise of this question but Filipino case (on Quora) they tend to give extra credits and then blame Spanish in different occasion, depend on what circumstances they are having. But I don't necessarily think it's because of nationalism either, even if you have clear statistics which country is more nationalistic, person to person is different and people are inherently different.
No comments:
Post a Comment