JIL English Edition

Not all religious leaders wish to assume those responsibilities and some still promote religious triumphalism at the expense of interfaith amity, and this only compounds the levels of fear and mutual hostility. Those within these communities who are committed to pluralism and peaceful coexistence must step forward and take the initiative.

Once more, Islam is worthless for people who deny the humanity itself. Since religion is not presented for the donkey.

Primitive religion accepts art more readily than does organized religion. According to Weber, orgiastic religion tends to develop through songs and music while ritualistic religion tends toward the pictorial arts and religion which suggest a love for poetry and music. Look for instance at the difference between Catholicism and Protestantism in terms of the performing arts! Look at how many traditions in Islam prohibit creating statues and paintings.

In the Indonesian context, many relevant issues apply. Currently, our energy has been sapped by the horror of the US invasion of Iraq. In the religious field, an increase in radicalism seems to have become justified. Concerning the war, there has been almost no discourse of tolerance or for the urgency of upholding a religious vision which prioritizes moderation.

In the developing rhetoric within the Muslim
society, people who support the Islamic reformation process are frequently
observed as agents of foreign nations interests’ or puppet (i.e., the US and
Jews). That rhetoric is intentionally blown up to revive the negative sentiment
of the Muslim community towards reformation. After the Iraq war, I am concerned
that these sort of claims will become increasingly prevalent. For example,
Yusuf Qardlawi, an Egyptian religious scholar, has written a book, Al Hulul
Al Mustaurodah about imported solutions. As a critic of progressive-liberal
Islamic notions, he considers them to be imported and thus necessarily bound to
fail. Moreover the progressive-liberal Muslims could become targets for the
Muslim community’s rage target.

The US invasion of Iraq last week eradicated America’s most valuable assets: democracy and human rights. America lost its legitimacy as the champion of democracy. The democratic principles pioneered by the American founding fathers such as Thomas Jefferson evaporated in the hands of the current “unsophisticated” American leader.

Why does America insist on going to war with Iraq while France opposes it? Indeed, the military solution to disarm Saddam Hussein’s regime of its weapons of mass destruction is opposed by the whole world. Though the UN will not authorize the use of force, America is going ahead. Why have France, Germany and other countries in the European Union, formerly America’s allies and heirs of the renaissance who adore the values of liberty, individual autonomy and democracy, been so against the war?

Especially in the Middle East, the US will implement this domination through Israel—the dominant power in the Middle East. Bush and his advisors calculate that the short term losses will be outwighed by the long-term benefits.

George W. Bush’s rhetoric on invasion upon Iraq is to liberate Iraqi people from the Saddam Hussein’s tyranny. American aggression upon that one thousand and one night country is called as “Operation Iraqi Freedom.” But why Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Arab Emirate Union and their allies in the Middle East, which were authoritarian, tyrant and despotic are not touched by America? What is Bush’s main problem in persisting to attack Iraq?

Democracy which is praised and adored as the best governmental system, when it is unified by Bush with the war machine, turns into a frightening spectre for other nations. If people were frightened before of chauvinism, that fear is only increased by a chauvinistic democracy: the authorization and occupation of other countries behind the veil of democracy. The result is a special kind of democracy: an American enforced democracy.