
































Microsoft Word - Layout Cultural Pluralism in Bali.docx


 
IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 9 (1), 14-27 © 2025 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213  

Ethnolinguistic Pluralism and Multiculturalism in Contemporary Indonesia |14 

 
Received:  
April 16, 2025 
 
Revised:  
June 10, 2025 
 
Accepted:  
June 11, 2025 

Ethnolinguistic Pluralism and Multiculturalism in Contemporary 
Indonesia: A Case Study of Minority Javanese  

Muslim Migrants in Bali 
 

I Nyoman Wijaya1*, Sri Lestari1, Mosli Tarsat2 
1Department of History, Faculty of Humanities,  
Udayana University, Denpasar, Bali, Indonesia 

2History Programme, Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities,  
Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia 

 
*Corresponding Author: inyoman_wijaya@unud.ac.id 

DOI: https:// 10.14710/ihis.v9i1.26624 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Introduction 
In the late 1990s and early 2000s, Bali was experiencing heightened ethnic and religious 
tensions after the fall of President Suharto and crises in the tourist industry. These tensions led 
to what social historian Henk Schulte Nordholt called “entrenched identities” amongst 
Balinese, fostering an attitude towards the island of it being an “open fortress” (Nordholt, 
2008, pp. 387-416). In the period since his research, there have been marked changes and a 
lessening of these tensions. By examining a small Javanese Muslim migrant community and 
their inter-ethnic/religious relations with the Balinese in the predominantly Hindu village (or 
kelurahan) of Sumerta (Figure 1), in the eastern part of Bali’s capital city, Denpasar, we ask 
how Hindu-Muslims relations are currently being managed within everyday interactions on 
Bali. Of particular importance to this question is the everyday nature of language use, which 

Abstract 
 

This article examines how majority-minority relations in Bali, Indonesia, have 
changed in the last decade, in the context of multiculturalism and 
multilingualism. It does so through a case study of the socio-cultural practices 
of minority Muslim migrants in a predominantly Hindu community in the 
village of Sumerta, which is part of Bali’s capital city of Denpasar. The study 
shows fresh evidence for the dynamic nature, issues and challenges of inter-
ethnic/religious relations at the most local level, a matter of great significance 
in debates on cultural pluralism, multilingualism, tolerance and modern 
democracy on the broader national and global levels. Our discussion and 
analysis makes use of methodological and theoretical insights from socio-
ethno-linguistics, in combination with history and cultural studies. We argue 
that the cultural-religious and social practices of the different ethnolinguistic 
groups in this village are based on culturally plural community interactions, 
where the different ethnic and religious groups remain separate. Intergroup 
relations, however, show positive forms of cultural and linguistic engagement, 
primarily symbolic in nature, and thus tend towards multilingualism as an 
indicator of multiculturalism. 
 
Keywords:  Minority; Migrant; Islam; Cultural Pluralism; Multilingualism; 
Multiculturalism; Intergroup Relations; Tolerance. 



 
IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 9 (1), 14-27 © 2025 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213  

Ethnolinguistic Pluralism and Multiculturalism in Contemporary Indonesia |15 

we argue is indicative of a tendency towards multiculturalism and positive interaction. 
One major point of tension examined by Schulte Nordholt was the high influx of Muslim 

migrants from other islands to predominantly Hindu Bali. Sumerta, as a site of such migration 
by Javanese Muslims, is an important test case. In 2009, the migrants of Sumerta formed an 
organisation called Paguyuban Umat Muslim Akasia (PUMA), or the Akasia Muslim 
Community (Akasia refers to the name of the road on which most of the migrants live). This 
organisation marks a form of identification that in many ways represents the local dynamics 
of inter-ethnic/inter-religious relations of contemporary Indonesia, where groups are formed 
within communities. The local majority-minority power relation is a reverse image of relations 
on the national level, where Muslims are the majority. Both locally and nationally, inter-groups 
relations are a sensitive issue, and are the subject of major Indonesian debates about the nature 
of multiculturalism. 

 

 
 

Figure 1. Maps of the village of Sumerta in Denpasar, Bali, Indonesia. 
Source: Central Bureau of Statistics. (2019). Geospatial maps. Retrieved from 

https://geoportal.bps.go.id/maps/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=b47355787be7484f9ba0
23a407a5a15a. 

 
Multiculturalism is a complex notion, with many different usages and contexts, in which 

it can serve as an ideology, a policy, or a postmodernist discourse with different meanings as 
it is characterized in different ways and used in different contexts, e.g. Inglis (2018) and Oktay 
(2016, p. 77). Crucially, it assumes tolerance to the religious and cultural difference, and 
perhaps recognition of group or cultural rights (Kymlicka, 1995; Kukathas, 2003; Ashcroft & 
Bevir, 2018, p. 12). The emergence of home-grown radicalism or extremism is often considered 
as indicating the ‘failure’ of multiculturalism in its ideological and policy agenda, and the most 
dramatic Indonesian example would be the terrorist Bali Bombing of 12th October 2002. 
However, ‘multiculturalism’ as a broad descriptive term characterizes the ethno-linguistic 
diversity of society, in which there are always challenging inter-related issues of how majority-



 
IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 9 (1), 14-27 © 2025 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213  

Ethnolinguistic Pluralism and Multiculturalism in Contemporary Indonesia |16 

minority group relations, human rights, and collective identities are best handled in modern 
democracy. 

There have been few studies of multiculturalism in Bali investigating interactions of 
ethno-religious groups of the type seen in the village of Sumerta (Sujana, 2004, p. 7; Suacana, 
2004; Wisarja & Sudarsana, 2023). They all recognise that the Balinese society has been 
increasingly diverse. All of them, except Atmadja (2009, p. 19), claim that the Balinese society 
is multicultural.  

They do not, however, distinguish multiculturalism (as defined by Rex’s, 2010, pp. 217-
229) from what Furnivall’s (1956, pp. 304-305) calls ‘plural society’. The key difference between 
culturally plural and multicultural societies lies in the nature of the cultural integration and 
synchronization in the lives of member groups in the society. In a culturally plural society, 
each group lives in its own cultural world, maintaining its cultural boundaries more or less 
firmly, with almost no (or very minimal) cultural interaction with other groups (Wang, 2024, 
p. 6). Even if there is an interaction, the interactional situation is typically limited; for example, 
of the type seen in the market or other public space where it is because of a specific occasional 
purpose. In addition, in culturally plural societies, different groups are incorporated in 
different ways, typically with different degrees of asymmetrical political power with 
relationships commonly characterized by social segregation, domination, and discrimination 
(in some kind of disguise). In contrast, in a multicultural society, there are ample active cultural 
interactions among the social groups in their everyday lives. The intensive interactions are 
more than simply of the type in the market, rather in various public spaces with various socio-
cultural interests. Socio-politically in modern context, a multicultural society is typically 
characterized by democracy and egalitarianism with individuals and groups in the society 
synchronizing equivalently. People and social groups (including minorities) are equal before 
the law. The yare considered to have equal rights in exercising power, for example, through 
voting or other means.  

While distinguishable, the distinction between multiculturalism and cultural pluralism 
is arguably not clear-cut, but gradient in nature. There are multiple variables across individual 
and societal levels involved whose characteristics may be analysed as in between cultural 
pluralism and multiculturalism. In line with the previous studies, particularly Naya Sujana’s 
(2004, p. 7) and Suacana’s (2004), our study confirms the increasingly diverse nature of the 
Balinese society, which is susceptible to conflicts. We outline our findings in the ensuing sub-
sections, showing that there has been promising evidence of local community members’ 
embracing certain degrees of inter-ethnic/religious integration and engagement, and 
displaying on-going informal public civic education towards a multicultural society at the 
local village level in Bali. 

Issues of pluralism/multiculturalism and minority rights have been debated in the 
context of western liberalism and democracy. The debate is whether ethnolinguistic, cultural 
and religious diversity should be publicly recognized in a democratic society, giving rise to 
two opposing views, which Kymlicka and Opalski (2002, p. 1) call the ‘orthodox liberal’ view 
and the ‘liberal pluralist’ view. These views differ as to the role of the private versus the public 
sphere, with the orthodox liberal view negating totality and rejecting homogenizing forms of 
nationalism. Rather, every cultural community has the right to define itself without having to 
turn to or refer to a universal standard. This view is strongly influenced by the classical 
liberalism that emphasizes the necessity of legal restrictions to state power in managing its 
people to protect human rights.  

Individuals should be considered equal insofar as they have equal opportunity in 



 
IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 9 (1), 14-27 © 2025 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213  

Ethnolinguistic Pluralism and Multiculturalism in Contemporary Indonesia |17 

expressing the differences. The concept of a multicultural country is in this orthodox liberal 
view a country that maintains its distance to ethnolinguistic issues and that it guarantees each 
cultural community to take care of its own cultural affairs. The state respects cultural plurality 
but there is no need to formulate ideal (ideological and cultural) frameworks for its 
ethnolinguistic communities to adopt. In this view, if the state guarantees the rights of every 
citizen equally through the concepts of citizenship and individual rights, then in theory there 
is no minority issue. 
 
Method 
The liberal pluralist view advocated by Kymlicka (1995, pp. 11-33), in contrast, argues that 
justice in relation to minorities requires the public recognition and accommodation of 
diversity. The liberal pluralist view of multiculturalism combines the liberal values of 
autonomy and equality with the communitarian values (Leung & Valdes, 2019, p. 365) and the 
values of cultural membership. Cultural membership is crucial for an individual’s self respect; 
hence it is a ‘primary good (Nathan, 2015, p. 124; Kymlicka, 2016). It is a condition of personal 
autonomy, providing meaningful options and scripts with which people frame, revise and 
pursue their goals (Stockemer & Sundstrom, 2025, p. 274). Individuals/minority groups are 
entitled for special protections because the inequalities and circumstances that they are under 
are not of their own choice. Kymlicka (1995, p. 109) argues that a liberal egalitarian theory 
emphasizes the importance of rectifying unchosen inequalities. In Kymlicka’s view, 
individuals are not part of the state in the universal sense where each citizen is in direct 
relationship with the state; rather, through a process of membership in one of the 
ethnolinguistic communities. Then, the nature of individual rights and the opportunities for 
individual members to exercise them tend to vary according to the cultural communities. 

In the liberal pluralist view, to resolve multicultural issues, individual rights must be 
supplemented by collective minority rights, or what Kymlicka (1996) calls ‘group–specific or 
group–differentiated rights’ (Ragazzi, 2016, p. 737) The ultimate result of the interaction 
between the state and the minority group would be the recognition ‘group–differentiated 
rights’ such as self-government rights (through some form of federalism), polyethnic rights 
(for financial support and legal protection for their cultural/religious practices), and special 
representation rights (e.g. guaranteed seats in central institutions of the country).  

Using liberalism as the basis of analysis does not really work in Indonesia, however, 
where there is no strong tradition of liberalism. Liberalism is in fact specifically rejected on the 
level of the state. Indonesia’s constitution explicitly states the adopted ideology of Pancasila 
(Five Principles) with the national motto of Bhinneka Tunggal Ika (Unity in Diversity) 
recognizing multiculturalism as the central foundation of the Indonesian society. The 
Indonesian system therefore does not provide room for the implementation of forms of 
liberalism in determining the most appropriate multicultural model. 

Indonesian multiculturalism (or rather ‘plural society’ in Furnivall’s term) has a long 
history, characterised by its indigenous multilingualism (Vaughan & Singer, 2018, pp. 83-90). 
Its nature as seen in Bali and elsewhere in Indonesia is quite different from that in western 
countries. While the situation in Sumerta is undoubtedly a product of increasingly mobile era 
in modern Indonesia, indigenous multiculturalism has long existed in Indonesia. We have 
seen, for example, the case where a group of Buginese Muslims from south Sulawesi who have 
settled in the Loloan village in western Bali sincethe 18th century and have lived in harmony 
with their Balinese Hindu neighbours since then (Sosiowati, et al, 2019, pp. 586-617). The 
diversity of Indonesian ethnolinguistic make-up has led to complex indigenous 



 
IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 9 (1), 14-27 © 2025 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213  

Ethnolinguistic Pluralism and Multiculturalism in Contemporary Indonesia |18 

multilingualism and multiculturalism.  
The founding fathers of Indonesia were all too aware that the size and ethno-linguistic 

diversity of Indonesia is not only a source of pride and strength but also a source of problems 
(Arka, 2013, pp. 74-105). To resolve the problems, the concept of Bhinneka Tunggal Ika (‘Unity 
in Diversity’) was introduced in the early stages of the formation of Indonesia. It has become 
the foundation of the Indonesian multiculturalism model, officially determining the design of 
the nation's culture as stated in the explanation of Article 32 of the 1945 Constitution: 
Indonesian cultures are the peaks of local or regional cultures of Indonesia (Suparlan, 2002, 
pp. 98-104). The status of Indonesian as the national language has always been important to 
the idea of national unity, one of the five principles of the national ideology, Pancasila. 
Bhinneka Tunggal Ika and have been often enforced vigorously by the government, 
unfortunately with the emphasis on unity rather than diversity via forceful Indonesianisation 
especially during the era of Soeharto, Indonesia’s second president (1966–1998).  

While having a clear constitutional and ideological reference, multiculturalism in 
Indonesia is arguably an on-going project. The question is whether or not its ideals and goals 
as embodied by concept of Bhinneka Tunggal Ika and the ideology of Pancasila have been 
achieved. Indonesian Pancasila-based multiculturalism recognizes and glorifies ethnic-
religious-cultural differences with equality and balance of the rights of individual and local 
ethnolinguistic groups within the framework of the unity of Indonesian State. 

The post-Suharto era, which began with the Reformation Era of 1998 to 2008, saw the 
return of democracy in combination with greater autonomy given to the local government. 
These changes have given rise to more space for freedom of expressions of political, 
ethnic/religious aspirations and identities. Unfortunately, however, these changes have also 
given rise to the resurgence of the so-called politik aliran, the politics of ‘ethno-religious 
streams’, a form of identity politics (Nurjaman & Jainuri, 2019, p. 241). Indonesian 
multiculturalism is therefore paradoxically under threat. In Bali, local identity politics has been 
seen in the emergence of the movement the formal version of which was called Ajeg Bali, ‘Bali 
first’ in 2002 (Rosalina et al., 2023, p. 1). The movement is on-going in response to the perceived 
threat of the growing dominance and influence of Islam and Muslims on Balinese culture and 
local economy (Budiasa & Gunarti, 2016).  

The recognition of both individual and collective rights of ethnolinguistic groups is 
definitely not unique to Indonesian multilingualism. This idea is in a way seen in Rex’s liberal 
pluralist approach mentioned earlier. Salient to Indonesian multiculturalism model, however, 
is that a society is seen as having a common national mosaic culture, covering all salient 
cultures of local societies of Indonesia. What this means in practice is not always 
straightforward. One might wonder whether the Indonesian society nowadays is already a 
multicultural society as envisaged by the founding fathers of Indonesia, and/or as seen by 
outsiders.  

Scholars have been engaged in Indonesian multiculturalism, and put forward various 
thoughts and proposal how to achieve the ideals. For example, an international symposium 
organised was organized lasting for 4 days in July 2002, entitled "Rebuilding Indonesia, a 
Nation of Unity in diversity: Toward a Multicultural Society. "It was a big academic event, 
attended by 400 participants, with 200 presentations across 25 panels. It was attended by both 
domestic speakers coming from different parts of Indonesia, and international speakers 
coming from different countries across the globe (Singapore, Malaysia, Japan, Australia, 
France, England, USA, Italy, Denmark, etc.). 

One of the important topics discussed in the symposium, still relevant today, is 



 
IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 9 (1), 14-27 © 2025 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213  

Ethnolinguistic Pluralism and Multiculturalism in Contemporary Indonesia |19 

multicultural education and tolerance. Parsudi Suparlan, a prominent Indonesian 
Anthropologist, in the opening of the symposium, proposed that the Ministry of National 
Education should include multicultural education in school curriculum, from elementary to 
senior high schools. According to him, there is a pressing need for this, especially for areas 
where bloody communal conflicts among ethnic and religious groups have happened such as 
in Poso Central Sulawesi and West/Central Kalimantan. The proposal was unanimously 
agreed and supported. Multicultural education should be promoted and is believed to be the 
best strategy to prevent the recurrence of such communal bloody conflict (“Kompas”, July 31, 
2002). 

Azyumardi Azra, Professor of Social-Intellectual History and Rector of Syarif 
Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta, proposed that the curriculum of multicultural 
education in Indonesia should include subjects such as tolerance, themes on ethno-cultural 
and religious differences, the dangers of discrimination, conflict resolution and mediation, 
human rights, democracy and plurality, humanity universal, and other relevant subjects. 
Multicultural education as discussed in the symposium had in fact been advocated in the 1980s 
as ‘an inclusive concept used to describe a wide variety of school practices, programs and 
materials designed to help children from diverse groups to experience educational equality’, 
to deal with serious problems in society that can evoke strong emotions, feelings and highly 
polarize opinions’ (Yang, 2022, p. 4). 

However, the formulation and implementation of multicultural education in Indonesia, 
according to Azyumardi Azra, still requires serious and specific discussions. For example, a 
careful consideration is needed to decide whether multicultural education should become a 
separate and independent subject, or integrated into existing subjects, given the fact that 
Indonesian school curriculums have been quite crowded (“Kompas”, July 31, 2002). 

 Eighteen years on, there is still a question whether the Indonesian society is indeed 
already multicultural, in line with the concepts of Bhinneka Tunggal Ika and Pancasila, and 
consistent with universally adopted values such as human rights and tolerance. Such question 
arises in light of recent troubling development of intolerance in Indonesia, where ethno-
religious sentiments have been utilized for political gains; e.g. in the 2017 Jakarta’s governor 
election and the imprisonment of former governor, Basuki Tjahaja Purnama or Ahok. The 
Jakarta’s case is phenomenal as it received national and international coverage for its 
significance. However, at the grass root and most local level in other parts of Indonesia, there 
is an ongoing underlying tension reflecting the dynamics of intergroup relations in the process 
of achieving a multicultural society, to which we now turn by looking at the case of Muslim 
migrants in Kelurahan Sumerta in Denpasar.   
 
The Arrival of Muslim Migrants in The Village of Sumerta 
The Sumerta Muslim migrants began to settle in this village within the city of Denpasar in 
1997-1998, when Indonesia was hit by the Asian economic crisis (Kayun Suhairi, personal 
communication, March 18, 2017). They came as economic migrants seeking work in Bali’s 
tourist industry and related enterprises. Since then, the number Muslim migrants coming and 
living in Sumerta village has increased significantly, even though there was a halt temporarily 
due to the Bali Bombings of 2002 and 2005. Bali’s tourism began to recover after 2008, resulting 
in a substantial increase of the number of Muslim migrants in predominantly Hindu Sumerta. 
This was the stimulus for the establishment of the association, PUMA. The association was 
initiated and established by the Muslim community leaders, who argued that such an 
organization was badly needed to accommodate the needs, or ‘aspirations’ in Indonesian 



 
IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 9 (1), 14-27 © 2025 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213  

Ethnolinguistic Pluralism and Multiculturalism in Contemporary Indonesia |20 

discourse, of its members. The organization would also help Muslim migrants handle a range 
of issues in their daily social lives, something for which the traditional banjar structure 
supported Hindu Balinese (Kayun Suhairi, personal communication, March 18, 2017). 
 
The Birth of PUMA 
The birth of PUMA was informally proposed during a Quran recitation session organized by 
a migrant named Samali. He invited Muslims living in Jalan Akasia to hold such recitations 
regularly. In one session, after the recitation, some of the male community leaders sat around, 
talking about the increasing number of Muslim migrants living in Sumerta. One of them, 
Waluyo, proposed to form an organization. Other fellow Muslims agreed, and Waluyo was 
then elected as the chairperson of the association, which he was happy to accept. Currently, 
its members are more than fifty-four families; most of them are from Jember and other areas 
in East Java (Waluyo, personal communication, March 18, 2017). 

In addition to Quran recitation activities, PUMA also organises social-religious events 
such as taraweh (prayers during the month of Ramadan) and halal-bihalal (social gatherings 
to celebrate the end of Ramadan), usually held outdoor in Bedugul Recreational Park in central 
Bali. However, if the activity takes place at the PUMA office, then the non-Muslim banjar 
officials including elders, community leaders, and Sumerta’s Lurah (official head) are invited 
as guests of honour. During Idul Fitri celebration (marking the end of Ramadhan fasting), 
Sumerta’s Village Head is invited to convey the greetings and other information to be sent to 
PUMA members. They also organize other celebrations, in particular the celebration of Maulid 
(the Prophet’s birthday) and, Isra Miraj (the Prophet’s spiritual journey). All of these religious 
activities require the proper approval or permit from such local authorities as the kelian banjar 
(the head of the traditional sub-village neighbourhood unit), Bintara Pembina Desa (the village 
military security apparatus). To maintain security during the events, pacalang (‘traditional’ 
village security) are always invited (Waluyo, personal communication, March 18, 2017). These 
security groups developed in the late 1990s in response to Balinese perceptions that society 
was becoming more dangerous, although in popular discourse they are said to have always 
existed. 
 
The Relation Between Islamic Migrants and Local Hindus in The Sumerta Village 
Since its establishment in 2008, there have been no serious troubles in the relation between 
Islamic migrants and local Hindus. There have been even virtually no activities breaching from 
PUMA's organizational statutes. This is because no matter however small the problem is, it 
has been promptly resolved by the PUMA’s board (Waluyo, personal communication, March 
18, 2017). The interaction of Muslim PUMA members with local Hindu residents and 
government officials in Sumerta Village has been going well. The local government at the 
village level has done its function as the guardian of all religious people quite well making 
sure that different ethnic/religious groups can do their cultural practices freely and safely. In 
terms of multicultural ideals, such socio-cultural practices as seen in Sumerta can be thought 
of as a form of civic education in the public sphere for multiculturalism. 

While on the surface there is no turmoil, one might wonder what the underlying 
condition is. For this, we investigated Muslim-Hindu intra/inter-group interactions, 
scrutinizing important intertwined identity-related symbolic variables, especially language, 
religion and ethnicity. Language is more than simply a means of communication; in its broad 
sense, it covers “not only words but also other languages of art, of gesture, of love, and the like 
(Taylor, 1994, p. 32.).”  



 
IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 9 (1), 14-27 © 2025 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213  

Ethnolinguistic Pluralism and Multiculturalism in Contemporary Indonesia |21 

Language has crucial socio-cultural symbolic functions particularly in complex 
multilingual settings as is the case in Bali, where it serves as a means of expressing group 
identity, and has unique pragmatics of inclusion and exclusion (Sosiowati et al., 2017, pp. 273-
282). In this respect, the phenomenon of multilingualism and code switching/mixing is of 
particular interest as it is sociolinguistically motivated, as will be shown in the later part of this 
article (Nguyen, 2024). 

Religion and ethnicity are two most important socio-cultural variables that make up 
groupings in Indonesian’s pluralistic societies. They come with a set of shared values and 
common histories, identities/memberships. Pluralism/multiculturalism becomes a problem 
when members of different ethno-religious groups cannot manage cases when these different 
ethno-religious values (or the interpretation of them) are in conflict, or cannot be comfortably 
accommodated within the same society. Therefore, a harmonious plural, especially 
multicultural, society requires tolerance. This is one of the issues examined in this study as it 
is relevant in contemporary Indonesian context, following the widespread intolerance 
practices in this country in the last two decades, for example as evidenced from the attacks of 
Christians, Churches, and police stations and police headquarters by terrorists affiliated with 
groups of Muslim extremists in several places in Indonesia during recent years. 

In the context of multiculturalism, ethnicity, and tolerance, the fulfilment of civic duties 
is very important, as has been done by the British, who have implemented multicultural 
education since the 1960s (Sutherland, 2024, p. 104; Callan, 2000). In the case of Sumerta, there 
are good lessons from this study about the interactional dynamics of minority and majority 
groups in the public sphere. Before discussing this, we first clarify the key terms, debates and 
approaches in the context of the previous studies of pluralism/multiculturalism in Bali, 
Indonesia and beyond. 

 
Linguistic Practices 
Linguistic practices in Bali, including in the village of Sumerta, are characterized by 
multilingualism, used here in a broad sense to cover bilingualism. Multilingualism is defined 
as ‘the ability of societies, institutions, groups, and individuals to engage, on a regular basis, 
with more than one language in their day-to-day lives’ (the Council of Europe in (Krawczyk-
Neifar, 2017, p.172). It is a norm in Bali, and elsewhere in Indonesia. The Balinese people speak 
their mother tongue, Balinese, and Indonesian equally well. The PUMA members speak their 
mother tongue, Javanese, and the national/lingua franca Indonesian. Some of them also speak 
Balinese although their Balinese is typically restricted to the low/common register. In this 
section we provide examples of linguistics practices of PUMA migrant members, and then 
discuss their significance in the context multiculturalism.   

The subject of whether the Balinese language should be a compulsory subject in all 
Balinese education has been hotly debated in formal and social media contexts in recent 
decades. Prior to the 1980s, one could still find many Balinese who did not have a very good 
knowledge of Indonesian, and so Balinese language was present in formal education. This 
situation changed markedly after the 1980s, to the point where younger Balinese grew up with 
Indonesian as their first, rather than second language. Fearing the marginalization of their 
language, the Balinese have successfully advocated making the Balinese language a 
compulsory element of the educational curriculum (“Kompas,” May, 4 2013). Based on 2006 
legislation, a minimum of Balinese language was mandated in 2013. In 2018, advocates of 
Balinese lobbied for its compulsory use in government offices (“Antara Bali,” February, 1 
2018). Such use of language sends signals to non-Balinese about relations between insiders and 



 
IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 9 (1), 14-27 © 2025 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213  

Ethnolinguistic Pluralism and Multiculturalism in Contemporary Indonesia |22 

outsiders. 
The first notable pattern of linguistics practices of PUMA migrant members is the 

prevalent use of Indonesian in intergroup communication, or even in intragroup 
communication among the PUMA members. The use of Indonesian as a lingua franca in inter-
ethnic communication is not surprising, definitely not unique to the village of Sumerta. 
Indonesian for wider inter-ethnic communications elsewhere in Indonesia has been widely 
reported in previous studies (Abas, 1987; Fachrurozi, 2017, pp. 216-217). 

The second pattern is the use of Javanese. It is typically used in domestic settings among 
the family members of the migrants. However, Indonesian, instead of Javanese, is also often 
used in intragroup communication among the migrants, as reported by Waluyo, a PUMA 
member. This is rather surprising. A plausible explanation for this is that the Muslim migrants 
come from different parts of Java with different Javanese dialects. Indonesian is then used a 
lingua franca, an egalitarian language levelling the need to have distinct social registers, also 
geographical dialectal differences. In addition, the use of Indonesian appears to be motivated 
by a practical need in inter-group communications. Mistari explained it this way: 

 
“As for Indonesian, we usually use it during meetings; when there is a meeting 
with the attendees of mixed people; so yes, we won’t use the local language but 
we must use the Indonesian language so that all can understand.” (Mistari, 
personal communication, March 24, 2017) 
 
The third pattern is code switching done by certain PUMA members who have acquired 

some competency in Balinese. This is a common practice of linguistic engagement with ethnic 
difference in the interactional sphere. Limited code switching is possibly done by using simple 
tags/particles (like ’nggih ‘yes’, tan ‘not’, both high Balinese forms) and kin terms of address 
like bli ‘(elder) brother’. This is a strategy to index a willingness to accommodate the local 
language of the ‘host’ group. A more extensive code switching is typically encountered with 
migrants who have settled in Sumerta for long time and/or who are married to the Balinese. 
Puji Suwantoro, for example, from Jember East Java, moved to Bali in 1990 and married a 
Balinese from Singaraja, North Bali. His family members are multi-linguals, with code 
switching (Indonesian-Balinese-Javanese words or phrases) is a common practice in the 
family. The same code-switching practice in the family domain has been reported by Waluyo 
and Mistari.   

According to Waluyo, the PUMA migrants consider that they feel obliged to use 
Balinese, or code switching with Balinese, or Indonesian, instead of using Javanese when they 
communicate among themselves in public space in the presence of the Balinese around. This 
is to avoid misunderstanding. For the migrants who have acquired competence in Balinese, 
the PUMA members are encouraged to use Balinese especially when communicating with the 
local Balinese. In fact, as reported by Mistari, they do prefer to speak Balinese in such a 
situation. This is a deliberate choice of symbolic gesture to show cross-cultural awareness and 
respect to the local Balinese. They expect that such linguistic practice would lead to a 
harmonious inter-ethnic/personal relation. This symbolic engagement is a kind of linguistic 
accommodation to efface conditions of ethnic, ingroup/outgroup difference and possible local 
resentments (Lele, 2021, pp. 8). 

However, when they know that the Balinese interlocutor is of high caste (which requires 
a proper high register in Balinese), they usually switch to Indonesian. Mistari described the 
language choice in such a situation as follows: 



 
IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 9 (1), 14-27 © 2025 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213  

Ethnolinguistic Pluralism and Multiculturalism in Contemporary Indonesia |23 

 
"In order not to make mistakes, we just use the Indonesian language when we talk 
toa high-caste Balinese. I may still be able speak (proper/high register) Balinese (for 
this), but my fellow Javanese migrants may not understand it; so we just use the 
Indonesian language so that there won't be any problems." (Mistari, personal 
communication, March 24, 2017) 
 
Such issues are not uncommon in urban settings, where Balinese too are anxious not to 

offend by using the wrong language level, although in the case of Balinese usage, this is usually 
handled by using high status forms of words. Balinese also use a lot of Indonesian vocabulary 
in their use of Balinese language. 

To conclude, linguistic practices so far outlined reflect some degree of diglossic 
(indigenous) multilingualism: Indonesian is used as a language for wider inter-ethnic 
communications, also used in formal context and perceived as having high social status. 
Balinese and Javanese as local ethnic languages are used typically in informal contexts e.g. in 
domestic and intragroup communications. Code switching in inter-ethic communication is 
deliberately used with symbolic pragmatic intent to show respect and engagement with the 
local culture in the context of harmonious inter-ethnic relations.  

Turning to the relation between multilingualism and multiculturalism, we can have a 
space as represented in Table 1 below. Multilingualism and multiculturalism are complex 
notions, and the relation of the two is also equally complex. The binary notation of +/– in each 
of the two should be understood as representing the opposite ends of the degrees of presence 
and absence of multilingualism/multiculturalism. That is, their presence at the individual and 
societal levels is a matter of continuum. In what follows, we only discuss the spaces that are 
relevant for our present study, namely cell (3) “multilingual societies/individuals that are not 
multicultural”, and cell (4) “multilingual societies/individuals that are also multicultural”. We 
ignore cells (1)-(2) as we are not dealing with monolinguals. It should be noted that on the 
notion of multilingualism at the societal level, [+multilingual] in Table 1 could mean a society 
comprising of distinct monolingual groups. Thus, cell (3) represents ambiguous situations. 
First, it captures the common case with individual members of the society being 
multi/bilinguals (to be discussed below). Second, it also captures the society comprising of 
monolingual groups, counted as ‘plural society’ in Furnivall’s sense (Kusumaryati, 2023, p. 
202).  This is extremely unusual in modern era, not attested in Sumerta and it perhaps does 
not exist elsewhere in contemporary Indonesia. 
 
  multicultural 

  – + 
multilingual – (1): –/– (2): –/+ 

+ (3): +/– (4): +/+ 
 

Table 1. The Interrelation of Multiculturalism and Multilingualism 
 
On the basis of what we know about the patterns of linguistic practices (i.e. 

multilingualism) and patterns of cultural practices as discussed earlier (i.e. multiculturalism) 
as shown in Table 1, we argue that the Sumerta society is essentially within cell (3), with some 
sign of properties leaning towards (4). As mentioned in the beginning of this subsection, the 
Sumerta society is multilingual in the sense that individuals or ethnic-groups in Sumerta, in 
this case the Balinese and PUMA members, are able to engage with more than one language 



 
IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 9 (1), 14-27 © 2025 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213  

Ethnolinguistic Pluralism and Multiculturalism in Contemporary Indonesia |24 

in their daily lives. Of course, their proficiency of engagement across different languages is of 
varying degrees. For example, certain PUMA migrant members who are able to speak Balinese 
can engage only in the common/low register of Balinese, and switch to Indonesian if they know 
that their Balinese interlocutors are of higher caste status.  

On the basis of ‘engagement’, parallel to the definition of multilingualism given in the 
beginning of this subsection, we can also define multiculturalism as the proficiency of cultural 
engagement: the ability of individuals or groups of individuals to engage with more than one 
culture in their day-to-day lives. On this view, while PUMA migrant members have been 
demonstrated to show some degree of cultural awareness in multicultural communication 
(e.g. using code-switching with certain pragmatic intent as discussed earlier), on the basis of 
our ethnographic work, they are typically not (yet) proficient multicultural agents. That is, 
most of them are not yet able to perform a high level of engagement with the Balinese culture 
in their everyday lives. Most of the engagements are symbolic in nature, as we shall discuss 
below.  

In fact, because the Balinese culture is primarily Hinduism based, and the PUMA’s is 
Islam based, active cultural engagements of the PUMA migrant members in Balinese culture 
(or vice versa, the Balinese group in Islamic culture) would only possible within certain limits. 
In other words, full or deep cultural engagements may not be allowed on religious grounds. 
An individual for example cannot be both a Muslim and a Hindu at the same time in the 
current legal system in Indonesia. Thus, a PUMA migrant who married a Balinese wife has to 
choose either religious affiliation. Being a Muslim, he may have acquired a high degree of 
Balinese cultural knowledge, potentially allowing him to have an active engagement in the 
Balinese culture. However, as a Muslim, he will be prohibited by the Hindu based awig-awig 
(i.e. customary laws) to participate in local Hinduism related cultural events. Note that his 
Islam religion will also prohibit him from active engagement in non-Islamic cultural practices. 

Thus, a truly multicultural society with deep inter-group cultural engagement would be 
in theory impossible. The engagements are therefore understandably typically symbolic, 
confined to certain non-religious roles; e.g. the involvement of the pacalang as the security as 
mentioned earlier. Likewise, certain ritual practices and arts performances linked to religious 
identity are highly sensitive, and cannot be mixed. For example, it would be impossible if the 
Hindu Balinese to participate in the collective ritual prayers of sholawatan. Likewise, it 
impossible for the migrants to perform Balinese dances such as Rejang Renteng, a sacred dance 
usually performed in Hindus temples during the piodalan ritual. The participation of the 
Balinese or the migrant in these events is at best as helpers and on-lookers.   

To conclude, the individuals and ethnic/religious groups in Sumerta are primarily 
engaged with their own cultural practices. This suggests a characteristic of Rex’s (2010, p. 155) 
cultural pluralism as each group maintains its cultural boundaries. They, however, show 
awareness of each other’s cultures, and have demonstrated limited cultural engagements 
characterizing multiculturalism for symbolic reasons. These facts support the analysis that we 
primarily have a culturally plural society in Sumerta. 

 
Conclusion  
This paper has discussed indigenous multiculturalism involving majority-minority intergroup 
relations in the village of Sumerta in Bali, contributing to the debate on the distinction of 
cultural pluralism and multiculturalism. It has presented the complex dynamics how inter-
ethnic/religious group relations have evolved, with the Javanese Muslim migrants successfully 
maintaining harmonious relations with the dominant Hindus.  



 
IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 9 (1), 14-27 © 2025 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213  

Ethnolinguistic Pluralism and Multiculturalism in Contemporary Indonesia |25 

The behavioural characteristics exhibited by both groups as seen by their religious, 
cultural and linguistic practices suggest a village-level plural society mirroring the society of 
Bali and Indonesia. Individuals and ethnic/religious (sub)groups are well aware of the ideals 
of Pancasila-based multiculturalism because such multiculturalism is part of the national 
ideology of Indonesia. Ethnic groups show active engagements with different cultures in the 
society. The engagements are however essentially symbolic and limited in nature, typically 
intended as a public display serving as informal civic education to the public towards a socially 
tolerant and harmonious society. 
 
Acknowledgments  
The author would like to thank I Wayan Arka, Professor of Linguistics, FASSA, FAHA, School 
of Culture, History and Language, Australian National University, who not only read [this 
work], but also provided comments and taught methods for analysing data on the relationship 
between multilingualism and multiculturalism, as presented in Table 1 in this article. The first 
author acknowledges the support of the grant "Cultural Practices of Bali Culture in Sumerta 
Denpasar Timur Village 2002-2017" from the History Study Program Faculty of Arts Udayana 
University, 2017. The first author also thanks the students of the History Program who have 
participated in the research. 
 
References 
Abas, H. (1987). Indonesian as a unifying language of wider communication: a historical and 

sociolinguistic perspective. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, series D No 73. 
Arka, IW. (2013).  Language Management and Minority Language Maintenance In (Eastern) 

Indonesia: Strategic Issues. Language Documentation and Conservation, 7: 74-105. 
https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/items/852e9433-b0fe-4137-b9b4-d2d9ca 
4ddfa7.  

Atmadja, N. B. (2009) Identitas Agama, Etnik, dan Nasional Dalam Perspektif Pendidikan 
Multikultural.  Pustaka Jurnal Ilmu-Ilmu Budaya, 8(1).  

Budiasa, I. P. A. K. & Gunarti, E. (2016). Genealogical information searches in Kawitan Culture 
on Balinese Hinduism society: From Lontar (palm-leaf manuscript) to electronic form. 
Paper presented at: IFLA WLIC 2016. Retrieved from https://library.ifla.org/id/eprin 
t/1449/.  

Callan, E. (2000). Review of diversity and distruct: Civic education in a multicultural 
democracy, by S. Macedo. Canadian Journal of Political Science/ Revue Canadienne de Science, 
33 (4): 861-862. https://www.jstor.org/stable/i362166.  

Fachrurozi, M. F. (2017). Language, press, and Indonesian nationalism. Advances in Social 
Sciences, Education and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), 154. https://doi.org/10.2991/icclas-
17.2018.30.  

Furnivall, J.S. (1948). Colonial policy and practice: A comparative study of Burma and Netherlands 
India. New York: New York University Press. 

Inglis, C. (1996).  Multiculturalism: New policy responses to diversity. MOST Policy Papers, 4.  
https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000105582.  

Kompas (2002, July 31). Multikulturalisme, konsep yang terus dibentuk. 
Kompas. (2013, May 4). Bahasa Bali mata pelajaran wajib di Bali. 
Krawczyk-Neifar, E. (2017). Bilingual teacher training: Failure or success? a students’ and 

teachers’ perspective. In Mydla, J., Poks, M. & Drong, L. (Eds.), Multiculturalism, 
multilingualism and the self: Literature and culture studies. Switzerland: Springer 



 
IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 9 (1), 14-27 © 2025 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213  

Ethnolinguistic Pluralism and Multiculturalism in Contemporary Indonesia |26 

International Publishing. 
Kukathas, C. (2003). The liberal archipelago: A theory of diversity and freedom. Oxford: Oxford 

University Press. 
Kusumaryati, V. (2023). Pig-feast democracy: Direct local elections and the making of a plural 

political order in West Papua. American Ethnologist, 51 (2): 193-206. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/amet.13267.  

Kymlicka, W. (2016).  Liberalism, community, and culture twenty-five years on: Philosophical 
inquiries and political claims. Dve domovini, 44. https://doi.org/10.3986/dd.2016.2.06.  

Kymlicka, W. (1995). Multicultural citizenship: A liberal theory of minority rights.  Oxford: Oxford 
University Press. 

Kymlicka, W. & Opalski, M. (2002). Can liberal pluralism be exported? Western political theory and 
Ethnic Relations in Eastern Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 
https://doi.org/10.1093/019924815X.003.0001. 

Lele, G. (2021). Asymmetric decentralization, accommodation and separatist conflict: lessons 
from Aceh and Papua, Indonesia. Territory, Politics, Governance, 11 (5): 972-990. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2021.1875036. 

Leung, C. & Valdes, G. (2019). Translanguaging and the Transdisciplinary Framework for 
Language Teaching and Learning in a Multilingual World. The Modern Language Journal, 
103 (2): 348-370. https://www.jstor.org/stable/45172005.  

Nathan, G. (2015). Innovation process and ethics in technology: An approach to ethical 
(responsible) innovation governance. Journal on Chain and Network Science, 15 (2): 119-
134. https://doi.org/10.3920/JCNS2014.x018.  

Naya Sujana, IN. (2004). Konflik Sosial dalam masyarakat Bali: Fenomena dan strategi 
penanggulangan. In I.N.D Putra (Ed.), Bali menuju Jagaditha: Aneka perspektif (pp. 83-112). 
Denpasar: Pustaka Bali Post. 

Nguyen, A.M.D. & Benet-Martinez, V. (2013). Biculturalism unpacked: Components, 
individual differences, measurement, and outcomes. Social and Personality Psychology 
Compass, 1(1): 101-114. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00029.x.  

Nordholt, H. S. (Ed.) (2007). Bali an Open Fortress 1995-2005: Regional autonomy, electoral 
democracy and entrenched identities, in renegotiating boundaries: Local politics in Post-Suharto 
Indonesia. Singapore: NUS Press. 

Oktay, R. R. (2016). The challenges of contemporaneity: Postmodernity and multiculturalism. 
Switzerland: Springer. 

Ragazzi, F. (2016). Suspect community or suspect category? The impact of counter-terrorism 
as ‘policed multiculturalism’. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 42 (5): 724-741. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2015.112180.  

Rex, J. (1997). The concept of a multicultural society. In M. Guibernau & J. Rex, The ethnicity 
reader: Nationalism, multiculturalism, and migration. Cambridge: Polity Press. 

Rosalina, P. D., Dupre, K., Wang, Y., Putra, I. N. D., & Jin, X. (2023). Rural tourism resource 
management strategies: A case study of two tourism villages in Bali. Tourism Management 
Perspectives, 49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2023.101194.  

Nguyen, L. (2024). Rethinking the matrix language: Vietnamese-English code-switching in 
Canberra. International Journal of Bilingualism. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006924 
1254454.  

Nurjaman, A. & Jainuri. Islam and democracy in Post-Suharto Indonesia. Advamces in Social 
Sciences, Education and Humanities Research, 339. 1st Annual Conference on Social Sciences 
and Humanities (AICOSH 2019). https://www.atlantis-press.com/proceedings/aicosh-



 
IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 9 (1), 14-27 © 2025 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213  

Ethnolinguistic Pluralism and Multiculturalism in Contemporary Indonesia |27 

19/125916028.  
Sosiowati I. G. A. G., Arka, I. W., Aryawibawa, I. N., & Widiastuti, N. M. A. (2019). Domain 

change and ethnolinguistic vitality: Evidence from the fishing lexicon of Loloan Malay. 
Language Documentation & Conservation, 13(0): 586–617. 
https://researchportalplus.anu.edu.au/en/publications/domain-change-and-eth nolin 
guistic-vitality-evidence-from-the-fish.  

Sosiowati, I. G. A. G., Widiastuti, N. M. A. & Arka, I. W. (2017).  Constructing identity and 
language vitality of minority language: Evidence from Loloan Malay.  In I. N. Sudipa, 
Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Austronesian and non-Austronesian 
languages and literature (pp. 273-282). Denpasar: Udayana University Press. 

Stockemer, D. & Simdstrom, A. (2025). Age inequalities in political representation: A review 
article. Government and Opposition, 60: 271-288. DOI: 10.1017/gov.2023.11.  

Suacana, I. W. G. (2004, May 3).  Problema sosial masyarakat multikultural. Bali Post, p. 4. 
Suparlan, P. (2002). Membangun kembali Indonesia yang Bhinneka Tunggal Ika: Menuju 

masyarakat multikultural. In The Simposium International of the 3rd Indonesia 
Anthropology’s Journal. Retrieved from https://lib.ui.ac.id/detail?id=20452209&lok 
asi=lokal.  

Sutherland, C. (2024). What’s in a word? Modelling British history for a ‘multi-racial’ society. 
Race Ethnicity and Education, 27 (1): 99-117. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2022.21 
60775.  

Taylor, C. (1994). The politics of recognition. In A. Gutmann (Ed.), Multiculturalism: Examining 
the politics of recognition. Princeton:  Princeton University Press. 

Vaughan, J. & Singer, R. (2018). Indigenous multilingualisms past and present. Language & 
Communication, 62: 83-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2018.06.003.  

Wang, J. (2024). Colonial genealogies of pluralism: Consociation as disavowal in contemporary 
democratic theory. American Political Science Review, 1-14. DOI: 10.1017/S00030554240009 
0X.  

Wisarja, I. K. & Sudarsana, I. K. (2023). Tracking the factors causing harmonious Hindu-Islamic 
relations in Bali. Cogent Social Sciences, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.22 
59470.  

Yang, J. (2022). Chinese contemporary art teachers’ professional development in the 20th and 
21st centuries within the multicultural framework. Heritage Science, 10 (1). 
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-022-00692-8.  

 


