Indonesier machen sich über Trumps "Persönlichkeitspolitik" lustig

Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto sparked controversy last month during a political party event in Jakarta when he referenced a derogatory term historically used against Indigenous Indonesians who collaborated with Dutch colonizers. The remark, which drew sharp criticism on social media, highlighted growing concerns over his communication style, which some compare to that of former U.S. President Donald Trump. At the event, Prabowo waved printed speech notes while joking that reading them might cause the audience to fall asleep. He later promised to be "polite" before deviating from his script again, calling certain individuals "londo ireng", a Javanese term once used to describe collaborators with Dutch colonial forces. The comment triggered backlash, with some netizens expressing shame over the president’s remarks. The incident occurred amid a series of controversial statements by Prabowo, including suggesting that citizens should help grow rice if prices were high, dismissing critics with the phrase “ndasmu” (similar to “whatever”), and downplaying the economic implications of the rupiah’s weakness against the U.S. dollar. These remarks have raised questions about the impact of his informal, sometimes provocative approach on public trust and economic stability. In one notable case, a live-streamed session with business leaders was abruptly cut off, and journalists were reportedly removed after Prabowo claimed that Iran already possessed nuclear weapons, a statement that Iranian diplomats swiftly rejected. Political analysts have noted a shift in Prabowo’s public persona, particularly in preparation for the 2024 elections. Once closely tied to the military, he has increasingly positioned himself as a relatable, family-friendly leader. Ambang Priyonggo, a media and politics professor at Multimedia Nusantara University, observed that Prabowo’s communication strategy has evolved significantly. His use of casual, direct language, often improvised, mirrors the populist tactics of U.S. President Donald Trump, whom Priyonggo described as “spontaneous, direct and often controversial.” Both leaders, according to Priyonggo, employ “personality politics,” relying on emotional appeals and nationalist rhetoric to connect with audiences. This style, however, carries risks. Priyonggo warned that such an approach could foster a “cult of personality,” where critiques of policies are misinterpreted as attacks on the leader personally. He emphasized that if Prabowo continues to prioritize charisma over substance, it may erode public confidence and deepen skepticism toward his administration. This concern is amplified by recent student-led protests across Indonesia, which have focused on rising living costs and perceived mismanagement of public funds. These demonstrations underscore a broader discontent with the government’s handling of economic issues and its responsiveness to citizen grievances. Government officials have attempted to balance these criticisms. A spokesperson from the Indonesian Government Communications Agency mentioned that materials for state speeches and policy announcements undergo a formal review process. However, the frequency of Prabowo’s impromptu remarks suggests that this system may not always align with the structured messaging expected of a national leader. Meanwhile, media organizations and independent journalists have expressed alarm over the potential erosion of democratic norms, citing instances where Prabowo’s comments have been deemed “demeaning” and “dangerous for press freedom.” As the 2024 election approaches, the debate over Prabowo’s leadership style is likely to intensify. His reliance on emotionally charged language and spontaneous commentary may continue to shape public perception, though the long-term consequences remain uncertain. For now, the focus remains on how these rhetorical choices influence voter sentiment, media credibility, and the overall direction of Indonesia’s political landscape.