Liberation through culture

The speech that Sukarno gives at Bandung in 1955 is well fitting for the president of a newly sovereign country, it is inspirational and optimistic and focuses on uniting the leaders of Asia and Africa on the basis of their shared struggle for independence. What is perhaps most notable in Sukarno’s speech, especially when read alongside the words of Amilcar Cabral, is his emphasis on religion: it’s origins in these lands and the diversity of religion both within Indonesia and the countries being addressed. Sukarno notes that “religion is of dominating importance particularly in this part of world” and for the most part he is correct; what stands out is how his importance for religion parallels with Cabral’s use of culture as a force of liberation and unity for the African people.

Cabral discusses culture as a force of liberation for it is a manifestation of the historical and material of the indigenous society and its peoples, and is that not what religion is? The same oppression of culture that takes place under the colonial regime; that same oppression is enforced on religious organization and expression. For the religious ideas, whether they are Muslim or Buddhist or Hindu, they remind the colonized of their own civilization and its desires. In the same way that tribal chieftains and urban intellectuals are co-opted by the colonial regime to aid their domination, religious and spiritual leaders are materially incentivized to start preaching what the colonizer practices. Is this manipulation of the religious strata of society not a cultural oppression in itself?

Moreover, culture is incomplete without religion; when we look at a society, we can see that many of its cultural traditions and norms are deeply influenced by religion and this influence extends beyond the surface. It shapes everyday life and transactions. This is especially true of many postcolonial societies whose cultural evolution was obstructed by colonialism itself. In such societies, the influence of religion expanded because of colonialism, as the indigenous people struggled to hold on to their identity in the face of imperial conquest.

The persistence of religion in colonies is also a testament to the similarities between it and culture, and Cabral’s note of how African culture has survived resonates with the establishment and perseverance of religion, particularly in the subcontinent, where it was a Muslim rule that was overtaken by colonialism. The development of religion also takes place in a similar framework to culture, with differences between the urban elite and rural masses manifesting in the different interpretations of belief and the divergence in ritual practices. The petty bourgeoisie see their ideas on religion as infinitely more truthful and “correct” compared to how religion becomes a “cheap stunt” when it comes to the rituals adopted by the masses.

While Sukarno and Cabral discuss the same liberation and Cabral’s thoughts on culture are similar to Sukarno’s on religion, they do ultimately differ in their desires. While Cabral sees the armed struggle and overthrow of colonial powers as inevitable and indeed necessary for freedom, Sukarno understands that the colonizers in possession of unconventional warfare must be respected and that peace must prevail over war. Perhaps in Cabral’s narrative, that might place Sukarno as the co-opted elite.