DECONSTRUCTING INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION 4.0 DISCOURSE IN EDUCATIONAL INEQUALITY IN INDONESIA

Research with the topic of deconstructing industrial revolution 4.0 discourse is become important to provide awareness that except spiritual concepts, absolute truth cannot exist. In the discourse of Industrial Revolution 4.0, we must see the truth as separated fragments. The discourse of the industrial revolution 4.0, is born and forced to become a new regime of truth in society. Knowledge and enthusiasm regarding the discourse of the industrial revolution 4.0 which is disseminated systematically and then manifested into regulations actually curbs people's way of thinking. Therefore, this research aims to examining overlooked meanings, or even presenting a different perspective with critical analysis regarding industrial revolution discourse in education. And also revise the facts behind the belief and enthusiasm for the industrial revolution 4.0 discourse. This research uses a qualitative approach, with a literature study method, so that data is obtained through reviewing various scientific journals related to the research theme. Research findings show 1) industrial revolution 4.0 discourse was formed because the state positioned education as an opportunity for economic activity, which then had to be adapted and lead to children's investment in the future through education, 2) The delegation of quality education to the private sector and the reduced role of the state are caused by neoliberal discourse. Problems then arise when the discourse on industrial revolution 4.0 actually ignores the right to an equitable and prosperous life and further sharpens inequality in society, 3) Each social class has different habits (habitus) to respond to readiness for the industrial revolution 4.0. Starting from media ownership and access to learning, to family cultural factors and the absence of the state in important areas of learning.


INTRODUCTION
From the many problematic records in education, the direction of change today generally refers to changes that tend to be disruptive.The era of disruption has various characteristics including massive change, fast movement, complex causative factors, diverse patterns that are difficult to predict, uncertainty of the resulting changes, and ambiguity in the direction of change (RISTEKDIKTI, 2018).In another opinion, disruption is also defined as innovation (kasal rhenald, 2017).The tendency of a very dynamic society makes the phenomena and events in it an interesting study to discuss.
In this state of ambiguity, a discourse, namely the industrial revolution 4.0 in a long period of time has become a 'new truth regime' in the face of world education, including Indonesia.The discourse here should not be simplified the same as 'gossip' or even something planned has not happened.But discourse is knowledge that is deliberately disseminated so that it becomes belief and truth in society.The mention of industry 4.0 itself begins with a computerized manufacturing project that is hegemonized by the German government (Muhammad, 2018).For reasons of innovation and adaptation as well, education in Indonesia began to develop a strategic plan through policies and regulations in order to welcome technology and information-based education.It is proven in practice that the term 'making Indonesia 4.0' in the world of education (Surani, 2019)is very popular.
Increasing human resources (HR) is considered to play an important role in initiating the Making Indonesia 4.0 program.The Indonesian government, like other governments in the world, believes it will contribute positively to the nation's economic growth (Adriany & Saefullah, 2015).In addition, in an effort to accelerate the formation of quality schools, the state will cooperate a lot with foreign government assistance and industrial private sectors, as well as evaluate global labor mobility programs in order to empower many human resources to accelerate the transmission of knowledge and abilities (Dianti, 2017).That way, every student and educator in this case is required to fulfill all the skills needed in the 21st century.It is also important to improve the learning environment that allows students to have hands-on industry experience through internships, soft skills development, and competency competitions (Malihah & Diyah Setiyorini, 2019) However, empirical experience of the shock effects of changes that occurred during the Covid-19 pandemic made researchers assume many loopholes to deconstruct the industrial revolution 4.0 as the dominant discourse in society, especially those related to education.Like what was mentioned by (Malihah Elly, 2021) who said that online learning is an exit strategy so that learning always continues.For researchers, it indicates that the use of digital-based technology dominates every community activity, including educational activities.Then behind the massive use of technology, a study was found that said that the Covid-19 pandemic resulted in the percentage of poverty in Indonesia in 2020 increasing from 4% to 12% (Santosa, 2020).This social inequality has a more impact on people with low economic status and who feel the most sting from the pandemic (Whitehead et al., 2021) Efforts to glorify the discourse of industry 4.0 in education at least until the Covid-19 pandemic indicate a dilemmatic phenomenon.The learning process during the Covid-19 pandemic seen from the category of school locations in Central Lombok, NTB, for example, which is divided into three school locations, namely urban, suburban, and remote, shows that the location of schools in urban and suburban areas is only in good categories while in remote areas there are various obstacles (Noviana et al., 2020).Even for the majority of people in remote areas, not only the internet and signals they do not have, basic learning devices such as mobile phones in the online learning period also do not exist.Judging from the internet speed alone, the average internet penetration in Indonesia is only at 20.1 Mbps, far different from the average speed in the world which touched 73.6 Mbps (KEMP SIMON, 2020).
Then the inability of the state to maximally facilitate inclusive education in schools adds to the problematic record of the industrial revolution 4.0 discourse.The lack of friendly facilities for children with special needs in schools is a problem that has begun to prolong (Malihah et al., 2021).The imbalance of rights and access that exists in such conditions has the potential to lead us to education that is exclusive only to certain groups or groups.It will only indicate differences in behavior to students and result in discriminatory attitudes.In other words, we allow an inequality in education, giving rise to a strong counter-opinion, based on the fact on the ground that equal opportunities in education is just a myth.
What Paulo Freire worries about 'bank' style education (Paulo, 2019) is an interesting concept in the discourse of the industrial revolution 4.0.The state plans, makes policies, discourses, practices, also internalizes the values and spirit of technological development with the intention that later in the future innocent children can pay for the services that have been provided in the future.It would be wrong to position these students only as objects, as instruments of state investment.Under the pretext of 'adapting to the times', the industrial revolution was discoursed.It's also important to realize that adaptation is the most fragile form of self-defense, as well as something very philosophical.Adaptation is only for those who give themselves up to be governed, made as objects, an illustration of the imposition of the will on others.Thus the teacher-student relationship is also only a subject and an object.The teacher talks about many things that are alien to the experience of existence.

METHODOLOGY
The method used is a literature study approach (library research) that uses writings related to research materials such as books and journals.According to (Zed Mestika, 1955), said that literature research or literature study, is a series of research activities related to central data collection methods, after that it enters the stage of reading and recording, then processing the research material.Meanwhile, (Sugiyono, 2011), explained that literature study is related to theoretical studies through references related to culture, values, and norms that develop depending on the social situation at the time the object is studied.From the two definitions above, it can be concluded that in the literature study approach, the author does not directly go into the field to meet respondents.But the data is obtained through the results of readings recorded, then analyzed, Whether it's writing contained in books or other documents related to the research theme.Therefore, the author conducted a literature study related to the theme of the article discussion.
After the data is collected, the author then analyzes the data through a process of assessment and comparison of the data that has been obtained systematically.On this occasion, the author uses content analysis techniques.Content analysis is a discussion that has in-depth characteristics of the content of information, both printed and unprinted information sourced from the internet (Sofiah et al., 2020).Analysis of the content contained in this literature study is by analyzing various books, journals, and research articles related to the research theme

RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Efforts to deconstruct the discourse of the industrial revolution 4.0 will not be carried out if only we still think as generally society responds to technological developments as the only positive way out of existing social changes.If we think with such a style of thinking, then there will be no alternative discourses that can match the Industrial Revolution 4.0 as the dominant discourse that dominates the spaces of public conversation.Critically examining it is important to further know what discourses are then ignored and not paid attention to properly, as a result of the discourse that is too dominant, namely the Industrial Revolution 4.0 in society.
However, first we have to see how the role of technology and the internet has become an important part of people's lives.On the one hand, technology can be used to support education, facilitate access to information, and enable more interactive learning.On the other hand, such as mentioned in the previous paragraph, technology also carries risks such as misuse of information, harmful content, and negative behavior online.In research conducted by (Risdianto & Cs, 2019), changes that occurred in the Industrial Revolution 4.0 created significant transformations in various sectors, such as the change from conventional retail to e-commerce, the emergence of online-based transportation services, the use of robot technology in industry, the replacement of letters with electronic messages, and changes in learning models with easy access via the internet.Data also shows that much of the equipment currently used by society related to technology accounts for about 30%.The number of productive age population in Indonesia reaches around 68.7% of the total population, and the active use of smartphones in this country reaches more than 100 million people A Then start-up businesses in the field of education, such as ruangguru.comand quiper.com,have seen great opportunities in the Industrial Revolution 4.0.Ruangguru, for example, has recorded more than 6 million users in 2017 (Risdianto & Cs, 2019).In this context, the challenge for teachers in this era is to adapt learning strategies and models to changing technological developments.The Industrial Revolution 4.0 has changed the educational landscape by presenting a variety of new learning models that focus more on easy access, flexibility, and affordable costs.However, the hegemony of the Industrial Revolution 4.0 is counterproductive to the reality on the ground.For example, almost half of adults in Indonesia did not own a mobile phone that could access the internet (e.g.smartphones) before the COVID-19 pandemic, creating a fundamental barrier to accessing the internet.These digital devices are still unaffordable for many people (SETIAWAN & PAPE, 2022).
According to the (Badan Pusat Statistik Indonesia, 2023), the percentage of poor people throughout Indonesia has reached 25.90 million people.with a monthly poverty line of Rp. 550,458.This means that monthly expenditures of less than Rp.550.000/month are categorized as poor.With this poverty standard, at least 10% population in Indonesia is a lower class.As a comparison, World Bank (Arrijal, 2023) actually recommended that Indonesia urges to change its standard poverty line, namely to US$ 3.20 per day.So that people who earn less than 1.5 million per month are categorized as poor.With this Poverty standard, at least 40% population in Indonesia categorized as poor.Now we have almost half of the population is categorized as poor when we use the data from the World Bank.The different is too far, which means the more people who are categorized as poor, the more people who will be categorized as a group is oppressed by industrial revolution 4.0 discourse because of their unpreparedness to adapt.
However, this statistic has shown us that inequality is really exist.The middle and lower class in society has to survive despite their conditions who is unimaginable suffering.Unfortunately, the industrial revolution 4.0 discourse make them forced to adapt the situations.A brief overview in the paragraph above about how digital technology has brought changes and become an important part of people's lives clearly proves that the Industrial Revolution 4.0 has mastered the spaces of public conversation.Therefore, it is necessary to create a discourse to later be used as an effort to produce a new alternative discourse.Here researchers intensively examine these alternative discourses into issues that are less noticed by the public, as a result of the too dominant discourse of the Industrial Revolution 4.0 in society.

How Industrial Revolution 4.0 Became a Truth in Society
Making Indonesia 4.0 was first initiated by President Joko Widodo's government on April 4 2018.Against the backdrop of global industrial changes and developments in artificial intelligence, apart from that, this is necessary to increase the competitiveness of Indonesian people.Research from (Kusumasari et al., 2018) emphasized that it is very important to improve the quality of Indonesian people through vocational education and training that is in line with industry needs.The government is also preparing various policies and regulations to be able to adapt to existing changes, such as the blueprint for the Indonesian payment system 2025 by Bank Indonesia which will be a new direction for the digital-based national payment system (Prasidya & Dewi, 2023).
The "Making Indonesia 4.0" program actually explains how the discourse process ultimately becomes truth in society through Michel Foucault's discourse theory.This starts from a condition where the country imagines the changes caused by the industrial revolution 4.0 as something that must be adapted.With the aim of Indonesian society to produce human resources (HR) that can compete globally.On this basis, the state then produces knowledge and information about the industrial revolution as a truth that must be followed by its people.On this basis, the state also produces policies, both national and regional, to facilitate the perpetuation of the industrial revolution 4.0 discourse as the dominant discourse, which ultimately leads to an ambition for uniform thinking patterns in facing existing changes.
This uniform understanding of the changes caused by the industrial revolution 4.0 is then seen as a form of practice to regulate people's ways of thinking and habits.Where discourse can be understood as a form of regulated practice and thought (Foucault, 1980), at the same time producing certain truths and producing power.In this stage, society sees truth as a tool that 'naturalizes the power relations that exist in society' (Naughton, 2005).Foucault's framework of thinking sees that power is not centralized, but is spread across various discourses in society (Foucault, 1980).The relationship between knowledge and power is perpetuated because power produces certain types of knowledge and knowledge justifies existing power relations (Fenech & Sumsion, 2007) So that in the end the industrial revolution 4.0 discourse becomes a 'new truth regime' that dominates public conversation spaces.The relationship between power and knowledge is undeniable because the state or in this case the government has all the instruments to make the industrial revolution 4.0 discourse an absolute truth.At the same time, the people justify and see this knowledge as something positive by internalizing this knowledge into their daily life enthusiasm.

Students As A State Investments Tool
In the roadmap of making Indonesia 4.0, the skills and abilities of the workforce continue to be encouraged to continue to increase in accordance with the needs of the global market, especially in the use of the internet of things (Satya, 2018).This indirectly places students as a tool of state investment to be able to adapt to existing changes.'Adaptation' is the diction chosen by the state to be able to produce a skilled workforce in accordance with the needs of the global market, thus the state has made students as objects that must be conditioned.Where students are projected to repay state services in the future by becoming human beings whose desires and behaviors are in accordance with the wishes and expectations of the state.If the conditions are like this, then what (Paulo, 2019) says we must reflect, that adaptation is the most fragile form of self-defense.Because by adapting, we voluntarily make ourselves governed by circumstances, without any dialectical process to make the chances of those circumstances being better and progressive for society in the future later.So the existing social changes have actually made the country and the prospective workforce exist, in this case students become mere objects and investments.
Investing students to be able to compete in this global market violates the meaning of education which should humanize.Research from (Goudarzi et al., 2021), for example, which says that with the concept of competition and free markets, humans lose empathy for other humans.Emotional closeness is no longer considered necessary.Everyone interacts with others based solely on meeting non-intimate needs.Digital habits have also changed the quality of relationships between individuals.This is strengthened, one of which is the trend of people who no longer want intimate and romantic relationships (Fitrianingrum et al., 2021).That way the investment of these students will lead to the exploitation of humans from their humanity only.
In the end, educational conditions like this will result in inequality of roles in each educational actor.The state sees the school as a tool to distribute its interests, while the teacher sees learners as objects that must be conditioned to always be in accordance with the interests of the state.So that the learning that occurs is empty and foreign.Because students are alienated from their own life experiences.This is because the school is in a position as the only actor who is seen as having the knowledge to be justified by every learner in the classroom.Of course in this case it is about the changes caused by the industrial revolution 4.0 in society.

The Private Sector As Main Actor Of Education
In this context we will look at neoliberal elements in Indonesian education.Education for neoliberalism is a tool to improve a country's economy (Rosser, 2015).Almost all countries in Asia, for example, receive loan assistance from donor agencies such as the World Bank, including funding for the implementation of education.This makes the role of the state replaced by the private sector in managing education in society.This has implications for state policies, because through the assistance of these loans, the World Bank usually influences public policies in a country (Rosser, 2015).A total of US$1.5 billion was given to the Indonesian government to support active projects and future projects, including the Strategic Plan (RENSTRA) program in collaboration between the Ministry of National Education and the World Bank (worldbank, 2014).Same as World Bank, other interventions such as those from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) also have a major influence on human capital improvement policy programs in Asian countries.OECD actively carries out movements to improve human capital discourse through economic-based knowledge productions (Adriany, 2017).They believe the growth of human skills is the key to responding to changes in the industrial revolution 4.0.
At this point, the planning and implementation of education in the industrial era 4.0 in Indonesia has been strongly influenced by the private sector.At the same time, the role and presence of the government has been suppressed to a minimum due to the influence of its policies.Under these conditions, the state has become dependent on these donor agencies (Adriany, 2017).State dependence on The donor agency reinforces neoliberal concepts in education in Indonesia.At this stage we can actually interpret that it turns out that the state or in this case the government is reluctant to be the main actor in determining the face of education, or even the state does not know and know the needs of its people at all so it must hand over the management of education to foreign parties.
The concept of education as an economic activity will put learners in a condition to always meet market needs, and even compete freely.This free competition will later give birth to social injustice.Because in society there is almost certainly no equal competition.Everyone competes with the resources they have, the problem is that not everyone has the same resources.
The existence of this social inequality will affect the response of every group of society to changes caused by the industrial revolution 4.0.People who have established resources will be better able to compete to meet the needs of the global market.

Social Habitus
Attempts to deconstruct the discourse of the industrial revolution 4.0 then arrived at Pierre Bourdieu's analysis of social habitus.To understand social reality, Bourdieu sees the individual as a subject who has a dialectical process of capital (capital), arena (field), and habitus as a form of individual praxis (Mustikasari et al., 2023).Every resource, both economic and cultural, will have a reciprocal relationship with the environment owned by the individual, which will then form habitus in the form of social praxis.In short, habitus is obtained through the results of individual experiences both play activities, parenting, and education in society with a broad meaning.Habitus can also mean a person's understanding or knowledge of the world and its social reality (Wuriyani, 2020).
At the stage after we understand social habitus, then at the same time we realize that society cannot be categorized as a completely equal social group.The interesting part of social habitus is when this theory distinguishes a person based on his ownership of capital and habitus.Someone who has an established habitus due to good capital ownership tends to dominate the arena (environment) and win social competition, because in the arena there will always be competition between individuals (Wiranata, 2020).Individuals who are unable to compete due to inadequate capital or capital will produce social inequality in society.Social inequality has become an acute and recurring problem caused by unequal competition and tends to be forced.Even in the realm of education, which in fact is a tool to improve the social status of the community.
Education should be a means of social mobility for the community.However, the reality of education that occurs on the ground actually indicates that schools have become an arena for reproduction of mass social inequality.This is because there are significant habituses or habits that differ between social classes in society, which indirectly shows the existing social inequality.The research of (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1990) succeeded in revealing the dominance of capital in students; reading habits, foreign language skills, technology utilization, and also other habituses in society are not passed down instantly, but through habituation of cultural capital socialized through the family.Habits such as reading and digital comprehension skills are instilled in families, and are generally found in families with middle to upper social classes.Because they have the resources for that.Conversely, lower-middle class families generally do not practice these habits due to economic and access limitations.This condition makes the upper middle class dominate the social changes caused by the industrial revolution 4.0.While the lower middle group becomes the dominated group.
It does not stop there, inequality occurs when learning support facilities and access to quality learning are actually not feasible and difficult to obtain.Not all children can have the opportunity to go to school in a school environment that is a fact that leads us to the extremes of inequality that exist in society.This is explained in (Wachidah & Wulandari, 2014) research where schools that are in the status of Underdeveloped, Frontier, and Outermost (3T) do not get quality education due to the lack of supporting facilities and difficult access.This problem was then slowly overcome and has become a cycle of national education problems, which then makes schools an arena for reproduction of social inequality in society.
Because the stark difference in resources makes competition between students, teachers, and schools only a show of social injustice.(Fitri et al., 2020) have discussed in their research that according to data from the Ministry of Education and Culture in April 2020, about 18% of primary and secondary schools (around 40,779 schools) do not have internet access, and about 3% of schools (7,552 schools) do not have electricity supply.In fact, based on information from the Federation of Indonesian Teachers Unions (FSGI), geographical constraints are a serious problem for students in Southeast Sulawesi.In addition, lack of interest in learning among students and lack of support from parents also affect the effectiveness of distance learning.This raises concerns that these students may not gain enough knowledge for their future education.

CONCLUSION
This research must be able to provoke the public that it turns out that we have become objects of change.The discourse of the Industrial Revolution 4.0 has turned off critical reason to create better conditions under the pretext of adapting to the times.Where the Industrial Revolution 4.0 has become the dominant discourse in society through systematic strategies and practices, through various state tools and instruments.This study further shows that the implementation of policies regarding the Industrial Revolution 4.0 in the context of education contributes actively in perpetuating social inequalities in society.In fact, we see the roles of the state in providing quality education begin to be replaced by the roles of non-government organisations (NGOs).In learning, differences in resources, infrastructure, and the ability to utilize digital technology between social classes become problems that are too prolonged and seem to be ignored.So that ultimately leads us to deconstructing the discourse of the Industrial Revolution 4.0 with symptoms that also occur in the realm of education in society.What is presented in this study then focuses on a harsh reality that equality in education has not occurred in society.Equal opportunities to access quality learning are still a myth that can be realized if the strength of resources and the quality of learning support are also different.