Youth in the Age of Hatred: Religious and Ethnic Factors Within the Islamic Senior High School Students’ Reception Toward Hate Narratives

Ahmad Aminuddin, M. Iqbal Ahnaf


The rise of hate narratives along with the new model of communication through the internet has become a new challenge for people in this digital era, especially for youth, the Z generation. This generation, in fact, has an intimacy with the internet. It means that they have more possibility for the influence of hate narratives. This study is aimed exploring the influential factors on Z generation reception to the hate narratives on the internet. Specifically, it proposes to recognize the influential factors on the reception of the students of Madrasah Aliyah Negri (MAN) or State Islamic Senior High School of Tuban (MAN Tuban), East Java. This work is based on two hate narrative issues of Suku, Agama, Ras dan Antargolongan (SARA) or religious, ethnic and intergroup diversity backgrounds, including those of anti-Christianity and those anti-Shiite. This work concludes that the influential factors to the students' reception toward hate narratives come from two categories. First, students are to be the audience of their social systems and backgrounds. The involvement of the students in fundamentalist Muslim groups, in fact, has led them to have exclusive views in seeing others and to feel always under intergroup contestation. Second, the role of the characters of the narratives that influence student’s thought is very important to count. It includes the legitimization through emotion which specifically presents fear and feeling threatened. Those characters have further triggered the students’ empathy to do something beneficial for the sake of the in-group (altruism). In addition, the characters of the narratives have the figures behind them that have influenced students to immediately believe in the narratives they offer only through seeing their profiles on the internet showing their expertise.


hate; narratives; youth; reception; influential; factors; Tuban

Full Text:



Ahnaf, M. I. (2006). The Image of the Other as Enemy; Radical Discourse in Indonesia. Bangkok: Aman Silk Worm Books.

Amelia R, M. (2016, Agustus 2). Ini Motif Ahmad Tulis Status Provokasi Kerusuhan Tanjungbalai. Retrieved from

ANNAS Indonesia. (2014). Visi dan Misi. Retrieved from

_______, (2016). Cara Aneh Sholat Orang Syiah. Retrieved from

_______, (2016). Membahas Syiah Bukan Berarti Memecah Belah. Retrieved from

Bukhoriy (al), M. I. (2018). al Jami‘ al Sahih al Bukhariy. Vol. 8. Book 73, Number 40. Retrieved from

______, (2018). al Jami‘ al Sahih al Bukhariy. Vol. 3, Book 43, Number 626. Retrieved from

______, (2018). al Jami‘ al Sahih al Bukhariy. Vol. 1, Book 3, Number 100. Retrieved from

Doob, L. W. (1950). Goebbels’ principles of propaganda. Public Opinion Quarterly, 14 (3), pp. 419-442.

Dovidio, J.F., Hewstone, M., Glick, P. and Esses, V.M., (2010). Prejudice, Stereotyping and Discrimination: Theoretical and Empirical Overview. In Dovidio, J.F. (Ed.). The Sage Handbook of Prejudice, Stereotyping and Discrimination, California: Sage Publication, pp. 3-29.

Esack, F. (1997). Quran, Liberation and Pluralism: An Islamic Perspective of Interreligious Solidarity against Oppression. Oxford: Oneword.

Esses, V. M., Jackson, L. M., & Bennett-AbuAyyash, C. (2010). Intergroup competition. In Dovidio, J.F. (Ed.). The Sage Handbook of prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination. California: Sage Publication, pp. 225-240.

Fadani (al), M. Yasin. (1983). T}abat al Kizbara. Damaskus: Da>r al Bashi>r.

Faridl, M. (2007). Peran Sosial Politik Kyai di Indonesia. Jurnal Sosioteknologi. 6 (11), pp. 238-243.

Kominfo. (2016). ICT Indicators Infographic Household and Individuals. Jakarta: Author. Retrieved April 2, 2018, from

Liddle, W. (1999). Skripturalisme Media Dakwah: Suatu Bentuk Pemikiran dan Aksi Politik Islam di Indonesia Masa Orde Baru. In Woodward, Mark R (Ed.). Jalan Baru Islam, Memetakan Paradigma Mutakhir Islam Indonesia. Bandung: Mizan, pp. 287.

McDonald, M. (2018). Constructivisms. In Williams, Paul D (Ed.). Security Studies, An Introduction (2nd ed.). UK: Routledge, pp. 59-72.

Post, J.M., (1999). The Psychopolitics of Hatred: Commentary On Ervin Staub's Article. Peace and Conflict, 5 (4), pp. 337-344.

PPIM UIN Jakarta & UNDP Indonesia. (2018). Api Dalam Sekam: Keberagaman Gen Z. Convey Report. Jakarta: PPIM UIN Jakarta, 1 (1).

Psychologists for Social Responsibility. (1989). Dismantling the Mask of Enmity; An Educational Resource Manual on the Psychology of Enemy Images. Washington: Author.

Reyes, A., (2011). Strategies of Legitimization in Political Discourse: From Words to Actions. Discourse & Society, 22 (6), pp. 781-807.

Sesardic, N. (1999). Altruism. [Review of the book The Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behaviour]. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 50 (3) pp. 457-466.

Son Hing, L. S. and Zanna, M. P. (2010). Individual Differences. In Dovidio, J.F. (Ed.). The Sage Handbook of Prejudice, Stereotyping and Discrimination. London: Sage Publication, pp.164-178.

Struch, N. & Schwartz, S. H. (1989). Intergroup Aggression: Its Predictors and Distinctness from In-Group Bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5 (6), pp. 364-373.

Suara Islam. (2015). Yahudi Kristen Selalu Mengancam. Retrieved from

VOA Islam. (2015, February 22). Ustadz Farid Oqbah: Syiah Rencanakan Bunuh 100 Ulama Ahlus Sunnah Indonesia, Saya Salah Satunya. Retrieved from

Yzerbyt, V. Y. (2010). Motivational processes. In Dovidio, J.F. (Ed.). The SAGE handbook of prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination. California: Sage Publication, pp. 146-162.

Article Metrics

Abstract views: 676 PDF views: 439