The Pursuit of Humanitarian Nationalism
Ninety-two years after the Youth Pledge, is the pursuit of Indonesian nationalism still relevant, or is has it become outdated with the passage of time?
Ninety-two years after the Youth Pledge, is the pursuit of Indonesian nationalism still relevant, or is has it become outdated with the passage of time?
We cannot know for certain the fate of nations in the future. Globalization and technological advancements can cause disruption to the organizational patterns of human society to cause significant change to the existence of nation-states.
What we can express at the present moment is gratitude. After 75 years of Indonesian independence, the existence of the “Indonesian nation” as a super-organism, with its complex diversity and breadth, has performed its emancipatory function admirably. This may sound odd to most of us whose thinking has been regularly flooded by bad news. More than that, the history of hundreds of years of human evolution has formed the human brain so it possesses a very acute awareness of potential dangers. The combination of the two has hampered our ability to perceive good news (Diamandis and Kotler, 2012).
Also read: Relevance of Youth Pledge
In reality, history has chronicled many good accounts of the Indonesian nation-state as it traversed a variety of challenges and trials. Externally, the solidarity of this nation succeeded in liberating different ethnoreligious groups from the fetters of colonialism from without. Internally, national solidarity has turned Indonesia into a relatively peaceful home for plurality.
Interethnic and interreligious conflicts have become more infrequent. Mortality declined gradually from 14.6 deaths per 1,000 people in 1967 to 7.1 deaths per 1,000 people in 2016. Life expectancy also continued to rise, from 52.8 years in 1967 to 69.2 years in 2016, growing annually by around 0.55 percent (World Data Atlas, 2017).
The “discovery” of bahasa Indonesia (the Indonesian language) as a unifying language has been engraved as a phenomenal achievement. Starting out as the Malay language of Riau, it grew rapidly into the lingua franca of the entire country, even becoming the mother tongue for the majority of the new generation, providing a very important means of communication for cross-cultural intercourse. The capacity of this language to adapt in line with the changing times has led several European linguists to refer to the Indonesian language as a shining example of what is called “language modernization”. This was to such an extent that it prompted French scholar Jérôme Samuel to write Modernisation lexicale et politique terminologique: Le cas de l\'Indonesien (Lexical modernization and the politics of terminology: The case of the Indonesian language, 2008).
Also read: Ethics of Goals and Ways
Inter-group (ethnic, religious, racial, group) identity conflict does indeed erupt on occasion. This is partly due to the legacy postcolonial pathology that has not yet healed completely in the house of healthy nationalism. This is not because the nationalist values that have been prescribed are ineffective, but rather, it is simply due to inadequate dose and inconsistent use of this “drug” while the existence of the nation-state does not readily give rise to civil culture.
The horrors of bloodshed that involved elements of society and the state has occurred once, in a action-reaction pattern that was triggered by differing ideological views and socioeconomic injustice, which in turn gave vent to totalitarian aspirations, both leftist and rightist. However, of all the national tragedies that have occurred, these conflicts did not lead to the collapse of the national house. National solidarity was even called on as an antidote and an appeal was made to the nation’s people to learn and not to repeat the same mistake.
By saying so, this doesn’t mean that potential threats to the continuity of our “nation-state” no longer exist. Externally, the intensification and extensification of globalization can strengthen the influence of external values, cultures and civilization, spreading ideological pluralization, polarization and fragmentation through the nation’s life.
Also read: Youth Pledge and Smart Data
Internally, potential threats to the continuity of the nation-state can come from mental-cultural decadence that result from the weak education regime in cultivating national morality and character, with the implication that public morality and public character became eroded as the basis of mutual determination and social solidarity.
Threats can also come from institutional-political decadence as a consequence of the carelessness of a political regime in planning the design and system for managing democracy and government, for ignoring the demand for unity and justice as mandated under philosophical values and constitution of the state. Threats may also rise from decadence in material welfare as a result of the inability of an economic-production regime in meeting the expectations for economic inclusion and shared prosperity, which only widens social inequality.
Also read: Breaking the Chain of Political Vulgarization
Relevance of nationalism
In considering the implications of globalization, we can project the developments that might occur with respect to the continuity of the nation-state. As Keith Suter described (2003), four scenarios are possible: strong nation-state/weak international cohesion (steady state); strong nation-state/strong international cohesion (world state); weak nation-state/strong international cohesion under the control of corporatocracy (global inc); weak national state/weak international cohesion (wild state).
Of these four scenarios, Indonesia’s preference is the second. Indonesia will continue to be a nation-state by preparing to leave certain affairs to global governance. The founding fathers have anticipated this scenario since they envisioned and prepared for Indonesian independence. In his 1 June 1945 speech, Soekarno said, “We should not just establish the independent State of Indonesia, but should also work toward cooperation between nations.”
Further, he stated, “The nationalism we advocate is not nationalism in isolation, not chauvinism, but rather nationalism that leads to cooperation between nations (internationalism).” On the other hand, he also warned that internationalism would be meaningful only if it was instilled in the context of socio-historical particularities of a heterogenous nation-state.
Also read: Our Diversity
The emergence of supranational organizations and multinational corporations with enormous capital can, in fact, reduce the role of government in a nation-state. But the nation-state will continue to be the locus of activity for its citizenry’s life and identity, at least until such an institution emerges that is adequate in replacing it as the key administrative unit for responding to global change.
In this context, it should be understood that the existence of a nation-state with its nationalist spirit is not something to be viewed negatively, as its critics perceive it. Andreas Wimmer (2019) pointed out that that a negative perception of nationalism missed the point. Some types of the nationalist spirit can indeed be misled into blind fanaticism and in developing a superiority complex, as in the case of populism and fascism. Yet, nationalism also offers ideological foundations for the emergence of modern institutions such as democracy, the welfare state and public education.
Basically, all forms of nationalism share the same doctrine. First, members of a national community understand that, as a group of equal citizens that share a history and political aspirations, they should lead the state. Second, they should do so for the national interest. In other words, nationalism opposes the foreign instructions from the members of other nations, like those of colonial times and many dynastic kingdoms, as well as governments that ignore the general vision and requirements of a state. With this clear meaning, we are all nationalists today, perhaps with some exceptions.
Apart from that, what Giuseppe Mazzini has long espoused remains relevant today, that a democratic nation committed to human equality constitutes a necessary intermediary between local (tribal) egoistic loyalism and imperialistic internationalism. In developing the right kind of patriotism, a nation-state’s people can appreciate internal pluralism as a precondition to universal brotherhood.
In this regard, Auguste Comte pointed out much earlier that the path to a universal brotherhood bound by the values of religions of humanity could be arranged by mediating organizational networks within a nation-state. How nationalist sentiment can pave the way to universal brotherhood can be achieved by developing nationalism without chauvinism, racism or ethnocentrism.
In line with this, Indonesia’s founding fathers proposed an extremely visionary concept of nationalism, that the nationalism to be promoted in this country would be inclusive and extensive, both domestically as well as internationally. In terms of domestic ties, what was desired was not the narrow and segregational ethnic nationalism, but instead the inclusive civic nationalism. Manifesting civic nationalism in Indonesia necessitated a sociable nationalism that could overcome the tendency of individualism and ultra-sociocentrism (totalitarianism).
Also read: Golden Indonesia 2045 No Pipe Dream
In a super-pluralist society, overemphasizing individualism and communalism makes national integration difficult. But suppressing individual aspirations and differences by (left- and right-wing) totalitarian aspirations could eliminate potential wealth and creativity. The middle path that the Pancasila state ideology chose was the wisdom of Bhinneka Tunggal Ika (Unity in Diversity): acknowledging pluralism/diversity while seeking homogeneity/unity.
In international relations, the nationalism that was desired was not chauvinistic (closed and xenophobic), but rather the broad cosmopolitan nationalism, on expectations of developing cooperation with other nations. It was what Soekarno called the principle of “socio-nationalism” (combining the third and second principles of Pancasila).
Nationalist education
Promoting this positive breed of nationalism requires education and inculcation that are stringently planned, integrated, consistent and persistent. Many experts have elucidated the significance of education in strengthening civic culture and reducing ethnocentric sentiment.
Marcel Coenders and Peter Scheepers (2003) documented the results of a variety of studies on the link between education and ethnocentric sentiment (negativity towards differences). One of the most consistent findings was the negative association between educational achievements and ethnic prejudice, in the sense that people with higher education had less prejudice against differences in ethnic identities than those with lower education. This link has been proven by various empirical studies of different periods and countries. Empirical proof also exist that highly educated people are less vulnerable to in-group favoritism compared to those with lower education.
The theories of socialization offer an explanation for this phenomenon. This theory’s central premise is that educational institutions transmit the norms, values and models of behavior that a certain society considers appropriate. The negative association between educational achievements and ethnocentric exclusivity is mainly due to the education system disseminating a certain orientation of democratic and civic values (Selznick and Steinberg, 1969).
Also read: Preserving the Pearls of Independence
In contemporary research, the negative link between education and ethnocentric sentiment stresses the cognitive side to this behavior. This cognitive approach is emphasizes that the conviction of prejudice is an intellectually unenlightened conviction. Ethnic prejudice – whether positive in-group prejudice or negative out-group prejudice – is a simplification of the social reality, a generalization that is arbitrarily applied to all ethnic groups.
Likewise, the conviction of xenophobia that views immigrants and foreigners as a cause of social problems is a simplistic outlook on the social reality. Those who tend to look for scapegoats fail to understand the complexities of abstract and impersonal causes.
According to the cognitive approach, people with higher education are less inclined to develop in-group favoritism and out-group prejudice. This can be explained in their connection to the centralized process of an education system: the transfer of knowledge and information; development of cognitive capacity; and transfer of norms, values and models of behavior that constitute the central premise of theories of socialization (De Witte, 1999).
In the cognitive approach of socialization theory, although people with higher education generally develop less ethnocentric sentiment than those with lower education, this doesn’t mean that all highly educated people always behave that way. It depends greatly on intensity and effectiveness with which the education system has socialized the norms, values and models of civic behavior. Furthermore, if the education system has a tendency to ignore value education and prioritizes instrumental education, it could affect the inclusivity and tolerance of the highly educated.
At this point, it becomes necessary to examine the factors that influence the character of education. One of these is political culture. In this context, Frederick D. Weil (1985) proposed a theory that the values transmitted by a country’s education system reflects the (official) political culture of that country, which is in turn determined by the prevailing regime. In this sense, the negative link between education level and ethno-nationalistic prejudice is caused by the dissemination of democratic and civic values at educational institutions.
Weil’s theory further states that the values transmitted by education reflect the dominant political culture. Therefore, the impact of education in reducing intolerance and ethnocentrism will be small in those countries with a less democratic political culture or those that had been developing their democratic traditions for a shorter period of time.
Also read:Indonesia’s Hopes at 75
Besides, a separate hypothesis posits that the degree of cultural diversity also influences the political culture that an education system transmits. On studying conflict resolution in pluralist communities (Lijphart, 1977), Weil said that, in the effort to avoid open intersegment conflicts in pluralist communities, the political elite had to assume leadership in promoting peaceful accommodation between various groups.
Since political culture is transmitted via the education system, it has been assumed that educational institutions in more pluralistic communities make a greater attempt to teach and disseminate the values and behavior of tolerance. But the results of a survey by Coenders and Peter Scheepers (2003) concluded that the available data did not support the hypothesis that communities with religious heterogeneity had a stronger tendency to instill tolerant behavior. In their final analysis, they determined that the effect of religious heterogeneity should be supported by the political culture developed in schools.
Also read : Welcoming Golden Indonesia (Anxiously?)
With these various theoretical frameworks and empirical realities, education can take several steps in promoting the inclusive nationalism of Indonesia. First, we should strive for broader social access to attaining higher levels of education. Second, a higher education level is not enough on its own, and should incorporate an educational commitment to inculcating civic norms, values and behavior as well as a democratic culture. So far, the education system has overemphasized pragmatic-instrumental learning with little attention to value education.
At the same time, this nascent democratic country has already achieved procedural democracy, but remains culturally feudalistic-authoritarian. No serious initiative has been made as yet to develop a culture of democracy through the education system. In brief, whatever the impacts of globalization, they will not undercut the Youth Pledge’s emancipation project in the pursuit of humane nationalism.
When various forms of tribalistic anarchism and triumphalist globalism harms human unity in domestic and international relations, the time has come for us to revive the fiery spirit of the Youth Pledge. It is a determination of positive patriotism to strive for sociopolitical and socioeconomic inclusion by strengthening the nationalist spirit as a means of fostering global brotherhood, which must be sown in the heart of education and national life.
Yudi Latif, Member, Indonesian Academy of Sciences (AIPI).