RELIGIOUS DEMOCRATS: DEMOCRATIC CULTURE AND MUSLIM POLITICAL PARTICIPATION IN POST-SUHARTO INDONESIA DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science at The Ohio State University by Saiful Mujani, MA ***** The Ohio State University 2003 Dissertation Committee: Approved by Professor R. William Liddle, Adviser Professor Bradley M. Richardson Professor Goldie Shabad ___________________________ Adviser Department of Political Science ABSTRACT Most theories about the negative relationship between Islam and democracy rely on an interpretation of the Islamic political tradition. More positive accounts are also anchored in the same tradition, interpreted in a different way. While some scholarship relies on more empirical observation and analysis, there is no single work which systematically demonstrates the relationship between Islam and democracy. This study is an attempt to fill this gap by defining Islam empirically in terms of several components and democracy in terms of the components of democratic culture— social capital, political tolerance, political engagement, political trust, and support for the democratic system—and political participation. The theories which assert that Islam is inimical to democracy are tested by examining the extent to which the Islamic and democratic components are negatively associated. Indonesia was selected for this research as it is the most populous Muslim country in the world, with considerable variation among Muslims in belief and practice. Two national mass surveys were conducted in 2001 and 2002. This study found that Islam defined by two sets of rituals, the networks of Islamic civic engagement, Islamic social identity, and Islamist political orientations (Islamism) does not have a negative association with the components of democracy. The only negative relationship is found between Islamism and tolerance toward Christians. ii However, intolerant Islamism is not a real threat to democratic stability because intolerant Islamists tends to be passive, not active, political participants. There is no association between intolerant Islamism and protest activity that might have the potential to destabilize the democratic system. On the contrary, almost all components of Islam have a positive and significant relationship with secular civic engagement, with political engagement, and with political participation. These three components of democracy reinforce support for the democratic system as whole. Therefore, Islam helps Muslim citizens to be active in politics and this activity is congruent with the democratic system as a whole. What emerges is not religious Muslims who are against democracy, nor non-religious democrats, but rather religious Muslims who contribute to strengthening democracy. They are religious democrats. iii Dedicated to Ikun, Putri, Berlian, and Jagad iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work is written to fulfill the requirements for my Ph.D. degree in political science in the Department of Political Science, The Ohio State University. There are many people and institutions which help me to complete my graduate studies and this dissertation. Without their help, it would have been impossible for me to finish. I cannot mention all of them here, but I must single out a few. First, Professor R. William Liddle, chair of my dissertation committee and academic adviser during my graduate studies here at Ohio State. He is instrumental to my academic career not only because of his intellectual stimulation, advice, and encouragement, but also because of his effort to bring me to Ohio State since the beginning. He is my kiai and friend. As a friend, he and his family have made me feel at home during the years that my family and I have lived in Columbus. Professor Bradley M. Richardson has inspired my research on mass attitudes and behavior, a rara avis in the study of Indonesian politics. He convinced me that survey research of mass opinion, while complex and difficult, is an important way of understanding society and politics, especially in our democratic era. Professor Goldie Shabad gave valuable comments and suggestions on the draft. She stimulated me to think more deeply about the relevance of the comparative political v science theories that I have applied to the study of Indonesian Islamic politics. Perhaps most important, she helped me to stay on track with the main theme of this project and to avoid getting lost in the jungle of findings. Professor Azyumardi Azra, my senior colleague at the Pusat Pengkajian Islam dan Masyarakat (PPIM), Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah, at Jakarta, strongly encouraged me to pursue my doctoral study. Dr. Jamhari, director of the PPIM, played the essential role in the implementation of my dissertation idea. He appointed me to head the two mass survey teams, on the basis of my proposal, and allowed me to use the data for this dissertation. Without his invitation and the help of other PPIM colleagues, field coordinators and interviewers spread throughout a very large country, this dissertation would have been impossible. In addition, I need to mention my PPIM colleagues for their extremely helpful cooperation during the surveys: Fu‘ad Jabali, Ismatu Ropi, Dadi Darmadi, Oman Faturahman, Jajang Jahroni, Din Wahid, Murodi, Mahyuddin, Arief Subhan, Muhammad Dahlan, Burhanuddin, Tasman, Andy Syafrani, Tasman, and Heni Nuroni. Here in Columbus, santris of Kiai Liddle are very helpful and encouraging: Rizal Mallarangeng, Denny J.A., Eep Saefulloh Fatah, Kuskridho Ambardi, Yohanes Sulaiman, Dinna Wisnu, Takeshi Kohno, Blair King, and Kathleen Woodward. Some institutions provided funds for my graduate studies, dissertation research and writing: the Department of Political Science at The Ohio State University, the Mershon Center at The Ohio State University, the Presidential Fellowship program of the Graduate School, The Ohio State University, Fulbright and AMINEF, USINDO, the National Science Foundation, the Asia Foundation, and the Freedom Institute. vi To all of the individuals and institutions mentioned above I would like to express my gratitude. They are, of course, not responsible for any mistake in this work. All errors are mine. Finally, my graduate studies and this dissertation would have never been completed without the support of my wife, Ikun Baikuniyah, and my children, Putri Matahari, Berlian Khatulistiwa, and Jagad Alit. They make this life beautiful. vii VITA August 8, 1962 …………...…………. Born – Serang, Indonesia 1998 …………………………………. M.A. Political Science, The Ohio State University 1989 …………………………………. B. A. Islamic Studies, Institut Agama Islam Negeri (IAIN), Jakarta 1989 – present ………………………. Lecturer at the Universitas Islam Negeri (UIN), Syarif Hidayatullah, Jakarta PUBLICATIONS Mujani, Saiful. 2002. “Civil Islam atau Negara.” Studia Islamika 10: 151-163. Liddle, R. William, and Saiful Mujani. 2000. “Islam dan Kultur Demokrasi.” Jurnal Demokrasi dan HAM 1: 112-132. Mujani, Saiful. 1994. “Mu‘tazilla Theology and Modernization: Intellectual Portrait of Harun Nasution.” Studia Islamika 1: 177-199. FIELD OF STUDY Major Field: Political Science viii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract …… ……………………………………………………………………….... ii Dedication ……….…………………………………………………………………… iv Acknowledgment ……….……………………………………………………………. v Vita …………………………….……………………………………………………. viii List of Tables ……………………….………………………………………………… xii List of Figures …………………………….………………………………………… xvi Chapters: 1. Introduction ………………………………………………….…………………… 1 1.1. Civic Culture Perspective ……………………………………….…………….. 1 1.2. Religion and Democratic Culture …………………………………….………….. 6 1.3. Islam and Democracy …………………………………………………………… 13 1.4. Indonesian Muslims ……………………………………………………………... 32 1.5. Hypotheses …………………………………………………………………….… 35 1.6. Measures of Democratic Culture, Political Participation, and Islam ……………. 37 1.7. Method and Data …………………………………………………………............ 50 1.8. Overview of Dissertation ……………………………………………………….. 52 2. Islam and Democracy: Intellectual Origins and Macro-Context …………………. 55 2.1. Shari‘a and Politics …………………………………………………………….. 56 2.2. Democracy and Indonesian Muslims ………………………………………….... 93 2.3. Conclusion …………………………………………………………………… ... 95 3. Dimensions and Measures of Islam ……………………………………………... 101 3.1. Faith ……………………………………………………………………………. 102 3.2. Mandatory Rituals ……………………………………………………………… 104 3.3. Suggested Rituals …………………………………………………………….… 105 3.4. Nahdliyin Rituals ……………………………………………………………….. 109 3.5. Islamic Social Capital …………………………………………………………... 110 ix 3.6. Islamist political orientations (Islamism) ……………………….......................... 119 3.7. Patterns of relationship among Islamic components …………………................ 123 3.8. Correlates of Islamic components and socio-Economic and demographic factors ……………………………………………………............. 126 3.9. Conclusion …………………………………………………………………….... 128 4. Social capital ……………………………………………………………………... 129 4.1. Interpersonal trust ………………………………………………………............ 142 4.2. Networks of civic engagement …………………………………………............ 152 4.3. Islam and social capital ………………………………………………………… 160 4.4. Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………… 163 5. Political Tolerance …………………………………………………………….… 163 5.1. Tolerance and Democracy ……………………………………………………... 168 5.2. Islam and Tolerance …………………………………………………………..… 180 5.3. Islam, Democratic Values, and Tolerance …………………………………….... 190 5.4. Political Tolerance and Communism …………………………………………... 198 5.5. Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………..