ON PRAGMATISM

Swadi Sual

The word ‘pragmatic’ is always used to refer of a person or community characteristic

that tend negative because they want to get everything in the simple way and out of
procedures. In politics, pragmatic is associated with effort to have something in all possible
way, even not legal or procedural, as in Machiavellian’s view. In the same case the word
‘opportunist’ has same destiny in the politics term. The people who take advantage of occasions
to have save position are called opportunist. These two words, pragmatist and opportunist, are
conversed with the word ‘idealist’ that refer to people who want to realize the ideas
consequently. In the revolutionary left activists circle those two words has a negative
connotation.
Pragmatism is assumed have similar meaning with pragmatist; it is true if we go check
in the thesaurus. But we need to exhume deeply the meaning for understanding how the
language works in social life. Pragmatism is a philosophy that was grown in United States of
America started from Charles Sanders Pierce (1839 – 1914) continued by William James (1842
– 1910). In their terminology, pragmatism is the way finding the truth not in ideas but in the
practical reality; so the truth of idea has a practical consequences. The truth of ideas must be
proved in practical reality and if it works then the evidence will be seen as the value part of
idea; but if it failed then we must look for another new idea. However, pragmatism related with
utilitarianism in perspective that the truth must have value of utility. The thing is true if it has
useful capacity for human life.
It is sure that pragmatism is always conversed with discourse of Marxism that tends
idealistic, positioned the reality on the idea and theory, because pragmatism was found and
grown in the giant capitalistic state of America. But in his writing, William James found that the
word ‘pragmatism’ and ‘practice’ has same root1 by the explanation of Pierce in the 1878.
Pragmatism is grown and popular in the US, the symbol of individualistic and global capitalism.
Otherwise, the word ‘practice’ (praxis) is found in the discourse of Marxism as a practical
philosophy (the philosophy of praxis). So, what is the similarity between pragmatism and the
practical philosophy? Karl Marx (1818 – 1883) in the Theses on Feuerbach section 11,

“The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point, however, is to
change it. ...”2

The critique of Marx toward philosophy tradition, same as on his critique to Proudhon in The
Poverty of Philosophy, was the stagnation of metaphysic ideas which no utilities to change the
situation of workers (proletariat). Based on materialism, Marx intended to use philosophy to

1
The word 'pragmatic' taken from Ancient Greek prāgmatikos from word pragma that mean act or prattein means
to do. In Latin prāgmaticus.
2
“Para filsuf menginterpretasikan dunia dalam berbagai cara tetapi yang terpenting adalah mengubahnya.” This
thesis became the anvil of Marxism for practical philosophy.
build a mass consciousness to make social revolution. He was anti ideology because on that
time ideology has a meaning of knowledge that covered the awareness of society3. But last his
doctrines becoming ideology called Marxism which many people believe in fanatically. Whereas
it is contrary with the materialism dialectic law that idea always related with the material
change.
Marxism got critiques for becoming static (rigid) doctrine and oracular as described by
Karl Popper (1902 – 1994) in his book The Open Society and Its Enemies. Popper suggested an
improvisation (fix and repair) of society adapted with the need of time and situation. In deeply
understanding it is same with the law of historic materialism and materialism dialectic. But
Marxism moved away from its principles. Moreover, Marx has inconsistency on his life periods;
that’s why the historian divided his thought in young and old Marx. Young represents the
critical, anti-ideology, and liberal-radical thoughts. The old one represents the ideological
thoughts where his writing with Friedrich Engels (1820 – 1895) about Communist Manifesto
becoming the anvil of left movements.
The failures of communist states become precedent for research of capitalist states to
claim the truth of pragmatism and liberal democracy is better. The communist failure was
viewed as the evidence that ideology is irrelevant. The left people who believe in revolution are
seen as the people who don’t understand the real situation. In pragmatist perspective, people
has no to sustain on the ideas that was proven as failed and wrong. What we need to do is to
find the new idea that more useful and relevant. Maybe it is like Indonesian people who
sustained in old ideologies and keep praise and glorify even though without real impact for
society4.
In this case we must see how China became pragmatist by doing new economic policy
(NEP) . After the Culture Revolution in Mao’s time which seen as uncivilized, Deng Xiaoping
5

(1904 – 1997) remarked in pragmatic meaning,

”No matter what color the cat is, as long as it can catch rats!”

China’s government that still hold single party of communist have realized about the real
situation6. They don’t sustain in rigid ideology to make economic and politic policies. The
orientation of economic and politic is adapted in the principle of utility and not on ideological
fanaticism. China’s political system still hold in communism certainly has utility for their social
real life while the economic system is opened to the wide world. It is totally different of what
Soviet-Union did under the government of Mikhail Gorbachev with Perestroika and Glasnost.
Russia is saved but Soviet-Union ruined by this politic and economic reformation. This is a
precedent of incapable to adapt.

3
This is referring to the old culture like feudalism.
4
For the deeply discussion about critical ideology in Indonesia find in the book Negara Sebenarnya (The True State)
written by Benni E. Matindas.
5
In Soviet-Union this policy had used in the period transition where government let the private economic and not
giving total intervention in economic activities.
6
But long time ago Japan have become pragmatist in the time of Meiji’s Restoration; the modernization of Japan.
 I am trying to find relation between pragmatism and Marxism which in popular seen as
two contrary paradigm. Marx sent his book about political-economy (Das Capital) to Darwin, in
faith, that his works are suitable with evolution principles, but being refused by the England
naturalist. We can find also in the capitalism discourse the terms from naturalist about
individuality and the competition in the wild world as the natural destiny of creatures. Charles
Darwin (1809 – 1882) remarked,

“It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the one most
responsive to change.”7

In Darwin’s view, the species who responsive of change (adapt) will survive and make
regeneration. Thus, species will vanish or perish if they have incapability to adapt in new
situation of nature. This approach also can be used for human species in the situation of state
and ideology (social Darwinism?). What I mean to say here is pragmatism and the philosophy of
praxis is relevant in the nature of creatures.
But why pragmatic/pragmatism has negative impression especially in political discourse
in Indonesia. Let us analyze how this word is used referring the bad political attitude. The
pragmatists tend to abandon the values of ideology and morality also sacrificing many people to
take personal or community advantage/profit. Pragmatism in person: someone who
sacrificing other and doesn’t care of norms and ideal value for chasing private advantage.
Pragmatism in community: sacrificing another community and abandon the norms and
value of morality to got community advantage.
Individual pragmatism can be found everywhere, in the business activity or in politics
activities. The competition seems like in wild world struggling to survive. Everything will be
sacrificed to survive. Just like in communal pragmatism that build solidarity for business and
politic interest. Person or community will be seen as pragmatic of not represent their identities.
For instance, a person who came from tribe or religion that identified has integrity, honesty,
revolutionary, and pious characteristic but in real life choosing to prostitute in the practical
activities for getting financial profit. Or, we found there is a party which has religion ideology
but the practical politics are anomaly far from the norms and morality of religion; ex. Doing
corruption or receiving sex gratification.
US use the pragmatism perspective in their abroad policy for getting profit and
advantage for the country. For example, US will support monarchy or despotism in a some
countries as long as it is useful for their position. Otherwise, they will attack the country, even
democratic, if contrary with their abroad policy or their interest. Iraq can be a precedent that
destroyed by US when making oil embargo; but before they were friend. Saddam Hussein who
changed against US became enemy that must be perished. How about Russia, China, and North
Korea? Maybe US think these countries has nuclear weapon and solid, so it is not useful to
offense them.

7
“Bukan spesies paling kuat ataupun memiliki intelejensia yang bisa bertahan hidup tetapi mereka yang paling bisa
menyesuaikan dengan perubahan.”
 In Indonesia pragmatism is used in personal and community level which no advantage
for the whole country. A personal ambition to get position and money can be reason to sacrifice
the people and state. Corruption, collusion, nepotism, gratification colored the practical politics
of the state. The political parties only provide the service of political transportation and force
the passengers to give some money. The orientation of its pragmatism is the advantage for
personal or community. Certainly this is not same with US, China, Japan, and Russia to practice
pragmatism. The political leaders in Indonesia sacrificing the people for getting personal and
community advantage/profit. The Indonesian’s practical politics is away from the pragmatism in
the true way. Contrary the norms and potential values for getting advantage together is
abandoned for personal and community.
Maybe Indonesia’s politician did no able to see the relation utility of the conception for
the whole social interest. Because there is also various programs imitate from other country but
failed to apply in Indonesia. Is this about cultural aspect that not suitable with imported ideas
or our society has no ability for adaptation.[]

Note: this is re-written from Indonesian version.