GJ 130 | KRITIK KERAS UNTUK NAHDATUL ULAMA : DARI TAMBANG SAMPAI AGEN ZIONIS ISRAEL

Summary

In this thought-provoking video, the speaker critiques the current state of Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) in Indonesia, reflecting on its past influence and power, particularly during the New Order era. They express disappointment with NU’s shift from political and social activism to serving as a tool for political elites, particularly in mining concessions. The speaker argues that NU has become a mere 'sweetener' for politicians and businessmen, losing its former strength and independence. With sharp criticism, they highlight NU's failure to address social and religious issues, ultimately questioning its impact on Indonesian society today.

Takeaways

• 😀 Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) reached its peak influence during the New Order era, with members growing significantly and having a broad impact across Indonesian society.
• 😀 In the past, NU was independent and could collaborate with anyone but never be controlled, even by the government, exemplified by harsh criticism of the Pak Harto regime.
• 😀 Despite its strength and influence, NU's role has drastically diminished in modern times, often being used as a political tool in regional and general elections to legitimize candidates.
• 😀 NU's involvement in politics now is mainly to act as a 'sweetener' for political figures rather than standing up for its principles and the people.
• 😀 The handover of mining concessions to religious organizations, including NU, is criticized as a way to shield government interests that harm the public, turning NU into a protector of the oligarchic elites.
• 😀 The mining industry in Indonesia is portrayed as a source of increased poverty despite economic growth, with NU supporting the continuation of harmful practices in mining management.
• 😀 There is concern about NU's increasing role in justifying injustice, with clerics issuing fatwas that legitimize damaging practices and protecting the elite's interests.
• 😀 The speaker suggests that NU no longer serves its original mission, neglecting social and religious matters in favor of political and economic interests.
• 😀 The growth of religious and social issues within NU is questioned, with no data supporting improvements in social conditions or reductions in crime where NU is prominent.
• 😀 The speaker expresses disappointment at NU's current state, contrasting it with its past resistance to government control, particularly its stance against the PKI and its ability to remain unified and strong.
• 😀 The current NU leadership is criticized for being susceptible to influence, with references to its alleged complicity with Zionist interests and the corruption of its clerics, weakening its moral standing.

Q & A

What was the peak of Nahdlatul Ulama's (NU) influence in Indonesia?

The peak of NU's influence in Indonesia occurred during the New Order era, when its members grew significantly, and the organization had widespread influence across various sectors of society, including the government.

How did NU interact with the government during the New Order era?

NU maintained its independence by collaborating with anyone but not being steered or controlled by anyone, even the government. This allowed them to fiercely criticize and resist the New Order government when needed.

How did Gus Dur stand out during the New Order era?

Gus Dur, a prominent NU figure, stood out by openly criticizing President Suharto's government. He even wrote that Suharto was 'stupid,' a bold move that few dared to make at that time.

What has changed in NU's role in politics today compared to the past?

Today, NU is seen as more of a tool for political manipulation, particularly in regional and general elections. Politicians seek NU's support by involving its clerics to boost their legitimacy, making NU's role in politics seem more opportunistic and less principled.

What is the critique about NU's involvement in the mining sector?

The critique centers on NU's support for mining concessions granted to religious organizations, which are accused of acting as a buffer for government interests that harm the public and the environment, all while the poor in mining areas remain impoverished.

How has NU's stance on mining been criticized?

NU has been criticized for defending the mining industry, with its leaders claiming that exploiting mining for the people's benefit is justified. However, this stance is challenged by evidence showing that mining operations have led to increased poverty and environmental degradation in mining regions.

What role does the speaker believe NU plays in legitimizing injustices?

The speaker argues that NU now acts as a legitimizer of injustice, issuing fatwas that justify actions such as environmental destruction and exploitation of the poor, aligning with the interests of oligarchs and politicians rather than the people.

What has become of NU's impact on social and religious affairs?

The speaker laments that NU, once influential in social and religious matters, has now largely abandoned these concerns. Instead, NU focuses on political and economic issues, particularly those related to mining, without addressing the social problems in communities.

Why does the speaker criticize the current generation of NU members?

The speaker criticizes the current generation of NU members for failing to address pressing social issues and for defending actions that harm the public. Instead of focusing on social welfare, they are accused of getting involved in politics and business deals, with little to show in terms of positive outcomes.

What historical comparison does the speaker make regarding NU's current situation?

The speaker compares NU's current situation to its past strength, noting that during Soeharto's time, NU could not be infiltrated or divided, but now it is seen as weak and susceptible to external influences, including aligning with controversial figures like the Zionists.