stefgi32
Meh
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2008
- Messages
- 84
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- N/A
I'm currently studying Sukarno, and there is this debate on whether he was a product or maker of history. Does anyone know what is meant be 'product of history'?
If it helps, this is a sliver of the argument presented in the paper I've been given by my lecturer:
Sukarno is often seen by all historians as a product of the Javanese society, and of the era of Western dominance, political and economic, against which he struggled.
Javanese culture stressed the blending in powerful rulers of opposites: Sukarno combined or claimed to, Marxism and Islam, nationalism and internationalism; he had communists and liberals as allies; he wanted to represent all Indonesians as a unity despite great class and cultural and political differences. This is seen as very Javanese. His guided democracy he claimed, represented Indonesian talking out their differences, musyawarah (consultation to reach consensus) rather than the rule of 50% plus of voters (as he saw liberal democracy). In Surabaya as a youth, he met leaders of different streams of nationalism: secular, Muslim, Marxist. He attempted to blend them in his writings of the 1920s and in the 1960s as NASAKOM......
And yeah...I kind of have a vague idea of what is meant by product, but I'm not entirely sure..because from what I understand, to me he is obviously a maker of history because he made the events listed above occur, he made it so that communists and liberals were allies through his speeches and charisma...my idea of product in this context is someone who is being directed what to do and say by someone else or someone that is being sold to the public....so thus the argument does not make sense to me so there must mean something else by product......
So yeah, I'd just like to confirm with everyone what is their understanding of 'product of history' and how the points listed relate to this argument?
If it helps, this is a sliver of the argument presented in the paper I've been given by my lecturer:
Sukarno is often seen by all historians as a product of the Javanese society, and of the era of Western dominance, political and economic, against which he struggled.
Javanese culture stressed the blending in powerful rulers of opposites: Sukarno combined or claimed to, Marxism and Islam, nationalism and internationalism; he had communists and liberals as allies; he wanted to represent all Indonesians as a unity despite great class and cultural and political differences. This is seen as very Javanese. His guided democracy he claimed, represented Indonesian talking out their differences, musyawarah (consultation to reach consensus) rather than the rule of 50% plus of voters (as he saw liberal democracy). In Surabaya as a youth, he met leaders of different streams of nationalism: secular, Muslim, Marxist. He attempted to blend them in his writings of the 1920s and in the 1960s as NASAKOM......
And yeah...I kind of have a vague idea of what is meant by product, but I'm not entirely sure..because from what I understand, to me he is obviously a maker of history because he made the events listed above occur, he made it so that communists and liberals were allies through his speeches and charisma...my idea of product in this context is someone who is being directed what to do and say by someone else or someone that is being sold to the public....so thus the argument does not make sense to me so there must mean something else by product......
So yeah, I'd just like to confirm with everyone what is their understanding of 'product of history' and how the points listed relate to this argument?