Abstract
This thesis investigates the ways in which the national ideology of Pancasila has been centralised as asite of contestation between secular-nationalists and Islamists in Indonesia. It firstly investigates how
the discourse of Pancasila has been employed by secular-nationalists to delineate the acceptable
bounds of political debate, and to exclude those who they have considered to be engaged in political
activity outside this acceptable realm, most notably political Islamists. It subsequently discusses the
ways in which Islamists have responded to the challenge of this discourse, utilising the discourse of
Pancasila in new ways to counter the hegemony of secular-nationalists in civil and political society.
The study is built upon a Gramscian framework which has been modified for the specificities of the
Indonesian context and of an ideological contestation between secularists and Islamists. It describes
the process of the establishment of the hegemony of secular-nationalists in Indonesia by utilising
Pancasila as a means of inculcating in the Indonesian population that the existing political order and
the sidelining of Islam from political life is common sense and the only way things can and should be.
The latter half of the thesis describes attempts by Islamists to build a counter-hegemony through a
Gramscian war of position to spread Islamist ideas, which lays the groundwork for a war of position,
and more substantive political change to Islamise the state and civil society. Data was collected from
primary sources and texts such as speeches, legal documents, educational and indoctrination
programs, news and mass media, as well as interviews with contemporary Islamist figures engaged in
the building of a counter-hegemony.
Secular-nationalists of various ideological inclinations from Soekarno’s era, to that of Soeharto and
the post-Reformasi leaders have differed on aspects of their economic and social policies. They have
shared, however, a commitment to a political order that places all recognised religions of the state on
an equal footing, subservient to the state itself and Pancasila. The secular-nationalist class initially was
heavily reliant on coercion to establish its dominance at an ideological level, while working to establish
a consent-based hegemony to secure their ideological position. As per Gramsci’s description of the
state as “hegemony armoured by coercion,” this has continued into the present-day, with periods in
which Islamists have challenged the hegemony of secular-nationalist control of the state and Pancasila
met with greater repression and coercion. In recent years with the increasing challenges to the preeminence
of a secular interpretation of Pancasila by Islamists who contest ownership and the right to
interpret Pancasila according to their own beliefs and values, secular-nationalists such as the
government of President Jokowi have responded with increasingly coercive measures.
| Date of Award | 2025 |
|---|---|
| Original language | English |
| Awarding Institution |
|
| Supervisor | Nathan Franklin (Supervisor) & Steven Farram (Supervisor) |