Time for More Protest

fastpitch17

Well-Known Member
Charter Member
Cager
Joined
Jul 19, 2016
Messages
4,716
Probably the same members as HTI. What this group has to do with anti Pancasila, pro caliphate is beyound me. Of course, if they are one and the same them makes sense and they need to go too. They say it limits citizen's rights. I didn't think citizens had a right to be anti Pancasila being that is the constitution.

National Movement to Safeguard the Indonesian Ulema Council's Fatwa (GNPF MUI) plan to hold a rally to demand government to annul Regulation in Lieu of Law (Perpu) on mass organization (Ormas). The protest is planned to be held on the upcoming 28 July.
https://en.tempo.co/read/news/2017/...-on-Mass-Organization-GNPF-MUI-to-Stage-Rally
 
Maybe the people selling nasi bungkus have run low on cash and need an earner...
 
On one hand HTI is an extremist, and organizations like these were routinely banned under Suharto under the old anti-subversion law, because their philosophy was not in line with Pancasila. However, the very same law was also routinely used to jail legitimate political opposition. Suharto interpreted open dissent as against Pancasila, and since the government decided what and what wasn't 'pancasilais', nonviolent people who pissed him off went to jail.

The new law seems to be an attempt to strike a balance between individual rights and national interest. It doesn't target individuals, so supposedly you as a person can still voice opposition. However, once you organize, your organization can be legally disbanded.

As a person who lived under Suharto, I can't say I like this law. It smells too much like the anti-subversion law invalidated in 1999. I know that it removes the legality of extremist groups, but I have a problem with the government making the judgment.

There is no easy answer.
 
Last edited:
It definitely seems an oppressive law ... BUT ... the groups in the crosshairs have no interest in individual rights, only their ability to express THEIR point of view, screw everyone else's
 
The problem is that this law is one of the very few options Jokowi has to fight against the spread of Middle-Eastern-financed extremist ideology. The law has its problems, but there are far worse laws on the books here. HTI, FPI, and others are an existential threat to the fragile modicum of inter-faith harmony we have here. The objections I hear against this PP seem to focus on its potential abuse as a weapon against political dissent, but the actual purpose of the law is pretty clearly to fight a legitimate threat. Hopefully the press will help prevent Jokowi from exceeding this narrow mandate.
 
I'm not worried so much as to how the current administration uses this law but, what happens if you put this law in the hands of someone like Prabowo if he got elected?
 
It definitely seems an oppressive law ... BUT ... the groups in the crosshairs have no interest in individual rights, only their ability to express THEIR point of view, screw everyone else's
But if we are equally disinterested in their individual rights, then the difference between us and them is in name only. Today I'm part of 'us', but what if one day you change your mind and decide that I'm part of 'them'? All of a sudden my individual rights don't matter to you anymore.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Dan
Human rights -- everybody or nobody, those are the choices.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Dan
I'm not worried so much as to how the current administration uses this law but, what happens if you put this law in the hands of someone like Prabowo if he got elected?
What happens when Suharto's son-in-law gets to use this anti-subversion lite law? You don't need a crystal ball to predict it.
 
Well I suppose it all comes down to two choices:

1. Let the status quo continue while the mass groups and their radical agenda is given carte blanche to disrupt society.

2. Live under a more authoritarian regime which suppresses the radicals/extremeists.

I'd be more inclined to choose the second in the name of 'the greater good'. I'd sooner put up with a corrupt regime rather than see the place turn into the next Iran or Afghanistan.

People demonised the likes of Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi and Hosni Mubarak. There may have been plenty of wrong doings, a few skeletons in the closet etc etc. But at the end of the day law and order was kept and the countries weren't in the mess that they are now.
 
Well I suppose it all comes down to two choices:

1. Let the status quo continue while the mass groups and their radical agenda is given carte blanche to disrupt society.

2. Live under a more authoritarian regime which suppresses the radicals/extremeists.

I'd be more inclined to choose the second in the name of 'the greater good'. I'd sooner put up with a corrupt regime rather than see the place turn into the next Iran or Afghanistan.

People demonised the likes of Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi and Hosni Mubarak. There may have been plenty of wrong doings, a few skeletons in the closet etc etc. But at the end of the day law and order was kept and the countries weren't in the mess that they are now.
You don't even need to make a choice of the two. There are already laws on the books to deal with these guys. Same laws they applied to arresting and imprisoning gafatar leaders. There are laws against hate speech and these organization are famous for giving them. Laws against threatening a president and calling for the killing of political leaders and these groups do that quite often. Laws and laws that could be used without setting up something like this PP.

The government has a lot of tools at their disposal but for some reason they fail to use them. Perhaps because they would need to single out individuals to charge them and then that riles the troops into backing them more. These groups are not going to go away just because you take away their right to be a legal group. They will rename and continue with whatever they were doing. That or go more underground and than very few know what they are doing.

HTI is a bad group. Totally in it to change the current governing of Indonesia. Still, would you rather know what they are up to or have to dig for information on them? These groups are not going away. The FPI will continue as they always have. There can be no change until the leadership is removed and maybe that could be like Suharto's reign if need be. These groups are not going away while the politicians and police fear them or act on their behalf. I say keep close attention to who is taking what side in these matters because as the FPI's Rizieq has stated, a revolution is in the making. His planned at this time return on Indonesia's Independence Day may have some significance to it. All these groups are together on disrupting the government and getting their way. One can only hope that if it comes to bloodshed, these so called nasi bunkus followers think that perhaps they were not cut out for this physical stuff and run the other way.

In the mean time, the government needs to get their ears into the Mosque and quell any radical sermons and then remove anyone giving them. They need to get their ears in the Muslim schools and identify the problems there and either remove them or close them. This is where the radical message is mostly getting spread.

So, the government can do a lot of things but so far, have not. Densis88 just goes after suspected terrorist, the police in general need to go after all the rest. Don't hold your breath but do hold your ear to the ground. It will all start in Jakarta so they can use the ample media coverage to get their message out across the nation.
 
Yes there are ample measures already to tackle the situation, but they're either not being used or being used (less than) half heartedlty. If all these measures had been implemented early on, it the situation wouldn't have gotten out of hand.

However, the situation has spiralled out of control and only a heavy handed approach will probably resolve it.

If we jog our memories back to last November. The police thought it would be a good idea to dress in white and chant with the protestors. If the army had been deployed it would have been a different story as you have rightly said.

The nasi bungkus, a bus ticket and pocket money for a pack of kreteks would definitely seem unappealing when having to face a heavily armed regiment in return for it.
 
Yes there are ample measures already to tackle the situation, but they're either not being used or being used (less than) half heartedlty. If all these measures had been implemented early on, it the situation wouldn't have gotten out of hand.

However, the situation has spiralled out of control and only a heavy handed approach will probably resolve it.
Yes, it has gotten out of control but this latest attempt by disbanding organizations is just words. Nothing heavy handed about it. Just another half hearted attempt at doing nothing. It won't change anything but seems to feed the people that like to demonstrate and disrupt the flow of Jakarta. All they do is make a mess, disrupt traffic, and get media coverage. There may have been some force used at a previous demonstration that had some violence but it was the VP that said there would be no armed police. He has always been one that seemed to side with the radicals on may issues. Maybe because he's president of the Mosque Association or something like that.

Jokowi says he wants drug dealers killed. OK, dumb but at the same time, drug dealers can harm a portion of the population. You would think that efforts to take over all the population government would be met with even more force. It should be. Words are not going to do it.
 
2. Live under a more authoritarian regime which suppresses the radicals/extremeists.

I'd be more inclined to choose the second in the name of 'the greater good'. I'd sooner put up with a corrupt regime rather than see the place turn into the next Iran or Afghanistan.

Here's the problem: you have a choice. If you're an expatriate you can choose to pack your bags and go back home. "oh well, the country went tits up, guess I have the privilege of moving somewhere else."

Most Indonesians don't have that as a legitimate option. They can't use their stellar Indonesian passport to just fly away when their government adopts harsh tactics. We're speaking of a government that sanctioned the murder of up to 1 million of their own people, a country that is still using oppressive, police state tactics in some outlying provinces.
 
Jokowi says he wants drug dealers killed. OK, dumb but at the same time, drug dealers can harm a portion of the population. You would think that efforts to take over all the population government would be met with even more force. It should be. Words are not going to do it.

In relation to the drug problem, words are actually doing it. Portugal has had greater success at stemming the tide of drug addiction and mortality than any other country on Earth. They did it by treating drug addiction as a public health issue rather than a criminal issue, by giving people therapy instead of incarceration.

It has worked. Past history teaches us that Duterte et al. will fail, and fail humanity in general, too.

Terrorism, extremism are not public health issues and I am not suggesting we treat them as such. We don't need to deradicalize people in mental health facilities. We do need to avoid open conflict with them, though.

You're dealing with people who are committed to a belief that thrives in the face of adversity, real or imagined. Coming down hard on them may validate their worldview, and may push some of them deeper into extremism. It will also push common people on the fence into their camp.

Secularism and tolerance are the antidote for religious extremism. Heavy handed dictatorships may suppress them (or more likely finance them so they attack targets away from them...), but in that case the "cure" is worse than the disease.

Pancasila as it is expressed to Indonesians today is part of the problem. There is collusion of mosque, church, stupa or mandir and state. So long as this is true, religious extremism will thrive. The freer and more open the society, the more likely it is for these extremist groups to exist on the periphery. It's true, Muslim extremists commit terrorist attacks in liberal democracies, but they do so as the exception to the rule and without input on the direction of our democracies.

The same cannot be said of Indonesia.
 
Here's the problem: you have a choice. If you're an expatriate you can choose to pack your bags and go back home. "oh well, the country went tits up, guess I have the privilege of moving somewhere else."

Most Indonesians don't have that as a legitimate option. They can't use their stellar Indonesian passport to just fly away when their government adopts harsh tactics. We're speaking of a government that sanctioned the murder of up to 1 million of their own people, a country that is still using oppressive, police state tactics in some outlying provinces.

Maybe a bit of an extreme scenario. I would hardly say the situation needs to evolve into a civil war.

As long as an example is made of the leaders of the radical groups, their 'rent a crowd' supporters will soon disperse if they know they can't get away with it anymore like they have been doing recently.
 
Order versus freedom, or rather in real world terms, oppression versus freedom. In Indonesia today, it's a false dichotomy -- things are not "out of hand."

In spite of the new bull-shit election law, Indonesians will soon have the opportunity to choose between another strongman or more of the moderate tightrope walking Jokowi. I wonder if a majority are pissing in their collective pants, as well, at the antics of the Islamic tools garnering all the press coverage; hope not.
 
Well I would hardly describe the situation as 'hunky dory' or 'a little off colour'.

Not all strongmen are are bad. Sure the likes of Robert Mugabe and previously Idi Amin are terrible examples. But others such as Lee Kuan Yew and Mustafa Ataturk (so called Benevolent Dictators), did good for the countries.
 
Human rights versus trains running on time; not a hard choice for me.
 
I know I'm only focussing on the issue of the radical mass groups. However what is the point of human rights in this context if it allows these groups to carry on existing?

A caliphate or shariah law will basically do away with human rights full stop.

So in this context, I'd rather my trains run on time than live in a massive carbon copy of Iran or Afghanistan.
 

Users who viewed this discussion (Total:0)

Follow Us

Latest Expat Indo Articles

Latest Tweets by Expat Indo

Latest Activity

New posts Latest threads

Online Now

No members online now.

Newest Members

Forum Statistics

Threads
6,648
Messages
112,142
Members
3,935
Latest member
jerryrohe36
Back
Top Bottom