Correlation between nationhood and democracy

Ignas Kleden ,  Jakarta   |  Mon, 06/09/2008 10:29 AM  |  Opinion

With or without historical evidence the year 1908 has been made the birth year of national awakening in Indonesia. Historians and political scientists are still debating whether Boedi Oetomo, which was founded in that year, was a political organization that had a national mission and goals.

Leaving this matter to the specialists, we can, however, depart from the simple fact that both historiography and myth-making make their own contribution to national education and political will formation.

Given the fact that national consciousness is now believed to be 100 years old, a question might arise about the age of democracy in Indonesia. Nationalism is celebrated because it has obviously something to do with the struggle for independence from the grip of colonial power. However, who is interested in celebrating the freedom of the people from the bondage of self-imposed dependence and self-fabricated immaturities?

Nationalism is a feeling of affiliation to a common cause that results from a common destiny in which there is a big gap and antagonism between those who are ruling and those who are ruled. Obviously, this feeling cannot be created by democracy, whose basic value assumption presupposes the universal brotherhood and sisterhood of all human beings.

It is clear from the history that the idea of equality was one of the most enlightening experiences of Indonesian students who were studying in the Netherlands in the first decades of the 20th century. Living and studying in a free society such as the Netherlands, they noticed for the first time that they were treated as equals in a foreign country that happened to be the motherland of many colonies, in a manner totally different from what they used to experience in their own country. Being equal in a foreign country while being discriminated against in their home country became, as it were, a paradox that helped inflame the first national consciousness among the young students.

To a certain extent, to be free implies being equal to others. In that sense all social habits and political practices that tend to discriminate against groups of people become a barrier to freedom. One can safely say that democracy and democratic practices have contributed substantially to the strengthening of national consciousness.

Needless to say, there were other political ideas that played an important role in the conceptualization of nation and nationhood aside from democracy. Marxism, Marhaenism, socialism, republicanism and Islam were important conceptual and constitutive elements in the formulation of what a nation is and what it should be like.

Interestingly, there was different (and sometimes opposing) attention and emphasis among Indonesian founding fathers on respective political ideas. Sukarno was always a loud and high-pitched voice advocating nationalism, though now and then he made some analyses of Islam in the world and Islam in Indonesia.

Agus Salim and Mohamad Natsir were highly educated in Islamic teachings and spent their time and energy elaborating on religious doctrines for national purposes. Hatta was a devout Muslim and a convinced nationalist concentrating on political and democratic education for the young people.

He collaborated with Sutan Sjahrir, a secular nationalist and a staunch democrat who preoccupied himself with the position of Indonesia in the world and with the idea of how to make western political and cultural ideas compatible with and relevant to local people. Tan Malaka, a well-grounded and articulate Marxist, worked out the idea of state and became a defender of republicanism.

Referring back to democracy, some of its universal values are clearly reflected in the common stand that all of the founding fathers did share. The value of freedom was obviously discernible in the unshakeable conviction of the historical necessity of national independence.

The value of equality led to the rejection of imperialism and colonialism from outside and to the refusal of feudalism from within the country. The value of justice inspired the proposal of cooperatives in the national economy, while the values of progress and openness underpinned the conception of common welfare. Vital resources were to be put under the control of the state, whereas the economy should take into account the principle of family life.

Now that the country is celebrating the centennial of national awakening it is timely to examine again the extent to which democratic ideas still work or do not function anymore. How far does the state perform its basic obligation of protecting the freedom of its citizens and insuring the opportunity for and access to common welfare?

If the prosperity of the people is endangered for whatever reasons, and if the freedom and security of the people can be easily violated by the violence of other people without the state's ability to provide basic protection and security, the tribute to the founding fathers has been ignored or neglected, notwithstanding the solemn centennial celebration. If that is the case, nationhood seems to be crumbling down and the state itself is on the brink of failing.

The writer, a sociologist, is chairman of the Indonesian Community for Democracy (KID).

Copyright © 2008 The Jakarta Post - PT Bina Media Tenggara. All Rights Reserved.