The Resistance of Islamic Organization in Indonesia to Globalization

(This paper has been presented in the 3rd International Conference on Social and Political Science held in UIN Syarif Hidayatullah on November 15th, 2017)

I.      A New Kind of Tragedy

Terrifying things have happened in Jakarta in the past decades. There was the Malari Incident in 1974 which results in 11 protestors dead and hundreds of cars and buildings destroyed [1]. There was the Tragedy of May 1998 where mass violence, civil unrest, and bodies lying on the roadside is a common thing [2]. There was, and still, many student gang-fights (tawuran) on a daily basis which killed some students from time to time [3]. 

All of those tragedy were nothing compared to what happened in Jakarta on December 2^nd, 2016. On that faithful day, hundreds of thousands of people wearing white robes and clothes rallies to the center of Jakarta shouting a single demand: “Ahok (the then-Governor of Jakarta) must be jailed [4]!” 

What makes this so-called ‘212 Demonstration’ scary, despite the absence of violence, is the fact that these are not an angry mob. These are highly organized groups unified by a single agenda, hellbent on overthrowing democracy and replace it with their more tyrannical version. What makes these people truly scary is the fact that they might be able to succeed.

When we take a look at the broader international context, the rise of far-right extremists is not unique to Indonesia. Europeans have been experiencing the rise of Neo-Nazi and Radical Nationalists in recent years [5]. Meanwhile, the United States (US) have elected a megalomaniac and a bigot called Mr. Donald Trump as their president [6]. Despite having ideological difference, all of these movements were related by similar characteristics. 

The first of which is, all of them claims to represent a certain traditional identity of which, they claim, have been ignored for years. Secondly, and most importantly, all of these movements were motivated by a strong hatred to the political ‘others’ that they construct as evil. In case of Indonesia, this is the religious Islamic extremist claiming to represent Moslem people to fight the ‘reign of Chinese minority’.

The advent of this far-right groups signifies a huge wave of change in the practice of politics. Whereas we thought that the era of globalization would bring forward an era of rational political economy, the far-right groups actually resurrect the dreaded identity politics once more [7]. 

Currently in Indonesia, we can’t engage in a conversation without being scrutinized of our partiality. It went so far, to the point that you can be accused of supporting certain groups simply by the virtue of your appearance. The impact that these religious extremist group can be felt, not in material level, but in the immaterial level. 

Despite numbers a few, these groups are quite vocal and effective in producing knowledge and discourse which can disrupt the liberal/mainstream discourse. Just by preaching in the mosque and social media, they were able to convince thousands of people that Moslems are the most superior religion while others are simply blasphemy, eliminating the value of tolerance and diversity in the process.

It is quite clear for the author that these far-right groups are problematic because their value and their existence is inherently against democracy. In other words, should the Islamic extremists succeeded in their goal, the sacrifice of countless people who have paved the way for democracy in Indonesia will be in vain. That will definitely be a far-greater tragedy than what have happened in Jakarta previously. 

In order to deal with this problem, the author believes that we must first understand the nature of these far-right groups. What is their background? How did they develop their motivation? Why were they able to be so determined at their goal? The answer to those questions and more will be answered by analyzing the discourse provided in their most important achievement: “The Declaration of Sharia Cooperatives 212.” 

Due to the anti-capitalism nature of the declaration, this paper will also frame it as a form of resistance toward globalization. The next question that must be answered will be how much the discourse contributes to the actual resistance itself and how the government can handle it.

II.    A Resistance to Globalization

Before we can begin discussing about globalization, we must first understand the true nature of this phenomenon. Unlike what is being popularized through media and the so-called intellectual statement, globalization is not innocent. It is not simply a natural phenomenon triggered by the advancement of technology which will benefit all humanity. 

It is, in fact, a technology itself, devised by a certain regime to achieve certain agenda. The regime, in which, goes by the name of ‘neoliberal-capitalism regime’ and an agenda simply known as global capital accumulation. This is an agenda which reflects the ever-accumulating nature of capitalism. By understanding this, we can now safely say that globalization exists to lay the foundation for such agenda. Therefore, globalization is no longer innocent.

By unmasking the true nature of globalization, we can now reflect it to the growing problem in contemporary society. As has been stated by Stephen Castles, globalization has the power to transform the social structure of any country. The symptom of such transformation can be seen from the closing of old industries, the lack of motivation to pursue agricultural-related jobs, the destruction of rural life, mass urbanization, the restructuration of labor unions, the weakening of welfare state system, a fragmentation in community, and most importantly: a reshaping of social identity. 

According to Castles, all of these symptoms are reflecting the very ideology of neoliberal-capitalism regime which favors liberalization, deregulation, and market privatization [8]. What it means is that in every part of the society, all of their resources were directed to the success of establishing such regime. This is what globalization does to our community.

The real problem with globalization as a discourse is the fact that it is marketed as a part of modernization, that is: a force of inevitability that the common mass has no choice but to accept and adapt to it [9]. As such, a mass-urbanization from rural to metropolitan area is seen as something normal while complaints about such phenomenon are treated as a grumbling from an old fart who is ‘trapped in the limbo of time and their romanticism toward a past where everything was where it was supposed to be’. 

In this scenario, globalization is trying to separate people from their socio-cultural and political value. Either you accept the contemporary practice of economy (which is what capitalism being called nowadays) or you keep your value, got left behind and forgotten. Such cruel choice is what gave birth to the phenomenon that Richard Falk called as the ‘resistance toward globalization’.

Back in 1997, Richard Falk has predicted that the advancement of technology will trigger a serious social problem. In his journal “Resisting 'globalization-from-above' through 'globalization-from-below',” Falk said that globalization will make economy as the most important government agenda – if not the only agenda. 

By doing so, globalization will force the government to abandon social welfare program, such as the creation of jobs and the abolition of poverty, in order to fulfill a certain standard established by neoliberal-capitalism regime [10]. This kind of behavior can be clearly seen from one of Mr. Joko Widodo’s first statement after he got elected as the president of Indonesia during his public appearance in APEC CEO Summit 2014:

“Today, I am very happy, to be with you, because you know I was a businessman years ago. So, this morning, I am very happy because we can talk about business, about investment with all of you. The picture shows you our map of Indonesia. We have a population of 240 million and the distance is like from London in UK to Istanbul in Turkey. And imagine, we have 17,000 islands… we have national one-stop service office that can help you, that will serve you, that will facilitate you, that will give you your business permit… on behalf of the Indonesian government and the people of Indonesia, I would like to thank you for your listening (to) my presentation. We are waiting for you to come to Indonesia. We are waiting for you to invest in Indonesia [11].”

Mr. Widodo, in all of his presidential-glory, speaking as if he is the CEO of a corporate called the Republic of Indonesia, prattling about how good the value that his country and his people have as a product and state his willingness to make it easier for foreigners to gain access to these products. 

Despite all of his campaign pep talk about economy for the people (ekonomi kerakyatan) [12], it is quite clear from that statement that he will go in-length to make sure that his country aligns with the neoliberal-capitalism regime’s agenda, that is: to open his market and give accessibility for global capital to accumulate easier. 

Such behavior is not only exclusive to Mr. Widodo as it was also seen in the gesture of Mr. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono [13]. What can be inferred from this explanation is that Indonesia has now become a part of certain international regime and that many people will be left out suffering due to this situation.

The opening of Indonesian market will be guaranteed to be beneficial for transnational companies and big wig investors, but what about for the people? As can be seen from the case of the implementation of Masterplan for Acceleration and Expansion of Indonesia’s Economic Development (MP3EI), the effect of such policy for the people turns out to be ugly [14]. As millions of Indonesian have been displaced from their home due to the need of developing infrastructure, somewhere in our right mind will definitely question whether such action truly beneficial for most people. 

Due to the destructive nature that globalization has to common people, Richard Falk called it as a ‘globalization from above’ which he defined as a political scheme devised by the elite in order to further their own agenda. Because of the neoliberal ideology embedded in globalization, all aspect of society will be shoved away to make economy the only agenda that matters. 

As if cornered against the wall, the alienated people will start a resistance against such scheme. The goal of such resistance will be to seize the popular discourse and disrupt it by using their own. Richard Falk called it as the ‘globalization from below’ [15].

According to Falk, there are at least four phenomena that can be seen as a form of globalization from below: 

First, society begins to see the futility of electoral politics. No matter who got elected, no matter their promise, they will always be the linchpin of neoliberal-capitalism regime. Because of that, a resistance to globalization will definitely be implemented outside of the electoral system. 

Second, politicians, most likely in the opposition camp, will respond to society’s anxiety by offering alternative policy which aligns with their interest. This will lead to the rise of populism in political practice. 

Third, the rise of populism will pave the way for the rise of right-wing extremism which will scare the governments to reconsider their alignment with neoliberal-capitalism regime [16].

Fourth, the government will lose control over identity politics. As people were able to empower themselves as well as self-producing knowledge, the government can no longer rally this people under the same banner of identity. The increasing intensity of interaction between like-minded people will create a new identity politics – a new formation of ‘self’ and ‘others’. As such, the forgotten traditional identity will arise as a form of new ultra-nationalism or religious extremist. 

The elements of populism, right-wing extremism and traditional identity will merge as a part of globalization from below [16]. It is in this framework that we can assess the genesis of far-right groups in Indonesia.

III.     The Rise of the Far-Rights in Indonesia

Most literature on the rise of far-right groups in Indonesia usually refers to the rise of Front Pembela Islam (FPI) and Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia (HTI), which are currently the most popular Islamic organization. However, extremist Islamic movement, in actuality, has always been part of Indonesia’s political history [18]. 

Together with communism, the threat from Islamic extremism toward this country’s ideology, the Pancasila, has always been prevalent since the independence day. The only reason why we haven’t become the ‘Islamic Republic of Indonesia’ is the ruthlessness of our country’s previous two authoritarian leader, Sukarno and Suharto, who repressed such movement with sheer force. 

Ironically, the return to liberal-electoral democracy is actually the biggest contributing factor that allows those movements to arise once more. Ever since the presidency of Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono in 2004, Indonesia’s political spectrum has veered to the right over time. If we take a look at the legislation of Anti-Pornographic Law, Anti-LGBT law, Anti-Extramarital Sex Law and the infamous internet positif (internet censorship), it is quite clear how conservative value has gained power over Indonesia’s politics [19]. 

The urge to establish certain moral standard and even interfere with private life is the result of our leader’s support base. In every kind of election, religious groups will definitely show up as one of the main supporter of certain candidate to the point that they can decide the result of an election by themselves. It is not uncommon for political candidate to go for a pilgrimage to Mecca during the campaign in order to be deemed worthy of Islamic groups’ support. 

In this kind of cases, we can see how Islamic groups gain power by using the election as a way to incorporate their values within the leaders’ policy. In fact, the existence of FPI can only be sustained, despite their love for violence and law-breaking action, due to the support from Mr. Yudhoyono who got his vote from, mostly, Islamic groups [20].

The religious extremists also have strong grip on the construction of morality at the grassroots level. I remember back in 2008, news about FPI’s action would only be considered as a joke among my circle. However, the same person I talked to today could have a drastically different opinion. Whether their appearance or the way they talk pointed to the idea that Islamic value is better as the foundation of this country’s ideology. 

The right to free speech granted in this era has allowed these organizations to produce and distribute their idea in a widespread manner [21]. This is also contributed by the fact that most Islamic community is bound by a strong sense of brotherhood and led by an indisputable Imam whose words are thought to represent the will of God. Like a military system, the word from an Imam became an order that can’t be resisted by his followers. 

This is especially true in rural area and Jakarta’s satellite city. The 212 Demonstration is only possible due to this very system that binds each Moslem people. What started as a hate speech towards the behavior of Jakarta’s then-Governor, Basuki Tjahaya Purnama, turns into real hatred and leads to a huge demonstration. All of this thing was possible due to the very nature of liberal democracy that this country upholds.

However, the mind of the people couldn’t be easily influenced if they don’t somehow relate to the idea being promoted by their Imam. The idea that Moslem people have been oppressed by Chinese minority is agreed widely because the exact thing is what actually happened in Suharto’s regime. 

Back then, Suharto repressed any kind of community which upholds ideology other than Pancasila. This is applied to communism and Islamism alike. After the genocide of communists, Suharto’s regime blocked any Islamic leader from entering political stages. The many Islamic parties were also forced to fuse into one, rendering them weak in terms compared to Suharto’s own party. This is part of Suharto’s agenda to depoliticize Islam or to put them in the same place as the Church – as a mere ground for spiritual engagement without ever participating in political decision. 

As if it was not enough, Suharto also stripped them from their value by prohibiting Islamic attribute to be worn in public place. A law from Education Minister even specifically says that women can’t wear Hijab in school [22]. The fact that Suharto’s regime were mostly supported by Chinese Taipan fueled the rage of Moslem people today. In other words, they felt that they were wronged, so they believed that it is only justice if they do the same to their oppressor.

Another factor contributing to the rise of the far-rights is the lack of their ‘left counterpart’. Due to the ban of communism as an ideology, there is pretty much nothing that can counter the widespread influence of Islamic extremism. In fact, the ban of communism actually serves as a leverage to demonize ‘others’ as a communist [23]. 

The portrayal of Governor Purnama and President Widodo as a communist is what allows them to amass enough people to rally a huge demonstration in Jakarta. The lack of socialization of communist idea has developed several myths about the actual ideology. For some reason, communism in Indonesia is associated with atheism. Moreover, the word ‘communist’ itself brings into mind the horror of Indonesian army general massacre during the September 30^th revolt, famously depicted in Arifin C. Noer’s film. 

Because of these myths surrounding the forbidden ideology, it is easy to trigger people’s rage simply by labeling someone as this so-called communists. The fact that Mr. Purnama and Mr. Widodo were supported by Chinese Taipan certainly increases the credibility of such claim since China and communism are practically inseparable.

We can notice how much the patterns of far-right groups’ rise in Indonesia very much aligned with what Richard Falk has predicted years ago. Disbelief towards electoral democracy might not yet happens but disbelief towards media coverage of it is very true. The emergence of many Islamic media in the internet is a proof how the far-rights try to disrupt popular discourse by publishing news with different perspective from most mainstream media. 

As a citizen, we pretty much don’t know which information can be trusted any longer. Is the president a capable man or is he a complete douche? Nobody knows, the media is so all over the place nowadays. 

What is true, however, is the rise of political populism as an easy way to gain power by siding with the far-right groups who happen to have more head count. Joko Widodo was able to avoid using such method although in its place he is now bound by the will of international capital regime instead. Another thing that is true is the rise of traditional identity, represented by Islamic community, and the identity politics it brought. Globalization from below has already begun in Indonesia.

IV.   The Other Side of the Story

It is easy to judge people by our own opinion, but it’s not so easy to judge people by who they really are. Just like there are two sides of the same coin, every story has its own duality. What is seen from the outside as the rising threat towards democracy can actually be seen as the most powerful resistance toward capitalism that this country has ever had. Indeed, the word “collapsing capitalistic economy” is the very word used in the declaration of Sharia Cooperatives 212:

“From head to toe, the products used by (our) community are products made by the capitalists. The money spends by the community is brought to the producer’s country. This is what led GNPF MUI (an Islamic organization) to strengthen the community’s economic foundation by creating Sharia Cooperatives 212 and collapsing capitalistic economy [24].”

Launched in Bogor on January 7^th, 2017, the word ‘212’ from Sharia Cooperatives 212 is meant to remind people of the 212 Demonstration which is now hailed as the day of Islam resurgence in Indonesia. By using the term ‘fardhu kifayah’ which they define as a collective obligation for Islamic community to seize the means of production to themselves, the Sharia Cooperatives 212 invites Indonesian Moslem people to help themselves being independent in their effort to disrupt mainstream political discourse. 

This is a pretty innovative movement since it complements the religious extremist narrative to replace Indonesia’s political system. After all, no political system, even the Islamic Caliphate one, can stand without its own economic system. This way, the discourse brought by Sharia Cooperatives 212 can tackle both the issue of establishing Islamic regime in Indonesia as well as resisting the globalization from above.

Then again, it is quite ironic that the group who demonizes communism actually offers a communist solution themselves. Despite the fact that cooperative is rooted in Indonesia’s history as an idea proposed by Muhammad Hatta, it can’t be denied that the very idea originates itself from the social-communism thinking. 

Some combative Moslems will probably try to rebut this argument by saying that cooperative is different from communism by the virtue of being more moderate. But no, the nature of ‘seizing means of production’ is a very communist thing used in an effort for class struggle [25]. 

Yet the religious extremists can offer such solution without any problem because the idea of communism in Indonesia has been subverted into something that resembles atheism and secularism. As long as the one who offer such solution is an honorable Imam, then it’s not communism, it is part of Islamic value which should be complied and promoted. Such is the mentality of most Moslem people in Indonesia.

But aside from the inherent contradiction of Sharia Cooperatives 212, the idea itself is very brilliant as a part of resistance toward capitalism. To this statement, Hizkia Yosie Polimpung wrote that nowadays, it’s not so easy to organize and implement such solution in a very large scale. Most anti-capitalism experimentation in Indonesia is usually done in a small scale by different leftist groups who, most of the time, can’t unite under the same banner. The end product itself is mostly just a small coffee shop or other kind of small businesses. 

Yet the Sharia Cooperatives 212 plans to build a franchise of minimarket around Indonesia which sells basic needs. This is definitely a huge achievement that must be appreciated [26]. It is not impossible for the religious extremists, which is more united and have strong supporter around the country, to amass enough economic income that they can finally be a strong voice of resistance toward capitalism and globalization alike. 

This is pretty much what makes this group very scary. Despite the noble goal to collapse an international regime, we can’t deny that this country’s freedom could be taken in the process.

V.    To Tame the Extremists

So, does the rise of far-right groups in Indonesia contributed to the anti-capitalism discourse? Yes, it does very brilliantly. But does it threaten the establishment of democracy and freedom in Indonesia? Yes, it does horrifically. This definitely puts us in a difficult spot. 

The government would definitely like to eradicate this group since it threatens their alignment with neoliberal-capitalism regime. In fact, such effort has already been started by the legislation of Civil Society Organizations Law which will allow them to disband any organizations that they deem unnecessary [27]. 

However, this kind of effort will only lead to the repetition of what Suharto has done. Alienation can only be effective for as long as you can maintain your regime, but once it collapses, the alienated will burst from its exile and disrupting the new regime once more. But most importantly, such solution is no longer effective in the contemporary era where the far-right groups have garnered enough means to produce and distribute their own discourse. Therefore, such legislation will never get full support from the society.

Another thing that makes it impossible to alienate the far-rights is the fact that the politicians actually need their power in number in order to maintain their position. Even if the current government doesn’t want to be related with these religious extremists, it does not mean that their opposition won’t. This is what actually happened in the Jakarta Gubernatorial Race, where underdog candidate, Anies Baswedan, actually won the election due to sheer support from Islamic community [28]. 

What this paper trying to say is that alienation can only do harm for the current government. The only way that can be truly effective to tame these extremists is to understand their rage. Try to talk to these people one by one and see the world through their eyes. 

If you think that this solution is too ‘wishy-washy’, then you should change your mind because this is supposed to be Mr. Joko Widodo’s marketed feature as a leader who can put himself on the same level with his people [29]. Instead of flirting with world’s leader in G-20 meeting, Mr. Widodo should speak with these extremists and socialize how important Pancasila is for the sustainability of this nation. Perhaps, he can also teach them about what communism actually is and expose the inherent contradiction in the far-rights’ movement.

When we have understood the root-cause of the rise of far-rights, we can see how the history of injustice greatly contributes to this phenomenon. As such, the first thing that government has to do to handle this problem is by addressing that issue and state their willingness to repair it. An apology might be far from enough but it is sufficient as a first step and would be better instead of continuously ignoring their suffering by aligning with an international regime who will only add to that suffering. 

Because, if they won’t do that, it is highly likely that the past regime will do it instead. As seen from the recent alliance between Suharto family and Islamic groups, it is quite notorious how easy these people to forgive someone who has caused them so much suffering [30]. Instead of the current government using this large group for building the nation, that power is actually used by the opposition for a goal no other than seizing power for themselves. 

If we learned anything from Brexit phenomenon in Europe, the far-right groups are far more dangerous if they are on the side of opposition as they will channel all of their energy and resources to topple an already establishing regime.

But in the end, everything is not up to the government. As an individual and as a society, we have our own power to shape the kind of discourse that we want. Instead of only relying on the president to open up a discussion with the extremists, perhaps we can be the one to initiate it ourselves. 

Instead of flaming anonymously in social media, we can actually talk to them directly in order to reach certain compromise. As far as the author concerns, this democracy that we have, albeit imperfect, is worth to be fighting for. We can’t let these people trample over that idea just because of misguided justice. If we want to truly defend our freedom, there is no better way than start doing things that will actually fulfill it. 

That is, of course, if we truly care about having freedom at all.

References

[1]     Tempo, “Malari Power Play,” Tempo (January 15^th, 2014), accessed on September 3^rd, 2017 at 15:51. https://en.tempo.co/read/news/2014/01/ 15/080545002/Malari-Power-Play.

[2]     Monika Swasti Winarmita, “The tragedy of May 1998,” Inside Indonesia (2009), accessed on September 3^rd, 2017 at 15:57, http://www.insideindonesia.org/the-tragedy-of-may-1998.

[3]     Fahmi Firdaus, “Tawuran Berdarah di Jakarta Kembali Makan Korban,” Okezone (February 24^th, 2017), accessed on September 3^rd, 2017 at 15:59, https://news.okezone.com/read/2017/02/24/338/1627296/tawu ran-berdarah-di-jakarta-kembali-makan-korban.

[4]     Kathy Quiano and James Griffiths, “Indonesia: 200,000 protest Christian Governor of Jakarta,” CNN (December 2^nd, 2016), accessed on September 3^rd at 16:01, http://edition.cnn.com/2016/12/02/asia/jakarta-indonesia-protest-ahok/index.html.

[5]     Gregor Aisch, Adam Pearce and Bryant Rousseau, “How Far Is Europe Swinging to the Right?,” The New York Times (March 20^th, 2017), accessed on September 3^rd, 2017 at 16:05, https://www.nytimes.com/int eractive/2016/05/22/world/europe/europe-right-wing-austria-hungary. html?mcubz=0.

[6]     Kristina Keneally, “Who’s to blame for America’s first megalomaniac, celebrity president?,” The Guardian (November 9^th, 2016) accessed on September 3^rd, 2017 at 16:21, https://www.theguardian.com/ commentisfree/2016/nov/09/whos-to-blame-for-americas-first-megalomaniac-celebrity-president#img-1.

[7]     Coen Husain Pontoh, “Indonesia Dalam Kepungan Politik Identitas” DW Indonesia (April 5^th, 2016), accessed on September 3^rd, 2017 at 16:13, http://www.dw.com/id/indonesia-dalam-kepungan-politik-identitas/a-19136113.

[8]     Stephen Castles, “Understanding Global Migration: A Social Transformation Perspective,” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 36:10 (2010), p. 1565-1586.

[9]     Ibid.

[10]  Richard Falk, “Resisting ‘globalisation-from-above’ through ‘globalisation-from-below,” New Political Economy 2:1 (1997), p. 17-24.

[11]  Joko Widodo, “Full Speech: Jokowi at APEC CEO Summit 2014,” Rappler (November 10^th, 2014) accessed on September 3^rd, 2017 at 16:20, https://www.rappler.com/world/regions/asia-pacific/indonesia/ 74620-full-speech-joko-widodo-apec-summit-beijing

[12]  Panca Hari Prabowo, “Jokowi tempatkan ekonomi kerakyatan sebagai pilar bangsa,” Antara News (July 7^th, 2015), accessed on September 3^rd, 2017 at 16:23, http://www.antaranews.com/berita/505660/jokowi-tempatkan-ekonomi-kerakyatan-sebagai-pilar-penting-bangsa.

[13]  Hidayatullah Muttaqin, “Jejak Neoliberalisme di Indonesia,” Jurnal Ekonomi Ideologis (June 22^nd, 2009), accessed on September 3^rd, 2017 at 16:26, http://jurnal-ekonomi.org/jejak-neoliberalisme-di-indonesia/.

[14]  Tito Dirhantoro, “MP3EI Timbulkan Masalah hingga ke Daerah,” Geotimes (May 16^th, 2017), accessed on September 3^rd, 2017 at http://geotimes.co.id/mp3ei-timbulkan-masalah-hingga-daerah/

[15]  Falk, Op. Cit.

[16]  Ibid.

[17]  Ibid.

[18]  Khamami Zada, Islam Radikal: Pergulatan Ormas-Ormas Islam Garis Keras di Indonesia, Jakarta: Teraju, 2002.

[19]  Gede Benny Setia Wirawan, “Unbalanced wings of Indonesian Politics,” The Jakarta Post (October 10^th, 2016), accessed on September 4^th, 2017 at 11:32, http://www.thejakartapost.com/academia/2016/10/10/ unbalanced-wings-of-indonesian-politics.html.

[20]  Bastiaan Scherpen, “Is hardline Islam really rising in Indonesia?,” New Mandala (February 24^th, 2017), accessed on September 4^th, 2017 at 11:34, http://www.newmandala.org/hard-line-islam-really-rising/.

[21]  Wirawan, Op. Cit.

[22]  Zada, Op.Cit.

[23]  Wirawan, Op.Cit.

[24]  Syafi’i Antonio, “Grand Launching Koperasi Syariah 212,” Youtube (January 6^th, 2017), accessed on September 4^th, 2017 at 12:31, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7BJfVTupSM.

[25]  Dodi Faedulloh, “Melacak Gerakan Koperasi dalam Marx dan Marxisme,” Kopkun Institute (May 9^th, 2014), accessed on September 4^th, 2017 at 12:36, http://kopkuninstitute.org/2014/05/09/melacak-gerakan-koperasi-dalam-marx-dan-marxisme/.

[26]  Hizkia Yosie Polimpung, “Masihkah Politik adalah Panglima? Fardhu Kifayah Koperasi Syariah 212,” Indoprogress (January 16^th, 2017), accessed on September 4^th, 2017 at 12:37. https://indoprogress.com/2017/01/ masihkah-politik-adalah-panglima-fardhu-kifayah-koperasi-syariah-212/

[27]  Kristian Erdianto, “Tanggapan HTI soal Penerbitan Perppu Pembubaran Ormas,” Kompas (July 11^th, 2017), accessed on September 4^th, 2017 at 16:42, http://nasional.kompas.com/read/2017/07/11/19531951/ tanggapan.hti.soal.penerbitan.perppu.pembubaran.ormas.

[28]  Bimo Wiwoho, “FPI Bakal ‘kawal’ Anies Baswedan selama Jadi Gubernur Jakarta,” CNN Indonesia (August 19^th, 2017), accessed on September 4^th, 2017 at 16:44, https://www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/ 20170819123915-20-235823/fpi-bakal-kawal-anies-baswedan-selama-jadi-gubernur-jakarta/.

[29]  Berita Satu, “Bantah Diktator, Hasto: Jokowi Karakter Pemimpin Merakyat,” Berita Satu (August 9^th, 2017), accessed on September 4^th, 2017 at 16:49, http://www.beritasatu.tv/news/bantah-diktator-hasto-jokowi-karakter-pemimpin-merakyat/.

[30]  Muhammad Ihsan Harahap, “Selawat Untuk Orde Baru,” Indoprogress (April 7^th, 2017), accessed on September 4^th, 2017 at 17:02, https://indoprogress.com/2017/04/selawat-untuk-orde-baru/.