TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Indonesian moderation and ‘Indonesianness’
Indonesia recently endured an apparent state of emergency with regard to radicalism, which along with terrorism have become major issues and served as justification for acts to control
Change Size
I
ndonesia recently endured an apparent state of emergency with regard to radicalism, which along with terrorism have become major issues and served as justification for acts to control.
Narratives to watch out for “jihadists”, “caliphate”, “Wahhabists” and others along with various deradicalization policies have filled public spaces.
The subject of mosques, campuses, state-owned enterprises and even early childhood educational institutions being exposed to radicalism, is so openly brought to light in society that it gives rise to a nationwide controversy.
If the concept of radicalism is linked with what was referred to by Omer Taspinar (2015) as “violent movements” like in the various cases of bombings, physical assault and all kinds of violent acts in Indonesia, it can be understood as an objective outlook and reality. Religious radicalism, including that in a small group of Muslims, certainly constitutes an actual social fact.
In such a position, both the government and many components of the nation are committed to jointly rejecting all forms of radical ideas and acts or radicalism that end in violence, treason and disruption of human life and the environment, which are strictly prohibited by God as they belong to fasad fil-ardl (external earth destruction).
Religious radicalism indeed occurs in life as is the case of other forms of radicalism in every part of the world. The stigma of Islamic radicalism is so strong and sometimes borders on Islamophobia, with its complex roots as explained by John Esposito and Iner Deyra (2018).
The social fact is also undeniable with the presence of radical-extremist movements like Hizbut Tahrir, al-Qaeda, Jamaah Islamiyah and various jihadist groups at global, national and local levels that spawn many problems and acts of violence.
However, the concept and aspect of radicalism in thought and reality are actually universal or general in nature, whether at the global or international and domestic levels in Indonesia.
The terrorism at Christchurch mosques in New Zealand that killed 49 people was not committed by Muslims, but targeted Muslim worshippers.
Similar incidents took place in the country, like the mosque burning in Tolikara in Papua, the attack by an armed group in Wamena, Papua, that claimed 33 lives, injured hundreds and forced thousands of migrants to flee Papua, the killing of 31 construction workers in Yigi-Nduga district, Papua, and the separatist movement that jeopardizes public and state security.
All these point to the fact of radicalism, more specifically extremism and terrorism, are not simple and does not concern one group.
Liberalization that followed Indonesian reform was in fact radical. Neoliberalism and neocapitalism threaten Indonesia and the unitary state of Indonesia. After four constitutional amendments, many basic aspects have changed in an “extreme” way, like the People’s Consultative Assembly, which is no longer the supreme state institution, articles on human rights that are very liberal, the democratization of Article 33 that serves the interests of capitalism, the omission of “indigenous Indonesian” as the requirement for the presidency, regional autonomy that resembles a federation and other things that trigger counter reactions to reinstate the original 1945 Constitution and other responses.
The same is true of the practice of hegemony in the control of the state and natural resources by a handful of people who engage in oligarchic politics that considerably harm the fulfillment of people’s needs and the country’s ideals. This problem is not free from the clout of radicalism and extremism in the complex realm of Indonesia.
When radicalism is understood as an extreme and hard-line outlook and orientation within one pendulum, it can be concluded that ideological, political, economic and cultural radicalism is as problematic as religious radicalism or extremism for the future of Indonesia.
Therefore, moderation is needed as an alternative to deradicalization so as to remain in line with Pancasila as a middle-way ideology that reflects the moderate character of the nation. Moderation serves as a reference of strategy in the face of radicalism.
Moderation of Indonesia and “Indonesianness” as an outlook and orientation is inevitable, as promulgated in the preamble of the 1945 Constitution and envisioned by our founding fathers.
The moderation of Indonesia is certainly objective in all aspects of life. Indonesia should be freed from all forms of radicalism, both from the clout of extremism toward liberalization and secularization and from orthodoxy in political, economic, cultural and religious life.
It thus becomes something biased and pejorative when radicalism is restricted to religious radicalism, particularly that of Islam as reflected in various views and policies regarding deradicalization.
The biased views, besides being opposed to Pancasila as a benchmark of statehood, will only result in Islam and Muslims being blamed as a stigma of radicalism, while ignoring other kinds of radicalism that are no less dangerous or problematic.
This objective outlook by no means negates the presence of radicalism or more specifically religious extremism in some part of the Islamic community in Indonesia, which in a number of cases display radical and extreme realities that require moderation of religious practice and Islam as rahmatan lil-‘alamin (blessing for all creations).
The construction of biased and generalized radicalism can put Indonesia in a radicalism emergency, while basically there are still many moderate sociological aspects that can develop Indonesia into an advanced, unified, sovereign, just and prosperous country. The exaggerated outlook with an overdose of deradicalization or deradicalism can even lead to a paradox: fighting radical acts with radical means will breed new radical acts.
To address religious radicalism as in the cases of bombings or the promotion of radical ideas, area blocking is needed besides strict law enforcement so as to prevent the spread of radicalism to areas that are actually within safe and peaceful moderate zones.
A diverse Indonesia should further promote the growth of positive energy for the future of the nation and the country’s golden generation. If the campaign against radicalism runs on a daily basis without efforts to tackle it, Indonesia will be polluted by radicalism, even more so if it is propagated in a noisy way with tons of negative messages related to radicalization, radicalism, deradicalization and deradicalism.
As Abu Hurairah put it and recounted by Bukhari-Muslim, that “Ana inda dhanny ‘abdi biy” (I am [your God] is as my servant thinks), so the negative messages will not become a widespread reality. At least they will not create a “radicalism syndrome” or “radicalism schizophrenia” that expose Indonesia and “Indonesianness” to structured, systematic and massive radicalism.
___________
Chairman of Muhammadiyah. The article is abridged from his speech delivered during his inauguration as professor of sociology at Muhammadiyah University of Yogyakarta on Dec. 12.
