There could well be evidence FD - you certainly haven't presented any though. Do you think thats a problem in a discussion like this? In fact your abstention (refusal?) in evidence producing here is twofold:

1. presented no evidence to suggest that Indonesian society overall is the self-censoring "Islamofascist shithole" you claim it is
2. presented no evidence to demonstrate that the Ahok verdict/gaoling would assuredly have the impact on Indonesian society you insist it does (that they self censor en masse).

For one thing, how many Indonesians were even aware of the trial, and of those how many were so immersed in the details that it triggered a 'I must self-censor' reaction? And even further, of those who both knew of the trial, and were immersed in all the details, what proportion were cognizant enough to differentiate between a cynical use of religion to concoct a trumped up charge on a powerful politician who had many powerful enemies, and just everyday normal constructive debate that goes on between ordinary people throughout the country.

And by the way - the answer to all of the above also needs evidence - the burden of which is on you.

freediver wrote on Mar 1^st, 2019 at 1:07pm:


deterrence for what exactly FD? Being a gubernatorial candidate and pissing off powerful enemies?

And yeah, I think its reasonable to present evidence for the sweeping stereotype that the entirety of Indonesian society self censor en masse and thus making Indonesia an Islamofascist shithole.

You might for once consider the question how many Indonesians actually knew about the case? That would be fairly important prerequisite for deterrence wouldn't you think? Yet somehow you refuse to even contemplate it. And thats even before going to more nuanced considerations like even amongst the people who were aware of it, would it necessarily deter them if they were smart enough to understand the difference between a blatantly cynical political witch hunt and legitimate dialogue and debate conducted every day by ordinary people?

Auggie wrote on Mar 1^st, 2019 at 5:57pm:

Itself an.... er.... overthrow.

For the worse.

freediver wrote on Mar 1^st, 2019 at 6:22pm:


So you keep saying.

Doesn't support your sweeping generalisations about Indonesian society though, not by a long shot.

So lets recap - your argument as it stands now:

Indonesia is an Islamofascist oppressive shithole where everyone self censors on matters on religion because.... one politician was gaoled for blasphemy. There may even have been more.

Does the prosecution rest FD? Or would you like to add more? I mean apart from ranting on with ridiculous strawmen about how gandalf loves Islamofascists - feel free to skip over those

Auggie wrote on Mar 1^st, 2019 at 8:28pm:

Yes, yes, we all know about dangerous perhapses.

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 1^st, 2019 at 7:16pm:


Here is what I actually said Gandalf:

He was jailed for blasphemy Gandalf. He is not the only one. There was a grass roots campaign against him based on his blasphemy, thanks to the backwardness that Islam inculcates in it's followers. Of course, as a Muslim, you will try to paint this as anything other than Islam destroying freedom of speech, and you will pretend that everyone else sees it in terms of your fabrication. But all this does is highlight the fact that your support for freedom of speech is mere pretense, and you will discard it at the first opportunity, even if it means jailing a non-Muslim for offering the same benign interpretation of Islam as you.

What other Muslim nations do you believe have a "healthy free marketplace" of ideas when it comes to interpreting Islam? Might as well get a whole list of your misrepresentations....

Do you think public debate only stops being a "healthy free marketplace of ideas" when every single person self censors?

When anyone mentions the reform of Islam, it opens a number of ramifications that would need to be clarified first. We infidels are not in a position to even start making suggestions. But standing on the sidelines of Islam the panorama is one of primitive stupidity. And one where contradiction is the justification for torture and murder in the name of God.

Turkey's President Erdogan, an Islamist, is of the view that there is no moderate or extreme Islam. And it seems there are no end of sub-sects of Mohamedanism who would agree, except their view of Islam is the only correct one. Zudhi Jasser, of the American Islamic Forum, is coming to Australia to sell more of this snake oil.

However, I think Erdogan is correct. Islam is belief in Mohamed as the messenger of God, and the Koran is the infallible word of God. There are not too many followers of Islam who will deny that, but every so often we hear someone claiming to be a Muzlum, while wishing to qualify these beliefs. In effect, creating their own sub-sect. I would say they cannot have it both ways, but I am an infidel to them.

Muzlums can be very smarmy, when not in a position of control, but under their breath they accuse us of a false perception of reality. Jasser does this, or he is not a follower of Mohamed.

Karnal wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2019 at 12:59pm:


I think there is potential for a lot of good points that are not at all flattering for either Islam or Indoensia here. Unfortunately, FD seems incapable of making any of them. The absurd sweeping stereotype that all Indonesians necessarily self censor in religious debate and that it is an Islamofascist oppressive shithole (the whole of society that is, not just the government) based on nothing other than this one case - is what I've been honing in on. FD's had how many pages to actually develop his case beyond this one flawed and baseless logic? I find quite frustrating when invited to actually make a reasonable case, someone reduces their entire argument to "what do you expect to happen??" type rhetorical questions on the one hand and really unbecoming ad hominems about how his accuser must be an apologist of Islamofascists.

Clearly this case is a blight on the Indonesian political system, and clearly it doesn't bode well for the future of its democracy. But a flawed democracy with dangerous 'Islamofascist' undertones is not the be-all and end-all for what Indonesian wider society actually is on the ground. And if we are looking for actual evidence for what Indonesian society *IS* as opposed to insisting what it must be based on particular incidents that happen in the political sphere (eg the Ahok trial), seeing how Indonesian people vote at elections is probably the easiest way to guage. And I'm happy to report that the much anticipated "Islamist electoral wave" following the Ahok verdict was quite the fizzer - based on the latest (June 2018) regional and municipal elections that are held in the run up to the Presidential elections. These results are generally seen as a portend for how the Presidential elections will go:

Islamists fail to sway regional Indonesian elections

I particularly liked the anecdote at the beginning about local Indonesians giving the big thumbs up to the mayor who was targeted by Islamists over the construction of a church.

So sure, the Islamists can rustle up a couple of hundred thousand rent-a-crowd (and they undeniably were rent-a-crowds - as in literally bribed to be there, reporters have exposed) in Jakarta against Ahok - you certainly can't deny their organizational skills. But when it comes to the crunch to actually persuade/intimidate ordinary Indonesians to vote for an "Islamofascist shithole" - well, the Indonesian people have demonstrated their willingness to give the Islamists the middle finger. I look forward to the upcoming 2019 general election as demonstrating the same sentiment.

What does this all mean? If nothing else (and I haven't really been aiming for anything else), it highlights that the sweeping stereotype that Indonesians cower in fear at the freedom-hating Islamists and all speak in hushed tones on matters of religion, self censoring en-masse - is not based on anything other than a single (though concerning) incident in Indonesian politics, and is therefore absurd. Beyond that (and I don't even need to go beyond that), there are so many more rational interpretations for that one incident and how it relates to wider society - that Indonesian people are smart enough to understand the difference between a blatant political witch hunt amongst the political elites, and normal, everyday religious discussion; that we don't even know how many Indonesians actually even knew about the Ahok case, and those who did, how many knew enough to actually feel the need to change their behaviour and self-censor? Or that the level of cynicism towards Indonesian politics is such that ordinary people simply dismiss it as being irrelevant to how they are allowed to conduct their lives.