Culture and Privilege in Capitalist Asia - Jurusan Antropologi ...

202 CULTURAL TENSIONS IN RURAL INDONESIA
Thus, unlike their fellow urbanites, the rural OKB cannot display their wealth in
shopping centres and movies without some sense of discomfort or anxiety. In one
sense, there is not much geophysical difference between Java in the 1950s and
today, only better houses and better roads. The human geography of the
countryside is basically the same; villages have only become more cramped and
intense. This lack of space and privacy puts limitations on how the new rich can
consume their goods. There is a paradox here: if the OKB want to consume
without arousing comment, they must leave the village, and then nobody takes any
notice of their wealth! It should also be remembered that we are not talking about
the traditional elite who hold a secure social position within the rural community
and who, to some extent, are accepted and expected to practise a rich pattern of
consumption. It is rather the mixture of class travel and modernity that people
have difficulty accepting.
We need here to say something about the social and moral ties between the new
rich and the non-OKB. How embedded are the OKB in the village social fabric?
From the evidence provided so far, one could conclude that the new rich in
Sariendah are spearheading a new development towards what summarily could be
called modernity, and that they are under heavy fire for disregarding age-old village
norms. Both of these images are valid. The OKB are isolated in the village, but
they are also a part of its social fabric, mau tidak mau, as one would say in
Indonesia, ‘whether they wish it or not’. One could thus argue that the OKB are
isolated because they are a part of the community. It is never the case that people
do not care about what the OKB are doing; neighbours are watched very carefully,
especially those who do not conform.
This reveals a number of tensions built into the ideological construction of the
new rich, tensions which I believe have always been there, but which, for political
reasons, have become more obvious in recent years. The primary field of tension
is between privacy and wealth, on the one hand, and loyalty to the community and
affinity, on the other; between the ‘individualism’ of the new rich and the
‘community spirit’ of the subaltern. The struggle is about ideology and resources:
what largesse the new rich should contribute to the community, when and how
people can demonstrate their wealth, whether to conserve or reform the
community spirit; how, in the end, communities are to be organised. As actors in this
struggle, new rich households are very much a part of the village community.
It has been argued that communitarianism and individualism in Java are located
in two different spheres: those of ritual and production, respectively (Schweitzer
1989; Hefner 1990). I would add that this distinction is not only about different
spheres, but also about class and ideology. Different villagers, depending on
economic position, social background and political aspirations, emphasise one set
of values over another. For instance, while some members of the new rich
maintain that their new wealth is necessary for Indonesia to become modern,
others say that it will spoil village life and people will end up like in Bandung and
Jakarta, not knowing their neighbours. Many villagers are also disappointed with
those members of the village elite whose children have been educated in