Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Radicalism is regarded as an internal threat in many countries, including Indonesia. Rulers will occasionally utilize radical label embedding to silence political opponents, including in the run-up to general elections. Some academicians believe that the terms radicalism and extremism are used interchangeably. Even though they still have disagreements, they regard the two as distinct. The same term, but understood differently by different parties, particularly those opposed to each other, can generate and exacerbate conflicts. This study used a qualitative technique to clarify radicalism and distinguish it from extremism, particularly from the perspective of people who (the Indonesians) proclaim themselves radicals. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were used to collect research data, which was then analyzed using a narrative technique. The findings of the study provide a thorough picture of radicalism. The informants did not object to being labelled as radical, but only in the sense that they interpreted radicalism which differed from the concept of extremism. Alternative responses to radicalism are discussed.
Zakarija Achmat (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: