In a country that has an intellectual class independent, and the people have cultural understanding high level of democracy, and equipped by a political elite who carry out a tradition of high ethics, the practice of conspiracy between the intellectual class and the political elite will be very difficult occur. Not only because each of them has a very strict and strong morality and state system, but also the community will be very effective in playing the role of both monitoring groups.

Moreover, supported by the phenomenon of social media that fundamentally changes the landscape of our social life, then, movements by utilizing these social media platforms are very capable of making the intellectual class and elite class cautious and increasing their sensitivity in understanding public aspirations in the form of bubbles that often appear and are viral in the virtual world.

In contrast to the countries mentioned above, the social reality that occurs in our country is the opposite of everything described in the previous paragraph. Today, it is very easy for us to point the nose at anyone in the intellectual class who tends to side with the interests of the political elite.

Not only because the intellectual class expects a prize in the form of a certain position, but also the political elite needs their services to provide legitimacy for all policy products produced by them, so that the legitimacy of the intellectual class is expected to be able to convince the public not to criticize the policies made.

Hence, Antonio Gramsci, a famous Italian thinker and philosopher, once, classified the intellectual class into two groups, one, called ‘organic intellectuals’, namely the intellectual group who chooses to be independent and open to the possibility of criticism of all behavior of power, and guarantees siding with groups of people who are in a position of urgency by power, while the other is a ‘traditional intellectual’, who chooses to interact with power in a friendly way, and pragmatically sided with political elite groups who are considered to be able to have a beneficial impact on him.

In fact, intellectual groups in this country, who are consciously in opposition to society, by siding with the political elite, due to certain guaranteed benefits that they will get as a result of the services they offer, can be classified as traditional intellectual groups.

A group which, by Gramsci, was criticized as a representation of the death of conscience and the darkness of morals possessed by this intellectual group, due to their inclination towards material resources that provide great value for their more secure sustainability of life.

This traditional intellectual group, even if later given the opportunity to lead a certain public office that has a specific function in the life of the wider community, will always design its policy lines in line with the interests of the political elite who have contributed to raising their social level with a seat of power that is often seen as containing certain privileges. in front of the other feudal mortals who often circled around power.

Meanwhile, the organic intellectual group is the opposite of the reflection of the traditional intellectual group. Idealism as a class that represents siding with the people who are often oppressed by power, becomes a clear line that characterizes their morality and affiliation in viewing the current socio-political reality.

This siding with the people, not only for groups of people who only have small financial power, with a social structure that is on a marginal line, but also for groups of people who are financially strong and occupy an elite social structure, if indeed this group is also the parties who always experience persecution and loss by power.

The magnitude of the authority and authority possessed by power, with the great potential for deviation and abuse by using the tools of power, is basically the basis why the intellectual class must be consciously opposed to power.

Basically, this intellectual group can have two choices regarding power, first, being within the power itself, by playing themselves as individuals who show high moral and ethical standards in operating power, so as not to deviate from the rails in favor of the public interest, and play an active role in perfecting the state administration system in order to close all the gaps that allow the entry of feudalism, corruption, collusion and nepotism into power, which can cause paralysis of the power itself.

Or secondly, being out of power, with mobilize public support to participate in realizing a measurable and precise correction system for power, so that power is not exercised arbitrarily due to a lack of supervision from intellectual elements—who are considered to understand power issues—and elements of society which with an awareness of the weight of their quantity, as well as the diversity of their social base, to transform into a pressure group against power which Lord Acton referred to as, "tends to corrupt".

Building awareness to be constantly alert to the arrival of unjust powers, due to the lack of control from the intellectual class and the apathy of civil society, according to Michael Foucault, are considered as prerequisites for the formation of a democratic state administration system, so that the potential for oppression to emerge through the hands of power can be avoided and, the life of the state will increasingly move in a better direction, as aspired by Al Farabi in his thesis on "the ideal state", namely: a state that fights for the prosperity and welfare of its citizens. All policies are directed at the interests of the people. It's not a group interest, let alone a personal interest.