PPKN Grade 10: Cara Pandang Para Pendiri Bangsa
Your class notes cover Pancasila, BPUPKI, the religion-state debate, Wawasan Nusantara, and the founding fathers’ different viewpoints. This guide helps you understand how those pieces connect — not just what each figure said, but why the differences mattered and how the final outcomes were reached.
The founding of Indonesia was not a smooth, unanimous decision. It was a debate. Different people, with different backgrounds and different visions, sat in the same room and argued about what kind of country Indonesia should be. Understanding cara pandang para pendiri bangsa — the perspectives of the founding fathers — means understanding that debate. Not just the conclusions, but the disagreements that led to them.
What This Guide Covers
Historical Context — Why 1945 Mattered
Japan had been occupying Indonesia since 1942. By 1945, it was losing the war. Needing Indonesian support, Japan promised independence and created the institutional structure to make it happen. That structure gave Indonesia’s political leaders — for the first time under occupation — a formal forum to debate what the new country would look like.
The pressure was real. There was no guarantee Japan would keep its promises. There was no certainty about when the war would end. And there were genuine, deep disagreements between Indonesia’s leaders about the philosophical foundation of the new state. They had weeks, not years, to resolve those disagreements.
In PPKN Grade 10, cara pandang means more than just “opinion.” It refers to the systematic worldview — shaped by education, ideology, religion, and political goals — that each founding father brought to the debate. Understanding cara pandang means understanding why each figure held their position, not just what that position was. Assignments that only list what each person said miss the deeper analytical requirement.
BPUPKI Formally Established
Badan Penyelidik Usaha Persiapan Kemerdekaan Indonesia formed by Japan under Lt. Gen. Harada. Dr. Radjiman Wedyodiningrat appointed chairman.
First BPUPKI Session Begins — Moh. Yamin Speaks
Radjiman’s opening question: “What will be the philosophical foundation of the new Indonesian state?” Moh. Yamin delivers the first formal proposal for Pancasila.
Soepomo Presents His Integralistic Vision
Soepomo argues against both the individualistic Western model and the Islamic state model, proposing a unified national community based on the family principle.
Soekarno Delivers His Five Principles Speech
Soekarno names the five principles “Pancasila” — the word he borrows from Sanskrit. He also proposes condensed versions: Trisila and Ekasila (Gotong Royong).
Jakarta Charter (Piagam Jakarta) Signed
The Committee of Nine — including Soekarno, Hatta, Yamin, and Islamic leaders — produces a compromise document. The first principle includes the controversial seven-word clause on Islamic law.
Pancasila Finalised — Seven Words Removed
One day after Proklamasi, Moh. Hatta negotiates the removal of the seven-word Islamic law clause from the Jakarta Charter. Pancasila is adopted in its current form.
BPUPKI and PPKI — Roles and Differences
Students often confuse these two bodies. They had different functions and operated at different stages of the independence process.
BPUPKI
Badan Penyelidik Usaha Persiapan Kemerdekaan Indonesia (Investigating Body for the Preparation of Indonesian Independence)
- Formed: 29 April 1945
- 62 Indonesian members + 7 Japanese advisors
- Function: investigate and deliberate on the philosophical and legal foundations of the new state
- Key sessions: May–June 1945 (state philosophy) and July 1945 (constitution)
- Output: draft constitution and Pancasila formulation proposals
PPKI
Panitia Persiapan Kemerdekaan Indonesia (Preparatory Committee for Indonesian Independence)
- Formed: 7 August 1945 — after BPUPKI was dissolved
- 27 members, chaired by Soekarno
- Function: finalise and formally adopt the constitution, state philosophy, and government structure
- Met: 18 August 1945 — one day after Proklamasi
- Output: final Pancasila, UUD 1945, and appointment of first president and vice president
BPUPKI generated proposals and debates. The founding fathers’ competing cara pandang were aired there. PPKI was the decision-making body. It was PPKI, meeting on 18 August 1945, that formally adopted the Pancasila and UUD 1945 — including Hatta’s last-minute modification removing the Jakarta Charter’s seven-word clause. When writing assignments, be precise about which body, which date, and which action you are describing.
Moh. Yamin’s Perspective
Muhammad Yamin was a poet, lawyer, and historian. His cara pandang was shaped by a deep nationalism rooted in Indonesian history and cultural identity. He spoke on 29 May 1945 — the first day of the first BPUPKI session.
Peri Kebangsaan, Peri Kemanusiaan, Peri Ketuhanan, Peri Kerakyatan, Kesejahteraan Rakyat
Yamin’s oral proposal listed five principles during his speech. These covered nationalism, humanity, belief in God, democracy, and social welfare. He then submitted a written proposal — which became controversial because historians have questioned whether the written version was backdated and modified after the fact, inserting principles that appeared more fully developed than the speech they supposedly accompanied.
Why this matters for assignments: The controversy around Yamin’s written proposal is a well-known historiographical debate in Indonesian civics. Your assignment may ask you to compare the oral and written versions, or to evaluate the reliability of historical sources from this period. The key analytical point is that the final Pancasila does not directly quote Yamin’s formulation — it reflects a synthesis of the entire debate, particularly Soekarno’s contributions.Soepomo’s Integralistic State
Soepomo was a legal scholar trained in Dutch and Javanese legal traditions. His speech on 31 May 1945 was philosophically the most distinctive of the three main contributions. He rejected both Western liberal individualism and Islamic theocracy, proposing something he called the integralistic state (negara integralistik).
The State as a Single Unified Family — Not a Contract Between Individuals
Soepomo argued that the correct model for Indonesia was not the Western liberal state — where the state exists to protect individual rights — nor the Islamic state — where the state enforces religious law. Instead, the state should be understood as a single national community, analogous to a family, where the leader and the people are unified in a shared purpose. This drew on Javanese political philosophy and German legal thought (he cited Spinoza and Adam Müller).
Assignment application: Soepomo’s concept is often tested against Soekarno’s. The key difference is that Soekarno’s Pancasila preserved pluralism — it made room for different religions, cultures, and political views within a single national framework. Soepomo’s integralistic state merged the individual into the collective in a way that critics have argued left no space for dissent. This tension is an important analytical point for any essay comparing the founding fathers’ visions.Soekarno’s Five Principles
Soekarno’s speech on 1 June 1945 is the most celebrated and most directly connected to the Pancasila as it exists today. He was the one who named it “Pancasila” — combining the Sanskrit words panca (five) and sila (principles or foundations).
Kebangsaan, Internasionalisme (Perikemanusiaan), Mufakat (Demokrasi), Kesejahteraan Sosial, Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa
Soekarno’s five principles placed nationalism first, not religion. This was deliberate. He argued that Indonesia’s extraordinary diversity — hundreds of ethnic groups, multiple religions, vast geography — required a foundation broad enough to include everyone. Kebangsaan (Indonesian nationhood) was not a narrow ethnic concept; it was an inclusive civic identity. Ketuhanan (belief in God) was placed last in his original speech, though it was moved to first position in the final Pancasila adopted in August 1945.
The three versions Soekarno proposed:Pancasila: Five principles as above.
Trisila (Three Principles): Socio-nationalism, socio-democracy, and Ketuhanan — a condensed version.
Ekasila (One Principle): Gotong Royong (mutual cooperation) — the irreducible essence he believed unified all five.
The final Pancasila keeps the five-principle structure but reorders them, with Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa as the first principle.
Soekarno’s Pancasila survived because it was genuinely inclusive — it gave each major group (nationalists, Islamic groups, socialists, regionalists) something they could accept, without requiring any of them to completely subordinate their identity. It was a political and philosophical achievement. The debate over Ketuhanan’s position — first or last — reflected exactly that tension between religious and secular-nationalist visions for the state.
Moh. Hatta and the Jakarta Charter
Muhammad Hatta was less a philosopher than a pragmatist and a democrat. His most significant contribution to Pancasila’s final form was not made in a speech — it was made in a quiet negotiation on the morning of 18 August 1945.
Seven Words That Could Have Fractured Indonesia
The Jakarta Charter (Piagam Jakarta), signed on 22 June 1945 as a compromise document, included the phrase “dengan kewajiban menjalankan syariat Islam bagi pemeluk-pemeluknya” — meaning Muslim Indonesians would be obligated to follow Islamic law. The day after Proklamasi on 17 August, Hatta was informed that Christian leaders in eastern Indonesia (particularly from what is now Eastern Indonesia/NTT/NTB/Papua regions) were considering separation if that clause remained. Indonesia was not even 24 hours old.
What Hatta did: On the morning of 18 August, before the PPKI session that would finalise the constitution, Hatta personally approached Islamic leaders — including Ki Bagus Hadikusumo and Teuku Mohammad Hassan — and persuaded them to accept the removal of the seven-word clause. In its place, the first principle became simply “Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa” (Belief in the One Almighty God). This formulation was broad enough to encompass all monotheistic faiths and, by extension, all recognised religions in Indonesia.The Religion and State Debate
This is the central tension in the founding fathers’ cara pandang and appears in almost every PPKN exam on this topic. There were three broad positions.
Islamic State Position
Led by figures including Ki Bagus Hadikusumo and various BPUPKI delegates from Islamic organisations. Indonesia’s Muslim majority, they argued, meant the state should have an Islamic foundation — at minimum, that Syariat Islam should apply to Muslims. The Jakarta Charter’s seven-word clause was their compromise position.
Secular-Nationalist Position
Held by Soekarno, Hatta, and others. Indonesia’s diversity made a state based on any single religion untenable — it would exclude and alienate non-Muslim citizens. The solution was Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa: a principle affirming religious belief without specifying which religion or imposing any faith’s legal code.
Integralistic Position
Soepomo’s view sat outside both camps. He did not want an Islamic state, but he also did not want Western-style liberal secularism. His unified national community model would have accommodated religion as part of national culture rather than as state law — but his model was not adopted in practice.
The official Kemendikbud textbook for Grade 10 Pancasila Education, authored by Abdul Waidl et al. and available via the national education portal (static.buku.kemdikbud.go.id), devotes Chapter 1 to the mapping of founding fathers’ ideas (peta pemikiran para pendiri bangsa). It explicitly identifies the three main BPUPKI speakers — Yamin, Soepomo, and Soekarno — and analyses how their different philosophical foundations (nationalism, integralism, and pluralistic Pancasilaism) shaped the final outcome. This is the primary source for any PPKN assignment on this topic and can be cited directly by students.
How the Final Pancasila Was Shaped
The Pancasila adopted on 18 August 1945 was not identical to any single founding father’s proposal. It was a synthesis — shaped by the debate, by the compromise of the Jakarta Charter, and by Hatta’s critical last-minute intervention.
| Founding Father | Position in Process | Key Contribution | What Was Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|
| Moh. Yamin | First speaker, 29 May 1945 | Proposed five principles including Ketuhanan (God) and Kebangsaan (Nationalism) in a framework oriented toward Indonesia’s historical identity | His emphasis on national identity and social welfare contributed to the debate’s scope, but his specific formulation was not directly adopted |
| Soepomo | Speaker, 31 May 1945 | Argued for the integralistic state based on national unity and family principles; rejected both liberal and Islamic state models | The rejection of Western liberal individualism influenced the Pancasila’s emphasis on community values, though the integralistic model itself was not adopted |
| Soekarno | Speaker, 1 June 1945; Chairman of Committee of Nine | Proposed the five principles by name, coined “Pancasila,” and argued for an inclusive national philosophy capable of accommodating Indonesia’s diversity | The five-principle structure, the name Pancasila, and the inclusive pluralistic philosophy were directly incorporated into the final version |
| Moh. Hatta | Vice Chairman PPKI; member Committee of Nine | Negotiated the removal of the Jakarta Charter’s seven-word Islamic law clause on the morning of 18 August 1945 | The final first principle — “Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa” — reflects his negotiated compromise, making Pancasila religiously inclusive rather than specifically Islamic |
NKRI — Negara Kesatuan Republik Indonesia
The choice of a unitary republic (NKRI) over a federal state was itself a significant founding decision — and not everyone agreed with it initially.
Why Unitary, Not Federal?
Hatta initially favoured a federal system, arguing it would better accommodate Indonesia’s regional diversity. But the majority — led by Soekarno and supported by most BPUPKI members — chose a unitary state. Their reasoning: federalism might allow colonial-era divisions (the Dutch had used federal structures to divide and weaken the independence movement) to persist. A unitary state would prevent regional fragmentation and ensure uniform national development.
The Paradox of Unity in Diversity
NKRI’s motto — Bhinneka Tunggal Ika (Unity in Diversity) — captures the founding paradox. The state is unitary and centralised, but the nation it governs is extraordinarily diverse. How you manage that tension defines much of Indonesian political history from 1945 onward: regional rebellions in the 1950s, the shift to Guided Democracy, the New Order’s centralisation, and post-Reformasi decentralisation all reflect ongoing negotiations between central authority and regional identity.
Wawasan Nusantara
Wawasan Nusantara — literally “archipelagic outlook” — is the geopolitical worldview that defines how Indonesia understands its own territory and national interests. It is connected to the founding fathers’ visions but was formalised later.
Indonesia Is Not a Collection of Islands. It Is One Nation Made of Islands.
This distinction is everything. The founding fathers rejected the idea that Indonesia’s 17,000+ islands and the seas between them were separate entities that happened to share a government. Instead, they asserted that the land, sea, and airspace of the archipelago constituted a single, indivisible national territory. The political, economic, social, cultural, and security dimensions of the nation must all be understood as a unified whole.
The Djuanda Declaration, 1957: Prime Minister Djuanda’s declaration of 13 December 1957 was the legal expression of this outlook. It asserted that the waters between Indonesia’s islands were internal waters under full Indonesian sovereignty — not international waters as Western nations claimed. This was controversial internationally and was eventually recognised by UNCLOS (the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea) in 1982. For PPKN assignments, the Djuanda Declaration is the key historical anchor for Wawasan Nusantara.Four Aspects of Wawasan Nusantara
- Political unity: One people, one nation, one state — NKRI
- Economic unity: Natural resources distributed for the benefit of all Indonesians, not just regional populations
- Social-cultural unity: Ethnic and cultural diversity as national strength (Bhinneka Tunggal Ika), not a source of fragmentation
- Defence and security unity: Threats to any part of the archipelago are threats to the whole nation
Connection to Pancasila
Wawasan Nusantara is not separate from Pancasila — it is built on it. The third principle, Persatuan Indonesia (Unity of Indonesia), is the philosophical foundation for the Wawasan Nusantara outlook. The argument is that you cannot have a genuine unity of diverse peoples and territories without a shared geopolitical understanding of what the national territory actually is and what it means.
Comparing the Four Founding Perspectives
This table is useful for essay planning. Assignments that ask you to “compare the perspectives of two or more founding fathers” need you to identify specific differences — not just list what each person said.
| Dimension | Moh. Yamin | Soepomo | Soekarno | Moh. Hatta |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Role of religion | Included Ketuhanan but within a nationalist framework | Religion as part of national culture, not state law | Ketuhanan last in original speech; inclusive, not specific to Islam | Removed the Islamic law clause; insisted on religious pluralism |
| Individual vs. collective | Nationalist collective identity; history-oriented | Fully collective — individual dissolves into national family | Collective national identity preserving internal pluralism | Democratic — individual rights within collective national framework |
| State structure preference | Not explicitly detailed; nationalist republic implied | Unified integralistic state; no role for oppositional politics | Democratic republic with strong national philosophy | Initially favoured federalism; accepted unitary structure as compromise |
| Intellectual tradition | Indonesian historical nationalism; literary background | Dutch and Javanese legal thought; German philosophy | Western democratic philosophy; Marxist influence; Indonesian nationalism | Western economics; democratic socialism; Islamic modernism |
| Legacy in Pancasila | Indirect — contributed to range of the debate | Community values; rejection of liberal individualism | Core structure, name, and inclusive pluralistic philosophy | Final formulation of Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa; religious neutrality |
Assignment and Exam Technique for This Topic
The most common mistake in PPKN assignments on this topic is treating the founding fathers’ perspectives as a simple list of facts. “Soekarno proposed five principles” is a fact. An assignment answer needs more than that.
Listing Without Analysing
Writing “Yamin proposed peri kebangsaan, peri kemanusiaan, peri ketuhanan, peri kerakyatan, and kesejahteraan rakyat” answers a recall question. Most assignments are not recall questions.
Connecting to Cara Pandang
Explain the worldview behind the proposal: “Yamin’s emphasis on Indonesia’s historical and cultural identity reflected his background as a historian and his belief that the new state’s legitimacy should be grounded in indigenous tradition rather than imported Western or Islamic frameworks.”
Treating the Final Pancasila as Inevitable
“Soekarno proposed Pancasila and it was adopted.” This collapses a genuinely contested political process into a single sentence. It misses the Jakarta Charter, the seven-word debate, Hatta’s intervention, and the near-fracture of Indonesia on 18 August.
Showing the Contingency
Explain that the final Pancasila required compromise at multiple stages — the BPUPKI debate, the Jakarta Charter compromise, and Hatta’s last-minute negotiation. A different outcome at any of those points would have produced a different Indonesia. That contingency is the point.
Conflating Wawasan Nusantara With NKRI
NKRI is the form of state (unitary republic). Wawasan Nusantara is the geopolitical outlook — how Indonesia understands its territory and national interests. They are related but not the same concept.
Distinguishing the Concepts Precisely
NKRI is the constitutional decision: a unitary state, not a federal one. Wawasan Nusantara is the territorial and geopolitical philosophy that followed: asserting that the archipelago, including its seas, constitutes a single indivisible national territory with unified political, economic, social, and security interests.
What a Strong Essay on Cara Pandang Para Pendiri Bangsa Needs to Include
Frequently Asked Questions
Humanities assignment help · History homework help · Critical analysis paper writing · Political science assignment help · Sociology assignment help · Essay writing services · Research paper writing services
Before You Start Writing
Identify what your assignment is actually asking. “Explain the perspectives of the founding fathers on Pancasila” is a different question from “Analyse the debate about religion and the state in BPUPKI.” The first needs a structured account of each figure’s position. The second needs you to map the competing arguments, explain the stakes, and show how the compromise was reached.
Both questions need you to know the same material. The difference is in how you deploy it. Get clear on the question before you start writing — not halfway through.
The primary academic source for this topic is the official Kemendikbud Grade 10 Pancasila Education textbook (Pendidikan Pancasila Kelas X, Kurikulum Merdeka), authored by Abdul Waidl et al., available at static.buku.kemdikbud.go.id. This government-issued textbook constitutes the authoritative curriculum source for all Grade 10 PPKN assignments on cara pandang para pendiri bangsa, BPUPKI, and the formation of Pancasila. It is freely available and directly citable.
Need Help With Your PPKN or Civics Assignment?
Our academic writing team supports humanities and social studies students on essays, analysis papers, critical thinking assignments, and all written coursework.
Humanities Assignment Help Get Started