Reconsidering the modern nation state in the Anthropocene

Abstract

This article presents the nature of conflicts in postcolonial societies as the consequence of being under external control and economic exploitation. Drawing on empirical cases from Indonesia and a comparative literature review of African states, this article reveals a huge dilemma within the desire to build a solid nation state in a deeply pluralistic society. The nature of the modern nation state, which from the start requires the forcible subjugation of the population, has become one of the greatest paradoxes. That is to say, the very idea of unity for the pursuance of equity contradicts the premise of democracy, because forcing unity onto diversity implies denouncing differences and thus violating universal individual rights to be different. On that account, Indonesia’s struggle with diversity has falsified Huntington’s thesis, according to which cultural differences necessarily tend to lead to conflict. On the contrary, Indonesia demonstrates that conflicts have stemmed from nationalism and political-economic ideologies rather than cultural differences. This article highlights two issues of global relevance. Firstly, the inherent problems of coexistence that arise from the legacy of the Christian missionary tradition advocating the separation of the state and religion in the colonies, whereas Islam is a religion of politics and of law. Secondly, the concept of al-din is hardly compatible with the Western concept of religion. In contemporary globalization, the modern nation state and nationalism are increasingly contrasted with the ‘cosmic’ nature of religion, which claims allegiances transcending differences of race and nationality. On the bright side, a case study of a Muslim ‘intentional community’ offers a pragmatic solution whereby an implementation of Islamic jurisprudence as a response to ecological issues by an individual Muslim group is doable within the constraints of a nation state. Thus the thesis moves beyond the rigidity of state system and promotes a ‘people to people’ approach.

How about a Green Caliphate?

“…This would facilitate a Dar al-Islam-focused environmental governance for the Ummah within minimal state frameworks. Furthermore, as mentioned earlier, I argue that Islamic governance should be organized organically around the center of God's sovereignty (Alkatiri 2018a). Perhaps fortuitously, my proposed model resonates with one proposed by Seyyed Hossein Nasr: one can envisage the possibility of the rise, once again, of a trend in the future towards a kind of Islamic political thought which combines the ideal of the unity of the Islamic world, based on culture, Divine Law, intellectual life, etc., with separate political units which embrace the majority peoples and cultural zones of the Islamic world, such as the Arabic, the Persians, the Turkish, etc… (Nasr 1994: 313) Such a project of 'the unity of Islam as a world civilization' certainly depends on creative interpretations of Shariah.…”

“…My PhD research assessed the willingness, ability, and possibility of local Muslim communities in Indonesia (as the world's largest Muslim nation) to pursue the ideals and actions of relocalization (Alkatiri 2015). I found that two local communities-namely, Hidayatullah in Balikpapan, East Kalimantan (Alkatiri 2018a), and An-Nadzir in Gowa, South Sulawesi-provide the closest example of intentional communities which can be transformed into models of endogenous 7 Islamic relocalization.…”

“…From a global environmental perspective, nationalist interests may come in conflict with the common good, for the latter confines its concerns to a bounded area where the sovereignty of the state is supreme and the national community is the object of devotion. My work elsewhere describes the nation-building enterprise in the history of Indonesia (Alkatiri 2018a), as it encouraged the ceaseless desire to compete with other nations. Nationalist Global Southerners -Muslims or not -are mired in the values of the very industrial society in the North that had produced the economic and ecological crisis they protest against.…”

“…The structure of these frameworks is important because the distributions of benefits and burdens resulting from them fundamentally affect people's lives. My work (Alkatiri 2017b(Alkatiri , 2018a investigates economic, political, and social tensions in Indonesia, a country in the Global South that has the world's largest Muslim population and has been accentuated with the political and economic dominance of the Christian and Chinese minority (Chua 2004). Historical accounts narrated by Utama (2016: para 4-6) make Indonesia a concrete example of Schumacher's critiques about how Third World development failed to bring incommensurable 'noneconomic factors' into the calculations of policy makers.…”

“…I have observed that intra-Muslim conflicts have intensified over the last few decades due to Western counterterrorism discourses and practices (Alkatiri 2018b, Mustapha 2021. Drawing on postcolonial theory and secularization theory, I have analyzed the colonial and domination practices of nation-states in both destroying the environment and marginalizing Muslims on cultural, political, and economic fronts (Alkatiri 2017b(Alkatiri , 2018a(Alkatiri , 2023. The Orwellian control of official religion and extermination of any expression of alternative visions of Islam in Indonesia proved to be unassailable obstacles to pursuing the path of eco-jihad (Alkatiri 2015).…”