The Real Democracy Is Not Kafir Analysis
Indonesian Moslem speak: The Real Democracy is not Kafir
The general terms of democracy today, mostly stated that every people in a country are involves in the decision-making. Another provocative meaning of it is “the rule of the people”. People become so eager to enter government’s area because they concern about the decision affecting their life, and they cannot merely trust someone who not knowing them well. It then forming motion of no confidence between people and their leader and finally creates a democratic movement. There are lots of reasons that muster the motion, 2 of them that often appears are first, power tend to corrupt. The human ego evokes power dispute results in unstable law and decrees like the Supersemar letter and sudden Gusdur’s retreating from presidential chair which was creating “frenziness” inside nation. It also provokes corruption, collusion, and nepotism. Secondly, the diversity between government’s and people’s way of thinking, in a certain case like the latest hot topic, university students demoing the rector’s decision of raising the school fee. Somehow, since the beginning of the leadership people have been eagerly seeking an understanding and trustable leader.
In the opposite, long before those problems, it is mentioned in the holy …show more content…
It is also not about majority agreement. It is about banishing the nafsah (ego) as an individual. It is like prophet Muhammad who is tawadu’ (low profiled), the leader of the country has to release his ego of the man of everything. He has to be the man of nothing, like a connector he has to listen and understand more. The people are also have to be the man of nothing in term of giving aspirations. Since what is best is not always the major voice, people have to be more critical between what they want and what they need, for occasionally the one that comes up to the surface of decreeing is people’s
The general terms of democracy today, mostly stated that every people in a country are involves in the decision-making. Another provocative meaning of it is “the rule of the people”. People become so eager to enter government’s area because they concern about the decision affecting their life, and they cannot merely trust someone who not knowing them well. It then forming motion of no confidence between people and their leader and finally creates a democratic movement. There are lots of reasons that muster the motion, 2 of them that often appears are first, power tend to corrupt. The human ego evokes power dispute results in unstable law and decrees like the Supersemar letter and sudden Gusdur’s retreating from presidential chair which was creating “frenziness” inside nation. It also provokes corruption, collusion, and nepotism. Secondly, the diversity between government’s and people’s way of thinking, in a certain case like the latest hot topic, university students demoing the rector’s decision of raising the school fee. Somehow, since the beginning of the leadership people have been eagerly seeking an understanding and trustable leader.
In the opposite, long before those problems, it is mentioned in the holy …show more content…
It is also not about majority agreement. It is about banishing the nafsah (ego) as an individual. It is like prophet Muhammad who is tawadu’ (low profiled), the leader of the country has to release his ego of the man of everything. He has to be the man of nothing, like a connector he has to listen and understand more. The people are also have to be the man of nothing in term of giving aspirations. Since what is best is not always the major voice, people have to be more critical between what they want and what they need, for occasionally the one that comes up to the surface of decreeing is people’s