Pengaruh Islamisme & Sosialisme
Oleh : Tulus Chandra Simanungkalit
Pengaruh ajaran Islam bagi Soekarno tampak jelas dikarenakan Soekarno
sangat meyakini firman Allah yang tertulis dalam Al-Qur’an yang berbunyi :
“ Sesungguhnya Tuhan tidak merubah keadaan sesuatu kaum, sebelum
mereka merubah keadaan mereka sendiri. “
Soekarno selain menyerap berbagai pemikiran dari berbagai pakar dunia, ia
juga menghayati kitab-kitab suci. Setelah ditelaah ternyata pemahaman Soekarno
terhadap Indonesia adalah pemahaman yang benar dan diatas pemahaman itulah
dibangun teori dan metode merubah nasib bangsa Indonesia.
Latar belakang pemikiran Soekarno juga sangat dipengaruhi oleh tradisi
Islam yakni Islam yang sebagaimana dipahami dan dihayati oleh masyarakat Jawa.
Untuk mewujudkan Indonesia yang merdeka Soekarno melihat bahwa akar teologi
Islam yaitu tauhid menjadi pijakan yang kuat untuk membangun etos kejuangan
tersebut.
Pemahaman Soekarno tentang Islam bukanlah dalam kerangka studi Islamakan
tetapi menjadikan Islam sebagai roh yang menjadi semangat bagio aktivitas
perjuangan politik. Dan gagasan Soekarno menemukan keberhasilan dengan
munculnya perlawanan terhadap kolonial Belanda yang dipelopori oleh sebahagian
besar umat Islam dalam wadah Sarekat Dagang Islam (SDI) tahun 1905 dan berubah
menjadi Sarekat Islam pada tahun 1911.
Soekarno juga pernah terlibat dialog dengan ulama NU seperti Rais Akbar
Hadratusy Syaikh Hasyim Asy’ari dimana dalam Muktamar NU tahun 1953 ditetapkan
bahwa negara Indonesia yang menjadi cita-cita NU adalah negara Darussalam
(negeri yang damai dan sejahtera) bukan Darul Islam (negara Islam). Pemikiran
strategis ini sangat menarik perhatian Soekarno.
Cokroaminoto yang menjadi guru politik Soekarno pada tahun 1924 membuat
sebuah risalah berjudul “ Islam dan Sosialisme “ yang intinya berisi :[
1. Bahwa Islam dengan ajaran anti riba (riba adalah rente tambah
meerwarde) pada hakikatnya adalah anti kapitalisme.
2. Bahwa perintah-perintah Tuhan untuk kedermawanan (zakat-fitrah, dsb),
kebajikan dan bermusyawarah (w’amruhum sjuro bainahum) kepada dan dengan sesama
manusia adalah suruhan Tuhan untuk sosialisme dan demokrasi.
3. Bahwa berdasarkan penyelidikan- penyelidikan sejarah oleh
Cokroaminoto dan karangan sarjana Islam maupun karya para Orientalis berisikan
masyarakat sosialis yang sesuai dengan ajaran-ajaran Islam bahkan pada masa
Sajidina Oemar menerapkan susunan pemerintahan dan masyarakatnya adalah
komunistis-militeristis dalam batas-batas ajaran Islam.
4. Bahwa Cokroaminoto berdasarkan analisa marxistis menarik kesimpulan
kemelaratan rakyat Indonesia disebabkan oleh kolonialisme dan kapitalisme,
dimana Sarekat Islam berkeyakinan memiliki kebersamaan tujuan dengan pergerakan
rakyat dan kaum buruh di dunia. Dalam artian Cokroaminoto melihat adanya
hubungan kerjasama antara gerakan buruh sosial-internasional dengan Pan
Islamisme.
Pan Islamisme adalah gerakan perjuangan nasional, perjuangan merebut
kemerdekaan nasional, perjuangan yang ditujukan untuk melawan kapitalisme dan
imperialisme. Pan Islamisme adalah persatuan semua orang muslim terhadap
penindasnya. Secara tegas Kyai Tubagus Hadikoesoemo menyatakan bahwa “ Orang
islam yang tidak mendukung persatuan dalam menghadapi kaum imperialis, maka
sesungguhnya ia sesat. “
Gerakan Sarekat Islam di Jawa adalah perkumpulan yang besar dan beranggotakan
petani miskin, bersifat spontanitas dan revolusioner. Sarekat Islam juga
terlibat dalam aksi pemogokan bersama kaum buruh dengan mendengung-dengungkan
jargon bahwa kekuasaan berada di tangan petani miskin, kekuasaan berada di
tangan proletar. Sarekat Islam juga menerapkan cara dan strategi yang sama
dengan kaum komunis. Sarekat Islam memiliki perjuangan yang sama dengan
komunisme yaitu melawan imperialisme-kapitalisme untuk kemerdekaan bangsa.
Beberapa faktor yang mendasari radikalisasi massa dan organisasi dalam tubuh
SI diakibatkan oleh faktor kemiskinan masyarakat yang begitu akut sebagai
konsekuensi kolonialisasi. Terutama semakin terasa setelah Pemerintah Hindia
Belanda merubah sistem penjajahan dari VOC menjadi sistem liberal.
Kedua janji Gubernur Jenderal Van Limburg Stirum pada tahun 1917 untuk
membentuk Dewan Rakyat (Volksraad) dan hal ini mengecewakan para tokoh
pergerakan mengingat yang mereka inginkan adalah sebuah dewan legislatif yang
sesungguhnya dan tidak hanya bersifat sebagai penasehat kekuasaan.
Ketiga, mengenai adanya pembentukan milisi bumiputera yang oleh Sneevliet dan
Cipto Mangunkusumo menuduh hal tersebut sebagai upaya menjadikan milisi
bumiputera sebagai umpan peluru dan perisai, sebatas untuk mempertahankan
kepentingan Belanda.
Faktor keempat yakni selain faktor nasional juga disebabkan faktor lokal
seperti wabah pes yang menyerang Semarang akibatnya buruknya perumahan dan
lingkungan tempat rakyat kecil tingga. Kondisi ini diperparah oleh buruknya
gizi masyarakat yang kurang makan, dikarenakan pemerintah Hindia Belanda tidak
memperhatikan masalah pemeliharaan kesehatan.
H.M. Misbach memandang bahwa Islam dan Komunisme adalah dua kekuatan yang
dapat dipersatukan untuk melawan kapitalisme,keduanya tidak saling
bertentangan, bahkan saling melengkapi satu sama lain dimana persamaan dari
keduanya adalah dimensi kemanusiaan.
Oleh karena itu menurut Misbach barangsiapa yang menegakkan agama merupakan
sebuah kewajiban untuk terlibat dalam pergerakan melawan sistem kapitalisme,
karena sistem itu membuat manusia tertindas dengan ketamakan dan penghambaannya
terhadap materi sehingga menjauhkan manusia dari agama.
Bahkan dalam pandangan Misbach bahwa Islam yang sejati adalah Islam yang
mengakui komunisme, kerena kedua ideologi tersebut memiliki tujuan yang sama,
yaitu pembebasan manusia dari ketertindasan. Dan sebaliknya komunisme juga
harus mengakui Islam sebagai sesuatu nilai yang memiliki kebenaran yang hakiki.
Sunny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2008/921/op12.htm
6 - 12 November 2008
Issue No. 921
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875
Arab roadmap left
Liberal and leftist forces in the Arab world are the best placed to forge a
new social contract for the Arab people, writes Amr Hamzawy*
----------------------------------------------------------
There is a general presumption that tends to dominate our discussions on the
importance and social efficacy of the liberal and left-wing forces compared
with those of Islamist forces. It holds that the social fabric and prevailing
cultural norms and political structures in Arab countries obstruct the growth
of the former while facilitating the growing popularity and influence of the
latter. Admittedly, there is considerable and diverse evidence to the fact that
this impression is partially true.
The sway that the religious dimension has over public debate, the decline in
the popularity of left-wing parties and the ideas they espouse, and the
powerful rise of Islamist forces are incontestable. However, it is
simultaneously true that, in spite of many institutional restrictions, Arab
liberals and leftists do not lack the social openings and political space
needed to build grassroots support around alternative visions or complementary
positions to those of the ruling elite and Islamist forces. In fact, the first
step that the left must take in order to recover from its current frailty is to
conscientiously take stock of the essence of the issues that open the avenues
into society and that shape the potential realistic contours of the spaces for
political action.
The following are four such issues that I believe are of central importance
across the board in the Arab world.
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC RIGHTS: With the exception of a few instances in the Gulf,
Arab countries are gripped with severe economic and social problems, most
notably widespread poverty, high unemployment and illegal immigration;
deteriorating educational, health and other primary social services; and
crumbling social security networks. Moreover, the neo-liberal economic policies
adopted by most Arab ruling elites since the 1990s have worked to exacerbate
these problems during the past few years (even if they led to some improvement
in overall rates of economic growth), driving entire sectors of the poor and
limited-income classes towards severe hardship.
Since the 1980s, Islamist forces have constructed an expanding social service
network in the fields of education, health and other support services, thereby
partially supplanting the ineffective government agencies that are officially
charged with these tasks. For the most part, however, the Islamists do not have
clear perceptions on how to deal with the deficiencies in the people's economic
and social rights, and in their publicised statements and programmes they
continue to swing back and forth between an economic liberal tendency that
regards the market and the private sector as the engines of growth and a quasi-
leftist tendency that advocates the return to the powerful, centralised,
paternalistic state.
The Arab left and socially committed liberals (a term I use to distinguish
them from the economic neo-liberal cliques in and around the ruling elite who
advocate and practise a form of rampant capitalism unhampered by restrictions
and social obligations and who are interested solely in profit) have a genuine
opportunity to formulate an alternative vision that casts to the fore the
essential issues behind the gross disparities in economic and social rights,
namely the questions of justice and equality, fighting unemployment, building
effective social safety networks, and reducing the ever-widening gap between
rich and poor in Arab societies. Undoubtedly, liberal and leftist
conceptualisations will be markedly different. However, the work of identifying
the flaws and weaknesses in the opinions of the ruling elites and the Islamists
and of exposing the injustices in Arab societies will bring them closer
together and, simultaneously, bring them closer to broad segments of
grassroots opinion. I am convinced that the best conceptual approach to this
task is to focus discussion on the missing social contract in our countries.
There is an urgent need to formulate a true consensus on the actual substance
of such a contract and to pressure both the ruling elites and the Islamists to
consider the relevant issues.
POLITICAL, CIVIL AND INDIVIDUAL FREEDOMS: All the official talk of democratic
reform and political liberalisation over the past few years has not been
translated into a qualitative shift in that direction in any Arab country.
Little has changed or seriously improved in such vital matters as the rotation
of authority, the rule of law, the separation of and checks and balances
between powers, and broadening popular participation in public life. Nor has
the growing political influence and activity of Islamist forces brought a
tangible and lasting expansion in the realm of political party competition.
Simultaneously, the Islamists have failed to strengthen their pressure on the
ruling elites to implement democratic reform. Indeed, in many cases, they have
fallen prey to participating in official contexts that have proved ineffective
and for which they are paying a heavy price in terms of declining popularity.
The poor and stagnant levels of political, civil and individual liberties and
the declining credibility of the government's and Islamists' reform banners
offer leftist and liberal trends the opportunity to home in on such issues as
the freedom of association and the freedom to form political parties and to
syndicate, the freedoms of opinion and expression, the right to worship, and
the need to eliminate all forms of discrimination in all these areas. In their
advocacy of such essential rights, political liberals and the left must come up
with a clear and succinct discourse centring around equal citizenship,
secularism and plurality and targeting in particular the more politically and
socially disadvantaged sectors of the population, such as religious and ethnic
minorities, women, and those whose personal lifestyles or preferences depart
from social or religious norms.
THE CONSENSUS-MAKING CULTURE: The polarisation between the ruling elites and
Islamist forces has caused the zero-sum mentality and simplistic absolutist
approaches to dominate all public debate and political life in the Arab world.
Unfortunately, many left-wing intellectuals and activists have also fallen prey
to such black- versus-white reductionism. Not all components of the ruling
elite or all the various shades of Islamism are tainted. True, at present the
ramifications of the predominant attitudes and policies of the official and
Islamist camps are grim. However, any realistic and serious search for avenues
to economic and social reform and to democratic transition can not ignore a
systematic exploration of areas in common with the ruling elites and Islamists
and, accordingly, the process of identifying the bases for possible
coordination and negotiation with them within the local and national framework
in every Arab country. I have no doubt that the only way forward
in this regard is to resist the temptation to formulate and disseminate an
inflexible and stereotypical image of the type of change that is needed, in
accordance with which evil ruling elites and Islamist extremists must be
replaced by honest and socially committed leftists.
FREEING ARAB DEBATE FROM THE CONFINES OF SPECIFICITY: Arab countries are not
alone in suffering the banes of cruel economic, social and political hardships
and injustices. These are universal human concerns, as diverse as their
manifestations and repercussions may be. The causes of justice, freedom,
equality and social solidarity are gaining increasing priority in the
humanitarian agendas of both industrialised and developing nations. Certainly,
the recent financial crisis that shook the fiscal pillars of the global
economic order has heralded the end of the era of unbridled rampant capitalism
and trained the intellectual spotlight on the major bastions of capitalism on
possible corrective strategies and, eventually, on a consensus on the means and
principles for striking a new balance between the economic domain (in its
narrower sense of activities undertaken for financial gain) and the social
domain and the attendant concepts of fairness, freedom and equality.
Refreshing the global outlook on the nature of the best means to manage the
relations between the state, society and the citizen offers the Arabs a broad
and important scope for linking our discussions on a new social contract to
extremely vital and dynamic dialogues that are taking place beyond our borders
in the West, the East and South. Political liberals and the left are best
poised to establish that link. They are the most familiar with the intellectual
approaches and conceptual instruments that shape such dialogues around the
world. Also, if they can rediscover themselves and revive the memory of their
former social efficacy, they can bridge the gap between the attitudes and
rhetoric of the Arab ruling elites and the Islamists, on the one hand, and the
forward-looking ideas and aspirations of the collective human conscience.
* The writer is a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International
Peace.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
---------------------------------
Dapatkan nama yang Anda sukai!
Sekarang Anda dapat memiliki email di @ymail.com dan @rocketmail.com.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
