DEBAT PANAS! Rocky Gerung VS Antonius Manurung : Pancasila Bukan Ideologi!?

Summary

The transcript captures a discussion about Pancasila, Indonesia's philosophical foundation. A speaker refutes the notion that Pancasila is an ideology, citing its incoherence and potential for authoritarianism. They argue for a coherent national ideology, criticize the idea of an official state ideology, and discuss the historical and cultural context of Pancasila. The speaker emphasizes the importance of understanding Pancasila's historical roots and its role in Indonesian society, advocating for a broader debate on its status and meaning.

Takeaways

• 🎩 The speaker, Anton Manurung, challenges the claim that Pancasila is not an ideology, referencing Sukarno's speeches and interpretations of Pancasila.
• 📜 Anton emphasizes that Sukarno, in his June 1, 1964 speech, viewed Pancasila as a guiding national philosophy and ideology for Indonesia's progress.
• 🔖 There is a strong rejection from Anton towards the idea that Pancasila is not an official state ideology, as expressed in opposition to statements made by Roki Gerung.
• 🌱 Anton urges for the understanding and application of Pancasila to be rooted in Marhaenism, linking it to the historical and philosophical aspects of the movement.
• 📚 He also calls for a deeper understanding of Pancasila’s historical context, mentioning that a lack of such understanding leads to the country's moral decline.
• 📅 Anton suggests the need for a National Ideology Council and the establishment of a law to commemorate the birth of Pancasila, beyond the existing presidential decree.
• 🧠 Roki Gerung argues that Pancasila is not an ideology in the conventional sense, highlighting the risk of authoritarianism and the importance of ideological openness in democracy.
• 📖 Roki discusses that democracy, as represented in Pancasila's fourth principle, inherently allows for the competition of ideologies, and enforcing a single ideology could undermine diversity.
• 🧐 He elaborates on the theoretical challenges of declaring Pancasila as a rigid ideology, as it would clash with Indonesia's inherent pluralism and democratic values.
• 🔍 Both Anton and Roki focus on the importance of maintaining a balance between upholding Pancasila’s values while preserving the country's democratic and pluralistic nature.

Q & A

What is the main critique of Anton Manurung towards Rocky Gerung's statement?

Anton Manurung criticizes Rocky Gerung for stating that Pancasila is not an ideology. As the leader of the Pancasila Grounding Movement, Manurung disagrees and asks that people like Rocky Gerung refrain from speaking about Pancasila if they don't consider it an ideology.

What is Rocky Gerung's argument against Pancasila being an ideology?

Rocky Gerung argues that Pancasila is not an official ideology of the state. He mentions that there has never been an MPR (People's Consultative Assembly) decision declaring Pancasila as the state ideology, and he believes that countries with official ideologies, like fascism or communism, tend to be authoritarian.

Why does Anton Manurung reference Soekarno's speech from June 1, 1964?

Anton Manurung references Soekarno's speech to emphasize that Soekarno himself described Pancasila as an ideology. He urges everyone to revisit this speech to gain clarity on the ideological nature of Pancasila.

What is Anton Manurung's perspective on the historical foundation of Pancasila?

Anton Manurung believes that the historical foundation of Pancasila is rooted in Marhaenism, a concept introduced by Soekarno that emphasizes the importance of social justice for marginalized groups. He suggests that current issues with Pancasila stem from a lack of understanding of this historical context.

Why does Rocky Gerung believe that democracy and ideology are incompatible?

Rocky Gerung argues that democracy allows for competition of ideas and ideologies, making it incompatible with having a single official ideology like Pancasila. He believes that establishing Pancasila as an official ideology would limit the diversity and pluralism essential to democracy.

What does Rocky Gerung say about Soekarno's approach to formulating Pancasila?

Rocky Gerung states that Soekarno compiled ideas from various global thinkers, such as Marxism, nationalism from Imanuel Kant, and others, to create Pancasila. He argues that Soekarno was adapting international ideologies rather than creating something purely Indonesian.

What is Anton Manurung's suggestion for improving the status of Pancasila?

Anton Manurung suggests two measures: the establishment of a National Ideology Council and the creation of a law to officially recognize the birth of Pancasila, beyond the current Presidential Decree 24 of 2016.

Why does Rocky Gerung believe that finalizing Pancasila as an ideology could be dangerous?

Rocky Gerung warns that finalizing Pancasila as an official ideology could lead to authoritarianism, similar to the way fascist or communist states operate, where diversity of thought and freedom are suppressed.

What is Rocky Gerung's view on the educational approach towards Pancasila?

Rocky Gerung expresses frustration with the current approach to teaching Pancasila, where it is treated as a 'final' concept. He believes that this prevents open discussion and further understanding, reducing intellectual growth.

What is the significance of the debate between Anton Manurung and Rocky Gerung in this forum?

The debate highlights the ongoing tension between those who view Pancasila as a fixed ideology (like Anton Manurung) and those who see it as a philosophical framework open to interpretation and change (like Rocky Gerung). This reflects broader questions about the role of ideology in Indonesia's democracy.