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

sharp contrast to the culture of the state and the official. A growing middle
class based on educational qualification and expertise confronts old
networks of patronage and loyalty.
(Robison and Goodman 1996:8—9)
In important ways these people are still discovering their place in a transformed
Southeast Asia. Among the locales where they find appropriate ways of declaring
their success are urban shopping malls and housing estates. Not only are
Javanese, Malay and Thai business people now active in the economy; values
have shifted so that material possessions and wealth are now seen as legitimate
sources of power, and are valued at least as much as the prestige of office (McVey
1992:18—20).
To the extent that this is true, then, the new patterns of consumption and public
display we will examine here are an important unifying force among the elites in
the region and within the individual countries under discussion. However, we have
yet to address the second of the common traits found among the wealthy of
Southeast Asia mentioned above. That is the equally widespread association of
this new wealth with ‘Chineseness’. The widespread resentments that this can create
(especially in Indonesia) oblige us to address this question first of all. Are the
principal unifying characteristics of these new elites to be found in their ethnicity,
rendering issues of consumption of secondary importance?
ETHNIC IDENTIFICATION OF THE NEW RICH?
KEN YOUNG 61
These confident new capitalists and middle-class professionals, particularly Thais,
Malays and pribumi Indonesians, may be the type of new rich individual that
political leaders in the region would like to encourage as part of their vision for
modern, industrialised, Asian nations. But are their fellow citizens comfortable with
this ideal type? Are the middle classes in general dedicated to this and related
ideas, especially middle-class intellectuals? And what of the ethnic Chinese, be they
citizens of Southeast Asian nations, born and raised there, or more recent
immigrants? What is their place in these vibrant emerging industrial societies? If
we are talking of Southeast Asia’s new rich, are not the Chinese, more than any
other group, the constant between these otherwise rather different societies? Do
they not in some senses transcend local political and cultural boundaries to
constitute a common thread in this success story?
On the other hand, apart from the case of Singapore, the ethnic Chinese do not
control the governments of Southeast Asian countries. Indeed, part of the record
of the success of ethnic Chinese bourgeoisies in amassing wealth in Southeast Asia
has been their skill at achieving an accommodation with governments. This has
yielded them significant opportunities to make profits, but they cannot command
those governments. Indeed, much of the resentment directed at the Chinese as a
group in Indonesia, and elsewhere, has been because of the blatant rent-seeking
deals done between key politico-bureaucrats and a handful of favoured ethnic