How a new economic imagination may help movements reclaim agency and construct more just and solidarity-based alternatives

Below is the contribution of Kamala Chandrakirana, Indonesia for Humanity (Indonesia) to the online session “Building the New: Reimagining Civil Society Resourcing in Times of Global Transformation”, held on 30 October 2025. At a moment when Indonesia faces the return of authoritarian and nationalist forces, Kamala reflects on what it takes to “begin again” for Indonesia for Humanity, even after 30 years of work. She reminds us that when old systems fail, beginnings become political acts — shaping who holds power, how we organize, the allies we seek and the futures we imagine.

You can read the full report / transcript of the session here, or the individual contributions from the other three speakers: Nour Nusseibeh, Dalia Association (Palestine); Marko Aksentijević, Ministry of Space (Serbia); and, Martin Macwan, Navsarjan (India).

Jenny Hodgson, GFCF (JH): Kamala (or Nana) is with Indonesia for Humanity, which has just turned 30 this week, so congratulations on that. Tell us, how are you reimagining at this landmark moment in the history of your organization?

Kamala Chandrakirana (KC): We are talking about new imaginings, which really is the call of our time – new imaginings for old struggles — when the world has changed fundamentally. I thought I’d use this opportunity to talk about insights on beginnings, and Martin just beautifully illustrated to us how ruptures create opportunities for new ways forward. And so, I want to focus just on that moment of beginnings.

I’m sharing from my experience in Indonesia, a country that has deep traumas from past violations and conflicts. We are navigating a legacy of 30 years of authoritarianism, and multiple kinds of conflict: inter-ethnic, inter-religious, and secessionist movements against the Indonesian State. We have gone through all the phases of conflict, up to what is now a flawed peace. But we also went through a period of around 15 years of democratic opening, which was a time for new beginnings with a lot of lessons in terms of starting something new. Indonesia for Humanity, now on its 30th birthday, is also beginning something new at a time when we are seeing the re-emergence of authoritarianism and nationalist populism. It is in fact a very difficult time.

I want to focus on beginnings, because in the excitement to “do something”, sometimes we simply rush to get things done. But beginnings deserve some thinking through, especially when what you are trying to start anew is something that is genuinely new and unfamiliar, with high stakes and big risks that can generate scepticism, confusion, tension, and also opposition. So, when you are starting something new under these conditions, the beginning matters, and that’s the lesson. Beginnings can convey the nature of what you’re initiating. Is it a project that you want to implement, or is it an act of resistance? Is it a bold dream that you want people to carry together? Beginnings can convey ownership: whose initiative is this? How big is the umbrella? How open or closed is the space? Beginnings are also opportunities to create a web of support, particularly when your initiative is something that will be contested, not just by other groups that oppose your point of view but also by the State. Beginnings are an opportunity to create your web of support because you know that along the way you will face serious obstacles.

Coming back to Indonesia for Humanity, on our 30th anniversary we want to start again, embark on something new. It’s a rather audacious idea, ambitious, and maybe a little foolish. Indonesia for Humanity as an organization is trying to change internally, but it is also embarking on an initiative that engages the movement. We are making a call for the movement, because Indonesia for Humanity itself was created by the movement, as part of the movement, and we see ourselves as part of a bigger community of social change activists. We want to make a call to build mutual reliance as part of securing our sovereignty in the face of a culture of dependence that has been growing for decades. The aid system and international donors were very important for us during the first decades of our political opening and democratization, because that allowed us to start many new things. But over the decades we have become stuck in a culture of dependency. We want to build resilience by bringing people together and enabling the sharing of resources. But it’s not just about sharing resources, it’s about envisioning and constructing a different economic base for our progressive movements.

“We want to make a call to build mutual reliance as part of securing our sovereignty in the face of a culture of dependence that has been growing for decades.”

It may seem audacious to think that we as actors with very few resources want to create an alternative economic base that is more just, generative, and solidarity-based. But we envision civil society being active actors in constructing this economy, as well as being good benefactors of it. We aspire to do this by forming new ties through a social contract. It is also a call for cultural transformation within our wider community. So yes, it might be foolish, but we’re going to have a go at it.

From my past experience, both inside and outside Indonesia for Humanity, I want to share three insights that could be truly generative:

1. Subjectivity matters: Especially when you are trying to weave across rips and tears in a community and trying to transcend old boundaries and past estrangements, subjectivity matters. Feeling and understanding that this means bringing people together, trying to transcend these rips and tears, is a kind of labour that I’d like to call “affective labour.” It is hard work, it is painful, and it is exhausting.
2. Language before structure: Language matters, because before we create a structure for collaboration and implementation, we need to create a language that can be a medium for cognitive connection, for shared references and for collective imagination. We at Indonesia for Humanity spend a lot of time trying to create new phrases and new language, new words to create a new worldview, because our call is for cultural transformation. In that sense, our own cultural transformation is very important, and language is central to that.
3. Reframing as reclaiming agency: This is connected to our crazy idea that we could be part of building an alternative economy that is just, generative, and solidarity-based. A conversation that we have started to open is based on the idea of economy as culture. In Manuel Castells’ edited volume called “Another Economy is Possible”, there is a quote that has become a reference for us: “The economy is not simply related to culture. Economy is culture. Economic practices are human practices that, as such, are determined by humans who embody their ways of being and thinking, their interests, their values, their projects.” 

When we understand the economy as culture, we feel empowered. It triggers a memory of how local communities have engaged in economic activities within their respective traditions and customs and in their local contexts. The economy is not just to be owned and controlled by economists. We can build confidence to culturally build our own economic practices based on the belief that economy is culture. This is a starting point that begins with a new imagining, while recognizing that we do not know whether we will succeed. That’s the nature of such work.

JH: Thank you. I love that you say “either this is ambitious or foolish.” I think whatever it is, it cannot just be the same thing that we’ve done before. We probably need a combination of ambition and foolishness right now. The way that you frame things — so many threads with what others have said — but articulated differently is so powerful. The idea that we need to construct a different economic base. In our othering of “the international development expert”, “the economist”, “the politician”, we have perhaps lost what it is to be human. Re-centering what it is to be human in harmony with the planet and in harmony with others, the ways that we feed ourselves, clothe ourselves, and create warm, cohesive, connected societies, is fundamental.

“When we understand the economy as culture, we feel empowered. It triggers a memory of how local communities have engaged in economic activities within their respective traditions and customs and in their local contexts.”

We’ve worked with Indonesia for Humanity, and it has been a very active member of our Measuring What Matters learning group. The approach you have developed, Pemaknaan – which sees measurement as the act of “making meaning” – elevates subjectivity as a critical dimension. The way in which this approach challenges the idea that we can somehow apply scientific logics to understand social change processes has been a real eye-opener. So, your framing of those bold ambitions around how we use language really resonates. In our sector, we often succeed by mirroring the language of the dominant system, and in doing so we lose our own roots.

Going back to questions of economies, how do we create spaces where new imaginations can take root?

KC: My starting point is that we need to construct the economy. Instead of asking which economies, economic theory, or economic model is out there to adopt, we need to design one that suits us. Something that is constructed from our own practices. Even in difficult times, there is still economic activity, including in the form of barter. Nour also mentioned the importance of being rooted in what we have. This is aligned to the idea that the economy is culture, which could trigger memories that we have forgotten. If we continue to depend on the words of “experts” and only see the economy as they define it, we become shackled to the economy we have now. We have forgotten how local communities work economically. By reaching deep into our collective memory and conjuring relevant contemporary practices, we might be able to construct something from what’s there.

At Indonesia for Humanity, we want to transcend old boundaries and past estrangements. As a community, our civil society has fragmented and made boundaries amongst ourselves by saying: “You do economic stuff. We do political stuff. Or, you’re doing psycho-social support or social welfare stuff while we are doing advocacy, and you’re doing development,” and so on. We have created a mind-set where we have made unhelpful distinctions amongst ourselves. So now we are trying to build bridges with the credit union movement in Indonesia that has been amazing in building an economic base for their members. We want to start making the links between them and community groups that are, for example, advocating for the rights of survivors of mass killings and mass violations. We want to make these connections and bring them together in small spaces.

“We are imagining this ecosystem as an economy that is not money-centric. Resources are not just about money: they also include knowledge, networks, and volunteerism.”

We believe in small spaces because, when you create spaces that are too big, there is a danger to resort to the comfortable or to focus on things that are already known. Small spaces can better create the conditions for bold thinking and for building a shared imagination. From there, we can begin to link those small spaces with each other, so that they can become a bigger ecosystem. We are imagining this ecosystem as an economy that is not money-centric. Resources are not just about money: they also include knowledge, networks, and volunteerism. At Indonesia for Humanity, these are the four dimensions of resources that can, and should, work together to become something that make up our collective strength, and that can take us down a different pathway.

JH: Thank you, Nana. I feel like we have been now forced into a new moment. We have been talking about reform, localization, the transformation of aid, and decolonization for a long time, but are still quite tethered to the old system, trying to make it just a little bit less bad. What I’m sensing from everything shared so far is that none of the institutions represented here are big institutions that turn up in big conferences and have huge, multi-million dollar budgets and hundreds of staff. These are actors, spaces, and communities operating at the “edges” of the system. The challenge and the invitation for all of us moving forward is: what can we do differently that actually starts to weave the threads between these bold, brilliant innovations?

Indonesia for Humanity is a civil society resource organization, working with the vision of a society empowered in its struggles towards justice, dignity, and well-being for all within the framework of human rights and environmental sustainability. The organization runs programmes across the themes of gender justice, human rights, diversity, tolerance, food sovereignty, and disaster response. Its activities are characterized by building collaborative action with civil society organizations and marginalized communities across Indonesia.

Read the full report / transcript of the session, or the individual contributions from the other three speakers:

• Nour Nusseibeh, Dalia Association (Palestine)
• Marko Aksentijević, Ministry of Space (Serbia)
• Martin Macwan, Navsarjan (India)