Mohammad Fazril Bin Mohd Saleh
International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM)
INTRODUCTION
A society is a basic unit of human civilization and culture, where these two play a vital role. From time immemorial human beings are tied in social relationship to one another.[1] Nowadays social status has taken on a new dimension according to the needs and requirement of the society. The primitive cultures and civilizations are very simple, therefore their society was also simple and now, society becomes more and more complex, apparently its complexity is at its zenith.
Although we live in ‘civilized’ world today with electronic wave system, satellite communications and wonderful devices which are supplying amazing comfort in the terrestrial life, but still we are not in peace. As criticized by Sirajul Islam: “ever imminent war, scarcity of morality, degradation of values, slackening of human rights and so on are peeping in at our doors every moment.”[2] Therefore, we feel the need of ‘civil society’, so that our good life, civilization and culture may be preserved.
Actually, the intention of this paper is to discuss briefly about the civil society, its concept, and Islamic evaluation on it. This paper will firstly look upon the concept of civil society which will be defined in the light of philosophers, thinkers, and political scientists. Also, there will be a case study of civil society in Indonesia particularly on the period of post-‘new order era’. Meanwhile, the Islamic evaluation on the concept of civil society will be the last sub-topic of this term-paper.
THE CONCEPT OF CIVIL SOCIETY
The answer to the question, “what is good life?” would lead to the concept of ‘civil society’.[3] But, according to Asha Mukherjee, answering this question satisfactorily needs that we first agrees as to what should be counted as good life. He said, “We find that ‘good life’ has an inbuilt two dimensions, the individualistic as well as social.”[4] Meanwhile, looking on the term ‘civil society’ in the modern perspective, Moten and Islam mentioned that the term is a peculiarly modern concept which was neglected for most of the 20th century in the West (particularly in the Western Europe), though it was commonly used in Marxist terminology and some of its derivatives and the term became popular in the late 1970s and early 1980s.[5]
In contemporary academic exploration, ‘civil society’ as defined by Cohen and Arato, is usually defined to refer to the level of governance between the state and the governed.[6] It includes, but is not limited to, non-government organizations involved in service delivery and advocacy activities, charitable organizations, private foundations, professional associations, social movements and activist networks. As insisted by Helen James, the key common denominator with all these groups is that they be ‘not for profit’, and seek to achieve their objectives through non-violent methods.[7]
Meanwhile for Philip Oxhorn, the civil society expert who focuses his analysis and studies of civil society in Latin America said: “Given the concept’s close association with Western history and political thought, its applicability to other regions such as Latin America is often hotly debated”.[8] Therefore, he defined civil society as ‘the social fabric formed by a multiplicity of self-constituted territorially and functionally-based units which peacefully coexist and collectively resist subordination to the state, at the same time that they demand inclusion into national political structure’.[9]
Even though the concept of civil society has largely flourished from the 18th century (in the time of early modern thought of the ‘Enlightenment’) and onward, but it is not a new concept. Sirajul Islam proved that the concept of civil society had been expounded in ancient Greece. Plato’s “Republic” offers vivid instances of civil society and justice.[10] Even, Socrates also advised each citizen to maintain civil laws and principles of the society, because, as a good citizen of a particular state, it is his moral obligation to obey the law of his state. However, their civil society was basically confined to the political theory.[11] In “The Republic”, Plato maintained that government, whether it is ruled by the king or the military, the people or the tyrant, should treat society in a reasonable way, as an image of the individual and people will be the sole composer of that regime.[12]
Meanwhile, the ‘social concept’ theory developed by Thomas Hobbes is basically signifies the associations of the people which is the necessary part of the civil society. In his book “Leviathan”, he said: “human beings in the state of nature are determined by the necessity of the mechanics of their bodies to pursue their own good, even at the expense of others and cannot be blamed for pursuing that to which nature impels them.”[13] According to him, human beings come together because they need each other to be complete, also for the social conditions necessary to bring out happiness and fulfillment.[14]
Afterward, Hegel, Toqueville, Marx, and Gramsci, all spoke about civil society in the political or economical sense.[15] Hegel gave rise to a modern liberal understanding of the concept of civil society as a form of market society as opposed to institutions of modern nation state.[16] He considered civil society as a separate realm, a "system of needs", that stood for the satisfaction of individual interests and private property. Hence, he used the German term "burgerliche Gesellschaft" to denote civil society as "civilian society". Then, Alexis de Tocqueville put weight on the system of civilian and political associations as a counterbalance to both liberal individualism and centralization of the state. Hence, Hegel's perception of social reality was followed in general by Tocqueville who distinguished between political society and civil society.[17]
Meanwhile, for Karl Marx, civil society was the ‘base’ where productive forces and social relations were taking place, whereas political society was the 'superstructure'.[18] Agreeing with the link between capitalism and civil society, Marx held that the latter represents the interests of the bourgeoisie. Therefore, the state as superstructure also represents the interests of the dominant class; under capitalism, it maintains the domination of the bourgeoisie.[19] Hence, Marx rejected the positive role of state put forth by Hegel. Marx argued that the state cannot be a neutral problem solver. Rather, he depicted the state as the defender of the interests of the bourgeoisie. He considered the state and civil society as the executive arms of the bourgeoisie; therefore, both should wither away.[20]
On the other hand, the negative view about civil society raised by Marx was rectified by Antonio Gramsci.[21] He underlined the crucial role of civil society as the contributor of the cultural and ideological capital required for the survival of the hegemony of capitalism. Rather than posing it as a problem, as in earlier Marxist conceptions, Gramsci viewed civil society (societa civile) as the site for problem-solving.[22]
For the London School of Economics Centre for Civil Society, ‘civil society’ is a concept located strategically at the cross-section of important strands of intellectual developments in the social sciences. To take account of the diversity of the concept, they adopted an initial working definition that is meant to guide research activities and teaching, but is by no means to be interpreted as a rigid statement: “Civil society refers to the arena of uncoerced collective action around shared interests, purposes and values. In theory, its institutional forms are distinct from those of the state, family and market, though in practice, the boundaries between state, civil society, family and market are often complex, blurred and negotiated. Civil society commonly embraces a diversity of spaces, actors and institutional forms, varying in their degree of formality, autonomy and power. Civil societies are often populated by organizations such as registered charities, development non-governmental organizations, community groups, women's organizations, faith-based organizations, professional associations, trades unions, self-help groups, social movements, business associations, coalitions and advocacy group.”[23]
Examples of civil society institutions are: (1) non-governmental organizations (NGOs), (2) private voluntary organizations (PVOs), (3) peoples’ organizations, (4) community-based organizations, (4) civic clubs, (5) trade unions, (6) gender, cultural, and religious groups, (7) charities, (8) social and sports clubs, (9) cooperatives, (10) environmental groups, (11) professional associations, (12) academia, (13) policy institutions, (14) consumers/consumer organizations, (15) the media, (16) citizens' militia, and (17) organized religion. Moten and Islam argued that civil society is not the exclusive domain of one country or continent, or of a particular type of political system. Almost all societies have within them civil formations regardless of the system of government.[24]
According to Larry Diamond, the organizations of civil society are voluntary, self-generating, autonomous, and rule abiding. They are concerned with the public ends; they relate to the state without seeking office; they encompass pluralism; and they are partial.[25] Moten and Islam had elaborated beautifully those characteristics of civil society given by Larry Diamond. They explained six characteristics of civil society, summarized as follow: (1) Voluntary and autonomous, (2) public ends, (3) pluralism and diversity, (4) partial and non-holistic, (5) link with the state, and (6) civility.[26]
CIVIL SOCIETY IN INDONESIA: A CASE STUDY
1. Profile of Indonesia
Indonesia is a democratic country that applies a presidential system and Pancasila (Five Pillars) is the soul of the Indonesian democracy. Indonesia adopts a democracy that is based on the 5 principles known as the Pancasila Democracy. Pancasila were proclaimed by President Soekarno (the first President of Indonesia) on the Declaration of Independence of the Republic of Indonesia on 17 August 1945. Pancasila consists of five principles that are interrelated and inseparable: (1) The belief in one God, (2) A just and civilized humanism, (3) Unity of Indonesia, (4) Democratic citizenship lead by wise guidance born of representative consultation, (5) Social just for all the people of Indonesia.[27]
Indonesia is located in Southeast Asia. It is one of the largest archipelagos in the world that has 17,508 islands, situated between two continents, Asia and Australia/Oceania. This strategic position greatly influences the country’s culture, social, politics and economy.[28] With a population of around 230 million people, it is the world's fourth most populous country, and has the world's largest population of Muslims. Indonesia is a republic, with an elected legislature and president. The capital city is Jakarta. The country shares land borders with Papua New Guinea, East Timor, and Malaysia. Other neighboring countries include Singapore, Philippines, Australia, and the Indian territory of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.[29]
The Indonesian archipelago has been an important trade region since at least the seventh century, when Srivijaya and then later Majapahit traded with China and India. Local rulers gradually absorbed foreign cultural, religious and political models from the early centuries CE, and Hindu and Buddhist kingdoms flourished. Indonesian history has been influenced by foreign powers drawn to its natural resources. Muslim traders brought Islam, and European powers fought one another to monopolize trade in the Spice Islands of Maluku during the Age of Discovery. Following three and a half centuries of Dutch colonialism, Indonesia secured its independence after World War II.[30]
The population of Indonesia can be divided into two major groups: in the western region most of the people are from the Malay ethnicity while in the eastern region there are the Papuans originating from the Melanesian Islands. Indonesia also recognizes specific ethnic groups that come from a certain province/area and have specific language for example the Javanese from Central or East Java, the Sundanese from West Java or the Batak ethnicity from North Sumatra. In addition, there are also minority ethnicities derived from Chinese, Indian and Arabic descendents. These people travelled as merchants through trade exchange since the 8th century BC and migrated to Indonesia.
As in other democratic countries, Indonesia applies the ‘three organs of government’ that recognizes the separation of the legislative, executive and judicial bodies. The legislative authority is under the People’s Consultative Assembly (MPR - Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat) that consists of two bodies namely the Parliament which consist of members of political parties and the Regional Representative Council (DPD - Dewan Perwakilan Daerah) composing of representatives from each province in Indonesia. Each province is represented by 4 delegates that are elected by the people in the respective region.[31] The People’s Consultative Assembly (MPR) is the highest state institution. Formerly the MPR consisted of the parliament members and group representatives. Currently, the MPR has 550 members from the parliament and 128 members from the DPD. The parliament members and the DPD members are elected every five years. Since 2004, the MPR has become a bicameral parliament with the DPD as second chamber.[32]
The executive institution is centralized under the president, vice president, and the cabinet of ministers. The cabinet is a presidential cabinet in which the ministers report to the president and do not represent the political parties. The judicial institution -since the reform era and upon the amendment of the 1945 Constitution- is administered by the Supreme Court including the administration of the judges.[33] The current nation of Indonesia is a unitary presidential republic consisting of thirty three provinces.[34]
Despite its large population and densely populated regions, Indonesia has vast areas of wilderness that support the world's second highest level of biodiversity. The country is richly endowed with natural resources, yet poverty remains widespread in contemporary Indonesia.[35] Indonesia's history has since been turbulent, with challenges posed by natural disasters, corruption, separatism, a democratization process, and periods of rapid economic change.
2. Concept of Civil Society in Indonesia
Since the discourse of the civil society concept in Indonesia became popular in the beginning of 1990s, there are two approaches or concepts which have been developed there.[36] The first one, according to Sujatmiko, is highly related to politics as it focuses on civil society’s vertical aspect, mainly focused on society’s autonomy from the state.[37] This concept is mainly supported by NGOs opposing the government. As the means to achieve democratization, these NGOs looked at the civil society as a striving arena in order to develop a strong and independent society. Therefore, according to Rustam Ibrahim, the first approach defines civil society as a concept of independent society’s presence and at some level is able to advance and to limit government’s intervention into the created avenues for its activities. The NGOs raised the civil society discourse in Indonesia in order to identify and build citizens’ capacity for advocating democracy and human rights in the face of the New Order (Order Baru) opposition.[38]
The second conceptualization highlights the horizontal aspect of culture like relations between individuals and groups.[39] It stresses civility aspects of civil society and because it is identical with the concept of civilized society in Indonesia known as masyarakat madani.[40] The term ‘masyarakat madani’ was introduced by Nurcholish Madjid, a famous progressive Indonesian Muslim thinker. He stated that masyarakat madani is a civilized society (in Arabic, madaniyyah), derived from the concept of civil society in Prophet Mohammad’s time with Medina as the centre of activities. According to Nurcholis Madjid, masyarakat madani is the kind of society that respects and perpetuates the principles of pluralism and tolerance which the ‘pluralism’ here means that there is sincere willingness to accept the fact of diversity and pluralism in a positive manner. Thus, by this, it will enrich the development and diversity of the nation’s culture through dynamic and various cross-cultural interactions. [41] Similarly, ‘tolerance’ relates to the willingness to accept differences on various perspectives and social behaviours.[42]
The followers of the masyarakat madani concept adopt a very “soft” approach in the relations between civil society and the state. Even though civil society is acknowledged as the main component of pro-democracy movement, the government is still perceived to be the crucial factor for democratization and the structure of democracy cannot be built without the state’s power.[43] In fact, the interconnection between the government and the civil society is often defined in a cooperative framework rather than based on conflict. This happens because the demise of the government’s legitimacy will lead to potential fragmentation within the civil society. The civil society has no meaning without a strong state.[44]
Following the end of Soeharto’s authoritarian regime and a few years into reform era (masa reformasi), the development showed that there is consensus among the civil society components. It means, there is a concept of civil society which consists of the combination of both the vertical and horizontal aspects. The society is not merely considered as the arena or space that filled with voluntary, organized and government-independent society groups, but they are also characterized by their tolerance, respect towards each other and the pluralism within them.[45]
This concept is very significant and relevant with the social condition of Indonesia, as a vast state, which consists of various ethnicities and religions. Therefore, the conditions require a serious attention from the government, especially the issue of reintegration. As stated by Rustam Ibrahim: “the political reform in Indonesia, however, despite the fact that it has transformed Indonesia into democracy, also caused a number of horizontal conflicts and violence in several regions.” These civil society organizations (CSO), which consist of organized groups and networks situated outside the family, state and market, interact with each other to promote common interests, including the public interest in broader sense. As a collective entity covering all organizations, groups, and organized networking outside the family, the civil society organization (CSO) category is very diverse.[46]
3. Civil Society in Indonesia
As mentioned before, the concept of civil society began to gain its popularity in Indonesia at the beginning of the 1990s. However, the beginnings of civil society activity, marked by the establishment of organized and relatively independent community groups, can be traced back to the time of Dutch colonialism in the beginning of the 20th century. According to Azyumardi Azra, Indonesian civil society has a long and rich history, particularly the ‘religious-based’ civil society. The earliest forms of nationwide civil society organizations in the country were Muslim social-religious organizations such as Nahdlatul Ulama` or NU, founded in 1912 by K.H. Hasyim Azhari, and Muhammadiyah, established by K.H. Achmad Dahlan in 1926.[47] Both organizations conceived in the colonialism era and are still greatly influential today. In connection with Dutch policies on political liberalization and modernization of its colonies, hundreds of community-based organizations for education, social issues, religion, economics and even politics blossomed in Indonesia with various goals but all in pursuit of the common goal of gaining independence from the Dutch. This development continued into the early stage of independence in early 1950s when several mass organisations of professionals such as labourers, youths, students, journalists, artists and others tried to affiliate themselves with political parties.[48]
The reign of the Suharto era, which enjoyed the backing of military forces for more than 32 years (1966-1998), resulted in a setback for Indonesia’s civil society development. The Suharto’s presidency, known as the New Order era, according to Rustam Ibrahim, was in fact a bureaucratic-authoritarian regime (Negara Otoriter Birokrasi/ NOB). He argued: “NOB was intended as a political system in which the state comes out as the dominant political force that is capable not only of controlling its own supporting factions but is also capable of marginalizing its opposition within the society. NOB was designed to exert strict control over civil society, as in an authoritarian country the life of civil society will always be controlled in order to prevent people from being actively involved in the political realm. The involvement of people in politics is considered a nuisance to the political stability and an obstacle to the national economic growth. Several mechanisms were used to control the society, such as obstruction and prohibition of civil liberties (freedom of association and freedom of expression) and the development of a corporate state ideology.”[49]
This ideology of corporate state primarily correlates with organization’s life where state governs civil society’s organization through interest representative system initiated and acknowledged by the state. The representative’s unit is functionally divided based on specific categories such as one labour union, one journalists’ association, one youth organization and so on. These units must have the government’s approval and submit themselves to the government’s control.[50] Those organizations appeared during the economic modernization period of President Suharto’s regime and known as Lembaga Pengembangan Swadaya Masyarakat (LPSM) or Society’s Self-Development Group.[51] Alternative organizations for these units were prohibited. The government created difficulties to these alternative organisations and, where necessary dissolved the organizations by coercive measures.[52]
In the middle of 1997, Indonesia suffered a serious economic and monetary crisis that led to a massive increase in the number of poor and unemployed, especially in urban areas. This situation prompted massive demonstrations by Indonesian students in Jakarta and other major cities, which had the support of NGOs and academics, and culminated in the fall of President Soeharto in May 1998. The fall of this authoritarian regime was followed by democratic transition in Indonesia. This event initiated a great deal of transformation within the Indonesia’s society, especially the rapid development of the civil society. CSOs have shown a significant increase in numbers. This period is known as the reform era and also known as the resurrection of the Indonesian civil society.
With the freedom to associate, assemble and express opinions for the people, the civil society sector has grown at a very rapid pace. The CSOs, whether new or old, compete with one another to be heard by the people. A team of researchers on Indonesian civil society from YAPPIKA described some illustrations of CSO growth as below:[53]
1. The number of NGOs, which are the most visible and vocal components of CSO, has increased greatly. In the new order era, there were only several thousand NGOs in Indonesia. This number has multiplied in the recent period.
2. In the new order era, there was only one labour union acknowledged, and it was highly controlled by the government. Nowadays there are 40 labour unions at the national level, not less than 300 labour organizations at the local level and more than 10,000 labour unions at the company level.
3. New Independent mass communication media such as newspaper, magazines and tabloid have growing very rapidly. There are hundreds of newly established newspapers, magazines, and tabloids, which span from capital cities like Jakarta to the cities in the provinces and deliver independent news.
4. Social religious organizations, intellectuals and scholars’ communities, student movements, research institutions, study groups and think tanks have also experienced significant development.
To YAPPIKA National Index Team, even though the civil society has grown very rapidly, it is clear that living in a repressive regime leaves a considerable impact and long lasting impression on the various elements of civil society. For more than three decades, the civil society was treated as part of problem and not the solution. The civil society’s sole purpose of existence is to be controlled and not to be heard or treated as partners. As a result, in 1998 when it aspired to contribute to democracy and good governance, CSO needed to reconsider its strategy and reposition itself in order to respond to the ever-changing challenges and opportunities.[54]
THE WORLDVIEW OF ISLAM: AN ISLAMIC EVALUATION
Nowadays, the term ‘civil society’ became too popular. It is found anywhere, yet what it means, according to Wayne Hudson, is often unclear.[55] As the term ‘civil society’ first emerged in Europe, yet there is no single European concept of it. Wayne Hudson criticized the definition of civil society particularly in Western literature which was shaped by Enlightenment conception of ‘religion’ and ‘the secular’ and assumes that in the long run, religion will decline, or at least play less and less role in public affairs. He said: “Today, however, European conception of ‘religion’ and ‘the secular’ are contested, and there is empirical evidence that religion is not declining or absenting itself from public affairs. Moreover, fundamentalist religion, both Islamic and Christian, is a major problem, both internationally and within some nation states. In this context, it may be useful to explore civil society in terms which are neither secularist nor confessional.”[56]
Therefore, the term ‘civil society’ is historicized and allowance is made for different civil societies in different part of the world and it cannot be assumed to be necessarily secular.[57] Similar to what have been mentioned by Philip Oxhorn: “Given the concept’s close association with Western history and political thought, its applicability to other regions such as Latin America is often hotly debated”,[58] the concept of civil society in Islam must be understood within Islamic framework which is based on the ‘worldview of Islam’ which is derived from divine revelation (The Qur`an and Prophet’s tradition).
The worldview of Islam is the creed (‘aqidah) of Islam itself[59]. It projects the vision of the one reality and truth. It encompasses both dunya and is a fixed unchanging, final and absolute vision because it is grounded in and derived from wahy.[60] This is not merely a theoretical claim, for Muslim historical experience has shown that the fundamental element of the worldview such as the conception of God, of the nature of man and of the psychology of the human soul, and the meaning of knowledge, of happiness, of virtue and vices, and of prophethood have no change throughout the long ages of Islamic epoch.[61]
It is not a derivation of cultural and philosophical elements but it is one whose source is wahy, confirmed by religion, affirmed by intellectual and intuitive principles.[62] This wahy is final, and it not only confirms the truth of preceding revelations in their original forms, but includes their substance, separating the truth from cultural creation and ethnic inventions.[63] Therefore, the worldview of Islam consist of[64]: (1) belief in the oneness of Allah; (2) belief that Allah is the creator of this universe; (3) belief that Allah is the sustainer of the world; (4) belief in the unseen realities and the life to come; (5) recognition of the Holy Prophet Muhammad as the Messenger of Allah, and (6) belief in the angels of Allah and the authority that defines the truth as separate from falsehood.[65] For Muslims, Islam represents a way of life guided by proper knowledge and ethical principles outlined in The Holy Qur`an and exemplified in the practical life of The Holy Prophet[66]
In such a society, human beings, due to the very attribute of being human, are revered and their rights are respected. [67] The government in such a society is the result of people’s choice and is accountable to the people. Citizens of Islamic civil society enjoy the right to determine their own destiny, supervise the administration of affairs and hold the government accountable. Also, civil society in Islam acknowledged the toleration of faith, conscience, freedom, morality, solidarity and subsidiary.[68] Therefore, according to Sirajul Islam, it is very interesting to indicate that the first civil community was formed by Prophet Muhammad SAW which was called al-Mujtama’ al-Madani (civil socity/state). This statement by Sirajul Islam has been supported by al-Attas. He claimed the concept of religion (din) is connected with the concept of civil society (al-Mujtama’ al-Madani) and proved it by established upon a firm system of roots and its semantic structure which is governed by a clearly defined system of semantic field that determine the conceptual structures inherent in its vocabulary and is also fix permanently by its root system.[69]
Al-Attas claimed that the word din (religion) and madain or mudun (city) are semantically connected as the idea of kingdom (madinah) inherent in the concept of din. He said: “the very notion of law and order and justice and authority and social cultural refinement inherent in all these signification derived from the concept din must surely presuppose the existence of a mode or manner of acting consistent with what is reflected in the law, the order, the justice, the authority and social cultural refinement, a mode or manner of acting, or a state of being considered as normal in relation to them.”[70] Thus, it is not a problem to say that the concept of civil society is existed in Islamic tradition. Hence, some scholars claiming that civil society is precisely Islamic original ideal form of society.[71]
CONCLUSION
From this brief survey, the establishment of ‘civil society’ is a need, so that our good life, civilization and culture may be preserved. The concept of civil society, even though was emerged in the West, but it is not a rigid concept. It can be defined and applied by different civil societies in different part of the world including Islamic society.
Meanwhile, the case study of Indonesian civil society has proven the claim aforesaid. As today in Indonesia, CSO is aspired to contribute to democracy and good governance, thus, it is significant for them to reconsider its strategy and reposition itself in order to respond to the ever-changing challenges and opportunities. As in Islam, civil society is accepted and is legitimate within Islam as long as they are not contrary to Islam. The term ‘al-Mujtama’ al-Madani’ reflexes the characteristics of civil society in Islam.
Cited Bibliography
Antonio F. Perez, Semou Pathe Gueye, Fenggang Yang, USA: The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy, 2005.
al-Attas, Syed Muhammad Naquib Prolegomena to The Metaphysics of Islam: An Exposition of The Fundamental Elements of The Worldview of Islam, Kuala Lumpur: ISTAC, 1995.
. The Concept of Education in Islam: A Framework for an Islamic Philosophy of Education, Kuala Lumpur: ISTAC, 1999.
Goldman, Michael (ed.), Journal of Teaching Philosophy, USA: Miami University, 1997, edition. 20:2, June.
Ibrahim, Rustam. Indonesia Civil Society 2006: A Long Journey To a Civil Society, Jakarta, YAPPIKA & ACCESS, 2006.
James, Helen. (ed.) Civil Society, Religion and Global Governance: Paradigms of Power and Persuasion, London & NY: Routledge, 2007.
Khan, Israr Ahmad. Qur`anic Studies: An Introduction, Kuala Lumpur: Zaman Islam Media, 2000.
Madjid, Nurcholish “Introduction to Civil Society and Democratic Investment: Challenges and Opportunities”, Civil Society versus Civilised Society: Archeology of the Notion of “Civil Society” in Islam Indonesia, ed. by Ahmad Baso, Bandung: Pustaka Hidayah, 1999
Miller, David The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Political Thought, London: Blackwell, 1994.
Mohd Dom, Adi Setia. Worldview of Islam Academy: The Concept, Kuala Lumpur: HAKIM, 2010.
Moten, Islam. Introduction to Political Science 3rd Edition, Singapore: Cengage Learning Asia, 2009.
Wan Daud, Wan Mohd Nor. The Educational Philosophy & Practice of Syed Muhd Naquib al-Attas, KL: ISTAC, 1998.
. (ed.) Knowledge, Language, Thought & the Civilization of Islam, Johor Bharu: UTM Press, 2010.
Zaleski, Pawel. "Tocqueville on Civilian Society. A Romantic Vision of the Dichotomic Structure of Social Reality", Archiv fur Begriffsgeschichte, Germany: Felix Meiner Verlag, 2008.
[1] Sirajul Islam, “Civil Society, Solidarity and Social Reformation in The Sufi Perspective”, Civil Society as Democratic Practice, edi. by Antonio F. Perez, Semou Pathe Gueye & Fenggang Yang, (USA: The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy, 2005), pg. 223, hereinafter cited as “Civil Society, Solidarity and Social Reformation in The Sufi Perspective”
[2] Ibid.
[3] Asha Mukherjee, “Civil Society: A Transpositional Understanding”, Civil Society as Democratic Practice, edi. by Antonio F. Perez, Semou Pathe Gueye & Fenggang Yang, (USA: The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy, 2005), pg. 257, hereinafter cited as “Civil Society: A Transpositional Understanding”
[4] Ibid.
[5] Moten and Islam, Introduction to Political Science 3rd Edition, (Singapore: Cengage Learning Asia, 2009), pg. 369, hereinafter cited as Introduction to Political Science 3rd Edition
[6] Cohen and Arato, Civil Society and Political Theory (London: MIT Press, 1992)
[7] Helen James, “Civil Society, Religion and Global Governance: The Power and Persuasiveness of Civil Society”, Civil Society, Religion and Global Governance: Paradigms of Power and Persuasion, ed. by Helen James (London & NY: Routledge, 2007), pg. 3, hereinafter cited as “Civil Society, Religion and Global Governance: The Power and Persuasiveness of Civil Society”
[8] Philip Oxhorn, “Citizenship as Consumption or Citizenship as Agency? : The Challenge for Civil society in Latin America” Civil Society, Religion and Global Governance: Paradigms of Power and Persuasion, ed. by Helen James (London & NY: Routledge, 2007), pg. 101, hereinafter cited as “Citizenship as Consumption or Citizenship as Agency? : The Challenge for Civil society in Latin America”
[10] Sirajul Islam, “Civil Society, Solidarity and Social Reformation in The Sufi Perspective”, Civil Society as Democratic Practice, pg. 224
[11] David Miller, The Blackwell encyclopedia of Political Thought, (London: Blackwell, 1994), pg. 77
[12] Sirajul Islam, “Civil Society, Solidarity and Social Reformation in The Sufi Perspective”, Civil Society as Democratic Practice, pg. 225
[13] Michael Goldman (ed.), Journal of Teaching Philosophy (USA: Miami University, 1997), ed. 20:2, June, pg. 122
[14] Ibid.
[15] Sirajul Islam, “Civil Society, Solidarity and Social Reformation in The Sufi Perspective”, Civil Society as Democratic Practice, pg. 225
[16] Zaleski, Pawel, "Tocqueville on Civilian Society. A Romantic Vision of the Dichotomic Structure of Social Reality", Archiv fur Begriffsgeschichte (Germany: Felix Meiner Verlag, 2008), pg. 50
[17] Ibid.
[18] Ibid.
[19] See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/civil_society
[20] Ibid.
[21] Eugeniusz Gorski, Civil Society, Pluralism and Universalism, (Washington DC: The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy, 2007), pg. 15
[22] Ibid. pg. 7-10
[23] See "What is civil society?", Centre for Civil Society, London School of Economics. 2004-03-01. Retrieved 2006-10-30.
[24] Moten and Islam, Introduction to Political Science 3rd Edition, (Singapore: Cengage Learning Asia, 2009), pg. 371
[29] See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesia
[30] Ibid.
[36] Rustam Ibrahim, Indonesia Civil Society 2006: A Long Journey To a Civil Society, (Jakarta, YAPPIKA & ACCESS, 2006), pg. 20
[41] Nurcholish Madjid, “Introduction to Civil Society and Democratic Investment: Challenges and Opportunities”, Civil Society versus Civilised Society: Archeology of the Notion of “Civil Society” in Islam Indonesia, ed. by Ahmad Baso, (Bandung: Pustaka Hidayah, 1999)
[43] Rustam Ibrahim, Indonesia Civil Society 2006: A Long Journey To a Civil Society, (Jakarta, YAPPIKA & ACCESS, 2006), pg. 21
[47] Azyumardi Azra, “Religious-based Civil Society and Anti-Corruption Campaign: The Indonesian experience in The Creation of Good Governance”, Civil Society, Religion and Global Governance: Paradigms of Power and Persuasion, ed. by Helen James (London & NY: Routledge, 2007), pg. 20, hereinafter cited as “Religious-based Civil Society and Anti-Corruption Campaign: The Indonesian experience in The Creation of Good Governance”
[48] Rustam Ibrahim, Indonesia Civil Society 2006: A Long Journey To a Civil Society, (Jakarta, YAPPIKA & ACCESS, 2006), pg. 18
[51] Azyumardi Azra, “Religious-based Civil Society and Anti-Corruption Campaign: The Indonesian experience in The Creation of Good Governance”, Civil Society, Religion and Global Governance: Paradigms of Power and Persuasion, pg. 289
[52] Rustam Ibrahim, Indonesia Civil Society 2006: A Long Journey To a Civil Society, (Jakarta, YAPPIKA & ACCESS, 2006), pg. 19
[55] Wayne Hudson, “Postsecular Civil Society”, Civil Society, Religion and Global Governance: Paradigms of Power and Persuasion, ed. by Helen James (London & NY: Routledge, 2007), pg. 149, hereinafter cited as “Postsecular Civil Society”
[58] Philip Oxhorn, “Citizenship as Consumption or Citizenship as Agency? : The Challenge for Civil society in Latin America” Civil Society, Religion and Global Governance: Paradigms of Power and Persuasion, ed. by Helen James (London & NY: Routledge, 2007), pg. 101, hereinafter cited as “Citizenship as Consumption or Citizenship as Agency? : The Challenge for Civil society in Latin America”
[59] Omar Jah, “Al-Balagh”, Knowledge, Language, Thought & The Civilization of Islam, edi. by Wan Mohd Nor Wan Daud and Muhd Zainy Uthman (Johor Bharu: UTM Press, 2010), pg. 83, hereinafter cited as “Al-Balagh”
[60] Adi Setia Mohd Dom, Worldview of Islam Academy: The Concept, (Kuala Lumpur: HAKIM, 2010), pg. 7
[61] Ibid.
[62] Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, Prolegomena to The Metaphysics of Islam: An Exposition of The Fundamental Elements of The Worldview of Islam, (Kuala Lumpur: ISTAC, 1995), pg. 4, hereinafter cited as Prolegomena
[63] Ibid. pg. 6
[64] Omar Jah, “Al-Balagh”, pg. 85
[65] Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, Prolegomena, pg. 78
[66] Israr Ahmad Khan, Qur`anic Studies: An Introduction, (Kuala Lumpur: Zaman Islam Media, 2000), pg. Introduction
[67] Moten and Islam, Introduction to Political Science 3rd Edition, (Singapore: Cengage Learning Asia, 2009), pg. 376
[68] Sirajul Islam, “Civil Society, Solidarity and Social Reformation in The Sufi Perspective”, pg. 230
[69] Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, The Concept of Education in Islam, pg. 2
[71] Sirajul Islam, “Civil Society, Solidarity and Social Reformation in The Sufi Perspective”, pg. 231
Catat Ulasan
terimakasih untuk article nya.
I have found a little mistake in your writing, especially in the part of 3. Civil society in Indonesia, first paragraph which stated "Nahdlatul Ulama` or NU, founded in 1912 by K.H. Hasyim Azhari, and Muhammadiyah, established by K.H. Achmad Dahlan in 1926."
as far as I know, it is in reverse. NU founded in 1926, and Muhammadiyah in 1912. check it again :)