Hegemony in the Shadow of Tradition: Hidden Resistance of the Lio Indigenous Community Against Mosalaki Domination in the Era of Modernization

Authors

  • Martina Ue Universitas Sanata Dharma

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62951/ijss.v2i4.514

Keywords:

Hegemony, Hidden Resistance, Lio Indigenous Community, Mosalaki, Power Dynamics

Abstract

This research analyzes the dynamics of hegemony and resistance in the Lio indigenous community of Ende Regency, East Nusa Tenggara, focusing on the power practices of mosalaki (traditional elites) and the forms of hidden resistance developed by farming communities. Using an ethnographic approach over four months in Keliwumbu Village, this study combines Antonio Gramsci's concept of hegemony with James Scott's theory of hidden transcripts to understand the complexity of power relations in traditional societies experiencing economic transformation. Data were collected through participant observation, in-depth interviews with 18 informants, and document analysis, then analyzed using a thematic approach. Findings indicate that the legitimacy of mosalaki power is constructed through three main pillars: genealogical narratives derived from the myths of Lepe and Mbusu, control over customary land encompassing 70% of agricultural land, and ritual authority positioning them as intermediaries with ata mate (ancestral spirits). Hegemonic practices operate through the pire system (customary prohibitions), mandatory nggua rituals requiring offerings, and control over decision-making as evidenced in the coal-fired power plant construction case. However, farming communities have developed hidden resistance in the form of subtle sabotage, passive non-compliance, gossip and informal criticism, and exit strategies through migration and purchase of alternative land. This resistance operates within the same cultural framework as the hegemony it contests, developing alternative interpretations of "true custom" rather than rejecting the traditional system entirely. This research contributes to theoretical understanding of hegemony in non-Western societies and reveals that "local wisdom" discourse can be manipulated to perpetuate structural inequality. Practically, these findings demonstrate the need for more critical approaches in development policies that accommodate internal power dynamics of indigenous communities to prevent reinforcement of local elite domination

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. Verso.

Bocock, R. (2007). Hegemony. Tavistock Publications.

Bovensiepen, J. (2014). Installing the insider outside: House reconstruction and the transformation of binary ideologies in independent East Timor. American Ethnologist, 41(2), 290–304. https://doi.org/10.1111/amet.12101

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Dale, C. J. P. (2013). Kuasa, pembangunan dan pemiskinan sistemik: Analisis kontra hegemoni dengan fokus studi kasus di Manggarai Raya. Sunspirit Books.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2017). The Sage handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). Sage Publications.

Emmed, M. P. (2013). Kekuasaan politik dan adat para mosalaki di desa Nggela dan Tenda, Kabupaten Ende, Flores. Indonesian Journal of Social and Cultural Anthropology, 35(1), 45–62.

Fontana, B. (2006). Hegemony and power: On the relation between Gramsci and Machiavelli. University of Minnesota Press.

Fox, J. J. (2006). The poetic power of place: Comparative perspectives on Austronesian ideas of locality. ANU E Press. https://doi.org/10.22459/PPP.09.2006

Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from prison notebooks. International Publishers.

Hall, D., Hirsch, P., & Li, T. M. (2011). Powers of exclusion: Land dilemmas in Southeast Asia. University of Hawaii Press.

Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (2019). Ethnography: Principles in practice (4th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315146027

Harvey, D. (2003). The new imperialism. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199264315.001.0001

Henley, D., & Davidson, J. S. (2007). In the name of adat: Regional perspectives on reform, tradition, and democracy in Indonesia. Modern Asian Studies, 42(4), 815–851. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X07002766

Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Harvard University Press.

Li, T. M. (2007). The will to improve: Governmentality, development, and the practice of politics. Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780822389781

Li, T. M. (2014). Land's end: Capitalist relations on an indigenous frontier. Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822376460

Patria, N., & Arief, A. (2003). Antonio Gramsci: Negara dan hegemoni. Pustaka Pelajar.

Scott, J. C. (1985). Weapons of the weak: Everyday forms of peasant resistance. Yale University Press.

Scott, J. C. (1990). Domination and the arts of resistance: Hidden transcripts. Yale University Press.

Simon, R. (2004). Gagasan-gagasan politik Gramsci. Pustaka Pelajar.

Vel, J. A. (2008). Uma politics: An ethnography of democratization in West Sumba, Indonesia, 1986-2006. KITLV Press. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004253926

Downloads

Published

2025-12-09

How to Cite

Martina Ue. (2025). Hegemony in the Shadow of Tradition: Hidden Resistance of the Lio Indigenous Community Against Mosalaki Domination in the Era of Modernization . International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 2(4), 29–38. https://doi.org/10.62951/ijss.v2i4.514

Similar Articles

<< < 1 2 3 4 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.