Unity in diversity: the religious, political, and cultural faces of Pancasila
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pancasila, the five core principles proclaimed at the founding of the modern Indonesian nation-state, has served as a unifying concept and the bedrock of Indonesians shared nationhood. This paper traces the evolution of Pancasila as the enduring state ideology from its consolidation during the Soekarno era and sweeping expansion under the New Order regime to its decline and subsequent revival during and after the democratic transition. I argue that Pancasila is central to Indonesias unity in diversity. It emerged as what scholars aptly describe as an empty signifier, an inclusive and all-encompassing ideological vehicle that leaves room for diverse and often competing interpretations. This interpretive flexibility allows religious, political, and cultural groups within Indonesian society to pursue distinct goals under the banner of Pancasila without deviating from or undermining the states ideological unity. It facilitates the formation of imagined communities, through which divergent views and interests are represented, reconciled, and legitimized by the Pancasila state. The imagination is both singular and plural: while groups such as secular nationalists, conservative Muslims, New Order elites, democrats, and Javanists build solidarity within their respective, self-contained communities, they collectively submit to and willingly adhere to a unified and sovereign Indonesian nationhood in which different voices are acknowledged and accommodated.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".