Ketimpangan dan Kontinuitas Patronase dalam Lintasan Sejarah: Menelusuri Sejarah Perubahan Agraria di Malang Selatan
Abstract
Abstract: Opinions that perceive villages (desa) as solid entity, traditional, reservoir of labor and foodcrops, have been intensively criticized. On the contrary, villages are filled with social-political tension, class difference, and became areas where large conflicts in history also took place. This article develops the second argument, which tries to trace agrarian transformation through history: from the colonial period, independence and the New Order. By presenting a case study in South Malang, East Java, this article aim to show that village dynamics are controlled by patronage relation, where agrarian policies only benefited certain groups in the village. Historical analysis also shows how patronage relation persisted, although the state had changed. Violence that occurred in regime change did not necessarily transform the patronage relation in the village, instead strengthened it through the formation of new alliances. Agrarian policies that are going to be developed in the present should notice this power relation. The question of ‘who gets what’ should be continuously raised by agrarian studies experts and policy makers.
Keywords: patronage relation, clientelism, class inequality, 1965 violence, colonial plantation, Malang-East Java
Intisari: Pandangan yang melihat desa sebagai entitas solid, tradisional, reservoir tenaga kerja dan pangan, telah banyak dikritik. Sebaliknya, desa dipenuhi dengan ketegangan sosial-politik, perbedaan kelas dan area dimana konflik-konflik besar dalam sejarah juga terjadi. Artikel ini mengembangkan pandangan kedua, dan berusaha menelusuri perubahan agraria dari masa ke masa: periode kolonial, kemerdekaan dan Orde Baru. Dengan mengambil studi kasus di Malang Selatan, Jawa Timur, artikel ini menunjukkan bahwa dinamika desa dikuasai oleh relasi patronase, sehingga kebijakan-kebijakan agraria hanya menguntungkan kelompok tertentu di desa. Analisa historis juga memperlihatkan bagaimana relasi patronase terus bertahan, meskipun negara (dalam hal ini sistem pemerintahan) telah berubah. Kekerasan yang terjadi dalam perubahan-perubahan rezim tidak mengubah relasi patron di tingkat desa, namun justru memperkuatnya dengan memunculkan aliansi-aliansi baru. Kebijakan-kebijakan agraria yang akan diambil pada masa kini seyogyanya memperhatikan relasi kuasa tersebut, sehingga pertanyaan ‘siapa mendapat apa’ harus kerap dikedepankan oleh para pegiat studi agraria dan para pengambil kebijakan.
Kata kunci: relasi patronase, klientelisme, ketimpangan kelas, kekerasan 1965, perkebunan kolonial, Malang-Jawa Timur
Downloads
References
Anonim 1964, January 25, ‘Notes ketjil dari Malang Selatan: tragedi busung lapar perlu perhatian, Trompet Masjarakat.
Arsip Badan Perencanaan Daerah Jawa Timur.
Asmu 1964, 29 June, ‘Keterangan Asmu tentang aksi sepihak: aksi sepihak kaum tani, karena ada aksi sepihak tuan tanah II, Bintang Timur.
Bedner, A 2016, ‘Indonesian land law: integration at last? And for whom?’ In J. F. R. Mccarthy, Kathryn (Ed.), Land and development in Indonesia: searching for the people's sovereignty, ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute Singapore, Singapore.
Breman, J 1983, Control of land and labour in colonial Java: A case study of agrarian crisis and reform in the region of Cirebon during the first decades of the 20th century, Dordrecht Foris & Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde, Leiden.
______ 1989, Taming the Coolie Beast : Plantation Society and the Colonial Order in Southeast Asia, Oxford UP, Delhi.
Breman, J & Wiradi, G 2002, Good times and bad times in Rural Java: Case study of socio-economic dynamics in two villages towards the end of the twentieth century, KITLV, Leiden.
Crouch, H 1988, The army and politics in Indonesia, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, N.Y.
Djojohadiwikarso, K 1951, 31 Djanuari, Okupasi tanah, Suara Tani, tahun VI.
Eisenstadt, SN & Roniger, L 1980, Patron—client relations as a model of structuring social exchange’, Comparative studies in society and history, 22 (1), 42-77. doi:10.1017/S0010417500009154.
Elson, R 1984, Javanese peasants and the colonial sugar industry: impact and change in an East Java Residency, 1830-1940, Oxford University Press, Singapore.
G30S/PKI tahun 1965. Inventaris 316-a. Arsip Komando Daerah Militer V/ Brawijaya.
Hart, G, Turton, A & Fegan, B 1989, Agrarian transformations: local processes and the state in Southeast Asia, University of California Press, Berkeley, Calif.
Indonesia, PP 1955, Daftar angka-angka hasil pemilihan umum DPR, th. 1955, Pantitia Pemilihan Indonesia, Jakarta.
Kano?, H 1977, Land tenure system and the desa community in nineteenth-century Java (IDE special paper: no. 5). Institute of Developing Economies, Tokyo.
_____ 1990, Pagelaran: anatomi sosial ekonomi pelapisan masyarakat tani di sebuah desa Jawa Timur, Gadjah Mada University Press, Yogyakarta.
Keppy, P 2010, The politics of redress: war damage compensation and restitution in Indonesia and the Philippines, 1940-1957,: KITLV Press, Leiden.
Klinken, GV 2009, ‘Patronage democracy in Provincial Indonesia’, In N. W. a. K. S. Olle To?rnquist (Ed.), Rethinking popular representation, Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
Lund, CRN 2016, ‘Occupied! property, citizenship and peasant movements in Rural Java’, Development and Change, 47 (6), 1316-1337.
Malang, BPSK 2018, Kabupaten Malang dalam Angka 2018, BPS Kabupaten Malang, Malang.
Mortimer, R 1972, The Indonesian Communist Party and land reform, 1959-1965, Monash University, Victoria.
Nasution, AIAI 1953, Fundaments of guerilla warfare: related to the Indonesian defense system in the past and in the future, Indonesian Army Information, Djakarta.
Nederlansche Handel Maatschappij. 2.20.01. Inventory 11636. National Archief. The Hague, Belanda.
Nordholt, HS 2015, ‘From contest state to patronage democracy: the longue durée of clientelism in Indonesia’, In Henley, D & Peter, B (Ed.), Environment, trade and society in Southeast Asia: A longue dure?e perspective, Brill, Leiden.
Paulus, J 1917, Encyclopaedie van Nederlandsch-Indie: Eerste Deel A-G, Martinus Nijhoff & Brill, 's-Gravenhage & Leiden.
Ricklefs, M 2001, A history of modern Indonesia since c. 1200, Palgrave, Basingstoke.
Robison, R 1986, Indonesia: the rise of capital: S.l. Asian Studies Association of Australia, Allen & Unwin, Sydney.
Sagijati 1968, Pelaksanaan Undang-undang Pokok Agraria termasuk landreform dalam hubungannja dengan transmigrasi di daerah yang padat penduduknya (Kabupaten Malang), Skripsi Sarjana Muda, Akademi Agraria, Jogjakarta.
Slamet-VIS 1988, Views and strategies of the Indonesian peasant movement on the eve of its annihilation in 1965-1966. unknown: unknown.
Saptari, R 1995, Rural women to the factories: continuity and change in East Java's Kretek Cigarette Industry, Dissertation: University van Amsterdam.
Sardju, I 1957, Juli, ‘Aksi-aksi kaum tani mempertahankan tanah bekas kehutanan jang sudah lama dikerdjakan, Suara Tani, Tahun VIII no. 8.
Tj 1951, 31 Djanuari, Okupasi tanah, Suara Tani, tahun VI.
Utrecht, E 1973, ‘Land reform and Bimas in Indonesia. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 3 (2), 149-164. doi:10.1080/00472337308566863
Verslag Over Het Boekjaar 1895-1950. Inv. ZK 60163. Nederlandsch Economisch-Historisch Archief (NEHA). Internationaal Instituut voor Sociale Geschiedenis, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Welvaartcommissie, Dutch East Indies 1907, Onderzoek Naar de Mindere Welvaart Der Inlandsche Bevolking Op Java En Madoera. [IX, Economie van de Desa]: Samentrekking van de Afdeelingsverslagen over de Uitkomsten Der Onderzoekingen, H.M. van Dorp, Batavia.
White, BFH 1989, ‘Java: social differentiation, food production, and agrarian control’ In Hart, GT, Andrew & White, B (Ed.), Agrarian transformations: local processes and the state in Southeast Asia, University of California Press, California, Berkeley.
