TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Freedom and its enemy
Indonesia was founded on the idea of freedom
Change Size
I
span>Indonesia was founded on the idea of freedom. In the dawning days of the nation, founding fathers came to an agreement that after more than three centuries of oppression and exploitation by colonial powers, Indonesia’s raison d’être was to liberate its people and bring justice and prosperity to all.
This is a concept that is well understood by most in the country. What is less well known is the fact that Indonesia was also founded on the idea of moderation. With hundreds of different cultures already existing before the arrival of a multitude of foreign influences, most Indonesians are keenly aware of the virtue of peaceful coexistence, which was adopted as the country’s motto: Bhinneka Tunggal Ika (Unity in Diversity).
While debating the country’s founding Constitution, prominent political figures took pains to ensure that Indonesia must be guided by principles that weren’t inspired by the extremes of any ideologies or creeds.
Having seen the cruelty of capitalist-induced Dutch colonialism and the aggression of fascism-inspired Japanese occupation, as well as the human toll of Stalin’s communism, founding fathers like Sukarno, Hatta and Sjahrir chose a middle ground between endorsing free enterprise for citizens and a state-directed policy to improve people’s prosperity.
The founding fathers also struck a similar balance in the debate regarding the relationship between the state and religion. Faced with the option of full-fledged secularism and the implementation of sharia, drafters of the Constitution opted for an arrangement that would recognize the place of religion in society, yet not allow teachings from any religion to direct state affairs and inspire governance. With this arrangement, the Constitution seeks to ensure that minority groups and minority faiths would be protected.
In recent years, the pact has begun to fray and as a result the social balance has been disrupted. After a little more than five decades, during which the balance was maintained, at times with the use of force, more and more people have begun to question the middle ground. More groups are convinced that faith should play a greater role in politics and that the faith of the majority should be the leading light.
To make matters worse, some politicians cynically exploit this rightward shift just for the sake of power and twice in the last five years, during the 2016 Jakarta gubernatorial election and this year’s presidential election, we witnessed how religious tribalism clashed with the forces of moderation. Caught in the middle are members of minority groups who had to cower in terror, questioning the effectiveness of a Constitution that is meant to protect them as firmly from the tyranny of the majority as from the dictatorship of the minority.
As the country celebrates its 74 years of independence on Saturday, in between parades, flag-hoisting ceremonies and pole-climbing contests, Indonesians must ask a difficult question: Whether they are to continue on the path of moderation or risk losing some of their freedom. It may require the courage of our forefathers who chose between merdeka (freedom) or mati (death) to answer this question.
Merdeka!
