PRAKSIS PKI 1951-1965: KAJIANTEOLOGIS-LIBERATIF

Abstract

The title of this thesis is Praksis Partai Komunis Indonesia (PKI) 1951-1965: Kajian Teologis-Liberatif (Praxis of Indonesian Communist Party [ICP] in the Period of 1951-1965: Liberative-theological Study). Preferential option for the poor and the oppressed is its basic premise. This commitment directs the author of this thesis to a concern for Indonesian Communist Party’s praxis in the period of 1951-1966. The praxis had led the communists to debacle through mass murder afflicted on Indonesian workers, peasants, dan other Indonesian common people. It meant that PKI’s debacle was not just a defeat of a political party who held Communism as its ideology, but also (and primarily) a defeat of Indonesia’s poor and oppressed people, especially its working class and peasants.

Why was PKI defeated? And what is the meaning PKI’s debacale in the light of a theology which is committed to the liberation of the poor and the oppressed? The author tries to answer these questions through interdisciplinary approach. Firstly, the author carries out a socio-political analysis. Secondly, he reflects upon it theologically. Socio-political analysis is carried out through studying history by using the perspective of Theory of Permanen Revolution (TPR). Theory of Permanent Revolution ia a Marxist theory developed Leon Trotsky, one of the leaders of 1917 Bolshevik Revolution. The author uses TPR to analyse PKI’s praxis and debacle in the period of 1951-1965, with a consideration that this theory has been an immanent critique in the world of Marxism during last one hundred years.  In this context, the author finds parallelism between PKI’s praxis and debacle in the period of 1951-1965 and other communist parties’ in various countries, including China of 1927. TPR helps the author to understand that PKI had some fundamental problems which was essentially same with Chinese Communist Party of 1927 and other Communist Parties. However, the author has a critical asssessement toward TPR, too. In his opinion, TPR is a brilliant theory of socio-political struggle of the working class, but at the same time it needs necessary fulfillment of certain socio-historical conditions. In using TPR as an instrument of socio-political analysis, the author finds several factors that seem to be outside of TPR’s scope.

After carrying out socio-political analysis dan formulating theological problems which it raises, the author reflects theologically on PKI’s praxis and debacle. The author uses liberative-theological perspective about Utopia. In carrying out his reflection,  the author tries to have dialogues with three prominent liberation theologians: Gustavo Gutierrez and Joao Batista Libanio (Roman Catholics) and Jose Miguez Bonino (Protestant). From these dialogues, the author formulates his own understanding about Utopia, which he names “Utopia with dialectical character and eschatological horizon”. After that effort, the author uses his understanding of Utopia to reflect on PKI’s praxis and debacle of 1951-1965. Theological interpretation of those praxis and debacle eventually leads to a design of socio-liberative theological effort which may be used and developed by Christians (including the author himself), which are committed to the people’s struggle of liberation of the poor and the oppressed.