Sukarno + Guided Democracy = Dictator?

Sukarno + Guided Democracy = Dictator?

Wag slander and bias thinking

Prof. Bob Hering in the near future will enrich the literature of the world with a two-volume biography of Bung Karno in English; the first volume is planned to be launched in the final months of 2001 as well. Although the work of Bob Hering has not reached the hands, but he already announced that his approach in preparing the biography of Bung Karno be purely analytical and interpretive, free from the cult of the individual, myth and romance that so far he considers always surround the figure of Sukarno. We believe that all people of course free to write about the Bung Karno, also free to choose the approach that will be used -- we just want to add that Bung Karno was not only surrounded by cult-like individuals, myth and romance, but also surrounded by one-ambiguous interpretation and frame of mind, hostility and prejudice, even hatred that not be helped. In Liber Amicorum this simple -- a collection of writings by friends recalled a man of rare Indonesia -- we want face to face with prejudice and confuse the mind that had been scattered on the spread would also abroad without adequate response.
      The main focus of most attacks against sin is that he's Sukarno's guided democracy with the concept of being a dictator, complete with a variety of adjectives such as: he protects the PKI, he contaminated megalomania, he does not take care of the economy, his anti-Western and so on. Some 'ABG' new academic degree, politici inexperienced just can predicate "MP" -- Member of Parliament, (member of parliament) --, all the little epigon in a hurry do not want to miss getting title of "intellectuals" such as of their patrons, not to be does not understand democracy when the bandwagon did not criticize Sukarno and chew-cud credo "Sukarno's dictatorship!", "authoritarian Sukarno's guided democracy!"

Now let us put it open on the table item name of "Guided Democracy" was. Held open so vividly that looks directly at the table rather than just one item -- it turns out there is more than one item, guided democracy there seems to be all kinds. Here we note some of the most obvious course, even a very striking because it appears to the naked. The goods that could not be covered up -- although it seemed as though overlapping tangled together --, but each sounds and show yourself in a transparent manner.
      Overlap tangled no matter -- political experts who do not like the Bung Karno with just a simple way to hang a label with a name only for a variety of items, each very different from it: "Guided Democracy." They felt no need to examine more deeply or to ask further ask: what kind of guided democracy, the concept of who? Who is the real dictator? Apparently, just let it be borne by the Sukarno all that! "Guided Democracy" became a collective name, a verzamelnaam, the term where collected all sorts of ugly to hang on the neck of Sukarno. But let us see what's on the table.

1. Guided Democracy in Abstraction

The first one we saw was "guided democracy" as understood, believed and interpreted by scholars who regard the dictator Sukarno. "Guided Democracy" in the perception of the first category is clearly diametrically contrary to the belief of "democracy" which they themselves profess. According to this first category of understanding, democracy is a free world and free markets. Beyond that, all understand and ideologies -- communism, Islamic fundamentalists or not, neutralism, non-aligned, the Pancasila, in short, all that should be grouped in a kind of demon that must be crushed.
"Guided Democracy" as it settles in the mind of this first class category, clearly no business at all with Sukarno. Little was no point of tangency with an insight into the guided democracy as the aspired and the coveted run in practice by Sukarno. "Guided Democracy" is touted by the group's first category is nothing but an abstraction. Not more than a reification, a product tamper their own brains, which they think is, they believe, even though they receive as a reality that are beyond their existence. Although the abstract, but that's the insistent accusations thrown into the face of President Sukarno, the insult to be shot to-wear political concepts Sukarno Sukarno was not the concept. Guided Democracy own the copyright holder did not ever imagine democracy as it exists in the perception of people in this first group. These people and all the anti-Sukarno, without exception, do not know and do not want to know that the curse of guided democracy that they were actually their own creation.

2. Guided Democracy Army
The second category is also evident in the mishmash that is "guided democracy" which supported and sought in every way by the military / Army, more specifically the Army under General Nasution during the Sukarno period, especially from 1952 to 1965, then continued with a steady and resounding success by generals during Suharto's New Order regime. Army's concept of Guided Democracy is not fictitious, not abstract but real running in practice and "100 percent support of Sukarno", President / Supreme Commander / Leader of the Revolution. Indeed there is a point-tangent with the concept of Sukarno's Guided Democracy, but not limited to more than just a semantic game, because both are two totally different things, wearing one of the same name: "guided democracy". In terms of substance, essence and spirit, two kinds of Guided Democracy was completely contradictory. Enforcement mechanism or a vehicle that is used in order to realize the concept of democracy à la Army, is a nationwide hiëarki line from center to the regions, ranging from headquarters, Kodam, Kodim, Koramil, and Intelligence Force -- it was called a concept of territorial control. All runs completely parallel to the mechanisms of power civilian bureaucracy in the national scale, ranging from central to provincial level, down into districts, subdistricts and villages.
      This type of guided democracy that supported the Army with Sukarno's Guided Democracy is actually the two bodies, two different spirits. Sukarno and the Army as a human being, as a discourse, as a state of mind are two conflicting entities. At that point confusion began to emerge: people who do not like Sukarno here to start using double criteria. They did not oppose the principle of guided democracy, if only in the concept of democracy as it is leading the Army, not Sukarno. Originally guided democracy like that suppress or at least impede communism and the PKI, then guided democracy like that once a legitimate and lawful presence!
      We do not have to be a political scientist with a PhD to know that who is actually in power during the Sukarno became president. Sukarno was tolerated by the military hold formal power, but power is always at hand rieel strength rieel actual real power, namely: the Army. Army who hold the power of concrete with a gun in hand, with legal foundation which legalized the concept of "territorial control" to control all activities of civil society. We will require several chapters to break down power structures and mechanisms of power that runs during certain periods of Sukarno, from 1945 to 1950, from 1950 to 1957, and even more so after 1957 to 1965. We need to all ask one key question: Is it true Sukarno-powerful ruling let alone to do injustice is like a dictator?
      Description This introduction is not a scientific discourse, but the real experience of journalism that attempts to explain the problem in the vicinity of "guided democracy" that everything would be shifted to the responsibility of Sukarno. For that we note here only a few grains of events that has defined the history of our Republic. The readers whom we want to track more and more serious in who actually hold power in our Republic rieel. What is the process of Guided Democracy Army concept step by step become realized in practice. How muzzled opposition, arrests, among others, Pramoedya Ananta Toer and Sutan Sjahrir et al., Restraint of the press, even in the end completing a history of Sukarno's rule.

-- 1945-50. Application of a parliamentary cabinet system, which is clearly contrary to the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia that adheres to the principle of presidential cabinet. For the sake of democracy, for the sake of unity and oneness, Bung Karno to let off his power as president. Liberal democratic party like that could ultimately give birth to 50 more political parties.

-- Event October 17, 1952: Army open demands to dissolve parliament. When the Bung Karno was refused because he remained faithful to the Constitution.

-- Rebellion PRRI / Permesta, SOB enforcement, emergency war, in terms of the struggle to retake West Irian. Who benefits from PRRI / Permesta and this SOB?

-- Nationalization of Dutch giant corporations (the Big Five), the Army early entry into the economic field, the start of the generals became president of the state companies, first in the field of trading, rising to the industry to control the oil fields and other mineral .

-- Decree of July 5, 1959 back to the Constitution-45, the Army became a supporter and main driver. So open wide the opportunity to launch the Army version of guided democracy with label conception Sukarno. Do not forget also the appointment of Sukarno as President for life by Soksi as a component of the Army force. (After 1965, political rumors circulated that it shows the ambition of Sukarno that crazy power with the support of the PKI).

-- Confrontation West Irian and Confrontation Malaysia -- a golden opportunity for the army, which controls the entire country through the concept of territorial control, to more freely again master budget-blank and have a mandate to conduct large-scale arms purchases.

Not to mention we saw how to ride the Army culture, writers and journalists with the concept Manikebu and BPS, all in one grand scenario that assumed the mission of the Cold War to get rid of the PKI to the Soekarno. (See: Peter Dale Scott, p.. 278 books 100 years Bung Karno). We are not here to question the political attitudes or cultural attitudes of the writers and journalists who opposed the communist doctrines, because it becomes their rights legitimate. The problem is too clearly how the Army to ride -- if not to say masterminded -- quote unquote this cultural event. Once the PKI and Sukarno broke down, Manikebu and BPS (Barisan Pendukung Sukarno) could have an active life again when it has assumed the mission of a cultural concept, but apparently Manikebu and BPS is no longer needed because the PKI and Sukarno had been destroyed. Mission Accomplish!
      That's Guided Democracy gait Army version that goes with great success. Anyone who cares to be true democracy if refused firmly guided democracy like that! Totally wrong here is that all the curse and oath-cuss the wrong address, because everything was thrown to Sukarno, who are conceptional absolutely nothing to do with that damned guided democracy. The people that à priori anti-Sukarno could not or would not distinguish between the concepts of socio-political maneuvers Sukarno and socio-political-military cq Army intertwine with Sukarno's concepts, because the military is always "loyal supports" President and Commander highest. Sukarno on the one hand and Nasution / Suharto as a military on the other hand are equally supportive of guided democracy and insight unity / unity of nation and country. But the similarity is only about skin, entirely different in content and motivation. Sukarno's Guided Democracy launched to defend the people who are always defeated by a majority of politicians in the House of Representatives (Parliament); military also supports democracy but because it requires leadership guided by strict control of its territorial control. Jut Sukarno advocated the unity and integrity to garner strength and empower all people to build and realize the ideals of socio-political. The military also minded unity and integrity, but the difference yet again to control the entire territory of Indonesia which they consider to be the land resources they need to master. It has been running since SOB mid 50's, and be open shamelessly again during the New Order after Sukarno removed.

3. Democracy is the concept of PKI

We know that before 1965, two major organizations most powerful and best organized of the Army and the PKI -- when borrowing nomenclature of Bung Karno, two organizations that should be equally positive is a component of the national potential -- but the two forces were in fact competing fiercely with the intention would feel happy when they managed to break his rival's neck. Army and PKI competing, equally be a "supporter" of President / Leader of the Revolution / Commander in Chief. When translated freely, that means each one has its own scenario but equally trying to ingratiate the President, or more precisely: are both riding the prestige of President Sukarno to achieve political gains. In practice, the Army is in a position to win a much more favorable than the actual PKI wishfulthinking excess air that they had achieved political hegemony in the fierce fight it. Economics was not in the hands of the PKI, the Army otherwise have access to the economy and they are more freely using the apparatus and bureaucratic mechanisms, the most important thing that the Army would hold the gun and control the entire territory of Indonesia, in the city want any in the village.
      PKI as well as supporting the Army's Guided Democracy, and as the party who believe that the revolution must be cultivated and increased gradually, so in theory they tend to choose a form of democracy is quite progressive but not radical. References PKI led to a pattern of "national democracy", the pattern of gradual transfer of power with progressive nationalist leaders sit as ruler / government leaders. Reference here leads to the transfer of power from Masaryk Czekoslowakia pattern to Gottwald, the pattern of Batista to Castro's Cuba and Algeria last pattern from Ben Bella to Boumedienne. Ben Bella was originally accepted as a revolutionary, but it is considered later underwent bourgeois decadence. As a theoretical discourse, insight "national democracy" is indeed interesting but irrelevant in practice, because in Indonesia the national leadership very different from the three countries of the former. President Sukarno was not the leadership that needs to be shifted, he's not just nationalists but even the left-nationalist who defended the oppressed peoples of Asia and Africa against colonialism and imperialism.
      We just provide the picture above to be clear, that Sukarno with the concepts -- including Guided Democracy -- face in 1965 did not run smoothly without intervention and a variety of interference from the right and left.

4. Guided Democracy actual

Which is on the table despite a variety of junk on top of Guided Democracy, which is actually, the original or democracy as intended and aspired to Sukarno, the father of his spiritual self, the author of legitimate copyright holders. It was going through the process and the long period of time. Since the young Sukarno into politics in the late 20s and early 30s, he already had a discourse about democracy as he idealized. Obviously Western democracy or liberal democracy from the very beginning he firmly rejected. Call this time as a period of "groping", because the young Sukarno firm knew what he was rejected but on the other hand is not clear how to formulate democracy which he coveted. During follow his political career, writings and speeches of Sukarno in the amount millions of words, we almost did not come across the term "guided democracy", nor do we find the term in speeches peak as a thinker and leader of the nation when he said Pancasila speech on June 1, 1945. As a political term, we begin to know "guided democracy" (guided democracy, democratie geleide, democracy with leadership, etc..) Ahead of Sukarno was forced to hold on inflation sanering 50 more political parties, it was not cleared until the three parties as did Suharto, but still eleven political parties allowed to live.
Learn the concepts and insights of thought Sukarno intact in its totality, then we see that the concept of democracy Bung Karno closely linked with an insight duumvirate, namely the struggle on the one hand and the unity and integrity of the nation on the other. Democracy is considered empty there's no point if you can not fight for freedom, justice and welfare, then the struggle would be in vain if they are not able to hold the unity and the unity that is necessary to garner the strength to be able to realize freedom, justice and the welfare of the people.
      A writer of German political biography of Sukarno once mistaken when he said that the big mistake that led to Sukarno's downfall was that he coûte que coûte anti-Western. But German experts would be absolutely right when he said that Sukarno was ousted from power because he is impartial to the stronghold of Western capitalism, firmly rejected Western democratic system. Sukarno did not believe that after the mechanism of a functioning democracy, after 50% plus one member of Parliament took a decision, then the millions of oppressed people should be happy and content to accept their fate has been decided democratically by the majority in the legislature. Sukarno was not anti-West, he never tired of raising political awareness of mass before and after Indonesia's independence by exaggerating the meaning of French and American revolutions, founding fathers of American independence as Abraham Lincoln and Thomas Jefferson that he adored. Sukarno openly expressly acknowledge the contribution of Western enlightenment thinkers were for national independence and the right inidividu or human rights. But Sukarno also realized after tracing the history of modern politics anywhere in the world, that the oppressed people who want to improve their fate in the end are generally always on the losing side -- the capitalist / capitalism always wins and succeeded in restoring the status quo to the favorable conditions for him . But according to the Bung Karno people can surely win, only if they can build strength in unity and unity among them. Here we see that the unity and integrity of the nation according to the concept of Bung Karno's not a megalomaniac to achieve greatness "Indonesia Raya", but it is a prerequisite and part of the concept of democracy Bung Karno and the struggle to uphold democracy itself.

The concept of Guided Democracy, which is running?

What can be inferred from the description of many faces "guided democracy" described above?

      Who walked and done in practice is guided democracy authoritarian and repressive, the concept of guided democracy Army who wore the label "Sukarno". This fact becomes more open and clear at the time of Sukarno has been successfully removed. Army's Guided Democracy and freedom to act in optima forma under the leadership of Soeharto's generals, and again here there semantic game. Guided Democracy, authoritarian and repressive that it now wears a new name: "Pancasila Democracy", and according to the Western world who call themselves "free world", its democracy was fully acceptable generals Suharto because he has been running at the correct line: get rid of Sukarno, the PKI and finish off all the strength left. 


Then what about Sukarno's guided democracy?
Researchers are observant and honest will come to the conclusion that the concept of Sukarno's Guided Democracy was never a chance to prove themselves the usefulness and kindness to the community. Rather than reaching adulthood or adolescence, he was dead in the embryo. That's where the great tragedy fighter liberator and unifier of the nation of Indonesia. For the sake of democracy and national unity, since 1945 he is willing and let the authorities formal powers as president stripped down. Sukarno became official during President from 1945 to 1965 was only six years in power effectively formally, ie in the period called Guided Democracy period. That, too, "accompanied" by a territorial authority that efficient and effective military, and global besieged by the forces concerned to get rid of the Cold War following gentlemen Sukarno own PKI.
      The following political experts epigont inexperienced who can not see the facts in front of the elephant's eyes like that, then do not cease until now pointing to the concept of a dictator Sukarno's guided democracy. Blindness like that, of course we can only conclude are caused by several possibilities: the experts were wrong frame of mind to them, there is a "denkfout" in their analysis, or indeed foolish not be helped, or did know all this but deliberately twisting the truth.
      Speaking of twisting the truth, we should note here something extraordinary at all since the founding of our Republic. Indonesian militarism led by generals Nasution and Suharto's generals followed by the Indonesian nation has inherited a very sophisticated skill and most orijinal. Namely: how in a way that legitimate, legal and constitutional seizure of power and silencing opponents in order to perpetuate that power. Use bullets or enter opponents in jail is not a problem, as long as all constitutional. That is the legacy of militarism Indonesia that is still occasionally practiced.
      After President Sukarno delivered his speech complement Nawaksara in January 1967, the Assembly under the leadership of General Nasution's still sacked (impeach) Sukarno of his presidential functions. President Sukarno with all the good will of course not be politically and morally suspect conspiracy when he was facing it. With or without supplementary Nawaksara speech, even if the Bung Karno willing to abandon its own principles by decreed the dissolution of the PKI, he still did not have any assurance that he would not be fired from its function as President. Instead we can see step by step how to stage generals Nasution and Suharto's generals to deploy all its territorial powers to manipulate the constituent assembly and the constitution soon after they managed to crush the movement 30 September Lieutenant Colonel Untung Syamsuri. In the history of our Republic will forever Indonesia recorded a period of militarism, the period in which the seizure of power, violations of human rights and individual liberties and rape our opinion, can take place officially, constitutionally legitimate, legal according to law and procedure, then the principle of impunity prevailing also for the corruption scale of billions and trillions.
      "Elite" we are vocal and are now sitting in the House of Representatives (Parliament) seems to be the rightful heir of their seniors in the years 1966-1967 who launched a rebellion / coup against President Sukarno with raping the constitution are valid according to the laws and procedures. Even so, the dictator remains Sukarno's guided democracy with the concept!
      We all know that Western democracy has a chance at life and practices of a century more before he was accepted as a stable and well established political system and the prevailing state of life in order -- but from Sukarno's guided democracy is still a baby red and also massacred in mass murder, by "democracy experts" expected to be able to give instant results like those brewed coffee brewing. Because no such magic may bring, it is the dictator Sukarno ....
      At the time of President Sukarno considers the phase of political reform is complete, the West Irian had returned to the bosom of "Ibu-Pertiwi", then Sukarno think it's time to fix the economic problems. With the help of, among others, the technocrats PSI, in 1963 was composed strategy formulation development pattern called the "Dekon" (Deklarasi Ekonomi). This "Decon" was dead in the fetus, spontaneous termination occurred due to events of 30 September, followed by the massacre, but the slanderer still cursing Bung Karno no economic mismanagement. Apparently miracles prosperous and fair society should be expected to materialize in a period of two years ....
      Actually, more cruel than slander and murder at the same time, is folly. How to argue with stupid people who are unable to see that Sukarno clearly did not have the talent to be a dictator. A fool can not even seem to know what it means dictator, what the terms of a dictator. Are not people just be a dictator when he has no conscience, if he's tough without a doubt capable of sending opponents to the hereafter, or at least to incubate them in jail without any trial affairs. Can Sukarno commit violence and atrocities like that?
      To help answer this question we refer to Sitor Situmorang who also contributed to this article in Liber Amicorum. In the course of his political life, we may note what is said Sitor as "Moments of Truth Bung Karno". At the beginning of 1966 took place a scene in Bogor palace noteworthy as the culmination of The Moment of Truth Sukarno. In a precarious and dangerous atmosphere, Willem Oltmans, Dutch journalist close to the Bung Karno said to the Bung Karno: "Father, very dangerous situation for the father. Meet the demands of the generals alone, dispersed the PKI! ", Thus saying the reporter with all good will. Bung Karno with a keen eye ray wrist grabbed Willem Oltmans, saying in Dutch: "Wim, you think I do not know what is happening now? I do not say a word, had massacred thousands of people out! What happens if I'm talking disband PKI?! "Wonder who that's going dialogue between Sukarno and the reporter. The same story can be heard also from Roeslan Abdulgani. For the sake of country and nation, for unity and integrity of Bung Karno be on top of everything! Bung Karno chose to be sacrificial, although extinct as a person and destroyed his political career. That is what we call the peak of The Moment of Truth of Sukarno, Sukarno's the truth, whole truth in totality.
      Although only post factum talk -- when Sukarno would contest when it --, it must be able to run over by Suharto and Kostrad out by the masses of the people with the majority of soldiers, Marines, Navy, PGT-AURI, let alone are still quite a lot of generals who remained loyal when it rounded to " Great Leader "/ Commander of the highest. But such a victory would be achieved only after passing the civil war and bloodshed. If there was a drop of just flowing thoughts on the Bung Karno dictator, the way history would be different. As said Sitor The Moment of Truth Sukarno choose Truth over personal safety, choose firm on the principle of unity and integrity of the nation above all else. Violence and bloodshed avoided although coûte que coûte clear victory in front of the eyes -- look at all the fact that, if not lower alleges defamation dictator Sukarno?
      Pramoedya Ananta Toer never say the words with wings, he said: "Bung Karno is a politician and statesman only in modern political history of the world, which unites the country and nation without a drop of blood was flowing!" Pramoedya then compare it with the "democrats Pancasila" Suharto. To build a New Order, the Army generals were massacred and thrown into jail without trial multimillion-citizen's own country! It's hard to argue with people who are not able to see it all, does not see the wolf in front of his eyes, let alone see the wolf as a rabbit.
      At the beginning of this introduction, we have quoted Prof. Bob Hering who in Bung Karno's biography, like freeing the writing from all private worship, myth and romanticism that he considers around Sukarno. Liber Amicorum was also humbly wish to wag all the slander, filth and confusion of thinking that not only surrounds the Bung Karno, but embedded in his body because of dumped him.
      A rather long description of "guided democracy" is nothing else going appealed especially to those that had to be less critical, just swallow them raw reference to "the experts, politicians, journalists" who work other not only aims to discredit Sukarno. When that happened 50 or 30 years ago, perhaps still mistake such attitudes can be understood as ignorance, ignorance, or fear of being talkative is not intellectual, fear not counted as a supporter of the new order, if not bandwagon criticizing Sukarno. But after experiencing 32 years of Soeharto's New Order regime, it should already be thinking consciousness can arise to determine which are democratic and where the dictator -- has been available long enough to be able to compare the chance of appeal, is not it? After seeing the general behavior of Suharto, his children and his cronies about power, about cruelty, about greed, there is still capable of defamatory Sukarno's guided democracy as a dictatorship? He was still just want to sing the old songs the same thing? Unable to change again because of hate has been ingrained Sukarno, was already so heavy hobby? The Dutch say: "het zingen en het zelfde deuntje stokpaardje berijden?"
       A third centuries, Sukarno discredited and standardized as a dictator by mobilizing massive propaganda machine of the New Order, using the full potential of mass-media and getting into all strata of our education. For 30 years woke up and formed a well-established public-opinion about Sukarno, with no opportunity at all for the Sukarno or its defenders for another opinion. Inaction or inertia-law and then apply here: most are no longer able to liberate themselves from the laziness of thinking that would have frozen it.
And so the dictator Sukarno permanent!

Sukarno and Concepts
Socio-political Already Printed Fossil?

Ending this introduction, we still deliver here two things, first item on the speech while our intellectuals that "Sukarno and the concepts already finished goods fossil", the second item involves maneuvers that reported by disunion among the founding fathers, liberty and our Republic.
      A dean at a private university in Jakarta, once said that Sukarno's concepts have become fossilized thinking, are not relevant, worn out for times that are already far advanced it is today. Do not know what words mean like that -- whether to show an advanced super intellect at all?
      With certainty can we say, the dean of itself and all those who thinks the same with the dean, has a fossil minds unable to think of dynamic and dialectical. All those who still can think normally would have known that all the concepts and theories of social science which would not be true -- stagnate -- if treated as dogmas die. Not only Marx or Keynes, Mao Tse Tung or the theory of cooperative Hatta, whatever religion even be a fossil when handled by the owners of fossil minds.
      We know that every molecule in the blood-meat Bung Karno to the end of the most delicate hair contains: motion, dynamics, emancipation and revolution! Can the man who received such a divine revelation, the birth of Pancasila that fossil? Trisakti a fossil? Sovereign in politics, self-sufficient in the economy, personality in the culture -- whether all that stuff fossils? Insights for The New Emerging Forces cons The Old Established Forces *, whether it is also fossil? Is not that all universal values are not bound by space and time?
      Discredit to Sukarno was performed with a variety of ways and moves from various majors. At first large-scale campaign de-Sukarnoisasi and embezzlement history by Soeharto's New Order and the people like Nugroho Notosusanto; then slander and confusion of thinking as to accuse Sukarno's dictatorship, involved G30S; and the rear is a crazy business fosilkan Sukarno and concepts brilliant socio-political. Just only in June, across the homeland we are witnessing Bung Karno said the fossil, which locked up, discredited, and despised all-out 30 years, rose again in all his greatness.

Where and who exactly are fossils?

The Founding Fathers of the Republic: Valuable National Asset
       Finally we want to remind you on this occasion on the symptoms or certain maneuvers that clearly and consciously opposes independence and the founding fathers of our Republic. Opposes the founding fathers of our Republic at the ends of the road will eventually mean speed up the process of disintegration and break the unity and integrity of the nation. When this is done by Van Mook, Van der Plas or Joseph Luns in the years since their revolution in any form can not accept the fact that the former colony independence and build self-proclaimed Republic of itself, then it is only natural -- the employer colonialist course difficult to defeat them. Sukarno, Hatta, Sjahrir the father of our nation and others, by the Dutch by all means try-sheep pitted and broken apart. But if the race-sheep was undertaken by our own people -- mainly by using mass-media --, which is actually still running continue to this day after our independence more than half a century, then this is a great tragedy.
       We see these symptoms appear in a variety of occasions. Indonesian people are already rusting anti-Sukarno at the time had come to commemorate 100 Years of Bung Karno, they write, they celebrated and they are flattered, flattered is precisely the greatness of Hatta, Sukarno while prioritizing weaknesses.
       We know very well that Bung Hatta, Bung Sjahrir, has certain strengths and advantages that can not be equaled or owned by Sukarno. Instead feel the same way! Bung Karno has advantages and strengths that can not be offset by Hatta and Sjahrir both at once. They are obviously have differences, but if present it is still relevant to be exaggerated? Even opposed to harass the one against the other? Is not it time awakened a new consciousness on the anniversary of 100 Years of Bung Karno and Bung Hatta 100 of this next year, to accept the founding fathers of our Republic with full awareness as a national asset of priceless value, for the sake of unity / unity and integration of the Indonesian nation, for the sake of build and realize the ideals which have not been realized by our founding fathers: the justice and prosperity for all our people?
      At times like today, the author reminded of an old character who was still under the Sukarno-Hatta generation who unfortunately had already preceded us all, namely Soebadio Sastrosatomo. All knew him as a figure PSI, admirers, their heirs, and successors Sutan Sjahrir ideals. At the time of Suharto's generals are still in power management, he once told the author: Stop harassing Sukarno! Stop harassing Hatta-Sjahrir! Generate strategies Sukarno-Hatta unity against fascism-Sjahrir Suharto! As a Sjahririst he said: "President Sukarno is me! Sukarno was Indonesia -- Indonesia was Sukarno! "At Soebadio say the magic words that, for one moment he did not mean to discourage let alone leave the Hatta-Sjahrir. What is pictured in front of him might be his friends in the party, the Sukarnoist and PKI members who walked as if without direction.
      Insights zig zag across Soebadio transcendental in nature reflections founding fathers of our Republic, there is no separating boundaries let alone solver -- he had grown a big fluffy overcome all the superficiality and stunt thinking. Our intellectuals, especially young scholars, should contemplate and imitate the attitude and political wisdom Soebadio that. Negative symptoms that worry on our intellectuals, young yes yes old, is that they swallow it raw and chew cud opinion-foreign experts who made referrals that eventually shut the independence of their own thinking. Such as thinking that divides our leaders in "the solidarity makers" and "the administrators". Such formulation should not automatically wrong, but he became confused and the wrong formula when it began to be regarded as a horoscope, interpreted shallow black and white.
       "The solidarity makers" -- that's where Sukarno grouped -- and then became synonymous with irrational, not an intellectual, and agitator handyman screaming at the microphone. "The administrators" -- that's where Hatta and Sjahrir --, they are considered the most rational thinking, nuchter, and a true intellectual. Cash Sukarnoist we hear a reaction, is not precisely Sukarno read more books than Hatta and Sjahrir combined into one? Precisely true intellectual Sukarno, master of science but are willing to come down to talk directly with people. Then the Sukarnoist asked about whether Indonesia is now free, if freedom struggle led by the "administrators" from behind the desk? The task to break away from Dutch rule so -- so start gradually cultivated, but yield to self-revolusian of revolution. Even more important we get more used to many schools and many universities to produce the HR (Human Resources), the cadres of academics qualified to lead the department, and so forth.
       We consider the comments and reactions like that -- by scientists, journalists or anyone Indonesian nation -- is vulger, will not lead us anywhere except to a nil-paced counter-productive. That is our purpose Soebadio name, because he who has been able to overcome all the smallness and shallowness that mubasir and wasted it. Clearly Sukarno, Hatta, Sjahrir, a row of this name can still be extended with other national leaders, such as Amir Sjarifuddin, Agus Salim, Moh. Natsir, Sudirman, Tan Malaka, Moh.Roem and so on. Each has talents, abilities, and disposition of each. Obviously they are different from each other, but unity in diversity that co-exist and complement and that's a potential national asset of our very valuable, capital to build and lead the future.
       Next year we will commemorate and celebrate 100 Years of Bung Hatta, a member of our Binitarian legendary. We are looking forward to the warning will last productive, dignified character and greatness Hatta appropriate. Bung Karno was always taught: "Only a great nation, know-heroes honoring heroes!" And people also know who should be respected although he was not there any written criteria.
       Stop exaggerating just to harass Sukarno Hatta! Stop exaggerating just to harass Sukarno Hatta! That's how we end this introduction to Liber Amicorum in words, spirit and political wisdom Soebadio -- for the sake of unity and integrity of the country and the nation of Indonesia! 

Joesoef Isak


Subowo bin Sukaris
HASTA MITRA Updated at: 4:56 PM