Writing Indonesian Popular Histories: Labour Strikes, Past and Present

Lecture by Ratna Saptari

20 April 2005, 3:30-5:00 pm, Boardroom (138), KITLV, Reuvensplaats 2, Leiden

Abstract
Scholars on social movements and popular protest have looked at strikes as events to understand the working of power relations and workers ' consciousness at a given moment in time. The aim of this talk is two-fold. The first is to compare strikes in two different time periods in Indonesian history, namely the early 1920s and the late 1990s to early 2000. Although temporary in nature both periods refer to a relatively liberal climate of state control. The railway, pawnshop and harbour strikes of Central Java in the early 1920s will be compared with among others, the Mayora strike (1998) in West Java and Gudang Garam strikes (2001, 2002) in East Java. The strikes in both these time frames have brought much media and government attention and resulted in a shift of existing power relations. At the same time it has led to a readjustment and reaffirmation of state and company control. A comparison of the two allows us to look at the possibilities and limitations of collective action in different time periods. However as with other event-based analyses, a focus on the main political actors in situations of friction and conflict precludes an awareness of the social supports (and tensions) underpinning such events. To a large extent this concentration on the unfolding and wrapping up of strikes is a result of the paucity of sources. The historian can only examine official reports and workers bulletins or written narratives (if any) on these events. On the other hand, to a certain extent this is also a result of the historians blind spot. The reproduction of strikes has often not been considered relevant to the production of such strikes. How have these strikes been sustained? In the absence or scarcity of strike funds, workers have to continue to survive when wages are withheld. How has this been organized? What are the sacrifices that other members of family and community have to make to maintain a strike? Also, what are the perceptions of those not involved in the strike: how can solidarity be maintained and how are they undermined?

This brings us to the second aim of the talk. What are the proper methodologies in reading and analyzing strikes. How can we look at dimensions that the historical sources cannot offer? The focus on the 1990s will not only allow us to examine various dimensions which may not be possible for the 1920s, it will also help us to read the available sources more critically. When most scholars question how we can use the past to understand the present, this talk will also question how we can use the present to understand the past.