Indonesia: Governor hopefuls, conflicts and civic pluralism

---

Our focus here is how particular groups are relatively acceptable while others are not. What actually constitutes tolerability or intolerability? How can tolerability be constructed and intolerability diminished or eradicated? What agenda should each pair of gubernatorial hopefuls adopt regarding cultural conflicts?

Ahmadiyya Times | News Watch |
Source/Credit: The Jakarta Post
By Khairil Azhar | July 7, 2012

It is interesting that all Jakarta governor hopefuls are visiting Chinese communities as part of their campaigns. Every visit is by and large well covered by mass media, thereby often offering cheap or even free publicity for the hopefuls. So far, almost all of them have done this “ritual”.

Yet, we may ask, “Why don’t they visit other minority communities, especially the ones with uncertain providence?” Indeed, we never see any of them pay a visit to Ahmadiyah communities or areas where churches are in dispute.

The first explanation for this omission might be what is considered an “acceptable culture”; that visiting Chinese communities, including at times their temples, is widely allowed socially. After all, even radical Muslims never protest these activities.

In addition, despite the fact that many of our Chinese brothers now embrace Christianity, with Confucianism and Buddhism the two religions for which they are culturally associated, they are not considered as threatening. Most possibly, it is because these two religions have no embedded mission to proselytize to people of other faiths.

The second explanation is certainly the problem of capital. All pairs of gubernatorial hopefuls must ensure that their campaigns (and their policies afterward, if elected) will secure the fuel of economic machinery. Jakarta’s economy, as well as Indonesia’s, depends greatly on the capital owned by the Chinese minority and, at the same time, on their economic flair and skills.

The governor hopefuls must, therefore, be able to guarantee their existential and social safety. The common question that arises is, “What will you do to make sure we can live safely in Indonesia and keep doing business here without interference?”

Our focus here is how particular groups are relatively acceptable while others are not. What actually constitutes tolerability or intolerability? How can tolerability be constructed and intolerability diminished or eradicated? What agenda should each pair of gubernatorial hopefuls adopt regarding cultural conflicts?

One of the latest promising solutions cropping up in Indonesia is something called “civic pluralism”. While the older understanding of pluralism — which received strong resistance from Muslims — aims to lead us toward any endeavor seeking philosophical or theological sameness among beliefs or cultures (within which it is assumed tolerance will flourish) this newer approach aims to accept diversity and take cross-religious and cross-cultural understanding as its starting point (Zainal Abidin Bagir et al, 2011).

In civic pluralism, with its political orientation rather than theological, the focus is on how to create a policy where different religious or cultural identities can live side by side while, at the same time, adhering to their own identities without causing detriment to one another.

Secularization, which is commonly defined as the distinction (or total separation) between state and religious affairs, is here understood more as “wishful thinking” rather than ever being fully manifested in many democratic countries. The inclusion of religious notions or even symbols is, therefore, acceptable to a well-defined extent.

Tensions, related to diversity and equality, are tolerable and are solved through dialogue, consensus or cultural (traditional) references instead of using legal processes. Put simply, alternative dispute resolution must play the most pivotal role.

A strong government, as a prerequisite, must therefore defend the democratic public sphere, and recognize and serve various societal groups without any discrimination.

And citizens must in turn be educated to be able to participate in consensus building and developing a communal ethos both within and beyond the legal domain.

To return to the first point made above, the acceptability of Chinese descent together with the Chinese people’s non-evangelical beliefs offers a good example of how civic pluralism can work. As far as we know, tensions — or violent conflict — between Chinese Indonesians and other social groups have mostly related to economic problems.

Second, the inclusion of Confucianism legally as the country’s sixth official religion also proves the possibility of developing cross-cultural understanding among civilians regardless of how diminutive it might be.

It also confirms that legislation, a core component in democracy, is one possible means of allowing civil society to represent itself properly and effectively.

So, as to the gubernatorial hopefuls in Jakarta, where violence in the name of religion frequently occurs, their meeting with our Chinese Indonesian brethren should not be mere lip service during this campaigning period.

It should also not be what Thomas L. Friedman wrote recently when remarking on democracy in America: “When one person can write a check to finance your whole campaign, how inclusive will you be as an elected official to listen to competing voices?” (The New York Times, March 31).

At last, the governor hopefuls actually have more than enough ammunition to be at the forefront of creating a more equal and peaceful society. When recurrent violence in the name of religion is allegedly perpetrated by so-called native ethnic groups, for instance, alternative dispute resolution is actually available. What is important, therefore, is the degree of social sensitivity and moral audacity in the gubernatorial pair that is finally chosen.

The writer is a researcher at the Paramadina Foundation, Jakarta.

Read original post here: Governor hopefuls, conflicts and civic pluralism


This content-post is archived for backup and to keep archived records of any news Islam Ahmadiyya. The views expressed by the author and source of this news archive do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of Ahmadiyya Times.