But the main difference ultimately is whether authorities, in this case the police and the city administration, actually do something about it.

Cities such as Jakarta are not on the brink of anarchy. But it has descended into a chaotic temperament of might is right and an understanding that if no one does anything about it, bedlam is permissible irrespective of rights of others.

Mobs have a long history in Indonesian politics. Most of the major socio-political organizations in this country have some form of “youth wing” in their ranks. How they choose to use them depends on the nature of the organization, circumstance and the level of political desperation on the day. These multipurpose garrisons are employed for a diverse range of activities, from social and political ones to being an intimidating deterrent.

One thing is clear, they are meant to be a tour de force of political prowess.

In some cases, “youth wings” can be an asset primarily because their parent organization is legitimate entities that engage in the formal socio-political sector.

But when a mob culture seeps the masses, potentially productive elements become a threat. In a liberal political setting, without the patronage of a genuine organization, these groups become roving mobs that act like criminal gangs.

In brief, the culture of thuggery.

We applaud that the practice of thuggery, which has become so prominent in this metropolis, is finally being rightly vilified at the highest levels.

A multi-party coalition of legislators at the House of Representatives has condemned the actions of the Islam Defenders Front (FPI), demanding that the organization should be forbidden.

A 1985 law raises the possibility of banning groups disruptive to security and public order, along with those which spread teachings in opposition to state ideology Pancasila and the Constitution.

But banning the FPI, as a matter of fact, is unimportant. Perhaps even unnecessary, especially using laws that are rather draconian and originally designed to mitigate freedom of political association.

To invoke the law now could actually open the flood gates of proscription for political motives toward legitimate groups who may be critics of the status quo.

What’s in a name? Banning the FPI would only disperse membership into smaller, and even more radical gangs.

The trouble with the FPI may not even be the FPI itself.

It is the omission by the police to effectively encourage lawless activities through a “do nothing” attitude when such incidents arise. In fact, it seems almost a standard procedure to let incidents occur first, then take action once property and people’s heads have been bashed away.

The police realize their duty to fight crime, but they certainly neglect a more important obligation to prevent crime.

Some have even accused people close to police sources of actually being backers of groups of street thugs as part of a wider underworld racket that includes protection money and debt collection, among others.

This habit of omission rewards anarchic behavior, empowering groups such as the FPI and a half dozen others in the capital with a sense of impunity.

Actually, we cannot blame serial thugs for their behavior. There is no point expecting the higher rules of moral civility to groups of men (and some women) who are cowards and hypocrites by preying on pacifist civilians in the name of God.

What we should condemn even more is the police and authorities who have not, and still are not, doing anything against these groups. Ultimately, they become the real brutes who decline communities and create public insecurity.

Popular

PDI-P will likely be part of opposition: Ganjar

Indonesia one step from Olympics after beating South Korea

Bahlil leads task force to boost sugar, bioethanol production in Papua