W

span style="color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.8); font-family: Acta-Book; font-size: 17px; line-height: 24.2857px;">What will future historians make of Basuki “Ahok” Tjahaja Purnama 25 years from now? Has the Jakarta governor stopped city-wide flooding from being a fact of life? Was he a rude person, or just a straight talker? How effective was he compared to former governors Ali Sadikin and Sutiyoso? What are his legacies for Jakarta and for Indonesian nationhood?

Four years ago he was the running partner of Joko “Jokowi” Widodo, who had become the most popular choice to lead Indonesia, and so the former deputy governor with a stereotypical Chinese nickname ( taken from his Hakka given name Ban Hok ) assumed the leadership of the one of the world’s biggest cities, which happens to have the most severe traffic jams in the world.

Chinese-Indonesians both admire Ahok and worry about him. They like his iconoclastic acts, his argumentative defenses and his Christian and Chinese identity. 

They also worry that his assertive statements will inflame anti-Christian and anti-Chinese sentiments that might lead to another anti-Chinese riot.

Last year, Indonesian progressives and Governor Ahok shared the same enemies — the old elites who did not like political changes in Jakarta and Islamic thugs who claimed that Jakarta and Indonesia had been “stolen” by “the heathen Chinese”. 

Jokowi and Ahok were even considered renegades by their own parties for failing to serve their interests, which in turn convinced the people that our political system is rotten and the President and the governor are fixing it.

This year, a rift is widening within the progressives, the people who see themselves as religiously liberal and who voted for Jokowi in 2014. Recently the arrest of a city councilor and a property developer uncovered an allegation of graft surrounding the Jakarta Bay reclamation project. 

At first the news was greeted positively by the progressives, who are critical of politicians and tycoons.

But soon a virtual civil war took place. The development started late last year, when there was controversy over Ahok’s decision to evict slum residents and to move them into apartments. 

Several academics, architects and journalists believed that Ahok’s aggressive approach in getting things done should not apply to the poor — not when he is not as aggressive toward the rich.

Consider that there are two camps among Jakarta’s progressives, which could be labelled the left and the liberals. 

Their cooperation went well early this year, during the LGBT scare and during the challenge against the Belok Kiri ( Turn Left ) Festival, aimed to address ignorant rejection of all things “left”. 

The reclamation scandal and evictions from areas like Kampung Pulo and Luar Batang served as flashpoints between these two groups.

The left and the liberals have several similarities. They are religiously liberal and have no problem with Ahok’s Chinese background. 

They are active online and understand several languages. They are familiar with global news, literature and popular culture. 

They are well-educated and believe that information and education could overcome corruption and bigotry in Indonesia. They dislike the religious conservatives and the ultranationalists.

They also have several differences, highlighted well by the debates over Ahok. The liberals want a cleaner, safer and wealthier Jakarta. They support Ahok’s bid to lead Jakarta for the next six years. 

On the other hand, the leftists want a more just Jakarta, where the poor are helped, protected and educated. At first many of them argued that they supported Ahok, while later attempting constructive criticism, but recently more leftists stated that Ahok should leave in 2017 and a more humane person should lead Jakarta.

The point of the debate is about if Jakarta wants to become Singapore or not. Becoming Singapore means having a clean, safe and productive city with working public transportation, libraries and museums, sidewalks and pedestrian zones. 

Liberals are delighted with the idea, while for the leftists it is a dystopia. For them, “becoming Singapore” is the disintegration of a dynamic community. It is a capitalist dictatorship. It is a lifeless theme park that only pampers the rich. What Jakarta needs is a humane, collaborative and probably even socialist development program.

This might sound like the rift between the Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders Democrats in the United States presidential primaries, which has also gone ugly. 

Like Clinton supporters, liberal Ahok supporters believe that a strong leadership is needed, at least to fight the racists and the incarnations of evil. 

After the conservatives are kept at bay, the economy can move forward.

Meanwhile, like Sanders supporters, leftist critics of Ahok believe in social democracy and insist the system must change — better a new possibility than the same old song. 

Interestingly, there are Jakartan liberals who support Sanders, although it is very difficult for a Jakartan leftist to sympathize with Clinton. I have friends in both camps and it is painful to see them clashing, albeit indirectly ( even my US friends seem to avoid direct online spats between each other regarding Clinton versus Sanders ). 

I think my progressive friends and readers can figure out which side I’m on. I subscribe to The Economist, I dance on Singapore’s pavements and I cannot name a working Marxist society.

I really wish the progressive civil war would pass soon, as we are still facing the same enemies — the religious conservatives and the old elites interested in preserving patron politics. The former is very dangerous for Indonesia’s future while the latter keeps our nation stuck in the 20th century. 

It seems, however, that the civil war will continue, probably all the way to the 2017 gubernatorial election. Of course I agree that Ahok is not a liberal — he is not like Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. 

I still believe, however, that he is the best person to govern Jakarta, now and throughout this decade. I completely understand the viewpoints of my liberal and my leftist friends and I have picked a side.