Preachy Newspapers Are the Real MUI

Question. Which is more annoyingly self-righteous: the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) or the media? No. It’s not the MUI; they are far less annoying than the media, the self-proclaimed ‘voice of reason’!!

Is it just me or this logo does look like Starbuck's?

In spite of all their outrageous comments on issues ranging from Facebook to Hollywood’s latest disaster flick 2012, the MUI actually has never intended to impose their ‘truths’ on people who differ from them. Faith is something that you cannot debate rationally for it is made out of fear and anxiety – not logic. The MUI clerics, like the great medieval philosophers, are fully aware of that axiom. There’s no room for dissenting when it comes to ‘belief’: so, the MUI says, you just take it, or leave it. That’s why their fatwas are always exclusive; issued only to serve the interests of those who recognize their authority. If you are not a Muslim, or if you are but don’t believe the council holds the highest authority to speak for the religion, like the majority of Muslims in Indonesia, then you need not to worry about what the MUI is saying. They are not talking to you! What they are saying does not matter to you! But the media like The Jakarta Post and The Jakarta Globe are just so happy every time the MUI is acting stupid. Do they know that all religions are stupid? They are. Really. That’s why human beings love them so much. It’s not news anymore. So what’s wrong with the MUI saying that 2012 is against Islamic teaching? Ain’t the Vatican saying Dan Brown is telling a lie with The Da Vinci Code? The call for a ban from the MUI is virtually never enforced. Alcoholic beverages are available here. Prostitutes are everywhere. Pirated porn DVDs are, well, secretly sold but are easy to get. True they deem Ahmadiya heretic; but, remember, it’s the AGO that issued a regulation to ban the persecuted group. So all the media frenzy about the MUI calling for a ban of this and that is just ridiculous.

The MUI is indeed less talkative than the media.The media speak everyday. They have wider audience. Their mission is also not less majestic than that of the Muslim clerics: to “enlighten” people. This is the root of the problem. The media always speak of what they believe to be ‘universal truths’ which everyone should embrace. Indeed, it’s hard to tell if there is such thing as ‘a universal truth’. You may need to take a philosophy class, read hundreds of books and a lifetime reasoning to get the answer. But one thing for sure: what you believe is a universal and objective truth could be seen as a particular and subjective proposition by other people. The journalists are no exception. The thing is, they make their opinions known to public and present them as ‘rational arguments’ which are based on ‘indisputable facts’. And that’s exactly what makes them look annoyingly self-righteous. If you a read a newspaper: you’ll probably find the daily sermon: The government is wrong. The government should do this instead of that. The government is right. For we, the journalists, SAY so. The people are always right. For we agree with them. If not, they should be educated. They lawmakers are lazy, stupid and immoral. They deserve to be mocked. And so on.

I maybe biased. And I can also be as self-righteous as the MUI and all the ‘enlightened’ journos. But neither I nor the MUI is as insistent as the  media in telling the people, the whole nation, that what they say is right.

Why Is Communism Cool?

So, my dear friends, here’s what my dad says about Communism: “They are savage Godless people!! I saw it with my own eyes. They dug a pit and put a piece of a railway track on top of it. Do you know what they were going to do with it? They were going to use it to decapitate the Muslims!” And as if that story isn’t horrifying enough, my mom never forgets to add: “Your grandpa was among the people they, the PKI, planned to kill. I remember when I was a child the PKI people were spreading rumors about [ghosts or vampires, I forgot], telling people to hang onion and chili in their houses to ward them off. We never knew then that the onion and chili were actually the hammer and sickle for them!”

Cool!

I wish I could tell my parent that Communism is cool. Not that I believe they were telling lies to me. They were just telling me what they believed they saw; a reality constructed by the propaganda of their parents – which they passed on to me. Well,  they did their job well. I did fear communism as I feared kolong wewe, the female spirit who likes to kidnap children and keep them behind her breasts (which are very huge, btw). But that’s it. As soon as I began to question whether kolong wewe is really busty exists, I ceased to believe that anything to do with communism is wrong and demonic. After all, there’s no way I could verify if the PKI were really planning a massacre and sadly turned out to be the ones being massacred. It doesn’t matter lah. I have studied history long enough to know the truth that the past is like a blank paper on which you can write anything you want if you have the sword to tell the losers to shut the fuck up.

Shut the fuck up!!

One thing for sure, communist art is really cool. That Russian chicks are infinitely cute and its literary icons are just damn geniuses is not the only reason why I believe Russia is way cooler than the US, whose women and writers are just so lame. Look at that woman on that poster: there is  something in her that you won’t find in Marilyn Monroe or any other “it” girls. She’s a mother and her son was on the battlefield. I got that picture from here. And the blog owner is kind enough to give us the translation of the poster’s writings. It says: Keep your eyes open./These days/Even the walls have ears./Chatter and gossip/Go hand in hand with/Treason. Of course you don’t have to approve what it says. But you just can’t deny the fact that the verse fits the picture so perfectly and that the whole art piece is just damn cool. I can’t explain what cool is: go ask Wikipedia.

Cute. But less cool.

I don’t think the picture above is cool. But the red and yellow do make her look cuter a little bit. Her face is just too innocent. I think what makes Russian chicks are cool is the impression that they are submissive without having to look submissive. I maybe deceived by  James Bond and dozens of cheesy Hollywood flicks, but don’t you agree with me? Ever seen Ukraine prime minister? Ah, damn, I gotta go. I’ll continue later if I still have the mood to write this. Btw, can anybody tell me why communism is, at least visually, cool? And is there any way I could see the works of the PKI artists?

‘Alay’ Rules!

So it seems The Jakarta Post is the first to write about the “alay” thing. And the writer has done quite a good job. Stop bullying people on the Net. Let’s make our digital sphere a safe place for everyone.

Another Earth?

God blesses you

We’re not alone Saudara-saudara.

To Kill or Not To Kill

The police killed another two men they said were terrorists. This is one hell of a good news, eh? It is in many ways exhilarating  to hear of the demise of a bunch of locos whose ill-deeds are just too abhorrent to be seen as ‘regular’ crimes that they should not even be considered as criminals – to quote Slovenian writer Slavoj Zizek, terrorism is an extra-judicial crime. But terrorism is basically faceless. Neither Osama bin Laden nor Noor Din M Top is comparable to Hitler or Mao, the iconic faces of whom have virtually defined fascism and communism of the 20th century. Mr. Top is dead, but his ideology persists. Killing the terrorists does not necessarily end terrorism. On the contrary, their glorious deaths as martyrs in the hands of the police will only breed more terrorists. We know that, of course. The so-called terrorism experts know that as well. And so, I believe, did the police. So why do they think they need to kill them?

We cannot fight terrorism using state terror

Ulil Abshar Abdalla says here that what the police did is justifiable. His reasoning is quite simple (perhaps too simple for a Harvard graduate?): the police must have had enough evidence to suspect the two men in Ciputat, Syaifudin Zuhri bin Djaelani Irsyad and Mohammad Syahrir, as terrorists before they raided their boarding house. The two men, Ulil argued, were not being ‘cooperative’ and even hurled two bombs to the police. That said, he concluded, Densus 88 had no choice but to kill them. Case closed. What follows is newspaper headlines speculating and confirming the identities of the slain terrorists; and, of course, some mundane comments on Facebook. Nobody seems to care whether the two men were actually involved in any terror attacks in Indonesia; or, again, whether they deserved to die (except the Komnas HAM, which is, of course, a good thing).

As much as I respect Mas Ulil, his argument is at best naive, and at worst shamefully biased. That Abu Bakar Ba’asyir and other Muslim radicals are probably applying double standards when they decried the killing of the two suspected terrorists as human rights abuse should not make their unusual claims invalid. What the police did was obviously excessive. Densus 88 is a special unit set up after the Bali bombings to quell terrorism. I expect the force to be more sophisticated in their approach than the regular ‘Polsek’ policemen in dealing with terrorism. I have no authority to speak in details about how the police should carry their operation, but should they have the capability of catching suspected terrorists alive? The police, for instance, could ambush them when the suspects are traveling alone; or when they are assumed to bring no weapons. They could also hurl tear gas or… umh… well, my friend here knows better lah. If Ulil thinks the police had no choice but to kill them, I doubt if he’s a true ‘liberal’ Muslim — or worse, whether he’s being objective enough in seeing the matter.

Security is important, but it should not undermine individual rights. Indonesia should learn from other countries, especially the US, in their efforts to fight terrorism, not to imitate what they have been doing all this time, but to avoid repeating their mistakes. The counter-terrorism law the government enacted a few years ago aims at ensuring our safety as citizens, not depriving us from our rights to legal protection. You see, the logic behind my apprehension is quite simple too. Imagine one day you come to a friend’s house and realize that your friend is actually Noor Din’s gay partner when the police begin shooting at you! This is not about whether you are with the police or against them. I just want to make sure that Indonesian citizens have the right to defend themselves before the court against any accusations before the police pick up their guns and shoot them.