I

ndonesians marks the anniversary of the official state ideology, Pancasila, on June 1, despite controversy. As the state ideology, Pancasila should be the source of political and legal order for government and public life. Now, it is deplorable that a 13-year reform period has witnessed the fading of the Pancasila following the downfall of Soeharto’s New Order regime.

Pancasila, which was used as a means of repressing ideological freedom under Soeharto era, is now lost in competition with the massive adoption of transnational ideologies. In the contemporary political dynamic, Pancasila as the state ideology is being criticized severely.

Some radical transnationalists have accused the Pancasila of failing to tie diversity and consider it diachronic thought. To them, the Pancasila is out of line with the ideology of absolute truth they believe in, that is to say, theocracy. Various attacks against Pancasila through social movements have apparently been made to deconstruct the unitary state of Indonesia.

Anti-Pancasila groups grew quickly and declared frankly their aim to change the state ideology and ruin Indonesia.

It is ironic that the state took part in relegating Pancasila to a lower or outer edge. The Post-New Order administration has regarded Pancasila as the myth of this country’s existence.

Any efforts to revitalize Pancasila have been abandoned. For instance, Pancasila is no longer categorized as major or special curricula from secondary school to university level.

The results of a research report on ideology in 2009 came as a surprise. More than 61 percent of respondents said they did not view Pancasila as being capable of getting over this diverse country’s problems, while 45 percent said Pancasila was less valuable and meaningful than religion. Talking about cognitive aspects, of 1,000 youngsters in the 18-23-year-old group, 59.2 percent failed or were unable to memorize the Pancasila (Syofyan: 2009).

Why is the Pancasila being thrown overboard?

The answer lies in the fact that people remain traumatized and relate it to the New Order’s means of oppressing people and establishing social injustice on behalf of political stability and economic growth.

It is high time to provide a jumping-off point for reviving the Pancasila. This will take hard work, following the public cynicism of the previous government and aggressive Western influence over Indonesian values. The need for reviving Pancasila calls for the following strategic steps:

First, people need to recognize that Pancasila is not a myth or ideology of sacred and absolute truth. It is supposed to be subject to public discussion and discourse with its liberating force. Society should participate in the process of the reinterpretation of Pancasila in keeping with place and time.

Amid the growing religious radicalization, for example, Indonesians may return to the country’s original and widely respected values of tolerance and mutual respect, with Pancasila as the bedrock.

Reviving Pancasila is also aimed at rejuvenating nationalism. What our founding fathers meant about nationalism had nothing to do with being an isolated country or a chauvinistic one, but a nationalism recognizing world brotherhood and a family of nations. The spirit of Indonesian nationalism should not be a forerunner to xenophobia.

Pancasila must be a living ideology, a working ideology that can be anticipative, adaptive and responsive. Pancasila is not a strict dogma as that would prevent it from becoming responsive to the challenges of the era. It should be able to face current and future challenges.

Second, reviving Pancasila is in need of living examples from the country’s leaders in terms of social justice, spirituality, and humanism. Better change should start with our leaders, because our people are taking their cues from them.

Indonesian leaders’ living examples are expected to make people to realize Pancasila, allowing peoples of different ethnic and religious backgrounds to bond. The failure to do so would definitely make both leaders and people just implement Pancasila in books, in writings and speeches, but then betray it in daily life.

Third, Pancasila needs to play role in establishing egalitarianism respecting principles of civility since it is the people’s ideology. For that purpose, the government should also abridge regulations that fly in the face of the core Pancasila principles.

Legal reform fitting the Pancasila is necessary. The country’s law must stand for both the rich and the poor. At the moment, laws that are not impartial remain scattered. It is important to highlight the need to spread the use of the ideology past the confines of a ceremonial day on the first of June, for example by respecting and helping each other and caring about environmental issues. These are actually the principles of Pancasila.

Reviving Pancasila means a joint commitment and hard work, mainly involving the government and people. Relying too much upon House members would be fruitless, on the strength of their political party’s interests over public aspirations. In making that mistake, this country remains on the verge of meeting real chaos.

For better or worse, Pancasila remains Indonesia’s common denominator to bridge the yawning gaps in assorted political power.

The writer, a graduate of the University of Canberra, Australia, teaches politics and culture at Andalas University, Padang.