KEGAGALAN KONSEP NASIONALISME BERTUHAN JEREMY MENCHIK DAN ALTERNATIFNYA DALAM MEMBACA KEKERASAN BERAGAMA DI INDONESIA

Muhammad Rizkita, NIM.: 19105010041 (2023) KEGAGALAN KONSEP NASIONALISME BERTUHAN JEREMY MENCHIK DAN ALTERNATIFNYA DALAM MEMBACA KEKERASAN BERAGAMA DI INDONESIA. Skripsi thesis, UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA.

Preview	Text (KEGAGALAN KONSEP NASIONALISME BERTUHAN JEREMY MENCHIK DAN ALTERNATIFNYA DALAM MEMBACA KEKERASAN BERAGAMA DI INDONESIA) 19105010041_BAB-I_IV-atau-V_DAFTAR-PUSTAKA.pdf - Published Version Download (2MB) | Preview
	Text (KEGAGALAN KONSEP NASIONALISME BERTUHAN JEREMY MENCHIK DAN ALTERNATIFNYA DALAM MEMBACA KEKERASAN BERAGAMA DI INDONESIA) 19105010041_BAB-II_sampai_SEBELUM-BAB-TERAKHIR.pdf - Published Version Restricted to Registered users only Download (4MB) | Request a copy

Abstract

The phenomenon of religious diversity in Indonesia has attracted the interest of many scholars from around the world. Jeremy Menchik is one of them. In his book titled "Islam and Democracy in Indonesia: Tolerance Without Liberalism," Menchik attempts to portray how the three religious organizations in Indonesia, namely NU, Muhammadiyah, and Persis, interpret and practice the concept of tolerance. Menchik reveals that these three religious organizations have ambivalent attitudes towards practicing tolerance. While they accept orthodox religious minority groups, such as Ahmadiyya, they simultaneously reject heterodox groups. Menchik rejects various assumptions that attribute the increase in intolerance towards Ahmadiyya as a failure of democracy after the fall of the Suharto regime. To analyze intolerance towards Ahmadiyya, Menchik introduces the concept of "godly nationalism." In the context of the state-religion relationship, Menchik believes that Indonesia is a "godly country," positioned between secularism and theocracy. Meanwhile, regarding religious violence, Menchik argues that intolerance towards Ahmadiyya can be seen as "productive intolerance" because it strengthens the godly nationalism embraced by the Indonesian people. However, Menchik's concept of godly nationalism lacks clarity when viewed from a secular perspective. Firstly, Menchik fails to explain whether the rejection by the three religious organizations (NU, Persis, and Muhammadiyah) is ideological (secularism as an ideology) or related to governance (secularism as a statecraft). Secondly, the concept of godly nationalism does not provide space for Islamic thinkers who tend to be liberal. These ambiguities are attributed to Menchik's inability to consider two factors: first, Indonesia has never experienced a secularization momentum as seen in the West, and second, the Indonesian public sphere does not contain negative sentiments between religious and secular citizens. Ultimately, the ambiguity of the concept of godly nationalism leads to its failure in the context of religious violence, particularly in understanding regional cases of violence against the Ahmadiyya group. In this paper, I propose the concept of post-secularism to analyze the relationship between the state and religion in Indonesia more effectively. By viewing Indonesia as a post-secular state, religious ideas can still play a significant role in the democratic process while simultaneously maintaining a discourse in the public sphere that is conducted in a secular language accessible to all citizens regardless of their religion. This reciprocal relationship between the state and religion is pioneered by Jürgen Habermas through the concept of the Institutional Translation Proviso (ITP). In this paper, I demonstrate that the ITP occurs in the dynamics of formulating Pancasila as the foundation of the state. From this perspective, intolerance towards religious minority groups like Ahmadiyya indicates an obstruction in the realization of the ITP.

Share this knowledge with your friends :

Actions (login required)

View Item