C

anadian Muslim author Irshad Manji has been threatened and attacked in Jakarta by Muslim militias, including the well-known Islam Defenders Front (FPI). Is it a kind of neo-fascism in action, or an expression of Muslim majority sentiment and fear, or both at the same time?

There is nothing really new about these sorts of assaults. Attacks against individuals or groups that are seen somehow as odd, distinct or separate sort of people have become increasingly common as those who represent a real community or even aspiring to lead them, fall outside of the idealized world of some mainstream groups.

At a more profound level, however, the individuals and groupings being attacked are perceived by their aggressors as deviating from, or threatening, the “normal pattern of human life”, and are subsequently de-humanized by their critics who use terms such as “incomprehensible”.

As anthropologist Mary Douglas (1966) has argued, writing about dirt, purity and danger, such marginal societal groups are “out of place”, and therefore, ought to be “out of sight”.

Historically, the dehumanization and persecution of minority groups is unfortunately rather common. The Nazis used similar rhetoric in the 1940s when they wanted to annihilate what is nowadays called the LGBT community.

In the 1980s, the Indonesian Military wanted to get rid of petty criminals, known as the Petrus killings of the Gali-Gali, not least because the latter were marked by tattoos, which were seen as an abomination by those dressed in neat official (military) uniforms. Some even justified the 1960s massacres by rhetoric that referred to inhuman enemies.

In other words, “incomprehensible” sexual or gender orientation, “conspicuous and distortive” bodily markings, and “extreme” political deviation were in those cases functioning as political or spiritual challenges, or both, to the state authorities or those oriented toward the powers that be.

What is new with the recent assaults against Manji is that these attacks are coming from nominally majority groupings, who are increasingly acting like minorities driven by a greater need for recognition and increasing claims of a monopoly of authority over what they convey as purely religious messages.

However, as I have earlier argued in this paper (Feb. 27), the FPI and other Muslim militias can be seen as new jagos (fighting cock). Physical acts and appearance are important for these groups, and according to eyewitness reports, both were key features of the way they forced their way into the Salihara Cultural Center by destroying the fences and trying to convey their messages. It’s an expressive act of jagoism at its best.

Only a few weeks ago, Manji had also been assaulted in Amsterdam at a public debate introduced by Dutch Green Left Muslim-liberal politician Tofik Dibi. The event was disrupted by Belgian Muslim radicals.

Manji, but also the organizations that invited her, should have known what could happen and taken some precautionary steps.

In Amsterdam, the discussion continued after the police arrested the radicals. By contrast, the local police in Jakarta, using bylaws on foreigners as a pretext, tried to appease the violent radicals by urging the institutes and the public to stop the discussion.

Many have hoped for too long for higher state authorities to act decisively. It is time for Indonesian civil society to survey and seriously investigate the phenomenon of Muslim jagos.

As the generals who supported their founding in the late 1990s are now becoming routine politicians, we should work to understand who provides resources and support to these kinds of militias, what steps can be taken to minimize their violent acts and what sanctions the state should take against its own institutions, that were either unable or unwilling to take action to protect the constitutional rights of its citizens.

The writer is a journalist.