T

his is a comment on an article titled '€œTAOK: A puncture in the hegemony,'€ by Max Lane, The Jakarta Post, March 12.

The author of this article is a self-radicalized (in his own words) well-known academic who is in pursuit of reliving the past but, more dangerously, attempts to stimulate the debate of the new socialists, aka communists, that are emerging from the shadows.

The new Indonesian extreme left is in alignment with new political actors running for presidential offices, focusing on building the infrastructure to reenter the 2019 political landscape and, underneath the rhetoric and academia arguing the historical relevance, the author is pushing for new forms of socialism to be adopted in Indonesia. This is a dangerous path.

Signs of militants in the ranks of the new communists in Indonesia are visible and, whereas this is perceived as part of some sort of glorious struggle, we should condemn the violence that the new left in Indonesia is pursuing. Civil society oddly enough is however keeping mum about the new jihad seeking revolutionary indoctrinations of making us believe that communism was a good thing. Trust the history books, it wasn'€™t.

The author also raises the more important question that, since Indonesian policy officials can hardly deal with radical Islam, are we are equipped for or do we comprehend the true face of the new communists? Is it about time that the current and future administration makes a policy stance against the new Marxists?

The Indonesian penal code is actually very clear on the subject and deems Marxism a danger to Indonesian society. This was based not on some Soeharto-era illusion but on a deep understanding of what Marxist ideology and the extreme left represent to Indonesians. We should be a lot more critical of the voices that attach themselves to the subject of communism and strive to mobilize the Indonesian public on a new agenda.

In fact, since the narrative presented by this academic was placed in the historical context of communism, we need to recognize that communism was deemed by the '€œSoviet people'€ as irrelevant in 1991 yet toppled the repressive dictatorship in the fall of that year.

Not only was the regime toppled but the fallacy of socialism was revealed, and in the historical context the neo-communist/socialists should recognize the indisputable fact that socialism has failed at every turn along the way. Socialism is a failure as a political force, as a social system and, for certain, was a disaster as an economic system. Indonesians should be aware of false prophets and of the glorification of what is being pushed by the new left.

We may think that the debate about the 1965 period is based on Indonesian history and soul-searching to settle injustices but in reality it is a fad that has appeared, which attempts to bring the communist agenda out of the attic and back to the political landscape in Indonesia.

Shasi S
Jakarta