Nationalism and Epistemic Intellectual Awareness

During breaks at a seminar on “State and Transnationalization” in Penang, Malaysia, in the mid-1980s, I was talking with an anthropologist of the neighboring country, Sayyid Husin Ali.

“I am,” he said, “the one who has been abandoned by both.” What he meant by “both” were Indonesia and Malaysia. When I inquired what the reason was, Sayyid, who wrote a dissertation about the role of bomoh (traditional healer) in his society at Oxford University, Britain, replied, “It’s because I prepared a program for the unification of Indonesia and Malaysia.” Then the figure who was “shaken” in the ethnic turbulence in Malaysia in 1969 and I laughed heartily.

At a glance, I assumed the motivation for the program that today seems strange and invites spontaneous ridicule was only a reflection of psychological intimacy between Malay communities. However, later I found that the desire was founded on, as we will see, intellectual and epistemic awareness. In a further study, I discovered the concept of the pre-Malay notion of Indonesians, as developed by French anthropologist ET Hamy in 1877. Like Justus van der Kroef in his analysis “The Term Indonesia; Its Origin and Usage” (1951), Hamy used the word “Indonesia” to identify the Polynesian race in East Indonesia and several minority ethnic groups of the Malay Archipelago, such as the Dayak in Kalimantan and the Batak people in Sumatra. According to Hamy, these ethnic groups show more Caucasian character than do other Malay ethic groups that are more typical of Mongoloids.

So, however odd and ridiculous it may be, through Hamy’s concept of Indonesians as pre-Malay, Sayyid’s idea and program for Indonesian-Malaysian unification in the 1960s had its intellectual and academic precedent. It is in this perspective of intellectual and academic precedent that I understand what is called “national awakening” in Indonesia through the “movement” of Dr. Wahidin by setting up Budi Utomo in 1908 only constituted one of the intellectual responses out of the “global” movement framework.

Also read: Destruction of Achievement

The reason for this is that the “movement” started in 1907 through a meeting of Dr. Wahidin, R. Soetomo and R. Soeradji only reached its peak on 20 May 1908, with the founding of Budi Utomo (BU) in Jakarta. Later, as stated by Drs. Sudijo in Perhimpunan Indonesia Sampai dengan Lahirnya Sumpah Pemuda (Indonesian Associations until the Youth Pledge, 1989), through its first congress held in Yogyakarta from 3-5 October 1908, the leadership of BU fell into the hands of “comparatively senior figures”.

Several months later, the “semi-revolutionary” youths were denied the platform of BU at the Yogya congress.

They, wrote Sudijo, “were mostly acting governors and regents. Meanwhile, STOVIA students who had managed to establish the BU association had no positions on the central board”. If we define national awakening as a major event that gave rise to the impact of sustainable awareness, the spirit of change born out of the 20 May 1908 event was not strong enough to serve as its basis. Several months later, the “semi-revolutionary” youths were denied the platform of BU at the Yogya congress.

SEKRETARIAT PRESIDEN

President Joko Widodo and Malaysian Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin greet journalists at the Merdeka Palace, Jakarta, Friday (5/2/2021). The two leaders discussed a number of issues in bilateral meetings.

Therefore, if we wonder how the national awakening process was able to produce a sustainable big bang, the answer should be sought from other places, which are the lines of history of academic-epistemic and political struggle in the pursuit of the concept of Indonesia and its use for the collective identity of a nation at the global level.

Academic-epistemic basis

Here we can begin with the “passing” explanation of Klaas Stutje about the action of Mohammad Hatta after, along with Soekarno, proclaiming independence on 17 August 1945. It was, as described in Stutje’s book, “Campaigning in Europe for a Free Indonesia: Indonesian Nationalists and the Worldwide Anticolonial Movement 1917-1931” (2019), the appeal of Hatta to his old friends “to revive the spirit of unity of Brussels”.

Hatta, as the leader of Perhimpunan Indonesia (PI/Indonesian Association) in the Netherlands, along with four other young activists, were invited to attend the Congress Against Colonial Oppression and Imperialism in Brussels, 10-15 February 1927. At the Brussels congress, Hatta not only had the opportunity to describe the reality of Dutch colonialism, but also proclaimed himself as a representative of the Indonesian nation.

Also read: The Plight of Pancasila Education

This event had a significant influence in the global epistemic context. Not only was it attended by 174 participants representing 137 organizations from 34 countries, but it was also “watched over” by Nobel laureates Albert Einstein, Romain Rolland from France, Jawaharlal Nehru from the Indian Congress Party, Liao Huanxing from Chinese Guomindang Party (GMD) and Messali Hadj from Etoile Nord-Africaine, Algeria. The latter figures, according to Stutje, were exponents of global anticolonial movements.

Certainly, it was not Hatta’s first global debut. In August 1926, as written by the chairman of the National History Research Institute of 17 Agustus 1945 University, Drs. Sudijo, Hatta represented the Indonesian nation in Bierville, a small town near Paris, France, in the Congress Democratique Internationale Pour la Paix (International Democratic Congress for Peace). In a tone of heroism, Sudijo depicted the Bierville event by emphasizing that Hatta “explicitly used the name Indonesia in his speech and no longer mentioned ‘Dutch East Indies’.”

“In this way, the meaning of Indonesia,” continued Sudijo, “is no longer in the sense of ethnology and anthropology, but rather already has a political sense. All the aspirations for national independence are symbolized in the name ’Indonesia’.” “Consequently, it was PI that, for the first time, attached a political and constitutional sense to the name Indonesia.”

Nevertheless, the Brussels congress had a more specific meaning. Stutje related that, following the congress, Hatta and peers gave vented their joy. They not only succeeded in making the goal of their struggle heeded by the international forum, but also secured a position in the working committee of the global movement organization.

Above all, noted Stutje, Hatta and peers deserved their elation, because PI with only 150 students as members and as yet no political experience was placed on par with the Indian Congress Party and GMD with millions of members. The presence of the world-renowned scientist Einstein in the forum to witness the appearance of delegates of the Indonesian nation in such a delicate situation, of course, also had great significance in the global epistemic context. Wasn’t what Hatta and peers meant by “Indonesia” officially still absent? It was in this context that soon after the independence proclamation, in order to consolidate the epistemic strength, Hatta called on his old “friends” to carry on the “Brussels spirit of unity”.

SEKRETARIAT PRESIDEN

President Joko Widodo accompanies Malaysian Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin during a state visit welcoming procession at the courtyard of the Merdeka Palace, Jakarta, Friday (5/2/2021).

The word “Indonesia” used by Hatta and peers as an alternative political identity was indeed born out of the academic dynamics of the 19th century. It could thus be understood by a handful of Indonesian educated people, too. This had to do with George Winsor Earl (1813-1865), from Britain. His “profound observation” of ethnologic and geographic facts in Southeast Asia and Australia had driven Earl to become, as indicated by Russell Jones in “George Windsor Earl and ’Indonesia’” (1975), a gifted scholar.Results of the observation were published in a series of scientific works in the Journal of the Indian Archipelago and Eastern Asia under James Richardson Logan (1819-1869). In an issue of the journal, Earl, in February 1850, wrote an article “On the Leading Characteristics of the Papuan, Australian, and Melayu-Polynesian Nations”. In a long footnote, Earl wrote: “By adopting the Greek word for ’islands’ as a terminal, for which we have a precedent in the term ‘Polynesia’, the inhabitants of the ‘Indian archipelago’ or ’Malayan archipelago’ would become respectively Indu-nesians or Melayunesians”.

The word “Indu-nesia” or later “Indonesia”, in this way, had been born more than 70 years before Hatta and peers declared it before the global public of Europe in 1926-1927. But the thing worth noting is that the preservation of the word “Indonesia” occurred among academicians in the 19th century. It’s because after Earl, in a book published in 1869, Logan continued to use the word “Indonesia”. Through this work of Logan, ET Hamy further preserved the word “Indonesia” in Les Alfourous de Gilolo appearing in 1877.

A German ship-cum-ethnology doctor, Adolf Bastian (1826-1905), even used this word as the title of his work published in 1884: Indonesien oder die Inseln des Malayischen Archipel. As stated by Russell Jones, Bastian, in a footnote, used the word “Indonesia” by referring to Logan’s book 15 years earlier.

In other words, both its creation and its preservation have taken place within the circle of academicians who devoted their lives to science

Here we are aroused by a different awareness, that in any way the word “Indonesia” came out of an academic-epistemic process. For this reason, it’s no exaggeration for us to say that the birth of the word “Indonesia” constitutes scientific-based conception. In other words, both its creation and its preservation have taken place within the circle of academicians who devoted their lives to science. That’s why only a few educated people are capable of respecting this monumental work. From this perspective, national awakening thus possesses a solid conceptual foundation.

Intellectual basis

In his writing in the Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, entitled “Nusantara: History of a Concept” (2016), German sociologist Hans-Dieter Evers introduced the phrase the power of words.

“Words, concepts and slogans,” he wrote, “can be a powerful mover of history”. Through this phrase the concept of “Indonesia” thus far preserved within the circle of 19th century academicians, in the hands Indonesian intellectuals in Europe was transformed into an incredible power of resistance.

To put it in another way, the “launch” of the word “Indonesia” in the global political horizon of Europe at the time was already an eruditeness-based political expression. Here the intellectuals had become an epistemic group whose courage and calculative attitude toward consequences were guided by adequate knowledge.

This was noticeable in the change of the name Dutch East Indies Association (Indische Vereeninging) formed by Indonesian students in the Netherlands in 1908 into Indonesian Association (PI) in 1925 under the leadership of Sukiman Wirjosandjojo. Even as written by Sudijo in PI, the name of its periodical also became more “provocative”: Indonesia Merdeka (Independent Indonesia), from its previous name Hindia Putera (East Indies People). The use of the word “Indonesia” for the association name and periodicals therefore served as a watershed (or dividing line) in the structure of their awareness. So, the words “Dutch East Indies” were seen not only as outdated, but also as reflecting submission. Conversely, the word “Indonesia” symbolized resistance, liberation and a determination of independence.

Also read: Myanmar Coup and ASEAN Standpoint

The erudite basis of the use of “Indonesia” was certainly apparent in the solid structure of logic developed by writers or contributors of PI’s Indonesia Merdeka in the Dutch language. This was also the case in the international students’ organization in the Netherlands. As described by Drs. R. Nalenan in Arnold Monotutu Potret Seorang Patriot (Arnold Monotutu a Patriot’s Portrait,1981), as PI members, Ahmad Subardjo, AA Maramis and Moh Nazif wrote letters in French to all representatives of member countries of Academic du droit international de la Haye, an international students’ organization of an academy in The Hague led by a Polish diplomat with a Dutch secretary general. The letters protested against the assignment of Monotutu, a student from Indonesia at the academy in the 1920s, as a representative from the Netherlands.

VNA VIA AP

This image taken in Hanoi, Vietnam, shows a monitor screen of ASEAN leaders attending the Special ASEAN summit on COVID-19 online Tuesday April 14, 2020. Counter-clockwise from top left: ASEAN Secretary General Lim Jock Hoi, Thai President Prayut Chan-ocha, Singaporean President Lee Hsien Loong, Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, Myanmar State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi, Malaysia Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin, Indonesian President Joko Widodo, Laos Prime Minister Thongloun Sisoulith, Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen, Brunei Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah and Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc.

That’s why they demanded that Monotutu be presented as a representative of the nation of “Indonesia”. While in reality Monotutu came from a Dutch colony, through their intellectuality, the PI members’ proposal was accepted. In this manner, without precedent and under the Dutch government’s suspicion, “Indonesia” was officially included as one of the nations in the students’ organization in the Netherlands, the principal country of the Dutch East Indies.

In the context of PI, Hatta and peers concretely proved that “national awakening” could just come out of the belly of the beast itself.

This last event gives an example that in essence “national awakening” was not was not geographically confined, but instead was a product of a network of eruditeness going beyond it. In the context of PI, Hatta and peers concretely proved that “national awakening” could just come out of the belly of the beast itself. The movement was not only capable of convincingly spreading the epistemology of nationalism at the global level, but as Stutje wrote in Campaigning in Europe, also became the first group having the awareness that ethnic and religious splits posed a major impediment to the formation of effective political pressure against colonial rulers. Indeed, it was this group that joined to fuel and flame of nationalism in the country as they returned to Indonesia.

KOMPAS/JOHNNY TG

Fachry Ali

Fachry Ali, Cofounder of the Institute for Business Ethics Studies and Development (LSPEU Indonesia)

(This article was translated by Aris Prawira)