Flowing ideas, porous borders

By admin-s On Oct 22, 2014

(MMO) – To close avenues for discussions and dialogues would only induce secret or underground activities especially among the restless youths, which can be more insidious.

The controversial Indonesian Muslim scholar, Dr Ulil Abshar Abdalla, cautioned the Malaysian authorities, who banned him recently from entering Malaysia, that progressive ideas in the modern world could not be blocked or banned. He was blacklisted because of his “liberal” views of Islam that were feared by such people as Jakim and other Muslim leaders.

Although forbidden from speaking at a roundtable on the threat of religious fundamentalism organised by the Islamic Renaissance Front (IRF) in Kuala Lumpur that was scheduled on October 18, Ulil made good his caution when he used the social media Skype in order to participate in the 3rd International Conference on “Human Rights and Peace and Conflict in Southeast Asia” that was held in Kuala Lumpur recently.

Much has already been said by critics about the banning of Ulil by the Malaysian government, but suffice it to say here that it is indeed sad, if not shameful, that government leaders and religious authorities in the country chose to shy away from an intellectual discourse in a manner that can be misconstrued by some as Islam disallowing or discouraging its adherents from involving themselves in civilised dialogues and discussions.

Or worse, this act of banning may be wrongly taken by some as an indication that Muslims in general are incapable of having intellectual engagement and instead resorting to some undemocratic and uncivilised behaviour, thereby reinforcing the horrific media imagery of Muslims running amok, burning properties, issuing threats of violence, or killing people whom they disagree with and consider “heretics”.

As if to further strengthen this unfortunate and negative stereotype, a Cabinet minister recently said that it was okay for Perkasa’s chief Ibrahim Ali to threaten to burn Malay-language Bibles as he meant well, i.e. to purportedly defend Islam. Defile someone else’s holy book in order to protect one’s own religion?

Defenders of this warped logic should know where it can lead to: some people may argue, for instance, that it’s fine for American Pastor Terry Jones to threaten to burn some 2,998 copies of the Quran in late 2013 as a show of protest against “violent” and “evil” Islam especially in the aftermath of the 9/11 tragedy. There’s no end to this belligerent approach to faith and social issues.

Indeed, ideas must be fought with ideas, and not by burying our heads in the sand in the hope that those unwanted thoughts would somehow go away. In this contemporary world where advancement in information and communications technology (ICT) facilitates easier and faster communication, it is crucial that we become well equipped to engage ourselves in intellectual exchanges.

The fact that Ulil could still “participate” in the KL human rights conference shows that through ICT, ideas, no matter how controversial they can be, can still flow, transgressing physical borders and stubborn denial.