Community | April 24, 2009 | 36 comments

Indonesia’s Voters Retreat From Radical Islam

source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/25/world/asia/25indonesia.html?hp

Image
current89
JAKARTA, Indonesia — From Pakistan to Gaza and Lebanon, militant Islamic movements have gained ground rapidly in recent years, fanning Western fears of a consolidation of radical Muslim governments. But here in the world’s most populous Muslim nation just the opposite is happening, with Islamic parties suffering a steep drop in popular support.

In parliamentary elections this month, voters punished Islamic parties that focused narrowly on religious issues, and even the parties’ best efforts to appeal to the country’s mainstream failed to sway the public.

The largest Islamic party, the Prosperous Justice Party, ran television commercials of young women without head scarves and distributed pamphlets in the colors of the country’s major secular parties. But the party fell far short of its goal of garnering 15 percent of the vote, squeezing out a gain of less than one percentage point over its 7.2 percent showing in 2004.

That was a big letdown for a party and a movement that had grown phenomenally in recent years, even as more radical elements directed terrorist attacks against Western tourists and targets. The party had projected that it would double its share of seats in Parliament even as it stuck to its founding goal of bringing Shariah, or Islamic law, to Indonesia, the world’s fourth most populous nation, with 240 million people.

Altogether, the major Islamic parties suffered a drop in support from 38 percent in 2004 to less than 26 percent this year, according to the Indonesian Survey Institute, an independent polling firm whose figures are in keeping with partial official results.

End of excerpt

Source: The New York Times Online
  1. groups:
    Community
  2. tags:
    News,  International Politics
  3.     
    |

36 comments // Indonesia’s Voters Retreat From Radical Islam

  • mendokusai
    • 0
      mendokusai  

    • "god damned arab muslims"???

      those god damned arab muslims were the bridge that pulled your sorry ass ancestors out from the depths of the middle ages. those god damned arabs were probably thinking about the superiority of races when they were teaching crusaders about shampoo and soap. the pendulum swings both ways but an ignorant turd who gets their history lesson from the 700 club wouldnt have a clue.

      run along now and go spread some hate. there are no brahmins or chosen ones here.

    • 3 years ago
  • holyshiite
    • 0
      holyshiite  

    • Blah, blah, blah, blah. mendoblah, blah...Fact is, some races ARE better than others, mostly due to the culture they adopt. Arabs are way down on the list. Indonesians were influenced and coerced by the warring ways of the God Damned Arab Muslims but at least they can think for themselves.

    • 3 years ago
  • calm_incense
    • 0
      calm_incense  

    • GOOD NEWS!

      My guess is that they looked to their neighbors up north - Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, China - and figured that's a far more promising future than what they'd expect from pursuing the same theocratic crap that's destroying the Middle East.

    • 3 years ago
  • el_chivo
    • 0
      el_chivo  

    • Great news, not because is Islam, but because every government should stay far away from religion, no matter what religion.

    • 3 years ago
  • Ares
    • 0
      Ares  

    • Wow, I guess even Muslim people hate radical Islamic people. Wait, is it OK because they're Moslem, and not OK because I'm Christian?

    • 3 years ago
  • akamaial
  • galwayman
    • 0
      galwayman  

    • mendokusai,got your email glad you responded.all they have to do is build a suitcase nuke and deliver it and set it off inside a city! They have enough psychos who are willing to die for the cause! We must stop them before they gain access to weapons of mass destruction nuclear,biological,or chemical as sure as I'm writing this they will use them 9-11 showed that they are ready willing and able to act and kill! islam true meaning is peaceful religion these psychos are not peaceful they are willing to kill their own just as much as they are willing to kill us!

    • 3 years ago
  • jh64487
    • 0
      jh64487  
    • galwayman:

      actually the suitcase nuke has been debunked, couldn't happen. go on, google why, they did a report on its inprobability. (and the fact that it hasn't happened ANYWHERE yet it a pretty good indication it won't)

      9/11 showed two things, they are ready to kill, and that we let them do it. you know that bush was warned about an eminent attack and he shrugged it off. it was a failure on our part, not a success on theirs.

      and then what happened dude. we have killed (or been responsible for the death of) at least 100,000 civilians in Iraq. how many afghani's are being killed daily i don't know. and do you really think the thousands of pakistani civilians we've killed trying to take out a handful of leaders in peshwar and has worked?

      2000, pakistan is fairly stable. 2009. pakistan is in the grips of islamic extremism. what happened in between? we bombed the shit out of innocent civilians on the border regions. what the fuck do you think american's would do if canada started claiming they were bombing extremists in america with predator drones? we fucking wipe them out.

      ...why do you expect these people to react differently?

      oh and dude, just reply to yourself to reply to this, you're clogging up the wall

    • 3 years ago
  • charfman
    • 0
      charfman  

    • It was my hope that Obama would stop the US from meddling in the affairs of any and all foreign countries and bring all our troops home... from all over the world...
      This was a rather unrealistic hope but... what if?

    • 3 years ago
  • galwayman
    • 0
      galwayman  

    • mendokusai,
      no reponse? damn our debate was just started and I was enjoying it! Please do continue when your schedual allows!

    • 3 years ago
  • mendokusai
    • 0
      mendokusai  
    • galwayman:

      @ galwayman

      yea, sorry i wasnt on time

      a couple of things to consider. what guarantee is there that the crazies would be capable of launching nukes? yes, i do agree that there are people who would gladly give their life for the opportunity to launch nuclear weapons at the west. but what are the chances that they actually could carry it out?

      secondly, lets say that they can in fact nuke the west. are you trying to tell me that there is no other way to prevent such a thing other than by nuking them out? (i will skip over the whole minority report debate about pre-crime and punishment before the crime because while this is slightly different, i doubt most people would be able to follow the differences. i am giving you the argument that they are guaranteeing a strike and taking words to be as guilty as the action itself)

      that is such a dangerous precedent to set you have no idea. bomb them now before they bomb us. i could go on and on about how wrong it would be for the here and now as well as for later generations, but that is besides the point. anyone can criticize. real change would come about in the realization that bombing is not the only solution to this situation. mik cited a couple of wars up above as the way that conflicts were resolved. how strange that those are the conflicts that are remembered for the wrong reasons (war). yet how many times have there been conflicts resolved without military conflict?

      and here is a huge lesson that people need to keep in mind when it comes to nuclear weapons; just because a war may be over doesnt mean that the conflict is. do you have any idea what kind of fodder you are providing for future generations who have their minds on revenge?

    • 3 years ago
  • fun_size
  • galwayman
    • 0
      galwayman  

    • mendokusai,
      with these psychos its either convert or die there is no in between! if they get control of nuclear weapons they will use them! today its possible to build a nuke small enough to take out an entire city! Would you prefer that option? once the bad guys get nukes and will clearly use them what choice is there but to strike first? I don't like it either but since the government in pakistan is basically a joke and riddled with taliban supporters the west would have little choice but a first strike to prevent them from killing us! the question becomes does Obama have the guts to do it to save lives?I am aware of the loss of life and the damage to the envioment that would result from a nuclear first strike but since its clear that these psychos would use nukes on us what choice do we have?

    • 3 years ago
  • mendokusai
    • 0
      mendokusai  
    • galwayman:

      akamaial you speak as if you are any better than they are

      your ignorance alone would make you more than qualified to excel as an extremist. swap that nappy hawaiian shirt out for a headrag and you would fit in quite well with the regurgitating minions of the taliban. its all a matter of what garbage you were spoonfed. in your case, it just happened to be fox news instead of the crooked mullah down the street from the mudarrasah.

      the pathetic part is that someone such as yourself is too stupid to realize it. which is what makes someone like you so perfect for the role.

    • 3 years ago
  • akamaial
  • mendokusai
    • 0
      mendokusai  

    • ok so a few things

      true that womens rights in the middle east suck. no doubt about it. people use religion to manipulate and the practices have become engrained in the culture.

      but you have to put things in context. i mean, black people didnt start to vote until 40 years ago; women didnt start to vote til about 100 years or so ago. in the span of history, that is a blink of an eye. im not saying to ignore the situation. but its wayyyy more effective for people to witness your progress and desire to pattern themselves after you instead of imposing or interfering.

      nuking people is not the answer. it never has been. it never will be.

      the american attention span is ridiculously short. just killing everyone and assuming that you have solved a problem is the most idiotic thinking imaginable. have you ever stopped to think how nations resolved conflicts before the advent of the nuclear age?

    • 3 years ago
  • mik661
  • mendokusai
  • galwayman
    • 0
      galwayman  

    • mendokusai,
      Do you really think so?Even if the US stayed out of the middle east Isral has every right to exsist and our support of that right condems us in the eyes of radical Islam! We should cut the saudis off! we can not allow these scum,who would murder everyone of us,to gain control of nuclear weapons! These "people" have no respect for any human life that refuses to live in the 14th century under radical Islamic law! They have no respect for womens rights! they must be stopped by any means even if we have to nuke them before they nuke us as unhappy as that makes me personally!

    • 3 years ago
  • jh64487
    • 0
      jh64487  
    • galwayman:

      no no, you misunderstand the situation bud, our support of israel condemns in the eyes of just about EVERY arab muslim.

      and why not? we trooped in there 80 years ago, told the people living their to get lost and then used military force to overwhelm any dissent.

      AND LOOK HOW WELL ITS WORKED. coming up with a fair and equal solution for the palestinian situation would have positive repercussions for israel as well.

      here's another thought, after the gaza war a month ago hama's has actually gained even more support among the gazans. try and figure out why and you'll figure out why just bombing the fuck out of someone won't prevent but rather encourage the rise of radical islam.

      we need peace, not war

    • 3 years ago
  • JohnA
    • 0
      JohnA  

    • "From Pakistan to Gaza and Lebanon, militant Islamic movements have gained ground rapidly in recent years"
      Not to mention London and Paris.

    • 3 years ago
  • mendokusai
    • 0
      mendokusai  

    • @ galwayman

      radical islam would not be in the position it is today without your exact way of thinking

      you ignorantly contribute to the strengthening of external forces when you believe it is your duty or god-given right to interfere in the matters of others and dictate how a group of people (who you have absolutely no clue about their customs, traditions, history, or tendencies) should live

      there are indeed fanatics who want nothing but death for the west - just as you want them "wiped from the earth"

      the big difference is that the west is the one in their front yard. the situation you mentioned in pakistan is a perfect example. if american forces would quit randomly bombing innocent people at weddings then maybe the taliban (supported by the saudis who by the way are maintained by american taxpayers - a whole other example of problematic interference) wouldnt have any momentum among the people to make gains and threaten for pakistani leadership

      the underlying problem lies in the need to interfere with and exploit others. as jh mentioned above, indonesia (along with singapore, malaysia, turkey, etc) serves as a good example of what can happen when america just stays the fuck out of other people's business

    • 3 years ago
  • mik661
    • 0
      mik661  
    • mendokusai:

      Why don't those others then stay in their own country and quit traveling to fight in other peoples wars in the name of their brand of Islam. The common people of Pakistan have are not the ones supporting the Taliban. they are the ones silently suffering in fear of them. You are deluded in thinking that if we completely left Pakistan and Afghanistan that the people would rise up against religious extremists. Its not about religion it is about power. The Taliban want it and by leaving them to act as they will they will get it. Actions by the West have often been misguided and aggravated the situation but the issues of "Jihad" and extremism are entirely the creation of the people who benefit politically and financially from it. The religious overtones are means of controlling the populace. Remember that the Grand Daddy of it all, Wahabism, grew as a response to the Saudi Royal families actions in governing Saudi Arabia. America was drawn into that conflict due to our support of the Royal family via monetary and military aid. Bin Laden himself declared originally that his actions were provoked by American troops on Saudi soil, despite the fact that we were invited guests there of the legitimately recognized government.

    • 3 years ago
  • JohnA
    • 0
      JohnA  
    • mendokusai:

      Oh bull. They could care less what he or anyone else thinks. We're not Muslim, that's the bottom line, and no amount of appeasement will change that. It's not that we don't respect their culture, they don't respect ours. They don't want to live in peace with other religions, they want us to convert or die.

    • 3 years ago
  • mendokusai
    • 0
      mendokusai  
    • mendokusai:

      @ mik

      you are correct in that the majority of pakistan is at the mercy of a few and that they are indeed suffering. but i never said that anyone would "rise up" if america were to leave. your description of the facts are not that off but your understanding of the relationships between them are. your question as to why dont people stay in their own countries is a natural one - one that many in the middle east ask of american troops on a daily basis.

      your analysis wouldnt be complete tho without looking at the other end of things. pakistan's other extreme of corrupt leader who sold out their country did not do any good either. when people become fed up, they have no real incentive to advocate for change because they know that either way they are screwed. again my point wasnt that they would rise up and lead themselves to greatness. it was that people dying from american bombs would take away a key element of the taliban's support. if there were indonesians dying from american bombs i guarantee you that there would be a group of manipulative "islamists" who would be capitalizing on the same perverted interpretaions of jihad (which by the way if anyone truly understood this stuff, they would know that jihad is not a set of instructions on how to kill infidels - its a typically eastern philosophy that has little to do with physical conflict and more to do with metaphysical awareness)

      @ john

      yep one day maybe they will have troops stationed in your neighborhood with drones flying over your head. but dont you dare resist because terrorism is bad.

    • 3 years ago
  • mik661
    • 0
      mik661  
    • mendokusai:

      However beyond all that there are people such as the Taliban who seek dominance. Whether the people be cowed by Musharef or the Taliban either way they are doing nothing. The lawyers revolt that outsed Musharef could have easily been crushed by the military but they chose to sit this one out. I thinks its obvious that the military and security forces are riddled with supporters of the Taliban. This is why they allowed Musharef to be run out of town. Now they lay back letting a weak civilian government take the heat whilst the Taliban move in. This allows them to escape American wrath until it is a moot point. Again, if we were to simply pull out a extreme islamic government with nuclear weapons would be the result and maybe the result regardless of what we do. I am also well aware of the phiosophical meaings of jihad but like many religious beliefs the practical affect in the real world is somewhat different. It is being taught and practiced as a war against infidels in which the infidels only safety is too lies on its back with a Muslim boot on its throat admitting that they are of a inferior belief.

    • 3 years ago
  • galwayman
    • 0
      galwayman  

    • This is good news indeed but in the middle east its totally different! we may have no choice but to stop radical Islam from gaining control of nuclear weapons in pakistan! In my opinion until radical Islam is wiped from the earth we have a major problem! These fanatics want nothing less then death for the west!

    • 3 years ago
  • Theekshani
    • 0
      Theekshani  
    • galwayman:

      The only way to "wipe out" radical anything is to stop trying to wipe it out. Radicals thrive on persecution.
      What they need are more reasonable alternatives and less fighting.

    • 3 years ago
  • VramK
  • FallenMorgan
  • Mount_Zion
  • lucidstone
  • unimatrix0
    • 0
      unimatrix0  

    • One would think and hope that societies self correct; an asymptotic movement swinging left and right as it approaches the center.

      Radical anything seems unsustainable. At some point the collective grows weary and forces an adjustment.

    • 3 years ago
  • jh64487
    • 0
      jh64487  

    • probably because, unlike in the other nations undergoing islamic radicalization, we aren't at war with indonesia and they have no real ties to the pan-arab movement either (regarding the Israeli/palestine situation).

      in fact, we economically benefit immensely.

      and if you can't see the lesson that is clear from this you are an idiot (or a flying pig)

    • 3 years ago
  • kennymotown
    • 0
      kennymotown  

    • I have no problem with islam but radical islam is real trouble. Looks as though at least in Indonesia the population has enough of bombings and their wicked ways. I wonder if electing Obama has anything to do with this. A signal from the west that the adults and true Americans are back in charge.

    • 3 years ago
  • Donovanwilliams
more from Community:
from the community

top videos