Talk:Bersiap

New Article

Started this stub for expansion. The term 'Bersiap' was quoted several times but did not have the required article. In Dutch literature it is often mentioned. Hope wikipedia/en can establish a comprehensive and objective article from the sometimes subjective sources available. KARL RAN (talk) 11:48, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Compliments

to contributors. this is in fact one of the best overviews available online! regards, ray —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.70.98.245 (talk) 06:30, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Agree, quite conclusive and very well referenced. Will pick up some of the literature cited. Excellent job. Wikipedia achieving its mission i would say. Regards from Florida. Morgan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.175.145.92 (talk) 08:52, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Actually, the notes and citations are equally informative. Regards, Morgan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.175.145.92 (talk) 09:05, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Period

According to the Dutch government the so-called Bersiap period covers the whole period of the Indonesian Independence Struggle (i.e. from 17-9-1945 to 27-12-1949). Please see this. Meursault2004 (talk) 11:29, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Those dates correlate exactly with the Indonesian National Revolution. However, I am supportive of a separate article such as this for the earlier stages of that period. However, I'm not convinced of the period lasting through to Dec 46 - that seems to late. And, the name must be a Dutch usage - I don't have it in my Indonesian or English texts. regards --Merbabu (talk) 11:35, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes indeed. It is a Dutch usage. It is only found in Dutch publications such as this one Bussemaker, H.Th. Bersiap! - Opstand in het paradijs. (Walburg Pers, Zutphen, 2005) ISBN 9057303663., which I am going to read. Meursault2004 (talk) 12:58, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Gents, when creating this article I have tried to collect and collate as much factual information and data as possible and also make sure this article is in line with the am 'Indonesian national revolution' one. i have (as always) sincerely tried to avoid any unverifiable info, contentious comments or original conclusions, but in all honesty: sources are pretty scattered and sometimes contradictory or very subjective. one of my main academic sources is: Meijer, Hans. In Indie geworteld, de Geschiedenis van Indische Nederlanders, de twintigste eeuw., Chapter: 'De bersiaptijd.' (Publisher Bert Bakker, Amsterdam, 2004) P.236-266 ISBN 90 351 2617 3. But prof.meijer only highlights the period oct-dec 45 (phase 3 and part of phase 4). my other main sources are several papers by prof.bussemaker and he commences his analysis as off aug 1945 to dec 1946. these papers are written well before the am book publication, so it wld be good to see if he has acquired advancing insights or drawn other conclusions. but im pretty sure his work still concurs the period lasted from August 1945 to December 1946.

i am currently (re-)reading Alexander Evert Kawilarangs biography and his first hand recollections give very interesting insights from an indonesian perspective, be it that he also does not use the term bersiap.--KARL RAN (talk) 13:52, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

this is the source of testimony cited by Hans Meier, recently available in english. -Anon- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.136.199.182 (talk) 14:34, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

dutch version of the original article is available again. -Anon- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.138.102.165 (talk) 04:32, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Atrocities

2ALL - This recently contributed chapter by JAGO is although unpleasant to read, crucial to understanding what type of atrocities were committed during this period. I wonder if we should add more examples?

To make sure contributors are on the same page - a definition of 'Atrocities': War crime and crime against humanity. In law it refers to cruel and draconian treatment, including inhumane and unusual punishment and torture of non-combatant civilians.

--KARL RAN (talk) 11:27, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

p.s. @Merbabu - in ref to the recent edit summaries: numbers of pemuda casualties during the battle of surabaya are obviously relevant in the Casualties chapter, just not in the Atrocities chapter. anyway yr latest edit reflects this perfectly. cheers

Bersiap article vs Indonesian Revolution article

Merbabu I am not going to undo or delete anything yet, but why are you re-writing the Indonesian National Revolution into this article. Can you not just summarise and refer back to your INR article. I think I understand what your doing, but isnt this copy and pasting a waste of effort? Best regards, --KARL RAN (talk) 12:44, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

As I understand it, this article is about the first 18 mths of the INR. This is a very eventful period, that deserves more detailed treatment than what is provided in INR - indeed, this should be a sub-article, but in more detail - there's more to come, then it will make more sense.

The article that you have written, until this point] is 95% about Indonesians killing Dutch people. Do you see the problem? It's a little lop-sided. --Merbabu (talk) 12:51, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

PS - glad to hear that you're not going to undo or delete anything. --Merbabu (talk) 12:56, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Your version, and let's be honest, seems only interested in painting a picture of Indonesian killings of Dutch and Eurasian civilians. This is even more evident when one reads the info in the footnotes. And, as the section above where you suggest more info on atrocities - just in case it wasn't clear enough? --Merbabu (talk) 22:55, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Just a thought here: Maybe you guys have taken the definition too wide. If the term is mainly taken from accounts by survivors from the Eurasian out-group and isnt used by either Indonesians, Brits or Japs, then it might just refer to the atrocities experienced by this group and not the wider circumstances. (?)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Bersiap. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110821232021/http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20110819f2.html to http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20110819f2.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111210090742/http://dutcheastindies.web.id/extremists-run-amok-against-indische-nederlanders.html to http://dutcheastindies.web.id/extremists-run-amok-against-indische-nederlanders.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120314210012/http://www.indieherdenking.nl/cms/publish/content/downloaddocument.asp?document_id=10 to http://www.indieherdenking.nl/cms/publish/content/downloaddocument.asp?document_id=10
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120321152546/http://www.insideindonesia.org/weekly-articles-103-jan-mar-2011/postcolonial-neglect-in-holland-20031930 to http://www.insideindonesia.org/weekly-articles-103-jan-mar-2011/postcolonial-neglect-in-holland-20031930

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:39, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

September 2020 changes

I have called for a broader set of eyes on this one [1]. I've also restored a lot of the removed content over the last few days. The stuff is largely well-sourced and removal should be discussesd and agreed before removal. I also reverted the unilateral page relocation and change in article topic. Also needs discussion and agreement before action. thanks --Merbabu (talk) 23:31, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Update: I went through and restored a lot of the removed text, refined some POV writing. This is a combination diff comparing the article's current version and prior to BabiBandung's edits and my refinements. combined diff. It shows much of his writing still there. --Merbabu (talk) 00:07, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Improvements removed withot real significant reasan exceapt Indonesian propaganda. Wh rempvel? --BabiBandung (talk) 02:03, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Unlike your edits, everyone of mine was explained. Your comment above is incoherent. --Merbabu (talk) 02:42, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Could you show your explenations, bcause i can't see only you who denies a genocise, LOL, so show your sources? --BabiBandung (talk) 04:32, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

my sources for what? i haven't added anything. merely restored referenced stuff you removed without explanation. I've exaplained this all the way. It's quite simple. --Merbabu (talk) 04:39, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Controversy

In 2022 Bonnie Triyana, an Indonesian historian, sparked controversy when he suggested to simply erase the term Bersiap from a museum exposition in the Rijksmuseum, Netherlands. Bonne Triyana's suggestion to erase the term Bersiap for a genocide, was considered by the victims as an unscrupulous attempt to deny the genocide ever happened. It is common practice in Indonesia for most atrocities committed by the Indonesian army to remain highly censored and officially banned from the Indonesian National history teaching curriculum. In the end, the Rijksmuseum in the Netherlands did not comply with Bonnie Triyana's demand to erase the term. 77.204.199.118 (talk) 20:58, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

I removed this section because it was uncited and I see someone restored it with citations and modifications. I definitely do not object to it being included somehow in the article as it has been indeed covered in the news. But I do think we should consider what section it appears in and how it is framed. For example, is the controversy about Bersiap specifically about what one scholar has said about it? Is the controversy about this historical event not the allegations of genocide and political persecution etc in the first place, and the fact that different groups view it very differently? That is what I was talking about with weight and context in my edit comment. Of course anyone can find almost any topic and go to another country and find how it enters the news more recently due an exhibit or publication. For example, if we go to the article The Holocaust there is not a "Controversy" subsection specifically talking about what one Holocaust denier has said. Instead there is this section and subsection "Aftermath and legacy .. Trials ... Reparations ... Remembrance and historiography". I would suggest that mentioning museum exhibits and disputes about them should appear in such a subsection with a broader examination. --Dan Carkner (talk) 19:29, 3 May 2022 (UTC)