Islamic institutions and political violence in twentieth century Indonesia
Subsequent Statement of Responsibility
Y. M. Herrera
.PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, ETC
Name of Publisher, Distributor, etc.
The University of Wisconsin - Madison
Date of Publication, Distribution, etc.
2011
PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION
Specific Material Designation and Extent of Item
308
DISSERTATION (THESIS) NOTE
Dissertation or thesis details and type of degree
Ph.D.
Body granting the degree
The University of Wisconsin - Madison
Text preceding or following the note
2011
SUMMARY OR ABSTRACT
Text of Note
Tolerance has emerged as the singular answer to many of the questions of the twenty-first century: how to resolve ethnic conflict, how to cope with instability in new democracies, and how to resolve the friction between the dueling projects of liberal secularism and religious revival. Unclear, however, are the causal origins of tolerance. How do institutions that promote peaceful coexistence emerge? Are these institutions the same in the post-colonial Muslim world as in the West? Once established, what explains the variation in the practices of tolerance over time, by different actors, and toward different minorities? Based on two years of field research including extensive archival work, in-depth interviews and new survey data with 1000 Islamic elites from Indonesia, the world's largest-Muslim majority country, this dissertation develops a theory of tolerance and intolerance as strategies by political actors instead of an outcome of theology or doctrine. I argue that tolerance and intolerance are something that Islamic actors do rather than something that they are . Part one differentiates Indonesia's system of communal tolerance from the liberal model of tolerance and situates its origins in the late colonial period. Part two exploits three types of variation to show that tolerant and intolerant behavior are contingent outcomes of state-formation, the delineation of friend and enemy in war, identity construction in civil society, and political alliance. This argument has causal implications for explaining conflict and coexistence and theoretical implications for understanding the origins and practices of tolerance.