Indonesian dictator Suharto dies

[Iskandar]

... and is going to have a state funeral.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7211565.stm

[Hababi]

... and is going to have a state funeral.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7211565.stm

The only good thing about Suharto is that he wasn't as bad as the communists he was fighting. But he was still at the far end of reactionary dictators. Like a really, really bad version of Franco.

[Iskandar]

He killed like half a million Communists, so yeah, I can see comparisons to Franco.

Also millions of other opponents, apparently. The guy was in power for almost three decades.

To give him a state funeral is a sick joke.

[Hababi]

Also millions of other opponents, apparently. The guy was in power for almost three decades.

The figure I heard was 1 million total.

To give him a state funeral is a sick joke.

It's more than a bit bizarre.

[McP3000]

He killed like half a million Communists, so yeah, I can see comparisons to Franco.

Also millions of other opponents, apparently. The guy was in power for almost three decades.

To give him a state funeral is a sick joke.
Ha ha

"Yeah, this guy killed 1 million people with the free market versus killing 1 million people with communes and government regulated subsidiaries"

[Iskandar]

Ha ha

"Yeah, this guy killed 1 million people with the free market versus killing 1 million people with communes and government regulated subsidiaries"There's no difference to me. A million people dead is a million people.

His legacy is a lesson for free-market ideologues who think there can never be a capitalist dictatorship ever, though.

[Hababi]

There's no difference to me. A million people dead is a million people.

His legacy is a lesson for free-market ideologues who think there can never be a capitalist dictatorship ever, though.

Killing people distorts the free market.

[Iskandar]

Killing people distorts the free market.Lol. Didn't stop Suharto.

[McP3000]

There's no difference to me. A million people dead is a million people.

His legacy is a lesson for free-market ideologues who think there can never be a capitalist dictatorship ever, though.
I was laughing at the idea that him being a mass murdering capitalist makes him a better person than a mass murdering communist

even though he is more economically sound :p

His legacy is a lesson for free-market ideologues who think there can never be a capitalist dictatorship ever, though.
:lol:
First off, TONS OF PEOPLE THINK THAT
Secondly, he didn't run a tried a true free market if he could kill 1 million peoples

[Iskandar]

First off, TONS OF PEOPLE THINK THATTons of people do think that, and they're idiots because there have been tons of capitalist dictatorships.
Secondly, he didn't run a tried a true free market if he could kill 1 million peoplesKilling people has nothing to do with economic policy.

[McP3000]

Tons of people do think that, and they're idiots because there have been tons of capitalist dictatorships.
Well, none that i've met...*shrug*

Killing people has nothing to do with economic policy.
The ability to have enough government control and monetary power to kill 1 million people seems pretty anti-Free market to me

[Iskandar]

The ability to have enough government control and monetary power to kill 1 million people seems pretty anti-Free market to meNot to me.

[McP3000]

Not to me.
http://www.wpclipart.com/food/cooking/chef_says_okay.png

[Iskandar]

Huh?

[Knifeboy]

Killing people has nothing to do with economic policy.

Sometimes killing people can be an economic policy!

[Iskandar]

We're killing people for the sake of the Free Market.

[VomitStainedCretin]

Sometimes killing people can be an economic policy!Export their flesh and claim it is a new kind of meat derived from pigs genetically modified with monkey DNA - MORK!!!

Yeah, Suharto's record towards ethnic groups in East Timor and West Papua isn't particularly respectable to say the least, particularly after forcefully incorporating those states into Indonesia.

[je suis un beau chapeau]

he had firm breasts

[cobert]

Yeah I want to see this connection between killing people and being anti-free market. As long as there is a military the government can kill 1 million people and have a free market.

[shaqadelic]

Despite his actions in the past, he has overseen Indonesian spectacular development.

... and is going to have a state funeral.

Then all Western leaders who supported him during his abuses should be denounced and disowned as well. I would love to see such application of equality in the West.

[Smokey D]

Despite his actions in the past, he has overseen Indonesian spectacular development.


So did Stalin.


Then all Western leaders who supported him during his abuses should be denounced and disowned as well. I would love to see such application of equality in the West.

Are you going to claim there is no difference between supporting something and doing it yourself?

[shaqadelic]

So did Stalin.

Suharto's development have less human cost than Stalin's. Also, the result of development and stability is shared by a bigger portion of the society.

But that's not the point. My point is Indonesians have benefited from Suharto's leadership. I believe this contribution is overlooked among his human rights abuses and corruption.

The general feeling (and I feel it is appropriate) in Indonesia is that 'his sins be pardoned and his good deeds be received'.

Are you going to claim there is no difference between supporting something and doing it yourself?

If the support is the arms that are used and is given when the action plan is known, then how much difference does it make?

And besides are you implying the Western leaders who supported Suharto's abuse should not be denounced? If so, then that makes a mockery of upholding human rights.

[Smokey D]

Suharto's development have less human cost than Stalin's. Also, the result of development and stability is shared by a bigger portion of the society.

That's a pretty poor reason to celebrate a murderer.

But that's not the point. My point is Indonesians have benefited from Suharto's leadership. I believe this contribution is overlooked among his human rights abuses and corruption.


Yah, but most tyrants do somethings that are beneficial.



The general feeling (and I feel it is appropriate) in Indonesia is that 'his sins be pardoned and his good deeds be received'.

It's pretty freaky that Indonesians are willing to to say personal material benefit is worth 500 000 dead people.


If the support is the arms that are used and is given when the action plan is known, then how much difference does it make?

Quite a big one, but it doesn't give an excuse.


And besides are you implying the Western leaders who supported Suharto's abuse should not be denounced? If so, then that makes a mockery of upholding human rights.

Should they be denounced? Maybe not. Should their complicity with Suharto be investigated and publicised? Definitely. But the murderer is different to the murderer's friends.

[shaqadelic]

That's a pretty poor reason to celebrate a murderer.

State funerals in Indonesia aren't celebrations, nor do they only focus on the person's good deeds. They are to remember his good deeds but at the same time touch upon his bad deeds and hope that it is forgiven.

It's pretty freaky that Indonesians are willing to to say personal material benefit is worth 500 000 dead people.

Even those who have been wronged by Suharto expressed that they can forgive him. Notably, East Timor's elected President urge his people to do just that.

It is not a fault that these people can find in their hearts to forgive. Such actions are essential for reconciliation and to move forward.

Should they be denounced? Maybe not.

Why not? I am surprise that you feel these people should not be denounced or punished. I thought you believe in upholding human rights.

Should their complicity with Suharto be investigated and publicised? Definitely. But the murderer is different to the murderer's friends.

A murderer's friend who supplies the arms for murder and gives green light to murder aren't complicit, they are conspirators.

[Against Miik!]

Thats to bad. I have to read the NY Times for my International Relation class everyday for a test, and I was a bit behind, so I just read an article that said he wasn't doing to well. I haven't gotten to today or yesterday or whenever this happened, but the test is today. Hopefully there will be a question about this and I can thank you all for me getting it right.

[pedro durruti]

State funerals in Indonesia aren't celebrations, nor do they only focus on the person's good deeds. They are to remember his good deeds but at the same time touch upon his bad deeds and hope that it is forgiven.
You cannot divest him of his actions, good or bad. By giving him a state funeral they are essentially honoring him. It would make no sense to honor John Wayne Gacy just because he was a good member of his community.
Even those who have been wronged by Suharto expressed that they can forgive him. Notably, East Timor's elected President urge his people to do just that.

It is not a fault that these people can find in their hearts to forgive. Such actions are essential for reconciliation and to move forward.
I doubt that the president's able to speak for all the people Suharto had murdered. It is not a fault but I can't say it makes sense for someone who I don't believe feels any remorse for what he's done.

[shaqadelic]

I am feeling a difference in culture here. I have observed that in the West, one can live a well respected life but if he committed murder, all his good deeds will be forgotten and what defines him is his murder.

Indonesians generally don't think that way. Those that I have spoken to praise Suharto for his good deeds and candidly criticize his bad deeds. In short, both his good and bad deeds define him

State funerals take upon the same line -- it is not there to be apologetic neither is it there to whitewash his bad actions. Suharto's eldest daughter eulogy makes it quite clear "We ask, that hopefully all of you, sirs and madams, be willing to forgive all mistakes and faults of the late (Suharto)".

That is why there is no opposition to the state funeral in Indonesia, even by those who have been wronged by him.

I doubt that the president's able to speak for all the people Suharto had murdered.

He can't speak for all but Horta definitely shares their experience of suffering (lost family and friends).

It is not a fault but I can't say it makes sense for someone who I don't believe feels any remorse for what he's done.

How do you know that he doesn't feel remorse?

Some, like imprisoned journalist Yusuf Isaak, think that Suharto's actions are unforgivable and unforgettable. But he certainly doesn't based his feelings based on a hunch whether Suharto is remorseful or not.

[pedro durruti]

I don't, that's why I was careful and said that it was just a belief. I've never heard Suharto renounce his former actions, but I don't deny that it is possible that he has.
That is why there is no opposition to the state funeral in Indonesia, even by those who have been wronged by him.
I suppose you are right, but I would not want to be praised if I was ultimately a bad person. I see him not as both a good person and a bad person, but a bad person who did both some good things and some bad things.

[Smokey D]

State funerals in Indonesia aren't celebrations, nor do they only focus on the person's good deeds. They are to remember his good deeds but at the same time touch upon his bad deeds and hope that it is forgiven.

A state funeral is recognition that a person is somehow different or better than normal people. I cannot see how you can give Suharto that kind of recognition.

Even those who have been wronged by Suharto expressed that they can forgive him. Notably, East Timor's elected President urge his people to do just that.

So?

It is not a fault that these people can find in their hearts to forgive. Such actions are essential for reconciliation and to move forward.

I think you can forgive without praising.

Also, would they be so willing to forgive if Suharto hadn't improved their material condition? I suspect not, or at least not as many.

Why not? I am surprise that you feel these people should not be denounced or punished. I thought you believe in upholding human rights.

Because a murderer is not a murder's friend.

A murderer's friend who supplies the arms for murder and gives green light to murder aren't complicit, they are conspirators.

Yes, they are culpable, but not to the same extent.

[pedro durruti]

Is that a proper analogy when you're talking about heads of states?

[Iskandar]

Sure, why not.

[pedro durruti]

Well for one, US help to Suharto led to more murder. That is US involvement directly caused more people to die. I think a more appropriate analogy would be mob bosses organizing a hit. There may be a head mafia man who is the only one to give the command, but all the others collaborate with him and help organize the plan for murder. None of them are the actors of the murder, but all are in some part its author. "Let's kill this guy, boss!" The hit is headed by one but orchestrated by several of them.

Actually, if a friend told me he wanted to kill the man downstairs, and asked me to give him my gun, otherwise he would not murder him for he is a very big man the man downstairs, I am also the murderer- or at least just as responsible for the murder as my friend. A murderer is one who carries out the action of murder. Without my assistance, this action would have never been realized. But since I give him my gun, the potential murder now becomes entirely possible, so I, assuming my friend follows through, helped create the action of murder. Technically speaking of course my friend is the murderer, but that would be shifting the blame of the act. Just as two basketball players both win the game for themselves as a team with an assist and a follow-up layup.