anarchy in alifuru
Anarchy in Alifuru – The History of Stateless Societies in the Maluku Islands (2025) by bima satria putra
notes/quotes via 84 pg kindle version from anarchist library [https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/bima-satria-putra-anarchy-in-alifuru]:
14
intro
15
Therefore, this book provides space for a type of historiography for those who were conquered, marginalized, and on the periphery. I attempt to reconstruct what James C. Scott, in his book The Art of Not Being Governed: An Anarchist History of Upland Southeast Asia (2009), describes it as a “non-state space.” Scott’s study focuses on the highlands of Zomia in Southeast Asia, where societies had fled from state projects – slavery, conscription, taxes, forced labor, epidemics, and warfare – of the surrounding nation-states. This book is highly provocative and has sparked ongoing academic debates about the type of “anarchist” societies that are believed to have deliberately chosen to remain stateless.
james c scott.. art of not being governed..
16
In its historical definition, anarchism is certainly stateless, but stateless societies are not necessarily anarchist. Modern anarchism, which developed in Europe, is better understood in terms of specific ideological pillars and principles. When I use the term “anarchy” here, it refers more to a broader libertarian universe, which is not always connected with historical terms but includes struggles and initiatives against authoritarianism, opposition to domination, and advocacy for egalitarian forms of relationships. Anarchy in this context has nothing to do with the revolutionary socialist tradition of anarchism as seen in Bakunin, primarily because its focus is on alternative political institutions (which are stateless) and does not address other aspects such as economic structure or gender studies. However, I am not the first to use an anarchist approach outside its historical tradition. Scott is one such example, as well as the anarchist and anthropologist David Graeber, and Pierre Clastres with his classic work on South American Indian communities – specifically the Guayaki – titled Society Against the State (1977). A global overview of this approach is provided by Harold Barclay in People without Government (1992), with the subtitle “The Anthropology of Anarchism.”
mikhail bakunin.. david graeber..
This book is essentially a “history of anarchism,” examining stateless spaces in Maluku, or the extended eastern Indonesian region, where societies continued to follow local political traditions and norms.
rather.. a history of your defn of anarchism.. all still w/in the broad spectrum of sea world
Nevertheless, I propose that this stateless space be referred to as the “Alifuru World” as a counter-narrative to the “Maluku World” proposed by Leonard Y. Andaya. From the center of Ternate-Tidore civilization [Maluku], the islands to the south were considered the domain of wild, primitive, and uncivilized people. In local terms, Alifuru, which according to van Baarda (1895) comes from the Tidore vocabulary halefuru, consists of hale meaning “land” and furu meaning “wild” or “savage.” This is also why the southernmost sea in Maluku is called the Arafura Sea.
17
Therefore, this book adopts the understanding that there are dualism of worlds, or spaces, namely the world of Maluku and the world of Alifuru. These two spaces, the state and the stateless, the center and the periphery, have dynamic, layered, and diverse relationships that vary over time.
20
Chapter 1. Non-state Spaces: The Earliest European Reports
24
Unlike Ternate-Tidore, the absence of a king or single ruler in Banda compelled these leaders to act together to enforce political control or achieve shared economic benefits based on consensuses that was achieved through deliberations.
aka: form of m\a\p.. so .. cancerous distraction
25
“they could not really be regarded as having rulers,”” according to Dutch reports, because their leaders “had very little influence over their subjects, whose opinions they had to respect, and accommodate their administration to them.
but they did have influence.. ie: consensus ness is influence.. any form of democratic admin.. any form of m\a\p
28
Each village on Kisar Island was led by orang kaya from the marna class. English navigator George Windsor Earl (1841112) observed that the orang kaya in Kisar administered justice “like a father managing his family.” When Dutch sailor Dirk Hendrik Kolff anchored in Kisar in 1825, nearly all the orang kaya on the island gathered and deliberated:
still a form of m\a\p.. ie: father rules ness.. et al.. oi
29
The debates are occasionally continued for two or three days, but they are usually settled without much difference of opinion.”
aka: cancerous distractions.. any is too much.. any is maté trump law.. any is voluntary compliance.. et al
public consensus always oppresses someone(s)
The inhabitants of Kei Islands live in villages (ohoi) led by the orang kaya, most of whom are from the mel-mel class. According to Catholic missionary Geurtjens, who worked in the early 20th century, the orang kaya in Kei “used to be very independent governors in their villages.” Van Wouden (1968: 36) commented on this:
“…we must most likely interpret this to mean that each village was essentially an independent unit… He [orang kaya] was not allowed to act arbitrarily, and for all important matters, he had to hold meetings with the ‘elders’ of the family group.”
Stratification in Kei seems to have spread to the Tanimbar Islands, as their social classification is identical. However, the life of the Tanimbar people remained democratic. In the mid19th century, a pair of Scottish explorers, the Forbes, lived for some time with the Tanimbar people. Naturalist Anna Forbes (1887: 180) reported: “they are without rules, without masters, they do not understand how to obey; you can request, pay, barter, but you cannot command.” Her partner, Henry Ogg Forbes, a botanist, also observed:
not deep enough.. need all ness.. so need sans any form of m\a\p ness.. if any form of m\a\p (ie: any form of democratic admin).. then rulers ness..et al
30
Everyone is free to express their opinions in the assembly, including women.
that’s seat at the table ness.. not legit free ness.. oi
how we gather in a space is huge.. need to try spaces of permission where people have nothing to prove to facil curiosity over decision making.. because the finite set of choices of decision making is unmooring us.. keeping us from us..
ie: imagine if we listen to the itch-in-8b-souls 1st thing everyday & use that data to connect us (tech as it could be.. ai as augmenting interconnectedness)
the thing we’ve not yet tried/seen: the unconditional part of left to own devices ness
[‘in an undisturbed ecosystem ..the individual left to its own devices.. serves the whole’ –dana meadows]
there’s a legit use of tech (nonjudgmental exponential labeling) to facil the seeming chaos of a global detox leap/dance.. for (blank)’s sake..
ie: whatever for a year.. a legit sabbatical ish transition
32
“Because of egalitarian values in Buru culture, leaders must operate not by ordering people about, but by their personal charisma and ability to persuade their kinsmen to go along with what they suggest. Whether or not people caan (literally “listen to,” and in an extended sense “follow/go along with/obey”) a leader depends on his ability to persuade them to do so. Decision making is accomplished not by declaration of the geba emngaa – either individually or collectively – but by persuasion and ultimately by consensus among all those involved in a matter.”
ordering people about and persuade ness .. same song.. forms of people telling other people what to do
40
All decisions related to public affairs were always made through deliberations involving many people. In short, there was no centralization of power and accumulation of wealth as in state societies (we will discuss this further). This is what we mean by anarchy.
if decision ness.. deliberation ness.. et al.. then centralization et al.. so to me.. not legit free.. not legit w/o rule
42
Chapter 2. State Formation in Maluku
50
The authority of Ternate and Tidore in Halmahera, Seram, and Papua, at least, were not always able to reach inland areas inhabited by the Alifuru. They merely conquered, gain recognition or respect, and this at times were facilitated by the presence of Muslim trading villages along the coast.
60
Chapter 3. The Mardika Strategy: Preventing State Formation
Siwa-Lima as Primitive War
Reports from the Europeans, whether explorers, colonial officials, missionaries, or anthropologists, were filled with prejudices inherited from the ancient Greek and Roman paradigm regarding the division between the center of civilization and the periphery inhabited by barbarians. This paradigm did not change much until early modern writers like Thomas Hobbes, in his work Leviathan (1651). According to him, the natural state of humans is a condition of anarchic war of all against all. Thus, Antonio Galvão wrote the ancient tale of Bacan in the mid-16th century:
“Once long ago there were no kings and the people lived in kinship groups (Port., parentela) governed by elders. Since “no one was better than the other,” dissension and wars arose, alliances made and broken, and people killed or captured and ransomed.”
if legit free.. dissension/wars.. et al would be irrelevant s.. this is actually ie of myth of tragedy and lord et al
The absence of kings and states is at best seen as low culture, or at worst, depicted as uncivilized. Being stateless was considered equivalent to animals, for a society without a state was perceived as no society at all. The existence of state was seen as a pillar of order and peace; anarchy meant chaos and war. Although European reports were often exaggerated, there was some truth in this matter.
oi
61
In the Archeology of Violence essay, Pierre Clastres rejects Hobbes’s understanding that primitive society is a war of all against all. Clastres explains that anarchic-primitive society cannot wage war to conquer because if that were the case, there would be winners and those who are conquered. According to him (2010265), a war of all against all would lead to the establishment of domination and power that can be forcibly exerted by the winners over the conquered. A new social configuration would then emerge, creating command obedience relationships and the political division of society into Masters and Slaves: “It would be the death of primitive society,” because the master-slave division does not exist in primitive society. In his 1838 report, British navigator George Windsor Earl also commented on the extent to which “chaos” in Leti occurred due to villages remaining autonomous from one another:
“It often ends in war, but rarely accompanied by much bloodshed.” This sentence needs to be emphasized as it accurately describes traditional warfare in Maluku.
makes no diff.. same song as long as any form of m\a\p
62
A shipwrecked sailor in Timor wrote that local “wars have more in common with children’s games than real fighting.”
Historians generally agree that wars in Maluku became bloodier due to colonialism. According to Andaya (1993), the European model of warfare required more personnel and weaponry compared to traditional warfare, leading to more casualties and escalating blood feuds.
Besides rejecting Hobbes’ understanding, Clastres also rejected the implied exchange concept by Lévi-Strauss: that there is war, therefore no exchange; there is exchange, therefore no war. For Clastres, exchange and alliance are merely consequences of war, because if there is an enemy, there must be allies (bound by marriage). Primitive societies cannot practice universal kinship in the exchange of women (or marriage, to prevent incest) as modern societies do, due to spatial constraints where friendship does not adapt well to distance. Exchange is easily maintained with nearby neighbors who can be invited to a feast, from someone who can accept the invitation, and who can be visited. With distant groups, such relationships cannot be established. Thus, primitive societies cannot be friends with everyone or enemies with everyone.
“In the case of friendship of all with all, the community would lose its autonomous totality through the dissolution of its difference. In the case of war of all against all, it would lose its homogeneous unity through the irruption of social division primitive society is a single totality. It cannot consent to universal peace which alienates its freedom; it cannot abandon itself to general war which abolishes its equality. It is not possible, among the Savages, to be either friend of all or enemy of all.” (Clastres, 2010: 265).
63
Therefore, Clastres (2010: 271-274) argues that war holds a different meaning for primitive societies. “The constant problem of the primitive community is not: whom will we trade with? but: how can we maintain our independence?” For primitive societies, war serves to preserve the political independence of each community. As long as there is war, there is autonomy: that is why war cannot and must not cease, which is why war has a permanent nature: if an enemy does not exist, an enemy must be created. This opinion may explain why societies without states are historically more prone to conflict. Kolff, in his 1825 report on the island of Leti, explained that disputes among community leaders occurred so easily because they considered themselves equals:
“When distributing the presents, sent by the Government, at the general meeting of the chiefs, I was requested to apportion the shares for each village, the chiefs themselves candidly confessing that since they all considered themselves as equal in point of rank, were this duty left to themselves, it would certainly give rise to a renewal of the discord that had so long prevailed among them.”[60]
The report quoted above shows that war and the absence of state are treated as synonyms. The weakness of authority, autonomous villages, and equality among residents – namely the absence of a state in Maluku – are seen by Europeans as conditions causing war. For Hobbes, state exists to oppose war; for Clastres, it is the opposite, war exists to oppose the state. “…the machine of dispersion functions against the machine of unification (Clastres, 2010: 277). Siwa-Lima acts as a Clastrian machine to prevent the state.
Indigenous Confederations
When European reports state that unity can only be achieved through the state, it implies that anarchic societies are incapable of managing collective affairs on a scale beyond their residential communities (communes). If Siwa-Lima is a mechanism for dissolution that prevents its society from uniting in anti-state logic, I have found that societies in Maluku, at different periods of time, have created non-state institutions. Unlike Jailolo, Bacan, Ternate, or Tidore, which evolved into institutions where the centralization of power ended with decision-making monopolized by a few or even a single person, in some places in Maluku institutions were established for centralized collective decision-making while maintaining local political norms. These institutions resemble a federation, as proposed by theorists of modern anarchism in the history of political thought.[61]Since the emergence of modern anarchism in the mid-19th century, anarchists have consistently proposed federalism of direct democratic communes as a replacement for the state. This institution is where people make decisions about important matters concerning their lives, instead of leaving these matters to be determined by a few individuals. Although this development was not new at its time, it was first articulated by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, often referred to as the “Founding Father of Anarchism” from France. In Du Principe Fédératif (1863), Proudhon stated that “the federal system is the opposite of hierarchy or administrative and governmental centralization.” According to him,
64
The anarchists’ proposal for autonomous communes, implementing direct democracy, decentralized but connected in federalism, though in a much looser form, has been practiced by ancestors in Maluku. Roy Ellen (2003: 8) argues that trade in the Banda Zone was not conducted by a large, centralized government controlling river mouths as in the Straits of Malacca. In central Maluku, Ellen notes that “loose federations” persisted on small islands like Banda because there were no extensive forest areas whose access could be controlled via river estuary or coastlines.
The Gamrange people, originating from three regions (Weda, Maba, and Patani) along the coast of Weda Bay in Southeast Halmahera, have rejected the dual hegemony of Ternate-Tidore by choosing to revere the past glory of the defunct Jailolo. This strategy of aligning themselves with a now-nonexistent power allowed the Gamrange people to create de facto autonomy from Ternate-Tidore while establishing their own political institutions, which “had the right to govern their respective territories, like autonomous regions, but with the obligation to help each other” (Topatimasang, 2016: 98).
last 2fps.. that anarchy defmn not w/o rule
66
European views should be suspected as being part of an agenda to turn indigenous societies into subjects of discipline. In such cases, colonialism often found justification in the paradigm in which Europeans felt they bore the responsibility to advance indigenous societies, which were perceived as being at a lower level of civilization or entirely uncivilized. Underneath this, the primary goal was to enhance the ability to identify, monitor, measure and calculate, govern, mobilize human resources, and exploit the resources of indigenous societies. This agenda was sometimes framed as eradicating illiteracy, pacifying conflict areas, spreading Christianity, or primarily economic development, implying that indigenous peoples were too lazy or ignorant to trade.
In his book Trade Without Rulers, Northrup (1978: 4-5) critiques the prejudice that views small-scale non-state societies as insufficiently capable of engaging in cultural and economic systems far larger than their political units. He argues that largescale trade does not require large-scale political institutions. Although Northrup’s study was conducted in Africa, his views also apply to Maluku. Interestingly, these federative institutions coexisted with traditional warfare and trade. Let’s take the examples of Banda and Aru.
At the end of the 16th century, the Spanish chronicler Argensola described that “there were seven towns on the island [Banda], where they were hostile to each other.”[64] The oldest report about Siwa-Lima that we can trace also comes from Banda. Made by a Dutch East India Company official before 1621, the following report shows that Siwa-Lima ensured each participant was relatively equal without being united by a state:
“Whenever they gather to discuss important matters, the Orang Kayas take their place [on the low platform under the tree], each according to his descent and age, showing great deference to each other, while the common people … sit on the ground, the uli siwa [federation] on the west and south, the uli lima [federation] on the east and north… [N]o serious political matters or war can be decided alone…. [The representatives of the different villages] always want to be cock of the walk, but have to respect the others [or they must pay a large fine]. In this way they keep each other in check, so that they can all be equal, which causes great dissension.”
70
He also roamed the interior safely. According to Wallace, since there was no government in Aru, it was not the state that kept its people from falling into “chaos”:
“Here we may behold in its simplest form the genius of Commerce at the work of Civilization. Trade is the magic that keeps all at peace, and unites these discordant elements into a wellbehaved community. All are traders, and all know that peace and order are essential to successful trade, and thus a public opinion is created which puts down all lawlessness.”[
71
Wallace stated that the people of Aru “[s]ometimes they hunt or fish a little, or work at their houses or canoes, but they seem to enjoy pure idleness, and work as little as they can.”[74] The inhabitants of Banda before 1621 were said to “live off the produce of their land; and although there was constant war, most remained idle.”[75] Similar depictions have been repeated almost everywhere of Maluku for hundreds of years. The main response to this is usually that these depictions were merely used as a justification for colonialism. While there is some truth to this, the work hours and leisure time in societies as recorded by Europeans were not actually excessive.
Pierre Clastres, by analyzing the mode of domestic production by Marshall Sahlins, cites ethnographic evidence that primitive economies were indeed less productive because work was consumer production to ensure the satisfaction of needs and not as exchange production to gain profit by commercializing surplus goods. According to him, primitive societies are societies that refuse economy (Clastres, 2010: 198). This view might further explain the myth of the lazy native; laziness is a rejection of accumulation: “…primitive man is not an entrepreneur, it is because profit does not interest him; that if he does not “optimize” his activity, as the pedants like to say, it is not because he does not know how to, but because he does not feel like it!” (Ibid, 193).
Clastres (2010: 199) also concluded that “[p]rimitive society allows poverty for everyone, but not accumulation by some.” Accumulation by a few means changing social relations, namely a division that forms a dominant minority (chiefs and clients) that would rule and dominate the majority. That is why Clastres said that the conditions to become a chief are the ability to speak well and generosity.
73
Ergo, with or without a state, wars could happen. With or without a state, trade could happen. With or without a state, peace could also happen. Now, the arrangement for with or without a state is an active choice. Alifuru, therefore, aligns with David Graeber’s explanation: “Anarchistic societies are no more unaware of human capacities for greed or vainglory than modern Americans are unaware of human capacities for envy, gluttony, or sloth; they would just find them equally unappealing as the basis for their civilization. In fact, they see these phenomena as moral dangers so dire they end up organizing much of their social life around containing them.” (Graeber, 2004: 24). We call this anarchy.
74
Conclusion. Alifuru: Conquest & Liberation
76
History in Maluku can be viewed from the perspective of the rulers and the ruled; I take the latter. Instead of interpreting history as an evolutionary stage from low-level savage societies destined to follow the flow of civilization (where they have become the main victims of development), we must understand this history as a process of capture-escape and snatch-collapse. This is the perspective of the Alifuru – the people whom surrounding state formation projects have been trying to rule for centuries. This is the historical perspective of those who were ruled and conquered. This approach is sometimes called “people’s history,” occasionally “history from below,” and more recently, “anarchist history.”
Thus, I reject Andaya’s (1993: 49) understanding, who said that “Maluku is neither a political state nor a stateless society.” According to him, local traditions explaining a relationship between a community and other communities – be them on a certain island or within the broader Maluku World – function as a guiding map and authorize political expansion, while providing an accepted basis for action sans political pressures amid cultural and societal differences.
Instead, I propose that historically there has been a separation, two spaces and worlds, namely the state space (Maluku World) and the stateless space (Alifuru World). The relationship and position of both have been thoroughly discussed previously, and many of its elements help us explain the Maluku landscape formed today.
As analyzed by Hägerdal (2024), legends and traditions about the beginning of European colonial presence in Southeast Asia sometimes depict foreigners as protectors, but also as largely dangerous and unreliable forces. The people of Maluku did not always see their relationships with Tidore-Ternate or European rulers as beneficial. If they became subjugated or victims of piracy, many communities across Maluku saw Europeans as potential allies and new rulers. At the same time, being under the shadow of government for most of the time was clearly unpleasant. It meant being regulated and supervised, taxed and levied, and their labor mobilized for things that typically only benefited the ruling class.
The most accurate conclusion at present is that the Alifuru became anarchists not because they were too ignorant to form a state. The Alifuru became anarchists also not simply because they were too far from the reach of government services and power. The Alifuru were anarchists because their society was characterized by relative equality; consensus decisionmaking; and the absence of centralized political institutions. Furthermore, they continuously fought for autonomy and actively strove to prevent themselves from forming a state. This means that the Alifuru were consciously and actively anarchist. They knew what they were avoiding and what they wanted.
***
And now, what is the benefit of this text?
Amid the roar of mining machinery and rainforest continuously transformed for large-scale plantation openings dragging us to the brink of mass extinction and climate crisis, we need to rethink all the assumptions of civilization and development being touted today. What is the meaning of progress in modern history? Both capitalism and communism, though differing in their approaches, utilize the same vehicle of industrialism and believe that there are historical stages leading to progress. These stages are sometimes bridged by rapid social changes, a revolution. But Walter Benjamin has an alternative suggestion: “Marx said that revolutions are the locomotive of world history. But perhaps it is quite otherwise. Perhaps revolutions are an attempt by the passengers on the train – namely, the human race – to activate the emergency brake.”[
77
Our economic-political order has gone too far and too fast. It is a global machine driven by the law of limitless growth that drastically reduces the Earth’s capacity to support a more habitable ecosystem. This was already Wallace’s contemplation hundreds of years ago. During his time in Aru, his worldview changed drastically. He began to question why Europeanmade goods were sold cheaper in Aru than in their place of origin, even though these goods were not truly needed by the indigenous population. He realized something was wrong with the global economic order at that time.
“[…] that in one of the most remote corners of the earth savages can buy clothing cheaper than the people of the country where it is made ; that the weaver’s child should shiver in the wintry wind, unable to purchase articles attainable by the wild natives of a tropical climate where clothing is mere ornament or luxury, should make us pause ere we regard with unmixed admiration the system which has led to such a result, and cause us to look with some suspicion on the further extension of that system. It must be remembered too than our commerce is not a purely natural growth. It has been ever fostered by the legislature, and forced to an unnatural luxuriance by the protection of our fleets and armies. The wisdom and the justice of this policy have been already doubted. So soon, therefore, as it is seen that the further extension of our manufactures and commerce would be an evil, the remedy is not far to see.”
The remedy is not far off, said Wallace. If we seek inspiration for revolution, perhaps we need to stop, if necessary, go backwards. I am not proposing that we return to the past. I do not mean for us to behead, or destroy our own property, or flee to the mountains, like the Alifuru ancestors once did. I am proposing decolonization, because being free from colonialism and forming a new state alone is not enough, and has even proven to be disastrous. The inspiration needed may not come from the Western world, but here now on our land. Look at Nunusaku, there is anarchy, and Mikhail Bakunin would surely agree.
84
About The Author
Bima Satria Putra, born in Kapuas, Central Kalimantan, on November 4, 1995. Graduated in journalism from Fiskom UKSW, former Editor-in-Chief of the Student Press Institute Lentera. Now he is a writer, researcher, and translator. Interested in the study of history, anthropology, and ecology. His works include: Perang yang Tidak Akan Kita Menangkan: Anarkisme & Sindikalisme dalam Pergerakan Kolonial hingga Revolusi Indonesia (1908-1948) (published in 2018) and Dayak Mardaheka: Sejarah Masyarakat Tanpa Negara di Pedalaman Kalimantan (published in 2021). He is currently conducting research on the Fire Tribes Project (PSA) and remains committed to writing while serving his fifteen-year prison sentence from 2021.
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
be you. 