The (In)Tolerant Face of Our Youth
Recently, Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom (FNS) and the Indonesian Survey Institute (LSI) released a study on the attitude of Indonesian Muslim Youth in several issues. Among the findings were disagreement towards polygamy from about 85% respondents and perception of 94% respondents that people will be happier if they are married.
In addition, the study also offers promising findings on youth’s perception towards radicalism. More than 82% respondents said they were concerned about the lack of religious freedom. More interestingly, 60% saw radical Islam as their concern. Apparently, Indonesia in the future will be more tolerant than it is now because the youth is more progressive than their old counterparts, right?
Other side of the Same Story
Without intending to undermine the optimism study above offers, it would be unwise to overlook studies that offer evidence to the contrary. Of particular interest is the Institute for the Study of Islam and Peace’s (LaKIP) 2010 survey on socio-religious attitudes of high school students in greater Jakarta.
This controversial study –invited disbelief from the Minister of Religious Affairs himself, among other figures– found that 52% of students agreed with forceful closure of problematic worship house. Worse, the survey claimed 41% students were willing to commit such action. Furthermore, more than 40% students objected any erection of non-Muslim worship house in their neighborhoods.
Loosely speaking, the FNS-LSI’s and LaKIP’s findings seem to contradict each other. The first shows that the youth is concerned by radicalism and intolerance, while the later shows the youth is part of that intolerance. The question then, what kind of face our future generation really has, the tolerant or radical one?
Guessing, and Shaping the True Face
Without going into technical details of survey administration, it can be said that –assuming proper procedures were employed– both surveys are equally capable in describing the phenomena they studied (in the way they conceptualized it) yet equally incapable to act as sole representation of youth’s tolerance level.
There are many factors in the surveys that can explain why they got different pictures, one of which are worth mentioning. LaKIP’s survey was aimed most to understand specific intolerance in the context of Islamic studies and student group (Rohis) while the FNS-LSI tried to understand broader context and contemporary issues. The consequence is that LaKIP’s questions were more religiously framed. The participants could be more predisposed to answer in a way they thought was more ‘religiously appropriate.’
Given such technical incompatibility, it would be unwise to pick either survey as the only true representation of Indonesian youth’s face. Thus, unfortunately, we are once again left with idiosyncratic freedom to judge for ourselves the real image of our youth. Some people would like to see our youth as tolerant, while some others find that hard to believe.
I myself want to believe that we have tolerant youth, but the LaKIP’s work and the fact that many radical groups’ members are indeed youths make me think that the case cannot be that simple. We are in a crossroad. The LaKIP’s study shows that we have problem. The FNS-LSI’s study, on the other hand, shows that there is still hope for our pluralism campaign.
The most important thing to remember is to be honest to admit that we do have tolerance problem. At the very least, we must be willing to admit that we will have the problem if we do not work hard enough now. A sick person will not get cured by merely assuring himself that he is healthy.
Let’s not repeat politicians’ mistake years ago when saying, “There is no terrorist in this country.” The fact is we have a lot of terrorists. Let’s not rely too much on what we believe, or want to believe. Sometimes believing is not enough, sometimes it needs real work to make the belief comes true. And in this case, we must work hard to teach and ensure our youths are tolerant, regardless what surveys say.