EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Zaenuddin Hudi Prasojo INTERNATIONAL EDITORS Afifi al-Akiti (Faculty of Theology and Religion, Oxford University, United Kingdom) Yasien Mohamed (University of the Western Cape, South Africa, South Africa) Irwan Abdullah (Gajah Mada University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia) Zainal Abidin Bagir (Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia) Hans-Christian Günther (Department of Classics Albert Ludwigs University of Freiburg, Germany, Germany) Kamaludeen Bin Mohamed Nasir (Nanyang Technological University, Singapore) Mohd Roslan Mohd Nor (University of Malaya, Malaysia) Giuseppina Strummiello (University of Bari Aldo Moro, Italy) Abdul Razak Abdulroya Panaemalae (Walailak University, Thailand) Florian Pohl (Oxford College of Emory University, United States, Germany) Mujiburrahman (IAIN Antasari Banjarmasin, Indonesia) Minako Sakai (Director of Social SciencesResearch Group, Australia) Busro Busro (UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung, Indonesia) Tassim Abu Bakar (Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Brunei Darussalam) ASSISTANT EDITORS Faizal Amin, IAIN Pontianak, Indonesia Saifuddin Herlambang, IAIN Pontianak, Indonesia Syamsul Kurniawan, IAIN Pontianak, Indonesia SECTION EDITOR Setia Purwadi, IAIN Pontianak, Indonesia LANGUAGE ADVISOR Jennifer H Lundt, Colgate University Scholar, New York, United States Al-Albab Volume 9 Number 1 June 2020 Al-Albab ISSN 0216-6143 (print) and ISSN: 2502-8340 (online) is an interdisciplinary journal published twice a year in print and online (e-journal) by the Pontianak State Institute of Islamic Studies, Pontianak. Our academic publication concern includes the studies of world religions of Islam, Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, Chinese religions and other religions. Interdisciplinary studies may include the studies of religion in the fields of anthropology, sociology, philosophy, psychology, education, cultural studies and other social sciences. Since the journal is published twice a year, special issue would be made available for special condition. The regular issues include June and December editions each year. The journal publishes research-based articles in the area of religious studies. All prospective contributors from various background are welcome to contribute to the journal publication. Contributions in English should be typed single-space and contain minimum of 4.000 and maximum of 8.000 words. The citation should follow APA style with footnotes. Editorial Office: AL-ALBAB, Gedung Saifuddin Zuhri Pascasarjana IAIN Pontianak, Jalan Letjend Suprapto No. 19, Pontianak Selatan Pontianak 78122, Kalimantan Barat, Indonesia. Phone: (62-561) 734170 Fax: (62-561) 734170 ; Handphone/WA: +6281256738348 E-mail: redaksi.bjrs@gmail.com Website: http://jurnaliainpontianak.or.id/index.php/alalbab AL - ALBAB VOLUME 9 NUMBER 1 (JUNE 2020) CONTENTS 1. Music in The Liturgy of The Catholic Community in Jakarta, Indonesia Adison Adrianus Sihombing .............................................................................. 3 2. Muhammadiyah’s Criticism Towards Government Policies in The Era of Din Syamsudin’s Leadership Tohari, Sjafri Sairin, Muhammad Azhar, M. Nurul Yamin ....................... 19 3. Why Indonesia Prefers A Mono-Religious Education Model? A Durkhemian Perspective Mohamad Yusuf .................................................................................................... 37 4. The Borneo Islamic Heritage and The Significance of Idahan Jawi Manuscript Suraya Sintang, Rosdiana Onga, Siti Aidah Hj Lukin, Asmady Idris ...... 55 5. Hamka, Social Criticism and The Practices of Polygamy in Minangkabau Saifuddin Herlambang ........................................................................................ 69 6. Social Capital and Civic Engagement in Times of Tension: An Evidence from Interethnic Relation Developed in Stella Maris Credit Union Pontianak, West Kalimantan Alanuari, Mohammad Iqbal Ahnaf .................................................................. 87 7. The Myth of Religious “Radicalism” Amanah Nurish ..................................................................................................... 107 8. The Style of Sufistic Interpretation: A Philological Study and Content Analysis of the Manuscripts by Three Popular Ulemas in West Kalimantan Syarif ......................................................................................................................... 123 [ 107 ] AL ALBAB: Volume 9 Number 1 June 2020 DOI: 10.24260/alalbab.v9i1.1546 THE MYTH OF RELIGIOUS “RADICALISM” Amanah Nurish University of Indonesia Email: amnurish@gmail.com ABSTRACT This work examines an academic exposure on the issues of religious radical- ism increasing globally not only in the West but also in the east countries. As a majority Muslim populated country, Indonesia is one of the reluctant examples in facing the problem of religious radicalism. In addition, this research paper examines the term of “radicalism” politically associated with extremism and terrorism. The primary issue is explicitly addressed to religious radicalism in terms of meaning and image. Hence, we perceive that religious radicalism can be understood as mainstream feature on religious behavior including religious ac- tions leading to the steps of violent extremism or terrorism. Religious radicalism today is massively defined as a negative rather than positive connotation. Such glimpse traps us to be “narrow minded” in perceiving the role as well as the holy spirit of religions. Therefore, the critical questions of this research paper include what happens with the framing of religious radicalism today; How is the histor- ical narration of radicalism; and is it a problem when someone being radical to practice and understand religions or beliefs. Lastly, how philosophical meanings of the word radicalism alone response such debate. However, the general termi- nology of religious radicalism has led significant social, political, and cultural impacts toward religious harmony and religious life particularly in Indonesian context. Keywords: Religion; Radicalism; Image; Narration; Media. INTRODUCTION It is undeniable that nowadays human beings live under digital age and Internet society that possibly admits modern humans to consume information including the discourse of religions. By using internet, religious discourse and knowledge are abundantly accessible and able to spread widely with borderless. Digital and virtual live is the element of information which plays pivotal roles in shaping social, cultural, political and religious life. In the history of human civilization, technological development was aimed to help human’s problem where philosophy and religion could not provide material needs in our modern life. Technology makes everything easier that even connects [ 108 ] AL ALBAB: Volume 9 Number 1 June 2020 DOI: 10.24260/alalbab.v9i1.1546 society to practice their faith or religion. For instance, virtual dakwah or online worship is commonly found today. To gain knowledge of religion in virtual life seems to become “instant” where people may attend or participate to religious ceremonies as well as rites through Internet, without attending churches or mosques just to listen the preachers in front of smartphone or gadget. This is in fact that technological development does not always relate to capital economy, yet, they connect to religious activities on virtual life. Debate of religious issues in virtual life has been discussed enormously by experts and scholars (Mark, 2002; Leitch, 2004). Technology had emerged in the beginning to be more rational to respond modernity; meanwhile it seems far away from superstitious life in which it is one of the religious elements. Nowadays, people however tend to worship technology and religion in the same level. Today we also have seen people looking for religious belief through online such as YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc. This is the evidence that technological development helps us to do so. In Indonesian case, especially urban people who are aware with technology they become formally more religious compared with one or two decades ago, and it happens because of technology. Technology becomes everyday life as religion, although in one aspect, we are facing “spiritual crisis” which means a phenomenon where people embrace religions, yet they ignore spirituality (Lewis, 2008), and they become fanaticism with their belief that affects religious conflict as well as violence. The “spiritual values” of religions for peace, harmony, and tolerance, has been absent (Kale, 2004). Recently, religions become “soft power” of political interest in the body of government and political agencies (Fontana, 2008; Sewell, 1992). Obviously, technological platform like internet today plays important role in the campaign of “religious radicalism” that support extremism. The use of technology and internet is for the media tool to recruit individuals for the purpose “brainwashing” of extremism and terrorism. In relation to academic scholarship of technological development and Internet society, Bakardjieva argued, “technology therefore is not neutral. As far as particular interests have shaped it, it carries a class bias and helps to entrench capitalist power” (Bakardjieva, 2005: 15-16). However, religion and Internet are not separable. If Karl Marx (1818 – 1883) ever said that “religion is opium”, then I argue that today internet is a new “opium” (Nurish, 2019). The issue of religious activism is well developed throughout Internet and virtual links and it triggers young generation to gain knowledge of “religions” by social media and this is why information served by social media creates the spread of knowledge on “religious radicalism.” [ 109 ] AL ALBAB: Volume 9 Number 1 June 2020 DOI: 10.24260/alalbab.v9i1.1546 At this point, the term “religious radicalism” is currently associated with fundamentalism and anarchism that aim to the step of violent extremism and terrorism. Religious radicalism becomes popular term to identify Islamist group after tragedy of 9/11 known as terrorist attack. Such bombing and terrorism awakened us to be more aware with religious ideology, although terrorism is not always related to religions—and religious terrorism emerged since centuries ago (Siddiq, 2019). Terrorism in this context is defined as violent action that threaten security, social, cultural, and religious harmony, and so forth that destroy human life. According to Tweeten, “terrorism means unlawful acts of violence against property or people designed to accomplish political objectives through fear and intimidation” (Tweeten, 2003: 1). The global terrorism is associated with political phenomena of ideology of Islamic sect such as Salafi jihadi movement (Rahmatullah, Y., 2017; Fatmawati, F., Noorhayati, S., & Minangsih, K., 2018). Solahudin has stated that Salafi jihadi taught by Abdullah Azzam (1941-1989), a Palestinian member of Muslim brotherhood, saying that “one of Azzam’s views on jihad was permissible to carry out terrorist acts during a jihad” (Solahudin, 2013: 14-15). Although this movement misused religion as the reason for acts of violence, there is ambiguity of the essential spirit of religion that requires its follower to create peace among human beings, and of course religion is not the root as well as cause of violence. If people act violence with the basis of religious ideology and its reasons, they fail to interpret and understand the spirit of religion. This debate reminds me on Richard Dawkin’s argument on his book entitled God Delusion saying only religious faith is a strong enough force to motivate violence. “There is a violent essence inherent in religion”. Richard Dawkin’s statement makes Karen Armstrong to argue that Dawkin’s theory is “wrong”. According to Karen Armstrong on her writing “the myth of religious violence” clearly stated that the problem of violence and wars like ISIS does not relate with religion, it is linked to secular military dictatorship and political agendas.1 Academic scholarship on religious violence connects with political and theological debate. Unlike Armstrong, Walter Benjamen has different critical glimpse on the subject of violence distinguished into two categories; mythical and divine violence. According to Benjamin, “mythical violence seeks to stand in for God and it produces lawmaking, while divine violence is law destroying” (Martel, 2012: 51). Religious violence often uses the name of God as the reason for law enforcement and this is what terrorist groups like ISIS conduct to achieve 1 Armstrong, Karen. 2014. The Myth of Religious Violence. Can be found: www. theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/25/-sp-karen-armstrong-religious-violence-myth-secular. Accessed, August 22, 2019. [ 110 ] AL ALBAB: Volume 9 Number 1 June 2020 DOI: 10.24260/alalbab.v9i1.1546 triumph, although it has been fail. Since ISIS emerged, the issue of terrorism associated with religious radicalism began constricting mass media being highlighted news. Later, all of us also started to discuss the relation between religious radicalism and violent extremism or terrorism. The public speeches that condemned terrorist attack have been campaigning to fight religious radicalism for the purpose of counter-terrorism. In western countries such as Europe, United States of America and Australia, Islam phobia has been common in social and political turbulence of which discrimination and conflict may occur. For this issue, we can find how social media creates a frame so-called “religious radicalism”. We can easily judge certain religious groups to be “radical” with negative image without understanding or tracing back the meaning of radicalism. The term “radicalism” makes chaotic perspective in perceiving religious groups that may cause more problems when we raise the issue of radicalism. To achieve spiritual stage requires radical knowledge. Religious radicalism, in fact, leads to understand supernatural, metaphysical, and transcendental meanings in human’s experience. Radicalism is a divine approach that rejects ‘sense of frightening’ to fight. As a phenomenology, radicalism must be linked to philosophical or theological rather than political orientation. “RADICALISM”: THE MATTER OF PERSPECTIVE My point of view to perceive radicalism is something positive. In addition, it is necessary and kind of intellectual requirement that we need to be radical in our discipline including our belief or religion. Unfortunately, the word radicalism is associated with pejorative meaning. Although there is no clear justification of the meaning of radicalism, McLaughin stated that we shall distinguish the meaning of radicalism within two categories. For socialist groups they will define radicalism as a good narrative, while conservative groups perceive radicalism as a bad narrative. According to McLaughin, the term radicalism is divided in two types of dictionary, British and America. American dictionary, we will find the word of radicalism with the image of villainy. Meanwhile British dictionary defines the word of radicalism is not a bad thing and it is not a synonym of extremism while American defines the word radicalism fanaticism, extremism, dogmatism, etc. There have been two periods the term of radical started to have different meaning during the fourteenth and nineteenth century. Mclaughin argued that there are three steps to define the term of radicalism. The first definition of radicalism relates to socialist (as a good thing) and conservative (as a bad thing). Secondly, [ 111 ] AL ALBAB: Volume 9 Number 1 June 2020 DOI: 10.24260/alalbab.v9i1.1546 radicalism has connotation of revolution and extremism. The third definition says that radicalism is utopianism which can be similar with illusionary and it is able to aim violent action (McLaughlin, 2012: 8-11). What McLaughlin mentioned above is a product of a historical usage of the word on radicalism. He also stated that “the broad etymological terms, therefore, radicalism would appear to amount to a certain orientation (practical or theoretical) towards “the roots”, “foundations”, or “origins” of something ((McLaughlin, 2012: 18). I think from his definition that it is etymologically acceptable that the historical usage of the term on radicalism depends on different perspective and approach. Since 19th century, the usage of the word radicalism is mostly associated with fundamental political change. In one side radicalism can be understood as positive. Another side of radicalism is also pejorative connotation. “Acts, undertaking, means, and measures may be called ‘radical’ when they reach down to the roots: of a problem, a challenge, a task. Note, however, that the Latin noun ‘radix’ to which the metaphorical uses of ‘radical’ trace their pedigree, refers not only to the roots but also to foundations and to origins” (McLaughlin, 2012: 19; Bauman, 2009: 25). Thus, the fundamental question is what’s wrong to be religiously radical? We might have different options to answer. Thus, it depends on what perspective (between the connotations used by American or British dictionary) that we have chosen. The word of ‘radicalism” associated with religious ideology of extremism proves that we sometimes easily judge certain religious groups to claim and to categorize as political threat. I argue that the connotation of radicalism in Indonesian context follows American dictionary which has negative and villainous sense that must be fight. In other words, we might say that radical groups become a serious threat for nation and democracy. However, the term of radicalism sounds very political nuance and radical groups are put as dangerous enemy although not all radical people join with extremist or terrorist organizations. This word is exactly a political propaganda that we need to problematize. In addition to criticize the word of radicalism, we should be aware that such word implies prejudice to certain ideology so-called radical. The connotation of radicalism commonly describes religious groups linked to extremism or terrorism with certain categories with identification of religious sects or ideology, religious custom, religious attitude, and so forth. The general category of radical groups is nowadays linked to fundamental Islam. Since the catastrophic 11/9 attack, the word of radicalism and terrorism started to be popular among us. Indonesia, as the biggest Muslim country, takes a part of against of religious radicalism after George W. Bush announced publicly in media to against fundamental and radical groups. I think this was a [ 112 ] AL ALBAB: Volume 9 Number 1 June 2020 DOI: 10.24260/alalbab.v9i1.1546 historical event during 21st century in usage the term of radicalism associated with villainy and terrorism. Then my following question, who is radical groups? If we answer with above category of radical groups refer to radical Muslims who commit with terrorist organizations that anti-western ideology. Although we agree that anyone from any religion may commit with terrorism or extremism. Yet, if we look at media framing terrorism there will always be a phrase appearing on media like “Muslim radical groups” with bombing suicide. Of course, we may not deny that radical Muslim groups are dangerous and become the first target of terrorist links where they connect globally with their networks. This is what makes Western society feels threaten by radical Muslim groups living in the west or east countries. Radical Muslim groups become global threat that disconnects and disapproves with democratic governance, because in the perspective of American connotation, radicalism has imaginary society to be Islamic country as new world order. Radicalism (American connotation, as mentioned before) never tolerated secularism and liberalism which has root from “western” who are “anti-Islam”. Since the last decade, we started campaigning to run program in all levels for de-radicalization (which means Islamist groups). Mass media plays significant role in the campaigning of the connotation of radicalism in negative image, and media has been successful to frame the word of radicalism as global fear and threat. I strongly argue that the issue of religious radicalism and terrorism is propaganda. Although in one side I agree that religious radicalism and terrorism associated with Islam is “annoying”, “anomie”, and “terrible”. The trouble of Islamist groups is not the matter of radicalism yet it is mostly related to equality, justice, education, and so forth. Most importantly it is also linked to political agenda and power. Islamist groups being anti-western ideology never accepted system of democratic governance and liberal politics; these are not from the root of the history of politics, nation, and state in Islam. This explanation describes what we call “jihadist” not “radicalism”, in my point of view. Jihadist and terrorism groups are interrelated. This refers to the scholarship of Jihadist written by Muhammad Hassan Khalil (although I disagree with his statement and definition of Muslim radical). He states that: “Muslims generally understand jihad to be a noble “struggle” or “striving” for the sake of God. It comprises various actions, from fighting on the battle field to endeavoring to attain inner peace in the prayer hall. It is, therefore, simplistic to define it as many writers do as “holy war.” It is also problematic to insist as many apologists do that it has nothing to do with warfare. In fact, in the specific context of Islamic law, jihad [ 113 ] AL ALBAB: Volume 9 Number 1 June 2020 DOI: 10.24260/alalbab.v9i1.1546 typically denotes an armed struggle against outsiders” (Khalil, 2018: 2). Jihadist and radicalism have different dimensions in terms of movement. Despite radicalism sometimes contains “negative image” it does not mean they are violent, while Jihadist is close to violent extremism without being religiously radical. This is why we shall distinguish between jihadist groups and radical groups. Of course, the word ‘jihad’ is also debatable among scholars. “Muslims generally understand jihad to be a noble “struggle” or “striving” for the sake of God” (Khalil, 2018: 2). Though Jihad refers to Quran and Hadith and rhetorical passages urging the believers to participate in the wars to against the enemies of God (Bonner, 2006: 3). Jihad can be understood as exclamation of “holy wars” by misusing the passages of Qur’an and Hadith. Bonner stated that: “Jihad, for the historian, it thus only about clashes between religions, civilizations, and states but also about clashes among groups within Islamic societies. While philosophers defined the term Jihad in one hand is part of the divine law of Islam, and, on the other hand the phenomenon of warfare, which has occurred throughout history in all places inhabited by humans” (Bonner, 2006: 4-6).” There are different debates of Jihad, which according to Bonner Jihad is applied in the history of Islamic law which means exclamation of “wars or killing enemies of God” that we know as “holy war”. Yet, the meaning of Jihad is philosophically known as non-violent actions, building peace, and developing Islamic dakwah peacefully, including against wars and socio-economic injustice. It depends on which Islamic group or ideology that we would define the term of Jihad. Some theological sources prove that the exclamation of Jihad and terrorism relates to the doctrine of Wahabi supported by Saudi. “Reaching some small understanding of Islamist’s terrorism sources in Saudi Arabia and its migration to South Asia began to help unravel the mystery of who these people were. It was illuminating to discover that there was puritanical religious and educational structure in Saudi Arabia in which separatism from other peoples and religions. As Schwartz wrote, “Wahhabism exalts and promotes death in every element of its existence: the suicide of its adherents, mass murder as a weapon against civilization, and above all the suffocation of the mercy embodied in Islam” (Millard, 2004: 34-35). I would prefer saying that not all Wahabi committed with violent extremism [ 114 ] AL ALBAB: Volume 9 Number 1 June 2020 DOI: 10.24260/alalbab.v9i1.1546 and Jihadist groups although they are radical. The media propaganda is when a frame of radicalism being connected with the fundamental step of jihadist and terrorist groups. The relationship between religion and media have been discussed into public debate, due to the role of media in framing religions is very influential. Media’s industries have power to evoke opinion as well as mobilization in public reaction including the issues of radicalism. Since the last two decades, Muslim society has been portrayed by western as “scapegoat” of terrorism. Saba Mahmood and Lila Abu-Lughod, Muslim anthropologist, paid critical attention how Islamist movement. In this sense, Saba Mahmood in the “Politics of Piety” clearly stated the September 11th tragedy triggered political and Islamic sentiment in the west. In another hand, according to Saba Mahmood “If Muslim supporters of the Islamist movement, their now almost taken for granted association with terrorism has served to further reaffirm their status as agents of a dangerous irrationality” (Mahmood, 2005). Muslims are presented as a special and threatening culture—the most homogenized and the most troubling of the rest of western world (Abu-Lughod, 2013). Meyer and Moors wrote “equally important, the media imply particular formats and styles often taken for granted, and operate in new infrastructures. These factors shape the specific modes by which religions go public, modes that are difficult to control by religious establishments. New media thus have both a destabilizing and an enabling potential for established practices of religious mediation” (Meyer & Moors, 2006: 11). The contestation of meanings on radicalism starts to happen not only by framing of media, but also the connotation and bad image of radicalism supported by academia and universities, intelligent agencies, government and non-government organizations, and other spots of agencies that agree with the term of radicalism as bad image and this must be swept. Instead of making clear on the definition of radicalism, we easily keep labelling radical groups with “cynical sense”. In addition, we keep busy running program on anti-radicalism because they are not ideal groups and must be cleaned from the system of democratic governance. Fighting radical groups is not solution to reduce extremism or terrorism, because the problem is not with radical groups. The problem is that we are living into divided ideology and we are fragmented by social, religious, and cultural categories. We are divided by fundamental categories that may refer to political catastrophe such as terrorism, a global enemy that we are fighting. My suggestion is that we should be aware in using categories of which linkages between radicalism and terrorism. I think we need to re-conceptualize not only the meanings but also the programs of de-radicalization supported [ 115 ] AL ALBAB: Volume 9 Number 1 June 2020 DOI: 10.24260/alalbab.v9i1.1546 by government, media, academic institutions, international donors including non-government organizations, and all related communities. In the history, radicalism had never been problem—meanwhile extremism or terrorism does. This is what we need to rise serious and significant critics to those who concern with the issues of radicalism and terrorism. “RADICALISM”: LANGUAGE AND MYTH Radicalism is the matter of ‘word and language’ interrelated to our social life (Arnswald, 2009; Chomsky, 1956, 2005, 2013; Cook, 2000; Das, 1998; Fitch, Hauser, & Chomsky, 2005). Radicalism as ideology might illuminate positive values if we follow the essential meaning of it. I strongly argue that radical groups are neither bad nor threatening groups. They may be radix in understanding and practicing religions or beliefs as mentioned earlier. The problem is that we perceive relationship between radicalism with bigotry, and it is deeply signified as “bias meanings” that I already mentioned above. There is massive campaign to fight religious radicalism because this group impeded world peace and democratic stability. As we live under the information of age and “mythology” where the game of language derives “spots” to mobilization or even movement. Religious radicalism is a phenomenon where language and “myth” rooted by political orientation. What happens with religious radicalism today proves that radicalism associated with dangerous and evil is “a new myth” after 9/11 attack. Karen Armstrong has discussed the myth with very impressive approach. Myth as human experience that today the word “myth” is often used to describe something that is simply but not true. She added that “a myth therefore is true because it is effective, not because it gives us factual information. If, however, it does not give us new insight into the deeper meaning of life, it has failed” (Armstrong, 2005). This statement prevails to the public opinion nowadays on radicalism. The “myth” of theological meaning on radicalism driven by the sense of cynical feelings and suspicious one to another among religious groups (Barthes, 2007; Levi-Strauss, 1955, 1979; Nasto, 1996; Ziegler & Findley, 1997). When we mention radicalism denotes to the sense of frightening groups. It seems we are under control of “sense” of the word radicalism. Following Wittgenstein’s idea of “sense of life”, it is reasonable to say that “the meaning of ‘sense’ is also elucidated from this standpoint. The expression that seems to include a totality raises the suspicion of an objectification” (Wittgenstein, 2009: 41). By referring Wittgenstein’s philosophical view, I would say that the interpretation of the word ‘radical’ has implication to ethical action in which the product of meanings on ‘radical’ signifies the motif of prejudice. [ 116 ] AL ALBAB: Volume 9 Number 1 June 2020 DOI: 10.24260/alalbab.v9i1.1546 The word ‘religious radical’ defined by political orientation might be a popular myth in our global issue today. It does not matter with defining “true” or “false” on the word radicalism. When every day we repeat to mention the word ‘radicalism’ with negative context, then it will produce symbolic meaning that ‘radicalism’ is something bad and must be avoid. Referring to Bourdieu, he argued that: “The naïve question of the power of words is logically implicated in the initial suppression of the question of the uses of language, and therefore of the social conditions in which words are employed. In fact, the use of language, the manner as much as the substance of discourse, discourse depends on the social position of the speaker, which governs the access he can have to the language of the institution, that is, to the official, orthodox and legitimate speech” (Bourdieu, 1991: 107-109). The power of words does not only express the message of discourse, it compromises a condition where there is particular interest behind the words, no matter about politics, ideology, and other related. The clash and the war of ideology becomes real evidence as our problem in this century; the rising of ISIS, Islam phobia, anti-secularism, anti-atheism, and so on. We proudly blame one to another for the sake of making peace, fighting terrorism, or even framing a new myth that we call as radicalism, fundamentalism, liberalism, etc. In my opinion, the problem is not about such ideologies in our society but it is contestation of power relation which might be legitimated by our language. Radicalism is one of the elements among those links that dominate the global issue funded by ‘western’ orientation. It seems that we are declining in our ethics to perceive phenomena of religions in diverse society within plural sectarianism. We have currently failed to unite that “all is one” as the spirits of our faith. We are fragmented by perspective and meanings in our game of language to respond the problem of ‘global evil’, and then we blame ‘religious radicalism’ as the root of conflict as well as war. Religious radicalism is not the problem in the global terrorism, it is our failure to justify religious radicalism as an instrumental myth. Myth and language are interconnected in our social communication and interaction. Since the history of human’s civilization, the role of language has been so powerful. It is not only a tool of social and cultural communication, but also a product of power. Language and power are being habit as discussed by Bourdieu. According to Bourdieu language that we used in social interaction develops ‘habitus’. In his theoretical argument, Bourdieu has stated that: [ 117 ] AL ALBAB: Volume 9 Number 1 June 2020 DOI: 10.24260/alalbab.v9i1.1546 “The habitus is a set of dispositions which incline agents to act and react in certain ways. The habitus also provides individuals with a sense of how to act and respond in the course of daily lives. It orients their ‘actions’ and inclinations without strictly determining them” (Bourdieu, 1991: 12 – 13). As cultural product, language maintains human’s action in which Bourdieu concerned with the discourse of habitus. The way we practice our language will require repeatedly acts that we understand as habitus. Language does not only represent ‘text’ but also ‘context’. What I meant by ‘text’ here refers to the message of the word, meanwhile ‘context’ contains locus and tempus that of existing ‘text’. ‘Text’ is reality which includes language, culture, art, science, religion, and so forth that we have seen in our daily lives. Therefore, ‘text’ always creates the ‘meaning of life’ like what Wittgenstein said. There is always existence of morality in the structure of language that we use. In the military tactic and strategy, language plays important tool when they operate to spy opponent or enemy. In the history of world war II Hitler and his troops also used “code of language” for genocide of Jews people. They created “hate speeches” with negative prejudice and stigma, intolerance, dangerous and hostile people that Jews people threaten Germany. Hitler on his public speeches continually delivered message of hatred to Jews people and he accused Jews by using his racist language to appeal his followers for genocide. What Nazi did violence to Jews people was supported by his followers and media because negative stigma, intolerance, and hate speeches were regarded as the ‘truth’. I mean to say that this is merely an example where ‘code of language’ can be a powerful weapon to justify moral actions. It is undeniable reality that our lives contain structure of language. Language is uncountable reality that sometimes media propaganda has been successful to promote the negative image on religious radicalism. For example, the word ‘religious radicalism’ today that has been framed as negative connotation by media associated with the tragedy of 11/9 and related to Muslim society. Media, sometimes, are easy to judge and claim “radical or terrorist groups” by their custom or appearance such as burqa, niqab, beard, etc. “In the West today, Muslim communities are regularly portrayed as backward and prone to violence. In the new common sense, international confl icts are reduced to a “clash of civilizations” in which entire regions of the world are represented as rejecting values such as freedom and nonviolence” (Abu-Lughod, 2013). In the social relation, even we have seen in many cases that there is always negative prejudice to those who wear niqab or burqa. Radical groups literally and physically are equivalent with such particular customs. This category [ 118 ] AL ALBAB: Volume 9 Number 1 June 2020 DOI: 10.24260/alalbab.v9i1.1546 tends to be irrelevant for the meaning of religious radicalism. In addition, this might be happening because media blows the image on radical groups with particular customs of old-Middle East fashion that does not relate with the meaning of religious radicalism. If we keep in our mind that radicalism connected to such customs, then we repeat to create ‘imagination’ and a new myth. CONCLUSION After analyzing the term of “religious radicalism”, we are being aware that currently there is a complex challenge where the role of language in religions ties to global politics. The phenomenon of radicalism is a pivotal discourse as critics to the concept of de-radicalization associated with violent extremism and terrorism. There have been linkages between religions and global political situation that misused language. Like what Huntington said there is a serious clash between “east’ and “west” after 9/11 attack. We are fragmented by ideology which drives us to fight and prejudice each other by what we call as “religious radicalism” that becomes our global enemy today. Through media, divided society into different ideology has been shaped by language, symbols, and category of class. We proudly spent billion dollars for budgeting the programs of counter terrorism or de-radicalization, yet, we never seen the real problem why religious violence remains to happen—and why terrorism never stopped their actions. Even, their viruses are growing more from time to time. Violent extremism/terrorism and religious radicalism by which they mean bigotry as well as negative connotation are threatening our peaceful values. I am, of course, not denial on such statement. As we already know that terrorist organizations with different surface have existed centuries ago, not only in this contemporary time. The way we, in the context of Indonesian situation, overcome the problem of “religious radicalism” is too “naïve”. There is “hyper reality” in our abundant projects of facing the problem “religious radicalism”. “Hyper reality” in this context can be understood as Baudrillard’s theory saying that there is unconsciousness of human beings to distinguish between realities and fantasy where imagination, facts, authenticity, artificiality, or lie is difficult to measure. Everything just collides to be unmeasurable assumption (Luke, 1991; Nunes, 2016; Perry, 2012; Robinson, 2012; Stolze & Stolze, 2019). “Hyper reality” and unconscious condition have possibly driven to prejudice, and this might work on the issue of “radicalism” especially in Indonesian experiences to face the problem of terrorist organizations linked to Islamist groups. Supported by media, “hyper-reality” creates an image of “enemy” that must be fight. This [ 119 ] AL ALBAB: Volume 9 Number 1 June 2020 DOI: 10.24260/alalbab.v9i1.1546 example can be seen through movies, entertainments, newspapers, memes on Twitter-Facebook-or Instagram, etc. imagined as “the other”. “The other” here means both what we call “religious radicalism” and none “religious radicalism”. Can we imagine then these two groups fight and against each other? Yes, this is now happening in our reality that we may not ignore. We seem like pretending anti violence by fighting “radical groups” as negative connotation and as enemy, yet, our understanding and our campaign of spreading the word of “radicalism” with negative connotation contain violence to others groups. If we realize that there is something clumsy in our method to resolve a problem of terrorism in the philosophical and sociological perspectives, then I believe that we will try to seek a new way and a new method for facing the “roots of terrorism”. However, in the basic humanity, everyone feels unpleasant if they are categorized as radicalism with negative prejudice although they are supporting “terrorism”, yet, in their head there is never negative values. I think this is what I mean to change or to create a new approach in using word and language of ‘religious radicalism”. In the past, religions were unique and peaceful component to reach transcendental understanding by the virtue. “Holy War” and terrorism had never been accounted in the spirit of religions. Although we have seen in many cases that there is a ton of violence in the name of gods and religions. Islam is one of the examples which prove us that the misuse of some verses in the holy Qur’an to support killing non-Muslim actions used by terrorist groups. Our job is not to continue giving a negative stigma on religious radicalism, yet, we need to liberate negative meaning on religious radicalism to be more positive based on the history of usage of radicalism. However, the social and cultural implication of using the word “radicalism” today are “stereotyping” affecting prejudice or even “neo-violence”. Referring to Chomsky (1928), language plays pivotal role in the social relation and it has dominant line in our social, cultural, and religious activities. Language drives social and cultural influence to express human’s actions because it has value. This analogy describes how society behavior is inspired by language that regularly we heard as the legitimation of the truth. The same thing like we heard the voice of the word “radicalism” because today we believe that “radicalism” is bad, although it’s never been like that (Nurish, 2019). Maybe, it is time to change “a global myth” what we call “religious radicalism”. [ 120 ] AL ALBAB: Volume 9 Number 1 June 2020 DOI: 10.24260/alalbab.v9i1.1546 BIBLIOGRAPHY Abu-Lughod, L. (2013). Do Muslim Women Need Saving? Massachusetts: Har- vard University Press. Armstrong, Karen. (2005). A Short History of Myth. London: Canongate Books. ------. (2014). The Myth of Religious Violence. The Guardian.com: www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/25/-sp-karen-armstrong-reli- gious-violence-myth-secular. Accessed, August 22, 2019. Arnswald, U. (2009). In Search of Meaning : Ludwig Wittgenstein on Ethics, Mysticism and Religion. In Search of Meaning : Ludwig Wittgenstein on Ethics, Mysticism and Religion. https://doi.org/10.26530/oap- en_422396 Bakardjieva, M. (2005). Internet Society: The Internet in Everyday Life. Lon- don: Sage Publication. Barthes, R. (2007). Myth today. In Stardom and celebrity: A reader. https://doi. org/10.4135/9781446269534.n5 Bonner, M. (2006). Jihad In Islamic History: Doctrines and Practice. New Jer- sey: Princeton University Press. Chomsky, N. (1956). Three models for the description of language. IRE Transactions on Information Theory. https://doi.org/10.1109/ TIT.1956.1056813 Chomsky, N. (2005). Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry. https://doi.org/10.1162/0024389052993655 Chomsky, N. (2013). Problems of projection. Lingua. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. lingua.2012.12.003 Cook, J. W. (2000). Wittgenstein, empiricism, and language. New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.38-1490 Das, V. (1998). Wittgenstein and anthropology. Annual Review of Anthropolo- gy, 27, 171–195. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.27.1.171 Fatmawati, F., Noorhayati, S., & Minangsih, K. (2018). Jihad Penista Agama Jihad NKRI: Antonio Gramsci’s Hegemony Theory Analysis of Rad- ical Da’wah Phenomena in Online Media. Al-Albab, 7(2), 199-220. doi:https://doi.org/10.24260/alalbab.v7i2.1174 Fitch, W. T., Hauser, M. D., & Chomsky, N. (2005). The evolution of the lan- guage faculty: Clarifications and implications. Cognition. https://doi. [ 121 ] AL ALBAB: Volume 9 Number 1 June 2020 DOI: 10.24260/alalbab.v9i1.1546 org/10.1016/j.cognition.2005.02.005 Fontana, B. (2008). Hegemony and power in Gramsci. In Hegemo- ny: Studies in Consensus and Coercion (pp. 80–106). https://doi. org/10.4324/9780203927182 Kale, S. H. (2004). Spirituality, Religion, and Globalization. Journal of Macro- marketing. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276146704269296 Khalil, M. H. (2018). Jihad , Radicalism , and the New Atheism. United King- dom: Cambridge University Press. Levi-Strauss, C. (1955). The Structural Study of Myth. The Journal of American Folklore. https://doi.org/10.2307/536768 Levi-Strauss, C. (1979). Myth and Meaning. RAIN. https://doi. org/10.2307/3032441 Lewis, S. E. (2008). Ayahuasca and Spiritual Crisis: Liminality as Space for Per- sonal Growth. Anthropology of Consciousness. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1556-3537.2008.00006.x Luke, T. W. (1991). Power and politics in hyperreality: The critical project of Jean Baudrillard. The Social Science Journal. https://doi.org/10.1016/0362- 3319(91)90018-Y Mahmood, S. (2005). Politics of Piety: The Islamic Revival and the Feminist Subject. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Mark, P. (2002). Everyday ( Virtual ) Life. JSTOR, 33(4), 743–760. Martel, J. R. (2012). Divine Violence. New York: Routledge. McLaughlin, P. (2012). Radicalism: A Philosophical Study. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Meyer, B., & Moors, A. (2006). Religion , MEDIA , and the Public Sphere. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Millard, M. (2004). Jihad in Paradise: Islam and Politics in Southeast Asia. New York: An East Gate Book. Nasto, B. (1996). The power of myth. Nature Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1038/ nm1096-1062b Nunes, M. (2016). Jean Baudrillard in Cyberspace : Internet , Virtuality , and Postmodernity. Jstor. Nurish, A. (2019). Ilusi , Kecemasan , Dan Tindakan Kekerasan From Fa- naticism To Extremism : Illusions , Anxiety , and Acts of Violence. LIPI : Jurnal Masyarakat Dan Budaya. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi. [ 122 ] AL ALBAB: Volume 9 Number 1 June 2020 DOI: 10.24260/alalbab.v9i1.1546 org/10.14203/jmb.v21i1.829 Perry, N. (2012). Hyperreality and global culture. Hyperreality and Global Cul- ture. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203019375 Rahmatullah, Y. (2017). Radicalism, Jihad and Terror. Al-Albab, 6(2), 157 - 178. doi:https://doi.org/10.24260/alalbab.v6i2.731 Robinson, A. (2012). Jean Baudrillard: Hyperreality and Implosion. Ceasefire Magazine. Sewell, W. H. (1992). A Theory of Structure: Duality, Agency, and Trans- formation. American Journal of Sociology, 98(1), 1–29. https://doi. org/10.1086/229967 Siddiq, A. (2019). Academic Approach for Religious Radicalism. Al-Albab, 8(2), 163 - 178. doi:https://doi.org/10.24260/alalbab.v8i2.1276 Solahudin. (2013). The Roots of Terrorism in Indonesia. Sydney: UNSW Press Book. Stolze, T., & Stolze, T. (2019). Contradictions of Hyperreality: Baudril- lard, Žižek, and Virtual Dialectics. In Becoming Marxist. https://doi. org/10.1163/9789004280984_012 Tweeten, L. (2003). Terrorism, radicalism, And Populism In Agriculture. Lowa: Lowa State Press. Vincent B. Leitch. (2004). Postmodern Theory of Technology : Agendas. JSTOR, 12(1), 209–215. Ziegler, H., & Findley, T. (1997). Myth and Metaphor. In Rewriting History. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-476-04274-3_3