Geertz's Logic of Myth

By: Syamsul Kurniawan

Clifford Geertz introduced the logic of anthropological research that is important in examining the distinctive locality elements of a culture. For example, understanding the myths that live amid local communities is a crucial element in understanding the local culture. 

By Geertz himself, the phenomenon of myth amid society can be explored very well so that myths amid culture seem exotic, terms with wisdom values, and take place naturally. The tale, which is nothing but a product of acculturation amid this society, is likened to Geertz like a biophysical change, namely the process of mixing materials in nature with nature itself.

For example, myths are born from the phenomenon of syncretism in Javanese culture, where local Hindu-Buddhist and Islamic traditions experience a fusion. This is inclusively seen by Geertz, so that myths containing elements of local culture that exist amid society after experiencing syncretism, we no longer see something sacred as before, but as something that can be explained. Thus, we are no longer taboo to discuss this mythical issue; we think and feel it as a natural process and can understand it inclusively.

In this context, the logic of Geertz's anthropological research has succeeded in placing "rationalism" as a standard in reading mythical phenomena that he finds in the culture of the society he researches. In this area, like most other anthropologists, Geertz's ideas are also hit by pros and cons, such as his explanation of myths born from the consequences of the classification of society in Javanese Muslims, namely priyayi, santri, and abangan. Moreover, in his description of this myth, he associated it with ethical and moral standards.

Geertz also compares the differences in myths he encounters in the societies he researches and finds common ground. He concluded that adapting tales and interactions between society and its culture and nature is more than just participatory. According to him, there is direct human involvement to know directly, objectively, and without tendency. Such phenomena glorify "symbols," for example, graves. 

In addition, Geertz said the importance of an anthropologist who examines myths could place themselves precisely whether as an "insider" or "outsider" in his capacity as a researcher, "first person" or "third person" in his position as a researcher, and know how to objectively approach the object of research under study by maintaining a code of ethics in research, and so on.

To overcome the problems that an anthropological researcher may experience, Geertz proposed the importance of Heinz Kohut's psychoanalytic theory used in the logic of anthropological research, especially to draw a common thread that is not based on assumptions alone, but by being directly involved with syncretic or acculturative cultural phenomena. Thus, in this context, for Geertz, an anthropological researcher needs to interpret the cultural objects he examines in the context of his experience as experience-near and experience-distant. 

For example, Geertz tells his experience conducting research on the culture of Javanese, Balinese, and Moroccan people by giving its subjective meaning so that it is possible to analyze myths, mantras, cultural symbols, etc. Geertz also found that myths in Java, Bali, and Morocco surrounding the idea of selfhood are very different. For example, when a young man dies, his wife. The subjective meanings that develop amid society are not the same between Java, Bali, and Morocco. 

Why is this subjective meaning significant to researchers? This is about the essential academic honesty that should exist in researchers, which is between the rationality and moral-ethical aspects, as researchers should not be separated. (Geertz, 1999)

Thus, in connection with this myth, the subject of Geertz's anthropological research intersected with his study on Javanese religion and flow politics, which we then commonly know from the results of his research. He introduced priyayi trichotomies, santri, and abangan, the urban character of people in Java as hollow towns rather than solid towns,  political groupings without a class basis. He included comparisons between Indonesian Islamic models and Moroccan Islam (between the scope of religion and the force of faith). From what Geertz explained as the mythical model in Indonesian Islamic society and Moroccan Islam, the relation to the latter shows that fictitious societal differences about how religion is manifested are strongly influenced by the cultural environment that develops in societies that should not be the same. 

In the context of research on myth, Geertz arguably deserves to be called an outstanding anthropologist who can make conceptual modifications to what he researches. The logic of Geertz's anthropological research on myths even found relationships between symbol systems, value systems, and evaluation systems of the societies he studied. Suppose previously myths were nothing more than cognitive systems, systems of meaning, and systems of culture. So Geertz provides anthropological tips so that others can understand the action of the myth; that is, there must be another concept that connects the system of meaning and the value system, namely the symbol system. This is because, according to the logic of Geertz's research, the importance and value systems of myths certainly cannot simply be understood by others because they are very individual. For this reason, a plan must communicate the relationship between the two, namely the symbol system. Through that system, the meaning and cognitive systems of hidden myths can be shared and understood by others.

Finally, the interest in Geertz's studies is very varied. With the logic of his anthropological research, he succeeded in studying social history through his study of social change in Indonesia's two cities: Java and Bali. Geertz studied not only mythical problems that intersect with religion and societal culture from a sociological or anthropological perspective but also studied economic problems until the theory of involution was born and much more. He significantly contributed to the world of anthropological research, even today.***

References

Geertz, C. (1999). From the Native’s of View: On the Nature Anthropological Understanding. In R. T. McCutcheon, The Insider/Outsider Problem in the Study of Religion; A Reader. Continuum.

Social Stratification in Bourdieau's Perspective

By: Syamsul Kurniawan

A researcher should ideally master research maps, fully understand research methodology, and understand the characteristics of the community being studied, including the social structure. This paper provides an overview of this social structure and essential things that researchers must understand. From its perspective, this paper borrows Pierre Boudieau's theory.

The existence of humans as social beings in social life clearly cannot be separated from the possibility of social stratification. In fact, in religion, social stratification also occurs and even influences. For example, the existence of belief in a place is difficult to deny, and it often affects the social and cultural conditions that exist in the social environment, including influencing the existing social stratification.

Robert M.Z Lawang explained that social stratification classifies people in a specific social system into hierarchical layers based on power, privilege, or prestige qualifications. (Lawang 1985) Meanwhile, according to Pitirim A Sorokin, social stratification is the difference in population or society based on hierarchical (tiered) class layers. (Sorokin 1927)

A social stratification is a form of social practice, as a social practice during society. As understood, social stratification is generally measured from first, wealth (Capital), such as one's ownership of property, high income, and the like; second, power; for example, someone who has great power and authority often occupies better social strata than those who do not; third, honor (nobility) such as nobility, Habib, and so on; fourth, science (sciences), an example of someone who has a particular position amid society because of his advantages in terms of science or education that he takes.

As a consequence of social practice, social stratification can be divided into, first, open social stratification, namely the attitude of citizens who can experience social mobility, moving up to a higher social layer for those who have the ability, and vice versa. Second, closed social stratification, namely the existence of limits on a person on the possibility of moving positions from one social layer to another, is permanent. A concrete example of the second is birth which determines one's caste, especially in feudal society.

In constructing everyday social practice, we can analyze social stratification based on Pierre Bourdieu's theory. In this connection, social stratification is a dialectical dynamic between 'exterior internalization' and 'interior externalization' (Jenkins, 1992, p. 67). exists outside the social actor, while the interior is everything attached to the social actor. Thus, how social stratification is formed can be understood from both. In social practice, everything observed and experienced outside the social actor (interior) moves dynamically dialectically with the disclosure of everything internalized to become part of the self—social actors (interior).

Of course, social stratification exists in time and space. As a product of social practice, stratification cannot be understood outside the context of space and time, which Bourdieu calls 'tempo.' (Bourdieu 1997) The formation of this social stratification, due to this 'tempo,' obviously takes time and takes place in a particular space. Not immediately or naturally. Adaptation will require time and place for specific areas to be practiced in a social system. The practice is often regulated and driven unconsciously or not fully consciously.

According to Bourdieu, the social actions that form social stratification in this realm are more likely to result from individual improvisation and the ability to play a role in social interaction. In social life, most agents (individuals or groups, Bourdieu often also calls them actors) tend to accept the social world, likewise, with the social stratification in their midst. Agents need to rethink why they must do this and that, why this or that. The reason is that agents deal with their social world and become an integral part of their social world. In it, agents grow, learn and acquire a series of cultural practice competencies, including social roles and identities. These roles and social identities are formed and simultaneously develop social stratification.

Thus, social stratification is related to what Bourdieu formulated with '(habitus x capital) + field = social practice. (Bourdieu, 1984)

 

Social stratification as habitus

In Bourdieu's theory, Habitus is a durable and transposable system regarding what we accept, values, and how to act in the social world, likewise, with social stratification. Habitus is a scheme obtained by the agent through dismantling the conditions faced by the agent and conditions faced by the agent through the internalization of external constraints and various possibilities. In this case, social stratification as Habitus is a shared experience owned by the agent as a subject, despite its uniqueness.

Social stratification, as Habitus, includes cognitive and affective dimensions manifested in the disposition system. Thus, social stratification is also a set of dispositions. 'Disposition' in this case is: first, the result of a governing action; second, the way to be; and third, intention or inclination. (Bourdieu, 1997)

Decision-making by agents can be related to: first, the reflection of what the Habitus does; second, the choice of the situation; or third, an illusion, namely the unconscious doing something because he is trained and practiced continuously about his Habitus. In other words, a person's attitude and tendency to perceive, feel, act, and think about the social stratification around them is nothing but the result that is internalized thanks to the person's objective conditions. 

In short, Habitus functions as a framework that gives birth to and shapes a person's perceptions, representations, and actions (structuring structure) of the social stratification in their midst. Habitus, in this context, is a patterned rule, but humans do not have to be subject to specific regulations and, at the same time, have a focus on the goals and results of particular actions. However, goal-directedness only consciously intends to achieve the goal with mastery of exceptional intelligence. This is the case in the context of the formation of social stratification in society. (Bourdieu, 1984)

 

Social stratification occurs in a domain

In Bourdieu's view, Habitus underlies the field. So social stratification is also related to the domain. Moreover, denying how social stratification is closely related to systems and relationships (relationships) in a particular space and time is difficult. By digesting this realm, we can rationalize the social stratification that forms. Bourdieu said, 'To think in terms of field is to think relationally.' (Bourdieu, 1984) 

Based on Bourdieu's logic, social stratification is in a field where it is impossible to separate this field from social space. Social space in this context is an integral arena that contains a system of domains. According to Bourdieu, the social space is also a place of power contestation. There is an effort to struggle for resources (Capital) and fight for access to power. The struggle is to obtain a position in the realm. What about the agent position? The place of an agent in the arena is highly dependent on the amount of ownership (volume) of Capital it has, its composition, and changes in its size and design from time to time. (Bourdieu, 1984) In the field, reproduction or transformation occurs. (Webb, Schirato and Danaher 2002) In the context of the formation of social stratification, this is what happens.

 

Social Stratification Related to Capital

Bourdieu's Capital is social relations. Capital is a social energy that only exists and produces results in the realm of struggle where Capital produces and reproduces. One of them is the social stratification that is formed.

Bourdieu mentions several types of Capital at stake in the field: economic Capital, Social Capital, Cultural Capital, and symbolic Capital. (Ritzer 1996) Financial Capital includes the means of production (machinery, land, labor), materials (income and goods), and money. The latter is the most visible, can be used for any purpose, and is usually passed down from generation to generation. Social Capital is manifested through relationships and networks, which are helpful resources in determining and reproducing social positions. Then what is included in cultural Capital is the formal intellectual qualifications and family heritage produced. This Capital has, for example, diplomas, the knowledge obtained, cultural codes, ways of speaking, writing skills, manners of character, manners or manners, methods of getting along, and so on that play a role in determining reproducing social positions. At the same time, symbolic Capital is understood not to be separated from symbolic power, namely power that makes it possible to get equivalent to what is obtained through physical and economic strength, thanks to the special effects of mobilization. This model can be a house in an inclusive settlement, an office in a strategic trade center, a car with a driver, etc. However, it can also be in the form of conspicuous clues. 

Another example is the title listed on the business card, how to speak in front of subordinates, and so on, which shows the owner's status. These capitals all of which are at stake and contested in the realm. These three capitals are very potential to form social stratification.

As previously explained above, some social stratifications are open, and some are closed. Both are easy to understand because stratification is indeed formed due to contestation in the social sphere. "The field is also a field of struggles…" (the field is also an arena of struggle), Bordieau wrote. (Bourdieau and Wacquant, 1996). The structure of the realm guides and provides strategies for positional agents, individuals, or groups to maintain or increase positions in achieving social standing. In this regard, the formation of social stratification and the strategy of these agents depends on the position occupied and the Capital they have in that realm. "The strength and form of the procedure depend on the place the agent occupies in the power relationship (rapport de force). (Bourdieu, 1993)

 

According to Bourdieu, two types of strategies are relevant to social stratification: the reproductive system. Agents design this strategy to maintain or increase Capital in the future. This strategy is a set of practices; the amount and composition of production capital become the primary benchmark. Even social stratification is designed for this reason; second, the return strategy (reconversion strategies). This strategy is concerned with the movements of agents in the social space, which then constructs social stratification. The social space in which agents move is structured in two dimensions: the total amount of structured Capital and the formation of dominant and dominated types of money. 

Apart from these two strategies, other systems can construct social stratification. In this context, according to Bourdieu, are possible, such as biological investment strategies, inheritance strategies, educational strategies, and symbolic investment strategies. Natural investment strategies are seen in efforts, for example, to control the number of offspring. It is done to ensure the inheritance of Capital and facilitate the increase in social position. This strategy also relates to maintaining health, including food consumption choices, exercise, rest, recreation, and entertainment. The inheritance strategy serves to guarantee wealth, especially material. It is done because of the understanding that economic Capital is relatively more decisive in power relations. Educational systems are directed towards the goal that social actors have the appropriate skills needed in the social structure to receive group inheritance or even improve their social position. At the same time, the economic and symbolic investment strategies are directed directly to struggles in the social sphere. Economic and symbolic investment strategies are now required for social work. The financial investment strategy is directed at maintaining and increasing various types of Capital. Investment in this domain is not only financial Capital but also social Capital. This strategy is carried out to perpetuate and build long-term and short-term social relationships. In maintaining eternity, social relationships are transformed into long-lasting obligations, such as exchanging money, marriage, employment, provision of time, etc. Symbolic strategies are used to maintain or increase social recognition. This strategy aims to produce perceptions and judgments supporting its uniqueness, such as name inheritance. In addition to encouraging efforts to be respected, the inheritance of family names is also a significant element of symbolic Capital. 

Again, agents use strategy to maintain position (in social stratification), improve function, differentiate themselves, or acquire new posts in the realm. As explained, there will always be a social "battle" in the domain, where the constant who wins will be at the top of the pyramid of social stratification.***

 

References

Bourdieau, Pierre. 1984. Distinction; A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. UK: Routledge & Kegan Paul LTd.

—. 1997. Outline of Theory of Practice. USA: Cambridge University Press.

—. 1993. The Field of Cultural Production; Essay on Art and Literature. Cambridge; UK: Polity Press.

Bourdieau, Pierre, and Loic J. Wacquant. 1996. An Innovation to Reflexive Sociology. Cambridge; UK: Polity Press.

Jenkins, Richard. 1992. Pierre Bourdieau. Newyork; USA: Routledge.

Lawang, Robert MZ. 1985. Materi Pokok Pengantar Sosiologi. Jakarta: Karunika, Universitas Terbuka.

Mutahir, Arizal. 2011. Intelektual Kolektif Pierre Bourdieau; Sebuah Gerakan Untuk Melawan Dominasi. Yogyakarta: Kreasi Wacana.

Ritzer, George. 1996. Sociological Theory. Newyork; USA: McGraw Hill Companies inc.

Sorokin, Pitirim Aleksandrovich. 1927. Social Mobility. California: Harper & Brothers.

Webb, Jenn, Tony Schirato, and Geof Danaher. 2002. Understanding Bourdieau. London; UK: Sage Publication.

Multiple Intelligences

By: Syamsul Kurniawan

In the old theory of intelligence, most authors signaled intelligence in at least three senses: first, the ability to learn; second, the overall knowledge gained; and third, the ability to adapt to new situations or the environment in general. In short, intelligence is the ability to solve problems faced by life, deal with problems, and make or do something useful in life.

The multiple intelligences proposed by Gardner can be said presently to perfect previous theories related to human intelligence. Later, Gardner's theory was used as a reference for teachers, school education practitioners, and parents.

Gardner, who pioneered the theory of multiple intelligences, was born in Scranton, Pennsylvania, in 1943. His parents once wanted to send Gardner to Philips Academy in Andover, Massachusetts, but he turned it down and instead attended the nearby prep school in Kingston, Pennsylvania (Wyoming Seminary). Except for this preparatory school, Gardner had a history of education at Harvard University, and here he had the opportunity to learn a lot from several experts such as Erik Erikson (psychoanalyst), David Riesman (sociologist), and especially Jerome Burner (cognitive psychologist) who researched a lot about human knowledge. Gardner learned a lot from several of these experts, especially about his investigations of human nature, which included how humans think. Gardner completed his education at Harvard in 1971 with a dissertation on style sensitivity in children. Graduating from his Philosophical Doctoral, Gardner remained at Harvard and served as a teacher. During this time, Gardner did a lot of research, such as one he worked on with David Perkins, A professor in education. Frames of Mind,  published in 1983, was Gardner's first book about the theory of multiple intelligences.

Regarding the theory of multiple intelligences, Gardner defines intelligence as the ability of a child to solve and provide solutions to problems faced in real life, which tend to be diverse and complex. But for Gardner, intelligence is not enough to be defined as a child's ability to solve IQ test questions in the classroom. However, as Gardner suggests, intelligence as a theory of multiple intelligences is the ability of a child to solve problems in the real world and various situations.

Gardner emphasizes the ability to solve problems in the real world because, according to him, a person is said to have high intelligence if he can solve real problems in his life; it is not just a theory. The more a child is skilled and able to solve life problems with diverse and complex situations, The higher the intelligence.

By Gardner, intelligence was redefined. Gardner, who is a psychologist from Project Zero at Harvard University, as said by Daniel Muijs and David Reynolds in their book Effecting Teaching quoted by Munif Chatib, through the concept of multiple intelligences, managed to break the dominance of IQ theories and tests which since 1905 are widely used by psychologists in the world to measure intelligence.

Multiple intelligences is an assessment that wants to look descriptively at how a child uses his intelligence to solve problems and produce things. In general, Gardner's theoretical approach examines how the mind operates in the concrete and abstract world. In the book Frame of Mind, Gardner says,  'Intelligence is the ability to find and solve problems and create value products in one's own culture.'

The theory of multiple intelligences proposed by Gardner did not rely on a standard psychological test but on habits to measure a child's intelligence. At least, this refers to two things: first, a child's problem-solving pattern (problem-solving), And second, the habit of creating products with cultural value (creativity).

In short, in the theory of multiple intelligences, a child's intelligence should be seen from many dimensions, not only logical or verbal intelligence. That's why he called the concept of multiple intelligences. Gardner has deliberately not given a particular label to the meaning of intelligence, as did other originators of intelligence theorists, such as Alferd Binet with IQ, Daniel Goleman with EQ, and Paul Scholtz with the Adversity Quotient. The use of 'multiple intelligences' diction is more flexible and allows the realm of intelligence to continue to expand. As we know, previously, intelligence was classified by Gardner into six forms intelligence (first coined this concept) and then into 9 bits of intelligence. Regarding multiple intelligences, Gardner always describes three things that he thinks are important, namely core components, competence, and the best end conditions. And this is very relevant in the world of children's education, which parents should realize well during the period of being with children amid this pandemic.

Each area of the brain called the lobe of the brain, is said to have a core component in the form of potential sensitivity that arises from that area of the brain when given the right stimulus. As a result of the proper motivation, this sensitivity will produce competence. And if these competencies are honed continuously in education, depicted on the correct syllabus, the competencies will emerge as the best final condition of an individual. This best absolute condition is what most people call it, as seen from the child's talent. But if the stimulus is inappropriate, the competence will not appear prominent in the sense of 'mediocre.'

There are 9 bits of intelligence classified by Gardner, such as first, linguistic intelligence, which is a person's ability to use and process words effectively both orally and in writing. An individual with high linguistic intelligence should be able to speak well and fluently, quickly develop his language knowledge/ability and easily learn many languages. Those with this linguistic intelligence include poetry/song creators, editors, journalists, drama actors, literati, novelists, and so on. Second is logical-mathematical intelligence, the ability to use numbers and logic effectively. Individuals with logical-mathematical intelligence generally stand out and can easily do thought work, for example, related to the abstract. They can understand mathematics and philosophy and learn to count, calculate, and play with numbers. Even in many findings, those with this intelligence tendency prefer complex number symbols to long book sentences. Third, visual space intelligence (spatial intelligence) is the ability of an individual to capture the world of visual space precisely. Profiles of individuals who have this kind of intelligence are usually hunters, architects, navigators, and decorators. Those with visual space intelligence are generally sensitive to balance, relationships, colors, lines, shapes, and spaces. Fourth, bodily-kinesthetic intelligence, which is the ability of a person to use the body or gestures to express ideas and feelings, such as actors, dancers, athletes, sculptors, and surgeons. Fifth, musical intelligence, namely the ability to develop, communicate and enjoy various kinds of music and sound, including sensitivity to rhythm, melody, and intonation, the ability to play musical instruments, sing, compose songs, and the ability to judge songs or music, and so on. Sixth is interpersonal intelligence, which is the ability to understand and be sensitive to the feelings, intentions, desires, dispositions, temperaments of others and the like. The ability to establish relationships and communicate with various people is a hallmark of individuals with this intelligence, as demonstrated by most communicators, mediators, facilitators, and mass mobilizers. Seventh, intrapersonal intelligence is the ability related to knowledge of oneself and the ability to act adaptively based on self-knowledge. Eighth, environmental intelligence/naturalist (naturalist intelligence), namely the intelligence to understand the world of flora and fauna well, understand and enjoy nature, and use this ability productively, as done by farmers, ranchers, and so on. Ninth, existential intelligence concerns a person's sensitivity and ability to answer existential problems or his existence.

This theory of multiple intelligences proposed by Gardner has marked the emergence of a new paradigm in education or learning. As noted earlier, in our educational world, it is often categorically separated children who are considered competent on the one hand and children who are deemed stupid on the other, by cognitive measures. Thus, with the concept of multiple intelligences, there should be no more smart or stupid children; What exists is their intelligence that is not the same alias different from one another. In this area, parents should be aware and wise that some children may have one or two intelligence and be weak in what some other children master. Consequently, parents educating their children are more varied because they can no longer focus on strengthening one or two intelligence as they perceive it. It could be that what he perceives is far from the potential intelligence that their children already have.***

Reading Sukarno Correctly and Completely

By: Syamsul Kurniawan

On June 6, the first President of Indonesia, Sukarno, had his birthday. Sukarno was born Kusno Sosrodihardjo on June 6, 1901 in Lawang Seketeng, Surabaya, East Java. His father was Raden Soekemi Sosrodihardjo, a teacher in Surabaya, Java. His mother, Ida Ayu Nyoman Rai, is from Buleleng, Bali.

Sukarno was called the son of the dawn because, according to Javanese belief that people were born at sunrise, their fate had been conquered first. His birth dawned on a new day and century because Sukarno was born in 1901. The conditions that started Sukarno with all new beginnings made him seem destined as a reformer in the future he lived.

The birthday is marked by the number six and the star Gemini, the symbol of twins, and that's what Sukarno looked like—two opposite traits. Sukarno could be soft, could be chatty, could be tricky like steel, and could also be soft rhythmically. His demeanor is a blend of healthy thoughts and emotional vibrations. Sukarno was forgiving, but he was stubborn. He put the enemies of the country behind bars, but he did not let the birds be confined in cages. Another incident that was considered a harbinger of fate by Sukarno was the eruption of Mount Kelud when he was born.

He stated, "Superstitionists foretell predictions; this is welcome to baby Sukarno." In addition, the explanation of Kusno's name change to Karno also gave one more myth in little Sukarno about himself as a future warrior and hero of his nation. The belief in the signs that appeared on the day of his birth gave Sukarno a picture of the future from his childhood.

In the pages of Indonesian constitutional history, Sukarno is recorded as the first President of Indonesia who served from 1945-1966. But his role in the struggle of the Indonesian nation is much broader. Sukarno and M. Hatta read the Proclamation of Indonesian Independence on August 17, 1945. Therefore, Sukarno received the title of Mr. Proclamator. In addition, he also became one of the Fathers of the Nation who played many roles in awakening, giving the nation's identity, and laying the foundation of the Republic of Indonesia, namely Pancasila, which was delivered on June 1, 1945. Before explaining the basis of the state, Sukarno spoke at length about the need to achieve independence as soon as possible. Like Karno, people who want to marry do not have to have a house first, have furniture, and so on. Similarly, with independence, there is no need to wait until various state equipment exists.

To read Sukarno correctly, ultimately, must be seen from the long history of his struggle for the Indonesian nation. Sukarno was a very romantic man who was never selfish but always thought of the country's importance. Since young Sukarno actively fought against the Dutch. When the number of the nation's elite who fought for independence was still small, Sukarno had sacrificed time, energy, and future since he was a student at ITB, without counting the gains and losses of his struggle. As an engineer, Sukarno had the opportunity to obtain a job that promised income and adequate material facilities. However, none of this was used; even Sukarno sacrificed his youth and was often in and out of prison for an independent Indonesia. This was Sukarno's unyielding attitude in the struggle against colonialism and imperialism in Indonesia and most Asian African countries. Going in and out of prison and living in exile for a dozen years did not change the attitude of his political struggle to achieve an independent Indonesia.

But as an ordinary man, Sukarno was not without weaknesses. As a state official, for example, he had "enjoyed" his position so much that there was an impression that he no longer placed himself as a public servant in a democratic society. As president, he should be aware of his position as a person in office as long as the people mandate him, even with certain term limits. Sukarno ignored that. It seemed that Sukarno did not need any other "support." We still remember when on December 1, 1956, Hatta resigned from the position of Vice President. We also still remember his close people, such as Sjahrir, Amir Syarifuddin, Tan Malaka, and Moh. Natsir and others, one by one, distanced themselves from him. In the mid-1950s, Sukarno's incredible attention to his position made him unaware that the impact of the cold war had far-reaching Indonesia.

The victory of the PKI in the 1955 and the 1957 regional elections, for example, had influenced the attention and policies of the main actors of the cold war toward Indonesia. On the one hand, China and the Soviet Union welcomed the victory joyfully because it signaled the spread of communism in Indonesia. On the other hand, the US and its allies said the success raised their fears that Indonesia would break away from Western circles of influence. In the domino theory mindset, the loss of Indonesia would threaten Western interests in Southeast Asia. Little by little, a stage of tension was built. In 1965-1966 the location was the scene of a bloody struggle between the PKI and Western-backed armed elements.

Sukarno came to his senses but too late. He trembled as he watched hundreds of thousands of his loved ones being slaughtered in a planned and brutal manner. Little by little, he was clamped. Finally, the father of the nation and the great teacher of this nation was removed from the stage of power. He died a poor political prisoner in a country where he fought so hard for independence. The end of Sukarno's life was heartbreaking. But his teachings as the father of the nation and teacher of the country remain relevant and essential for this nation-state. People can learn not only from what is said but also from actions, along with their advantages and weaknesses. We hope that the youth of this country will not tire of continuing to learn from history, including from Sukarno.

Happy birthday to my role model: Karno! ***