When Indonesian People be a Blunder of God

After many religious intolerance incidents were happened nowadays, I was then remembered when Nietzche said, “Which is it? Is man only a blunder of God? Or is God only a blunder of man?”

Both of these choices are actually accurate to depict about Indonesia’s condition nowadays and since Indonesia stands as a country which acknowledges the existence of The Supreme God, it is clear to assert that the former gives a birth to the later.

Firstly, looking at the first question, instead of asking why we are made by God, I prefer to ask what action that should be done in order to not make human merely a blunder of God? This question is absolutely important, especially for them who always exalts God and making Thee as a banner for doing such actions

Cruel deed, violence, blatant action unto minority; all of this unfortunately are done in the name of religion, in the name of God, in order to establish a particular truth about a transcendent value. This is the reality which all Indonesians have to show almost every time. And in this condition, I can surely say that those who engage in such actions in Indonesia have been a blunder of God and thus I will say “yes” unto Nietzche’s first choice question.

Taking this problem unto a reflective area, I will ask: is it true that God has ordered Thou fellow to use violence upon other? If everybody is made equally according to God’s image, why then there are several people whom are repressed as if it is legal just because they are accused as blasphemous and do not tend to follow a mainstream religion?

It seems awkward for me if then religion teaches about violence. But, I don’t have any doubt that actually many of religions’ scripture involve some text that notes down about violence upon other and this text which are often used as a basis to do violence upon other. Furthermore, aside from harsh scripture, another reason that is often used when violating others is about morality. Just because one person is accused for degrading moral in their own concept, they can be very easily to do harsh action upon other.

First, in dealing with harsh scripture, open-minded behavior is obviously needed by every one in order to know about what scripture really says since the content of any kind of Holy Scripture also involves a historical data and circumstances where it was written. Understanding it literally, word by word, can potentially give a birth upon clashes. Hence, what is really needed is a holistic understanding.

Circumstances always changes and religion has to do the same. This condition is undeniable because if religion still defended its rigidness, it could be easily thrown out by its adherents. Hence, dealing with harsh scripture has to be done in nowadays atmosphere and social condition.

Perhaps it is true that long years ago violence was still considered as a better way for surviving. But, this assertion cannot be applied further for this time, especially in Indonesia where religious diversity clearly exists. Violence and repression cannot be considered again as a way to gain a peaceful living. Even if it can achieve peaceful living successfully, it is not a long-time period of peace that has been built since horrible feeling about violence and repression always remain in every heart of people and thus making them ready to make retaliation.

Second, in dealing with morality, it is imperative to not be trapped unto the narrow concept of morality. Degrading moral is not merely about sexual sphere but it is also about how to maximizing the well-being of people as had been noted by Sam Harris in his book, The Moral Landscape.

Thus, is it true that doing violence upon other can really contribute to maximize the well-being of society? In my opinion, this action contributes nothing for inclining the morality of Indonesians. On the other hand, I do believe that tolerance action can increase the well-being of society in Indonesia since diversity exists here and within this framework Indonesians can live peacefully without have to engage in any kind of clashes.

After explaining that the first choice question exists, it is a time to explain how the second choice question can be an effect of the former. If then there are many religious intolerance in Indonesia, an innocent people can be easily ask: is God really legitimate such cruel action? An atheist, skeptic, also can rise an assertion which says that actually we do need any God to be exist since what is actually happened with Thou existence is only a division which further just make a violence.

All of these assertions are undeniable since reality provides all Indonesians with the brutal fact: violence in the name of God with their own religion and thus rising up a thesis that actually God stands as if a blunder which has to take responsibility upon such actions. This condition actually gives a “yes” answer to the second question.

It is then clear enough why I call them as a real blunder of God because with their cruel action, they have harmed God’s name –which is always exalted by them- successfully. They always very busy with applying transcendent value as if they precisely know what God really wants but they neglect to treat others well.

It is clear that in order to stop this chain is to stop the cause. The cause then is clear enough: it is about deal with them who has been a blunder of God. If it can be successfully stopped, this chain can also be stopped. But, how can Indonesians stop the first cause? By disbanding a blasphemous sect or disbanding a mass organization which provoking a cruel action?

As had been noted by Kierkegaard, a philosopher, our life is full with choices, thus we will get our existence with doing a choice action in an atmosphere of sea of choices. Hence, it is all about how far Indonesia government, which acts as a sovereign, can rationally choose an action that should be done in order to prevent further chaotic condition. And a rational choice can only be achieved if Indonesia government itself does not longer its blindness and close its ears unto intolerance realities.

Treat everyone equally. This is a main principle which I offer and believe can deliver people to not be a blunder of God. People have their own legal right to worship their God without have to suffer repression. One thing that has to be always remembered: worshipping God is nothing if people cannot treat their akin equally without have to harming them. Is it useful to always go to mosque, church or any other worship place but in reality we still do violence upon other? How much successful are we to be a projection of God if our action cannot be a mirror of Thou blessing? People are not valued from how often they go to worship place, instead they are valued from how they treat other.

Hopefully, for the future, there will be no “yes” answer unto Nietzche’s question since Indonesia is a religious country. How Indonesia can be truly considered as a religious country if reality indeed shows the different? Indonesia has to prove it immediately.

Do Not Make Communication Tools be a Gap for Building True Relationship

In modern era nowadays, when people are more deeply attracted with their own business, communication tools which can give a satisfying service are highly exalted. Smart-phone, laptop, and other communication mediums thus become a new way of life-style and seem to be a must-have good as people have to live in their dynamic circumstance enveloped by metropolitan style.

Unfortunately, this modern life-style is often placed and used in its improper time. I often saw a group of people or family were gathering together either in a café or a restaurant. But, one thing that I saw was not a warm circumstance that actually could be built in there.

Instead, they preferred to get attract with their blackberry or their smart-phone. Each of them then just got busy with their own business. They might feel warm and close with their chat-friend when on the other hand anybody who sat surrounding them was posited as if they were strangers. Is there then any fault with communication tools?

Understanding

It is often forgotten that actually communication mediums are only a complement side of human whole life. These mediums do not constitute fundamental aspects of human-being to build their relationship. Positioning the medium as if they are the ultimate aspect can bring people unto an individualized world, when they become unaware with their surrounding circumstances.

One of many fundamental aspects of human-being that has important relation regarding this condition is the capability of human to understand. People are not merely a being who can only do sensory-action: seeing, listening, tasting, hearing, and smelling. Furthermore, human-being is also endowed an aspect of intellectual thinking in their very deep that can bring those sensory-actions to grasp a whole understanding unto others.

This condition can only be achieved with one prerequisite: there is a direct-communication that happens between each of human-being. Furthermore, this direct-communication cannot be reduced unto a model of communication which is built throughout chatting or any other mediums since there will be many aspect of sensory-action those are lacked. Hence, it is important to know what is actually meant by understanding by an intellective thinking that can bring any transcended value.

Understanding throughout intellective thinking absolutely has different side with merely understanding. As Louis Leahy noted down in his treatise, Human Being, understanding in this sense brings a new side in approaching an object: it is more profound, individual, and universal than the usual.

It can be profounder because it does not only grasp the shape of its object or the outer reality of the object. On the other hand, they grasp the deepest side of object, searching the truly principle that constructs the object, and then trying to search its meaning and relation for them in their daily life.

Furthermore, in this trying to get profounder side of object, understanding also tries to become universal, means to conceive wholly about the object. Understanding thus does never half-conceiving manner exists.

Aside from its profound and universal side of understanding, intellective thinking also brings individual side to approach. This individual side can also be said as approaching personal side of human and it can be very useful in building inter-human relationship.

Emmanuel Levinas, a philosopher, once said that actually each of people is absolutely different from other, thus each of them cannot be placed as robots that have same characteristics if they had been set from their factory. Human is different in their nature and this difference can be realized in an inter-subjective face-to-face gathering. In this gathering, human realized others’ difference than them and thus automatically has the same position as them as a subject, not object.

This is an imperative side which should be built in personal side of understanding, means to know the uniqueness side of other person. Since people can know well the different between himself and other, they can value other as they do unto their self. This side of personal side also contributes to make a profound understanding toward other since people will know other originality and their truly self.

Thus, a question does rise: how can people build this kind of intellective-thinking understanding model?

Sensory side takes the first step and thus it is important to have a direct encounter with other people. In a direct communication, many modes of languages will be out from every people. Gesture, face-feature, eye-gazing, and other modes will be happened there. This kind of language inevitably opens further unto a next step of deeper understanding since throughout this manner people just not speak but also seems try to make it real what has been spoken unto their partner in order to make their partner can get wholly what they are talking about.

Furthermore, after from gesture and body features in making language in direct communication, another important side for building whole understanding from this kind of communication is a sense of touch and face-to-face encountering which are absolutely different from modern communication model which only provide people with sound, text, or video.

A sense of touch cannot be replaced with anything since when this sensory takes place, every situation can be radically changed. Someone who is feeling sad can be easily fixed up when their friends are gathering to hug and thus giving a comfort side that cannot be given throughout chatting or any kind of messenger. This also prevails for someone who is feeling happy since this feeling can be easily shared with his friends and thus celebrated it together. Touching and facing directly how people’s colleagues also share what others’ feelings absolutely brings comfort and happiness and this clearly cannot be reduced by any kind of communication tools.

This is what I meant with understanding in an intellective sense. People in this atmosphere can give their sympathy and empathy unto others. They absolutely know how to act unto other, to grasp a meaning from others’ story, and also they can know well others’ originality in order to make a good relationship since they can know it throughout their sensory action and processing it with their intellective side. This kind of understanding absolutely cannot be provided with any kind of communication tools. I cannot imagine how people in the future if their lost their direct contact with others and get busy with their own messenger and smart-phone and so on even when their partners are telling about their problem in front of them.

Only in direct-communication people can build their whole understanding unto others. Thus, let place any communication tools in their proper position and let build a true relationship throughout whole understanding with surrounding circumstances. Do not let these tools make a gap between those who really stands near us.

Using BOS Fund Effectively

The Jakarta Globe daily newspaper on August 10^th 2010 concerned about one main problem in education sphere in Indonesia, namely the unaware parents phenomena about allocation of school operational aid (BOS)

This phenomena based on the data that were collected from a survey of 3600 parents from 720 elementary and junior high school that were held on 2009. This survey then showed that about 55 percent of parents are unaware what the fund is for, 97 percent do not know how much money that their child receive under this program and about 74 percent do not know about how it is spent.

This phenomenon about how parents who were involved in that survey are ‘blind’ and unaware about the existence of BOS actually stands as the root of the BOS problem.

Furthermore, those condition and attitude –‘blindness’ and unawareness- takes up to surface a foul potency that can be done by school, namely debauchery of BOS. This debauchery can have many forms such as neither for recreation for teachers in the name of comparative study program, using that fund to pay bonus, remuneration, and transportation cost for teachers or school official, nor for attempting for a school to be an international standard school, like an incident which is now being investigated by Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW). And if the debauchery of BOS fund actually happens continuously, the parents then who will finally suffer many disadvantages because there will be such illegal collection neither for test paper, uniform, nor text books that actually can be freely got because all the cost for them should have be the main concern of BOS program.

Those kind of acts surely contradict with the main purpose of BOS, namely to help student who are 7-15 years old to get education as has been mandated by Article no 20 year 2003. From this article, it can be seen that the main objective of this BOS program is the student themselves. This BOS fund then ought to be used as an expense that should be allocated for helping student who have improper economy condition for getting education program; so, in the future, this program is expected can successfully make a free education program for elementary student.

Hence, the two main things that should be done in order to realizing the BOS program are transparency and accountability from the school which act as side that has that grant. Those two main points are imperative to be implemented so the parents can know exactly and clearly how and for what that fund is spent. If there are no any longer transparency and accountability, the case above about the “blindness” of parents about BOS program can be explained easily.

Hence, parents participation in the allocation of BOS fund is also imperative. It is by all means in order to keep the BOS fund is spent in the right purpose and also to support the transparency and accountability.

Parents should become more active and do not become apathies.  Moreover, parents also should be involved by school officials in discussion talking about the allocation of BOS program, neither in planning, implementing, watching, nor evaluating. This action can be done through the making of school committee as has been mandated by decision of Ministry of Education of Republik Indonesia number 044/U/2002 about Education council and school committee

Furthermore, the relation that is happened between parents and school should be equal, not as a top-down relation as had been said by Ade Irawan from Education Coalition on kompas.com site on August 11^th 2010. If the relation that is happened just a top-down relation, parents are just people who always say “yes” to anything school policy, despite their ignorance of how useful it would be.

The next problem from this BOS program is that it has not yet enough capacity nowadays to fulfill all the cost for education process in schools in Indonesia; so realizing a free education program in Indonesia still seems will be taking a long time.

Answering this problem, at least there are two solutions that can be done. First by distributing the BOS fund especially in schools which are located in remote and isolated regions which the society inside have not yet enough money to pay the education cost. By concerning to distribute the BOS fund in such regions, it will guarantee the existence of schools there to always educate the children.

Second by doing a cross subsidy at schools in metropolitan country especially which are have enough capacity in financial matter. This cross subsidy is by all means to guarantee them who have not enough money to pay education cost to continue their study in those schools. The others who have better condition economically have to pay more in order to cover up all education cost in those schools. Hopefully, with this cross subsidy, the studying process can run perfectly even though the BOS fund that are allocated to those schools do not as much as allocated in isolated and remote regions.

Mass Organizations: Not to Fragmenting Indonesia

After the new order regime was collapsed by Indonesians scholar in 1998, the amount of mass organizations in Indonesia then profoundly increase. Not less than 9000 organizations are recognized until now and it can be easily foreseen that there are so many such organizations which are not recognized yet but have already been performing their activities.

Indonesia nowadays is standing as a democratic country where its population can raise up their arguments, opinion, and also critics. They are also can form an organization that is established by the same purpose among its member and also in order to act as a channel that can involve in developing Indonesia. This act is legal; based on Article number 8 year 1985 about mass organization.

Unfortunately, there are some mass organizations that only have a huddle mentality and become unaware with Indonesia’s main goal which actually ought to be their goal that have to be achieved in a row with their efforts to accomplish their subjective purpose. Furthermore, they only exploit the democracy momentum in order to achieve only their own goal, not Indonesia’s.

There are many incidents that clearly show this problem. One of them is can be traced if its issue is about religion. Violence upon Ahmadiyah followers in Kuningan and also prohibiting upon HKBP followers in Bekasi that is done by FPI members can show that mass organizations can act as if they are higher than constitution and Indonesia;s framework, namely Pancasila.

Furthermore, the incident of ordering to catch Playboy Magazine editor by FPI members clearly shows that they can easily step over Indonesia’s constitution and law as if they are police who can catch a person who is suspected as fugitive.

Aside from those incidents, the incident from Bendera organizations who threw feces unto Malaysia embassy shows that this mass organization can only defame Indonesia in international constellation. They do not think how if our embassy in Malaysia is also thrown by feces. Their act just makes deterioration upon Indonesia-Malaysia relationship

One thing that easily can be forgotten is about implementing Pancasila that actually have to be their framework as it is said upon regulation number 8 article number 2.  

First when the issue is about religion. It is true that upon the regulation there is no forbidden to form a mass organization based on the same religions among its members.

But there is one thing that has to be noted: that using religion principle as a base of mass organization also has to accord to Indonesia’s main aim, namely to raise up Indonesians prosperity and making Indonesians society that have to respect each other as a part of implementing religion principle in society.

This means that when mass organizations are built by religion principle as their foundation, they have to tolerate each other in their social life, not to oppress the other by their religion principle.

Second, when the issue is about civility and the unity of Indonesia. Realities show that it is often happened frictions and clashes between mass organizations. Each of them cannot restrain themselves to not insist their own truth to be implemented unto others. Communication has lost and clashes are the only way that has been considered as the good one.

Is it true that mass organizations are formed in order to separate Indonesians? These uncivilized acts threat the unity in Indonesia and it is not impossible that Indonesia in the future will be fragmented unto many kinds of mass organizations which always put their subjective aim without have to look at Indonesia’s main problem and giving solution to them.

Furthermore, all of these acts cannot bring mass organizations to participate in building Indonesians prosperity, protecting Indonesia nation wholly, increasing the intellectual life of Indonesia nation and also guarding the world peace as has been said upon Indonesia’s constitution preamble.

Hence, what is actually needed nowadays just making the process to form mass organizations more strict. This thing is done solely not to repress society aspiration in democracy process that has been developing in Indonesia. It is imperative in order to guard Indonesia’s ideology and constitution so they cannot be easily stepped over by mass organizations which only have huge masses.

Aside that, implementing and revising the regulation more strictly thing that can be done as the second alternative.

It is true that freezing and dismissing a mass organization have been regulated in the regulation article number 13, 14, and 15. But, the implementation especially for those who do activities which disturb society neatness and security is very minim.

Hence, the law officer should be stricter in law enforcement and also the process of justifying the actor of problematic mass organizations have to be more transparent, so Indonesians can clearly shows and know the ending of that case and do not be leaved in blindness about whether that mass organizations is still exist or not.

Furthermore, if a mass organization is already dismissed, it is imperative to avoid them raise up again with using another name but same ideology. It can be done by the first step above, namely making stricter the process to form mass organizations.

Mass organizations are indeed very useful and this statement cannot be denied. They can be as a channel to society to sound their aspiration to government. They also can help government to raise the prosperity of Indonesians. However, when mass organizations are no longer work in the regulation that has been determined and just can force their own subjective aim and step over the law, it is important to immediately freeze and dismiss them. Mass organizations cannot act as “street justice” who always feel as if they are the strongest just because their huge masses.

Banning on Porn Sites: Tendentious and Utopian

Minister of Communication and Information, Mr. Tifatul Sembiring, is going to block all regional and international porn sites. He hoped that this blockning would finish before Ramadhan (Muslim’s holy month). However, this agenda shows three questions to discuss. First, why this agenda is lifted up in Ramadhan? Second, could this program run effectively? And finally, with the cost up to 1 billion rupias, is it not can be said as a money wasting?

Tendentious

Actually, from my opinion, it can be said that this agenda is really tendentious. May be this opinion is very subjective and this will be my task to explain how tendencious is this program.

Firstly, the qousteion that have to be answered is about the time when this agenda was lifted up. Thejakartapost site cited the reason that came from Tifatul himself. He said that it should be finished in order to not to affect (Muslims) from executing their religious obligation. From this statement, it clearly shows that this agenda were purposed to exclusively protect Muslims who will execute their fasting in Ramadhan. Why don’t he run this agenda when neither the Christians are going to celebrate easter, the Buddhas are going to celebrate Waisak, nor the Hindus are going to celebrate Nyepi? Instead of concern on its firstly purpose to improve the moral of Indonesians, the subjective tendency is dominant in the purpose of this agenda.

Furtehrmore, if he were aware with the moral decadent in Indonesia, especially after the occasion about porn videos, he ought to block all the porn videos a long time ago before Ramadhan. Thus, this eplanation brings to the question about why not this agenda not lifted up a long time ago? Is it only a campaign to lift up the images after a few days ago he made some Christians angry with the statement about porn videos and Jesus crucifixion? Is it only an agenda to repair his images on society? If the answer is yes, it can be certainly forseen that it will absolutely fail

Effectiveness

The second matter that is going to surface is about effectiveness of this blocking. The Indonesians ISP Association in thejakartapost site said that technical challenges would make it nearly impossible for Indonesai to ban internet porn sites.

This statement clearly shows that however the efforts that are deployed in order to ban all the porn sites, they are never can press the technology development that will always give many chances for people to access porn sites, eventhough they have already banned. The banning to porn sites never permanent. It just exist just a few days or a few months and after a new technology appear at surface, they should realize that all the effort that had been deployed are certainly futile.

Beside the matter about how long it can exist, it should be asked whether this agenda can improve the morality of Indonesians or not. From my opinion, this agenda will fail to attain this purpose. Instead of banning the porn sites, it will be better to use persuasive approching in order to give them moral responsibility. This task should be done firstly from family.

The next qouestion is about the cost to complete this agneda. Does it proper to say that this agenda just a money wasting? When we cannot predict certainly about how long this agenda will run effectively and we should use 1 billion rupias, does it can be conceieved rationally? Furtehermore, the corruption wlll be always taking place in Indonesia, especially wherever there is a great cost project.

From all my eplanations, I can summarize that this agenda just a subjective utopia program. It takes a big cost, cannot guarantee about how long it can exist and also how success they can improve the moral responsibility of Indonesians; and let we see whether this agenda will be run or not and if the asnwer is yes, we have to evaluate about the succesfulness about this program and the minister should take responsibility if the result is fail.