From what I know living, working and travelling for work to Islamic countries is the people are OK. Like all cultures there is good the bad and the down right ugly. Their approach to the toilet and the mess they leave is something they need to address.

Islam unlike the Catholic Church is set up with each Mosque being an autonomous entity. There is no central command and control structure. No formal hierarchy. It is setup like a set of cells so it can never be destroyed. Like a spy network or a terrorist organization or even how AA is structured. It is by design not centralized.

Combined with the Quran can never have a single change made for the rest of humanity and each Iman can interpret it as god wants then to see it I cannot see how it can ever be reformed. It is here to stay.

I have meet many great and nice Moslems. There is nothing wrong with the people.

I feel in general the following:
1. Islam cannot be reformed as a religion. (well not like the church has done)
2. The brain washing that goes into the teaching of the children from a very young age, they all have to learn the Qoarn off by hard and they recite it over and over again. Leads to believers of a way of life and god is in everything they do and say that is not allowing them to have the period of enlightenment we experience during the Reformation. In the 21st Century we have a large % of the population going backwards. This is not a good thing for our future and is on par,  no... worse than the Us Midwest. They are breeding ignorance that can only lead to people being easily lead by leaders who will say they act in the name of God.

That's my 2 bits worth. Anyway I am only responding on this topic because I am out of the country right now. Just a post like this I could end up in jail. I will refrain from posting again. It is all monitored. So enjoy the topic. 

freediver wrote on Feb 19^th, 2019 at 9:50pm:


It isn't. All I'm saying is there are is a very diverse community of muslims in Indonesia who mostly interact, debate and learn from each other in a peaceful and harmonious way. Is that not consistent with a healthy free market of ideas?

Quote:


It is the biggest and probably the most tolerant and progressive muslim majority country in the world, so I would say so, yes.

freediver wrote on Feb 20^th, 2019 at 11:27am:


I think you'll find that the central authority model of Muhammad and the first caliphs you refer to was well and trully dismantled long before the actual caliphate officially ceased to exist. By around the 11th-12th centuries the clunky authoritarianship of a single caliphate ruling the entire empire from Persia to Andalus existed in name only. By then the calphate was in reality a multitude of different autonomous fiefdoms. And on that point, its interesting to note that in the Andulus, the period of greatest cultural and scientific flourishing coincided with the period of greatest political fracturing (circa 11th to 13th centuries)- when the caliphate broke down and the region was ruled by separate and competing fiefdoms. My theory is that with political decentralisation came ideological and cultural diversity, and a healthy 'free market of ideas' that helped advance science and philosophy.

freediver wrote on Feb 20^th, 2019 at 9:30pm:


All governments tell their people from the outset which ideas you can and cannot promote FD. Here you are not allowed to promote the idea that the holocaust was a lie. You are not allowed to promote the idea that people are inferior based on race. It is literally against the law to do so. And those are just the clear cut cases - there is a lot more legal grey area that causes most people self censor - like vilifying on the basis of religion.

And my point here is not to claim that Australia is just as bad as Indonesia - it probably isn't. The point is that your argument here seems rather meaningless, since no country on earth is technically a "free market of ideas". Hence why I didn't actually use that term on its own. The key word that I used was "healthy (free market of ideas)" - as in in spite of the restrictions on free speech (that all governments place), the level of permitted debate, still represents a "healthy 'free' market of ideas". And how do I judge that? I guess the assumption inherent in this discussion is that the free-er and more open the debate on a given issue, the more (for want of a better word) 'progressive' the ideas, and by extension attitudes on that issue become. A notion that I'm sure you would agree with. So if we are talking about the 'ideas' surrounding Islam in Indonesia, they seem to be by and large relatively (as in comparable to the western benchmark) progressive judging by both surveys on things like inclusiveness and minority rights, as well as the political and cultural environment which demonstrably overwhelmingly rejects reactionary and extremist versions of Islam (without outright banning them). This correlates closely with the existence of a very diverse range of Islamic interpretations and ideas, as well as the proven ability of different groups to coexist, intermingle and cooperate together.

I would say that as vague and difficult to define the term "healthy free market of ideas" is, it seems to me that in terms of Islam in the world today, Indonesia is about as clear cut a demonstration of this concept as you can get.

Quote:


And this is a blatant infringement on freedom of speech - which from memory you oppose just as much as I do.

Quote:


Racial vilification is illegal. There are plenty of people pushing various forms of scientific racialism. I realise this is splitting hairs, but it is an important distinction.

Also, both of these are paper tigers compared to Indonesia.

Quote:


I agree that a lot of people self censor when it comes to Islam, but that is more out of fear of crazy Muslims than any legislation. Apart from that Islam is pretty much open slather on both religion and religious people.

Quote:


Wow. Would you like to take a minute to make up your mind?

Quote:


This isn't a technical discussion, unless you want to be as evasive as possible.

Quote:


What about in terms of whether they are a free market of ideas, or whether you can get put in jail for offering a progressive interpretation of Islam?

Quote:


Are you saying that putting people in jail for having a progressive interpretation of Islam is mainstream Islam?

And can you explain your reference to "outright banning"? Blasphemy is a crime in Indonesia. Are you saying the "extremist" versions of Islam would not be considered blasphemy?

Quote:


Are you referring to Ahok being released from jail a few weeks ago?

Or are you talking about a different Indonesia? One that only exists as an Island in your mind perhaps?

Quote:


It may well be the closest Muslim-majority country that exists, but it is still a shithole of oppression where you would probably get put in jail for some of the things you post here.

Do you ever tire of polishing the turds of Islam?

freediver wrote on Feb 21^st, 2019 at 3:04pm:


Just to reiterate my point: you take the mere existence of anti-blasphemy laws which I humbly suggest you understand very little about in terms of how and when it is enforced, and how it even impacts people's every day lives - as the entire basis for such a sweeping statement as describing the entire country as a "shithole of oppression".

I put it to you that the assessment of whether or not Indonesia is a "shithole of oppression" should be based on a lot more than mere existence of blasphemy laws. And from what I can see, Indonesia, as in the actual society where actual people live, seems quite a long way from a "shithole of oppression".

freediver wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2019 at 8:47am:


And he shouldn't have been. But I put it to you that this was an extraordinary case. How often does this actually happen in Indonesia, such that we can have a better handle on whether or not Indonesia is, in your words, an "oppressive shithole"? How widespread and deeply ingrained is self-censorship on matters of Islamic debate in Indonesian society? I respectfully put it to you that you don't have an answer to this.

At least answer me this FD: Isn't it true that your entire case for why Indonesia can't possibly be a "healthy" place for the free exchange of ideas around Islam, and even further that the entire country is an "oppressive shithole" - comes down to nothing more than a) the existence of blasphemy laws and b) the gaoling of a single governor on clearly trumped up charges?

Of course this high profile but single case is outrageous, a travesty of justice - but it hardly defines what Indonesian society is on the ground.