{
    "success": true,
    "data": {
        "id": 1263204,
        "msgid": "aug-17-and-new-order-nation-building-problem-1447893297",
        "date": "2002-08-13 00:00:00",
        "title": "Aug. 17 and New Order: Nation-building problem",
        "author": null,
        "source": "JP",
        "tags": null,
        "topic": null,
        "summary": "Aug. 17 and New Order: Nation-building problem Max Lane, Center for Asia Pacific, Social Transformation Studies University of Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia, max_lane@telstra.com Indonesia was in a state of constant revolutionary motion from the beginning of the 20th century until Sept. 30, 1965. All around the world the modern nation state was created through revolutionary processes.",
        "content": "<p>Aug. 17 and New Order: Nation-building problem<\/p>\n<p>Max Lane, Center for Asia Pacific, Social Transformation Studies<br>\nUniversity of Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia,<br>\nmax_lane@telstra.com<\/p>\n<p>Indonesia was in a state of constant revolutionary motion from<br>\nthe beginning of the 20th century until Sept. 30, 1965. All<br>\naround the world the modern nation state was created through<br>\nrevolutionary processes. The French Revolution, with its slogan<br>\nof \"liberty, fraternity, equality\" has probably made the greatest<br>\nimpact on the popular mind although other European nations also<br>\nexperienced great revolutions.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, the concept of a modern<br>\nnation state called Indonesia was non-existent. What is now the<br>\nIndonesian archipelago comprised a wide range of societies. There<br>\nwere strong and highly developed kingdoms and societies organized<br>\nalong tribal lines.<\/p>\n<p>There were no modern nations, that is, communities with clear<br>\ngeographical borders, a common language, common currency and<br>\nshared economic life, and a shared cultural outlook.<\/p>\n<p>Like the struggle in Europe against despotism under kings and<br>\nprinces, in the archipelago, the political struggle associated<br>\nwith the struggle to create and establish the modern state was<br>\nrelated with the struggle against colonial despotism; which often<br>\nutilized aspects of the old, feudal despotism of the sultans and<br>\nkings that dominated the islands before the arrival of the Dutch.<\/p>\n<p>The struggle cannot be separated from the struggle for freedom<br>\nof despotism of all kinds. Most leaders of the anti-colonial<br>\nmovement, figures such as Sukarno, Mohammad Hatta, Syahrir, and<br>\nthe one who started it all, Tirto Adhisuryo, were all democrats,<br>\nopposed to despotism.<\/p>\n<p>Their answer to colonial despotism was the idea of \"Indonesia<br>\nMerdeka\" -- a \"free\" and \"independent\" Indonesia. Tirto<br>\nAdhisuryo, the subject of the series of four novels by Pramoedya<br>\nAnanta Toer (the \"Buru Quartet\"), founded the first newspaper<br>\nthat struggled against colonial despotism. The newspaper's slogan<br>\nwas \"voice of the governed\".<\/p>\n<p>It was the cry of the governed against despotism that<br>\ntriggered a great revolutionary process, leading to the idea of a<br>\nmulti-ethnic nation, \"Indonesia\", that brought into being the<br>\ngreat mass movements of the 1920s and 1930s, such as the Sarekat<br>\nIslam and Sarekat Rakyat; and that inspired the proclamation of<br>\nindependence on Aug. 17, 1945 and the political, guerilla and<br>\ndiplomatic struggle between 1945 and 1949.<\/p>\n<p>Indonesia was, and therefore is, the product of a conscious<br>\nstruggle for democracy and not a manifestation of a cultural,<br>\nethnic or religious unity. Later, various leaders and movements<br>\nsought to give more specific content to the call for \"Indonesia<br>\nMerdeka\". Some did seek to draw ideas for this purpose from<br>\nstocks of ideas from pre-existing cultural traditions.<\/p>\n<p>These included various trends in Islam and from Javanese folk<br>\nas well as aristocratic philosophy. But never was any of this<br>\nthinking far away from one or other of the streams of thought on<br>\nmodern democracy. Sukarno could draw on Thomas Jefferson and<br>\nKarl Marx, while using Islamic and Javanese folk concepts.<\/p>\n<p>The anti-colonial movement developed great streams of Islamic,<br>\nsocial democratic, and socialist thinking. The proclamation of<br>\nindependence followed by intense struggle until 1949 ended Dutch<br>\ncolonialism and formal transfer of authority from the Netherlands<br>\nto the Republic of Indonesia. The Indonesian state was<br>\nestablished, a huge step in building an Indonesian nation. But<br>\nformal independence did not complete the formation of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>The Indonesian language needed to be spread to the population<br>\nand to be developed into the real language of the people.<br>\nPolitical institutions that would convince the people that they<br>\nwere real owners and participants of the new country had to be<br>\nestablished. A national culture had to be developed that was more<br>\nthan just a conglomeration of traditional cultures; a national<br>\nliterature had to be established. The economy had to be<br>\nrestructured out of the hands of the Dutch and developed as an<br>\ninstrument of the welfare of the Indonesians, and not a small<br>\ngroup of Dutch, British and U.S. companies.<\/p>\n<p>The process of nation building, of completing all these tasks,<br>\nwas characterized by struggle between the ideological<br>\nperspectives that had developed during the previous decades. This<br>\nprocess, including up until 1965, despite various distortions,<br>\nwas essentially democratic: All the major ideological streams in<br>\nsociety were able to participate. Political parties were the main<br>\nengines of nation building; ideological struggle was the essence<br>\nof its democratic character.<\/p>\n<p>In 1965, Maj.Gen. Soeharto suppressed all struggle between<br>\nideologies, imposing a single formal \"ideology\", \"Panca Sila\".<br>\nThe New Order also introduced, by both force and money politics,<br>\na single real ideology combining extreme obedience to authority<br>\nand desire to be obeyed (gila hormat), worship of money and<br>\nvulgar economic growth and consumerism. We can call this ideology<br>\n\"Golkarism\".<\/p>\n<p>Parallel with this was a suppression of the political parties<br>\nof the Left, the purging of centrist parties of their Left wing<br>\nand the gutting of the right-wing parties of the ideological<br>\nlife. Soeharto's suppression of ideological struggle and his<br>\ngutting of the political parties also ended key elements of the<br>\nnatiion-building process itself. President Sukarno regularly<br>\nstressed right up until 1965 that the national revolution was not<br>\nfinished. Soeharto destroyed the revolutionary process before it<br>\ncould be completed.<\/p>\n<p>None of the political institutions, neither the parties that<br>\nsurvived during the New Order nor the parliamentary institutions,<br>\ndeveloped as genuine instruments of participation and ownership.<br>\nEven now the mass of the population is alienated from these<br>\ninstitutions and the political elite that inhabits them. Not<br>\nsurprisingly, local rather than national sentiment is<br>\nstrengthening. Even in Java, people are demanding provinces of<br>\ntheir own, such as Cirebon.<\/p>\n<p>The trend towards localism and the alienation from political<br>\ninstitutions, including parties, will only be reversed if<br>\nideological life can be restored. Nation-building can only be<br>\nresumed and completed with a conscious effort to redefine once<br>\nagain what is meant by \"Indonesia Merdeka\".<\/p>\n<p>In the political institutions, Golkarism still prevails. In<br>\nthe mainstream parties, one form or other of Golkarism dominates.<br>\nMany new parties have been formed but none yet have been able to<br>\nlaunch a new ideological offensive to redefine and give content<br>\nto the \"Indonesia Merdeka\" that was proclaimed on Aug. 17.<\/p>\n<p>Where will such a dynamic come from? The New Order created a<br>\npolitical elite rolling in money whose ideology is Golkarism. The<br>\nNew Order also created a mass of tens of millions of poor people,<br>\nalienated from the institutions of the political and conglomerate<br>\nelite.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1920s, Sukarno told the story of how he watched a poor<br>\nfarmer work his land with a single buffalo and no matter how hard<br>\nhe worked remained poor. The man's name was Marhaen. Marhaenism,<br>\nor an ideology of prioritizing both the needs and the<br>\norganization of the poor developed as a popular outlook during<br>\nthe national revolution between the 1920s and 1965.<\/p>\n<p>Now very few speak of the \"Marhaen\": But there is more talk of<br>\nthe \"rakyat miskin\", the poor. Now there is no great \"poor<br>\npeoples movement\", but everywhere the poor protest their<br>\nconditions and grumble about the elite. If the elite has created<br>\nGolkarism, then a poor peoples movement, when it develops, will<br>\nsurely also produce ideologies of its own.<\/p>",
        "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/aug-17-and-new-order-nation-building-problem-1447893297",
        "image": ""
    },
    "sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
    "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}