Mankind has regularly witnessed the immense destruction wrought by natural disasters. Similarly destructive to human life are man-made atrocities, like war and genocide. Those who are lucky enough to have survived either type of cataclysmic event must then begin the process of confronting and reconciling the memories of the catastrophe that befell them.  Public commemorations of these events have run the gamut from poetry and works of art to government sponsored “truth commissions” and institutional reform.

The ways in which people chose to memorialize hardship, whether organized by a group or expressed by an individual, offer illuminating insights into the human psyche and post-conflict justice and also provide valuable information about a society, government or culture.

Several Stanford groups are sponsoring a series of events and research projects designed to explore the many facets of the human phenomena called ‘memory’. Scholars participating in the endeavor, entitled “Contemporary History and the Future of Memory,” represent a broad spectrum of disciplines, but share a common objective: to analyze the range of ways that people have coped with adversity in the past so that future communities may benefit their experience. Attention to the role that memory plays in helping people move beyond tragedy is especially pertinent now as citizens of Chile and Haiti transition from survival to recovery after the devastating earthquakes that took place in each country.

“Contemporary History and the Future of Memory” began in the spring of 2008 with the launch of a multi-year research and public policy program sponsored by Stanford’s Forum on Contemporary Europe (FCE) and the Division of Literature, Cultures, and Languages (DLCL.) The aim of that program, as described on the DLCL website, is to investigate “how communities that have undergone deep and violent political transformations try to confront their past.”

In the fall of 2009 the Program on Human Rights at the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law joined the initiative, bringing with them expertise in reconciliation, a fundamental phase in the cycle of memory.  The series title was amended to “History, Memory & Reconciliation” in recognition of their contribution. This year’s events featured a visit by Gayatri Chakravarty Spivak, the internationally renowned scholar of comparative literature from Columbia University, who addressed the subject of cultural and linguistic memory. During the spring quarter human rights and memory will be addressed in separate events by two guest scholars. Cambridge Anthropologist Harri Englund gave a talk on April 6th and University of Chile Law professor José Zalaquett will take part in several events on April 22nd and 23rd, including a lecture on Post-Conflict International Human Rights: Bright Spots, Shadows, Dilemmas.

Four Stanford scholars co-chair “History, Memory & Reconciliation.” They are French Professor Elisabeth Mudimbe-Boyi, Assistant Professor of English Saikat Majumdar, Law School lecturer and FSI fellow Helen Stacy, and Roland Hsu, Assistant Director of FSI’s Forum on Contemporary Europe.

Professors Majumdar and Boyi answered a few questions about the value of delving into memory and how humanities research informs the broader dialogue. Read the full interview here.

Prominent Indonesian Muslim intellectual Nurcholish Madjid once declared “Islam Yes; Islamic political party No!” Voters in contemporary Indonesia seem to agree with this basic sentiment. Despite the recent Islamic revival that has dramatically increased public expressions of piety, Islamic political parties have failed to gain any significant electoral traction in Indonesia. In fact, between the 2004 and 2009 national elections, support for Islamic parties actually decreased from 38 percent to approximately 28 percent. Yet during those same five years, the Islamic political parties that failed to win at the ballot box mobilized enough political and popular support to pass one of Indonesia’s most divisive pieces of legislation—the Anti-Pornography Law. These seemingly contradictory elements of Indonesian politics provide starkly different impressions of Islam’s political role. Does a weak showing in the country’s electoral politics indicate the imminent demise of Islam in Indonesian politics? Or does the politically adept maneuvering of Islamists—who seek political power through legislation about bodily discipline—foretell gloomy days ahead?

Explanations for this paradox depend largely on where we look for “the political.” Political scientist Greg Fealy has described Islam in Indonesia as a mosaic. If we spend too much time focusing our gaze on one single area, he observes, we lose sight of other patterns elsewhere in the mosaic. To understand political Islam by ballot box alone is to miss the cultural undercurrents that have direct bearing on Islam and politics in Indonesia.

The anti-pornography bill was not only a political battle waged inside the parliament building; it was also a media drama that played out in the newspapers, televisions, and on the Internet. Human rights and women’s advocacy groups vehemently protested an early version of the bill, which stipulated that women would be prevented from leaving their homes during certain evening hours. From a different vantage point, the mostly Hindu island province of Bali threatened to secede, arguing that the article prohibiting “revealing” clothing in public would wreak havoc on the island’s tourism industry, still sluggish after devastating bomb attacks in 2002 and 2005. Whereas many non-Muslims worried about the “Islamization” of Indonesia, proponents of the bill lamented the “degradation of national morality.”

Popular Muslim television preachers were among the bill’s most vocal supporters. Eager to parlay their celebrity appeal into political clout, TV preachers Ustad Jefri Al-Buchori and Arifin Ilham helped to lead the so-called Million Muslim March to rally public support for the anti-pornography bill. Celebrity preacher and self-help guru Abdullah Gymnastiar led a sophisticated multimedia campaign to promote the bill through television, radio, the Internet, text messages, and public rallies. All of these popular preachers, in step with the political strategy of the Indonesian Council of Ulamas, invoked the religio-political language of moral crisis in an attempt to control the terms of political debate. Unable to win an election, Islamic groups flexed their moral muscle in the public sphere. From the pulpit of his Sunday afternoon television program, Gymnastiar characterized those against the bill as “having no shame” before God or country. Nearly every single political party, anxious not to appear “un-Islamic,” voted to support the anti-pornography legislation.

The political participation of a new generation of media-savvy religious leaders reveals a sentiment quite different from Nurcholish Madjid’s liberal aspirations. As one proponent of the Anti-Pornography Law put it, “Islamic political party No; Political Islam Yes!” Whereas utopian visions of the international caliphate may not resonate with Indonesian voters, it appears that political Islam—as played out on the public stage—is alive and well. What remains to be seen, however, is whether those who engage in the politics of piety also have the moral courage to champion Indonesia’s more pressing issues of poverty and corruption.

------------------

Shorenstein APARC Dispatches are regular bulletins designed exclusively for our friends and supporters. Written by center faculty and scholars, Shorenstein APARC Dispatches deliver timely, succinct analysis on current events and trends in Asia, often discussing their potential implications for business.

يقوم برنامج الإصلاح و الديمقراطية في العالم العربي بمركز الديمقراطية و التنمية و سيادة القانون في جامعة ستانفرد، بتحليل الديناميات الإجتماعية و السياسية ذاخل البلدان العربية. كما يقوم بتحليل أنظمتها السياسية وذلك من خلال التركيز على الأوضاع، الفرص، و الطرق الممكنة من أجل تفعيل الإصلاحات الديمقراطية بالمنطقة.

و يستقطب هذا البرنامج المتعدد الإختصاصات محاضرين و مشاركين من مختلف مراكز صناعة القرار، منظمات المجتمع المدني، المنظمات الغير حكومية، الإعلام، و المجتمعات السياسية. بالإضافة إلى استقطاب فعاليات أخرى ،من العالم العربي، من مختلف الخلفيات و المرجعيات. وذلك من أجل بحث كيفية إمكانية ترسيخ الديمقراطية و تأسيس حكامة مسؤولة و عادلة كتحدي عام يواجه المنطقة ككل و بالأخص ذاخل بعض البلدان و المجتمعات.

ويهذف هذا البرنامج إلى أن يكون منبعا للرصيد المعرفي حول مواضيع الحكامة الجيدة والإصلاح السياسي في المجتمعات العربية، من خلال إنتاج بحوث أكاديمية دقيقية و سباقة تقوم على أساس عمل ميداني ذاخل العالم العربي يتيح فرصة التعبير أمام مختلف الآراء والأصوات.

كما يستفيد هذا البرنامج من المشاركات الغنية و القيمة للمجتمع الأكاديمي بجامعة ستانفرد بكل مكوناته:  أساتذة، باحثون، وطلبة. بالإضافة إلى المساهمات القيمة لشركائنا في العالم العربي و أوروبا.

وتتضمن النشاطات الخاصة بالبرنامج مايلي:

بحث متعدد الإختصاصات: يعمل البرنامج على إنجاز بحث متعدد الإختصاصات في مجال السياسة مركزا على أوجه متعددة للإصلاح و الديمقراطية في العالم العربي. و يتم ذلك من خلال مشاريع بحوث قصيرة وطويلة المدى، يتم العمل عليها عبر مواضيع منفردة بالإضافة إلى بحوث أكثر شمولية تركز على بلدان عربية محددة. ويتكلف أعضاء فريق البرنامج بالقيام بالأبحاث بالإضافة إلى الشركاء الدولين.

برنامج الباحث الزائر: يستظيف برنامج الإصلاح و الديمقراطية في العالم العربي باحثين و مهنيين رائدين من أجل استكمال و القيام ببحوث فريدة خلال اقامتهم بمركزالديمقراطية و التنمية و سيادة القانون.

تداريب: يعمل البرنامج على خلق فرص تداريب جديدية بالنسبة لطلبة ستانفرد لتمكينهم من قضاء بعض الوقت في العالم العربي و أيضا لتمكينهم من العمل ذاخل المركز.

ورشات ونذوات: يستظيف البرنامج عدة نذوات، الورشات ومحاضرات، غالبا بالتعاون مع شركائنا بستانفرد و بأماكن أخرى، كما يستضيف أحداث أخرى بالعالم العربي.

مطبوعات: يشارك البرنامج في نشر’مجلة الشرق الأوسط للثقافة و التواصل‘ و هي مجلة متعددة التخصصات [تنشر من طرف برل]. كما يقوم البرنامج بنشر مقالات و مسودات و كتب محررة.