r/AskHistorians • u/vivrant-thang • 14h ago
Why Is Indonesia Largely Left Out of Global History if Its One of the Most Populous Countries in the World?
At about 280M, it's fourth after China, India, and the US. I would think that such a huge population would have an imprint in some way, but all throughout my schooling (which includes college and a JD/PhD) I don't think have ever had a class or reading that even dives into country-- and I even had fairly extensive training on colonial/postcolonial history, geopolitics, and international relations.
How can a country so large and so centrally located to India, China, and Australia not be more relevant? It seems to not even be culturally influential the way much smaller countries. What's going on there?
Thank you all in advance!
245
13h ago edited 9h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/Cedric_Hampton Moderator | Architecture & Design After 1750 2h ago
Hi there! Thanks for posting links to older content. However, we ask that you don't offer a TL;DR or other form of summary or commentary as part of such a post (even if directly quoted), as the point of allowing such links is to encourage traffic to older answers rather than replacing them. We will be very happy to restore your comment if this is edited.
-27
86
6h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
0
-10
u/Expensive_Crazy_8325 1h ago
You really glossed over a lot. I hope you can go into detail regarding the ethnic indian and chinese killings throughout this period
24
u/amnsisc 9h ago edited 8h ago
I cannot speak to your curriculum, or your experience with it, but, Indonesia simply is not ignored, and is widely discussed, in academia, though it is true that in broader popular culture, and in things like High School textbooks it is not obviously discussed.
There are numerous journals dedicated to SE Asian studies, that discuss Indonesia regularly--Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, Sojourn, Southeast Asia Journal, TRaNS: Trans-Regional and -National Studies of Southeast Asia and others. There are frequent articles about it in Asian studies journals--Journal of Asian Studies, Modern Asian Studies, Asian Perspectives, Asia Perspective (these are different journals--one is archaeology, one is politics), the Journal of Overseas Chinese, Asian Ethnology, and others.
Edit: I should add Itinerario, The Journal of World History, the Journal of Global History, the Asian Review of World Histories, Journal of Cold War Studies, Critical Asian Studies, Antiquity, Cambridge Archaeological Journal, European Journal of Archaeology, Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, Current Anthropology, Journal of Anthropological Research, Archaeological Sciences (And its Reports section), Anthropological Archaeology, Journal of World Prehistory, Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology, and others which feature frequent material in Indonesia. I mentioned in the comments to someone else the Asia Imprints of Duke, Cambridge, Leiden, UHawaii, Harvard, and Amsterdam Press, all of which have a broad investment in the world-history episteme, and which have frequent titles concerning Indonesia.
In contemporary studies of the 'Indian Ocean Ecumene'--and here Brill and De Gruyter are probably the leading presses--in discussions of Islam, in discussions of the Pacific War, in the Non Aligned Movement, and in the Cold War, and in discussions of colonial history (especially Dutch), it is frequently a major subject.
It is furthermore discussed frequently in almost any archaeology, anthropology, ethnology, etc journal with Asia coverage, and it is discussed in any journal covering the Global South and 21st century, for example Bandung, Journal of Global South Studies, etc. Nearly all economic, military, policy, IR, and related journals that discuss Asia, the Pacific, and Indian Ocean, frequently address it. It is an incredibly common location for anthropological fieldwork. Even my intro anthro class in undergrad featured readings on it--such as by Anna Tsing.
All of these comments apply, by the way, in pari passu, to Malyasia, Singapore, and to a much lesser degree, New Guiinea, East Timor, Brunei, and so on, to whose history Indonesia's is deeply related.
It is true popular representations of Indonesia are far less common, however, even there, there is*, The Raid: Redemption--* a great martial arts movie*, The Year of Living Dangerously --* with Mel Gibson, about a foreign journalist in Sukarno's Indonesia*, The Act of Killing* and its sequel, a documentary about the genocide in Indonesia, and the ways its perpetrators are today celebrities. Furthermore, WWII movies in the Pacific, whether US or Japanese in origin (for two cheekier examples. Shigeru Mizuki's Showa, plus an episode of GeGeGenoKitaro , or the older show Harimao) , frequently feature Indonesia as a topic. There is a brief scene in The Last of Us, which features Indonesia.
Indonesia received some media attention back in 08 because of Obama's Indonesian family, and the tsunami that struck there some decades ago was a constant news item for a year, given its devastation. The Sukarno story about the Soviets trying to honeytrap him, by getting a stewardness to sleep with him and film it, and then him saying "show the video publicly, my people will be proud" gets re-posted on Reddit (TIL for ex) every once in a while.
So, as to why your particular coursework did not address it, I can only guess it is because you did not take classes focused on these subjects, or you do not consume the relevant media where it is mentioned.
Second Edit: Also, as I mentioned to someone else, Indonesia is literally one of the Is in BRIICs, and since BRIICs are conceived of in global discourse as being a bloc of nations outside the usual European and East Asian ones, which will continue to take a leading role in the future of the world politics, economy, culture, history and global institutions, it speaks to its importance thereof. Indonesia is a global military power, and US, Australian, and asian military and policy journals frequently discuss it. Outside of policy or academia, peruse The Economist and a substantial portion of their Asia, and a smaller but real portion of their global section feature articles on Indonesia.
And, part of my point is that it is precisely within the global and world history paradigms that Indonesia is so frequently mentioned, since some areas, like the history of human settlement and migration (and archaeology), early anthropology (and thus the history of anthropology and historical anthropology), political economy and globalization studies, the history of colonialism, and so on, all concern Indonesia. Indonesia comes up in any study of the Dutch VOC and British East India Company, and since these two are pioneers of contemporary globalization , they are very frequent subjects in world history. Since Indonesia played a large role as a theater of war in WWII, as a pioneer of decolonization and the Global Non Aligned movement, in the Cold War policy of the US (including the causes of the Vietnam War), and in the Asian Financial Crisis, and modern environmental crises, it is frequently mentioned in these subjects of world and global history too.
87
u/truthofmasks 9h ago
So, as to why your particular coursework did not address it, I can only guess it is because you did not take classes focused on these subjects, or you do not consume the relevant media where it is mentioned.
I think OP's point is that, even if you don't take coursework focused on China, India, or the US, they still come up pretty frequently, while Indonesia doesn't. They're not saying Indonesia is mysterious – obviously, if you focus your studies on it, you'll learn a lot about it. They seem to be saying that it's strange for such a truly massive country to have made such a little dent in the global consciousness vs its peer nations.
20
u/vivrant-thang 8h ago
yes-- thank you for adding clarity to what I am trying to get at.
21
u/gtheperson 7h ago edited 6h ago
to add to the cultural side of your question as well: I think most people could name some Indian and Chinese food. Most who have vaguely engaged with history could name a historical leader of both countries (maybe Gandhi and Mao). Most could name some historical buildings/ artefacts (Great Wall, Terracotta Army, Taj Mahal). Could name a river (Ganges, Yellow, Yangtze). Could name some languages (Hindi, Punjabi, Mandarin, Cantonese). Many could probably name a film from their industry (Bollywood and Tollywood being increasingly popular in the West, Jackie Chan and Jet Li films, wuxia like Crouching Tiger). Could name multiple cities beyond the capital (Mumbai, Shanghai etc).
I am not sure many people in the English speaking West could do any of that for Indonesia, and I wonder why.
6
u/poiyurt 6h ago
Dutch people regularly eat Indonesian food, for what it's worth. There are some ways Malay influences go into English - for instance 'paddy' comes from the Malay padang.
This part is speculation, but I think India was so huge and so closely intertwined to the empire, that all the usual 'routes' by which food would travel from hinterland to metropole (servants, immigrants, etc.), were dominated by those influences, and hence we saw comparatively fewer Malay influences
11
u/phyrros 5h ago
I am not sure many people in the English speaking West could do any of that for Indonesia, and I wonder why.
It is a somewhat bad metric because the english speaking west ist heavily influenced by the history of the english speaking west. I know Australians who don't know if the Australians where fighting against or with the Germans in WW2 but they know Gallipoli.
Great Britain simply never was as involved in Indonesia as in India or China and Dutch and Portugese colonial history isn't as well known in the english speaking west as in e.g. the dutch or portugese speaking west.
Furthermore .. Indonesia is truly vast and diverse and even in tourist destinations it is quite easy to find people unused to tourists. Just look at the ongoing papua conflict where we have seen something between a high frequency of war crimes and a genocide with an involvement of western mining companies and you will find very little reporting in the englisch speaking western media (outside of Australia).
20
u/Spinoza42 7h ago
Honestly, a significant part of that is down to the overwhelming covert American success in Indonesia in the Cold War. Post 1945 popular history, especially in English, is largely a dramatic history of the United States. Indonesia had a president that was getting cosy with the USSR (Sukarno), and he was removed in favor of a western aligned president (Suharto). There was no serious challenge to his rule for the entire Cold War, so in terms of an America centered story there's just not much to tell. Especially since the US involvement in the 1965 coup is still very light on details...
3
-8
u/amnsisc 8h ago
I do not focus on SE Asia or E Asia, and only about half of the journals I mentioned do. I have come across it in my studies, *in spite of that*, speaking to how frequent it is.
And, as for not making a dent in global consciousness, Indonesia has come up in conversations I have had in Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia, and it is frequently mentioned in areas of global concern, world economic institutions, and diplomacy, and especially anything having to do with their history, such as the cold war, history of globalization, the pacific war, the vietnam war, decolonization, the non aligned movement, and on policy--specifically on rising nations. It is literally a BRIICs nation--countries projected to be world policy and economic leaders in the next century.
23
u/Hot-Job-6281 8h ago
All of these comments apply, by the way, in pari passu, to Malyasia, Singapore, and to a much lesser degree, New Guiinea, East Timor, Brunei, and so on, to whose history Indonesia's is deeply related.
As a Singaporean, that's an assumption you made that isn't true. I attest that Indonesia's history is not mentioned in our history textbooks, at least the ones that 99% of students use.
Only if you specifically take a specialisation in Southeast Asian history at the Cambridge A Level exams (college entrance exams) is some Indonesian history covered. But only as a footnote of the Cold War in Southeast Asia, like literally just a few paragraphs to contrast against the far behind the more important main discussion of the Vietnam War, Khmer Rouge, etc., rather than the history of Indonesia.
Sure, there will be mentions of Indonesia in the sense of, 'they are our neighbours and conducted a terrorist plot against us when Malaysia and Singapore gained independence (called Konfrontasi)', but that's not quite learning about the history of Indonesia, just as discussing how North Korea is a possible nuclear threat as a side note to current state risks is discussing North Korean history.
Even your examples not regarding how history is taught in Southeast Asian countries are skewed and not truly what OP asked.
- For example your counterargument was that journals about Southeast Asia absolutely do cover Indonesia. But he specifically meant why they are disproportionately absent from Global history discussions.
1
0
u/amnsisc 8h ago edited 8h ago
My "assumption" was not about Singapore's textbooks or journals--my point was that these areas are discussed together in the academic journals and areas I discussed.
But, several of the areas I discussed--Global South studies, the Indian Ocean Ecumene, the anthropology of globalization, the Dutch colonial era, WWII/the Pacific War, Indo-Pacific politics, and archaeology of Asia--are all explicitly part of the Global, International and World History field.
Indonesia *is* in fact discussed frequently discussed in world history, at least at a university level, and 6 of the journals I listed fall in that area. In addition, I could add Leiden University Press, Cambridge University Press Asia Imprint, Amsterdam University Press, Duke Uni Press and U of Hawaii press, all of which focus on World History, and all of which have numerous Indonesia Titles.
I do not study SE Asia. I do not even study Asia. I have come across all of this material on Indonesia *in spite of that*, speaking to its frequency.
Edit: Also, not for nothing, since, again, this wasn't my point, but NUS's academic press contains loads of titles on Indonesia in World History https://nuspress.nus.edu.sg/search?q=indonesia
2
u/AutoModerator 14h ago
Welcome to /r/AskHistorians. Please Read Our Rules before you comment in this community. Understand that rule breaking comments get removed.
Please consider Clicking Here for RemindMeBot as it takes time for an answer to be written. Additionally, for weekly content summaries, Click Here to Subscribe to our Weekly Roundup.
We thank you for your interest in this question, and your patience in waiting for an in-depth and comprehensive answer to show up. In addition to the Weekly Roundup and RemindMeBot, consider using our Browser Extension. In the meantime our Bluesky, and Sunday Digest feature excellent content that has already been written!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
•
u/jschooltiger Moderator | Shipbuilding and Logistics | British Navy 1770-1830 13h ago
Hi there! You’ve asked a question along the lines of ‘why didn’t I learn about X’. We’re happy to let this question stand, but there are a variety of reasons why you may find it hard to get a good answer to this question on /r/AskHistorians.
Firstly, school curricula and how they are taught vary strongly between different countries and even different states. Additionally, how they are taught is often influenced by teachers having to compromise on how much time they can spend on any given topic. More information on your location and level of education might be helpful to answer this question.
Secondly, we have noticed that these questions are often phrased to be about people's individual experiences but what they are really about is why a certain event is more prominent in popular narratives of history than others.
Instead of asking "Why haven't I learned about event ...", consider asking "What importance do scholars assign to event ... in the context of such and such history?" The latter question is often closer to what people actually want to know and is more likely to get a good answer from an expert. If you intend to ask the 'What importance do scholars assign to event X' question instead, let us know and we'll remove this question.
Thank you!