Wealth & Money Quote by Abu Bakar Bashir

The provocation isn’t really about currency; it’s about sovereignty, allegiance, and who gets to set the terms of daily life. “Why should we use the Dollar even when we trade among ourselves?” is framed as a commonsense question, but it smuggles in a moral map: using the dollar is cast as a voluntary submission to an outside power, even in transactions that have nothing to do with the United States. The line works because it turns an abstract financial system into an intimate humiliation. It’s not “the global economy made this convenient,” it’s “we’re choosing dependency.”

As an activist’s rhetorical move, it’s clean and portable. “Among ourselves” is the key phrase: it invents a unified “we,” collapsing class, nation, and ideology into a single community imagined to be self-sufficient if only it would stop lending legitimacy to someone else’s paper. That simplification is the point. De-dollarization becomes less a technocratic policy and more a test of solidarity.

In the context of political Islam and anti-Western mobilization, the subtext gets sharper: money isn’t neutral; it’s a conduit of influence, surveillance, and cultural drift. The dollar stands in for an entire architecture of Western dominance - sanctions, banking chokepoints, the ability to punish or reward at a distance. The question invites listeners to feel that every dollar-denominated exchange is a small vote for that order.

It’s persuasive precisely because it offers an easy villain and an easy lever: change the unit, reclaim the future. The hard part - building trustworthy institutions, stable local currency, and cross-border confidence - is left offstage.