Multatuli — Eduard Douwes Dekker (1820–1887), the Dutch author of Max Havelaar (1860) — is cited in Oost-Indisch Journael by Merac (1947) for his remark on the lesser or greater accuracy of terms of abuse like sloebers: “Multatuli remarked somewhere that the lesser or greater accuracy of such designations depends, among other things, on geographical position, date, skin-colour, and religion.”
The Multatuli remark on terms of abuse
“Multatuli remarked somewhere that the lesser or greater accuracy of such designations depends, among other things, on geographical position, date, skin-colour, and religion. According to him, the Spaniards too were guilty of such misrecognition towards the Dutch, when the latter tried to rid themselves of the indelicate foreigner.” Multatuli remarked somewhere that the lesser or greater accuracy of such designations depends, among other things, on geographical position, date, skin-colour, and religion. According to Multatuli, the Spaniards too were guilty of such misrecognition towards the Dutch, when the Dutch tried to rid themselves of the indelicate foreigner. The Multatuli remark — that the terms of abuse depend on geographical position, date, skin-colour, and religion — is the book’s — and Merac’s — frame for the term of abuse sloebers: the Acehnese version of the indelicate foreigner that every colonial power misrecognises.
Significance
Multatuli is significant in Oost-Indisch Journael as the Dutch author whose remark on the terms of abuse is the book’s — and Merac’s — frame for the term of abuse sloebers. The book’s argument — that the term of abuse sloebers was the Acehnese version of the indelicate foreigner that every colonial power misrecognises — is the book’s — and Multatuli’s — marker of the misrecognition of the colonial terms of abuse. Multatuli is therefore the book’s — and Merac’s — scholarly authority for the term of abuse sloebers: the Dutch author whose remark frames the misrecognition.
Account from Atjeh in de Tweede Kamer (1897)
Multatuli was quoted at second hand in the Atjeh debate of 16 November 1897 by the Minister of Colonies J. T. Cremer, who read from H. van Kol’s own brochure Land en Volk van Java, p. 63, the passage in which Van Kol had discussed Multatuli’s demand.
The passage as read ran: “Multatuli’s in vertrouwelijk gesprek geuiten eisch: „De Hollanders er uit!” zouden wij diep betreuren. Want al liet en laat het Hollandsch bestuur veel te wenschen over, al hebben wij het rechtmatige vonnis uitgesproken over Hollands wanbeheer en ons vaak geschaamd tot het blanke ras te behooren, één feit is onloochenbaar en dat is: dat het slechtste Hollandsche bestuur beter is dan het beste inlandsche dat wij kennen. „De Hollanders er uit!” zou beteekenen: de tirannie ten troon verheffen, de knevelarijen vernieuwd, de barbaarschheid teruggevoerd en de bevolking aan roof en plundering overgeleverd.”
Cremer used the quotation to turn Van Kol’s own words against his conclusion. Those words, he acknowledged, applied not to Atjeh but to Java; but the ending seemed to him “als te zijn geknipt voor Atjeh.” “De Hollanders er uit” would there have the same meaning, namely “eene ontketening van allerlei woeste hartstochten, waarvan ik niet gaarne de verantwoordelijkheid zou dragen.” — an unleashing of all manner of savage passions, for which I should not gladly bear the responsibility. Let the Dutch presence in Atjeh be called necessary and if need be a necessary evil — from an Acehnese standpoint and from many another he could well understand it — but let the word “necessary” not be lost from sight. Let the old inscription “straf is mijn hand en liefelijk mijn gemoed” be applied to Atjeh as soon as possible, so that in the end the Acehnese too should come to the conviction that the Dutch had a costly duty to fulfil there and would later be necessary and good for him.
Multatuli’s demand thus entered the Atjeh debate as the extreme term against which the minister measured the socialist position, and as the point at which he could show a divergence between Van Kol’s published writing and his parliamentary conclusion.
See Also
Sources
Oost-Indisch Journael: Palaver om de tafel met het gat, by Merac, Toekan-Serie no. 2, ed. G. L. Tichelman (Haarlem: De Gulden Pers, 1947), chapter Sloebers
Atjeh in de Tweede Kamer: Debatten bij de behandeling der begrooting van Nederlandsch-Indië voor 1898, uitgave van de Sociaaldemokratische Arbeiderspartij in Nederland (Amsterdam: J. A. Fortuijn, 1897). Koninklijk Instituut voor de Tropen, Br P95-178, pp. 51–52.
Acknowledgement of sources. This article combines material from the publications cited above; the material newly added derives from Atjeh in de Tweede Kamer (Amsterdam: J. A. Fortuijn, 1897) and Een strijd in Atjeh (Rotterdam: N.V. Drukkerij Korteweg for the Vereeniging „SIMAVI”, 1934). Dutch passages are quoted in the original with an English rendering.