Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal Vol. 13, No. 1 2021 © 2021 by the author(s). This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License (https:// creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0/), allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license. Citation: Basir, S., and Prajawati, M. I. 2021. Moral Responsibility and Wholeheartedness: A Source of Cohesion in Javanese Society. Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 13:1, 15–27. https:// doi.org/10.5130/ccs.v13.i1.7617 ISSN 1837-5391 | Published by UTS ePRESS | https://epress. lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index. php/mcs REFEREED PAPER Moral Responsibility and Wholeheartedness: A Source of Cohesion in Javanese Society Basir S Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia, Salemba Raya Street No. 4, Jakarta, 10430, Indonesia Maretha Ika Prajawati Universitas Islam Negeri Maulana Malik Ibrahim Malang, Gajayana Street No. 50, Malang, East Java, 65144, Indonesia Corresponding author: Basir S, Universitas Indonesia, Salemba Raya Street No. 4, Jakarta 10430, Indonesia, basir@ui.ac.id DOI: https://doi.org/10.5130/ccs.v13.i1.7617 Article History: Received 07/03/2021; Revised 11/04/2021; Accepted 06/05/2021; Published 25/05/2021 Abstract In social life, humans cannot be separated from social interactions with others. This is based on the fact that humans are social creatures, which in their lives cannot live alone but need help from others. This makes people need help and assistance in solving problems in their lives. In Javanese culture, collaboration that is carried out collectively is known as soyo. Soyo is carried out as an effort to be able to lighten work and is evidence of harmonious life in a community. This study examines the soyo phenomenon from a social and cultural perspective. The findings show that social learning is important in the continuation of the soyo tradition and that moral responsibility and wholeheartedness are essential features of engagement in the practice. Keywords Moral Responsibility; Wholeheartedness; Soyo; Social Capital; Social Learning DECLARATION OF CONFLICTING INTEREST The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. FUNDING The authors would like to thank Universitas Indonesia for funding this research through PUTI Grant with contract number NKB-2085/ UN2.RST/HKP.05.00/2020. 15 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://doi.org/10.5130/ccs.v13.i1.7617 https://doi.org/10.5130/ccs.v13.i1.7617 https://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/mcs https://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/mcs https://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/mcs mailto:basir@ui.ac.id https://doi.org/10.5130/ccs.v13.i1.7617 Introducing soyo In a country that has a pluralistic society like Indonesia, it is important to build and increase the value of solidarity and a culture of helping each other. The Indonesian state works from a firm base because the behaviour of mutual cooperation existed long before this country was established. Mutual solidarity and helping each other are born from the collective behaviour of a society that arises from the cultural habits and customs of the archipelago. These values are then transformed into a spirit and characteristic for the people of Indonesia (Hodriani et al. 2018). However, the incidence of various conflicts between ethnic groups, religions of community groups, even between government elites are evidence of the weakness of social solidarity which affects the behaviour of community solidarity. Humans are social creatures, who cannot be separated from their social interactions with others, meaning that they cannot live alone and often need help from others when solving problems in their lives. A form of collaboration that is carried out collectively in Java is known as gotong royong. Gotong royong is carried out as an effort to lighten the work of others and it has become evidence of a life lived in harmony within a community. Gotong royong can be interpreted as a form of social solidarity that emerges when assistance is forthcoming from other parties with personal or group interests. This regulates attitudes of each member of society to the group as a whole and can lead to members acting as one unit (Taslin & Yusuf 2017). Gotong royong, which is a form of mutual assistance, is a characteristic of genuine mutual cooperation (Bintarto 1980). Many types of mutual cooperation can be found in society including in the domains of matters of death, marriage, home decoration, mosques and community service. Today, there are shifting cultural changes, one of which is the cultural shift in terms of mutual cooperation. This was demonstrated by cultural values are slowly being abandoned as forms of modernity and modern life-styles, due to changes in attitudes, behaviour and mental changes brought about by increasingly modern technology (Projodikoro 1993). Changes in terms of a more modern lifestyle also make society more individualistic, consumptive, hedonistic, and opportunistic (Hodriani et al. 2018). Currently, not many people still engage in mutual cooperation in the community. In a country that has the characteristics of a pluralistic society such as Indonesia, it is important to pay attention to building and maintaining the values of solidarity and the culture of gotong royong to implement a more democratic life order. Gotong royong is born from the collective behaviour of the Javanese community and society that arises from the customs and habits of the culture as a whole. These values are then transformed into a unique spirit and the characteristics of Indonesian society. One area that is still thick with the culture of mutual cooperation is in the village of Pesanggrahan in eastern Java. The forms of mutual cooperation include community service in the construction of houses and places of worship. Community service is an activity of directing personnel without payment or wages for a project that is beneficial to the public (Koentjaraningrat 1990). Mutual cooperation in the construction of houses and places of worship in the Javanese culture of this village is called soyo while people who do it are called sayan. In soyo, mutual cooperation activities are carried out spontaneously and without payment or wages for work that is useful for the public interest in society. One of the characteristics that stands out in soyo, is where community members voluntarily come together with other communities to work without any reward. This practice is becoming uncommon and not many residents do it. Currently, many of the characteristics of mutual cooperation in society have begun to shift to a position where all work is done by masons who receive wages when the job is finished. In the perspective of Javanese culture, social life in Javanese society is known as a proverb with the phrase, sepi ing pamrih rame ing gawe. “Don’t expect anything in return for what you can do for other people” or “people are quiet but do lots of good (quality) work” or. “expect no reward, but be serious at work”. That is the free translation of the Javanese philosophy above. From this philosophy, we are taught to work optimally Basir and Prajawati Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1 202116 without expecting too much reward from the job. The point is sincerity in everything. This ancient Javanese philosophy describes someone who does not appear in the distribution of awards and praise, but who is always there and enthusiastic when they work. Furthermore, they are often very quiet and always work hard in silence. In today’s terms, they are a very rare species. Most people are not like this: if they are given a job to do and there is the chance of getting paid, immediately everyone comes claiming to be the most meritorious. This proverb contains a deeper meaning implying that humans always need other people and cannot live life by themselves. The values a person holds can be determined by society itself. These values can be measured from the standard of a norm, namely obedience to the prevailing norms and fulfillment of obligations in society. Soyo’s activities cannot be separated from the philosophy of life of the Javanese people. Javanese society as one of the largest components of society in Indonesia has a unique culture (Oka 2003). Daryono (2006) states that Javanese culture is generally categorized as having three features, namely: 1) Basing itself on harmonization; 2) more likely to be following the functional structure paradigm and 3) highly appreciative of transcendental things or values. Although the work carried out in soyo activities may be paid work in other contexts, it cannot easily be considered from a management perspective. Not all modern management theories, which mostly refer to the results of Western thinking, can be applied in Indonesia. In the practice of implementation, management, and the completion of a job do not fully use modern management techniques or methods but are often found combining them with simple management or what is commonly known as traditional management (Lukiyanto 2016), that is, management that is developed from the cultural heritage of a nation. These include actions, behaviours, and activities that are always taught to the next generations, that develop from generation to generation and refer to community relations, values, and knowledge, intuition, and practice in the local or national environment ( Jackson 2013). Gotong royong could also be considered in the context of the western concept of social capital, those societal links that lead to trust and solidarity in a community (Coleman1988; Putnam 1993). A recent study in Java has analysed the workings of gotong royong in a rural setting and closer to an urbanized area (Rosyani et al. 2019) and demonstrated its similarities to social capital. However, the workings of soyo take it beyond the western concept of social capital. Soyo is based on moral values, including the value of togetherness, mutual assistance, prioritizing public interests, fulfilling welfare, and efforts to adjust between personal interests and public interests. Besides moral values, soyo also contains religious, cultural, and economic values (Koentjaraningrat 1990). In soyo, a form of mutual cooperation is a form of social solidarity. This culture ultimately applies from generation to generation so that it forms real social behaviour and can then form a social order in society (Hodriani et al. 2018). Traditionally, soyo individuals or groups of soyo do not receive a salary or wages for completing their work but they work selflessly regardless. Supardan (2009) argues that the solidarity that exists in society is based on a sense of collective awareness which demonstrates the totality of the beliefs and sentiments of community members. In mutual cooperation activities, the division of labor that arises creates an interdependent community structure. In mutual cooperation, it can therefore be seen that there is a division of labor that is a part of solidarity in society. The soyo that is done by the community is a form of solidarity in human social life. Taylor (2015) states that the use of the term solidarity refers to the activities carried out by the community based on sympathy for other communities. Currently, it is important to continue to preserve community social activities such as soyo. According to Barkin and Lemus (2014), activities undertaken to build the social activities available in the community are carried out to withstand the destructive impact of the times on social welfare. The cooperation that is carried out within the community requires reciprocal cooperation based on decisions to ensure the welfare of the community members. This study examines the soyo phenomenon from a social and cultural perspective. Basir and Prajawati Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1 202117 Method This qualitative study uses a phenomenological approach. A phenomenological approach is a philosophical approach to studying individual experiences that are subjective and shaped by the context in which they live (Zigmund and Babin 2007). It was conducted in the village of Pesanggrahan, Kota Wisata Batu, in East Java. Pesanggrahan, in ancient times, was a place where royal officials rested on their travels. It is said that the kings, queens, dukes, and courtiers of the kingdom, including the King of Mataram and his concubines, often bathed in the hot springs of Songgoriti and then mesanggrah (rested) in what is now Pesanggrahan Village. Geographically, the Pesanggrahan area, which is located at the foot of the slopes of Mount Panderman, with a beautiful panorama and very cool weather at that time, made a special attraction for anyone who was on their way to rest in this place, so in the end, this area was called Desa Pesanggrahan or Pesanggrahan Village. The increasing rate of population growth and the increase in social and cultural development with the norms of community life which are regulated based on government structure, has meant that Pesanggrahan Village is divided into several small areas called “hamlets” with names which are also taken by following the history of its origin. Researchers chose the research location because almost every week, on Saturdays and or Sundays, soyo activity was found. People who are active in soyo activities or who had been the beneficiaries of soyo activities took part in in-depth face to face interviews. Identifying participants was not straightforward. Pre-observations were made to determine key informants from the inhabitants of Pesanggrahan Village. The pre-observation was carried out by conducting light interviews about the profile and activities of soyo. However, in the pre-observation conducted on 15 people in Pesanggrahan village, 4 informants were not willing to be interviewed. Of the remaining 11 people, 5 people gave the same answer so that information saturation occurred. Finally, 6 key informants were found. The key informant profiles in this study are: 1. Sumadi (SD), Sumadi is a native of Pesanggrahan, 55 years old, self-employed. 2. Mudik (MD), Mudik is a native resident of Pesanggrahan, 48 years old, he works as a head craftsman every day. 3. Yono (YN), is an elder in the Pesanggrahan village, 58 years old, his job is as a freelance worker. 4. Bowo (BW ), Bowo, who has lived in the Pesanggrahan village since he was a child, is 55 years old, working as an entrepreneur. 5. Slamet (ST), Slamet is one of the Pesanggrahan village officials who is also a native of the pesanggrahan, 50 years old. 6. Qodir (QR), Qodir is a native resident of the Pesanggrahan, 47 years old, his job is as a freelance worker. Data collected from this core of key informants was complemented by observations from other members of the community. Soyo mechanism The data gathered from participants demonstrated that the practice of soyo is not only a local tradition that promotes the continuity of solidarity and the tradition of mutual cooperation but also is evidence of efforts to maintain community togetherness and solidarity in today’s modern life developments. People described how mutual cooperation arises from the encouragement of awareness, and enthusiasm to be able to do and bear the consequences of work, especially in circumstances that happen collectively, with many tasks happening simultaneously and in a busy atmosphere, without thinking about or prioritizing benefits Basir and Prajawati Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1 202118 for oneself, but focussing on mutual happiness. The findings demonstrated how gotong royong is the charity of all for the benefit of all of the efforts of all for mutual happiness. The principle of mutual cooperation contains the awareness of working spiritually as well as physically in a joint effort or work to emphasize the importance of a shared social life with each other. So far, soyo has been practiced at the community level and also at the family level through the assistance of money, goods, and labor to relatives who are building houses. An example is the soyo mechanism put forward by an informant: “My house was built with the community through Soyo. Sunday is the right day, because on Sundays many people do not work. I invited several people to be able to help me by visiting their house. I will tell you how many meters the building will be built. This is important because it relates to the number of people who will invite to Soyo. This cooperation is mutually beneficial between me and the community around us. This means that when they come to my house to do soyo, then in return I will also come to help if they organize soyo.”(Interview, SD, 2020) The statement above shows that soyo is a culture that has existed from ancient times and still exists today, done in this case to ease the work of building his house. At a broader level, the example shows the involvement of someone in the house construction process without formal information, and using word of mouth to disseminate information that will culminate in other villagers helping to build houses. Therefore, other people come because one of them has agreed to take part because of the spirit of mutual cooperation and kinship. The informant MD showed how his approach complemented other soyo mechanisms: “Like for my house, I invited 25 people inearly in 2000, but there were almost 60 people who came; the system, in the morning, gives you food with glutinous rice, a pack of cigarettes, lunch can be chicken, rawon, rice, crackers, tempe. We do not spend money, in soyo we don’t need to command people, we just say “let’s do it”. We work out what expertise people have or what they have done before, who can mix cement, who can lift bricks, mix well ... you know, you know.” The figures below show soyo activity in Pesanggrahan, first in constructing a mosque and next in building a house. Figure 1. Soyo in building a mosque Basir and Prajawati Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1 202119 Figure 2. Soyo in building houses The statement above shows that there is so much mutual cooperation in the community when a member of the community holds a soyo. As noted by the informant MD, in soyo, you will usually be given snacks in the morning as well as meals during the day. There is also no formal division of tasks, but rather togetherness where people take on the tasks they can do, for example stirring cement, which they will voluntarily do without waiting for someone to take on a leadership role and tell them to do it; and everyone takes the same approach. One could say that this is a workforce consisting of one mason and several community members. Good and mutual cooperation exist between the head craftsmen who provide directions to the community to carry out work in house renovation activities. The community members carry out work following the direction of the head craftsman and collectively complete the construction of houses. In this case, the form of cooperation in mutual cooperation activities is needed because without cooperation, the activities would not be able to take place well. Cooperation and coordination are important, to minimize misunderstandings in the community on the implementation of activities so that activities continue and follow common goals and expectations. The nature of mutual cooperation among the people of Pesanggrahan Village is still very strong, one of which is the tradition of soyo activities, where the initiator is called sayan. The association of the village community which is still communal has become a fertile ground for the growth and development of the soyo tradition which is based on the strong principle of mutual help among its fellow citizens. The main factor in the existence of soyo in Pesanggrahan Hamlet, Batu City is tradition, those habits that have been practiced for a long time and have become part of the life of a community. Local traditions in our society Basir and Prajawati Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1 202120 today, especially rural communities in all corners of the country, are still being maintained and are still being practised. Moral Responsibility Soyo, as a type of social solidarity, is formed because of the help from other parties for personal or group interests. A reciprocal sense of moral responsibility underpins this help and is evident in loyalty to the collective. “We, the term in Javanese, must be care with the other, that is, a kind of village leader. Let me tell you, for example, if there are people who want soyo I listen to them, I will, yes because of this heart. What do we have time for if it is not used to help others, right? Even though I wasn’t told to do it, because I heard about it ... it has become a tradition, so it is still being done ...” (BW) From the statement above, we can see that soyo is done because villagers have a friendly attitude towards other people, thus as long as they have time and they know that a soyo will be held, other community members will attend. When a soyo is performed and a member of the community is unable to attend, the person concerned still shows a moral attitude by visiting his neighbor’s house, as stated by informant YN: “At that time a neighbor was going to do soyo, I happened to be unable to attend because I had a family event to attend. I don’t feel good if I don’t come because my house was built with soyo too. So, the night before the soyo was performed, I went to the house and told me honestly that I could not participate in soyo because there was a family event that I could not leave. However, I still provide assistance as a form of our awareness and concern for living in society.” This statement explains that even though someone might have conflicting commitments that coincide with the presence of soyo in the village, that person will still participate in soyo even if only for a short time. They do this to avoid feelings of embarrassment and to demonstrate their awareness of being a neighbor in the community. Another aspect of the importance of taking part in soyo was disclosed by informant BW: “For me, I’m tired from working all day long, but tomorrow there will be a Soyo in must try to come. Getting there is difficult... most of the soyo is done on Sundays ...” This explains that people feel an obligation or responsibility to be there: if there is a soyo, as much as possible people will come to take an active role, even though the previous day the person concerned might have worked hard for the whole day; this is done because of the togetherness and friendship that must be maintained within the community. Wholeheartedness Soyo must be based on the spirit of sincerity, willingness, togetherness, tolerance, and trust. In short, the value of soyo is more intrinsic in nature, arising from social interactions with a background of non-economic interests or rewards and participation in it must be wholehearted. As stated by informant ST: “What drives me is my heart. Even if those who have a desire [for a soyo] do not order it I feel reluctant [not to take part], I do, because I am sincere, I feel sincere, in our small hearts we must participate ...” The statement above implies that soyo is done out of sincerity towards the attitudes and beliefs of the community. Informant QR made a similar statement: “ The urge to do soyo, the first is sincerity, sincerity is doing work without expecting anything in return.For example if they forget to invite me to soyo, because of busy or some other reason, I smile calmly, it doesn’t Basir and Prajawati Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1 202121 matter to me, I will still come. Because we live in society, we must work together. If you are far away, with whom we are neighbors, then it will be the closest relative to us.” This statement emphasizes that soyo is done because togetherness is most important; mutual cooperation is upheld as a value which is carried out based on wholehearted sincerity to participate in soyo together and cooperate with other members of the community. Discussion The Javanese people have various kinds of cultures that are rooted and believed to have existed in the community along with their existence more widely in Java, but with the development and consequence of modernization, these cultural products have begun to change and tend to be abandoned. This culture has values that are very beneficial for the survival of its people. One of the traditional customs that are still often carried out is the soyo activity which was born as a result of “marriage” and the blending of local culture and Islamic culture. The findings have shown that, until now, in the Batu City area, namely in Pesanggrahan Village, the tradition of soyo, for the building of houses still exists. The nature of mutual cooperation in the people of Pesanggrahan Village is still very strong. The association of the village community which is still communal has become a fertile ground for the growth and development of the soyo tradition, which is based on the strong principle of mutual help among its fellow citizens. Explaining how the tradition still exists, in spite of the significant changes that have happened in recent times, is difficult. A possible answer lies in social learning theory. Currently one of the most important concepts in social learning theory is the notion of community in society, which describes a learning theory which has a strong relationship with the construction of social knowledge. Social learning theory holds that people learn attitudes and behaviours from those around them, imitating what they see and hear, and passing that learning on to others. In small, stable communities, social knowledge can grow and flourish as people share their experiences and mutually reinforce the values that underpin this knowledge. All parties involved in soyo are encouraged to have the same spirit of equality, (Rahayu et al. 2015). People are encouraged to have a spirit of mutual help, so that everyone can optimize their abilities to develop themselves and their social life. The spirit of work is the main element for social solidarity, humanity, and unity. The values and enthusiasm in soyo are positively utilized in people’s lives, and work to mobilize community solidarity. The more people engage in soyo, the more it functions to build and instil a sense of solidarity and equality (Koentjaraningrat 1988) among the people. From a social learning perspective, the unconditional mutual cooperation behaviour fosters togetherness. Soyo acts as a form of social solidarity, and is manifested in various ways, including building houses, building and maintaining mosques, building and maintaining village offices, building farm roads, constructing clean water reservoirs, and so on. In the understanding of Javanese people, soyo is a cultural form that shows a sense of togetherness in the implementation of community activities. The implementation of soyo, especially in the construction of public facilities, is a tradition that has been carried out from generation to generation in social life. Several informants explained that cultural cooperation is the hallmark of the Indonesian nation and argued that this culture must be introduced to the younger generation to counter the onslaught of global currents that have reached Indonesia. Recent cases show that social inequalities are occurring in our community, especially among teenagers, who are attracted by the glamour shown in the media, leaving to one side that sense of social solidarity that underpins what it means to be Indonesian. The move towards contemporary urbanized values seems to parallel the waning of gotong royong (Rosyani et al. 2019). In a few places, communal relations, such as soyo activities, still exist and these are needed in the modern era in urban communities. It may not be fanciful to believe that this can become a platform for the Basir and Prajawati Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1 202122 development of mutual help and mutual cooperation between members of an urban community. In this case, traditional factors (Zulfadrim et al. 2018) have a very important role in maintaining and preserving the culture of cooperation that are found in soyo activities. Furthermore, local wisdom contained in this tradition, such as religion, togetherness, tolerance, and happiness have the potential to make it sustainable in the community (Aghsari et al. 2018). The attitude of help and mutual cooperation in Javanese society is a community binding system that must be maintained. In gotong royong, there exist elements of reciprocity, of giving and receiving. Every individual wants to help others with a sincere heart without expecting anything, either praise or material benefit. Therefore, this practice has the potential for a considerable influence on society, especially in aspects of dedication and social participation. In soyo, there is an attitude to work without reward, generated by free will and without compulsion (Bourdieu, 1986; Lin, 2001; Salehudin et al. 2013; Simarmata et al. 2019). Soyo cannot be done if people do not want to offer up their best abilities and skills for the benefit of others (Duwata 2013; Simarmata et al. 2017). The social integration that is developed in soyo is a form of social integration that is heavily influenced by togetherness among citizens, and involvement in it, which is done voluntarily, is a way to show integration and community concern. In soyo, there is an attitude of doing social services that are integrated with individual voluntary actions (Purna & Wahyuningsih 1996; Thomas et al. 2011). Groups of people who have the same local traditions will interact with each other through various forms of communication. This communication is itself a form of social interaction, so communication and social interaction can be seen as a social process. Social communication is the basis of all social life; without social communication, there can be no social life. Social communication ensures a dynamic relationship, which involves individuals and groups of people. A harmonious environment will nourish the community; when one member of the community is in trouble or needs assistance, other members of the community will readily provide help. Good and harmonious social relations like this can be built if the community is willing to carry out mutual cooperation activities. Gotong royong can foster good social relations in the community. As a result, the relationship between community members will be even more harmonious. The culture of mutual cooperation in soyo as a moral value has philosophical roots in academic studies. It is shown that in the culture of mutual cooperation, the values of social capital which are necessary for the progress and welfare of society are attached. This value is reflected in the concern of the residents and their enthusiasm for soyo in the village, such as in community service activities and at fund-raising events for weddings (rewang). This concern is not only with the material (the practical aspects of donating money and/ or goods), but also with the non-material (being present and working together). The value of togetherness is one of the values in soyo which can be seen from the cohesiveness of the community in completing work that is useful for the public interest; it can also be seen in the efforts of the community to continue to preserve mutual cooperation. The emergence of mutual cooperation in soyo in society is something that cannot be denied. Mutual trust is a key aspect of soyo. When people practise soyo, they are demonstrating sharing a goal for work to be successful. The results of this cooperation at the same time produce good moral principles in the community. Without these good moral principles, there is no guarantee that job performance will be done well. Soyo is active participation from each individual, who adds positive value to objects, problems, or needs of the people around him (Rochmadi 2012; Simarmata et al. 2017). This active participation can take many forms, including material, financial, physical, mental, spiritual support, skills, constructive ideas, or advice. Active participation in soyo arises from awareness as part of a meaningful group (Rahayu et al. 2015). Soyo can only occur if people are sincerely involved in various activities held in their community (Brahmana et al. 2009). Basir and Prajawati Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1 202123 The youth as the nation’s next generation cannot be separated from the success of their parents in instilling the values of mutual cooperation. Education aims to make youth become part of society and to encourage them to take part in future development. Social capital is attached to the belief and belief in values. This means that social capital contains values of trust (mutual trust) which are rooted in cultural factors, such as ethics and morals. When trust becomes a guideline in social interaction, the community has instilled moral values, as a way to develop values which are authentic and honestly held. Local social networks have a positive impact on improving economic welfare and development in local areas and play an important role in environmental management. Another value that appears in the activities of soyo is the value of civility. Solidarity is a condition that indicates closeness between members in a community group. The conception of solidarity is always associated with a sense of togetherness and sharing the same fate. The strength of solidarity is influenced by the activities of soyo which are followed by individuals in society who have their respective functions according to their roles in society. Of course, these differences in roles do not affect the course of soyo’s activities. If members of the community can communicate well with each other, then the ability to unite differences to be able to build high solidarity from every activity carried out by the community can be realized. As people with different roles become open to each other so that one can complement another, civility exists and the difference in roles in society is not an obstacle in strengthening solidarity. Soyo activities demonstrate how the community can maintain stability. Soyo is togetherness. Without togetherness, there is no soyo activity. Togetherness must be based on social action and social solidarity. With the togetherness engendered in soyo, everyone will work together to achieve the agreed mission (Koentjaraningrat 1984) and live together in the community. When it is put into practice, soyo demonstrates a dynamic understanding that describes charity, collective work, the struggle to help without coercion and doing hard work for good, as well as the happiness of everyone involved (Adeney-Risakotta 2014; Godwin 1991). It aims to achieve the expected results from groups sharing a common interest, implying togetherness, equality, justice, care, and well as acknowledging those shared interests (Geertz 1983; Rochmadi 2012). These shard interests are also related to mutual benefits and mutual welfare in bearing and sharing each other’s burdens (Braithwaite 2011; Geertz 1983; Halabi 2009). Soyo can be seen as involving hard work, but it is more than that as it also implies solving problems from a working group to achieve the same goal (Bowen 1986; Duwata 2013; Laban et al. 2015; McCarthy 2014). It can also be interpreted as a planned joint action, organized in certain ways to achieve agreed goals to reduce work, or cooperation to create and meet common needs. Living together is the reason why soyo is passionate about social action and social solidarity. In soyo, each member of the group work has their own duty and role to fulfil, and this creates a bond of togetherness (Dewantara 2017). Soyo activities in the implementation of building houses or public facilities can provide economic benefits as follows: 1). Soyo activities carried out in the construction system can help ease the burden on families who build houses and 2). Soyo activities can provide benefits through public facilities to the community in the village and to residents of neighboring villages. Due to this economic aspect, the implementation of the soyo tradition can also be considered as an increase in the capacity of social capital in a society. However, in this case, Tonkiss (2009) reminds us that social capital only has economic value if it can help individuals or groups, for example, to access financial sources, get information, find work, start a business, or minimize transaction costs. Furthermore, Tonkiss said that, in reality, social networks cannot simply create physical capital and financial capital that did not exist. And yet, social capital is similar to other forms of capital, in that it is also productive. Social capital can be explained as a product of human relations with each other, especially intimate and consistent relationships. Social capital refers to networks, norms, and beliefs that have the potential to increase the productivity of society. However, social capital differs from financial capital, because social capital is cumulative and self-reinforcing (Putnam 1993). Therefore, social capital will not run out if it is used but will increase. Observing the principles contained in soyo, it is clear that the Basir and Prajawati Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1 202124 aspects contained in social capital are present. Social capital is conceptually characterized by the willingness of individuals to prioritize common interests and to accept moral responsibilities. The wholehearted willingness (conviction and awareness) that can generate cumulative energy results in performance that contains social capital values. This is clearly reflected in the rural community, especially the Javanese. Although it tends to appear at certain times, the value of mutual cooperation and social care is still found in Javanese society. Over time, technological advances have influenced the mindset of the people but did not obliterate the values that have been instilled long ago and can still be found today. The soyo tradition of the people of Pesanggrahan Village is evidence that the values of mutual cooperation and social care are still active. Conclusion The activity of the soyo community at Pesanggrahan in Batu City is an important event that reaffirms that communal practices based on social values can still be found in rural communities. The loss of social ties, especially in urban communities, has weakened the culture of mutual cooperation. However, the findings show that the social system can reinforce the noble values and local wisdom that have been passed down from generation to generation even in modern times through the spirit of social responsibility and sincerity in working together in society. Soyo, which draws on a sense of moral responsibility by all community members, and of wholehearted conviction to the sincerity of others, is an ancient tradition which can perhaps be re-established in local communities, through practices of social learning and help to contribute to a cohesive society. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Universitas Indonesia for funding this research through PUTI Grant with contract number NKB-2085/UN2.RST/HKP.05.00/2020.Special thanks should also be given to the anonymous reviewers who provided very detailed comments and constructive criticism that, in the end, hopefully contributed to an increase in the quality of this article and made the content more interesting. References Adeney-Risakotta, B. 2014, Dealing with Diversity Religion, Globalization, Violence, Gender and Disaster in Indonesia. Globethics.net, Geneva. https://www.globethics.net/documents/4289936/13403252/Focus_17_web_rev.pdf Aghsari, D., Wekke, I. S. & Abbas, N. 2018, ‘Harmony of coastal community regarding its ethnic religion and cultural diversity’, IOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science, vol. 156, no. 1, paper 012034. https://doi. org/10.1088/1755-1315/156/1/012034 Barkin, D & Lemus, B. 2014. ‘Rethinking the social and solidarity society in light of community practice’, Sustainability, vol. 6, no. 9, pp. 6432–6445. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6096432 Braithwaite, J. 2011, ‘Partial truth and reconciliation in the longue durée’, Contemporary Social Science, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 129–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450144.2010.534498 Bintarto 1980, Gotong Royong Suatu Karakteristik Bangsa Indonesia, PT Bina Ilmu Surabaya, Yogyakarta. Bourdieu, P. 1986, ‘The forms of capital’, in Richardson, J. (ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, Greenwood Press, New York, pp. 241–258. Bowen, J. R. 1986, ‘On the political construction of tradition: Gotong Royong in Indonesia’, Journal of Asian Studies, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 545–561. https://doi.org/10.2307/2056530 Basir and Prajawati Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1 202125 https://www.globethics.net/documents/4289936/13403252/Focus_17_web_rev.pdf https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/156/1/012034 https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/156/1/012034 https://doi.org/10.3390/su6096432 https://doi.org/10.1080/17450144.2010.534498 https://doi.org/10.2307/2056530 Brahmana, E. B., Rochayanti, C. & Susilo, M. E. 2009, ‘Nilai-nilai gotong-royong dalam tari mbuah page (analisis semiotika nilai-nilai gotong-royong dalam tari mbuah page pada acara adat merdang-merdem di Desa Perbesi Kecamatan Tigabinanga Kabupaten Karo Sumatera Utara)’, Jurnal Ilmu Komunikasi, vol. 7, no. 1. http://jurnal.upnyk. ac.id/index.php/komunikasi/article/view/8 https://doi.org/10.31315/jik.v7i1.8 Coleman, J. 1988, ‘Social capital in the creation of human capital’, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 94, pp. 95–120. https://doi.org/10.1086/228943 Dewantara, A. W. 2017, Alangkah Hebatnya Negara Gotong Royong: Indonesia dalam Kacamata Soekarno, Kanisius, Yogyakarta. https://doi.org/10.31227/osf.io/e7cqk Duwata, N. 2013, ‘Aktualisasi nilai kekeluargaan (persaudaraan) dan nilai kegotongroyongan dalam permainan tarik tambang pada warga masyarakat RT 24 RW 06 Sidikan Umbulharjo Yogyakarta tahun 2012’, Jurnal Citizenship, vol. 2, no. 1. https://garuda.ristekbrin.g.id/documents/detail/123883 Geertz, C. 1983, ‘From the native’s point of view: on the nature of anthropological knowledge’, in Geertz, C. (ed.), Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology, Basic Books, New York, pp. 55–70. Godwin, R. K. 1991, ‘Charges for merit goods: Third world family planning’, Journal of Public Policy, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 415–429. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X00006346 Halabi, S. F. 2009, ‘Participation and the right to health: Lessons from Indonesia’, Health and Human Rights, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 49–59. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20845850 https://doi.org/10.2307/40285217 Koentjaraningrat 1984, Masyarakat Desa di Indonesia, Lembaga Penerbit Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta. Koentjaraningrat 1990, Pengantar Ilmu Antropologi, Djambatan, Jakarta. Koentjaraningrat 1988, ‘The Indonesian mentality and development’, Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 107–133. https://doi.org/10.1355/SJ3-2A Laban, S., Oue, H. & Rampisela, A. 2015, ‘Irrigation practice and its effects on water storage and groundwater fluctuation in the first dry season in the rice cultivation region, South Sulawesi, Indonesia’, Procedia Environmental Sciences, vol. 28, pp. 271–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2015.07.035 Lin, N. 2001, Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. https://doi. org/10.1017/CBO9780511815447 Lukiyanto, K. 2016, Mandor: Model Kepemimpinan Tradisional Jawa pada Proyek Konstruksi Era Modern, Gramedia Pustaka Utama, Jakarta. McCarthy, J. F. 2014, ‘Using community led development approaches to address vulnerability after disaster: Caught in a sad romance’, Global Environmental Change, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 144–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.05.004 Projodikoro, W. 1993, Pergeseran Nilai Kehidupan Masyarakat, Pustaka Jaya, Jakarta. Purna, I. M. & Wahyuningsih, R. A. 1996, Macapat dan Gotong Royong, CV Putra Sejati Raya, Jakarta. Putnam, R. 1993, ‘What makes democracy work?’, National Civic Review, vol. 82, no. 2, pp. 101–107. https://doi. org/10.1002/ncr.4100820204 Rahayu, S., Ludigdo, U., Irianto, G. & Nurkholis 2015, ‘Budgeting of school operational assistance fund based on the value of gotong royong’, Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 211, pp. 364–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. sbspro.2015.11.047 Rochmadi, N. 2012, ‘Gotong royong sebagai common identity dalam kehidupan bertetangga negara-negara Asean’, Jurnal Forum Sosial Universitas Negeri Malang, http://digilib.um.ac.id/images/stories/artikel_dosen/menjadikan%20gotong%20 royong%20sebagai%20common%20identity%20-%20nurhadi.pdf Basir and Prajawati Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1 202126 http://jurnal.upnyk.ac.id/index.php/komunikasi/article/view/8 http://jurnal.upnyk.ac.id/index.php/komunikasi/article/view/8 https://doi.org/10.31315/jik.v7i1.8 https://doi.org/10.1086/228943 https://doi.org/10.31227/osf.io/e7cqk https://garuda.ristekbrin.g.id/documents/detail/123883 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X00006346 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20845850 https://doi.org/10.2307/40285217 https://doi.org/10.1355/SJ3-2A https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2015.07.035 https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815447 https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815447 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.05.004 https://doi.org/10.1002/ncr.4100820204 https://doi.org/10.1002/ncr.4100820204 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.047 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.047 http://digilib.um.ac.id/images/stories/artikel_dosen/menjadikan%20gotong%20royong%20sebagai%20common%20identity%20-%20nurhadi.pdf http://digilib.um.ac.id/images/stories/artikel_dosen/menjadikan%20gotong%20royong%20sebagai%20common%20identity%20-%20nurhadi.pdf Rosyani, Muchlis, F., Napitupulu, D. & Faust, H. 2019, ‘Gotong royong (cooperation) transformation of rural communities in Jambi Province, Indonesia’, Jurnal Perspektif Pembiayaan dan Pembangunan Daerah, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 103– 110. https://doi.org/10.22437/ppd.v7i1.7466 Salehudin, M. S., Prasad, D. & Osmond, P. 2013, ‘A field survey of local community empowerment initiatives at selected resort in Malaysia’, Conference of the International Journal of Arts & Sciences, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 445–452. Simarmata, H. T., Sunaryo, F., Purnama, C. S., Susanto, A., Nurjanah, N., Rizal, G. N. & Sapei, A. 2017, Indonesia: Emerald Chain of Tolerance, Pusat Studi Islam dan Kenegaraan Indonesia (PSIK-Indonesia), Jakarta. Simarmata, N., Yuniarti, K. W., Riyono, B. & Patria, B. 2019, ‘Gotong Royong in Indonesia History’, Proceeding of The 10th International Conference of Indigenous and Cultural Psychology 2019. https://doi.org/10.29037/digitalpress.45341 Supardan, D. 2009, Pengantar Ilmu Sosial, Bumi Aksara, Jakarta. Taslin, T & Yusuf, M. 2017, ‘Nilai-nilai gotong royong dalam pembangunan desa pada masyarakat Siompu’ (Studi di Desa Karae Kecamatan Siompu Kabupaten Buton Selatan), SELAMI IPS, vol. 2, no. 46, pp. 152–163. https://doi. org/10.36709/selami.v2i46.8520 Taylor, S. 2015, ‘Discursive and psychosocial? Theorising a complex contemporary subject’, Qualitative Research in Psychology, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 8–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2014.958340 Thomas, V. B., Selvadurai, S., Er, A. C., Lyndon, N. & Moorthy, R. 2011, ‘Factors influencing commitment of volunteers in neighborhood watch organization’, Journal of Social Sciences, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 569–574. https://doi.org/10.3844/ jssp.2011.569.574 Tonkiss, F. 2009, ‘Trust, confidence and economic crisis’, Intereconomics, vol. 44, no. 4. pp. 196–202. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10272-009-0295-x Zikmund, W. & Babin, B. 2007, Essentials of Marketing Research, 3rd ed. Thomson South-Western, Mason, OH. Zulfadrim, Z., Toyoda, Y. & Kanegae, H. 2018, ‘The implementation of local wisdom in reducing natural disaster risk: a case study from West Sumatera’, IOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science, vol. 106, no. 1, paper no. 012008. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/106/1/012008 Basir and Prajawati Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1 202127 https://doi.org/10.22437/ppd.v7i1.7466 https://doi.org/10.29037/digitalpress.45341 https://doi.org/10.36709/selami.v2i46.8520 https://doi.org/10.36709/selami.v2i46.8520 https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2014.958340 https://doi.org/10.3844/jssp.2011.569.574 https://doi.org/10.3844/jssp.2011.569.574 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10272-009-0295-x https://doi.org/10.1007/s10272-009-0295-x https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/106/1/012008