In the Tortuous Shadows of Ethnic Policies: Two Case Studies of Chinese Cultural Heritage in Indonesia and Malaysia

Gabriella Voss

doi:10.2478/vjeas-2021-0005

Abstract

Abstract Concurrent with the inception of the nation states of Indonesia and Malaysia in the middle of the twentieth century, ethnic policies were put into practice to destroy the Chinese cultural heritage that had hitherto been regarded as a vital part of the region’s heterogeneous cultural landscapes. Chinese language, organisations, and religious practices were banned, and architecture and artefacts with Chinese symbols or insignia either looted or destroyed. To what extent have these discriminatory agendas further influenced and shaped contemporary Chinese cultural heritage discourse? To answer this question this article starts with an introduction to the anti-Chinese agenda from Independence onwards, which is followed by two case studies from the field of cultural heritage: the organisation Boen Hian Tong in Semarang on Java in Indonesia, and the NGO Penang Heritage Trust in Malaysia. The research is based on fieldwork carried out in Indonesia and Malaysia in 2014–2015.

Highlights

Concurrent with the inception of the nation states of Indonesia and Malaysia in the middle of the twentieth century, ethnic policies were put into practice to destroy the Chinese cultural heritage that had hitherto been regarded as a vital part of the region’s heterogeneous cultural landscapes
The Chinese Indonesian sinologist Leo Suryadinata (b. 1940) concludes that the different policies directed towards people of Chinese descent in Southeast Asia are most probably reflecting the demographic structures of the different nation states (Suryadinata 2013: 275)
In Southeast Asia, the intentions of ethnic policies depended on the prevailing political systems and the economic situations of the new nation states

Summary

Ethnic Policies Targeting People of Chinese Descent in Southeast Asia

The Chinese Indonesian sinologist Leo Suryadinata (b. 1940) concludes that the different policies directed towards people of Chinese descent in Southeast Asia are most probably reflecting the demographic structures of the different nation states (Suryadinata 2013: 275). Two or more groups may unite to form a new group, larger and different from any of the component parts This we refer to as amalgamation [...] alternatively, one group may lose its identity by merging into another group, which retains identity. Suryadinata refers to acculturation as a less invasive, “weaker” form of assimilation. With accommodation, he refers to the development of different working arrangements, whereby the distinct identities of the groups are maintained, by which he decidedly “uses the term in a liberal way and do not exclude a certain degree of common national identity” (Suryadinata 2013: 288). By stopping Chinese immigration or through the “import” of other migrants from neighbouring countries

Policies Towards People of Chinese Descent in Indonesia

Policies Towards People of Chinese Descent in Malaysia

Conclusion

Findings

BAPERKI BHT GTWHI LHTA NEP NGO NPC PAPA PHT PKI PRC