PINTAR SEJARAH LEWAT ‘JALAN PINTAS’ PENUH TAWA

Judul Buku : Kartun Riwayat Peradaban Jilid 1
Judul Asli : The Cartoon History of The Universe Volume 1-7
Penulis : Larry Gonick
Penerbit : Kepustakaan Populer Gramedia
Tebal : VIII + 362 halaman
Cetakan Pertama : September 2006

Pernah menyangka nenek moyang dari nenek moyang manusia itu ikan? Sempat membayangkan bagaimana Eugene Dubois yang menemukan fosil Pithecanthropus erectus itu ‘ngambek’? Bagaimana dengan fakta bahwa manusia zaman pra sejarah tidak tahu kalau berhubungan seksual bisa menghasilkan anak? Kalau yang ini: tujuh ribu tahun lalu orang Sumeria membangun rumah lumpur yang rubuh setiap kali hujan turun? Pernah memikirkan kemungkinan bahwa Ishak dikurbankan Abraham bukan karena perintah Tuhan, tapi karena dia bandel? Pernah dengar tentang sebuah negri yang selalu diserang bangsa lain tapi saling serang sendiri saat tidak diserang? Kalau belum, maka komik berjudul ‘Kartun Riwayat Peradaban Jilid 1’ yang disusun Larry Gonick ini bolehlah Anda baca.

Dalam komik ini, Gonick mula-mula mengajak pembacanya naik mesin waktu ke awal terbentuknya semesta. Dari sana, pembaca kemudian pelan-pelan diajak Gonick maju menyusuri terbentuknya bumi. Pada awal terbentuknya, bumi hanya dihuni makhluk-makhluk bersel satu. Gonick menggambarkan makhluk-makhluk bersel satu dengan hiperbolis. Makhluk-makhluk bersel satu digambarkan memiliki pikiran dan emosi sehingga dapat (tentu saja) berpikir, marah-marah, menangis, tertawa, dan bernafsu. Hal ini membuat para makhluk itu terlihat kocak.

Makhluk bersel satu ini kemudian berkumpul menjadi makhluk bersel banyak: ada yang jadi hewan, ada pula yang jadi tumbuhan. Semua hewan awalnya hanya tinggal di air sampai suatu waktu ada hewan yang ‘nekad’ ke darat dan mencoba hidup. Ikan, salah satunya (sebelumnya didahului serangga). Ikan ini kemudian berevolusi menjadi dinosaurus dan mamalia kecil. Dinosaurus kemudian punah. Pada akhirnya, hanya mamalia kecil yang berhasil bertahan hidup setelah melalui seleksi alam.
Kisah terbentuknya semesta hingga kepunahan dinosaurus itu disusun dalam Bab 1 yang berjudul ‘Evolusi Segalanya’. Hal yang menarik dari bab ini adalah cara Gonick mencitrakan hewan-hewan dalam komiknya. Jangan bayangkan hewan-hewan itu digambar seperti hewan-hewan di buku-buku sejarah atau biologi! Gonick menggambar hewan-hewan itu dengan menggemaskan dan lucu (seperti tokoh-tokoh hewan dalam film ‘Madagaskar’).

Dalam bab selanjutnya, yakni ‘ Tongkat dan Batu’, Gonick menceritakan sejarah evolusi kera (yang adalah salah satu jenis mamalia yang berhasil lolos seleksi alam itu) menjadi manusia purba. Pernah menonton serial kartun ‘The Flinstones’? Nah, sekonyol karakter-karakter dalam serial itulah manusia purba dicitrakan dalam komik ini. Bedanya dengan ‘The Flinstones’ yang menceritakan fiksi, komik ini menceritakan sejarah. Homo erectus adalah jenis yang nantinya berevolusi jadi manusia modern. Sebelum jadi manusia modern, manusia purba melalui kehidupan nomaden, berburu dan meramu, hingga bercocok tanam. Pada masa bercocok tanam inilah manusia purba mulai menjinakkan hewan, menciptakan bahasa, nilai, dan karya seni.

Setelah masa itu, para manusia purba mulai membentuk masyarakat purba. Mereka hidup dalam klan-klan. Pada masa inilah posisi perempuan mulai terancam. Para manusia awalnya tak tahu bahwa ada hubungan antara hubungan seksual dan reproduksi. Sialnya, para laki-laki duluan tahu karena mereka memperhatikan domba-domba yang mereka gembalakan kawin dan beranak. Sebelum mengetahuinya, lelaki tidak mempunyai rasa memiliki anak yang dilahirkan perempuan, pun perempuannya. Tapi karena pengetahuan itu, laki-laki kemudian merasa memiliki perempuan yang melakukan hubungan seksual dengan mereka dan anak si perempuan. Perempuan yang dianggap sebagai milik laki-laki, karenanya, harus tunduk pada laki-laki.

Selanjutnya, dalam Bab 3 yang berjudul ‘Dunia Sungai’, pembaca diajak Gonick jalan-jalan ke Mesir. Mulanya, bab ini menceritakan soal kebangkitan, kehidupan, sampai kejatuhan Sumeria. (Rumah lumpur yang rubuh tiap hujan turun itu bisa pembaca lihat di bab ini). Bab ini juga bercerita soal peradaban Mesir: adat pemakaman para bangsawan dan raja, serta sejarah Mesir mulai dari kepemimpinan Raja Zoser sampai kepemimpinan seorang firaun yang menjuluki dirinya ‘Ramses yang Hebat’.

Bab 4 yang berjudul ‘Perjanjian Lama’, jelas menceritakan soal Bangsa Israel: mulai dari eksodus mereka dari Mesir hingga masa menetap mereka di Kanaan. Meski berjudul ‘Perjanjian Lama’, jangan kira Gonick hanya memvisualisasikan cerita dari Alkitab. Dalam menyusun bab ini, Gonick juga menggunakan sumber-sumber lain. Karena itulah ada banyak kejutan di dalamnya (terutama bagi para pembaca yang selama ini akrab dengan kisah-kisah Alkitab Perjanjian Lama). Pasalnya, nabi-nabi yang punya reputasi baik di Alkitab dikisahkan dan dicitrakan tidak ‘selurus biasa’nya.

Bab ini diawali dengan cerita tentang sebuah negri di antara Mesir dan Sungai Eufrat yang selalu diserang berbagai bangsa dan saling serang sendiri saat tidak diserang. Dalam bagian ini muncul cerita Nabi Yusuf. Selanjutnya, komik mengisahkan tentang eksodus pertama Bangsa Israel yang keluar dari Mesir menuju Kanaan, dipimpin oleh Musa. Di bagian inilah mulai muncul kejutan. Manna (roti) yang dalam Alkitab `turun dari langit ternyata ternyata merupakan benda putih yang dikeluarkan dari pencernaan (boleh dibaca: kotoran) serangga padang pasir. Di antara Bangsa Israel yang melarikan diri dari Mesir itu, tak semuanya tak suka tinggal di Mesir. Mereka yang ingin kembali ke Mesir, balik kanan, melakukan eksodus kedua setelah Musa mangkat.

Sementara itu, Bangsa Israel yang telah sampai di Kanaan memulai kisahnya. Pada mulanya mereka tak mempunyai raja. Pemimpin mereka disebut hakim -yang tentu saja memiliki fungsi yang berbeda dengan raja-. Pada saat Israel diduduki Bangsa Filistin, (Nabi) Samuel menjadi hakim. Pada masa ‘kepemimpinannya’, Bangsa Israel menginginkan raja. Dengan berat hati –karena menurut Samuel raja hanya akan menjadikan rakyatnya budak-,Samuel mengurapi Saul menjadi jadi raja. Setelahnya, Israel dipimpin Daud yang bukan keturunan Raja Saul, lalu Salomo putra Daud.

Soal Salomo ini, Gonick kembali memberi kejutan. Terbalik dengan Salomo versi Alkitab yang terkenal dengan kebijaksanaannya, Salomo versi Kartun Riwayat Peradaban ‘terkenal’ dengan kezalimannya. Cerita paling populer soal Salomo (karena ia dibacakan setiap tahun di Gereja) adalah soal dua orang ibu yang bertengkar memperebutkan seorang bayi. Semua mengaku merupakan ibu kandung si bayi. Untuk memecahkan perebutan itu, Salomo mengusulkan membelah bayi menjadi dua dengan pedang. Salah satu dari kedua ibu itu menangis. Ia memberikan bayi kepada ibu satunya. Masalah terpecahkan. Ibu asli adalah ibu yang tak rela anaknya dibelah dengan pedang. Soal cerita poluper ini Gereja menafsirkan Salomo sebagai seorang raja bijaksana yang bisa menyelesaikan masalah. Tapi Gonick, dengan macam-macam referensinya, justru menunjukkan bahwa itu adalah bentuk kezaliman Salomo. Bayi, melambangkan Israel. Ibu palsu, melambangkan Salomo. Ibu asli, melambangkan Adonia, keturunan asli Raja Saul (ingat: Salomo bukan keturunan Saul). Artinya, jika ibu asli (Adonia) tidak ingin menyerahkan bayi (Israel) kepada ibu palsu (Salomo), maka bayi (Israel) akan di(ter)belah oleh perang saudara. Karena Adonia tak menginginkan perang saudara, maka kekuasaan ia serahkan kepada Salomo. Setelah Salomo, pada masa pemerintahan Rehabeam, Israel terpecah menjadi Israel dan Yehuda. Bab 4 berakhir di bagian Yehuda yang ditaklukan oleh Babylonia.

Bab 5 dengan judul ‘Otak dan Perunggu’ berkisah tentang peradaban Yunani: legenda, kebiasaan, dan pemikiran masyarakatnya. Orang-orang Yunani berasal dari utara sebelum mengungsi dan menjajah Bangsa Pelasgia di sekitar Laut Aegea. Orang-orang Yunani yang akhirnya menetap di sekitar Aegea kemudian diserang Bangsa Doria sampai peradabannya musnah. Meski peradaban musnah, teknologi mereka berkembang baik: mereka menciptakan banyak senjata model baru. Peradaban mereka pulih kembali saat orang-orang Yunani merantau ke negri-negri lain dan menerapkan di Yunani apa yang mereka lihat di tempat rantau. Di Fenisia, mereka belajar tulisan. Di Mesir, mereka belajar drama dan upacara, di koloninya, Ionia, mereka belajar filsafat.

Meski pada Bab 5 Gonick berkisah tentang Yunani, pada Bab 6 yang berjudul ‘Siapakah Orang-orang Athena?’ Gonick tidak berkisah tentang Athena. Masih ada hubungannya dengan Athena, bab ini bercerita tentang orang Persia yang dibuat penasaran oleh orang Athena. Kenapa? Karena Athena bersama dengan daerah pemberontak Persia, Miletos, berhasil membumihanguskan ibu kota Persia. Tentu ini reputasi buruk bagi Persia yang hebat –yang sanggup menaklukan Kerajaan Media, Lydia, dan Babylonia-. Karena hal ini, Persia kemudian menyerbu Yunani. Siapa yang menang dalam pertempuran antara Persia dan Yunani? Untuk tahu jawabnya, bacalah komik ini.

Pada bab terakhir, ‘Segalanya Tentang Athena’, barulah Gonick menceritakan Athena dan ‘demokrasi’nya (demokrasi yang tidak menganggap perempuan dan budak). Di Athena, pekerjaan dilakukan perempuan dan budak sehingga para laki-laki punya banyak waktu untuk berpolitik, berfilsafat, dan menghasilkan karya seni. Pada masa inilah, si eksentrik Sokrates, filsuf Yunani Klasik, muncul dan bikin heran warga Athena. Bikin heran karena apa? Temukanlah jawabannya di komik ini dan bersiaplah tertawa.

Apa pendapat Anda soal komik yang menceritakan 13 miliar tahun perjalanan waktu dalam 350 halaman saja ini? Jika belum membacanya, bisa jadi Anda ragu soal seberapa komprehensif komik ini mampu menyajikan data-data. Tapi mengingat ratusan buku referensi yang digunakan Gonick, belum lagi padat dan kronologisnya data-data sejarah yang disajikan, saya sarankan Anda tarik kembali keraguan Anda. Setelah membaca komik ini, alih-alih meragu, saya memilih berdecak kagum kepada cara Gonick menyajikan data sejarah yang komprehensif itu ke dalam narasi yang menghibur.

Ya, unsur kronologis, komikal, dan humoris membuat komik ini jadi narasi yang menghibur. Gonick mempertahankan unsur kronologis dengan menempatkan informasi sejarah bernada datar di bagian teratas kotak-kotak gambar. Informasi sejarah disusun berurutan dari kotak gambar satu ke kotak gambar lain. Gonick kemudian mengimprovisasi informasi sejarah tersebut dengan mengkartunkan para pelaku sejarahnya dan menyisipkan humor-humor cerdas dalam dialog mereka. Unsur komikal, terbaca dari mimik wajah dan postur para pelaku sejarah yang dikartunkan. Meski gambar dan dialog yang dibuat Gonick imajinatif, Gonick tak melupakan logika, seting, dan kostum sehingga imajinasi yang dicipta Gonick tetap relevan dengan informasi sejarah yang disusunnya.

Unsur komikal dan humoris itu di satu sisi memanjakan saya, tapi di sisi lain ia membuat saya lalai dengan kronologis cerita. Karena terlalu asik menertawakan potongan-potongan kartun dan humor yang lucu, saya malah lupa merangkai potongan kartun itu menjadi satu kesatuan cerita. Ini membuat saya harus membaca berulang kali untuk mendapatkan pemetaan cerita yang utuh.

Seperti buku, komik ini diawali dengan Kata Pengantar juga. Tapi jangan bayangkan Gonick yang kreatif itu memberi Kata Pengantar berupa paragraf yang berisi rentetan kata-kata. Dalam komik ini, Kata Pengantar-nya pun disajikan lewat kartun dan humor. Kata Pengantar tak hanya muncul di awal, tapi juga di tiap bab dan sub-bab. Gonick selalu menampakkan diri di tiap Kata Pengantar untuk (tentu saja) memberi pengantar sehingga pembaca dapat mengikuti alur komik dengan baik. Bagaimana caranya Gonick menampakkan diri? Tentu saja dengan mengkartunkan dirinya sendiri ke dalam komik. Cara Gonick menyajikan Referensi tak jauh beda dengan caranya menyajikan Kata Pengantar: dengan kartun dan humor yang buat saya pribadi sayang untuk dilewatkan.

Dalam komik ini, secara umum, Gonick menggunakan sudut pandang penguasa -sehingga kita bisa melihat banyak sekali perang-. Ini terlihat dari tokoh-tokoh utama yang dipilih Gonick sejak muncul kerajaan. Tokoh utama dalam komik adalah para raja dan bukan rakyat, apalagi budak. Ini bisa dimengerti mengingat feodalisme pada zaman kerajaan memang menempatkan raja di atas segalanya (kecuali Dewa) dan budak di bawah segalanya. Oleh karena itulah, kisah-kisah yang diabadikan dalam tulisan pada zaman kerajaan hanyalah kisah-kisah para rajanya. Para budak kerap dianggap tak ada. Salah satu bukti dari tak dianggapnya budak pun ada dalam komik ini, yakni dilupakannya 900 budak Sparta yang ikut mati bersama 300 prajurit Sparta dalam penyerbuan Persia ke Yunani sehingga para ahli sejarah kerap menyebut peristiwa tersebut sebagai ‘Laga Terakhir 300’, bukan ‘Laga Terakhir 1200’.

Gonick tak hanya memasukkan data-data sejarah yang mempunyai bukti empiris dalam komiknya, tapi juga mitos macam Hercules atau fiksi macam Oedipus. Pertimbangan dari dimasukkannya mitos dan fiksi ini adalah tidak adanya data sejarah yang dapat digunakan untuk melengkapi rantai sejarah yang putus.

Komik ini adalah referensi tambahan yang baik untuk siswa SMP/SMA. Berbeda dengan buku sejarah cetak/pegangan siswa yang seringkali malah memberi informasi sejarah sepotong-sepotong, komik ini menyajikan pemetaan sejarah peradaban yang lengkap dan rapi. Kalau tak ingat bahwa siswa SMP/SMA harus belajar dari buku cetak/pegangan yang materinya ditentukan kurikulum, saya rekomendasikan komik ini sebagai pegangan wajib mereka di sekolah.

Membaca komik ini seperti menyusuri ‘jalan pintas’ menuju penguasaan sejarah peradaban dengan cara menyenangkan: tertawa. Sambil menertawakan kartun dan humor imajinatif Gonick, Anda bisa tahu apa yang terjadi selama 13 miliar tahun sejak semesta terbentuk. Buat saya, ‘jalan pintas’ dan tawa adalah alasan yang lebih dari cukup untuk menjajal komik sejarah yang disusun mantan mahasiswa Harvard Jurusan Matematika ini.

Anarchistic Society

Sabina Thipani

Society is a smaller part of a state where individuals live together. Society deals with many aspects such as industry, technology, ecology, economy, and cultural-consciousness of its members. State, as a bigger organization from society is believed by most people as an instrument which functions to bring prosperity for each individual. In fact, state is used as an instrument of oppression; repression from the more superior countries to the more inferior, also instrument to rule industry and economy for certain class. This domination of state creates problems in each aspect of society.

Anarchism is an ideology which believes that state must be abolished. Based on this, anarchism can be a solution for social problems which are caused by the domination of state. This paper will explain more about the detail of problems in society, how anarchism can be the solution of them, and how anarchism can be implemented in society.

Terms of Anarchism

What first come to your mind when you hear the word “anarchism”? Some people may associate this term to violence. Whereas, anarchism is an ideology, a political belief, which can be applied just like other ideologies such as socialism, communism, democracy, or liberalism. The most fundamental difference of anarchism from those ideologies is that:

anarchism does not believe that state can be an instrument to assure prosperity for each individual in certain society. Thus, Joseph Labadie, in “Anarchism: What It Is and What It Is Not” says that state must be abolished (par.3). This abolishment of state is also conveyed by Graham Purchase in “Anarcho-Syndicalism, Technology and Ecology”. He writes “in an anarchist society, the absence of centralized state authority will permit a radically new integration of nature, labour, and culture” (par.1).

Labadie states that anarchism can be considered as free association with neither oppressor nor the oppressed (pars. 4-8). In other word, anarchism believes in equal right for each individual. Coordination and operation are run without bureaucracy and hierarchy. Purchase writes that anarchism is depended on self governing of each individual in society (pars.8-10). One of the requirements of anarchism is the integration of environment (Purchase, pars. 12-18).

Problems in Society and Anarchism as the Solution

Before industry revolution, welfare of the individuals in society becomes the responsibility of society. But since industry revolution takes place, the nation has taken control the social welfare responsibility (“Social Welfare”).

Refer to Chaz Bufe in “A Future Worth Living”, we can see that the welfare which just be given from the state to its people does not happen. He states: We live in a world which is deeply unsatisfying for most people, a world in which many of our most basic need – for love, peace, freedom, security, and meaning in life - are not being met. Most of us face constant worry about economic survival, loneliness and isolation, or fear of it,and a constant feeling that there's never enough of anything good to go around, be it love, sex or money (par. 7).

This insecurity of individual prosperity is taken root from industrial, economical, technological, ecological, and cultural problems in society. Those fundamental aspects is taken control by the state.

Most of the states in this world nowadays are run with capitalistic system. This capitalistic system is started to be implemented in England since industry revolution. Industrial revolution was the time when agrarian society was transformed into modern industrial society. Industrial revolution consists of the changes in fundamental technology, economic, social and cultural aspects (“Industrial Revolution”). These changes do not always bring advantage for human being. Industry based on Purchase article has created environmental destruction and dehumanized workers (par. 4).

There are some aspects affected by industry revolution. But, economy is the aspect which has the “strongest relation” with industry. Purchase states that industry “is only made slightly destructive by the narrow, short-term interests of capital and state” (par. 4). Capitalistic economy system which is used since industry revolution seems to be a secondary aspect compared to industry. But from Purchase statement, there is an implicit impression that capitalism changes to be the primary motive with industry as the instrument. Apart from this changed role, industry and capitalism have strong relation. Since capitalism is a system which is based on ownership of capital, and capital is something fundamental in economy system, we can conclude that industry thus has strong relation with economy.

Marxism, a famous ideology which critics industry and capitalism the most comprehensively, argue that “in capitalist society, an economic minority (the bourgeoisie) dominates and exploit the working class (preoletariat) majority. Marx attempted to argue that capitalism was exploitative, specifically the way in which unpaid labour (surplus value) is extracted from the working of earlier political economists on value. He argued that while the production process is socialized, ownership remains in the hands of the bourgeoisie. This forms the fundamental contradiction of capitalist society. Without the elimination of the fetter of the private ownership of the means of production, human society is unable to achieve further development” (“Marxism”). This domination of bourgeoisie, according to Marxism, brings economy inequality. This problem is seen in Bufe’s article. He states there has been economy inequality today. It has been difficult to get job. According to him, this inequality causes alienation of human being because individuals must fulfill their need (pars. 10-12). Inequality which causes alienation is a proof of degradation of humanity done by industry which is run by capital. Human is no longer the center of all. Human becomes object of industry and economy interest.

According to Purchase, to solve industrial problem, there should be worker control in every factory so that workers and bosses has the same position and equality. He states that there should be egalitarian working environment between bosses and employees, also egalitarian among workers. Workers should get better wage and humanity experiences in working. This condition actually can increase production and minimize sabotage (par. 7).

Purchase provides another radical solution for the problem emerged from industrial system. He suggests efficiency and self sufficiency to be implemented in society. Purchase writes every society should have independency in producing one’s own needs. This can avoid exploitation of workers (par. 8).

But have you ever imagined you yourself has to raft your own phone cellular or sew clothes you wear? How about the plates you use to eat? Should you handle them by yourself? Will you have enough time, energy, and material for that? The obstacles of this industrial solution are: not every community has natural resources, no one wants to spend their whole life in factory even though we need goods, and not every body/community has craft to do every single thing (Purchase, pars. 9-10).

To overcome this obstacle, Purchase states that every body should spend a few hours per week to provide goods. No boss should take profit while they are not working like workers do. The production should not be oriented to consumerism but to human needs (pars. 9-10).

However, they are not only industrial and economical problems which bring dehumanization. Technology, as an aspect which become the cause of industry revolution and also the aspect which is affected by industry revolution in the same time, is also one of the other problems which cause humanity degradation in society. Purchase states “…children and adults alike spend hours on end surrounded by deafening noise and blinding lights in video arcades…” (par. 5). According to him there has been industrial robotification of human nature. But to get back to primitivism anarchic era in post industrial where there is no any technology, is utopia. Because primitivism is utopia, there should be mixture of Neolithic primitivism era with technology (Purchase, par. 5).

It has been mentioned that capitalism which uses industry vehicle not only causes dehumanization but also has created natural destruction. But either because capitalists are stupid enough to understand that or because they have no embarrassment, nature balance issue has been used as commodity by capitalism to survive. Purchase states that naturalistic capitalistic product will be used to fulfill individual consumerism. Accumulation of individual consumerism actually costs more expensive than what all people in this world really need (pars. 12-18).Those who have neither consciousness nor attention will consume those kinds of products with -probably- a good aim to save the earth. But the paradox of industrial system toward nature and the expensive amount which has to be turned is worse than the end of the word because of natural damage. Excessive consumption of individual has to be fought with communal consumption. On his article Purchase show how excessive individual consumption is less effective and efficient to overcome natural damage compared to communal use of public transportation. Buying one expensive bio energy car can be more expensive than thousands people’ costs on bus in a day. Thus using public transportation is one of the ways to solve ecological problem (pars.12-18).

We have seen the relation of industry to economy, industry and technology, industrial economy and its relation to ecology, and of course the impact of all those relation to human being in society. There is one more aspect needs to be concerned in society.

The most abstract and most difficult aspect need to be changed in society is the cultural aspect. Its abstract causes it difficult to be analyzed as how other aspects can be analyzed. However anarchism indeed should focus not only to economical and political problems, but also focus on cultural problems because in the end culture can be a very strong basis for individuals to do such actions.

The cultural problems need to be concerned appear on individual psychology such as emotional and individual sexuality (Bufe, pars. 13-52). According to Bufe, the most impactful contexts which create cultural consciousness are religion, family, education, and mass media.

Both family and religion actually has the same character. They are patriarchal. This patriarchal character causes repression to –especially- woman and also to sexuality of the individuals in society. There is subjection and degradation of women in patriarchal religion. Patriarchal religion abandons human intellectuality and put religion above all including humanity (Bufe, par. 13-52).

Object of patriarchy in family is not as wide as patriarchy in religion. However, the repression done to an individual causes not less big effect than the effect caused by patriarchy in religion. This sexual repression will bring an individual to some effects like what is written by Bufe: sexual repression in patriarchal family causes many problems to an individual. An individual would be fear to rebel, become obedient and have the fear of sexuality. It
constructs servility mental and abandonment of self. An individual will identify his/her self with external entities. An individual will only have blunt reason and intelligence, also repressive-authoritarian behavior (pars. 13-52).

Education system which is built by authoritative method took part on that (repression, even sexual repression). This system also has patriarchal impact. Bufe states that in most education systems, the role between student and teacher is very stiff. Student has no big room to question something. Students in schools are built to be an authoritarian because they are taught by authority (par. 50). Thus, authoritative education system also takes part on constructing patriarchy. In the end, an individual in society has no place at all to be him/her self. Society always represses individuals to build “harmony”. If not, an individual has to be ready for the consequences such as physically or psychologically isolation from society.

Education, according to Bufe, never teaches freedom to students. Even though there is a quick advancement in science or other disciplines, individual has never been taught about values. Education orientation is practical: how individual can get money and make profit. Thus, grade becomes something important rather than the knowledge itself (par. 51).

Ironically, violence seems to be the only aggressive expression that can be done unconsciously. Television shows excessive violence in practical and conceptual way. “… the media reinforces authoritarian structures in a more subtle way: it routinely presents such structures as not only being normal, but as being _inevitable_. Even at the height of the Cold War, when power-grubbing sociopaths in Washington and Moscow stockpiled enough nuclear weapons to turn the Earth into a burned out cinder - and came within an eyelash of doing so in 1962 - one never found even the faintest suggestion that there was any way to organize social life other than through coercive, hierarchical structures controlled by power-mad politicians holding the power of life and death over the rest of us. In part because of the media, most people won't even consider the possibility that there are alternatives to domination, submission, hierarchy, and coercion” (Bufe, par. 52).

Implementing Anarchism in Society

I have explained some important aspects in society including its problem and the solution given by anarchism. In this next sub-chapter, I am going to explain about the steps need to be done by anarchist movement to implement anarchism in society.

A movement would not be massively successful without organization. This includes anarchist movement. Some people misunderstand anarchism by relating anarchism with unorganized movement whereas organization is a very important instrument to reach anarchistic society.

According to Bufe, anarchism organization has to have voluntary cooperation/noncoerciveness character. The organization has to be non hierarchial and decentralized. The leadership is spontaneous effect in a horizontal relation and concerns to psychological problem such emotional and sexual issues (pars. 53-87).

The last aspect mentioned is very important. Psychological aspect is the aspect which often be forgotten by many movements. We have seen how big the effects emerged from psychological repression from patriarchy system is. Thus, this abstract aspect really needs to be considered in a movement. According to Bufe, anarchism movement should consider individual sexual longing and sexual repression (pars. 53-87).

The approach of anarchism movement itself should be both theoretical and experimental. Self sustaining is another aspect should be considered. Anarchism movement should provide pleasure rather than pain to all members, has positive orientation, has utilitarian spirit, and means determine ends (Bufe, pars. 53-87).

It is not enough to form an organization without having model. There must be models attractive enough to be adopted by any other anarchism movement (Bufe, pars. 53-87). In the recent sub-chapter, we have seen how big the effect of education for the society is. Thus, anarchism movement must pay attention to this aspect. To convey anarchism ideas, good education is needed to be the media. Purchase says that anarchism needs massive persuading fellow workers to organize themselves and resist state and corporate coercive apparatus (pars. 19-26).

Since fundamental aspects such as industry and economy are held by nation, anarchism has duty to bring them back to people. We have seen how those two aspects collaborated with ecology and technology and bring dehumanization. Thus those important aspects should be controlled by people. Purchase writes power of economy and industry power must be returned to people. Anarchists build nonprofit, community-based forms of individual skills exchange such as barter-based networks. Anarchists also represent co-operative efforts which strengthen the autonomy of both individuals and communities (pars. 19-26). Not only industry and economy, object of both, technology and ecology should be controlled by people also. Purchase says that anarchism movement exploits technology and ecology for the people (pars. 12-18).

The most important and tactical thing need to be remembered during the movement is the stability. There must be no chaotic or coercion actions done by anarchism movement (Purchase, pars. 19-26).

Conclusion

Since states have never functioned, we need anarchism to be implemented in our society. Aspects in society such as industry, economy, technology, and culture do not bring mentally and materially welfare to the people. Anarchism as an ideology has given solutions for the problem appeared in society. Implementing anarchism in society is not a utopia, but it needs a hard work. Anarchistic organization is an important instrument to attain anarchistic society.


Work Cited

Bufe, Chaz. “A Future Worth Living.” Anarchist Library. 1998. 7 February 2010 < http://flag.blackened.net/daver/anarchism/future.html>.

“Industrial Revolution”. Encyclopaedia Britannica.

Labadie, Joseph. ”Anarchism: What It Is and What It Is Not.” Anarchist Library. 1979. 7 February 2010 < http://flag.blackened.net/daver/anarchism/labadie.htm>.
“Marxism”. Wikipedia.

Purchase, Graham. “Anarcho-Syndicalism, Technology and Ecology.” Anarchist Library. 1995. 7 February 2010 < from http://flag.blackened.net/daver/anarchism/aste.html>.

“Social Welfare.” Encyclopaedia Britannica.

Strider, Lorne. “Planet of Room.” Anarchist Library. 2000. 7 February 2010 < http://flag.blackened.net/daver/anarchism/planet_of_rooms.html>.

Of Dressing Formally

Demand to dress formally has been tradition in PBI, or at least, since I studied in this study program. The standard of the formality is varied and usually based on lecturer’s taste. But most of them identify formality with shirt, T-shirt with collar, and shoes. According to some of them, this formality will make students look neat. Most of them argue that education is a field where the individuals must look convincing because they are going to deal with children and they are going to be models for them. The way they dress, according to those lecturers, can help other people give such good impression to the children and people in society. However, some students do not agree with that demand. They who do not agree usually do not really mean to criticize the demand of dressing formally. My speculation is they actually do not really mind of the way they dress; the way they dress is not something really crucial to be fought. Here, from this reading, I suggest that demand to be considered and the students of PBI to be critical to this demand. The reason why this demand must be considered is because the valuation of neatness and properness which becomes the impact of formality is subjective and not debatable. The demand to dress in such way is also the discrimination of someone’s expression. Beside that, formality does not guarantee someone’s competence or guarantee good learning process for the students. Here are the explanations of things –I have mentioned before- which need to be considered before demanding formal dress for students.

The first consideration is that neatness and properness as the possible effect of dressing formally is subjective. As what has been mentioned before, most lecturers require their students to wear shirt or T-shirt with collar, and shoes during their class. Those symbols become the reason why the students can be considered as neat. Whereas, subjectively I see that not every body wears those kinds of clothes looks neat. Neatness is about taste and taste cannot be debated. There are no absolute boundaries of neatness. That is why neatness cannot be measured. Thus identification of neatness with shirt, T-shirt with collar, and shoes is an effort to impose some people’s subjectivity to others. Then, to avoid subjectivity imposition from lecturers to students, demand of dressing formally should be abolished.

The second consideration is the way someone expresses themselves through dress. The problem is the subjectivity about neatness and properness is used as a foundation to decide something. Some lecturers require “neatness” to their students in order to be able to attend a class. The students -including them who do not agree with this requirement- prefer to obey it because attending class is more important rather than debating about how they want to dress. Because it seems that the lecturers have bigger bargaining position (even though according to most statutes, students actually has the same right to demand to the institution they are studying in), the students –like it or not- choose to obey the instructions given by the lecturers. Thus this “neatness requirement” in the end brings discrimination to someone’s right to dress as they like. Whereas, the way someone dresses is one of the ways to express one’s self. It does not mean that “to be neat” is bad. But, firstly, the definition of neat to each person is different. Secondly, what bad is: demanding others to wear something subjectively neat. Again, based on the rationalization have explained, dressing formally must be considered; dressing formally might be an option for someone to dress, but not an imposition.

The third consideration is the motto “Don’t judge the book by its cover”. Some lecturers argue that the neatness effect of the formal dress students wear will give good impression to others. The paradox is that most of us also often say, “Don’t judge the book by its cover.” The fact is that, in our society today, those who dress “neatly” is indeed often considered competent. Whereas, the other fact is that, not all of them are guaranteed competent. If we want to be consistent with the motto above, we have to fight for that. It does not mean that we intentionally wear clothes “messily” in order to be consistent with the motto, but actually, we do not have to be afraid to wear something we like even though most people consider it improper unless we do neither say nor believe in that motto which often “fills the air”. If we do (say and believe it), than it is our responsibility to change most people’s paradigm about how to valuate someone; show them that it is not what we wear which determine our competence, but what we have in our brain and our heart.

The forth consideration is students’ comfort when they study such material. Some lecturers argue that as candidates of educators, students of PBI have to be ready to be models for their students. That is why they need to dress neatly and properly because they need to educate their students later to dress that way. But have we ever asked: why do we need to dress that way and influence others to dress the same? Is there any significance of dressing neatly and properly with good learning process? Is not it more important to increase students motivation instead of worrying about clothes they must wear? Why do not we teach students with informal clothes? In Europe, most of schools absolve the students to wear any clothes they like, not impose them to wear uniform during their studying process in school. But there are still many intellectuals “produced” from that continent. It does not mean that those continent is better than our country (because we also have many intellectuals), but it proves that there is no indication of significance of formality with intellectuality. Google and Facebook as two of the biggest companies in the world absolve their employees to dress informally. In Oprah Winfrey Show the employees of Google even state that this is one of the reasons of their good ethos of working: they feel homey by dressing that way. A book titled “Belok Kiri Jalan Terus (Turn Left Go Ahead)” writes that Ivan Illich, a progressive intellectual, in his book “Descholing Society” criticizes education which emphasizes confession rather than knowledge (p. 46). Thus if the way we dress becomes a requirement of attending class, we can be considered emphasizing confession rather than knowledge because before getting knowledge, a student must be confessed neat by his/her lecturers. If we do not want to be categorized as someone who put confession above knowledge, we, as either students or lecturers, must put the content of the lesson above the clothes we wear.

There have been explanations about why dressing formally needs to be considered again. First is the neatness effect from the formal dress someone wears is subjective. Second is that the demand to wear formal dress is a discrimination of someone’s right to express them selves through the way they dress. Third is formal dress does not guarantee someone’s competence. The fourth is the knowledge and comfort to achieve it are actually more important in learning process rather than the confession that someone dress neatly, properly, formally or not. From those explanations, the demand mentioned from the beginning of this writing has potency to be ended soon by both students and lecturers.

ARE YOU SURE YOU ARE A PUNKER?

Sebuah tulisan polos-kategoris tentang 'pengguna' punk. Sebuah tugas pada mata kuliah Short Essay Writing.

Punk is popularly known as one of genre of music which has specific characteristic. This music is one of the branches of rock music. The beat of punk is usually dense. Its lyrics are critical and explicit. Musically, punk is a kind of music which is really simple because we usually only need to play three chords in the hole song. There are still other characteristic of punk music, but we are not going to talk about them further. However, punk is actually more than just music. Punk is a subculture emerged in Britain as a result of rebellion of working class. Punk phenomenon did not only influence music world, but also influencing fashion and life style. Before becoming popular, punk as the way of dressing used to be something strange and impolite. But nowadays, this way of dressing becomes popular. Even though, there is still big difference between popular and original way of punk-dressing. While punk as the way of dressing changes, punk life style does not. This life style of punk is not as popular as either punk music or fashion of punk. In Indonesia, punk nowadays becomes something popular. It is proven by the more music and fashion of punk which is applied by its teenagers. Considering this phenomenon, we can divide punkers into three biggest parts: ‘punk dresser’, punk musicians, and ‘punk life-styler’.

Punk dressers are those who usually dress like punkers although they have little or no knowledge about punk. Not only not knowing punk history, but worse: not knowing even punk music. Some of them consider the way they dress as ‘fashion only’. Thus, not all of them know how punk music is. Some of them even love melancholic music. For this kind of people, fashion of punk is separated to its music. However the way they dress is much more casual than punker used to be. As an addition, not all of the punk dressers not knowing anything about punk.

We also have punk musicians. These people usually concerned to play punk as the genre of them or their band. They know punk as music and it means they automatically know how to dress as punkers. Nevertheless, not all of them really understand the idea of punk, especially punk as the way to rebel. That is why many punk bands write popular lyrics which focuses on feeling or love. This is not how punkers used to write lyrics because punkers wrote about political, social or even critical global issues. Some bands deciding not to write punk lyrics as it used to be because they are not brave enough to take risk to be not as popular as other bands write popular lyrics.

The last category is ‘punk life-styler’. This is the hardest category of all because to be this category you must live with punk life style. One of it is living in the street. Even though most of this kind of punker do not play music, they know idea about punk well because they understand the idea of punk as the way to rebel, especially the way to rebel to society. If not, they might not want to live in the street with no permanent job, home, and clear prospect of life. Most people in society considering them as scum whereas those punkers might know many things about society better than the society itself. Not all of street punkers live in street in the whole of their life. Some stop and decide to do something better for the changes of society.

If you consider your self as a punker, you better consider which criteria you have and which punker you are. The real punker is actually they who know how to dress, how punk music is, and how punk lives. Above all, that knowledge is nothing if you do not understand any ideas about punk. So now, are you sure you are a punker?