Talk:Indonesia/archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

About Islam in Indonesia

the demographics section states: "Importantly, all Indonesians are required to choose an approved religion. As a result, many Indonesian "Muslims," especially, are actually nonpracticing Muslims of the "I was raised Muslim" variety, animists (a fact that the government strenuously denies), or entirely secular." I have never visited Indonesia, but as an Arab (Tunisian)living in Japan, I have noticed that all Indonesians muslims I know are much better practionners of Islam than Arabs and Berbers(or at least north africans). All Indonesian muslims I know pary five times a day, respect the hallal meat rules, do not drink alcohol under any circumstances and all women were the headscarf. This is not the case in North Africa were Islam has been around a much longer time, and where many people drink alcohol and and a minority of women wear the headscarf. So the above statment "....many Indonesian "Muslims," especially, are actually nonpracticing Muslims of the "I was raised Muslim" variety..." strikes me as very strange. Can someone inlighten me?

There are several issues at work here. One is the pre-Dutch colonial legacy of the feudal kingdoms of Indonesia, which were based in part on the Hindu caste system. When Muslim Arabs and Indians set up trading posts for the lucrative spice trade, the feudal aristocracy would often convert to Islam in order to get in better with the Muslim traders. Whether or not such conversion on the part of these aristocrats was heartfelt or not, the caste system to a certain degree demanded that the lower castes follow the aristocratic caste's lead and became nominal Muslims, and underwent Islamic rituals (profession of faith, etc.). In areas where the conversion was not "deep" however, many Indonesians were nominal Muslims while also observing old Hindu (and even older animist) rituals. The contradiction between saying the Shahada, while making a sacrifice to an idol during the harvest, was not very apparent.
This is not to say, however, that there were not pockets of particularly profound and deep Muslims in Indonesia. Aceh, the northern tip of Sumatra, is especially known for its orthodox and devout practice of Islam (indeed, partly why the separatist movement there wanted sharia law). The Moluccas are another such case, and this is partly why Muslims have resent the Christians among them.
I would say that the type and kind of faith and devotion and practice of Islam traditionally depends on one's location within Indonesia. Aceh and the Moluccas are traditionally fervent, in my opinion, because these were the areas where Arab and Indian Muslims settled down, set up trading posts, and because they are ports traditionally associated with the ships that went to Arabia and India both for purposes of trade as well as the hajj pilgrimage.
A more modern consideration in Indonesia has been that since the end of the Suhartoist Golkar Party's rule over the country, the Islamic fraternal groups have had a much greater say in the country's political scene. It has lead, in recent years, to some hardening of Muslim attitudes toward the sanctity of Islam and on the Islamic character of the Indonesian state (though attempts to approve even limited sharia law measures in the Constitution, which would apply to those whose ID cards indicate them as Muslim, have been rebuffed). Nevertheless, cultural expressions of Islamic-ness are more abundant than ever before which probably accounts for your encounter with teetotaling Muslims in headscarves.
Also, when comparing Indonesians to Arabs, it's important that it not be forgotten that European trade and colonialism had a deep impact on the Maghreb (North Africa) and Levant. Tunisia, Morocco, and Lebanon have quite a reputation among other Arab nations for excess -- I'd say, because of the legacy of French libertinism. --Daniel 06:09, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
My experience, (20 years ago, but still relevant) from living in the houses of 5 moslem families in Central Java over a twelve month period, was that while none drank alcohol or consumed pork and all participated to some extent in Ramadan, only one family prayed five times during the day. Certainly, they were all affluent and fairly westernised, but I would say that they were fairly typical of the middle classes. --Peacenik 02:46, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
With reference to Daniel's comments about Maluku, the 'fervent' moslems are generally from north Maluku (the sultanates of Ternate and Tidore), while South Maluku (Ambon, Banda) is more dominantly Christian, although both areas of the Maluku are actually very mixed in terms of the number of adherents of each religion, and this has been, as far as I'm aware, the situation for many centuries. The recent rise in tension between the religions in the area is largely due to moslem transmigration from Western Indonesia - mainly Java and Sumatera. The far south of Maluku, as well as the island of Seram, still have quite strong animist traditions.--Sepa 22:33, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
You say you've never been to Indonesia. So who are the Indonesians you met? If you met them in Arabia or thereabouts, th4ere's the possibility that they travelled there for religious reasons, which of course would make them the more devout type. Or maybe they figured they'd better abide to the rules while in Arabia. DirkvdM 07:05, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
Moslem lifestyle in indonesia is moderate than the other moslem country ( nation with most moslem population ) such as saudi arabia. for example women in indonesia can have the driving license while not in saudi arabia. i'm a moslem in indonesia.
Alcohol beverage and pork meat is hard to find in every market in Indonesia so most Indonesian (including non-muslim) not consume it. In a very rare case alcohol drinker is usually assosciated with outlaw or even drug user! But not about five time pray there is a significant number of people who didn't take this. Hijab or jilbab user is minority, but increasing in number.Aditthegrat 09:41, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I lived in the country for seven years. The person who wrote the section most likely visited Central Java, where Islam is indeed more of a nominal thing in many areas. There are also areas like Madura where Islam is practiced in very traditional ways. Several large Islamic universites exist throughout the nation.

what is the indonesian of good evening

Selamat malam --*drew 06:15, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Depending on context it could also be selamat sore. Sore tends to describe mid afternoon to early evening. --Peacenik 23:38, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
Neither "selamat malam" nor "selamat sore" has the connotation of "good night" in English, which is used usually only in parting. Both can be used as a greeting or in parting. Julius.kusuma 16:49, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
Perhaps selamat tidur would be closer in usage, if not in literal meaning. --Peacenik 03:36, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
The literal meaning of 'selamat tidur' being 'sleep well', or, more literally, 'sleep greetings'. DirkvdM 07:51, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
Another Indonesian phrase of 'good evening' is selamat petang. For parting, one can also say sampai jumpa ('see you'). *drew 08:01, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
Even though petang and sore have the same meaning, selamat petang is seldomly used in Indonesia. It is more commonly used in Malaysia and Brunei. While selamat sore is more common in Indonesia rather than selamat petang.
Selamat petang is used almost exclusively on the 6pm news broadcasts.

Petang is commonly assossiated with the time during sunset, around 6pm or something....

can someone confirm/add that arabic is not spoken?

Hi, I see no mention of the people of Indonesia speaking Arabic. Since most Muslims do speak Arabic, and Indonesia has hundreds of millions of Muslims, this strikes me as noteworthy. ...but I'm no Indonesia expert. Can someone else add this to the article or correct me? Thanks. Gronky 17:22, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, first of all, the Arabic that is spoken/recited in the Quran and the living everyday Arabic are quite different - if I recall correctly, my Palestinian friend said the difference is between the English of King James and modern American English. Indonesian Muslims may overwhelmingly know the former, but not the latter. I am sure there are Indonesians who speak modern Arabic (due to the fact that so many end up doing migrant work in richer Arab states, such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, etc.), but not to the point where it becomes their first language when they come back to Indonesia. --Daniel 18:12, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
I have to read between the lines a bit for the answer to my question, but you seem to concur that the ability to speak or read Arabic (in any of it's forms) is not widespread in Indonesia. I'll add this information to the article (and I'll try to also mention your information about some Indonesians learning Arabic for, or due to, working in richer arab states). I'll wait a little while before adding this, just in case someone else wants to clarify or add anything (or in case someone with more Indonesia knowledge wants to add this themself). Gronky 20:00, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
Many Indonesian Muslims did take Qur'an reading lessons (called "Pengajian" in Indonesian) when they are younger, but I don't know the percentage, and to what level of proficiency. However, I can confirm that very few Indonesians speak Arabic, Quran-ic or modern. Many Arabic expressions have found its way into spoken Indonesian, and everybody knows what "Assala mualaikum" and "Insya Allah" mean. But this is neither sufficient or indicative to saying that most people can hold a conversation in Arabic. So I would estimate that at best, some Indonesians can *read* the Quran realiably. Unfortunately I cannot give any reasonable estimate of the percentages. Indeed, this is an important fact that is often overlooked. I guess one can compare this to the proficiency of old Latin in Europe in the old days. Sure, the priests and ruling and intellectual elites have some command of it, and it is considered to be "good education", but most people have little to no command of latin, despite perhaps having been forced to learn it as a child ;-). Perhaps if somebody can provide actual numbers this should be mentioned in Islam in Indonesia. Disclaimer: I grew up in Indonesia, but I am not Muslim and I have not lived there for a long, long time, hence the above is at best my personal, and perhaps slightly biased, estimate. Julius.kusuma 21:17, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
"Most Muslims speak Arabic" only in the Middle East, which is a long way from Indonesia. Just as Hebrew and Greek - original Christian Biblical languages - aren't spoken by the vast majority of Christians, it shouldn't be surprising that many, many Muslims, especially Muslims who aren't Arabs, don't speak Arabic. It's a fair suggestion, but I don't think it's noteworthy that Arabic is not much spoken in Indonesia. CDC (talk) 20:50, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Most Indonesian Muslim are taught to read Qur'an, so IMHO most of them could only read arabic script(as I am).Aditthegrat 09:24, 26 February 2006 (UTC)


Depend on how you define arabic speaking. Although most of us (Indonesian) cannot speak arabic, our language, Bahasa Indonesia was developed from Melayu or Malay and the latter was heavily influenced by Arabic. Hence, we can understand some arabic words although we cannot understand the sentence. Kunderemp 03:49, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Source for population figure?

Is there a source for the population figure? Singkong2005 03:25, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

The source is from this article in Wikipedia, according to July 2005 estimate figure by CIA World Factbook. *drew 04:21, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

It is hugely questionable that the population can be 206 million in 2000, and then 240 million in 2005, implying over 3% annual growth. Since the 206 million is a census figure, I presume the actual population of Indonesia to be closer to 225 million, even assuming an undercount in the Census 2000. You have to take into account East Timor's seccession and the Dec 2004 tsunami and its after effects. I think CIA World Factbook is overestimating Indonesia's population, and generally not too reliable source of population estimates, certainly not better than the UN population bureau, but seems to be the most cited source on the net.

Agreed. But lot of Indonesian have at least three children. It still common in nowadays. The population in East Timor was very small compare to Indonesia. The Dec2004 Tsunami, althought it have great effect to Aceh, the population number affected by the Tsunami was very small compare to Indonesia. And most of the population was in Java Island. Kunderemp 03:53, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Indonesian Losses in WW2

Can anyone provide authoritative information on Indonesian civilian losses in WW2 1941-45?--Berndd11222 23:37, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Indonesia was not part of war of WW2. It was an invasion by Japan and the Dutch surrendered fastly. There were civillian loses from Indonesian, but it wasn't WW2. Instead, it was forced labour (Romusha) such as what happened in Gua Jepang, West Sumatra. There were sparse war in Japanese Era but they're not part of WW2. Instead, they were war against Japanese to freed Indonesian (and no relation with Dutch or any European war). Even if that what you think, we didn't have a good record of population at the time, unlike Europe. Kunderemp 03:33, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Indos in Indonesia

Somebody recently added the following:

The formerly large, influential Eurasian community (locally known as Indos) has largely left the country for the Netherlands, California and Australia, although a few still remain in Indonesia and are highly esteemed models and soap opera stars.

This sentence needs a re-work. I don't think that it is true at all today that the Indos are influential beyond what the size of their population may suggest. In the colonial times, many worked as intermediaries, but as far as I know most moved in the 1950s when the Dutch companies/plantations were nationalized. The last sentence is also somewhat misleading. It's not as if a large percentage of the Indos are models and soap opera stars. Can somebody confirm this, please? Julius.kusuma 13:49, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

The term "Indos" is considered offensive by some Indonesians.
You are correct, Julius. Most of the "Eurasian" moved after 1950. They know Indonesia because Indonesian-Dutch War 1945-1949 such as Princen who was former member of KNIL Kunderemp 02:17, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

denial on suhartos crimes against the indonesian people

Civil War

For more details on this topic, see Indonesian Civil War

By late 1965, the Indonesian Army had fragmented into left-wing and right-wing camps.

The former were allied with the Communist Party of Indonesia (PKI), which also controlled many of the mass civic and cultural organizations that Sukarno had established to mobilize support for his regime.

(is this a fact? sounds strange compared to other sources )

The PKI was in control of the "Fifth Column", an armed organization which members were recruited from farmers and laborers. The presidential guard was heavily persecuted after Suharto's KOSTRAD troops took control of Jakarta. Moreover, the commander of the Indonesian air force at the time was later imprisoned or executed as an alleged member of the alleged communist plot. Which other sources are you referring to? Regardless, these show that the Indonesian armed forces at the time was split into various political cliques which opposed each other. All of these are mentioned in most textbooks of Indonesian history. Julius.kusuma 15:37, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

The latter were courted from abroad by the United States, which trained a number of Army officers and which formed a number of think-tanks. After gaining Sukarno's acquiescence, the PKI began to arm groups of peasants in order to combat the growing power of right-wing military commands in the countryside. Army leaders objected to this campaign.

On September 30, 1965 six senior generals within the military and several other officers were murdered by palace guards, alleged to be loyal to the PKI. The guards claimed they were attempting to stop an attempt by the generals to assassinate President Sukarno. After panic spread throughout Indonesia about a communist coup attempt, Major General Suharto, the commander of the Army Strategic Reserve (Kostrad), organized an offensive

--(offensive? this "offensive" was not a coup? )

Whether it is an "offensive" or a "coup d'etat" is still a debated position inside and outside Indonesia even today. I don't think labeling it an "offensive" is misleading, however. Suharto's ride to power took a long time to complete, and this one particular event did not singularly lead to his eventual takeover. Julius.kusuma 15:37, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

under the justification of crushing this alleged rebellion. The army is believed killed tens of thousands of alleged communists in rural areas. The number of those murdered by 1966 was at least 500,000. The violence was especially brutal in Java and Bali.

Seeing the nationalist Sukarno as a threat to their interests, the West was keen to exploit the situation to its advantage.

--( "the west"? UK and US were the only ones at the central planning meetings before and after)

If this is true, then please provide some sort of reference and make the correction. Julius.kusuma 15:37, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Suharto's portrayal of events as 'communist carnage' was the official version promoted in the West.

--( and it was not? the entire article presupposes that this is correct and now you provide a disclaimer and a qualifier? if the above was true, then why? and why did you not provide the reasons for this qualifier? in the rest and beginning of the article were the alleged communist charges are raised?

Who's "you" whom are you addressing here? This is an open-source online dictionary, and as you can see from the history page for this article, many people have contributed to its present state. Are you asking whether the portrayal of the events as a 'communist carnage' was true or not? It was, and it is easy to look up news clippings from that era. In fact, this is/was the official version taught in Indonesia. Julius.kusuma 15:37, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Christopher Koch's popular novel The Year of Living Dangerously later helped cement this view. Yet a large body of evidence has since emerged that the killings were encouraged by the US and UK governments.

According to a CIA memo, Prime Minister Harold Macmillan and President John F. Kennedy had agreed to "liquidate President Sukarno, depending on the situation and available opportunities". In 1990 the American journalist Kathy Kadane revealed the extent of the secret American support of some of the massacres of 1965-66 that allowed Suharto to seize the Presidency. She interviewed many former US officials and CIA members, who spoke of compiled lists of PKI operatives, which the Americans ticked off as the victims were killed or captured. They worked closely with the British who were keen to protect their interests in Malaysia. Sir Andrew Gilchrist cabled the Foreign Office in London saying: "…a little shooting in Indonesia would be an essential preliminary to effective change". The PKI had won some popular support from the poor, it was this popularity, rather than any armed insurgency that alarmed the American government. Like Vietnam in the North, Indonesia might 'go communist'.

CIA was lying! They just used the doom of Sukarno as their campaign for Vietnam War. They didn't have any contribution to the fall of Sukarno.
If you're a communist supporter, you have to remember this fact
  • why Tan Malaka regreted the Indonesia Communist Party 1926
  • why Mohammad Hatta and Sutan Sjahrir left Perhimpunan Indonesia after the communist influence in the organization
  • what's happened in Madiun 1948?
  • what do most of Indonesia think about communist?
Read Soe Hok Gie's writing about his struggle. He was anti-communist but he was fair. He against the Orde Baru injustice to Communist Party-member. And read his article about Bali Massacre and you'll find the one who did the massacre was the Communist Party itself in order to clean his name out of "communist".
Read his article about his journey to America and how he suprised to be accused as helping CIA by thrown Sukarno out of his throne. Because CIA made a claim and as far as he know, there was no such a thing as "CIA contribution". It was he, as one of student, who ask help from millitary, not CIA.
Find any testimonial from anyone who was not communist, who live in East Java in 1960s (my mother and my father was one of them). You'll find it was people who kill the communist, not millitary. It was caused by their hatred to the arrogance of Indonesia Communist Party. Attributing massacre to Orde Baru only is insulting this people, this "setan desa", this "kyai" which propagate "opiate of the mass".
You may believe conspiracy theory how Suharto rose to his throne (i.e Supersemar conspiracy, G-30-S conspiracy), but you only ridicule yourself if you think Indonesia Communist Party was doomed because some few millitary conspiracy. Kunderemp 03:26, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Throughout the 1965-66 period, President Sukarno attempted to restore his political position and shift the country back to its pre-October 1965 position. Although he remained president, in March 1966, Sukarno had to transfer key political and military powers to General Suharto,

--( "had to" ... isn't "was forced to" the term one usually would employ on coup d'etats? why rosy up the picture in any way such as this??

Because whether it is a "transfer of power" or a "coup d'etat" is still a debated position inside and outside Indonesia even today. Julius.kusuma 15:37, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

who by that time had become head of the armed forces. In March 1967, the Provisional People's Consultative Assembly (MPRS) named General Suharto acting president

-- realy interesting: who were in that assembly and how were they elected???

This is covered in most textbooks of Indonesian history, but since I do not recall the exact composition I can't answer this directly. Julius.kusuma 15:37, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
    • First of all, welcome to Wikipedia! I hope that you will stay and contribute to the Wikipedia efforts. Second of all, Wikipedia is an open-source *dictionary*, and therefore the articles should be written in the style of a dictionary, and from a neutral point of view. If you believe that certain facts are omitted, then you are welcome to add them to the articles, but you should do so with proper citation. In my view, articles such as Suharto, Sukarno and other related, political articles should use careful wording to distinguish between proven fact, accepted popular belief, and conjectures. So if you feel strongly about the topics of any of these articles, please stay and contribute, but please also do so in a way that benefits the audience. If you do plan to stay around, please consider registering as a user. Thanks. Julius.kusuma 15:37, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Corby

Why is Corby not mentioned anywhere in this article? Highly POV to omit her reference.

Who is Corby? Julius.kusuma 13:46, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Why is Schapelle Corby not mentioned anywhere in this article? Because she's not Indonesian, she's not of any importance to Indonesia, and even in her own country she's only a pseudo-celebrity T&A show (on par with Paris Hilton for Americans).

It's not NPOV to insert text on her case; it's just more of the same old Australian-biased (and racist) POV. --Daniel 15:17, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Indonesia has a pretty questionable judicial system. You present omission of that, both here and ont he politics page, is highly POV. Corby is much of why the rest of the world knows about it. I respect that you may have had people adding whole sections on her in the past, and that is biased, but she does need to be mentioned here. Supression of information, as your doing in this case, is almost always POV. Fine, keep it to a minimum, point them at the Corby page with one off hand comment in a short section on the judicial system, but to have not even one link to the Corby page is POV. JeffBurdges 21:04, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

I would bet you a mint and say that most of the world neither know of nor care about Schapelle Corby; and even if most people in the world knew Indonesia through the Corby case (which they don't - most people in the world know Indonesia because of the bombings and tsunami these days) that says not one thing about why it should be included in a page attempting to encapsulate the information on one of the world's largest and most populous nations - other than that we should pander to the worst in people.

Or in other words: Just because most people in the world know Australia from the Mad Max series of films does not mean that anyone should put extensive information about the character, the films, or Mel Gibson into the Australia article.

As for the questionable Indonesian judicial system, the system is indeed questionable, but there are vastly better cases of that with which to indict the system. That you overlook the sheer magnitude of the corruption and human rights abuses under Suharto (which is clearly brought up in Indonesia, History of Indonesia and other articles) shows your own hypocrisy: apparently, the killing of 500,000 to 1 million Indonesians doesn't count as a knock against Indonesia's judicial system as much as some pretty white Australian going to jail.

At any rate, you seem to be nothing but a whining troll who expects others to do your editing for you. Nobody here is "suppressing information" other than you yourself, since you've never even bothered writing in your own suggestions. --Daniel 01:45, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Given the flaws in our own judicial and legal systems, and our own appalling human rights record, I think it inappropriate for Australians to be pontificating on the legal systems of our neighbours. Despite appearances, Indonesia has made tremendous progress recently, something the Australian media have omitted (POV anyone?)

Corby would be as relevant on this page as illegal/detained Indonesian fishermen would be on the Australian page. I'm sure there is a wikipage for 'our Schapelle' already.Theinnerexits 10:59, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

This is a hilarious suggestion - Corby has no importance to Indonesia. It may be significant though to Australia's perception of Indonesia, as is say Paul Hogan is to American's perseption of Australia. I am an Australian, and Australia's belief in Schapelle Corby was always exagerated. Those polls that showed her support at 90% of Australia's populaton were conducted in the crappy tabloid press published for and read and believed by morons (ie. crappy newspapers and sensationalist TV shows). Even at the height of credibility (it has now seriously dropped) respectable polls put it only as high as 50%. I like the suggestion above that although Indonesia's judicial system has problems (but improving) Corby's case is a poor example of this. The fact is, her chances of being let off in Australia on a similar charge with similar evidence would have been only marginally better. The point of all this is that Wikipedia Indonesia is just FINE without mention of her. Merbabu 12:50, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

History

The wiki says,The arrival of Arab traders from Gujarat, India, later brought Islam. I think this needs to be rephrased. Arabs traded with Gujarat, Kochin and Indonesia for spices. In fact, they brought Islam to all three places along with them (Gujarat was also conquered by Arab/Persian/Turk/Mongol). So the Arab did come to Indonesia, but not from Gujarat. It was just a stopover for them.

Chirags 18:19, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I've removed the specifics about Gujarat - how do things look now? Another well-phrased sentence about the coming of Islam might be good here; it's a pretty important part of Indonesian history. CDC (talk) 01:02, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Don't! There are controversies how Islam came to Indonesia. Gujarat was still a possibility since Islam come to Indonesia using sufism which was highly unlikely did by Arab. Hence, the supporter of this theory prefer Gujarat due a lot of influence of Hinduism, Persians, and Sufism Kunderemp 03:00, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
I lived in Indonesia for 7 years. People often spoke of the "Wali Songo" or "Five Prophets" who brought Islam (to the northern coast of Java specifically, and to the nation more generally). Perhaps it's worth looking for info on that.
Songo in Javanese means "Nine". "Wali Songo" means "Nine Wali". I can't find the correct English word to translate "Wali" but surely it is not "Prophet" which is "Nabi" in our language. Wali Songo only brought Islam to Javanese, not Indonesia. Although in some story they were representations of "Shariah", some stories of their private live represent Sufism influence.Kunderemp 02:29, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Why does Indonesia have such a high number of population?

I am taking an Asian study about China. We were talking about the history of how the population of China grew so fast. There were several reason of why that could happen. I am wondering why Indonesia has such a high number of population? As long as I could remember, I have never been told what the reasons are. If someone know what the reasons are, please tell me. Thanks a lot.

simple. Because in one family, at least there are three children. My fathers was the second of nine. My mother was the first of three. While I only have one sister, most of my friends have two or three sister or brothers. In the past, having nine or even fourteen children was common phenomenon. And althought there were two-child-policies from government, the government cannot enforce the policy to Indonesian. The policies is just a recommendation and mostly violated by Indonesian. Kunderemp 02:56, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

And the reason why they have so many children was because many Indonesian lives from agriculture, and the more children they got, the more help on the field there is. And there's this belief that says more children means more luck

Indonesia Freedom was not a gift from Japan

"in July 1942, Sukarno arrived in Jakarta. Sukarno and his colleagues collaborated with the Japanese occupiers. In 1945, with the war drawing to a close, Sukarno was made aware of an opportunity to declare independence. In response to lobbying, Japan agreed to allow Sukarno to establish a committee to plan for independence. Sukarno and Mohammad Hatta declared independence on 17 August."

These sentences is misleading. People will think, the Japan gave freedom to Indonesia, which they didn't. That was the Allies thinking which made Hatta and Sjahrir wrote Maklumat no. X to formed political parties to prove Indonesia was not formed by Japan, instead it declared by itself and ready to proceed as democratic country.

It was correct, Japan allow Sukarno, Hatta, and friends (Indonesia was not belong to Sukarno only!!!) to establish a committee to plan for Indonesia Independence. However, some of Indonesian felt discomfort and urged Sukarno to renamed the commitee (from BPUPKI to PPKI). And when Japan lose the war, they didn't immediately free Indonesia. Instead, they were waiting for the coming of Allies (British, Dutch) to give Indonesia back to Netherland. Sjahrir and the youngster (remember Rengasdengklok kidnapping?) forced Sukarno and Hatta declared the Independence immediately which eventually happened in August 17. Kunderemp 04:05, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I have changed them to "However, Sukarno and Mohammad Hatta declared independence unilaterally on 17 August soon after Japanese lose the war." Kunderemp 04:13, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Provinces of Indonesia

Most of western encyclopedia currently regard that Indonesia has 2 special territories and 1 special capital region. What abot Papua? In fact, Papua is formally just called province, but it has special status than other provinces. So I change the sentence into: Currently, Indonesia has 33 provinces (of those, 3 are have special status and 1 special capital region). BTW, Aceh hasn't been called daerah istimewa anymore. wic2020talk 06:48, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


"Indonesian" not "Bahasa Indonesia"

This is an English-language article, thus the official language of Indonesia should be referred to by its English name, ie "Indonesian". I have removed the references to "Bahasa Indonesia" being the national language (although i have noted in the article that this is indeed the language's name in Indonesian). THe Engish-language wikipedia articles on Germany does not refer to the national language as "Deutsch" rather it uses he English, "German". Same goes for articles on France, Denmark, Spain, etc. (the word "bahasa" actually means language - add the Indonesian name of a country/region after it and you have that language's name. Ie, Bahasa Jerman is German, Bahasa Inggris is English, Bahasa Indonesia is Indonesian, Bahasa Bali is Balinese, Bahasa Jepang is Japanese, and so on) --Merbabu 08:48, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

"Restoration" of Democracy

"Democracy was restored following the revolution of 1998."

Is "restored" the most accurate word to use? Was there any free nationwide election in Indonesia prior to 1998? If not, would "restored" still be the standard term?

Michael 06:40, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I think so. There were free nationwide elections in Indonesia prior to 1998. We were free to choose which party we like (unless you're Government official) however there were only three party was allowed to be in election. After 1998, every party can join election. (note, in 1955, we also have free nationwide election).Kunderemp 02:44, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

"Indonesians are required to declare themselves as one of these official religions"

This is a quote from the currant article. My question is: what are these official religions?--Greasysteve13 08:30, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Islam, Protestant (Kristen in Indonesian), Catholicism (Katolik), Buddhism and Hinduism. Yes, protestant and catholic are considered separate religions - at least officially, and not just separate denominations. The joke is that Indonesian has freedom of religion as long as your choice is on that list. Ie, no Judaism or atheism or animist. Although of course animism is still practised to some extent and is often quite happily mixed up with the other religions. Also, it should be noted that Indonesia has its own spin on the religions - usually more relaxed (but still very important). Ie, most Muslims don't worship like those in the MIddle East particularly those from rural areas - those in the cities tend to be more conventional. And the majority of Hindus are in Bali and is practised differently to say on the Indian subcontinent. --Merbabu 09:05, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for clearing this up for me.--Greasysteve13 03:49, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Did you know that there is nonetheless a functioning synagogue in Surabaya? I've been there and met the rabbi.
Yes I knew it. There is a mention of it on Surabaya. Meursault2004 10:59, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Incidentally, the worshippers there are officially Hindus! Davidelit 12:43, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Hindus? I thought they are officially Christians. Some have even converted to Islam. Meursault2004 14:00, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Which has left followers of Kejawen (like subud, sumarah) groups in a very interesting position :)

Wikipedia:Article Improvement Drive

Not on Indonesia but related, History of Southeast Asia is currently a nominee for Wikipedia:Article Improvement Drive. Please support the nominee by voting for it! __earth (Talk) 03:13, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Opening paragraph

Does anyone else find the uses of the word "nation" at times repetitive in the following paragraph: "Indonesia, officially the Republic of Indonesia (Indonesian: Republik Indonesia), is a nation of islands consisting of more than 18,000 islands located in the South East Asian Archipelago. It is the world's largest archipelagic nation. It is bordered by the nations of Papua New Guinea, East Timor, Singapore, Australia and Malaysia. Indonesia (from Greek: indus = India nesos = islands) is home to more than 200 million people, and thus is the most populous Muslim-majority nation in the world and the fourth most populous overall." The word nation is used in four consecutive sentences. Also, the "a nation of islands consisting of more than 18,000 islands" part doesn't really roll off of the tounge well, in particular. I suppose it is written that way because of the wikilink to the "Island nation" article, but it should probably be changed to simply "a nation of islands." Anyone agree? Blinutne 15:05, 4 June 2006 (UTC) Here here Danlibbo 00:04, 5 June 2006 (UTC)