I never called myself an activist (and I still do)

I never considered myself an activist. I once thought activists are those marching and protesting on the road. I thought activism conveys a negative tone: those who solely make noises and oppose government policy. I also thought activists are those voicing human rights discourse with foreign supports and thus harming Indonesia's interests, something which has been against my heart. I had always dreamed of becoming a diplomat for my beloved homeland. Even when I no longer dream of serving my country as a diplomat as I have another calling now, I still love this country and would not want to cause any harm.

When I first started working at the SETARA Institute, I did not call myself an activist. Well, I realise I do research and advocacy, but I called myself a researcher who conducts both research and advocacy.

Only until a senior activist I admire invited my colleague and I to meet over a cup of coffee, I started to rethink the definition of 'activist'. He sent me a Google invitation, it says: Meeting with two SETARA Institute activists. My colleague and I looked at each other with a little laugh. Not that it was funny, but we were both surprised and confused. It was our first time being called an activist.

I recalled the third month after I joined the SETARA Institute, I did a fieldwork with another senior activist. I asked him what he did for a living. He asked me back if I thought activism was a job. That time I thought being an activist is impossible if we had other jobs.

My view on activism has totally changed. It is no longer negative. It is indeed very cool! Activism is not a job. It is a soul. Whatever our job is, if we have the soul to drive social change, we are activists!

Being an activist does not mean we do activism in a confrontational way and view the government as an enemy. Instead, we can adopt dialogue approach. I believe activist is not called as 'activist' merely for the loudness of their voice, but for their intention and purpose for social change. It is not a good idea to have a confrontation with other parties. I am a strong advocate of dialogue and believe that dialogue will make people understand each other better, thus creating long-lasting social impacts.

And there are a lot of things we can do to drive social change. It is not only protesting on the road, but more importantly is thinking and doing it strategically to achieve the purpose. And this is what makes me excited because I can combine my passion for research and social change. Research surely plays an important role in advocacy. It gives credibility and backs our argument with data.

Do I call myself an activist now? I prefer not. Not because I am not proud of being an activist, but I just refrain myself from making a claim. I just let people define who I am, including if I deserve to be called an activist.

Whenever possible (because I realise it is not always possible, and I do describe myself as a strong advocate of dialogue here), I refrain from describing myself with a noun, e.g. advocate, activist. I prefer describing myself with a verb, especially continuous verb. Doing so indicates that what I am doing is not static. It is very dynamic. It is a work in progress and I need to make efforts continuously.