Book Review: Quo Vadis Muslim Democrats of Indonesia

In the 2017 Jakarta gubernatorial election, we were treated to religious expressions of Islamic groups in the electoral process that had never appeared before: being hostile, even threatening, figures of different religions, persecuting individuals who supported the opposing camp in public places, to the massive use of mosques as places for political campaigns and agitation. This atmosphere did not stop at the Jakarta gubernatorial election, but continued in the 2018 gubernatorial election, especially in West Java, until the 2019 general election. From the series of electoral processes, the term Badar War emerged, although faintly, as if Muslims in Indonesia were at war with another group as experienced by the Prophet Muhammad hundreds of years ago.

Regardless of which side we stand on, such a situation should make us reflect on the relationship between Islam and democracy in Indonesia. Years of practicing democracy have not necessarily led Muslims in Indonesia to engage as a nation. Muslims have indeed become accustomed to the procedural practice of directly electing their leaders or representatives in the corridor of democracy, but that is precisely the problem: making elections an arena of competition on the one hand, but on the other hand not making democratic values, such as the principles of egalitarianism, tolerance, mutual trust between citizens, and others, as a culture. Democracy is indeed not something that cannot be criticized, but accepting it half-heartedly will only give rise to political instability that hinders the process of democratic consolidation.

Muslim Democrats

From here a fundamental question arises, is it true that Islamic values and culture, at least those that live among Muslims in Indonesia, are not in line with the principles and values of democracy which are profane in nature? This is the question that Saiful Mujani examines in his book entitled Muslim Demokrat. In the Introduction, he starts from a number of literatures that doubt, and even tend to negate, the positive contribution of Islamic values and culture in the practice of democracy, as voiced by Elie Kedourie, Bernard Lewis, and of course Samuel Huntington. From the views of the three of them we will arrive at a thesis, that Islam is antagonistic to democracy, and therefore democracy in countries with a Muslim majority population will never run well (p. 14).

Several other socio-political scientists have tried to provide alternatives in viewing the relationship between Islam and democracy, including for the case of Muslims in Indonesia. However, according to Mujani, there has not been a single study that has reached a convincing and measurable conclusion regarding the relationship between Islam and democracy. Therefore, the research in this book attempts to prove a number of negative claims that have emerged regarding the attitudes of Muslims towards democratic values and instruments in Indonesia. The data used were taken from two national-scale surveys in 2001 and 2002. To prove the negative claims between Islam and democracy as mentioned above, Mujani began by building an analysis model that connects the intensity of Islamic worship practices with (1) social capital, (2) socio-political tolerance, (3) involvement and trust in political institutions, (4) support for the democratic system, and (5) political participation.

In his findings, Mujani stated that among Indonesian Muslims, all important elements of democracy strengthen each other. Mujani showed measurable evidence that rejects a number of views that Islam is not in line with democratic values and systems. In terms of social capital, for example, the lack of democracy among Muslim communities is often associated with weak civil society, and Islam is considered responsible for this problem. In the case of Indonesia, Mujani showed that there was not a single element of Islam that had a negative and significant correlation with involvement in secular associations. He specifically mentioned Sunnah worship, NU identity, Muhammadiyah identity, and networks of involvement in Islamic citizenship, as contributing significantly to involvement in secular associations. Thus, the first hypothesis measured by Mujani, that the more Islamic a person is, the lower their involvement in secular civic activities, was not proven in Indonesia.

Then, no less important is the refutation of Huntington's opinion, and also Kedourie's, that the concept of the nation-state must be built on primordial ties such as religion. This concept at first glance contradicts Islam, which does not recognize any territorial boundaries of religion through the concept of the ummah or Muslim community. Mujani opposes the opinions of both of them which are stated in the ninth hypothesis, that the more Islamic a person is, the less he or she tends to support the existence of a nation-state. In his findings, there was no significant negative correlation between Islamic elements and support for the Indonesian nation-state. He added that the existence of the concept of the ummah in Islam does not mean that it contradicts the idea of the nation-state. Overall, Islam has helped integrate Indonesian Muslims into the political system through involvement in secular associations, political involvement, and political participation. At the individual level, Islam has helped strengthen the democratic system and therefore made a good contribution to the process of democratic consolidation (p. 311).

Uniquely, Mujani does not elaborate further on the term Muslim Democrat which he uses as the title of the book. A title in the last sub-chapter in the Conclusion chapter, simply reads “The Emergence of Religious Democrats”, which contains the author’s reflection on the relationship between Islam and the state in Indonesia. In this sub-chapter, Mujani briefly presents the link between Islam and the state in the socio-political history of Indonesia, and closes it with several other possibilities for further research.

Apart from that, one of the most interesting things about Mujani's findings is about political intolerance. According to Mujani, Islamists who fall into the intolerant category do not have a tendency to be active in politics, and therefore are not a threat to the stability of democracy. At this point, I feel that there is a difference between these findings and the current situation. In recent years, intolerant Islamist groups have become increasingly active in political activities, ranging from groups that protest against the democratic system, to individuals who enter electoral competitions, either as political actors or as the main supporters of certain political actors.

This difference is of course commonplace, considering that this study was published more than ten years ago. In the period from the first national survey (2001) to the publication of this book (2007), Islamic groups with intolerant tendencies had indeed emerged. In Chapter Two on “Islam and Democracy: Intellectual Origins and Macro Context”, Mujani presents a quote from the position statement of Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia (HTI) which alludes to Islamic law regarding female leadership in the figure of President Megawati at that time. This shows that challenges to the course of democratic consolidation from religious groups have emerged. However, their numbers are limited, only in a few large cities, and therefore it is very possible that they were not or were less recorded in the survey as a sample of respondents.

Therefore, a newer, similar study is needed to re-portray the face of Indonesian Muslims today. One thing that is worth considering is to sharpen the structural dimension of Muslims in viewing the current condition of Indonesian democracy. In Chapter 6, Mujani does conduct SES (Socio-Economic Status) modeling, but the presentation is limited to measuring the extent of political involvement and trust of Muslims in political institutions (p. 209), not how Muslims act in response to socio-economic conditions in the political process. I think this will help to understand the intolerant attitude of Muslims lately, because we know that groups like this are one step ahead, from previously just criticizing democracy, shifting to using the discourse of welfare inequality that is generally experienced by Muslims, and the perception of discrimination in formal law enforcement. From here, a big question will arise to be examined further: is the current intolerant attitude of Muslims triggered by an evaluative process of democratic practices, or is there an agency involved in it that only appears at certain times, such as during elections or regional elections.

Airlangga Pribadi's (2013) critique of the role of pro-democracy Muslim groups in the contemporary political system can also complement further research on Islam and democracy in Indonesia. According to him, there needs to be a critical evaluation of the Muslim elite who now occupy strategic positions, both in government and in political parties, to examine whether they are still consistent with the progressive agenda of the community, or are instead absorbed and strengthening the position and interests of the oligarchic elite. With this perspective, Muslims are not positioned as passive actors, or even sources of problems, but rather entities that are directly involved in the practical political process. This can also trace where the disconnect lies between the positive contributions of Indonesian Muslims, as shown by the author, and the portrait of Islamic intolerance today.

Apart from that, the advantages of this book, like other books published by Saiful Mujani, lie in the wealth of relevant literature in explaining the various concepts to be tested. In addition, the author also presents his arguments clearly and in detail including in explaining the measurements used as the beginning of hypothesis testing. It is not an exaggeration to say that this book is a baseline for studies on Islam and democracy or voting behavior in Indonesia.

Library

Airlangga Pribadi, “A Lawsuit for Muslim Democrats in Indonesia”, Indoprogress.com, May 8, 2013 edition, accessed May 7, 2020.