By: Alfisyah Kumalasari) *
Today the spread of radicalism is considered worrying because it is supported by increasingly sophisticated technological developments. Therefore, the government’s steps to eradicate this understanding reap support. Given, the latent danger of radicalism is quite disturbing. Being in the 4.0 era this indeed often makes us have to be extra careful. Being careless just a little will make us complacent. Moreover, the era of digitalization that is increasingly making users forget themselves. The recognition of existence in cyberspace seems to be so dreamed of. Surge in followers also might make internet users become addicted. The digital world is considered influential in the spread of radical understanding, because through social networks radicalism expands without being detected.
Radicalism itself is an idea or idea to make social-political changes that adhere to extreme ways, including violence and acts of terrorism. Radical people often take shortcuts to dominate the social system in a country or region. The development of radical understanding in various parts of the world, including Indonesia, experienced significant movements, even at an alarming level.
Radical understanding spreads as if it does not know age, young and old, school children to officials or security forces does not guarantee to be free from the threat of radicalism. The most recent case was a suicide bombing in the Medan area, where the perpetrators allegedly adopted the Lone Wolf system, which was popular with its own work system. Although independent, it is possible if this actor has been affiliated with a number of radical groups in various regions through the internet network.
This has also been justified by many parties and the public. According to the news, in social media there are sites or links to secret groups that are difficult to detect. Sadly, in that social media sent contents and invitations every day related to violence and terrorism are sent every day. Logically, if the parties whose faith is unstable will be very easily electrocuted by the flow of radicalism. Which, every day is stuffed with misguided and destructive understandings.
Seeing this, President Joko Widodo was also concerned. He asked his staff to prevent radicalism which was considered very serious. Jokowi asserted, if the eradication of radicalism and intolerance is one focus on his second government.
Whatever it is, of course we are in agreement with the President who is addressing the issue of radicalism that continues to overshadow this nation. If it is true that radicalism cannot be separated from global influence, then the radicalism movement will continue to grow on a more massive scale in line with the information revolution of the physical cyber era. That way, inevitably Indonesia must prepare itself to counter the negative global impacts including the development of radicalism.
The root of the problem has actually been obtained. However, problems related to this matter have not been able to be solved and resolved comprehensively. With this new, more substantive approach, the prevention and eradication of radicalism will bring more results. If you see an approach to solving the problem of radicalism so far it is still considered to have minimal results. The indication of the symptoms of radicalism is growing day by day, increasingly widespread and alarming.
Therefore the system of approaches to overcome radicalism must be metamorphosed. The old pattern which is not effective and tends to oversimplify and overgeneralize in viewing radicalism should not be continued. However, the consequences must be to leave programs and action plans that are neither effective nor counter-constructive. In other words, it must look for program substitutions and better and more productive action plans.
Quoting the affirmation of the Coordinating Minister for Political, Legal and Security Affairs Mahfud MD, that radicalism does not show the identity of Islam or certain religions, or certain parties, people and organizations. New approaches and paradigms for dealing with radicalism should also be more targeted at the core of the problem. One of them is inequality or inequality, not only in the economic sector, but also in politics, law, social and society. So that later the optimal performance of the eradication of radicalism will soon produce results.
If you see an approach to solving the problem of radicalism so far it is still considered to have minimal results. The indication of the symptoms of radicalism is growing day by day, increasingly widespread and alarming. Therefore the system of approaches to overcome radicalism must be metamorphosed. The old pattern which is not effective and tends to oversimplify and overgeneralize in viewing radicalism should not be continued. However, the consequences must be to leave programs and action plans that are neither effective nor counter-constructive. In other words, it must look for program substitutions and better and more productive action plans.
Quoting the affirmation of the Coordinating Minister for Political, Legal and Security Affairs Mahfud MD, that radicalism does not show the identity of Islam or certain religions, or certain parties, people and organizations. New approaches and paradigms for dealing with radicalism should also be more targeted at the core of the problem. One of them is inequality or inequality, not only in the economic sector, but also in politics, law, social and society. So that later the optimal performance of the eradication of radicalism will soon produce results.
Former terrorist Khairul Ghazali alias Abu Ahmad Yasin, argues that people who adhere to ideologies of violence or terrorists will not be able to be awakened by argumentation. They are not people who need to be admonished. According to him, the economic approach will be more pervasive for adherents of the ideology of violence. Because, they (radicalism perpetrators) will feel cared for, including their children, wives and families. He believes in this way they will soften, especially if the economic conditions are also good.
In conclusion, efforts to deradicalize the non-violent approach are highly recommended. Given the violence can not be resisted with violence too. But there must still be an intelligent thought in order to tackle this radical understanding further.
) * The author is a social political observer
