Philosophical Review on the Meaning of the Term “Four Pillars” of MPR RI

The use of the term “Four Pillars” by the People's Consultative Assembly of the Republic of Indonesia (MPR RI) since the end of 2009 has generated numerous debates in Indonesian political life. The term of Four Pillars that consists of Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, NKRI (Unitary State of the Republik of Indonesia), and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika (Unity in Diversity) is aﬀected by the essence, meaning, and understanding of the four in their original meanings. This research aims to examine and analysis on the philosophical problem of Four Pillars terms in the context of philosophy of language especially in the context of contestation of meaning and the essence of Four Pillars term in public discourse and debate. The research was conducted in 2014 to 2018 through literature studies in Yogyakarta. The research fnds that the term of “four pillars” since it was produced by political elites through the public education program has degraded and legitimized the meaning of Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, NKRI (Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia), and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika (Unity in Diversity). Philosophically, the use of term of four pillars for public education to introduce national insight conducted by the People's Consultative Assembly of the Republic of Indonesia has distorting of meaning and displacing of meaning of Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, NKRI, and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika. The term of “four pillars” is also not yet known in this history or by the public.


INTRODUCTION
The development of the use of political language in Indonesia is an interesting and important subject to observe. In Indonesia, the formation and usage of the language of politics has experienced significant changes.
This research analyzes the development, dynamics, and change of political language used in Indonesia, especially concerning the ideology, state, citizen, national identity and mass communication. The role of language has become very significant in the process of forming the identity of a nation, the meaning of reality, representation, and the formation of knowledge (Harrison, 2009(Harrison, , p. 1084. In the context of the history of policy and the use of political language in Indonesia during the colonial period, the political language was produced and formed by the colonizers. The Dutch and Japanese political languages had various structures, shapes and roles. For example, the names of laws and governmental structures in the Dutch colonial era were much influenced by the Dutch language and the concept of political language then used in the Dutch state. Similarly, the political language used by the Japanese military's Preparatory Committee for Indonesian Independence was affected by Japanese terminology. This research is a part of a dissertation research focusing on how the language policy has been shaped by political elites in producing political language since the postreform era. In particular, this research examines the use of the term "Four Pillars of the Nation and State" referring to the national philosophy of Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, the unity of the state abbreviated as NKRI, and the national motto Bhinneka Tunggal Ika (Unity in Diversity) through philosophy of language framework. Next, the influences and implications of the political language used by the People's Consultative Assembly of the Republic of Indonesia (MPR RI) in the formation of public knowledge are also analyzed in this research.
The term "Four Pillars" of the Nation and State has sparked a debate in Indonesia. Since the introduction of the Four Pillars of the Nation and State in socialization by the People's Consultative Assembly of the Republic of Indonesia in 2009, this term was considered to be fundamental to the life of the nation and state. The public education campaign which was introduced when Taufiq Kiemas served as a chairman of the People's Consultative Assembly (2009)(2010)(2011)(2012)(2013)(2014), has been criticized and raised numerous debates among the public, academics, and educators. The use of the Four Pillars of the Nation and State has many pros and cons in the context of political, ideological, juridical, and philosophical frameworks for Indonesian life. Kaelan (2012, pp. 16-17) began his criticism toward the Four Pillars of the Nation and State by showing that the term "Four Pillars" contains a fundamental problem with its epistemological system. The arguments which pointed out by Kaelan can be concluded that; first, the Four Pillars of the Nation and the State do not satisfy grammatical or orthodox rules; second, the equalization of the functions of Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, NKRI, and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika assumes they are categorized by the same elements; third, there is a mistake in understanding the knowledge of Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, NKRI, and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika by confusing the values, norms, and life of praxis to those four aspects in the life of society has led to conceptual contradictions, language usage and philosophy. However, in reality, MPR cannot remove this term and must continue to implement the socialization program about it without any efforts to review and correct the use of the term in its socialization program.
Darmanto, in his article on Harian Kedaulatan Rakyat (June 19, 2013, p. 12) entitled "Media and Four Pillars of National Life," explains although linguistically pillar means "base," if it is aligned with Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, NKRI, and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika, it could be a clear mistake. In addition, the impact of a mistake like this by ordinary people would likely not be so great, but when the mistake is made by a respected institution Like the MPR, it certainly cannot be overlooked. Sudjito (2013, p. 11), in his introduction to a September 14, 2013, expert Focus Group Discussion with the title of "Scientific Review Towards the Matter of Dissent As Seen in Four Pillars the Life of Nation and State" gives two critical notes related to the various different opinions about the Four Pillars. First, the term "pillar" is considered not just a matter of linguistics, but also there are scientific dimensions that need to be accounted for as philosophical meaning and ideological implications for the life of nation and state. Second, in the time dimension, formerly, the term "pillar" was not known in the life of the nation and the state, now, it is but controversial. Thus, the scientific argument needs to be sought because it cannot be interpreted as a political communication tool. The use of the term "pillar" in the future so that life has not been seen as a matter consistently related to the life of nation and state.
In the judicial context, the decision of the Second, the term "Four Pillars" raises philosophical problems since it has caused the turmoil of thoughts. It also becomes the main problem of philosophy, for example, the debate about the substance; the source of knowledge; and the value that underlies the Four Pillars. This issue is intriguing to be examined due to its possibility to produce the knowledge gap -between what is supposed to be and the reality that is actually happening. At this time, the term "Four Pillars of the Nation and State" is considered an acceptable truth, possessing a basis of the true authoritative value, and a legitimate ontological basis. Third, the discourse on the position and role of Pancasila as the basis of the state is also debated in the dynamics of the Four Pillars. Based on the results of preliminary studies, it indicates a variety of contradictions related to the existence of the Fourth Pillars of the Nation and State. Forth, the term of the Four Pillars of the Nation and State as material objects in this research needs to be approached with a critical philosophy study approach that has not been done yet. Fifth, the term of the Four Pillars of the Nation and State has not been a scientific study and has been the focus of research in philosophy, law, social science, the humanities, and education. According to that, a comprehensive explanation concerning on the use of the Four Pillars of the life of the Nation and State in society is necessary even though it is still debatable. This research is one of the dissertation research that will reveal the related issues of the political language used by elites in understanding ideas and the ideas about the nation and state in particular state institutions. In this study, we focus on the debate over the meaning of the term four pillars as a problem of philosophy of language.
The researchers then undertake the first methodological step, identifying and classifying the philosophical aspect contained in the selected sources: investigating and inventorying hidden philosophical (ontological, epistemological and axiological) concepts in texts, events, situations and research-related issues. The method of analyzing the data in this study is the interpretation method. We attempt to interpret and reveal the ontological, epistemological, and axiological essence of the existing texts. In particular, this interpretation method is applied to analyze material objects and provide explanatory text related to the material derived from the text of legislation. This method of interpretation in analyzing the text of legislation uses four interpretations: interpretation by language, systematic and logical interpretation, historical interpretation, and comparative interpretation.
First, interpretation by language is a method to establish the meaning of a certain legal provision through the meaning of words and sentences of legal provisions in accordance with the meaning of everyday language. This interpretation is also termed as a grammatical interpretation -the meaning is interpreted based on commonly used grammar. The meaning of words in law is interpreted according to the meaning of the word used, compiled and formed (Rhiti, 2011, p. 230). Second, systematic and logical interpretation is a method which analyzing the meaning of a certain legal provision in relation to other legal provisions in a legislation. In other words, this interpretation is not released from the context of the existing legal system (Rhiti, 2011, p. 230). Third, the historical interpretation aims to analyze the meaning of certain legal provision by linking the provisions of the law with the history of the provisions of the law. Fourth, the comparative interpretation aims to analyze the meaning of by comparing the contents of the law with the contents of other legal provisions (Latif and Ali, 2010, pp. 47-48).
Then, the authentic interpretation is the interpretation that is given formally by the legislator. It can be seen from the explanation of the Act. Elucidation chapter by chapter that it is an authentic interpretation of a law is given by the author outside the text. It is not authentic, although the interpretation is correct (Rhiti, 2011, pp. 230-231). Hermeneutic analysis is used to understand the text that is in the reading. Gracia (1990, p. 496) explains that the text is interpreted as a series of signs that are arranged in a certain way by the author to convey a certain meaning. In particular, the meaning of a text depends on two factors: 1) individual meanings 2) meanings contained in certain sign functions within the composed text.
Hermeneutic analysis basically focuses more on the linguistic aspects in the text, namely, the syntactic aspect that is related to grammatical structure. Semantic aspects which related to symbolic meanings are connotative and denotative. Then pragmatic aspects are associated with the process of formation of words, grouping words, history of writing, the formation of sentences, punctuation, and pronunciation that affect human behavior (Poespoprodjo, 1987, pp. 168-170). Meanwhile, interpretation is a mental process conducted by the interpreter without having to consider the available procedures or techniques. The material object which is studied has two facets of explicit and implicit meanings. This analysis is used to interpret the language in four pillars.
Critical Discourse Analysis or CDA is a kind of analysis which is commonly used to analyze discourse in the text. CDA is a scientific method to determine how "language" or "term" is produced socially. CDA determines the language orientation that a person uses by looking at the judgment of whom the actor is in producing the language, when the language is used, how the arguments are used, and what the ideological direction of the language is (Meyer, 2001, p. 25). Referring to the CDA in the framework of Michel Foucault on the theory of discourse, lays down some epistemological issues of knowledge composed of aspects that are considered valid in a certain spatial and time; how valid knowledge is produced; how such knowledge may also end; what the function of knowledge in legitimizing subject and society is; and what the impact of knowledge is for the entire development of society (Jager, 2009, p. 33).
Semiotics can generally be interpreted as a theory of codes and theory of sign production. Semiotic theory attempts to explain each case about the function of marks within the framework placed on a system relating to one or more codes. The difference between code theory and sign production theory does not necessarily correspond to the distinction between "langue" and "parole", competent and appearance, syntactic and semantic, and pragmatic (Eco 1979, p. 3-4).

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
The term of four pillars as the policy of language made by political elites in the use of political languages such as Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, NKRI and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika has influenced the formation of public knowledge. Since the post-reform era, the use of political language has influenced the knowledge of society in understanding the life of nation and state. Edelman explained that language is a key creator in forming human experience in social life (Edelman, 1985, p. 10). Harrison (2009) also stated that the language policy in Australia has a goal; it is perceived to perform a symbolic function in promoting a unified national identity. (Harrison, 2009(Harrison, , p. 1084.
Various studies and researches related to Pancasila have been done before, but the discourse about Pancasila and the Four Pillars of the Nation and State is debatable. It shows that the tendency of study and research which related to the dynamics is arises from the debate of four pillar concept. As the result, the development of thinking about Pancasila has not changed significantly.
Broadly speaking, discourse aboit Pancasila can be grouped into three main aspects, for instance, a). history and politics, for example, the birth of Pancasila as the foundation of the state, and its position and role in the context of the Four Pillars of the Nation and State that are contradictive to the constitution; b). ideological and religious aspects; and c). Pancasila in art and cultural aspects. Meanwhile, the dynamics of position and scope related to the debate about the Four Pillars of the Nation and State focus more on the issue of Pancasila which is positioned as part of the Pillars of the Nation and State.
Ideology is often identified with nationalism or culture in some colloquial sense. It also can be identified as the anthropologist's culture in one meaning, such as when ideology is said to be the totality of the speakers' common-sense reasoning about all meanings, and/or the language of such reasoning. Famously, ideology is also defined as concerned with beliefs (Martin,2015, p. 11). Just as inclusive as Gramsci's idea that ideology conception of the world that is implicitly manifest in art, law, in economic activity all manifestly individual and collective life" (1971[1929-35], p. 328). Finally, in Hegelian terms, ideology may be "any cognitive system that stems from the order of idea" (Friedrich, 1989, p. 300).

What Is Meant by "Four Pillars MPR RI"?
The term "Four Pillars of the Nation and the State" began to be known since Taufiq Kiemas was chosen by acclamation as chairman of the MPR RI in October 2009. Previously, the People's Consultative Assembly of the Republic of Indonesia never used the term "Four Pillars" in implementing its work agenda. Instead, they used the term "socialization of MPR RI decisions" during the period 2004-2009. The basis for the "socialization of the decisions" by the People's Consultative Assembly of the Republic of Indonesia is the 1945 Constitution. It also includes amendments and the MPR RI decisions deemed necessary to be publicized in order to be known by the public and the state organizers. It is because many people do not know the decisions of the MPR RI (Majelis, 12/ TH.X/December 2016 edition, p. 6). Then, the leadership of MPR changed in 2009 and as a result "socialization of MPR RI decisions" was renamed "socialization of Four Pillars of the Nation and State" during the period of Taufiq Kiemas (2000Kiemas ( -2014. At that time, Taufiq Kiemas was known as the originator and giver of Four Pillars of the Nation and State, which he defined as Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, NKRI and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika. (Majelis, edition 12 / TH.X / December 2016, p.6).
The idea of the need for the socialization of the "Four Pillars of the Nation and State" departs from the various national and state affairs that occurred in Indonesia. The reality becomes the starting point of the concept of the term. Political and social dynamics, since the reform era of 1998, began with the fall of the Soeharto regime days after four students of Trisakti University on 12 May 1998. The reform movement has brought significant changes and has a positive impact on the life of the Nation and State, however, it also brought a number of national challenges that need to be solved (Kiemas, 2013, p. 4).
Since the reform of 1998, many considered Pancasila to have been swallowed by the earth from the life of the multi-ethnic and multi-religious nation. At that time, Indonesia experienced various problems, such as ethnic warfare, conflict between groups and villages, and increasingly rampant corruption. Such events disturbed the life of the nation and the state (Majelis, edition 7 / TH.V / July 2011, p.3). In addition, the content of "the Socialization of the Four Pillars of the Nation and State" is to describe the importance of keeping NKRI by practicing Pancasila, running the constitution, and respecting diversity. Taufiq  After becoming the law, the four pillars of basic consensus finally disappeared and did not appear in the Act and became the Forth Pillar of the Nation and State. Then, the term "Four Pillars of the Nation and State" is used by MPR RI to make political education possible. The work team on the socialization of the Four Pillars of life of the Nation and State from the People's Consultative Assembly states that: "The mention of the Four Pillars of the Nation and State is not intended to mean that the four pillars have the equal standing. Each pillar has different levels, functions, and contexts. In this case, the position of Pancasila remains as the fundamental value of nation and state. Four pillars conception of the Indonesian state is a minimum prerequisite for this nation to be able to stand firm and achieve progress based on personality characteristics of the Indonesian itself. Every citizen must have confidence that it is the moral principles of Indonesian that guide the achievement of the life of an independent, united, sovereign, just and prosperous nation (Chairman of People's Consultative Assembly and Working Team for Socialization of MPR RI period 2009.
MPR RI provides the understanding of the "Four Pillars of the Nation and State" that it is a collection of noble values that must be understood by the whole society. It is also a guide in the life of state administration to realize a nation and state that is just, prosperous and dignified

Four Pillars in the Philosophy of Language Perspective
Philosophy of language has concern and discuss about how language has a meaning and references correctly. The scope of philosophy of language to analysis an examine the proposition and the language logically order (Peterson,1980, p. 773). In general philosophy of language discuss three main problem areas: issues associated with logical form, issues associated with meaning, and issues associated with reference. A way of understanding of language some philosophers has a own theory such as Austin develop a taxonomy of speech acts. This taxonomy is starting point for works on pragmatics. Meanwhile Russell and Frege develop logic of language and types of language logic, and Wittgenstein develop language game, his theory focus on language has a rule of the game and it own meaning or semantic meaning (Burge, 1992, pp.14-16).
Politics and its language has become two inseparable matters, both have the wrong influence.
The political vocabulary which formed and reproduced by political elites has given birth to the knowledge of political theory, and political language in everyday life. In Indonesia, the term "Four Pillars of the Nation and State" (or 4 Pillars of Nation and State, or 4 Pillars) of MPR RI has never been known in Indonesian history since the colonial era until the fall of the Soeharto regime. The formation of Four Pillars political language occurred in late 2009. In contrast to the Soeharto era, the formation of political language by using the number "4" was once known as P4, which means the Guidance of Realization and Implementation of the Practice of Pancasila. This term is produced into a policy of political language conducted by the state and not by the political elites.

The term specifically refers to instilling the values of
Pancasila and national insight to the people.
However, unlike the post-reform MPR RIwhich interprets the existing political vocabulary into a politicized language, the politicization of language begins to emerge and grows massively without following good and correct language rules. It is the impact of many new political language terms that have not been known yet and not known in the political and social history of Indonesia. One of the interesting issues of the use of political language that has become a debate is the use of the term Four Pillars of the Nation and State which consists of Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, NKRI, and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika. Wahyukismoyo (2013, p. 12) explains that the national paradigm referring to the MPR Decree No.II / MPR / 1978 on the Guidance of Practice and the Applying of Pancasila (Ekaprasetya Pancakarya) indicates that the community understands Pancasila as the ideological foundation; the 1945 Constitution as the basis of the constitution; and GBHN as the operational basis. Wahyukismoyo stated that the national paradigm of the four pillars (4P) carried by Taufiq Kiemas is legally formal. There is no MPR decree but can be considered legitimate to be a source of law in Indonesia (although MPR Tap is still a polemic in this case). Darmanto (2013, p. 12) in his article in Kedaulatan Rakyat newspaper entitled "Media and Four Pillars of Life of the Nation" gave a correction for the use of the four pillar terms. Darmanto offers two options: first, if you want to defend the four pillars -since they are popular, the contents of the message need to be corrected by separating Pancasila from the four pillars, then consider adding another four elements. Second, one can emphasize the truth aspect of message content by changing the communication strategy so that it no longer uses the four-pillar term, but uses another more precise term.
The Kiemas, 2011, shows that "Four pillars" is the right program to be socialized and even implemented, where Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, NKRI, and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika are being threatened by the existence of various views, ideologies and external forces (Sutrisno, 2011, p. 6;Hasibuan and Yamin, 2011, p. 6). Sutrisno's view affirms that the four pillars are aimed at filling the void and the declining sense of nationality of the Indonesian people who have begun to show apathy towards the state. On the anniversary of Pancasila, June 1, 2016, the previous President of the Republic of Indonesia, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, gave a speech at the Jakarta Convention Center entitled "Reforming the Life Framework of State by Pancasila." The speech considered Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, NKRI and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika as the basic consensus of the Indonesian people concerning the framework of the life of the state to face the current challenges (Yudhoyono, 2006, pp. 8-9). Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono did not call them pillars. Taniredja explained that four basic consensus is not only those four but also added one, that is Pancasila. Thus, for him, the pillars consist of Pancasila, Proclamation of Independence, the 1945 Constitution, NKRI, and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika (Taniredja, et.al, 2015).
In the paper, Taniredja does not explain the relationship between the four pillars so that the future more likely will be confusing. It becomes a reference for the next generation when they read Taniredja's article entitled "New Indonesia Four Consensus One Basic Nationality and State" (Pancasila, Proclamation of Independence, the1945 Constitution, NKRI, and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika). Taniredja's writing explains further about the Four Pillars term to the four basic consensuses. Four consensuses refer to the Proclamation of Independence 1945, the 1945 Constitution, NKRI, Bhinneka Tunggal Ika. While the Pancasila was excluded from the Four Consensus category became the basis of nation and state of Indonesia (Taniredja, et al, 2015).
The Leaders of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) and the Working Team for the Socialization of the People's Consultative Assembly for the period of 2009-2014 revealed that the selection of the four pillars aims to remind the whole Indonesian people that the implementation and operation of national and state life is continuously carried out by referring to the intended state objectives and they must unite in filling the development so that this nation is more advanced and prosperous (Secretary General of MPR RI, 2012, p. 11). Kaelan (2012: vii) analyzes the epistemological problems of the Four Pillars of the Nation and State by criticizing whether the Pancasila is a pillar or is the basis of the state. Whereas in general knowledge, all Indonesian people will state that Pancasila is the foundation of the state of Indonesia. Meanwhile, Kansil (2011)  The result shows that "pillar" is not known in the life of nation and state in the historical, juridical and ideological context. In post-reform, the term "pillar" which used by MPR as a political communication in order to overcome the ideology of Pancasila can be understood and deserved to be appreciated. However, the use of the term "pillar" for Pancasila, must be corrected because it cannot be accounted scientifically (Proceedings of FGD Experts, Scientific Review of the Problem of Differences of Opinion 4 Pillars of the Nation and State, 14 September 2013, p. 18). Thontowi (2014, p. 49) in his testimony of the judicial review of Law Number 2 (2011) on March 4, 2014, at the Constitutional Court stipulates that: "The use of the 4 Pillars is currently being pursued to be socialized as an attempt to prevent the occurrence of moral degradation of nationality as stipulated in Article 34 Section (3b). It clearly has historically, juridically, and sociologically disadvantages. Consequently, the pros and cons arise in the society and the nation of Indonesia. The pros and cons are in relation to the 4 Pillars that align or place Pancasila as one of the pillars of the nation and they do not find the truth de facto and Noer (1984, p. 97) explains that Pancasila is a value as well as the ideology and philosophy of the state. The understanding of Pancasila can be deep or shallow, broad or narrow, hidden or obvious, and also can be born in words and deeds. Pancasila is developed not only in an imagined and exclusive position but as an ideological base that has an inclusive dimension. The basic values found in Pancasila are Godhead, Humanity, Unity, People and Social Justice and each has a universal principle. Densmoor (2013, p. iii) provides an analysis of the meaning of Pancasila in the context of three periods of leadership in Indonesia. Densmoor explains that, first, in Soekarno era, as a radical nationalist, he interprets Pancasila as something to ensure territorial integrity to provide a dialogue room for the nation's leaders from various religious and tribal backgrounds.
Second, in the Soeharto era, Pancasila was used as a tool to ensure the stability of the country by reducing the radical Islamic rebellion (Darul Islam) movement and eliminating communist ideology at that time. This means that Pancasila is used by Soeharto to reject the Islamic state and the Atheist country. Thirdly, in the era of democratic leadership, Pancasila was used to create conditions of integration between religious communities.
MPR RI (2012, p. 43) explains that re-interpreting Pancasila means to affirm the commitment that the values of Pancasila are the foundation and ideology in the society, nation, and state. MPR RI affirmed that Pancasila is not merely a concept of thought, but also a tool of values manifested as a guide in various aspects of life. Hendratno (2013), Rector of Pancasila University, Jakarta, in his speech at Focus Group Discussion (FGD) entitled "Pancasila as Philosophische Grondslag", explains that the materialism which causing Pancasila is based on Indonesian cultural values. Hendratno stated that Pancasila, is often acknowledged as the basis of philosophy (or the basis of the philosophy of state). State's ideology (staatsidee) has the understanding that Pancasila becomes the basis of values and norms to regulate the state government or to regulate the implementation of state (Hendratno, 2013).
The 1945 Constitution article 1 section (1) explains that Indonesia is the Unitary State, which is a Republic. Article 36 A states that the Symbol is Garuda Pancasila with the motto, that is Bhinneka Tunggal Ika (Unity in Diversity). Juridically, the term "Four Pillars of Life of the Nation and the State" has not found the right foundation since there is no exact article which categorizes Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, NKRI, and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika in the Constitution, as part of the pillar of nation and state. Soeprapto in his book entitled Empat Konsensus Nasional Kehidupan Berbangsa dan Bernegara, (The Four National Consensus of National and State Life) states that the position of Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, NKRI, and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika are unequal, thus it is less appropriate to be included in the same nomenclature. Therefore, Soeprapto mentions these four things as the four national consensuses (Soeprapto, 2012, p. 5).
Thontowi's study shows that the use of the term Four Pillars of life of the Nation and State which socialized by MPR RI is very unfortunate. The first reason is, in terms of history, the word "pillar" is never appeared in the debates of the sessions both in BPUPKI and PPKI. Second, the word "pillar" cannot be paired with the word "base". On the other hand, the word's origin is from English, or arkan or rukun (Arabic) that in the context of Indonesia language, it becomes a pole or buffer. While the "base" is different among the pillars because the base is ground or based (English), and the (Arabic) principles (Thontowi, 2016, p. 47).
The use of the term Four Pillars of the Nation and State has led to conflicting meanings. The theory of the meaning of the language can refer to Parera's theory of the types of conflicting meanings of language.
The use of the term Four Pillars of the Nation and  Bourdieu (1977Bourdieu ( , 1982 pointed to the various ways in which language forms become a part of the symbolic capital that can be mobilized in markets as interchangeable with forms of material capital. Gal (1989) and Irvine (1989) also argued that the study of language needs to be framed in terms of not only the making of meaning, of social categories (or identities), and of social relations, but also the political economic conditions that constrain the possibilities for making meaning and social relations (Heller, 2010, p. 102). The use of language created by MPR RI with the term "Four Pillars of MPR RI" raises debate in society and academic circles. The discourse of Four Pillars used by MPR RI consisting of Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, NKRI and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika has also brought about the debate in the meaning of political language. The use of the Four Pillars term have the same variants. Linguistic politics has changed the meaning of language from what should be established and made based on a particular political interest. The definition, nature, position, and function of Pancasila in the historical, juridical, sociological and philosophical aspects indicate that the meaning of Pancasila cannot be equated with pillar category and has position and function as referred to by MPR RI as 4 Pillars of MPR RI.

The Problem of the Meaning of the Term Four Pillars
In the historical aspect, Pancasila is the foundation of the state of the Republic of Indonesia. The history of the formation of Pancasila is formulated to become the basis of the state as in the session of BPUPKI when formulating on the basis of the state. Pancasila is used as the basis of the Independent State of Indonesia. It becomes the basic value contained in the Preamble of the 1945 Constitution of Alenia 4. It is juridical-constitutional which has been contained in the Preamble of the 1945 Constitution as the basis of the state. Sociologically, Pancasila indicates that since the acceptance of Pancasila as the foundation of the state, the people accept and acknowledge that the existence of Pancasila becomes the basis of the state and not the pillar of the state. Philosophically, it also shows that Pancasila in essence as the basic philosophy of the state of its position as a foundation in laying the building of state and nation. The shift in meaning and politicization of language by political elites has changed the understanding of society and the collective memory of the true history of Pancasila.
In the context of the use of the term of the 1945 Constitution, the basic understanding of the Constitution is the basic norm which becomes the reference of the state to build the political system, constitutional system, and the state form which is expected in accordance with the foundation of the state laid. The 1945 Constitution is never known as a pillar term so that the use of pillars for the 1945 Constitution is not appropriate because the context and the meaning of the pillars of the state with basic norms are different in meaning and it has juridical, political, and sociological implications. The term of the 1945 Constitution from the beginning was formulated simultaneously with the state of Pancasila which was never formulated as a pillar of nation and state. The 1945 Constitution has already existed since 1945 and it is the first constitution of the Indonesian state the declaration of its independence.
The term of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia (NKRI) has already begun in the process of formulating the 1945 Constitution. As contained in Article 1 Section (1) of the 1945 Constitution, it states that "the State of Indonesia is a Unitary State in the Republic". The conception of the unitary state has become a common consciousness that the form or container the state of Indonesia is a unitary state. The term "unitary state" refers to the form of a state that Indonesia has a form or container called a unitary state. This is different from the use of the term "pillar" that NKRI becomes a part of a country's pillars. The understanding of pillars with the shape or container of the state will have a very different meaning. Political interpretation of the political language used by the MPR RI has had an impact on the erroneous thinking and understanding of the meaning of NKRI in geographical and political contexts as one bond of one nation and one country.
The term Bhinneka Tunggal Ika first emerged in the 1950s when the state of Indonesia experienced the government era of the United States of Indonesia (RIS). At that time, the Indonesian government was formulating the symbol of the state together with seloka, Bhinneka Tunggal Ika. Then, the term Bhinneka Tunggal Ika was born together with the formulation and determination of the Indonesian state symbol of Garuda Pancasila.
In the 1945 Constitution the amendment of article 36 A says that the State Coat of Arms is Garuda Pancasila with Bhinneka Tunggal Ika Unity. The 1945 Constitution has clearly stated that Bhinneka Tunggal Ika is a nonpillar state motto. At the beginning of its formulation and use, the term Bhinneka Tunggal Ika has known as the slogan not as the pillar. Thus, in the context of historical and juridical-constitutional, the term Bhinneka Tunggal Ika is a state motto not a pillar of the state. The process of changing the meaning of political language produced and reproduced by the MPR RI has an impact on the confusion of knowledge in the community. MPR RI produced the symbolic political language and meaning which contrast to historical, juridical, sociological, and philosophical facts. The politicization of language has led to the legitimization of the political language's meaning that built on the correct language rules. The following is the process of changing the meaning of language conducted by MPR RI.
The politicization of language interpretation occurs because of the understanding and meaning of the concept of nation and state is not comprehensively understood by the political elite. The political policy of the language conducted by the elites is the manipulation and politicization of the language that affects the uncertainty of the use of the institutional standard terminology, education, and constitutionality. The inconsistency in the use of the term of state standard will have an impact on the abolition of the nation's history. State officials currently only recognize the term "pillar" consisting of Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, NKRI, and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika. There are a lot of young generation and post-reform officials who include into groups that are affected by the politics of the 4 Pillars conducted by the MPR RI. The change of meaning which was made by MPR RI became a process of politicizing the language that changed the grammatical, semantic, and syntactic meaning. The use of the term Four Pillars is a categorical mistake in placing Pancasila, 1945 Constitution, NKRI, and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika.

The Role of Language in Politics
Language serves two roles in politics, that is, to convey understandings and to clarify the political conception in order not to be interpreted in double manners. Political language is a term which used to emphasize the meaning of language in politics. Language becomes a means of communication to convey certain messages, meanings, and values to others. In politics, language is used to convey symbolic messages, political messages, and certain moral messages which aims to define and affirm the political meaning and the understanding of politics.
The language of politics emerges and evolves in conformity with of the times and the regime in power. Political language is used by political elites to communicate thoughts and ideas about the state, nationality, citizenship. The use of the term of Four Pillars became the political language produced by the political elites by manipulating and changing the meanings related to the position, function, and nature of Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, NKRI and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika. The role of language in this case is not only for political communication but a means to manipulate the human mind.

CONCLUSION
The term of Four Pillars used by the People's Consultative Assembly of the Republic of Indonesia (MPR RI) has had an impact on the uncertainty and it is potential to abolish the nation's history. The term four pillars which consist of Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia (NKRI), and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika is a categorial mistake. Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia (NKRI), and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika cannot be categorized into the same variant as pillar. The usage term of four pillars is distorting of meaning and displacing of meaning of Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, the Unitary State of the Republik of Indonesia (NKRI), and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika in the original context of their meaning.
The political policies of language created by the political elites aim to remind the society of the importance of Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, NKRI and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika. It is very important since society seems to forget those values. The debate on the term of Four Pillars of MPR RI in this research shows that the political language's policy conducted by political elites by using the term "Four Pillars" to socialize Pancasila, 1945 Constitution, NKRI, and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika is actually emerging as a reaction from the society. First, the term "four pillars" has not been well known in the history of the Indonesian nation. Second, categorizing Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, NKRI, and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika into the same variants as pillars have caused uncertainty in using the term in society and it changed its true meaning. Third, the use of the term "four pillars" is the politicization of the meaning of language conducted by the political elites that cause the public distrust towards the elites of the state.