Last year I was talking to my friend through facebook about my postgraduate life. I said, I wasn’t really sure whether I could survive or not because all I got was B grades. But my friend said, “you worry too much calvin, you are one of the smartest guy I ever know!”

“Smartest guy I ever know”… I’m not sure why I got such flattering words. While it sounds nice, I try not to think myself as smart, because I still remember the misery of my high school life. Probably the worst period in my life as it was nothing but academic embarrassment. For two years I was struggling to survive to reach minimum grades. When people call me “smart” I prefer to be humble about it. I prefer to call myself diligent person since I’m working hard like hell to achieve everything I have achieved.

What has made me so miserable during the high school? Take a look at my progress rapport during my 1st year in high school:

During my Junior High School I remember school was a breeze. I was in the top 10 in the class. You could say I was a straight B student (and still am). But when I was admitted to St. Ursula High School, my life turned upside down. On the first quarter on 1st year, my average grade was 72, the lowest grade I ever had in my school life. My favorite subjects – science such as mathematic and physics- suddenly they became the worst subject ever. I was never able to reach more than 5 on the first two years. Even more embarrassing was the fact I failed on social politic subjects such as history, economics,  and sociology! These three subjects are now my natural domain and I got good grades on them during my undergrad, and even my friends now call me “The Economist” (well political economist more suffice actually).

However I remember the economic paper also had the worst subject in the world ever: accounting. I’m not sure who proposed high school students to study accounting for two years, but I remember it was the most uninteresting and hardest subject in my high school. I was always cheating my friends’ homework because I simply didn’t understand what the hell was being taught.

For the science papers (math/physics/biology/chemistry), I have to admit. They were tough because I simply wasn’t interested studying them and they are irrelevant to my life (except physics). The math teachers were infamous for being killer teacher, and my class actually got the worst teacher. Well, our dear teacher was not really killer or douchebag really, but it’s just that her standard was too high that I couldn’t reach her expectation.

Religious and moral educations were basically bullshit subjects, it seems I failed to answer the questions in accordance to my teacher’s standard though.

However, despite my miserable life and minimum grades, I managed to pass the second year and finally admitted to language program. The third year was probably the best year in my high school life in academic terms:

Teacher’s remark: Firm with his goal to become a pianist. need support

Surprisingly I marked the highest on German language (higher than English!?) and actually considered to study German literature in University of Indonesia. If I had opportunity I would love to study German again, but at the moment it’s just too impractical because I don’t live with a lot of Germans.

I also saw the teacher’s remark, said I need support to become a pianist. hahaha, thank goodness I didn’t continue that one! Three of my friends submitted to music schools, and hearing their stories and hours of ordeal, boy I’m so glad I didn’t enroll to music school. It’s not like I’m incredibly talented anyway. The hardest piece I could play back then was Maple Leaf Rag and Chopin’s Waltz no. 14 in E minor. I still could read musical notes, but my fingers are very stiff now. Well at least I till could talk about history of classical music since I’ve been reading a lot of classical music history when listening classical music

After that of course, I graduated from high school and admitted to International relations. probably the best time of my life since I met people that would become my lifetime friends later.

Now you are probaby wondering, why do I share this piece of miserable history of my life? Simply because I think ind0nesian education system is UNFAIR (caps). I was put into an environment that unable me to reach my full potential.

Is there anything I learned from subjects being taught during my high school? Nada. I think I have wasted two years of my life there, being put in a system that made you think you are stupid. Seriously, on the two years of my life I was studying not to gain knowledge, but to improve my grades. Although I still retain most knowledge from subjects being taught in my 3rd year.

The unfair system made me think I was the dumbest student in the whole school because my grades were at the bottom. Everyday I was afraid and thinking “will I be able to graduate? Will I get minimum grades?”. In my case, education has been oversimplified into term of numbers. Indonesian education system is not holistic at all, it’s basically a system that tailored for robot. I have justification of my argument: The “stupid” student that almost failed twice in senior high actually managed to win a national literature competition and admitted for postgraduate scholarship in New Zealand in the next 14 years after working hard like hell. So was he stupid or did the system make him stupid?

The year 2013 was not the brightest for many emerging economies, including Indonesia. While in 2012 Indonesia reached its “usual” 6 percent economic growth, thanks to its large consumer economy and growing middle class, prospects are bleak for 2014.

In the last few months of 2013, the rupiah, along with other soft currencies, suffered severe depreciation. The value of the rupiah has plunged dramatically since the beginning of the year, which has damaged market confidence.

The rising middle class helped Indonesia weather the 2008 crisis, but in 2013 it may have contributed to our blooming “crisis”.

This pattern is similar to that of the economic crisis in 1998. During the 1990s, Indonesia’s economic boom crashed as investors pulled out their dollars from the domestic market, leading to a liquidity crisis. Massive bankruptcies
occurred because the increasing burden of dollar-denominated debt.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) stepped in and forced the central bank to increase the interest rate, resulting in another wave of pivot sector collapses. While the IMF had contributed to escalating the economic crisis, the options were limited as Indonesia had to restore faith in its currency.

The situation in 2013 resonates with the situation in 1998 where market confidence diminished due to currency depreciation. A weakening currency is ideally good for exports. In a perfect market, the market will correct itself as exports increase, a country will gain from surplus and new foreign reserves and the currency will strengthen again and find a new level of equilibrium.

But at the moment Indonesia is enjoying a double-edged economic boom. Mass consumption stimulates economic growth, but the economic fundamentals are not completely ready for a mass consumer economy. Take a look at the food sector: Indonesia has the serious problem of not being able to produce its own food sufficiently.

As the largest rice consumer in Southeast Asia, Indonesia is very vulnerable to crop failures because people are reluctant to switch to other staple foods. When local rice production cannot fulfill the domestic market demand, rice has to be imported to pick up the slack.

It is also the largest producer of instant noodles, and Indonesia is one of the biggest noodle consumers in the world; however, the industry depends entirely on imported wheat. This year, Indonesia has also suffered from rising prices of beef and onions due to protectionist sentiment.

While Indonesian decision makers have coordinated to issue appropriate policies to tackle this situation, options are limited because Indonesia has ratified various free trade pacts. Indonesia cannot unilaterally impose tariff barriers as they would violate its international treaties.

It has become prisoner of its own free-trade treaties and may end up as a loser in the free-trade game.

So far, the government has introduced various policies to offset this problem, such as increasing taxes on luxury goods, reducing oil imports and stopping the export of raw minerals starting next month. The central bank has also eased its restrictions to ensure banks and exporters can increase liquidity.

However, these short-term policies do not address the fundamental problems in the Indonesian economy. The policies could help temporarily offset the painful trade deficit and weakening currency, but they are not enough. Medium-term or long-term strategic policies have to be formulated to address the real problems instead of the symptoms.

For example, the state should give incentives (such as easy credit) to vulnerable sectors and small and medium enterprises affected by the free trade pacts.

Unfortunately, financial institutions tend to give easier access to consumer activities instead of loans for small and medium enterprises.

The major difference between 1998 and now is that the Indonesian rupiah is now managed under a floating exchange rate regime.

The central bank no longer needs to dip into its foreign reserves as aggressively as before to defend the rupiah’s rate.

In the worst case scenario, Indonesia may need to ask for another liquidity injection from other sources, though the IMF is no longer the only option. The central bank has signed bilateral swaps with other central banks.

There is also the Chiang Mai Initiative, which provides liquidity from pooled foreign reserve currencies from the ASEAN+3 members with less draconian conditionality.

While the situation is not as severe as in 1998, the current “crisis” is an opportunity to examine what is wrong with Indonesia’s economy.

Namely, a consumption-based economy is not always viable in a country with a weak currency and a high import rate. It triggers overheating in the economy that could end with a crash.

The reality of 2013 has shed light on the weak foundation of Indonesia’s consumption-based economy. It is fragile because of its over-dependence on imported goods. Indonesians consume more than they produce. Mass consumption will not be sustainable in the long run if the export sector remains sluggish.

The Indonesian middle class has helped to shelter the country from 2008 crisis, but it has also contributed to the trade deficit, because it is easier to import and consume rather than to produce and export.

Financial institutions also more aggressively disbursing loans for consumption instead of loan for small and medium enterprises.

Perhaps the 2013 “crisis” is a signal for decision makers to pay more attention to the export sector, to introduce strategic long-term policies and a wake-up call to not be disillusioned by Indonesia’s autopilot economy and rising middle class.

Originally published in Jakarta Post, 31/12/2013

PS: I probably will write another op-ed is next year since I’ve got another 20,000 words homework to do. Hopefully someday I could publish an academic journal!

Salah satu persoalan paling besar saat saya kuliah di Universitas Katolik Parahyangan adalah saya tidak diajarkan menulis akademik dengan baik, sehingga saya belajar sendiri – mengikuti struktur tulisan opini, yang jelas-jelas salah. Jika saya melihat tulisan-tulisan yang saya tulis pada saat kuliah S1, rasanya jadi malu sendiri. Kok dosen saya bisa-bisanya memberikan saya nilai A atau B? Kalau saya yang menilai tugas-tugas kuliah yang pernah saya buat saat S1, saya mungkin akan memberikan nilai C dan D.

Saat pertama kali mendapat tugas esai di semester 1, saya kagok dengan kriteria penulisan akademik yang diberikan Massey. Kok rasanya berbeda sekali dengan yang saya lakukan dulu pada saat S1? Berbekal dengan kemampuan pas-pasan, nilai saya di semester 1 semuanya B, dan di semester kedua akhirnya saya mulai memanen nilai B+. Saya lega, karena saya khawatir saya tidak berkembang sama sekali.

Dalam delapan bulan terakhir di Massey saya mendapat sekitar 20 tugas yang berhubungan dengan penulisan akademik. Satu tugas mengharuskan kita menulis jurnal pribadi mengenai “apa yang saya pelajari dari studi pembangunan”, jadi seperti ngeblog ceritanya. Saya menulis sekitar 26 tulisan. Tapi saya rasa saya tidak akan publish semuanya.

Kembali ke topik utama: penulisan akademik berbeda dengan tulisan-tulisan lainnya. Strukturnya harus kaku karena tujuannya adalah akademik. Struktur esai akademik umumnya terbagi menjadi seperti ini:

Ringkasan: Ringkasan pendek seluruh isi esai dalam 300 kata atau kurang

Argumen 1 (Biasanya dasar teori)

Argumen 2 (Biasanya penjabaran masalah)

Argumen 3 (Biasanya analisis masalah dengan menggunakan teori)

Yang harus diingat dalam menulis akademik:

- Kalimat harus objektif dan netral

- Opini harus selalu dijustifikasi dengan teori (hal ini berbeda dengan tulisan opini yang dipublikasikan di surat kabar)

- Harus menggunakan referensi. Kalau di indonesia ada footnote, tapi Massey mengajarkan kami menggunakan Harvard APA… yang jauh lebih simpel daripada sistem ibid, loc. cit, etc etc

- Susunan gramatikal juga penting. Kalau belum mahir, minta seseorang untuk proofread. Ini memang realita yang kejam.

- Bagian ketiga biasanya selalu pemikiran kritis (critical thinking): analisis harus memasukkan dua sisi, melihat positif dan negatifnya, sehingga tidak berat sebelah

- Pastikan esai menjawab pertanyaan. Kalau perlu, print pertanyaannya, dan tempelkan di depan anda sewaktu menulis esai. Pastikan tulisan tidak melenceng dari pertanyaan. Kalau misalnya pertanyaan tidak dijawab, dosen akan memberikan penalti.

Nah untuk lebih gampangnya saya akan memberi contoh tulisan esai saya mengenai topik Neo-Marxisme dalam bahasa inggris yang mendapat nilai tertinggi (A minus ini pun sudah berdarah-darah).

Berikut adalah pertanyaannya:

Choose one development approach (Neo-Marxism) and discuss how its genealogy has shaped that approach

Untuk yang kurang familiar mengenai Neo-Marxism. Pada dasarnya ini adalah sebuah paradigma yang populer di tahun 1960 yang mengkritisi pola kerjasama antara negara maju dan negara berkembang sebagai eksploitasi. Istilah “Neo” dalam Neo-Marxisme berarti adalah “Marxisme yang lebih baru (istilah “neo” biasanya muncul saat paradigma/teori lama diambil, dan dikontekstualisasikan dengan kondisi saat ini). Jatah kata untuk esai ini adalah 2000 kata. Terlalu sedikit sebetulnya.

　　The purpose of this essay is to discuss the Neo-Marxist approaches in development and how its genealogy has shaped its approach.

Marx’s arguments on inequality, exploitation, and class struggle have become the main influence that shaped Neo-Marxist approaches. Neo-Marxists argued that capitalism, through informal western imperialism contributed on underdeveloping non-European world (Nafziger, 2006: 60). Neo-Marxists advocate to adopt socialism instead of capitalism (Baran, 1953: 308). However, Neo-Marxist arguments are criticized for unable to provide concrete policy recommendation and stayed in theoretical debates (Browett, 1983). Neo-Marxism has limited influence in current thinking, because market socialism in Soviet Union and North Korea proved that socialism inevitably turns into totalitarianism and hindered full development of human beings.

First this essay will explain the key arguments in Marxism and how it shaped Neo-Marxist approaches to development. Second part, this essay will elaborate the key theories of Neo-Marxist approaches to development which consist of dependency, underdevelopment, and world system. Third section of this essay elaborate how Neo-Marxist approaches have a limited influence in current thinking on development.

Di bagian pembuka ini anda bisa melihat saya menulis ulang pertanyaan dari dosen, dilanjutkan ringkasan dari seluruh isi esai ini, lalu menjabarkan struktur dari esai (bagian pertama adalah… bla bla bla, bagian kedua… bla bla bla… bagian ketiga… bla bla bla)

Mari kita teruskan ke bagian pertama esai, apakah yang mempengaruhi Neo-Marxisme? Pertama saya membahas argumen utama Marx (dan harus membaca beberapa literatur jadul untuk mendapatkan argumen utamanya). Marx membahas tentang eksploitasi, kelas, revolusi, etc.

　　　Marx (1859) posited that capitalism creates a structure in society. He defined development as struggle between the bourgeoisie (capitalists) and proletariat (workers). On Marx’s view, capitalism has increased economic growth, however capitalism builds a new structure in society that hinders full development of human beings. Marx’s arguments refer to inequality, exploitation, and class struggle. He argued that private ownership should be eliminated from economy as private are function to serve their self-interest.

Marx (1859) argued that society is composed of two classes, the bourgeois and the proletariat. Class creates opposition, a vertical society where a handful of people control the resources and the rest have to work hard to make their living. The bourgeois are identified as capitalists, the ones who own factories and means of production. Capitalists exploit the laborers, who gain wages by working. There is social inequality because capitalists are rich, while the laborers are poor.

Marx (as cited in Cohen, 1978: 30) argued that capitalism contains contradictions, as one class is able to exert control over the means of production to appropriate the surplus value while the other class does the actual work and receives wages only sufficient to maintain its reproduction. Marx calls this as exploitation because the laborers do not receive adequate compensation. Capitalism becomes the main obstacle of human development as it destroys non-economic value and means that social relations are driven by profit (McClelland, 1983: 219). Economic growth under capitalism does not necessarily increase welfare equally to everyone but only to the selected few.

Marx viewed history as a cycle of class struggle where one dominant mode of production will change to another and capitalism is just one stage to socialism. Capitalism will destroy itself as labour will create class consciousness, which translates to political action (such as revolution). Marx argues that other classes will perish from modern industry. He views a state-planned economy as ideal form to achieve development. (Marx, 1886: 11, 86; Marx, 1859: 4; Marx, 1875: 12)

Marx’s ideas are influential, and have resulted various theories that are trying to explain the development gap among the states after the World War II. These theories are called Neo-Marxist approaches because the theorists draw from Marx’s arguments such as inequality, exploitation, and class struggle but utilized them in broader context to explain the relations among the rich and poor countries.

Neo-Marxism sees imperialism as the highest stage of capitalism, and being responsible for underdevelopment and asymmetric relationship between metropoles and its colonies, where the colonies, the weaker economies are dependent toward the stronger metropoles (Roxborough, 1979:56; Peet & Hartwick, 2010: 166; Patnaik, 1982: 3).

Neo Marxist theorists argue that after the World War II, the industrialized countries experienced growth and economic development through exploited the peripheral nations. Western countries actually contributed of making underdeveloped non-European countries. (Peet & Hartwick, 2010: 166; Roxbough, 1979: 56). The key theories of Neo-Marxism are dependency, underdevelopment, and world system.

Di akhir bagian pertama ini, saya menyisipkan beberapa paragraf untuk menjembatani bagian pertama dan kedua (Ide marx mulai diambil oleh beberapa kritik sosial, bla bla bla). Jangan langsung loncat ke bagian kedua tanpa menyambungkan bagian pertama, karena akan membuat pembaca “kaget”.

Kita mulai bagian kedua. Saya mulai membahas argumen-argumen utama Neo-Marxisme, seperti Baran, Frank, Cardoso, dan Wallerstein. Berhubung fokus utama studi saya adalah pembangunan (development), saya memasukkan satu argumen dari Wallerstein untuk menekankan “inilah pembangunan menurut para neo marxists: eksploitasi”

Baran (1952) was influenced by Marxist ideas and utilized them to the situation in the mid-twentieth century. Baran agreed with Lenin’s idea that capitalism entered underdeveloped countries not through small, competitive business, but through advanced, larger monopolistic enterprises. Dependency occurred when the poorer countries being over-reliant toward export-oriented economy, by providing the rich countries with cheap raw materials in large scale. Baran viewed capitalism has produced underdevelopment, a situation where countries can not enjoy living standard enjoyed by the developed countries. Capitalism has made poor countries’ economy goes backward because capitalism has linked their fate being dependent world market. Baran (1953) suggested the underdeveloped countries should detach from the world economy and use socialist economic planning instead of capitalism. (pp. 308).

Frank (1966) developed Baran’s idea further and argued that the developed countries were undeveloped, but never underdeveloped. He conceptualized Baran’s idea about the capitalist world system, referring the undeveloped countries as satellites and the developed countries as metropoles. The relationship between the two regions is asymmetric, as the dominant metropolitan areas subjugates the satellite regions with various agreements such as free trade agreements that extract economic surplus.

Frank criticized western development approaches dismiss the unique history within each country and assumed that underdeveloped countries were similar with European and North American capitalist nations. Despite the destruction of Europe caused by World War II, European countries had better infrastructure and human resources than underdeveloped countries, and were colonial powers. Thus, development policies cannot be formulated without considering the past events and histories that triggered underdevelopment in a country.
While dependency theory has been largely applied to Latin America, the concepts have also been applied to other parts of the world such as Africa. For example Rodney (1972) argued that the imperialism done by the western powers as the main responsibility of Africans’ economic retardation, as it drains the Africans’ wealth and makes it impossible for Africans to develop resources more rapidly.

Cardoso (1972) voiced similar criticism to Frank. Cardoso said that the different experience and historical situations of developed countries was not useful for understanding situation in underdeveloped countries. He observed that society has been transformed in post-war Latin America. There was a dynamic entrepreneurial class and working class as Latin American countries did not experience an agrarian revolution, class exploitation from period of industrialization persisted. He also pointed out that elites in poor countries allied themselves with foreign powers to exploit the poor which he referred as internal colonialism. Development may occur, although the cost may be high, even dependent countries can develop though their dependency may increase.

Wallerstein (as cited in Dixon, 1985: 172) developed World System Theory. He argued the world is a system and has a fundamental division of structural positions, which he referred as core, periphery and semi-periphery. Core countries are associated as strong states, with relative freedom from external control. They are economically stronger due to the possession of the latest technology and an abundance of skilled laboures with a high-value of diversified processed goods. Periphery countries are subordinate to the core countries. Periphery countries are politically weak, their economy are overspecialized in primary raw material products with low wage, unskilled labourers and obsolete technology. The semi-periphery countries are in the intermediate position, they share characteristics of both core and periphery.

Wallerstein (as cited in Petras, 1981: 149) argued that in a world system, the relationship between the core and peripheral regions are unequal and exploitative. This exploitation is achieved through various mechanisms that trigger unequal exchange. Transfer of value from a world of capitalist economy to another is accumulation that is necessary to maintain core countries’ monopolies over the periphery countries.

Development, according to Wallerstein (2004), dismisses the importance of different states’ histories and assumes all states will eventually turn out or more or less the same. The developed countries justify their development model to less developed countries to engage in sort of mimicry and promise of higher standard of living (pp. 10)

Bagian ketiga ini adalah analisis yang mengkritik Neo-Marxism. Esai akademik harus selalu memiliki pemikiran kritis, kita diharuskan mengkritisi teori tersebut dan melihat dari sisi positif dan negatif. Berhubung Neo-Marxism adalah teori kritis (critical theory) yang mengkritik kapitalisme (hanya mengkritik, solusi tidak jelas), kebanyakan kritikannya juga ya negatif: misalnya, tidak ada bukti empiris. Untuk di jurusan studi pembangunan Massey, kami biasanya dilatih untuk mengkritisi paradigma barat seperti neoliberalisme yang terlalu populer dan mendominasi pola pembangunan internasional (termasuk Indonesia)

　　Neo-Marxist theorists have been criticized because the theories lacked supporting empirical evidence. For example, Neo-Marxist theories can not be used to explain the rapid economic growth of newly industrialized countries in Asia during the 1970s (Browett, 1983: 193; Hamilton, 1983: 161). Some dependent countries enjoyed higher economic growth than the nondependent countries. Neo-Marxism is also considered outdated and dead, and no longer can be taken seriously. Dependency theory is only useful as theoretical-political memory. (Peet & Hartwick, 2010: 181)

The Neo-Marxist dependency theory also has been challenged. Although economic historians agreed that many colonies became dependent under foreign domination, the costs were offset by the development of infrastructures (such as school, railroad, and administrative services) under colonial powers. Similarly, dependency theory could not also explain the underdevelopment that were experienced by Thailand, Afghanistan, and Ethiopia which were not colonized (Nafziger, 2005: 147). World system theory has also been criticized for being too state-centric and ignoring the emergence of transnational classes that are not bound by any state or specific geographies (Robinson, 2011:19)

Neo-Marxist approaches have limited influence on current development thinking. Browett (1983) criticized Neo-Marxist theories have failed to produce alternative prescriptions for social change of how the peripheral states can escape from dependency, underdevelopment. Thus, their arguments ended as rhetoric. Their only contributions limited to writings in specialist books and journals that only a few people could understand. Neo-Marxism theorists are unclear about formulating what they want to achieve.

In the context of 1960s, socialism gained prominence because the Soviet Union avoided great depression, and achieved significant economic growth post World War II (Boettke & Coyne, 2004: 73). However the suggestion to adopt socialism (a centrally-planned economy) did not really translate into good development policies. In a centrally-planned economic system people are forced to produce and prohibited from doing what they want and government becomes one big cartel which caused inefficiency. Socialism is inevitably translated into totalitarianism where government controls all aspects of the lives of its citizens (Rothbard, 1962; Hayek, 2005). For example, the economy of the Soviet Union in 1921-1928 deteriorated significantly with an increase of forced labor after Stalin introduced market socialism. The Russian revolution actually created another structure where the ruling class were members of the communist party, whose interests were against Soviet workers’ interest (Nafziger, 2005: 144).

The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) is another case of market socialism. North Korea is a country with a highly centralized planned economy where competition is minimum. The government provides subsidized food rations. Healthcare, and education are offered from the state for free (Federal Research Division, 2007). However there has been increasing inequalities among the various social classes, such as average citizens and military elites. North Korea’s economy grew at only a 2.11% from between 2000 and 2011 (Hwan, 2012: 1), and suffered food shortage, famine, forced labor, and human right abuse (Human Right Watch, 2013).

Kimura (1999) argued that North Korea economic planning is influenced by Japanese fascism and Stalinism. Kim-il Sung pursued militarization of the economy and strengthened the state control, it is characterized by totalitarianism where government tries to control private life of its citizens through public policy.

Di bagian terakhir saya memasukkan contoh gagal aplikasi komunisme yang diimpikan Marx: ekonomi totaliter Uni Soviet dan Korea Utara yang membuat negara menjadi kartel besar dan membuat ekonomi stagnan di tempat.

Nah bagian terakhir lebih gampang, karena pada dasarnya anda cukup meringkas lagi semua yang ada tuliskan menjadi satu-dua paragraf pendek. Biasanya para mahasiswa sudah kehilangan jatah kata pada menulis ini, jadi silahkan edit lagi tulisan dari awal dan membuang kata-kata yang tidak perlu

Conclusion
Neo-Marxist approaches to development have been shaped by Marx. Neo-Marxist theorists brought Marx’s argument such as inequality, exploitation, and class struggle into broader context to explain the gap between poor and rich countries after World War II. Neo-Marxist theorists argued that the developed countries contributed on making underdeveloped countries as the relationship between these two groups are exploitative and asymmetric. However these argument were developed based on Latin American experience whose conditions started to deteriorate after World War II and failed to explain the success of newly industrialized countries in East Asia.

Neo Marxism has limited influence to current thinking. It does not provide clear solution of what concrete policies should be done and arguments stayed in theoretical debate. The suggestion to detach from capitalism is empirically challenged. Socialist development model has been implemented in Soviet Union and North Korea and deteriorated the economy of its citizens.

 

Sayangnya literatur yang saya baca untuk tugas ini kurang lengkap, jadi analisis saya kurang lengkap. Saya berargumen, neo marxism sudah tidak berguna, usang, tidak memberikan solusi, bla bla. Tapi menurut dosen yang menilai, kritik pada perusahaan multinasional juga dipengaruhi Neo-Marxist approach. Pada saat itu saya berpikir “oh shit! kenapa saya tidak memasukkan itu!?”. Tapi ya sudahlah, toh rata-rata untuk paper ini sudah menjadi B+ dan ujian kemarin performa saya juga tidak buruk-buruk amat.

Berikut adalah daftar referensi yang saya pakai dalam menulis esai ini:

Incoming search terms:

• Teori menulis Bahasa inggris

Finally I have reached the end of this year. What have I learned from development studies? Has my paradigm changed? This post is a general overview of what I feel after studying in Massey University.

When I first applied NZ Development Scholarship I deliberately picked development studies because I wanted to be economist without really learning economy (math, number, algebra, etc). I didn’t really understand what development studies is. All I know, this course seems suitable for my future career on eradicating poverty in Indonesia. Turned out development study is the “human side” of economics. Development study is much easier to digest since it’s derived from social science, so no alien language such as calculus. Yay.

Honestly I’m surprised of what I have gotten from development studies on the last 8 months. I came from international relations background. My paradigm was state-actor-oriented. In international relations I identified myself as neo-realist. I believed that state is the most important actor in international relations and it treated state as monolithic unitary actor. My knowledge on economics is also quite limited. I only had 5 class of economics during my bachelor degree (basic and advanced economics, international political economy, economic laws, and political economy of development).

Development studies however, is a very radically different field compared to my previous study. It is a very human-centered discipline. It encourages discourse to analyze to see what is beyond state actor. I had quite hard time to accept this because I always regarded non-state actors as unimportant. But as I digested more and more development theories, I began to be critical of my paradigm. I realized that poverty is a very complex issue. I couldn’t dismiss the fact that non-state actors such as NGO, international organizations have enormous effect shaping life of millions that living in poverty because states failed to address the problem. Basically development studies is for political science who wants to see beyond the black box. Not suitable for lazy people/students who don’t want to study non-state actors since it’s easier to make analysis by considering a state is unitary actor, no other entities are considered important (I used to be one of them).

After being immersed in Development Studies, I realized that my definition of development -all this time-, mainly influenced by neoliberal paradigm. I used to think to be developed all we have to do is having more GDP, thus economic growth. What is the best way to stimulate economic growth? Monetary and fiscal policy. Interest rate and tax. That’s the way I was taught in my bachelor degree. I thought, if Indonesia has more GDP, perhaps entering 1 trillion dollar club, something may happened, maybe we could reduce poverty as it means we have upgraded our economic power.

But what happened now? My paradigm somehow is being deconstructed by various discourses I got from development studies. I’m now more informed about the complexity of development, how it has been shaped by western, developed economies for long time. Thus being developed is equated with GDP growth, GDP per capita growth… basically more money to buy what we want to buy… dismissing the problem that is created during the process, such as environmental destruction.

When I was in Indonesia, environmental problem was not really my favorite subject. I thought it’s fine to compromise environment as long as we achieve economic growth, but I couldn’t have been more wrong. Environmental destruction actually has bigger impacts on increasing poverty. Look at West Papua for example. I couldn’t help but to feel sorry for the West Papuans for wanting to gain independence/separate from Indonesia. Papua has the biggest gold mining in the world, but the region is one of the poorest province in Indonesia. I’m not surprised if west papuans view Java as land of “brown colonists”. The Jakartans enjoy higher living standard than most of the regions, and it’s impossible not to overlook this inequality.

Closer look at the West Papua, then we see a region with a very complex poverty problem that affected by various dimensions such as social, political, economic, and cultural dimensions. It was also plagued by “politics of resignation” that trapped the people unable to escape from harm industry. The Papuans live in misery but unable to live without the one that exploited the region. However, as the company exploits, it destroys the environment and livelihood of the people living there. The Indonesian government does not do much about this either. Perhaps because Indonesians see west papuans as “underdeveloped” natives whose voices are not important to be heard. All they have to do is listening the central government and they will be developed. A top-down neoliberal approach is the best development policy for Papua.

Learning development studies has helped to expand my knowledge and paradigm of poverty and the concept of “Participatory”, something I never heard before. All my life I thought we shouldn’t criticize government’s development policies. But now I think I could address better criticism on development policies: is that what the people want? Is that contextual?

I think I have gained a lot knowledge on the last 8 months on the course on development studies. I gained knowledge that development is not only matter of economic growth and “development” should be holistic and address the needs of the poor. I just hope my knowledge could be utilized in Indonesia, because the development policies in indonesia is still influenced by neoliberal paradigm (although Indonesia itself is mixed economic models where government and private sectors played big part in stimulating economic growth) as it is much harder to produce holistic economic policies compared to produce macroeconomic policies such as increasing/decreasing interest rate to stimulate economic growth.

This study is also a personal journey for my ethnic identity.

If there is one issue I’m always bugged with, it’s the fact that I’m triple minority in my own country. From my paternal side, I inherited Chinese-Indonesian culture and from my maternal side, Dutch-Chnese-Indonesian. While I have a drop of Javanese blood from my maternal grandmother’s mother, it’s really hard for me to associate myself as “native Indonesian”, but I always consider myself as “Indonesian”, well at least until 1998, and I learned about 1965, and 1945 (Bersiap).

When I reviewed my life so far, I live in an isolated Chinese-Indonesian middle class environment. We have different physical characteristics compared to Indonesian natives that we have slanted eyes and (generally) lighter skin. But I don’t have any other identity other than Indonesian.

My first encounter on segregated society probably when I was 10 years old. I invited a friend of mine to play video game in my house. Naturally we sat side by side of course. But when my friend went home, one of my parent said to not ever invite him in our house anymore. He is an Indonesian native, probably from a kampung (village) and I shouldn’t be friended with him. I didn’t question my parent’s authority back then. I returned some video games I borrowed from him on the next day, and I never interacted with him again.

It’s funny how memories of simple social interaction like that could leave a deep impression since I never forget that scene (partially because that boy borrowed my NES cartidge and he never returned it). Deep inside I was questioning what’s difference between me and that kid? Why we were not supposed to play together. He maybe an Indonesian native… and then what?

I discovered later that the relationships between Chinese-Indonesian and Indonesian are extremely complicated. Chinese-Indonesians were associated as middleman during Dutch colonial period thus there are collective consciousness that they are not part of Indonesia, despite the fact that many have assimilated in the society and that they cannot speak any Chinese dialect (I could be considered a typical Chinese Indonesian, excluding the Dutch-Indonesian heritage).

What shocked me most of course, when 1998 May event erupted. Chinese-Indonesians were brutally murdered in the capital city, Jakarta. I was living in satellite city Tangerang back then, so my family was generally safe. However it traumatized me so much that I began to be politically conscious of my state being ethnic minority and start addressing myself as “Chinese-Indonesian”.

Later when my grandmother passed away in 2005, I was surprised when found out that she was never a Chinese-Indonesian. She was in fact Dutch-Indonesian who married to Dutch-educated Chinese-Indonesian and absorbed to Chinese-Indonesian culture. I discovered later Dutch-Indonesian or Indo/Indische were target of atrocity called Bersiap that happened not too long after Indonesia’s declared independence.

One discovery to another led me to self-discovery. I began to see the history of Indonesia from different perspective. I began to become critical toward how history is being presented in Indonesia. I discovered that Indonesia’s society looked like being brainwashed by biased story to glorify their history. Why for example, I never found the case of Bersiap in history books? All I know was, “Dutch were the evil white colonialists that were trying to rob our independence we just recently gained”.

I realize that it’s important to be politically conscious of your own identity. I’m afraid that if I forget my identity that I’m minority, I will be disappointed later just like when the 1998 May happened and many Chinese-Indonesians were shocked by the atrocity. For many decades they have been living as “Indonesian”, then why the hatred still persisted? The Indonesian government does not help much either, as they never apologize for the state terrorism under New Order and their negligence to protect the minorities.

One of the best thing I got from development studies is of course, the definition of development. I too, for long time has considered development being wealthy, having big houses, cars, etc. But what do they mean if we consider ourselves as alien in our society and our country? Having knowledge of development as freedom opened my eyes and increase my assertiveness to exercise my rights: that it is my right to claim my cultural right or fighting for history recognition (and yes, It’s my right to avoid uncivilized smokers)

But I’m also aware that, I should always be conscious of Indonesia’s cultural system where it is considered inappropriate to criticize an established system or doctrines such as Papua has always been part of Indonesia (which is clearly questionable) or non-Moslem minority should not criticize radical Moslems unless you want your life in danger. While I’m frustrated by this reality, but then I go to Hannah Arendt’s “banality of evil”, as it is possible that a human is losing its humanity as they are in a system that dehumanized them, stripping their ability to tell what is right and wrong. Somehow this system normalizes violence as the new “normal”. But it’s useless to keep hatred in your mind. That’s why I always try to understand, although it does not mean as forgiveness.

Anyway, a photo to celebrate the awful exams, finally it’s over. Posting this because I’m quite positive that I will graduate:

Enam tahun yang lalu saya menerbitkan Jukstaposisi, yang kebetulan mendapatkan penghargaan sebagai Juara Ketiga Dewan Kesenian Jakarta pada tahun 2007 dan pada tahun 2008 mendapatkan penghargaan sebagai finalis Khatulistiwa Literary Awards. Pada saat itu saya berpikir, betapa beruntungnya saya sebagai seorang yang tidak pernah menerbitan novel, mendapatkan dua penghargaan bergengsi untuk novel pertamanya. Saya yakin dua penghargaan literatur yang cukup bergengsi ini bisa menjadi catatan yang baik dalam CV sewaktu mengirimkan novel ke penerbit.

Fast forward tujuh tahun kemudian. Pada tahun 2013, harapan saya untuk menerbitkan novel kedua sudah nyaris mati. Selama enam tahun terakhir saya masih menulis novel, namun proses untuk mendapatkan penerbit sangat sulit. Pertama kali saya langsung mengirim naskah saya ke Gagas Media. Tapi ditolak karena mereka sudah “penuh” atau fully scheduled. Tapi mungkin itu jawaban diplomatis dari penerbit karena sekali lagi, Jukstaposisi bukanlah genre yang menjadi market utama Gagas Media. Saya rasa naskah yang saya kirimkan tidak cukup profitable untuk Gagas. Jukstaposisi mungkin “kebetulan” diterbitkan gagas yang di tahun 2007 sedang meningkatkan portfolio untuk novel sastra.

Kalau saya hitung-hitung, saya mungkin sudah mengirimkan ke 8 penerbit dalam enam tahun terakhir. Dua diantaranya tertarik untuk menerbitkan, tapi mereka bangkrut. Kedua penerbit tersebut adalah penerbit J dan AP. Yang bikin saya agak gondok, kedua penerbit itu tidak menginformasikan bahwa mereka akan bangkrut kepada saya, jadi naskah saya terlunta-lunta sekitar satu tahun. Untuk kasus AP, para orang yang bertanggung jawab selalu memberikan jawaban “naskahnya sedang dipelajari”. Setelah mengkonfirmasi kebangkrutan mereka kepada teman2 penulis lain, saya langsung memutuskan untuk mencabut naskah saya dari mereka dan kembali ke proses menulis. Pengalaman dari kasus AP lumayan pahit tapi memberikan pelajaran untuk tidak naif dan membuat saya bisa memperdiksi pertanda penerbit yang akan bangkrut.

Pada tahun 2013 ini saya mencoba kembali peruntungan saya. Saya berpikir: toh sudah pernah ada penerbit yang pernah mau menerbitkan naskah saya? Naskah saya tidak seburuk itu kan? Saya lalu memasukkan naskah saya ke beberapa penerbit besar: dan ditolak lagi. Saya menyampaikan apresiasi saya pada editor dan sekaligus bertanya: apakah naskah saya terlalu niche? Sang editor menjawab ya, sayangnya naskah yang saya tulis tidak cocok untuk market Indonesia. Temanya cyberpunk, okultisme, science fiction, alternate history. Susunan narasinya tidak ortodoks. Menurut seorang teman saya yang juga penulis, saya terlalu ambisius dalam menulis sehingga melakukan eksperimen, dan eksperimen ini belum tentu disukai oleh market Indonesia.

Saya lalu merefleksikan kembali diri saya. Sewaktu menulis Jukstaposisi, saya ingin melakukan dekonstruksi pada konsep Tuhan. Itu sebabnya saya bereksperimen dengan susunan narasi dan simbolisme yang tidak pernah dilakukan penulis Indonesia sebelumnya. Saya tidak ingin menulis sesuatu yang mainstream dan terlupakan. Itu sebabnya saya menulis cerita tentang tuhan yang bermimpi menjadi manusia. Tidak disangka… Juktaposisi mendapat penghargaan DKJ dan Khatulistiwa Literary Awards. Mungkin saya hanya beruntung? Mungkin karena salah satu juri menyukai tema novel saya, sehingga subjektivitas juri mempengaruhi penilaian novel yang akan menang?

Saya menulis novel kedua ini sekitar delapan tahun lamanya. Saya menulis ulang plotnya mungkin sekitar tujuh kali. Saya juga melakukan riset mendalam agar memperkaya dan memantapkan mitologi dalam novel saya.

Tapi saya rasa, semua usaha itu sia-sia. Naskah yang saya tulis tidak marketable untuk pasar Indonesia, kata penerbit. Tidak ada tempat untuk melakukan eksperimen literatur di pasar buku Indonesia. Ini memang kenyataan yang kejam, tapi harus saya telan. Akhirnya saya memutuskan untuk memasukkan novel yang saya tulis selama 8 tahun ini, “Kenangan Anthropos” ke dalam peti mati. Saya tidak akan pernah menyentuh naskah ini lagi karena saya tidak mau selamanya stagnan pada satu naskah. Saya ingin menulis novel lain. Naskah ini mungkin akan saya sentuh beberapa puluh tahun kemudian jika saya ada waktu.

Jika ada teman yang bertanya “Calvin, kenapa tidak pernah menerbitkan novel kedua?”. Jawabannya sudah cukup jelas: novel yang saya tulis terlalu “aneh”, “tidak masuk akal”, dan tidak akan disukai banyak pembaca buku di Indonesia. Tentu saja saya akan menulis novel lagi, mencoba menerbikannya ke penerbit, dan mungkin akan ditolak lagi. Tapi tidak masalah. Tidak semua orang bisa menjadi novelis sukses di Indonesia. Saya sendiri menganggap impian sebagai novelis hanyalah sisa idealisme masa lampau. Saya saat ini sedang studi pembangunan, dan karir saya kedepannya tidak berhubung dengan literatur. Saya menulis novel karena saya suka menulis novel, bukannya ingin mencari profit.

Teman-teman saya mengatakan saya orang yang terlalu banyak berpikir. Cerpen dan novel yang saya tulis memaksa orang untuk berpikir. Itu mungkin merefleksikan kepribadian saya, saya suka membaca cerita yang tidak bisa ditebak jalan ceritanya. Apa gunanya membaca cerita yang sudah tertebak jalan ceritanya dari awal sampai akhir?

Kalau ada yang bertanya kenapa ada penulis yang mau bereksperimen? Kenapa ada penulis yang tetap kekeuh bertahan di genre yang niche walau sudah tahu mereka pasti tidak dilirik penerbit? Jawbannya sudah jelas: Keunikan. Tiap karya yang ditulis seorang individu merupakan representasi sang individu itu sendiri. Apa yang akan terjadi saat individu kehilangan keunikannya dan harus didikte untuk menjadi “sama” dengan orang lain? Sebuah dunia dengan satu kultur homogen yang tidak menarik. Bayangkan dunia dimana semua orang menggunakan plot novel Twilight karena Twilight best seller. Atau semua orang menggubah musik dengan gaya Adele atau Milley Cirrus karena musik mereka top hits di youtube. Posisi saya belum berubah semenjak wawancara oleh Jakarta Post tahun 2008.

Novelis yang idealis pun akhirnya akan mengambil jalan tengah. Coba lihat Dewi Lestari dengan Supernova-nya. Coba bandingkan Supernova 1, 2, 3 dengan Supernova 4. Gaya penulisan supernova 4 yang sangat ringan merupakan kompromi sang penulis dengan market. Penulis-penulis lain mengalami nasib lebih buruk daripada Dewi Lestari. Apa anda tahu novel berjudul Area X karya Elisha V. Handayani? Itu merupakan novel science fiction buatan anak negeri TERBAIK yang pernah ada. Tapi sayangnya tema cerita Area X bukanlah tema cerita yang disukai penerbit Indonesia. Bagaimana dengan Ledgard karya WD Yoga? Novel ini juga adalah salah satu novel fantasi dengan eksekusi yang sangat bagus dan jauh lebih superior daripada novel fantasi karya penulis Indonesia yang pernah saya baca belakangan ini. Tapi seperti yang Anda lihat, kedua penulis tersebut (Elisha dan WD Yoga) hanya menuliskan satu naskah. Saya tidak akan heran kalau mereka mengalami nasib seperti saya. Naskah kami terlalu niche: pembaca yang menyukai genre novel kami tidak mainstream. Tidak cukup banyak untuk membuat profit.

Saya sebenarnya ingin sekali menggunakan self publishing seperti nulisbuku.com, tapi sayangnya saya saat ini tidak punya waktu dan energi untuk fokus pada penerbitan. Saat ini saya sedang fokus pada studi saya, dan saya bukan tipe orang yang multi tasking.

Saya sendiri menganggap terbitnya Jukstaposisi di bawah gagas media adalah sebuah keberuntungan, karena portfolio gagasmedia adalah kebanyakan buku-buku populer. Bahkan menurut informasi dari beberapa pembaca, novel Jukstaposisi sudah masuk obral dan dinilai dengan Rp. 5000. Apa artinya? Artinya novel Jukstposisi sudah menetap di gudang gagas terlalu lama, mereka harus segera menjualnya karena dengan harga Rp. 30,500 saja tidak ada yang mau beli.

Kenyataan yang pahit. Tapi saya pikir, ya sudah tidak apa-apa. Toh setidaknya saya sudah berusaha. Setidaknya saya tahu saya gagal setelah mencoba. Jauh lebih baik daripada gagal karena tidak mencoba sama sekali. Toh saya juga sudah mendapatkan rejeki lain.

Harapan saya ke depannya? Saya berharap saya bisa menyelesaikan novel lain yang saya garap (sekuel Jukstaposisi), dan menejermahkannya ke bahasa Inggris. Saya sangat kagum dengan Erick Setiawan. Novel of bees and mist-nya diterbitkan pertama kali dalam bahasa inggris dan diterbitkan ke bahasa indonesia setelah mendapatkan penghargaan bergengsi di Amerika. Novel tersebut jelas sastra, dan termasuk kategori “novel aneh” yang mungkin akan mengalami proses berdarah-darah jika naskahnya dikirim ke penerbit Indonesia. Untunglah naskah tersebut bahasa inggris, sehingga memiliki peluang market lebih besar. Walau of bees and mist termasuk kategori sastra, tapi pembaca sastra  bahasa inggris lebih banyak daripada pembaca sastra bahasa Indonesia, sehingga penerbit pun masih bisa mengambil profit -walau tidak sebesar novel-novel populer tentunya.

Akhir kata: bagi teman-teman penulis yang pernah mendapatkan penghargaan seprestisius DKJ atau lainnya (finalis maupun menang), titel juara anda tidak akan berarti di depan mata penerbit jika naskah yang anda tulis terlalu idealis, tidak cocok dengan selera pembaca indonesia dan tidak marketable.

Saya sendiri sudah berusaha melakukannya di bidang akademik. Semua tulisan artikel opini saya hanya saya kirimkan ke Jakarta Post karena lebih “menjual” di CV saya. Jika saya menulis jurnal akademik, saya juga akan hanya menulis dalam bahasa inggris. Sayangnya saya belum bisa menulis novel dalam bahasa indonesia. Menulis dengan inggris akademik jauh lebih mudah daripada menulis inggris sastra. Ide ini mungkin akan dicap “tidak nasionalis” oleh beberapa orang, tapi menurut saya tuduhan seperti itu tidak masuk akal. Bukankah begitu karya yang kita hasilkan dalam bahasa inggris akan mendapat lebih banyak perhatian di Indonesia begitu sukses di negeri lain?

Jika otak anda mampu menulis novel dalam bahasa inggris, tulislah novel tersebut dalam bahasa inggris. Jangan menulis dengan bahasa Indonesia. Akan lebih baik kalau para penulis dengan niche market (seperti novel fantasi) menulis novelnya pertama kali dalam bahasa inggris dan menerbitkannya di Indonesia setelah populer di negara lain. Di Indonesia, seringkali kita perlu mendapat pengakuan dari negara lain sebelum diakui di negara sendiri.

On 31 October finally I passed the Development Management paper. I’m really glad that I have such great classmates here. We have been studying intensively in the last two weeks and shared each other’s knowledge. It helped me a lot to incrase my knowledge, even to the subjects I previously didn’t like. After the exam however, I actually still retain 60% of the knowledge (the details might be gone in several months or years), thanks to my attempt to make summary of the journals and reconstruct all the knowledge in one single mind mapping. It’s incredible what humans brain are capable of during a deathline (pun intended).

Since I’m getting my confidence back, I’m finally brave enough to share my past grades and the ordeal I have been through:

As you can see, during the previous semester my general average grades was B. Flat. B. I wasn’t really sure where I went wrong, especially on the Sustainable Development paper. My lecturer said my final assignment was really good but she just gave me B (:sadface:). My hope was increasing during the second semester, I got my first B+, followed by another two A- it’s wasn’t easy to get these grades, I swear. I had to go to student consultant to fix my grammatical error during every deadline day (thankfully the consultants here are very competent, they could read at least 2000 words per one hour – under my stare, otherwise they would just babble about technical error which is not really my concern). I should have done it on previous semester, but I guess better late than nothing.

Anyway the final exam is coming on 12 November 2013. I have more confidence on this exam despite some topics that I need to revisit. But the pressure is much lower than the previous Development Management paper which is all about practical stuffs. The Development and Underdevelopment paper has more theoretical stuffs that I’m quite enjoy since they are related to my previous discipline.

After this? If I graduate from my post graduate, I must submit my proposal on 06 December. I’m planning to go back to Indonesia on 10 December and return to Palmerston North on 5 February (to offset the high price). I’m not too excited to go back to chaotic jakarta after living in boring but peaceful Palmy, however I do miss the cheap luxuries I could get in Jakarta since everything is expensive here. I miss karaoke, my old friends, and my dad’s corgis (my family – not too much, maybe because I grew up with working parents)

Well wish me luck!

Tidak terasa sudah sembilan bulan saya mengenyam pendidikan di Selandia Baru. Tanggal 31 Oktober dan 12 November nanti saya akan ujian, dan rasanya sudah seperti ingin gali lubang dan tenggelam ke dalam bumi, soalnya ujiannya handwritten exam dan tulisan tangan saya bukan kategori cantik. Teman-teman SD saya mengatakan tulisan tangan saya kaya cacing. Begitu kelas 2 SMP seorang teman memaksa saya untuk menulis dengan huruf balok, dan tulisan tangan tersebut paling bisa terbaca. Dalam tingkat skala jelek, kalau tulisan tangan sambung saya jelek sekali, maka tulisan balok adalah lumayan jelek.

Anyway, di posting kali ini saya akan menjabarkan beberapa kelebihan dan kekurangan studi di luar negeri dan semoga bisa diambil hikmah-nya untuk memajukan pendidikan Indonesia yang (katanya) makin merosot.

1. Pemikiran kritis

Dosen mengajarkan untuk berpkir kritis. Saat murid diberi teori, kita tidak menelan mentah-mentah penjelasan dosen, tapi kita juga distimulasi untuk memikirkan positif dan negatif dari teori tersebut sehingga semua terlihat netral, objektif dan tidak berat sebelah.

2. Diajari menulis akademik

Nah ini pengalaman pribadi. Kalau pernah komplain ini di sebuah status facebook betapa malunya saya kalau melihat kembali semua tulisan yang saya tulis saat menjadi mahasiswa S1. Tulisan saya SANGAT tidak akademik. Tulisan saya penuh dengan subjektivitas dan ekspresi-ekspresi yang sangat tidak tepat digunakan untuk sebuah esai akademik (“pedang bermata dua”? *BRB jedukin pala ke tembok*). Saya bahkan heran, dosen-dosen saya kok bisa-bisanya memberi saya nilai A dan B. Kalau saya menjadi dosen dan memberikan nilai pada tulisan saya, kemungkinan besar saya memberikan nilai D atau rewrite.

Tapi kalau boleh sedikit mengelak: sepanjang S1 saya tidak pernah mendapatkan pelajaran menulis akademik dan saya belajar menulis dari tulisan opini yang muncul di surat kabar seperti Kompas. Di Massey University ada sebuah student centre yang menyediakan konsultan untuk melihat struktur dan grammar dari esai kita, jadi tentu saja kualitas esai yang saya tulis menjadi jauh lebih baik setelah latihan demi latihan. (total esai yang buat sepanjang tahun ini sekitar 11, ditambah 22 jurnal tentang pembangunan yang ditulis dari awal mulai kuliah).

3. Hierarki yang horizontal

Bahasa suatu bangsa menunjukkan struktur sosial bangsa tersebut. Dalam bahasa inggris, sangat umum memanggil orang lebih tua (termasuk kakak ipar, mertua, dosen, profesor, kakek-nenek, etc) dengan nama depan. Hal ini secara tidak langsung membuat hubungan dengan orang lebih tua memiliki struktur yang lebih horizontal. Struktur horizontal ini membuat hubungan antara murid dan guru menjadi sejajar. Dosen tidak menjadi “guru” yang menyuapi mahasiswa dengan teori, tapi menjadi fasilitator yang berusaha memaksimalkan potensi murid.

Apakah mungkin hal ini bisa diterapkan di Indonesia? Saya sih ragu dan tampaknya tidak mungkin dilakukan. Bahkan saat saya bertemu dengan teman-teman dari Indonesia, saya otomatis akan menggunakan honorific saat memanggil nama mereka jika mereka lebih tua dari saya (mbak, pak, mas, bang) walau kami berbicara dalam bahasa inggris.

Kenapa demikian? Karena konstruksi sosial tentu saja. Saat berada di Roma, berlakulah seperti orang Roma. Saya rasa bukan ide yang bagus untuk semerta-merta menerapkan budaya luar ke dalam konstruksi sosial Indonesia, karena yang ada nanti dianggap “tidak sopan”, atau dituduh “kebarat-baratan”, “korban Westernisasi”, dan lain sebagainya.

Tapi yang pasti saya lebih suka memanggil dosen dengan nama depan, dan mengurangi gap antara dosen dan mahasiswa. Saya cukup kagum akan karakter dosen-dosen di Selandia Baru. Sebagian besarnya rendah hati dan menganggap mahasiswa sebagai teman (kami bahkan pernah diundang profesor fakultas untuk pesta kostum di rumahnya)

4. Akses jurnal asing

Salah satu frustasi terbesar selama kuliah S1 adalah terbatasnya akses jurnal asing. Setiap kali mengetik sebuh jurnal saya harus mengakses JSTOR, dan sayangnya Universitas Katolik Parahyangan tidak memiliki subscription ke JSTOR. Akhirnya saya meminta tolong beberapa orang dari forum internet yang memiliki akses situs tersebut. Karena pengalaman tersebut, saya selalu membantu teman-teman yang meminta bantuan saya untuk mengakses jurnal JSTOR karena saya tahu perasaan frustasi untuk meningkatkan kualitas tulisan kita.

5. Diberi feedback

Tiap esai tidak hanya diberikan nilai, tapi juga personal feedback. Dosen akan menilai konten seperti struktur, repetisi, referensi, logika tulisan, etc etc yang amat sangat membantu untuk menuliskan esai berikutnya. Pada awal semester, nyaris semua tugas say mendapatkan B. Tapi semester dua ini saya sudah mendapatkan nilai B+ dan A- (ini aja sudah sangat susah payah loh).

Hal ini juga dikarenakan saya mengikuti feedback dari dosen dan juga melakukan cek grammar dengan konsultan sebelum mengumpulkan tugas (untuk urusan grammar saya sudah nyerah, karena standar orang Selandia baru cukup tinggi. Universitas lain yang bahasa utama negaranya bukan inggris seperti Belanda dan Jepang mungkin tidak sesadis negara commonwealth yang mayoritasnya menggunakan bahasa inggris sebagai bahasa ibu)

6. Kelas yang interaktif

Terkadang dosen akan melakukan “roleplay”, dimana kami mendapatkan peran-peran dan harus berinteraksi berdasarkan peran tersebut. Berikut adalah dua roleplay yang pernah saya alami:

Roleplay sebagai Konsultan Pembangunan:

a. Dosen memberikan suatu kasus negara fiksional dengan berbagai tipikal masalah negara dunia ketiga (kemiskinan, krisis ekonomi, dll).
b. Kemudian kelas akan dibagi menjadi 3-4 tim, dimana tiap-tiap  tim ceritanya jadi “konsultan” yang disewa untuk memberikan solusi terhadap situasi tersebut berdasarkan beberapa teori yang berbeda (mis: neoliberalisme, alternative development, sustainable development, etc).
c. Kelas menjadi seru karena ada perdebatan antara positif negatif dari paradigma2 tersebut (yang paling dibantai tentu saja yang dapat neoliberalisme)

Power roleplay:

a. Dosen memberikan studi kasus sebuah proyek pembangunan di negara berkembang, dan menjabarkan stakeholders dari proyek pembangunan tersebut (mis: donor, menteri pembangunan, suku minoritas, NGO, etc)

b. Tiap orang di kelas akan dipasangkan kartu remi di belakang punggung mereka untuk memperlihatkan “power” yang mereka miliki. Paling tinggi adalah Kartu AS, dan paling rendah adalah kartu nomor dua. Tujuan roleplay ini adalah memperlihatkan power relations dalam proyek pembangunan.

c. Nah begitu dimulai, kita berinteraksi berdasarkan peran kita. Kalau misalnya kita diperlakukan dengan kurang mengenakkan oleh teman kita yang mendapat kartu lebih tinggi, hal itu karena hubungan kita didasari power relations.

Uniknya, profesor saya mempersepsikan reperesentasi minoritas memiliki power lebih tinggi dari kepala suku mayoritas. Apa mungkin terpengaruh latar belakangnya sebagai orang Selandia Baru? Berhubung pengalaman sebagai minoritas di Indonesia sudah cukup untuk memperlihatkan bagaimana harus bersikap sebagai minoritas.

7. Dipaksa Belajar Sendiri

Nah ini agak kontroversial. Saya tidak tahu ini kelebihan atau kekurangan, tapi di tiap semester saya mendapatkan paper yang ditujukan untuk Distance Student, artinya saya harus belajar sendiri untuk semua topik di paper tersebut. Sudah topiknya jlimet, tutorial dari dosen minimal, dan kami hanya disuruh baca jurnal. Rasanya seperti paper pembuat malapetaka.

Tapi seiring berjalannya waktu, saya mulai terbiasa belajar sendiri, karena bagaimanapun juga saat kita lulus nanti tidak akan ada yang mengajari kita dan semuanya harus dilakukan sendiri. Mahasiswa PhD pasti paling mengerti hal ini.

Incoming search terms:

• kuliah di selandia baru

I used to be envious to my friends who posted happy and smiling faces in faceboook during their graduate study in overseas. Winning a scholarship is like getting a lottery. Yay vacation, and it’s paid by the rich government from developed country!

Ironically that’s one of the (wrong) factors that motivated me to apply scholarship. Vacation.

Well shoot me. I’m wrong. BIG TIME WRONG.

Perhaps, changing my discipline is one of the biggest decision in my life. I found it tough to apply job for international relations graduate. I applied job to several IR-related organizations such as ASEAN and some other political think-tank companies only to find my application was rejected or no job vacancy available. I was very lucky when one of my friend who worked in consulting company left for ASEAN in 2011 and he approached me to fill the slot since I just left my job in financial investment company (which was fun btw, unfortunately I couldn’t handle my supervisor as he made me felt miserably stupid).

After getting my 1st job in this consulting company, I was getting bored and felt like I didn’t go anywhere. I was starting to google about anotherIR-related job and boy, I was lucky again, a strategic communication company was looking for jack-all-trade, a generalist who is capable to understand anything quickly which sounds like quality for any IR graduate.

My last job was fun (minus the indoor smoking, I liked everyone there. One of the best job experience I had, and all my bosses are awesome) though fortunately I was saved by the universe when I got the NZAID scholarship to study development studies in Massey University.

I picked development studies because I have been long time interested in economy. Well not pure economy actually, but more like political economy. Since my discipline is rooted from political science, I imagine it would be very tough for me to study economics since they deal with alien language such as equation (with funny assumption that market is perfect). I thought development studies will suit my need since after all, economics and development are intertwined aren’t they?

Well shoot me again. I’m wrong. BIG TIME WRONG.

Unlike development studies in Indonesia which falls under category “economy” (and usually located in economic faculty). Development studies in Massey is located in Geography building (!!!).

All this year I have been studying following papers (courses):

• Development Management: Paper about practical things in the field, useful for people who work as development practitioner.
• Development and Underdevelopment: Theoretical stuffs about development, from adam smith to modern day theories about development. A lot of theories here. Tough, brain-frying but still fun.
• Sustainable Development: Paper about sustainable development, environment, bla bla bla.

So far my grade has been “B” flat on average. I’m still struggling to improve my score to get average B+ so I can do thesis next year. However it’s not easy. Due to almost radically different paradigms, sometimes I find it’s tough to follow the topic of this discipline since they do not really emphasize on interest, but how do the relations among actors caused poverty and underdevelopment. It’s still essentially social science. International relations graduate could study this without problem, but they could find it tougher than previous discipline like what I feel at the moment.

Back then during my undergrad time, I found international relations was easier. All I need was just keeping in touch with world news. Know everything as much as possible. Pick favorite theories to see these pattern on interaction. My GPA was 3.25 out of 4 which was not that incredibly high but still good nonetheless, and I could accept it without problem since I have always been straight B student.

However now I realized that I’m entering a discipline that is contradictory with my previous discipline because many IR theories do not regard actors than states as important actors. In other hand, this development studies is a study that slicing up that black box.

People who love theories such as realism, neo-realism, or liberalism that simplify IR actors into monolithic state entities will find development studies intimidating, as it recognized importance of non-state actors such as international organizations, NGO, and humans. During my study in IR we only got very few classes where these topics were covered, namely in NGOs and Civil Society Empowerment (taught by Bob Sugeng Hadiwinata) or Political Economy of Development (taught by Sapta Dwikardana). I got A and C for these two classes, and I just aware the development studies resembles the latter. Just imagine my horror: what have I gotten myself into?

The most interesting part is of course, when my lecturer few weeks ago said to us that they were not economists. Their background were actually consisted of various discipline, such as geography. And I was like “huh!?” (and unlike my college where I was surrounded by geeky, awesome people where we can chat about our subjects in casual manner, I don’t have these kind people around). I feel it’s kinda not fair for me to discuss subjects that are not their specialty and wishing they could provide answer as easy as googling. The worse part everyone ironically thought I’m an economist because I always talk about political economy (nerdier subjects as currency reserve, the Fed, monetary policy, free trade, etc). Although to be honest how many economic students here could discuss with me the impact of quantity easing.

I’m not sure whether it’s the best choice for me to pick development studies in Massey yet because it seems the discipline is not the branch from economics. Here is a study where development are centered to humans and grassroot. Since my interest in economy was sparked from class “International Political Economy” (taught by Kristian Pakpahan), I was expecting I will revisit my favorite class again. Uh wrong. This class has nothing to do with monetary/fiscal policy. They talk about approach in development theories after World War II, but it’s just so different compared to political economy.

Leaving my comfort zone and previous discipline was the biggest choice in my life. I always love IR. In fact I have always been thinking what could have been had I picked international relations as my graduate degree… but then I remind myself, I have to face reality. The job for IR-graduates is very scarce. I think you need personal connection and incredibly lucky to find the right job and making it as your career choice. I don’t want to repeat the first two years of my life after getting my bachelor degree.

Development studies graduates have better chance to work in development management field, and working in organizations such as UNDP, ADB, or World Bank. One of the most problematic with international relations graduate is that it is too general. Sure there are market out there looking for “generalist”. But how many? Sure I was getting employed by strategic communication company due to my background in international relations, but not everyone was lucky like me. A graduate should have specialization, which unfortunately making IR as graduate study as unwise choice if you are not really sure where do you want to work in the future.

Taking IR as your graduate degree may be more relevant by these who are already working in relevant field. But if you haven’t been employed by right employer and in the right field, taking international relations may not the best path. Sure it might be fun. It might be easier for me since I’m deeply interested in it, but unfortunately it’s not suitable for my situation.

Am I regretting to take development studies? No, not at all. At the moment I’m having a short-term labor that sends me waves of anxiety (read: crazy deadlines and fear that my grades will decline beyond the stable ‘B’) but I still can handle the pressure at the moment. It would be worse if I studied something that incredibly pressure-free and found myself struggling without proper job after graduating. I will revisit this post perhaps 2-3 years later after I graduate and see if I actually had made right choice.

Another emo post because I cannot sleep tonight.

It’s 11:00 PM in New ZeEaland. I just went back from a faculty trip to wellington, all my body felt hurt (gulped 3 paracetamol today) and it’s incredibly cold in palmerston north.

I tried to sleep but found myself awake. Insomnia? I’m not sure. But when I closed my eyes, I remembered a lot of random things like my plan for winter break, visiting my sister in australia, catching up journal readings… and the worst?

Remembering your old friends in home country. When I said “old friends”, it’s not the forgettable classmates. It’s my college friends from Bandung.

Social skill is never my best skill. Growing up with books and limited friend circle made me have a relatively few close friends. I remember when my friends in high school were planning to go to ancol together. I felt awkward when I said I wanted to go with them as well. I asked them, was it fine if I participated with them as well? My friend said enthusiastically, why not? Let’s go together! At first I backed off that offer, I felt it was improper to me to  join their “gang”. But the barrier probably was in my head because that “gang” was not really gang at all, they were all just groups of classmates that sat around a very close seats and had more interaction.

However, as my high school life was one academic hell, I almost had time to think about social circle for the next two year since I was struggling in my first and second year. When I entered college in 2004, I said to myself, because I didn’t make a really lot friends during my high school because my failing grades, therefore I would be more active in organizations and dismiss my antisocial lifestyle.

And boy, that was unexpected. The social life in my undergraduate degree is probably the best time in my life. I made several lifetime best friends there. We shared laugh and (academic) misery together. The four years of my life felt like yesterday. It has been… almost 9 years since I entered college.

If there is one remarkable memory in my life. It’s my birthday. I kinda forget whether it was the one in 2005/2006/2007/2008. However basically some of my friends “kidnapped” me during midnight, and they gave me surprise party. It happened twice, the latter was more simple though. They just dropped in my flat and dropped me a cake. Simple but memorable.

Honestly ever since my oma passed away in 2005, I has never been looking forward to celebrate my birthday on 3rd march because I live separately with my sister whose birthday falls on 28th february. It has always been custom to celebrate our birthdays together ever since we were toddlers. When I lived in Bandung however, I couldn’t return to my home in tangerang, probably because I had assignments or something, I really forget.

Life is full of surprises isn’t it. When my friend gave me a suprise birthday party, I was really happy.

How happy? It’s like all world’s happiness are condensed into a single moment of eternity.

When I close my eyes, I still could remember the happiness. A feeling of being grateful for the affections given by my friends. I didn’t expect that coming. Why they gave me surprise party for example? For what reason? Me of all people?

I don’t know why I randomly suffers such alienation tonight. I just had a full-day trip to wellington with my new friends here. It was really fun and exciting. But when I entered my room tonight, I feel my energy is drained (introvert syndrome? Bipolar disorder? mood swing?. Instead of feeling of happy and being grateful, I feel being isolated and missing friends I used to have fun with.

Worsened when facebook kept the old photos. It multiplies the agony and made me remember that this year is indeed awful.

This year’s birthday is probably my worst birthday ever because I didn’t celebrate it. My latin american friend’s whose birthday fell on 2nd march celebrated it and I went to the party as well. Then when I remembered that my party would come tomorrow, I kept asking myself: was it normal that I didn’t want to celebrate with the new people I just met here because I barely knew them? Should I really celebrate? Does it worth their time?

One of my Indonesian friend told me she was willing to cook and invite people to make a small party. I was grateful for her offering, but at the same time I felt that I don’t worth their attention. We just happened to be friend and just don’t know each other yet, I felt it was improper request. Thus, my birthday passed just like as it is. Back in home, I usually celebrated if my sister was around.

However when she went to australia, I stopped celebrating my birthday party and think as usual day where my family and I had small dinner together. Perhaps I will have more courage to invite people to my birthday party next year as we probably know each other better (plus my cooking skill has been improving compared since I came here first time). Anyway, it’s no longer a big deal since my birthday has passed like months ago anyway.

They say everyone will have homesick syndrome when living overseas. I admit that, I miss my old friends. They say one of the best way to prevent this is by making new friends. Well I do. I have made a lot of new friends here. Being a student of social science, I find that I actually could become friend to everyone.

I have made  close indonesian and foreign friends here, but as for now, I’m not sure whether they consider me as “close friend” or not. It’s kinda scary when you think unilatarally that  you are close with someone, while this person might think you are just one of the forgettable people. It’s easier to protect yourself being hurt for being forgotten and rejected by minimizing your affection until you fully confirm it is safe to trust them completely.

It’s amazing that I found myself tonight, for being sad and almost crying for missing some people other than my oma. I don’t really miss my family (yet). I miss my friends most. I miss your laughter.

This is an emotional/sentimental post, so better get out if you want to avoid the drama of my life  

On 16 April, a best friend of mine just told me that she’s going to have marriage this year.  I was like very surprised. I wished this day wouldn’t come. I have prepared myself since she said it’s probably will be this year. But I keep making selfish wish, couldn’t it be just… a little longer? And when she told me the date,  I was feeling a bittersweet happiness and became overly sentimental  (I’m piscean, so please bear with it).

I have been friend with her for 17 years. She’s a very precious friend to me, and one of the only very few persons I really care and love.  Heck, we have been in same school since 5th grade of primary school! We got separated once we graduated from high schools, we still kept in touch though it was not as many as it used to be. However we occasionally had fun together. What I mean having fun is like, having lunch, food, or window-shopping bookstore, talking all kind of things, starting from school, life issues, newest book, basically anything.

When she told me about her marriage plan that morning, I was very happy, but at same time felt sad. I feel that she will be going far far away. I feel that once your (best) friends are getting married, they become overly distant. They no longer have time for you, since they have met their soulmate after all. You can no longer have time in their life. Your friend, they all will dedicate their time with their family, for their children.

I realized that I depend on them psychologically. Sometimes when I feel I don’t have place in this world, I will just go and approach them, they will just listen and give me their time. That’s what I love from my friends, they give me time, a thing that I never got from my family except from my grandmother.

I said to her, oh you are getting married. I’m so happy for you. I want you to be happy, if you’re happy, I’m happy as well. By the way guys, I love you so much.

If I could hug them right now, I probably will squeeze them while crying.  I said to them, hey I’m going to be alone again. But it’s okay, I’m now young adult, I’m wiser than I used to be. I could walk alone now. I don’t want to be unrealistically think that NOTHING will change.

Actually in contrary, I’m learning to accept that, everything will change. We won’t be longer have time to spend time together again, simply because scarcity of time.

I said to them, thank you for the beautiful memories. They filled all the loneliness in my life all this time by simply being there and giving me time. But good things always come to end, eh?  That’s why the happiness, is felt bittersweet. It tastes sweet, yet bitter. You want to be happy and want to be sad at same time.

However it’s still happiness. There is some part of me that is sad. Perhaps because I’m the youngest in my family, and my friends are the oldest ones, they treat me unconsciously like a little brother. I gotta admit that I’m always spoiled brat to them, and they don’t mind. Perhaps that’s what makes them one of my dearest persons in this world.

It doesn’t mean that I have no friends other than them. I have a lot of friends I met in college. However both of them have special in my heart. Perhaps because the fact that I have been around with them almost everyday for more than 14 years. During high school, we always went home together. The three is incomplete when only two is around. If I recalled all these memories, it felt nice. Somewhat it made me happy. They made me feel needed, unconditionally.

I’m glad though, I have told my two best friends that I loved them, so I won’t repeat the same regret. At least they know my feeling. I think it’s also improvement, I now could express my emotion. Something that I’ve never done before.

Most people in the past are… not part of your present, let alone in the future

Being here, surrounded by new friends, experiencing new emotions and excitement made me realize that… most people in the past are not part of your present, and the future. I keep in touch with my high school and college friends because they are the latest social circle I was involved with, we’re not strangers despite not interacting much in the social media. However it’s different when I interacted with my friends from junior high and primary schools. I reunited with them in facebook to know how they were doing… and after that? Nothing. No interaction, nothing, they just become one of the random people you found in internet.

I have been unfriending my friends in facebook to trim up my friendlist and keeping only these who still remember me. I now learn that, you don’t have really keep in touch with most of your friends, but only with the few closest ones. Simply, because they are not  part of your present or future.

Here in New Zealand, I experience how to make friends with people from different culture and background, and was surprised to find that I’m actually sociable person (!!). Honestly I associate myself as introvert, boring, bookish person and hard to deal with new people. But looks like my study in international relations forced me (for good), to socialize instead spending my time with books.

I’m still socially awkward at times because I always enjoy discussing topics that deemed “not fun” by most people.  That makes me realized why I have just a few friends who considers me in their social circle, simply because we share similar interest and niche. Sometimes I miss them here because there are not many people from similar background. But I guess it’s okay, international relations and political science have taught me how to use different masks in various social environment.

I’m quite content with my social life at the moment. I’m not sure how many of them will end up as strangers in the future, however I will judge it 10-20 years later.

For people whom I met in the past

 So long and thank you for the memories

…because I have more friends than I know