T. H. Marshall’s 1950 seminal work shows that the granting of civil, political, and social rights leads to the institutionalization of rules binding the state and its citizens. In practice, however, citizenship goes beyond these unproblematized paternalistic relations. It is political, involving connection, competition, and conflicts. Isin and Turner (2002) propose that “citizenship” should be examined through its extent (norms of inclusion and exclusion), content (rights and responsibility), and depth (citizens’ perceived relation to their political community). In Indonesia, the discrimination against members of minority religions by Islamic conservative groups is among the main issues in politics. This article therefore examines the ambiguity between the constitutionally embraced “religious freedom” and the everyday discriminatory practices of conservative groups. Taking the case-studies of the sectarian campaign against a Chinese-Christian governor, the blasphemy sentence of a Chinese-Buddhist woman, and the persecution of the Ahmadiyah and Syiah, I argue that conservative groups have practised a “segregated citizenship” that prioritizes the values and interests of the majority religion against those of both the “accepted” and the “unaccepted” minority religions.

中文翻译：

---

管教接受者和截肢者：印度尼西亚的宗教民族主义和种族隔离

TH Marshall 1950 年的开创性著作表明，授予公民、政治和社会权利导致约束国家及其公民的规则制度化。然而，在实践中，公民身份超越了这些毫无问题的家长式关系。它是政治性的，涉及联系、竞争和冲突。Isin 和 Turner (2002) 建议“公民身份”应通过其程度（包含和排除的规范），内容（权利和责任），以及深度（公民与其政治社区的感知关系）。在印度尼西亚，伊斯兰保守团体对少数宗教成员的歧视是政治上的主要问题之一。因此，本文探讨了宪法所接受的“宗教自由”与保守团体日常歧视性做法之间的模糊性。以针对一名华裔基督徒州长的宗派运动、一名华裔佛教妇女的亵渎判决以及对艾哈迈迪亚和伊斯兰教义的迫害等案例研究，我认为保守派团体实行了“隔离公民”，优先考虑多数宗教的价值观和利益反对“接受”和“不被接受”的少数宗教的价值观和利益。