Imperialism
The word imperialism, which has often been used interchangeably with colonialism, has a highly contested meaning. Deriving from the noun ‘empire’, ‘imperialism’ is understood as the extension by one group of rule or influence over another group. Unlike ‘colonialism’, however, which necessitates direct political control, imperialism could occur without the existence of a formal colony. This absence of a formal colony is perhaps why it has become so difficult to identify a definitive meaning for ‘imperialism’. Despite this vagueness, ‘imperialism’ is widely used to refer to the process of domination. Further complicating definition, ‘imperialism’ can also be used in conjunction with others words, as in ‘cultural imperialism’, ‘informal imperialism’ and ‘neo-imperialism’, which are attempts to describe the nature of this domination and control.
Underlying the generally understood definition of imperialism is the use of power to preside over others. Power is often understood as the conquest of other territories due to more sophisticated military apparatus and better political organisation. As Bernard Porter warned, however, this understanding can only capture a description of ‘formal imperialism’[1]. He went even further, suggesting that in its more subtle aspects - or in ‘informal imperialism’ - when one set of cultural values and beliefs dominates others, power is more difficult to measure. For example, in Southeast Asia, missionary promulgation of Christianity, or the spreading of Islam via trade relations was not intended to expand the respective imperial territories, even though their practices had imperialistic features. These cases exemplify how empire can be boundless, or without geographical borders. This phenomenon gives raise to the question of how power worked to influence peoples’ conversion.
The emphasis in this analysis on the exertion of power seems to result in imperialism being seen as a binary, one-way relation, with the superior dominating the inferior, as in a ‘formal imperialism’. Is this always the case, however? In the colonial period, the peripheral territories were seen as an extension of the metropole, yet it would be naïve to assume that power was only working in a single outward direction. Control could also be exercised by people in the periphery, despite the presence of people from the core[2]. It could be possible for empowered locals to play an even more antagonistic or malicious role then their rulers, in order to satisfy their interests. Another example might be Aboriginal people in Australia feeling dominated by white settlers, who in turn regarded themselves as victims of British imperialism. In reality, imperialism is not strictly a long-distance, binary domination or exclusively a state-enterprise.
It could be said that these various definitions of ‘imperialism’ demonstrate that no single meaning can be given to the word. Dissimilarities in process, genesis, and form imply that imperialism is not a single concept. The impossibility in ascribing one single definition has driven some commentators to use the Foucaultian concept of discourse, in particular those who are concerned with cultural imperialism[3]. This is perhaps a fair conclusion, in that it accepts the differing views from the various disciplines, and recognises a multiplicity of articulations from the metropole to the periphery. This new approach is, however, a challenge for some scholars, particularly historians who think that clear definition is crucial. Whether we regard imperialism as discourse or thesis is necessary to understand reality beyond the word ‘imperialism’.
[1] Bernard Porter, The Lion’s Share: A Short History of British Imperialism 1850-2004, (Harlow: Pearson Longman, 2004), p.4.
[2] Stephen Howe, Empire: A Very Short Introduction, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), p.15.
[3] John Tomlinson, Cultural Imperialism, (Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press, 1991), p. 9.
Friday, October 20, 2006
Sunday, September 24, 2006
Bule and Syariah Law
Few friends told me that one Acehnese guy wrote something about Bule in Aceh.[1] I am a bit curious as they said it was an awful writing. I googled it and found the article. The article mainly talked about how important bule is in representing Aceh into a wider world. Disastrous wave on the Boxing Day that washed out some part of regions and took hundred thousands lives could attract the wider world to help people out. Tsunami was unexpectedly a success in forcing the military to loosen up their control and a signal of unofficial ending of Martial Law. Aceh was then open for anyone who liked to help.
Generalisation is the crucial aspect which made analysis flawed. He put the relationship of Acehnese and Westerner in a dichotomic fashion, depicting Acehnese as innocence and bule as corrupted and full of self-interest. The arrival of Bule in Aceh is related to their attempts of satisfying their self-interests as if genuine and benevolent attitude can never be found in their works.
Most bule in Aceh perhaps work for INGO, few of them are backpackers, and the rest are for business matter. Even though, some INGO appeared to be a bit dodgy in their works, but its unfair to generalise all foreigners in Aceh representing the people and their life in very subjugating way.
[1]. This term is commonly used by Indonesians in refer to foreigners with white skin. This word originally carries meaning of pale and fair colour which can be found in foreigners. However, it is not strictly used for Anglo-Saxon background but also for hispanic background.
Generalisation is the crucial aspect which made analysis flawed. He put the relationship of Acehnese and Westerner in a dichotomic fashion, depicting Acehnese as innocence and bule as corrupted and full of self-interest. The arrival of Bule in Aceh is related to their attempts of satisfying their self-interests as if genuine and benevolent attitude can never be found in their works.
Most bule in Aceh perhaps work for INGO, few of them are backpackers, and the rest are for business matter. Even though, some INGO appeared to be a bit dodgy in their works, but its unfair to generalise all foreigners in Aceh representing the people and their life in very subjugating way.
[1]. This term is commonly used by Indonesians in refer to foreigners with white skin. This word originally carries meaning of pale and fair colour which can be found in foreigners. However, it is not strictly used for Anglo-Saxon background but also for hispanic background.
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
Politically Correct
When i was a kid, watching television program was always exciting. My parents did not bother with slapstick comedy of Donald Duck and Chip and Dale. We just sat down and laughed. My parents did not think of any possibilities if Chip and Dale represent male friendship.
These days it is all different story. Parents or adults will think of hidden agenda that is played out in kids television programme. ABC famous kid show Playschool was a target of criticism. John Howard accussed ABC running agenda with its reference to lesbian parents. In other occassion, the absence of the word Black in well-known nursery rhyme Ba Ba Black Sheep was an indication of this hidden agenda of teaching children to be politically correct.
This is perhaps out of proportion. None of kids ever think of the word Black has a degrading meaning. Nor does two mums mean promoting lesbianism. This sort of controversy is not the first time. In US a Reverend Jerry Falwell attacked British show Teletubbies as bad role model for children due to gay association with the purple Tinky-Winky.
In Tinky-Winky case, sexless Tinky-Winky is then sexed by Falwell interpretation of symbols attached to Tinky-Winky: purple and gay color, male voice but carrying little handbag and triangle as gay liberation symbol. But in Playschool case, it is rather different. Erasing Black sheep as an atempt of being politically correct is not ABC interpretation. It is rather Piers Arkeman of Daily Telegraph opinion. Controversy over two mums in the park which allegedly propagated lesbian lifestyle came from Howard's mouth.
What the problem is not about the hidden agenda or politically correct but it is rather perception of parents. It reflects the unreadiness of parents to deal with their kids' question about Black and lesbian lifestyle. Racism against Black has not became history and also misconception of same sex relationship is still worrying.
These days it is all different story. Parents or adults will think of hidden agenda that is played out in kids television programme. ABC famous kid show Playschool was a target of criticism. John Howard accussed ABC running agenda with its reference to lesbian parents. In other occassion, the absence of the word Black in well-known nursery rhyme Ba Ba Black Sheep was an indication of this hidden agenda of teaching children to be politically correct.
This is perhaps out of proportion. None of kids ever think of the word Black has a degrading meaning. Nor does two mums mean promoting lesbianism. This sort of controversy is not the first time. In US a Reverend Jerry Falwell attacked British show Teletubbies as bad role model for children due to gay association with the purple Tinky-Winky.
In Tinky-Winky case, sexless Tinky-Winky is then sexed by Falwell interpretation of symbols attached to Tinky-Winky: purple and gay color, male voice but carrying little handbag and triangle as gay liberation symbol. But in Playschool case, it is rather different. Erasing Black sheep as an atempt of being politically correct is not ABC interpretation. It is rather Piers Arkeman of Daily Telegraph opinion. Controversy over two mums in the park which allegedly propagated lesbian lifestyle came from Howard's mouth.
What the problem is not about the hidden agenda or politically correct but it is rather perception of parents. It reflects the unreadiness of parents to deal with their kids' question about Black and lesbian lifestyle. Racism against Black has not became history and also misconception of same sex relationship is still worrying.
Monday, August 28, 2006
Confession and Past Crime
The last man they expected to have an SS secret
Günter Grass
It’s enough to make an old man cry. Just days before publication of his long-awaited autobiography entitled Peeling the Onion, Günter Grass, bleeding heart icon of the German left, has confessed he was once a member of the Nazi SS.
The revelation by the Nobel prize winner, now approaching his 80th birthday, has shocked Germany’s literary and cultural world. It was Grass first and foremost who insisted the Germans “come clean” about their history and that his own generation should not try to pose as “victims” of Hitler’s National Socialist ideology.
I was a bit shocked to read this article. It never comes across my mind that Gunter Grass was a member of the notoriously murderous Nazi apparatus SS. As i paved the way through, i become even more surprised. Reaction to his confession sounds even more naive although it is very understandable.
The end of World War II, which was marked by the defeat of German meant the end of Jews worse nightmare. Many stories then were unfolded, revealed poignantly the grief of survivors and others. Since then anything related to Nazism has been demonised. Unredeemable sin is perhaps a general judgement to those who were members of SS or Nazi. But this didn't acknowledge the intricacy of situation at that particular time. We still remember how the question of perpetrator motive led to a heated debate amongst historians, triggered by Goldhagen and Browning discussion.
It must had been hard for young people living under Nazi at that time. Its not a matter of being member of Nazi. Nor did hostility toward Hitler matter. The nature of totalitarianism was rather difficult to describe. Choices were indeed limited. Terror haunted every aspect of people life, even for Nazi member itself. Benevolence showed itself in a very discreet way. The mass murder of alleged communist supporters in 1965 tells a rather indifferent story. When terror was ubiquitous, manifest in various forms, it made choices very limited. Simply, people had to choose only two options: either kill or to be killed. To hate communist or to hate Jews or end up being murdered.
I presume it must be hard too for perpetrator to keep nightmares. Maybe it was something to be proud of for some. Some would prefer to keep silent. But when things changed and what it was believed to be true turn out false, the nightmares comes again. This time it is even more tangible. It comes through the sneer of people lips around them but also through deadlines in the morning newspaper.
The only option perhaps was hiding, running away from the past, and burrying it with new identity. The question is for how long they have to hide? As long as possible. Dishonesty is then considered a great saviour.
The other way of dealing with it is confession. But this is also problematic. When they confessed to their society about what actually happened and what role they played in such events, repercussion is inevitable, depends on the degree of crime they have committed. Through confession, they are trying to deal with their nightmares. Confessing also means a genuine acknowledgment that forgivness could be the only saviour.
Günter Grass
It’s enough to make an old man cry. Just days before publication of his long-awaited autobiography entitled Peeling the Onion, Günter Grass, bleeding heart icon of the German left, has confessed he was once a member of the Nazi SS.
The revelation by the Nobel prize winner, now approaching his 80th birthday, has shocked Germany’s literary and cultural world. It was Grass first and foremost who insisted the Germans “come clean” about their history and that his own generation should not try to pose as “victims” of Hitler’s National Socialist ideology.
I was a bit shocked to read this article. It never comes across my mind that Gunter Grass was a member of the notoriously murderous Nazi apparatus SS. As i paved the way through, i become even more surprised. Reaction to his confession sounds even more naive although it is very understandable.
The end of World War II, which was marked by the defeat of German meant the end of Jews worse nightmare. Many stories then were unfolded, revealed poignantly the grief of survivors and others. Since then anything related to Nazism has been demonised. Unredeemable sin is perhaps a general judgement to those who were members of SS or Nazi. But this didn't acknowledge the intricacy of situation at that particular time. We still remember how the question of perpetrator motive led to a heated debate amongst historians, triggered by Goldhagen and Browning discussion.
It must had been hard for young people living under Nazi at that time. Its not a matter of being member of Nazi. Nor did hostility toward Hitler matter. The nature of totalitarianism was rather difficult to describe. Choices were indeed limited. Terror haunted every aspect of people life, even for Nazi member itself. Benevolence showed itself in a very discreet way. The mass murder of alleged communist supporters in 1965 tells a rather indifferent story. When terror was ubiquitous, manifest in various forms, it made choices very limited. Simply, people had to choose only two options: either kill or to be killed. To hate communist or to hate Jews or end up being murdered.
I presume it must be hard too for perpetrator to keep nightmares. Maybe it was something to be proud of for some. Some would prefer to keep silent. But when things changed and what it was believed to be true turn out false, the nightmares comes again. This time it is even more tangible. It comes through the sneer of people lips around them but also through deadlines in the morning newspaper.
The only option perhaps was hiding, running away from the past, and burrying it with new identity. The question is for how long they have to hide? As long as possible. Dishonesty is then considered a great saviour.
The other way of dealing with it is confession. But this is also problematic. When they confessed to their society about what actually happened and what role they played in such events, repercussion is inevitable, depends on the degree of crime they have committed. Through confession, they are trying to deal with their nightmares. Confessing also means a genuine acknowledgment that forgivness could be the only saviour.
Sunday, April 30, 2006
Kopi
Tiba-tiba saja saya tersedak ketika meneguk kopi siang itu. Sebabnya bukan karena menelan terlalu cepat tetapi karena bacaan yang ada dipangkuan saya. Pada tabloid Indomedia edisi 26, terdapat satu ulasan yang membicarakan perkara ngopi. Dalam artikel itu dikatakan bahwa ngopi-ngopi merupakan bagian dari kehidupan anak muda sekarang dan lebih lagi adopsi dari kebudayaan Eropa.
Sejenak saya merenungi kalimat-kalimat itu. Apakah memang benar demikian? Lantas terbayang di benak saya sekumpulan orang duduk-duduk di sebuah warung di pinggir jalan. Tak ada jendela kaca yang besar, pramusaji berseragam yang setia memberikan senyum terbaiknya, dan suara bising mesin pembuat kopi. Yang ada hanyalah gubuk terbuat dari anyaman bambu atau terkadang tripleks dengan bangku panjang dari kayu. Disudut meja terdapat dua buah termos besar dikelilingi beberapa gelas dan tiga toples berisi gula, teh serta kopi. Ini bukan gambaran sebuah warung di Paris atau Sydney. Tetapi gambaran warung kopi di beberapa pelosok di Indonesia.
Gambaran diatas dengan cepat memberikan jawaban atas pertanyaan yang tengah saya renungkan. Ngopi bukan hal yang baru di Indonesia. Petani biasa berkumpul di dangau bersama kawan-kawannya selepas menggarap sawah atau ladang. Tukang becak menyempatkan diri mampir di warung dan bertukar cerita dengan pemulung sambil minum kopi dan melahap camilan pisang goreng atau bakwan.
Jika ngopi bukan hal yang baru lalu bagaimana dengan anggapan bahwa ngopi-ngopi yang populer sekarang ini adalah hal yang baru. Yang baru adalah kebiasaan ngafe. Ngafe tentu lain dengan ngopi. Ngafe adalah kegiatan yang dilakukan di kafe atau pendeknya kongkouw di kafe. Berbeda dengan ngopi di warung tradisional, kafe menawarkan tidak hanya panganan atau minuman tetapi juga atmosfer. Lihat saja puluhan kafe yang berserakan, bangunan dan desain kafe tak sesedarhana warung tradisional. Ruangan kafe ditata rapi dan dihias pernak-pernik di sana-sini. Di samping itu warna-warna yang terang dan penuh keriaan mengisi ruangan kafe. Semuanya ini dibuat agar para pelanggan atau tamu merasa betah dan nyaman. Ditambah lagi, kafe memiliki pramusaji yang berseliweran membawa pesanan. Tak seperti warung tradisional yang mungkin dapat ditemui di setiap pojokan jalan, kafe berlokasi di tempat-tempat yang dekat dengan pusat bisnis, perkantoran atau mall.
Dari segi pelanggan, kafe memiliki pelanggan dari kelas menengah keatas, sedangkan warung tradisional banyak dipenuhi oleh kalangan menangah kebawah. Tak sulit untuk mengerti adanya perbedaan pelanggan ini. Harga makanan dan minuman di kafe jauh lebih mahal dari warung tradisional. Begitu juga pilihan menunya, kafe memiliki menu lebih beragam ketimbang warung tradisional. Kita mungkin tak akan menemukan foccaccia atau muffin dalam daftar menu di warung, namun nama-nama yang terdengar ‘funky’ mengisi deretan menu di kafe. Minuman yang tersedia di kafe lebih beraneka ragam ketimbang warung kopi biasa. Untuk kopi saja, kafe memiliki beberapa jenis kopi seperti café late, flat white, machiato, cafe and liquor (kopi yang dicampur dengan minuman beralkohol). Sementara di warung tradisional, jenis kopi yang disuguhkan hanya kopi tubruk. Paling-paling variasinya hanya kopi susu. Jangan harap minta yang macam-macam misalnya kopi dengan susu kedelai atau kopi dengan susu yang kadar lemaknya rendah. Niscaya sajian itu tak akan datang ke meja kita dan sebagai gantinya senyum kecut si penjual.
Bagaimana kebiasaan ngopi di kafe tiba-tiba digemari oleh anak-anak muda? Bukankah terlihat lebih keren meneguk minuman berwarna-warni dengan gelas penuh hiasan?
Sesungguhnya bukan ngopinya yang digemari melainkan image. Ngopi di kafe atau nongkrong di kafe tidak berarti apa-apa. Toh kalau dilihat harganya tergolong mahal, apalagi dengan harga yang di atas rata-rata belum menjamin bahwa makanannya enak. Namun apa yang didapatkan dari ngopi-ngopi di kafe adalah image. Dalam konteks sekarang, ngopi di kafe akan memberikan kesan kosmopolit, moderen, global, trendi. Kafe melengkapi kesan yang sudah didapat dengan mengenakan pakaian yang penuh dengan merek ternama semacam Converse, Abrecrombie, telepon selular tercanggih. Kesan ini kemudian dianggap sebagai identitas atau tepatnya identitas urban. Dengan memiliki semua itu "kita seolah sudah berubah menjadi orang dengan identitas baru". Namun bagi mereka yang tak mampu membeli kesan tersebut harus rela dicap kampungan.
Ngopi (ngafe) kemudian menjadi perlambang modernitas. Bagi mereka yang tak pernah merasakannya akan tersapu oleh gelombang perubahan yang akbar. Fenonemena ini seperti ulangan ketika Belanda datang ke Indonesia atau ketika pasukan Amerika mendarat di Jepang. Kedatangan warga asing tersebut merubah cara dan kebiasaan masyarakat setempat. Nonton film, minum-minuman bersoda, musik jazz, dan dansa mengganti kebiasaan tradisional. Anak-anak muda Indonesia maupun Jepang dengan cepat meninggalkan pakaian tradisionalnya dan menggantinya dengan apa yang dipakai oleh orang Amerika atau Belanda. Gejala yang sama terulang lagi di tahun 70-an ketika gaya berpakaian James Dean, kaus oblong dan celana ketat menjadi pilihan remaja perkotaan. Kemudian di tahun-tahun berikutnya Breakdance (Tari Kejang), kemeja planel ala Eddie Vedder, Pearl Jam atau kelompok musik alternatif asal Amerika atau ketika Lupus dengan rambut gondrong, tas yang panjang dan permen karet-nya menjadi panutan.
Munculnya kebiasaan baru ini tak lepas dari perkembangan teknologi informasi. Kemajuan teknologi informasi menggelindingkan roda globalisasi dengan lebih cepat. Majalah, televisi, film dan internet dianggap sebagai pembawa pesan paling handal dalam sejarah manusia. Semakin canggihnya teknologi informasi membuat pesan dapat dikirim dalam hitungan detik. Anak-anak muda dengan mudahnya bisa mengetahui berita terbaru tentang idola mereka, atau kebiasaan yang ada di belahan dunia lain. Tidak saja sebagian masyarakat yang menikmati kemajuan ini tetapi juga perusahaan-perusahaan yang berlomba-lomba menjajakan dagangan mereka ikut serta.
Dengan adanya media-media semacam itu, lalu lintas budaya bukan persoalan yang rumit. Dalam hal ngopi misalnya, kita bisa saksikan bahwa di kota-kota metropolitan lain, masyakarat biasa duduk-duduk minum kopi di pinggir jalan. Lantas, mulai dibuka kafe-kafe yang menyediakan kopi serta camilan. Kebiasaan ini pun menyelinap perlahan dan kemudian menjadi bagian dari keseharian. Kebiasaan ngafe dengan cepat menjadi bagian dari kehidupan kelas menengah perkotaan. Hal ini tak lepas dari kesan kosmopolitan yang muncul jika melakukan kebiasaan ini. Kejadian ini tampaknya hendak mengulang kesuksesan invasi junk food seperti McDonald, Kentucky Fried Chicken di Indonesia.
Kembali soal kopi, kopi bukan berasal dari Eropa. Konon pertama kali kopi ditemukan di Afrika. Penemuan ini tidak disengaja. Seorang, pemuda bernama Kaldi asal Caffa, Etiopia, heran melihat kambing peliharaannya berubah menjadi sangat aktif setelah memakan buah semacam ceri. Lalu ia mencobanya dan mengalami dampak serupa: hiperakif. Sekitar abad ke-10 hingga 15 kopi hanya melanglang buana di sekitar Arab dan Afrika. Baru sekitar awal abad 16 kopi mulai masuk ke Eropa.
Di negara seperti Australia, nongkrong di kafe bukan hal yang baru apalagi dianggap keren. Ini adalah hal biasa, sebiasa kita makan nasi dan tempe di Indonesia. Selain bar dan pusat perbelanjaan, kafe adalah tempat yang paling banyak dikunjungi. Hal ini dapat dimengerti jika melihat gaya hidup di negara seperti Australia yang sangat berbeda. Seringkali pertemuan dengan teman terjadi di kafe lantaran waktu yang terbatas. Jam kerja yang padat tak banyak menyediakan waktu untuk beranjangsana sehingga waktu luang yang tersedia digunakan untuk kongkow entah itu di bar atau kafe. Berbeda dengan di Indonesia, kita bisa langsung datang ke rumah teman dan ketuk pintu, lalu ngobrol seharian sembari minum kopi dan singkong goreng.
Tampaknya kecenderungan ngopi di kafe barangkali berkaitan dengan munculnya raksasa warung kopi Starbucks. Memang kafe-kafe sudah berserakan di Jakarta sebelum Starbucks datang namun kehadiran Starbucks tampaknya mendorong kebiasaan ngopi di kafe menjadi sebuah kecenderungan. Apa yang menyebabkan hal ini menjadi sebuah tren adalah strategi Starbucks, seperti halnya pedagang-pedagang raksasa lain semisal Nike, untuk tidak hanya menjual kopi melainkan identitas. Coba saja simak komentar Scott Bedburry, wakil presiden Starbucks yang dikutip dalam buku No Logo karangan Naomi Klein: "pelanggan tidak sepenuhnya percaya bahwa ada perbedaan yang besar diantara produk-produk," karena itu merek harus [mampu] membangun hubungan emosional dengan para pelanggan" (Klein 2000). Howard Shultz yang menjabat direktur eksekutif menambahkan: orang-orang yang mengantri di Starbucks bukan hanya karena ingin membeli kopi melainkan "romansa dari pengalaman menikmati kopi, perasaan kehangatan dan komunitas yang mereka dapatkan di toko-toko Starbucks" (Klein 2000). Bukankan pernyataan ini begitu meyakinkan? Apalagi ditambah cerita-cerita yang muncul dari beberapa orang yang pernah nongkrong di sana: "wah tempatnya asyik man!", "FYI (for your information), ada tempat nongkrong yang enak, namanya Starbucks", atau "tante gua bilang, banyak anak muda di luar negeri pada nongkrong di Starbucks, kesannya cool". Apa yang terjadi kemudian mudah ditebak. Segerombolan eksekutif muda, anak-anak SMA, mahasiswa dan mahasiswi berbondong-bondong menuju Starbucks. Its cool!
Namun dibalik kesan Starbucks yang cool, Starbucks adalah perusahaan yang kerap menjadi sasaran kritik lantaran tidak melaksanakan perdagangan yang adil. Harga kopi di Starbucks cukup mahal dan mereka mendapatkan kopi dari para petani dengan harga murah. Kocek Starbucks dengan mudah dapat menggelembung dari perbedaan antara murahnya harga kopi dan tingginya harga jual. Selain itu Starbucks pernah mendapatkan masalah perburuhan di Amerika. Para buruh-buruh Starbucks di New York protes lantaran bayaran mereka terlalu kecil (sekitar 7 dolar per jam) dan tak dapat memenuhi kebutuhan hidup kota New York yang mahal.
Jika para petani kopi diberitahu bahwa minum kopi menjadi sebuah identitas pastilah mereka mengernyitkan dahi. Toh minum kopi bagi mereka seperti layaknya makan siang. Tak ada yang istimewa. Justru masalahnya bagi mereka bukan persoalan identitas atau menjadi cool, kopi berkaitan erat dengan hidup mereka yang miskin. Namun tidak bagi sebagian anak-anak dari kota besar kopi menjadi semacam salah satu kunci untuk bisa terlihat kosmopolit atau cool.
Sejenak saya merenungi kalimat-kalimat itu. Apakah memang benar demikian? Lantas terbayang di benak saya sekumpulan orang duduk-duduk di sebuah warung di pinggir jalan. Tak ada jendela kaca yang besar, pramusaji berseragam yang setia memberikan senyum terbaiknya, dan suara bising mesin pembuat kopi. Yang ada hanyalah gubuk terbuat dari anyaman bambu atau terkadang tripleks dengan bangku panjang dari kayu. Disudut meja terdapat dua buah termos besar dikelilingi beberapa gelas dan tiga toples berisi gula, teh serta kopi. Ini bukan gambaran sebuah warung di Paris atau Sydney. Tetapi gambaran warung kopi di beberapa pelosok di Indonesia.
Gambaran diatas dengan cepat memberikan jawaban atas pertanyaan yang tengah saya renungkan. Ngopi bukan hal yang baru di Indonesia. Petani biasa berkumpul di dangau bersama kawan-kawannya selepas menggarap sawah atau ladang. Tukang becak menyempatkan diri mampir di warung dan bertukar cerita dengan pemulung sambil minum kopi dan melahap camilan pisang goreng atau bakwan.
Jika ngopi bukan hal yang baru lalu bagaimana dengan anggapan bahwa ngopi-ngopi yang populer sekarang ini adalah hal yang baru. Yang baru adalah kebiasaan ngafe. Ngafe tentu lain dengan ngopi. Ngafe adalah kegiatan yang dilakukan di kafe atau pendeknya kongkouw di kafe. Berbeda dengan ngopi di warung tradisional, kafe menawarkan tidak hanya panganan atau minuman tetapi juga atmosfer. Lihat saja puluhan kafe yang berserakan, bangunan dan desain kafe tak sesedarhana warung tradisional. Ruangan kafe ditata rapi dan dihias pernak-pernik di sana-sini. Di samping itu warna-warna yang terang dan penuh keriaan mengisi ruangan kafe. Semuanya ini dibuat agar para pelanggan atau tamu merasa betah dan nyaman. Ditambah lagi, kafe memiliki pramusaji yang berseliweran membawa pesanan. Tak seperti warung tradisional yang mungkin dapat ditemui di setiap pojokan jalan, kafe berlokasi di tempat-tempat yang dekat dengan pusat bisnis, perkantoran atau mall.
Dari segi pelanggan, kafe memiliki pelanggan dari kelas menengah keatas, sedangkan warung tradisional banyak dipenuhi oleh kalangan menangah kebawah. Tak sulit untuk mengerti adanya perbedaan pelanggan ini. Harga makanan dan minuman di kafe jauh lebih mahal dari warung tradisional. Begitu juga pilihan menunya, kafe memiliki menu lebih beragam ketimbang warung tradisional. Kita mungkin tak akan menemukan foccaccia atau muffin dalam daftar menu di warung, namun nama-nama yang terdengar ‘funky’ mengisi deretan menu di kafe. Minuman yang tersedia di kafe lebih beraneka ragam ketimbang warung kopi biasa. Untuk kopi saja, kafe memiliki beberapa jenis kopi seperti café late, flat white, machiato, cafe and liquor (kopi yang dicampur dengan minuman beralkohol). Sementara di warung tradisional, jenis kopi yang disuguhkan hanya kopi tubruk. Paling-paling variasinya hanya kopi susu. Jangan harap minta yang macam-macam misalnya kopi dengan susu kedelai atau kopi dengan susu yang kadar lemaknya rendah. Niscaya sajian itu tak akan datang ke meja kita dan sebagai gantinya senyum kecut si penjual.
Bagaimana kebiasaan ngopi di kafe tiba-tiba digemari oleh anak-anak muda? Bukankah terlihat lebih keren meneguk minuman berwarna-warni dengan gelas penuh hiasan?
Sesungguhnya bukan ngopinya yang digemari melainkan image. Ngopi di kafe atau nongkrong di kafe tidak berarti apa-apa. Toh kalau dilihat harganya tergolong mahal, apalagi dengan harga yang di atas rata-rata belum menjamin bahwa makanannya enak. Namun apa yang didapatkan dari ngopi-ngopi di kafe adalah image. Dalam konteks sekarang, ngopi di kafe akan memberikan kesan kosmopolit, moderen, global, trendi. Kafe melengkapi kesan yang sudah didapat dengan mengenakan pakaian yang penuh dengan merek ternama semacam Converse, Abrecrombie, telepon selular tercanggih. Kesan ini kemudian dianggap sebagai identitas atau tepatnya identitas urban. Dengan memiliki semua itu "kita seolah sudah berubah menjadi orang dengan identitas baru". Namun bagi mereka yang tak mampu membeli kesan tersebut harus rela dicap kampungan.
Ngopi (ngafe) kemudian menjadi perlambang modernitas. Bagi mereka yang tak pernah merasakannya akan tersapu oleh gelombang perubahan yang akbar. Fenonemena ini seperti ulangan ketika Belanda datang ke Indonesia atau ketika pasukan Amerika mendarat di Jepang. Kedatangan warga asing tersebut merubah cara dan kebiasaan masyarakat setempat. Nonton film, minum-minuman bersoda, musik jazz, dan dansa mengganti kebiasaan tradisional. Anak-anak muda Indonesia maupun Jepang dengan cepat meninggalkan pakaian tradisionalnya dan menggantinya dengan apa yang dipakai oleh orang Amerika atau Belanda. Gejala yang sama terulang lagi di tahun 70-an ketika gaya berpakaian James Dean, kaus oblong dan celana ketat menjadi pilihan remaja perkotaan. Kemudian di tahun-tahun berikutnya Breakdance (Tari Kejang), kemeja planel ala Eddie Vedder, Pearl Jam atau kelompok musik alternatif asal Amerika atau ketika Lupus dengan rambut gondrong, tas yang panjang dan permen karet-nya menjadi panutan.
Munculnya kebiasaan baru ini tak lepas dari perkembangan teknologi informasi. Kemajuan teknologi informasi menggelindingkan roda globalisasi dengan lebih cepat. Majalah, televisi, film dan internet dianggap sebagai pembawa pesan paling handal dalam sejarah manusia. Semakin canggihnya teknologi informasi membuat pesan dapat dikirim dalam hitungan detik. Anak-anak muda dengan mudahnya bisa mengetahui berita terbaru tentang idola mereka, atau kebiasaan yang ada di belahan dunia lain. Tidak saja sebagian masyarakat yang menikmati kemajuan ini tetapi juga perusahaan-perusahaan yang berlomba-lomba menjajakan dagangan mereka ikut serta.
Dengan adanya media-media semacam itu, lalu lintas budaya bukan persoalan yang rumit. Dalam hal ngopi misalnya, kita bisa saksikan bahwa di kota-kota metropolitan lain, masyakarat biasa duduk-duduk minum kopi di pinggir jalan. Lantas, mulai dibuka kafe-kafe yang menyediakan kopi serta camilan. Kebiasaan ini pun menyelinap perlahan dan kemudian menjadi bagian dari keseharian. Kebiasaan ngafe dengan cepat menjadi bagian dari kehidupan kelas menengah perkotaan. Hal ini tak lepas dari kesan kosmopolitan yang muncul jika melakukan kebiasaan ini. Kejadian ini tampaknya hendak mengulang kesuksesan invasi junk food seperti McDonald, Kentucky Fried Chicken di Indonesia.
Kembali soal kopi, kopi bukan berasal dari Eropa. Konon pertama kali kopi ditemukan di Afrika. Penemuan ini tidak disengaja. Seorang, pemuda bernama Kaldi asal Caffa, Etiopia, heran melihat kambing peliharaannya berubah menjadi sangat aktif setelah memakan buah semacam ceri. Lalu ia mencobanya dan mengalami dampak serupa: hiperakif. Sekitar abad ke-10 hingga 15 kopi hanya melanglang buana di sekitar Arab dan Afrika. Baru sekitar awal abad 16 kopi mulai masuk ke Eropa.
Di negara seperti Australia, nongkrong di kafe bukan hal yang baru apalagi dianggap keren. Ini adalah hal biasa, sebiasa kita makan nasi dan tempe di Indonesia. Selain bar dan pusat perbelanjaan, kafe adalah tempat yang paling banyak dikunjungi. Hal ini dapat dimengerti jika melihat gaya hidup di negara seperti Australia yang sangat berbeda. Seringkali pertemuan dengan teman terjadi di kafe lantaran waktu yang terbatas. Jam kerja yang padat tak banyak menyediakan waktu untuk beranjangsana sehingga waktu luang yang tersedia digunakan untuk kongkow entah itu di bar atau kafe. Berbeda dengan di Indonesia, kita bisa langsung datang ke rumah teman dan ketuk pintu, lalu ngobrol seharian sembari minum kopi dan singkong goreng.
Tampaknya kecenderungan ngopi di kafe barangkali berkaitan dengan munculnya raksasa warung kopi Starbucks. Memang kafe-kafe sudah berserakan di Jakarta sebelum Starbucks datang namun kehadiran Starbucks tampaknya mendorong kebiasaan ngopi di kafe menjadi sebuah kecenderungan. Apa yang menyebabkan hal ini menjadi sebuah tren adalah strategi Starbucks, seperti halnya pedagang-pedagang raksasa lain semisal Nike, untuk tidak hanya menjual kopi melainkan identitas. Coba saja simak komentar Scott Bedburry, wakil presiden Starbucks yang dikutip dalam buku No Logo karangan Naomi Klein: "pelanggan tidak sepenuhnya percaya bahwa ada perbedaan yang besar diantara produk-produk," karena itu merek harus [mampu] membangun hubungan emosional dengan para pelanggan" (Klein 2000). Howard Shultz yang menjabat direktur eksekutif menambahkan: orang-orang yang mengantri di Starbucks bukan hanya karena ingin membeli kopi melainkan "romansa dari pengalaman menikmati kopi, perasaan kehangatan dan komunitas yang mereka dapatkan di toko-toko Starbucks" (Klein 2000). Bukankan pernyataan ini begitu meyakinkan? Apalagi ditambah cerita-cerita yang muncul dari beberapa orang yang pernah nongkrong di sana: "wah tempatnya asyik man!", "FYI (for your information), ada tempat nongkrong yang enak, namanya Starbucks", atau "tante gua bilang, banyak anak muda di luar negeri pada nongkrong di Starbucks, kesannya cool". Apa yang terjadi kemudian mudah ditebak. Segerombolan eksekutif muda, anak-anak SMA, mahasiswa dan mahasiswi berbondong-bondong menuju Starbucks. Its cool!
Namun dibalik kesan Starbucks yang cool, Starbucks adalah perusahaan yang kerap menjadi sasaran kritik lantaran tidak melaksanakan perdagangan yang adil. Harga kopi di Starbucks cukup mahal dan mereka mendapatkan kopi dari para petani dengan harga murah. Kocek Starbucks dengan mudah dapat menggelembung dari perbedaan antara murahnya harga kopi dan tingginya harga jual. Selain itu Starbucks pernah mendapatkan masalah perburuhan di Amerika. Para buruh-buruh Starbucks di New York protes lantaran bayaran mereka terlalu kecil (sekitar 7 dolar per jam) dan tak dapat memenuhi kebutuhan hidup kota New York yang mahal.
Jika para petani kopi diberitahu bahwa minum kopi menjadi sebuah identitas pastilah mereka mengernyitkan dahi. Toh minum kopi bagi mereka seperti layaknya makan siang. Tak ada yang istimewa. Justru masalahnya bagi mereka bukan persoalan identitas atau menjadi cool, kopi berkaitan erat dengan hidup mereka yang miskin. Namun tidak bagi sebagian anak-anak dari kota besar kopi menjadi semacam salah satu kunci untuk bisa terlihat kosmopolit atau cool.
Hutanku Menyeka Pantatmu
HUTANKU MENYEKA PANTATMU
Ketika sedang “nongkrong” atau duduk di atas toilet hotel, biasaya kita melihat sebuah gulungan kertas yang menggantung ditembok. Gulungan kertas itu lazim disebut kertas toilet yang digunakan untuk membersihkan diri sehabis buang air. Singkatnya kertas tersebut digunakan untuk mengatasi perkara toilet.
Bagi masyarakat Indonesia mungkin kertas toilet bukan hal yang penting karena kebiasaan toilet di Indonesia tak menggunakan kertas toilet. Masyarakat Indonesia biasa menggunakan air untuk membasuh atau membersihkan diri sehabis buang air. Perkara membersihkan diri dengan air atau lazim disebut “cebok” masih saja dilakukan sekalipun bagi mereka yang masih menggunakan jamban atau toilet yang berada di pinggir kolam atau empang. Namun bagi masyarakat di belahan bumi lainnya, kebiasaan membasuh dengan air tidak dilakukan, sebagai gantinya mereka menyekanya dengan kertas toilet.
Sekilas, kertas toilet kelihatan seperti perkara sepele saja. Toh itu hanya kertas yang digunakan untuk membersihkan diri atau cebok. Sesungguhnya kertas toilet memiliki sejarah yang cukup panjang. Menurut catatan Bulk Wolf (Sejarah Kertas Toilet) yang terdapat dalam ABCNews, sekitar abad ke-14 Kaisar China meminta kertas toilet berukuran dua kali tiga kaki. Pada tahun 1596 Sir John Harington, menemukan toilet yang dapat mengeluarkan air (flushing). Hal ini lalu memberikan inspirasi bagi perkembangan berikutnya. Joseph C. Gayetty, seorang pengusaha, yang membuat kertas toilet yang disebut “therapeutic paper” (kertas terapi). Kertas toilet dalam bentuk gulungan baru muncul menjelang akhir abad ke-19 yang dipromosikan oleh Scott Paper—perusahaan ini pada akhirnya bergabung dengan salah satu perusahaan kertas toilet raksasa Kimberly-Clark.
Jika dilihat dari sejarahnya yang panjang, mungkin kertas toilet tak lagi dipandang sebagai barang sepele. Namun barangkali masih ada yang menganggap kertas toilet sebagai barang sepele tapi tidak oleh militer Amerika. Ketika Perang Teluk berkecamuk, tentara Amerika menggunakan kertas toilet untuk menyamarkan tank-tanknya!
Di negara-negara maju semisal Amerika, negara-negara di kawasan Eropa, dan Australia pemakaian kertas toilet cukup besar. Besarnya jumlah pemakaian kertas toilet ini tak lepas dari kebiasaan toilet yang ada di negara-negara tersebut. Oleh karena kebiasaan ini maka ia harus senantiasa tersedia dan karenanya harus selalu masuk dalam daftar belanja. Bahkan kertas toilet menjadi pilihan kedua terbanyak setelah makanan jika orang ditanya apa yang paling dibutuhkan seandainya terdampar di sebuah pulau (www.toiletpaperwolrd.com). Hal ini membuat kertas toilet merupakan barang yang cukup konsumtif. Masih dari sumber yang sama, menurut survey yang dilakukan Charmin (sebuah anak cabang dari perusahaan Procter & Gamble di Amerika), rata-rata pemakaian kertas toilet kurang lebih 8 lembar sekali pakai atau 57 lembar perharinya dan 20.805 lembar pertahunnya. Dengan angka-angka ini dapat dibayangkan jika di sebuah kota berpenduduk 20 juta, maka pemakaian kertas toilet pertahunnya kurang lebih mencapai 416 milyar lembar! Selain menunjukkan jumlah pemakaian yang besar, angka ini juga menunjukkan bahwa dibalik perkara cebok terdapat ladang bisnis yang menggiurkan. Lihat saja dalam skala kecil, bisnis toilet di Indonesia yang tak pernah sepi. Apalagi jika dalam skala besar, semakin banyak dolar yang dapat diraup dari bisnis toilet ini. Kimberly-Clark meraup sekitar 4,46 juta dolar pada tahun 1999 dengan penjualan sebanyak 16.9 milyar lembar kertas toilet dari 1 gulung kertas toilet yang berisi 280 lembar (www.toiletpaperworld.com).
Besarnya jumlah konsumsi kertas toilet mengakibatkan naiknya jumlah produksi kertas toilet. Hal ini tentu saja berimbas pada penyediaan kayu sebagai bahan dasar pembuat kertas. Jika seandainya pemakaian hutan di negara produsen dan konsumen kertas sudah mencapai titik maksimum maka hal ini dapat mengganggu proses produksi kertas. Selanjutnya kebutuhan pasar kertas tak medapatkan pasokan. Mungkin sebagian besar pengguna kertas toilet akan kebingunan jika kertas toilet tak mudah lagi didapatkan. Dalam situasi ini, jalan keluar yang diambil adalah mengimpor bubuk kertas dari negara lain. Jalan keluar semacam ini mengorbankan hutan-hutan di negara-negara dunia ketiga—banyak perusahaan kertas berlokasi di negara-negara maju.
Saat ini, sekitar 80% pasokan pulp dan kertas dunia berasal dari negara-negara Norscan, yang telah mencapai titik maksimum penggunaan hutan mereka. Padahal, pada saat yang bersamaan, kebutuhan dunia meningkat sekitar 3% setiap tahunnya. Harapan untuk memenuhi kebutuhan tersebut jatuh pada negara-negara yang masih memiliki hutan, seperti Indonesia, Brasil, Cile, Afrika Tengah, dan Rusia. Karena itu, di kawasan Asia, Indonesia memegang peranan penting dalam memasok kebutuhan pulp dan kertas dunia. http://www.aikon.or.id/minggukertas/faq.asp
Negara-negara yang masih memiliki hutan—umumnya negara dunia ketiga—mungkin melihat persoalan ekspor kertas sebagai peluang untuk mengangkat perekonomian negara. Beranjak dari pandangan tersebut, dibuatlah perjanjian bisnis antara negara pemilik hutan dan perusahaan kertas. Setelah perjanjian bisnis selesai ditandatangani, maka berdatangan orang-orang dengan segala mesin-mesin canggihnya untuk menebangi pohon-pohon. Tak dapat disangkal lagi, proses penebangan hutan untuk produksi kertas mengakibatkan kerusakan lingkungan. Lihat saja kasus Indorayon—sebuah perusahaan bubuk kertas di Sumetara Utara—yang proses produksinya kemudian membuat volume air Danau Toba berkurang. Mudah diprediksi bahwa kasus-kasus serupa juga terjadi di negara-negara lainnya jika melihat ulah para perusahaan penghasil bubur kayu.
Jika demikian buruk dampak pemakaian kertas terhadap lingkungan, apakah ada alternatif pengganti kertas, termasuk kertas toilet? Apakah lebih baik para pengguna kertas toilet dianjurkan untuk mengganti kebiasaannya, misalnya membasuh dengan air? Agak sulit untuk mencari pengganti kertas dan juga sulit merubah kebiasaan yang telah berlangsung berabad-abad. Jawaban lainnya mungkin adalah penggunaan kertas daur ulang sebagai kertas toilet. Jika dilihat dari banyaknya sampah yang dihasilkan dari pemakaian kertas, maka produk daur ulang seperti obat mujarab untuk mengatasi persoalan pemakaian kertas. Sekarang ini banyak kertas toilet yang merupakan produk daur ulang. Dengan adanya produk daur ulang ini maka para konsumen kertas dianjurkan untuk memilah sampah di kantor atau di rumah masing-masing.
Keprihatinan akan pemakaian kertas yang begitu besar dan dampaknya terhadap kelestarian hutan beserta habitatnya, harus mengendap dalam kesadaran para pengguna kertas toilet. Mereka harus pandai memilih produk kertas toilet yang dihasilkan dari proses daur ulang. Persoalannya yang muncul dari daur ulang adalah kualitas. Kualitas kertas toilet daur ulang mungkin tak sehalus kertas toilet yang tidak didaur ulang. Barangkali mereka yang sudah terbiasa menggunakan kertas toilet yang tidak didaur ulang akan kecewa jika menggunakan kertas toilet daur ulang. Mereka takut bahwa kertas toilet daur ulang tak cukup lembut di pantat. Tapi kekecewaan itu tak seberapa dibandingkan dengan lingkungan yang hancur dan eksistensi masyarakat yang bergantung hidupnya pada hutan menjadi terancam. Agak ironis, disatu sisi hanya persoalan pantat dan disisi lain persoalan eksistensi yang terancam. Mengenai hal ini seorang teman di Melbourne bercerita tentang seorang dari dunia ketiga yang bertanya pada pengguna kertas toilet, “Apa yang anda lakukan dengan kebiasaan toilet anda jika kami tak menebang pohon-pohon kami?” Pertanyaan ini bukan mengejek para pengguna kertas toilet namun mengajak untuk berpikir kembali bahwa apa yang biasa digunakan untuk membersihkan pantat diambil dari hutan-hutan di negara lain, yang merupakan bagian dari hidup mereka.
Bisa saja orang bersikap masa bodoh dengan tidak memikirkan tentang kaitan antara kertas toilet dan lingkungan. Ketika perut mules, tinggal kebelakang dan buang hajat, lalu bersihkan dengan kertas toilet.Tak peduli berapa banyak yang terpakai, pokoknya pantat kembali bersih. Ini yang paling penting. Ini memang pilihan apakah orang perlu sadar atau tidak akan kaitan antara kertas toilet dan lingkungan. Namun jika sikap tak peduli yang dipilih, maka orang-orang yang hidupnya bergantung pada hutan harus meringis melihat hutan mereka yang hijau berakhir di pantat orang yang bebal.
* Rahadian Permadi, aktivis kemanusiaan kini bermukim di Australia
http://www.sekitarkita.com/comments.php?id=158_0_7_0_C
Ketika sedang “nongkrong” atau duduk di atas toilet hotel, biasaya kita melihat sebuah gulungan kertas yang menggantung ditembok. Gulungan kertas itu lazim disebut kertas toilet yang digunakan untuk membersihkan diri sehabis buang air. Singkatnya kertas tersebut digunakan untuk mengatasi perkara toilet.
Bagi masyarakat Indonesia mungkin kertas toilet bukan hal yang penting karena kebiasaan toilet di Indonesia tak menggunakan kertas toilet. Masyarakat Indonesia biasa menggunakan air untuk membasuh atau membersihkan diri sehabis buang air. Perkara membersihkan diri dengan air atau lazim disebut “cebok” masih saja dilakukan sekalipun bagi mereka yang masih menggunakan jamban atau toilet yang berada di pinggir kolam atau empang. Namun bagi masyarakat di belahan bumi lainnya, kebiasaan membasuh dengan air tidak dilakukan, sebagai gantinya mereka menyekanya dengan kertas toilet.
Sekilas, kertas toilet kelihatan seperti perkara sepele saja. Toh itu hanya kertas yang digunakan untuk membersihkan diri atau cebok. Sesungguhnya kertas toilet memiliki sejarah yang cukup panjang. Menurut catatan Bulk Wolf (Sejarah Kertas Toilet) yang terdapat dalam ABCNews, sekitar abad ke-14 Kaisar China meminta kertas toilet berukuran dua kali tiga kaki. Pada tahun 1596 Sir John Harington, menemukan toilet yang dapat mengeluarkan air (flushing). Hal ini lalu memberikan inspirasi bagi perkembangan berikutnya. Joseph C. Gayetty, seorang pengusaha, yang membuat kertas toilet yang disebut “therapeutic paper” (kertas terapi). Kertas toilet dalam bentuk gulungan baru muncul menjelang akhir abad ke-19 yang dipromosikan oleh Scott Paper—perusahaan ini pada akhirnya bergabung dengan salah satu perusahaan kertas toilet raksasa Kimberly-Clark.
Jika dilihat dari sejarahnya yang panjang, mungkin kertas toilet tak lagi dipandang sebagai barang sepele. Namun barangkali masih ada yang menganggap kertas toilet sebagai barang sepele tapi tidak oleh militer Amerika. Ketika Perang Teluk berkecamuk, tentara Amerika menggunakan kertas toilet untuk menyamarkan tank-tanknya!
Di negara-negara maju semisal Amerika, negara-negara di kawasan Eropa, dan Australia pemakaian kertas toilet cukup besar. Besarnya jumlah pemakaian kertas toilet ini tak lepas dari kebiasaan toilet yang ada di negara-negara tersebut. Oleh karena kebiasaan ini maka ia harus senantiasa tersedia dan karenanya harus selalu masuk dalam daftar belanja. Bahkan kertas toilet menjadi pilihan kedua terbanyak setelah makanan jika orang ditanya apa yang paling dibutuhkan seandainya terdampar di sebuah pulau (www.toiletpaperwolrd.com). Hal ini membuat kertas toilet merupakan barang yang cukup konsumtif. Masih dari sumber yang sama, menurut survey yang dilakukan Charmin (sebuah anak cabang dari perusahaan Procter & Gamble di Amerika), rata-rata pemakaian kertas toilet kurang lebih 8 lembar sekali pakai atau 57 lembar perharinya dan 20.805 lembar pertahunnya. Dengan angka-angka ini dapat dibayangkan jika di sebuah kota berpenduduk 20 juta, maka pemakaian kertas toilet pertahunnya kurang lebih mencapai 416 milyar lembar! Selain menunjukkan jumlah pemakaian yang besar, angka ini juga menunjukkan bahwa dibalik perkara cebok terdapat ladang bisnis yang menggiurkan. Lihat saja dalam skala kecil, bisnis toilet di Indonesia yang tak pernah sepi. Apalagi jika dalam skala besar, semakin banyak dolar yang dapat diraup dari bisnis toilet ini. Kimberly-Clark meraup sekitar 4,46 juta dolar pada tahun 1999 dengan penjualan sebanyak 16.9 milyar lembar kertas toilet dari 1 gulung kertas toilet yang berisi 280 lembar (www.toiletpaperworld.com).
Besarnya jumlah konsumsi kertas toilet mengakibatkan naiknya jumlah produksi kertas toilet. Hal ini tentu saja berimbas pada penyediaan kayu sebagai bahan dasar pembuat kertas. Jika seandainya pemakaian hutan di negara produsen dan konsumen kertas sudah mencapai titik maksimum maka hal ini dapat mengganggu proses produksi kertas. Selanjutnya kebutuhan pasar kertas tak medapatkan pasokan. Mungkin sebagian besar pengguna kertas toilet akan kebingunan jika kertas toilet tak mudah lagi didapatkan. Dalam situasi ini, jalan keluar yang diambil adalah mengimpor bubuk kertas dari negara lain. Jalan keluar semacam ini mengorbankan hutan-hutan di negara-negara dunia ketiga—banyak perusahaan kertas berlokasi di negara-negara maju.
Saat ini, sekitar 80% pasokan pulp dan kertas dunia berasal dari negara-negara Norscan, yang telah mencapai titik maksimum penggunaan hutan mereka. Padahal, pada saat yang bersamaan, kebutuhan dunia meningkat sekitar 3% setiap tahunnya. Harapan untuk memenuhi kebutuhan tersebut jatuh pada negara-negara yang masih memiliki hutan, seperti Indonesia, Brasil, Cile, Afrika Tengah, dan Rusia. Karena itu, di kawasan Asia, Indonesia memegang peranan penting dalam memasok kebutuhan pulp dan kertas dunia. http://www.aikon.or.id/minggukertas/faq.asp
Negara-negara yang masih memiliki hutan—umumnya negara dunia ketiga—mungkin melihat persoalan ekspor kertas sebagai peluang untuk mengangkat perekonomian negara. Beranjak dari pandangan tersebut, dibuatlah perjanjian bisnis antara negara pemilik hutan dan perusahaan kertas. Setelah perjanjian bisnis selesai ditandatangani, maka berdatangan orang-orang dengan segala mesin-mesin canggihnya untuk menebangi pohon-pohon. Tak dapat disangkal lagi, proses penebangan hutan untuk produksi kertas mengakibatkan kerusakan lingkungan. Lihat saja kasus Indorayon—sebuah perusahaan bubuk kertas di Sumetara Utara—yang proses produksinya kemudian membuat volume air Danau Toba berkurang. Mudah diprediksi bahwa kasus-kasus serupa juga terjadi di negara-negara lainnya jika melihat ulah para perusahaan penghasil bubur kayu.
Jika demikian buruk dampak pemakaian kertas terhadap lingkungan, apakah ada alternatif pengganti kertas, termasuk kertas toilet? Apakah lebih baik para pengguna kertas toilet dianjurkan untuk mengganti kebiasaannya, misalnya membasuh dengan air? Agak sulit untuk mencari pengganti kertas dan juga sulit merubah kebiasaan yang telah berlangsung berabad-abad. Jawaban lainnya mungkin adalah penggunaan kertas daur ulang sebagai kertas toilet. Jika dilihat dari banyaknya sampah yang dihasilkan dari pemakaian kertas, maka produk daur ulang seperti obat mujarab untuk mengatasi persoalan pemakaian kertas. Sekarang ini banyak kertas toilet yang merupakan produk daur ulang. Dengan adanya produk daur ulang ini maka para konsumen kertas dianjurkan untuk memilah sampah di kantor atau di rumah masing-masing.
Keprihatinan akan pemakaian kertas yang begitu besar dan dampaknya terhadap kelestarian hutan beserta habitatnya, harus mengendap dalam kesadaran para pengguna kertas toilet. Mereka harus pandai memilih produk kertas toilet yang dihasilkan dari proses daur ulang. Persoalannya yang muncul dari daur ulang adalah kualitas. Kualitas kertas toilet daur ulang mungkin tak sehalus kertas toilet yang tidak didaur ulang. Barangkali mereka yang sudah terbiasa menggunakan kertas toilet yang tidak didaur ulang akan kecewa jika menggunakan kertas toilet daur ulang. Mereka takut bahwa kertas toilet daur ulang tak cukup lembut di pantat. Tapi kekecewaan itu tak seberapa dibandingkan dengan lingkungan yang hancur dan eksistensi masyarakat yang bergantung hidupnya pada hutan menjadi terancam. Agak ironis, disatu sisi hanya persoalan pantat dan disisi lain persoalan eksistensi yang terancam. Mengenai hal ini seorang teman di Melbourne bercerita tentang seorang dari dunia ketiga yang bertanya pada pengguna kertas toilet, “Apa yang anda lakukan dengan kebiasaan toilet anda jika kami tak menebang pohon-pohon kami?” Pertanyaan ini bukan mengejek para pengguna kertas toilet namun mengajak untuk berpikir kembali bahwa apa yang biasa digunakan untuk membersihkan pantat diambil dari hutan-hutan di negara lain, yang merupakan bagian dari hidup mereka.
Bisa saja orang bersikap masa bodoh dengan tidak memikirkan tentang kaitan antara kertas toilet dan lingkungan. Ketika perut mules, tinggal kebelakang dan buang hajat, lalu bersihkan dengan kertas toilet.Tak peduli berapa banyak yang terpakai, pokoknya pantat kembali bersih. Ini yang paling penting. Ini memang pilihan apakah orang perlu sadar atau tidak akan kaitan antara kertas toilet dan lingkungan. Namun jika sikap tak peduli yang dipilih, maka orang-orang yang hidupnya bergantung pada hutan harus meringis melihat hutan mereka yang hijau berakhir di pantat orang yang bebal.
* Rahadian Permadi, aktivis kemanusiaan kini bermukim di Australia
http://www.sekitarkita.com/comments.php?id=158_0_7_0_C
Reformasi in Malaysia and Indonesia
Reformasi in Malaysia and Indonesia
In 1998 Indonesia and Malaysia struggled for democratic transition. Under the same slogan of “reformasi” (reform), popular discontent in both countries turned into calls for political change. In Indonesia, political tumult began with the 1997 Asian Economic Crisis that deeply effected socio-economic fundamentals, and led to widespread social unrest. The government’s inability to deal with the crisis weakened the regime’s credibility. The same economic crisis - albeit to a lesser extent - meanwhile affected the national economy in Malaysia. Protests escalated, however, when Deputy Prime Minister, Anwar Ibrahim, was dismissed by the Malaysian Prime Minister and leader of a Malay-based ruling party UMNO (United Malays Nation Organisation). Nevertheless, the reform movement in Malaysia waned quickly and was unable to bring down Mahatir. On the contrary, the severe economic downturn, decreased support from elites, and tension within the military, underpinned by a massive peoples’ movement enabled the reform movement in Indonesia to oust the longest-standing Indonesian president, Suharto.
This essay will answer the question: why were reformasi protests successful in bringing about a change of government in Indonesia but not in Malaysia? Firstly, I will look at the nature of the political regime in each country, before discussing the nature of their respective oppositions. I will argue that differences in their opposition movements stemmed from the nature of the political regime in Malaysia that depends on electoral contest to change the government ultimately did not succeed to bring down the government.
The Indonesian political regime prior to reformasi can be seen as authoritarian, with its survival reliant on excessive control of civil liberties, the politicisation of the military through a ‘dual function’ doctrine, and the construction of patronage networks with business people through rent-seeking relationships. Moreover, in terms of political legitimacy, the authoritarian leader, Suharto, did not allow any opposition parties to challenge his presidency. Other parties were permitted, but deep intervention from the Suharto government impeded their potential threat.
In contrast, even though the semi-democratic Malaysian regime limited civil liberties, opposition parties were permitted to compete in regularly held elections. The regime did not interfere with these opposition parties organisationally in order to weaken their power. In other words, competitiveness was not banned but was limited. Case noted that the semi-democratic regime may stabilise more readily than authoritarianism as the “national leader has forged stronger ties to elites and social constituent” (2001, 9). This impacts on its political legitimacy as the authoritarian regime depended on raw economic growth rather than electoral victory as in the semi-democratic regime (Case 2001, 9). Case’s analysis of the two regime types can be useful in analysing the different political developments in Indonesia and Malaysia during their reform periods.
A consequence of these differing regime types is a fundamental difference in the nature of their opposition movements. The emergence of an opposition can be linked to the process of modernisation, which brings about a growing urban middle-class. In the authoritarian regime, the growing middle-class plays a crucial role in ending the regime as the absence of opposition parties leaves the responsibility for political change in the hands of non-state actors. On the contrary, a semi-democratic regime allows opposition parties to exist. Limited political space, and the government’s ability to control state resources, however, prohibits them from gaining more control.
In Indonesia the middle-class did not pose a serious challenge to the Suharto regime as they mostly worked in the government bureaucracy. Business people were mostly ethnic Chinese who needed to build rent-seeking relations with government in order to enhance their businesses. Minority groups within society also came into being, most notably in the form of autonomous organisations that advocated for the various interests which the regime failed to articulate. Unlike Indonesia, where political parties were subject to forced loyalty, opposition in Malaysia came from inside and outside the state. A middle-class, of both Malay and Chinese background, grew rapidly during the economic prosperity of the 1980s. Economic privileges towards ethnic Malays through the New Economic Policy, however, gave rise to the proliferation of NGOs (non-governmental organisations) that were mostly headed by people of non-Malay background.
According to the transition theory literature, economic difficulties can lead to the beginning of regime change (Gill 2000, 10). For an authoritarian regime whose legitimacy depends on raw economic growth, its inability to deal with economic downturn can delegitimise the regime’s credentials. The reform movement in Indonesia began with the economic crisis in 1997 that led to state bankruptcy. At the elite level division was inevitable, with some Islamic modernists, coming mostly from ICMI (the Indonesian Association of Muslim Intellectuals) turnin against Suharto. They were followed by business conglomerates whose businesses were significantly affected by the economic crisis. At the mass level, economic hardship escalated social grievances into outright violence. Malaysian domestic politics was similarly affected by the economic crisis, and consequent elite strain within the government. Mahatir’s plan to grant government bail-outs to protect national business elites was challenged by Anwar Ibrahim’s recovery campaign. This tension culminated in Mahatir’s sacking of Anwar Ibrahim as Deputy Minister. The economic crisis in Malaysia did not impact dramatically on the mass level. The growing resistance from the community was likely due to the scandalous removal of Anwar Ibrahim. Criticism was directed towards Mahatir’s authoritarian leadership by equating him with Suharto, deriding the practice of KKN (corruption, collusion and nepotism) within the government, and urges to lift the restrictions on civil liberties. Here it is important to underscore the difference of the impact of the economic crisis on regime legitimacy in Malaysia and Indonesia. The inability of the Indonesian government to deal with economic crisis worsened the political situation and delegitimised its credentials, whereas in Malaysia the economic crisis only had a slight impact on the country.
Civil society plays a significant role in bringing down a regime. The differing characteristics of civil society opposition in Malaysia and Indonesia also effected the different outcome. Even though civil society was flourishing in Malaysia, its presence was tainted by racial division. In addition, opposition parties such as the Democratic Action Party and Partai Islam SeMalaysia (Malaysian Islamic Party) used racial identity to appeal to the popular mass. In Indonesia, civil society emerged due to the state’s failure to articulate the interests of groups within society. The hostile attitude that the Suharto regime showed towards various groups in society did not result in a predominant ethnic group. Indeed, during his tenure, the Suharto government implemented an informal policy of Javanisation which resulted in center-periphery discontent. This policy, however, was not carried out in a way that uplifted the Javanese ethnic group at large. Rather it reflected Suharto’s personal vision for a sultanate leadership. A robust civil society that engaged in the precipitating reform movement can be seen as an outcome of social grievance that resulted from long-term repression.
The opposition movement in Indonesia, as distinctly characterised as described above, was able to bring about government change. Preceded by severe economic catastrophe, which led to elite strain, underpinned by a robust civil society, political reform in Indonesia was inevitable. On the contrary, the semi-democratic regime in Malaysia, chiefly charaterised by limited competition but the existence of opposition parties resulted in an integrated opposition and electoral process. As Aspinall suggested elections are still seen as the most appropriate way to change government (2005, 250). In addition, the lesser impact of the Malaysian economic crisis on society was not enough to threaten the regime’s credibility. Mahatir’s manoeuvre to protect the national bourgeoisie meant he did not lose elite support, rather than opt for a financial austerity that would ruin the patronage networks between business elites and his cronies.
Bibliography
Aspinall, Edward. 2005. Opposing Suharto: Compromise, Resistance, and Regime Change in Indonesia. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Case, William. 2002. Politics in Southeast Asia: Democracy or Less. London: Roudledge Curzon.
Gill, Graeme. 2000. The Dynamics of Democratization: Elites, Civil Society and Transition Process. New York: St Martin Press Inc.
In 1998 Indonesia and Malaysia struggled for democratic transition. Under the same slogan of “reformasi” (reform), popular discontent in both countries turned into calls for political change. In Indonesia, political tumult began with the 1997 Asian Economic Crisis that deeply effected socio-economic fundamentals, and led to widespread social unrest. The government’s inability to deal with the crisis weakened the regime’s credibility. The same economic crisis - albeit to a lesser extent - meanwhile affected the national economy in Malaysia. Protests escalated, however, when Deputy Prime Minister, Anwar Ibrahim, was dismissed by the Malaysian Prime Minister and leader of a Malay-based ruling party UMNO (United Malays Nation Organisation). Nevertheless, the reform movement in Malaysia waned quickly and was unable to bring down Mahatir. On the contrary, the severe economic downturn, decreased support from elites, and tension within the military, underpinned by a massive peoples’ movement enabled the reform movement in Indonesia to oust the longest-standing Indonesian president, Suharto.
This essay will answer the question: why were reformasi protests successful in bringing about a change of government in Indonesia but not in Malaysia? Firstly, I will look at the nature of the political regime in each country, before discussing the nature of their respective oppositions. I will argue that differences in their opposition movements stemmed from the nature of the political regime in Malaysia that depends on electoral contest to change the government ultimately did not succeed to bring down the government.
The Indonesian political regime prior to reformasi can be seen as authoritarian, with its survival reliant on excessive control of civil liberties, the politicisation of the military through a ‘dual function’ doctrine, and the construction of patronage networks with business people through rent-seeking relationships. Moreover, in terms of political legitimacy, the authoritarian leader, Suharto, did not allow any opposition parties to challenge his presidency. Other parties were permitted, but deep intervention from the Suharto government impeded their potential threat.
In contrast, even though the semi-democratic Malaysian regime limited civil liberties, opposition parties were permitted to compete in regularly held elections. The regime did not interfere with these opposition parties organisationally in order to weaken their power. In other words, competitiveness was not banned but was limited. Case noted that the semi-democratic regime may stabilise more readily than authoritarianism as the “national leader has forged stronger ties to elites and social constituent” (2001, 9). This impacts on its political legitimacy as the authoritarian regime depended on raw economic growth rather than electoral victory as in the semi-democratic regime (Case 2001, 9). Case’s analysis of the two regime types can be useful in analysing the different political developments in Indonesia and Malaysia during their reform periods.
A consequence of these differing regime types is a fundamental difference in the nature of their opposition movements. The emergence of an opposition can be linked to the process of modernisation, which brings about a growing urban middle-class. In the authoritarian regime, the growing middle-class plays a crucial role in ending the regime as the absence of opposition parties leaves the responsibility for political change in the hands of non-state actors. On the contrary, a semi-democratic regime allows opposition parties to exist. Limited political space, and the government’s ability to control state resources, however, prohibits them from gaining more control.
In Indonesia the middle-class did not pose a serious challenge to the Suharto regime as they mostly worked in the government bureaucracy. Business people were mostly ethnic Chinese who needed to build rent-seeking relations with government in order to enhance their businesses. Minority groups within society also came into being, most notably in the form of autonomous organisations that advocated for the various interests which the regime failed to articulate. Unlike Indonesia, where political parties were subject to forced loyalty, opposition in Malaysia came from inside and outside the state. A middle-class, of both Malay and Chinese background, grew rapidly during the economic prosperity of the 1980s. Economic privileges towards ethnic Malays through the New Economic Policy, however, gave rise to the proliferation of NGOs (non-governmental organisations) that were mostly headed by people of non-Malay background.
According to the transition theory literature, economic difficulties can lead to the beginning of regime change (Gill 2000, 10). For an authoritarian regime whose legitimacy depends on raw economic growth, its inability to deal with economic downturn can delegitimise the regime’s credentials. The reform movement in Indonesia began with the economic crisis in 1997 that led to state bankruptcy. At the elite level division was inevitable, with some Islamic modernists, coming mostly from ICMI (the Indonesian Association of Muslim Intellectuals) turnin against Suharto. They were followed by business conglomerates whose businesses were significantly affected by the economic crisis. At the mass level, economic hardship escalated social grievances into outright violence. Malaysian domestic politics was similarly affected by the economic crisis, and consequent elite strain within the government. Mahatir’s plan to grant government bail-outs to protect national business elites was challenged by Anwar Ibrahim’s recovery campaign. This tension culminated in Mahatir’s sacking of Anwar Ibrahim as Deputy Minister. The economic crisis in Malaysia did not impact dramatically on the mass level. The growing resistance from the community was likely due to the scandalous removal of Anwar Ibrahim. Criticism was directed towards Mahatir’s authoritarian leadership by equating him with Suharto, deriding the practice of KKN (corruption, collusion and nepotism) within the government, and urges to lift the restrictions on civil liberties. Here it is important to underscore the difference of the impact of the economic crisis on regime legitimacy in Malaysia and Indonesia. The inability of the Indonesian government to deal with economic crisis worsened the political situation and delegitimised its credentials, whereas in Malaysia the economic crisis only had a slight impact on the country.
Civil society plays a significant role in bringing down a regime. The differing characteristics of civil society opposition in Malaysia and Indonesia also effected the different outcome. Even though civil society was flourishing in Malaysia, its presence was tainted by racial division. In addition, opposition parties such as the Democratic Action Party and Partai Islam SeMalaysia (Malaysian Islamic Party) used racial identity to appeal to the popular mass. In Indonesia, civil society emerged due to the state’s failure to articulate the interests of groups within society. The hostile attitude that the Suharto regime showed towards various groups in society did not result in a predominant ethnic group. Indeed, during his tenure, the Suharto government implemented an informal policy of Javanisation which resulted in center-periphery discontent. This policy, however, was not carried out in a way that uplifted the Javanese ethnic group at large. Rather it reflected Suharto’s personal vision for a sultanate leadership. A robust civil society that engaged in the precipitating reform movement can be seen as an outcome of social grievance that resulted from long-term repression.
The opposition movement in Indonesia, as distinctly characterised as described above, was able to bring about government change. Preceded by severe economic catastrophe, which led to elite strain, underpinned by a robust civil society, political reform in Indonesia was inevitable. On the contrary, the semi-democratic regime in Malaysia, chiefly charaterised by limited competition but the existence of opposition parties resulted in an integrated opposition and electoral process. As Aspinall suggested elections are still seen as the most appropriate way to change government (2005, 250). In addition, the lesser impact of the Malaysian economic crisis on society was not enough to threaten the regime’s credibility. Mahatir’s manoeuvre to protect the national bourgeoisie meant he did not lose elite support, rather than opt for a financial austerity that would ruin the patronage networks between business elites and his cronies.
Bibliography
Aspinall, Edward. 2005. Opposing Suharto: Compromise, Resistance, and Regime Change in Indonesia. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Case, William. 2002. Politics in Southeast Asia: Democracy or Less. London: Roudledge Curzon.
Gill, Graeme. 2000. The Dynamics of Democratization: Elites, Civil Society and Transition Process. New York: St Martin Press Inc.
Enlightenment and Women
Enlightenment Philosophers and Equality for Women
Enlightenment philosophers raised the issue of equality between women and men, particularly in regards to access to education. Their interest in this issue emerged due to their high regard for knowledge, and criticism of superstition, bigotry, and irrationality, which they saw as hampering the maturation of human societies. This initial motivation meant that the Enlightenment philosopher’s focus remained on women’s rights to education, and did not extend to an interest in the conventional construction of gender roles. Women’s access to education was ultimately promoted by these philosophers in order to further fulfil their existing domestic responsibilities. They did not challenge the eighteenth century understanding of women, which was based primarily on natural physical differences, and extended into psychological labels of weakness and irrationality, in contrast to men.
It is pertinent to reflect on why the Enlightenment philosophers valued equality of access to education. In placing political liberalism and reason as a means to obtain greater knowledge of society and nature as central to their discourse, Enlightenment philosophers inevitably came to contemplate the role of women. Ignorance, bigotry, domination of clergy, theological dogma and superstition were predominant features of the established status quo, and resulted in social injustice, according to the Enlightenment philosophers. They argued for the emancipation of mankind (sic) through knowledge, science, and education[1]. Here the ideas of equality and education can be seen to be naturally interconnected.
Enlightenment philosophers raised the issue of equality between women and men, particularly in regards to access to education. Their interest in this issue emerged due to their high regard for knowledge, and criticism of superstition, bigotry, and irrationality, which they saw as hampering the maturation of human societies. This initial motivation meant that the Enlightenment philosopher’s focus remained on women’s rights to education, and did not extend to an interest in the conventional construction of gender roles. Women’s access to education was ultimately promoted by these philosophers in order to further fulfil their existing domestic responsibilities. They did not challenge the eighteenth century understanding of women, which was based primarily on natural physical differences, and extended into psychological labels of weakness and irrationality, in contrast to men.
It is pertinent to reflect on why the Enlightenment philosophers valued equality of access to education. In placing political liberalism and reason as a means to obtain greater knowledge of society and nature as central to their discourse, Enlightenment philosophers inevitably came to contemplate the role of women. Ignorance, bigotry, domination of clergy, theological dogma and superstition were predominant features of the established status quo, and resulted in social injustice, according to the Enlightenment philosophers. They argued for the emancipation of mankind (sic) through knowledge, science, and education[1]. Here the ideas of equality and education can be seen to be naturally interconnected.
Some fundamental contradictions emerge, however, when their concept of equality is taken further. Daniel Defoe’s article, (On) The Education Of Women clearly illustrates these contradictions. His and other Enlightenment philosophers understanding of women remains significantly influenced by the traditional view of women, which was ultimately subjugating and condescending. He says, “I cannot think that God Almighty ever made them [women] so delicate, so glorious creatures; and furnished them with such charms, so agreeable and so delightful to mankind […] to be only Stewards of our Houses, Cooks, and Slaves.”[2] Defoe does not seem to recognise the irony inherent in his own analysis. On the one hand, he advocates for a radical contextual change, and on the other he continued to maintain a fundamentally patriarchal and limited view of women, for example in his reference to them as delicate and charming creatures. Furthermore, Defoe and other Enlightenment philosophers typically outlined a type of education for women that fitted within their current domestic role. For instance, Defoe suggested that women be taught singing and painting in particularly, which can be associated with the model of desirable mother- and women-hood of that period[3]. The incongruity within this argument has resulted in various criticisms as to whether the Enlightenment philosophers were ultimately feminist or antifeminist.[4] As their understanding of women shared aspects with the conservative view, Enlightenment philosophers could be interpreted as perpetuating status quo values. It seems fairer to say, however, that these contradictions reflect the shifting values and perceptions that Enlightenment philosophers were grappling with at the time, tied up as they were with the traditions that they contested. To call philosophers of the Enlightenment period feminist or antifeminist is therefore anachronistic labelling.
The notion of women’s equal right to education was relentlessly promoted by the Enlightenment philosophers, and can be seen as a significant but limited advance in the issue of equality for women. The Enlightenment philosophers’ interest in this issue resulted from their belief in political liberalism and criticism of the existing social structures, but remained entrenched within a predominant male perspective and position of privilege. Despite these contradictions, Enlightenment philosophers did make possible the redefinition of equality in relation to gender roles in the next period.
[1] Roy Porter, The Enlightenment, Palgrave, New York, 2001, 5.
[2] Daniel Defoe, (On) The Education of Women 1719, Internet Modern History Sourcebook, http://www.fordham.edu/HALSALL/mod/1719defoe-women.html, retrieved 24 March 2006.
[3] Richard Hooker, Women: Communities, Economic and Opportunities, The European Enlightenment, http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/ENLIGHT/ENLIGHT.HTM, retrieved 25 March 2006.
[4] Blandine L. McLaughlin, ‘Diderot and Women’ in Samia I. Spencer (ed), French Women and The Age of Enlightenment, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, 1984, 269-308.
______________
Bibliography
Defoe, Daniel, (On) The Education of Women 1719, Internet Modern History Sourcebook, http://www.fordham.edu/HALSALL/mod/1719defoe-women.html, retrieved 24 March 2006.
Hooker, Richard, Women: Communities, Economic and Opportunities, The European Enlightenment, http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/ENLIGHT/ENLIGHT.HTM, retrieved 25 March 2006.
Defoe, Daniel, (On) The Education of Women 1719, Internet Modern History Sourcebook, http://www.fordham.edu/HALSALL/mod/1719defoe-women.html, retrieved 24 March 2006.
Hooker, Richard, Women: Communities, Economic and Opportunities, The European Enlightenment, http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/ENLIGHT/ENLIGHT.HTM, retrieved 25 March 2006.
McLaughlin. L, Blandine, ‘Diderot and Women’ in Samia I. Spencer (ed), French Women and The Age of Enlightenment, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, 1984, 269-308.
Roy Porter, The Enlightenment, Palgrave, New York, 2001.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
