A Call to Humanity: Stand for Gaza, Stand for Justice!

To our dear brothers and sisters in Gaza,

Your patience, faith, and unwavering resilience shine in the darkness of oppression. Your endurance is a story of suffering and a testament to the power of faith, dignity, and the human spirit that refuses to be broken.

The world watches as you stand amidst ruins, yet your hearts remain intact. Your homes may be taken, but your honor is untouched. Your land may be occupied, but your souls are free. You are the people of steadfastness (ṣabr), faith (īmān), and history—an unshakable mountain against the storms of tyranny.

Know that your cries are not unheard. Allah is Ash-Shahid (The All-Seeing Witness), and every tear, every lost life, and every prayer uttered from your lips is written in the divine record.\

وَلَا تَحْسَبَنَّ اللّٰهَ غَافِلًا عَمَّا يَعْمَلُ الظّٰلِمُوْنَ ەۗ اِنَّمَا يُؤَخِّرُهُمْ لِيَوْمٍ تَشْخَصُ فِيْهِ الْاَبْصَارُۙ

"And never think that Allah is unaware of what the wrongdoers do. He only delays them for a Day when eyes will stare in horror." [QS. Ibrahim (14):42]

O people of the world, this is not just the struggle of Palestine—it is the struggle of humanity itself.

Will you stand in silence while injustice prevails? Will you turn away from the cries of the oppressed? The test of our generation is before us, and history will record where we stood.

Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) said,

أحبُّ الناسِ إلى اللهِ أنفعُهم للناسِ

"The most beloved people to Allah are those who bring the most benefit to others" (Al-Muʻjam al-Awsaṭ 6192)

This is not just about politics; it is about the sanctity of life, the right to exist, and the right to live in peace. Every human being with a heart, regardless of nationality or belief, must ask: What can I do?

• Speak out. Raise your voice, for silence in the face of oppression is complicity.
• Educate yourself and others. The truth is a weapon against falsehood.
• Pray. For the people of Gaza, for justice, for peace.
• Support. Whatever you can—humanitarian aid, donations, or awareness campaigns.

Rumi, the great poet and mystic, spoke words that resonate in times of suffering:

"When the soul lies down in that grass,

the world is too full to talk about.

Ideas, language, even the phrase each other

doesn’t make any sense."

O people of Gaza, even as the world fails to find words to describe your pain, know that your souls are beyond the limits of this oppression. Your struggle is seen, your patience is honored, and your reward is with Allah.

Rumi also said:

"Don’t get lost in your pain,

know that one day your pain

will become your cure."

This hardship will not last forever. The oppressed always rise, and history has shown that no tyranny lasts. The dawn of justice will come, and those who stood for truth will stand victorious.

May Allah strengthen the hearts of the oppressed, soften the hearts of the heedless, and guide humanity toward justice. Ameen.

Gaza is not forgotten. Palestine is not alone. We stand with you. And always remember: Gaza and Palestine will always prevail. Insha Allah.

 [Bahasa]

Indonesian Economic Anomalies

Officials in Indonesia often proclaim that "the fundamentals of the Indonesian economy are quite strong." But is that really the case? The phrase "Indonesia's economic fundamentals are strong" refers to the belief that the country's key economic indicators—such as economic growth, inflation, foreign exchange reserves, and trade balance—are in good condition and provide a solid foundation for economic stability and resilience.

Indonesia has maintained steady economic growth, typically above 5% annually. For example, growth was recorded at 5.05% in 2023 and 4.95% in Q3 of 2024.

Inflation has remained stable and within the target range set by the government and central bank. For instance, inflation stood at 3.05% in March 2024, reflecting price stability.

Indonesia's foreign exchange reserves are substantial, ranging between USD 140-150 billion. This provides a buffer against external shocks and strengthens the country's financial position.

Is it true? Can we trust the data, or should we take it with a grain of salt? After all, it seems that data institutions in Indonesia have a peculiar talent for redefining statistics to make them look more palatable for the government—especially for the President. It's almost as if they believe that a little creative math can turn a shaky foundation into a rock-solid skyscraper!

While these indicators suggest strong fundamentals, challenges remain, such as currency fluctuations, reliance on commodity exports, and global economic uncertainties (e.g., geopolitical tensions or slowing demand). However, policymakers often emphasize these "strong fundamentals" to reassure investors and the public that Indonesia's economy is resilient and capable of weathering external shocks.

Several factors could potentially undermine the economic fundamentals of Indonesia, leading to a downturn. Ongoing geopolitical conflicts can create instability in global markets, affecting trade and investment flows. For example, tensions between major economies can disrupt supply chains and lead to increased costs for businesses. High and persistent inflation in major economies can lead to tighter monetary policies, which may slow global economic growth and reduce demand for Indonesian exports.

Geopolitical factors can significantly influence the economic fundamentals of Indonesia. Ongoing conflicts, such as the Russia-Ukraine war, can lead to disruptions in global markets, particularly affecting commodity prices. Indonesia, as a significant importer of oil and gas, may face increased costs, impacting inflation and overall economic stability.

Tensions in the Asia-Pacific region, including disputes in the South China Sea, can create uncertainty that affects trade routes and investor confidence. This may lead to capital flight or reduced foreign direct investment (FDI) in Indonesia.

Economic sanctions imposed on countries can lead to shifts in trade dynamics. For instance, sanctions on Russia have affected global energy prices, which in turn impact Indonesia's import costs and inflation rates

Changes in international trade agreements or tariffs can alter Indonesia's export competitiveness. If major trading partners impose tariffs or barriers, it could negatively affect Indonesia’s export-driven sectors.

Actions by central banks in major economies, particularly the U.S. Federal Reserve's interest rate hikes, can lead to increased borrowing costs globally. This situation can result in capital outflows from emerging markets like Indonesia, leading to currency depreciation and economic instability.

Geopolitical uncertainties can cause volatility in financial markets, affecting stock prices and investor sentiment. A decline in market confidence can lead to reduced investments and slower economic growth.

As a net importer of oil, fluctuations in global oil prices due to geopolitical tensions can directly impact inflation rates in Indonesia. Rising energy prices can increase transportation and production costs, affecting consumer prices and overall economic health

Geopolitical events can also affect the prices of other key commodities such as metals and agricultural products, which are crucial for Indonesia's economy. Geopolitical tensions may lead to social unrest or political instability within Indonesia if economic conditions worsen (e.g., rising prices). This instability can further deter investment and disrupt economic activities.

So, geopolitical factors play a crucial role in shaping the economic landscape of Indonesia. The government must remain vigilant and responsive to these external pressures to maintain economic stability and growth.

The strengthening of the US dollar (USD) can have significant impacts on Indonesia's economy. As the USD strengthens, the value of the Indonesian rupiah (IDR) typically weakens against it. This results in higher costs for imported goods, which are priced in USD. Indonesia relies heavily on imports for essential commodities like oil, machinery, and consumer goods. Consequently, more expensive imports can lead to inflation as businesses pass on these costs to consumers.

The rise in import prices due to a stronger dollar can contribute to overall inflation within Indonesia. Higher prices for imported food and raw materials can strain household budgets and reduce consumer purchasing power, potentially leading to decreased domestic consumption.

A stronger dollar makes Indonesian exports more expensive for foreign buyers, potentially reducing demand for Indonesian goods in international markets. This can negatively affect the trade balance, as exports decline while import costs rise, leading to a worsening current account deficit.

Many Indonesian companies and the government have foreign debts denominated in USD. When the dollar strengthens, the cost of servicing this debt increases in terms of IDR, putting additional financial pressure on borrowers and possibly leading to higher default risks

The strengthening USD may influence foreign investment dynamics. Investors might seek higher returns in dollar-denominated assets rather than investing in emerging markets like Indonesia, leading to capital outflows. This could further depreciate the rupiah and increase economic volatility.

Certain sectors, particularly those reliant on imported raw materials (like manufacturing and automotive), may experience increased production costs due to a stronger dollar. Conversely, sectors that export commodities may benefit from improved competitiveness due to lower prices in foreign markets.

Rising interest rates can dampen consumer spending and investment. If borrowing costs increase significantly, it may lead to reduced economic activity domestically.

A lack of regulatory consistency or abrupt policy changes can deter foreign investment. Investors seek stability and predictability, and any perception of risk can lead to capital flight or reduced inflows.

Indonesia's economy is heavily reliant on commodity exports. Fluctuations in global commodity prices can significantly impact revenue and economic stability. A sharp decline in prices could lead to lower export earnings and a widening current account deficit

Indonesia is prone to natural disasters such as earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, which can disrupt economic activities and infrastructure, leading to significant economic losses.

Inadequate infrastructure can hinder economic growth by increasing costs for businesses and limiting access to markets. Continued investment in infrastructure is crucial for sustaining growth. Insufficient investment in education and skills development can lead to a workforce that is not adequately prepared for the demands of a modern economy, affecting productivity and innovation.

While Indonesia's economic fundamentals are currently viewed as strong, these risks highlight the need for proactive measures to mitigate potential vulnerabilities. Addressing these challenges through sound policy frameworks and strategic investments will be essential for maintaining economic stability and growth.

Approaching Eid al-Fitr 2025, Indonesia is expected to be sluggish and unable to boost the economy due to several key factors affecting the purchasing power of the public.

The number of travelers during Eid this year is predicted to reach only about 146.48 million people, a 24% decrease compared to last year, which saw approximately 193.6 million travelers. This decline is unusual as the number of travelers typically increases each year.

The circulation of money during Eid is estimated to be only around IDR 137.975 trillion, down from IDR 157.3 trillion the previous year. This reflects a weakening of economic activity during the Eid period.

Weak Purchasing Power of Consumers

An unstable economic condition and layoffs (PHK) in various sectors have led to a decline in consumer purchasing power. The Consumer Confidence Index (IKK) also indicates a decrease, which implies that consumer spending is more defensive.

Economic Anomalies

Research institutions like CORE have noted anomalies in household consumption leading up to Eid, with deflation trends indicating a drop in public consumption. This impacts household decisions to postpone or cancel their travel plans. These conditions suggest that the purchasing power of the public is very low, contributing to the sluggishness of the economy during Eid al-Fitr 2025.

Due to several interrelated factors, the community's purchasing power tends to be defensive during Lebaran 2025. Many families are facing increased expenses for essentials such as food, fuel, and transportation. This financial strain forces individuals to prioritise basic needs over holiday spending, leading to a significant drop in travel plans for Eid.

Indonesia is experiencing its worst deflation in over two decades, with a recorded deflation rate of 0.09% year-on-year in February 2025. This unusual economic condition indicates weak consumer demand, which further diminishes confidence in spending. Surveys show that many consumers perceive limited job opportunities, leading to a cautious approach to spending.

Household consumption in the lead-up to Eid has been unusually low. The expected surge in retail sales typical during Ramadan is absent this year, with growth rates significantly below historical averages

The decline in consumer activity has ripple effects across various sectors, including retail and transportation, which typically see increased demand during Eid. Businesses are adjusting their strategies but may struggle to recover from the reduced spending.

The weakening of the middle class, which traditionally drives economic growth, contributes to the overall decline in aggregate consumption. As disposable incomes shrink, families cut back on discretionary spending during the festive season

The combination of rising living costs, deflationary pressures, declining consumer confidence, and socioeconomic challenges leads to a defensive purchasing behavior among communities during Lebaran 2025.

The anomalies observed during Lebaran 2025 suggest that the fundamentals of Indonesia's economy may not be sufficiently robust. Reports indicate that there is a significant drop in household consumption leading up to Eid, with many households, particularly from the middle and lower classes, reducing their spending due to economic pressures. The Center of Reform on Economics (CORE) highlighted that there is no visible trend of increased spending for Ramadan and Eid this year, which is atypical for this period.

Indonesia experienced deflation in early 2025, which is unusual for the pre-Eid period, when consumer demand typically rises. The deflation rates recorded were 0.09% year-on-year and 0.48% month-on-month in February 2025. Such deflation indicates weak consumer demand and can signal underlying economic issues.

The prevalence of layoffs (PHK) in various sectors has significantly impacted disposable incomes, leading to a cautious approach to spending among households. Many families are feeling financially squeezed, which further exacerbates the decline in consumption.

The overall economic activity during this festive period is expected to be lower than in previous years, with projections indicating that the economic growth rate may decline as a result of weakened consumer confidence and spending. The decrease in the number of travelers during Eid also reflects reduced disposable income available for discretionary spending.

Economic pressures such as the decline in household income and deflationary trends, changes in consumer behavior and external Influences can be mentioned as the main factors causing the consumption anomaly during Lebaran 2025 in Indonesia. The economic situation has led to significant layoffs (PHK) in the manufacturing sector, which has directly impacted the income of middle and lower-class households. This has resulted in reduced purchasing power and a more cautious approach to spending during the festive season

Indonesia experienced deflation in early 2025, with a recorded deflation rate of -0.09% year-on-year and -0.48% month-on-month in February. This unusual trend indicates weak consumer demand, as typically, prices rise leading up to Ramadan due to increased consumption.

There is a strong signal that middle and lower-class households are curbing their spending. The usual surge in shopping for Ramadan and Eid needs is absent this year, reflecting a significant shift in consumer behavior. The real sales index (IPR) showed a decline of about 0.5% year-on-year, primarily driven by reduced sales in the food and beverage categories. This lack of consumer activity further exacerbates the economic slowdown.

Despite some deflationary pressures, essential goods such as food have seen price increases since late 2023, further straining household budgets and limiting discretionary spending during the holiday season

These factors collectively illustrate a concerning economic landscape leading into Lebaran 2025, highlighting vulnerabilities within Indonesia's economy and the challenges faced by consumers.

The consumption anomalies observed during Lebaran 2025 can indeed be traced back to various policies and actions taken by previous administrations. Past decisions may have contributed to the current economic situation. Previous administrations may not have sufficiently diversified the economy, leading to over-reliance on specific sectors, such as manufacturing and commodities. This lack of diversification can make the economy more vulnerable to shocks, such as global economic downturns or fluctuations in commodity prices.

Policies related to labor rights and protections can impact employment stability. If previous administrations did not effectively address labor market issues, such as job security and fair wages, this could lead to higher rates of layoffs (PHK) during economic downturns, contributing to reduced household income and spending.The Omnibus Law can indeed be considered a factor in labor market policies that may have contributed to the anomalies observed during Lebaran 2025. The Omnibus Law on Job Creation, enacted in 2020, aimed to simplify regulations, attract investment, and create jobs in Indonesia. However, its implementation has had mixed reactions and implications for the labor market. One of the key criticisms of the Omnibus Law is that it potentially undermines job security for workers. By making it easier for companies to hire and fire employees, the law may contribute to higher rates of layoffs (PHK), particularly during economic downturns. This has direct implications for household incomes and consumer spending. The law allows for more flexible wage arrangements and reduces minimum wage protections in certain sectors. While this is intended to attract foreign investment, it can lead to lower earnings for workers, impacting their purchasing power and ability to spend during festive periods like Eid. The Omnibus Law has been seen as reducing protections for workers, which may lead to a more precarious employment situation. As job security diminishes, workers may become more cautious with their spending, saving more in anticipation of potential job losses.

The uncertainty surrounding job security and income stability can lead to decreased consumer confidence. When households feel insecure about their financial futures, they are less likely to spend on non-essential items during festive seasons like Lebaran. The overall economic stability is influenced by labor market conditions. High unemployment or underemployment can lead to reduced aggregate demand, resulting in lower consumption levels during key periods.

So, the Omnibus Law plays a significant role in shaping labor market policies that can impact economic conditions and consumer behavior. Its provisions regarding job security and wage flexibility may have contributed to the anomalies seen during Lebaran 2025 by affecting household incomes and consumer confidence. Addressing these challenges will require careful consideration of labor policies moving forward.

Decisions regarding public spending and investment in infrastructure and social programs can have long-term effects on economic growth. If previous governments did not prioritize investments in critical areas such as education, health care, and infrastructure, this could hinder overall economic development and consumer confidence.

The management of inflation rates by previous administrations could also play a role. If inflation was not adequately controlled, it could lead to rising prices for essential goods, further straining household budgets and limiting disposable income.

The effectiveness of social safety nets established by previous governments can influence how well households cope with economic challenges. If social assistance programs were underfunded or poorly designed, families might struggle more during tough economic times, impacting their ability to spend during festive seasons like Eid.

While social safety net programs under the previous administration aimed to address pressing economic issues, their implementation has been viewed by some as politically motivated. The effectiveness of these initiatives in genuinely improving the welfare of the population remains a topic of debate. For future administrations, it will be essential to ensure that social safety nets are part of a broader, more sustainable economic strategy rather than merely tools for political gain.

Social safety net programs, such as the Family Hope Program (PKH) and the Basic Food Card (Kartu Sembako), have been implemented as part of broader poverty alleviation efforts. Critics argue that these programs were strategically used to bolster political support, particularly in the lead-up to elections. The timing and promotion of these initiatives often coincided with electoral cycles, leading to perceptions that they were more about gaining votes than addressing systemic issues.

The effectiveness and reach of these programs have sometimes been questioned. While they aim to assist low-income families, there have been reports of inefficiencies, corruption, and mismanagement. Such issues can undermine public trust and lead to skepticism about the government's intentions.

While the programs may have provided short-term relief, questions remain about their long-term sustainability and impact on poverty reduction. Critics suggest that without accompanying structural reforms in areas such as education, health care, and employment, these safety nets may not lead to meaningful improvements in living standards.

Despite the current economic challenges are influenced by a complex interplay of factors, including global economic conditions and recent developments, it is clear that decisions made by previous administrations have had lasting effects on Indonesia's economic resilience. Addressing these foundational issues will be crucial for improving consumer confidence and enhancing overall economic stability in the future.

[Bahasa] 

Eid al-Fitr 2025: A Time for Gratitude and Renewal (2)

As the blessed month of Ramadan comes to an end, we welcome Eid al-Fitr 2025 with hearts filled with gratitude and joy. Eid is not merely a celebration; it is a spiritual milestone that reminds us of the lessons learned during Ramadan—discipline, patience, generosity, and the deep connection with Allah.

Throughout Ramadan, we trained ourselves to resist temptations, purify our intentions, and dedicate more time to worship. We fasted from dawn until sunset, not only from food and drink but also from negative thoughts and actions. Now, as we celebrate Eid, we must reflect: How can we carry the spirit of Ramadan into the rest of the year?

Eid is a day of gratitude. We thank Allah for granting us the strength to complete Ramadan and for showering us with countless blessings. The takbirat of Eid remind us to glorify Allah, acknowledging His greatness and mercy. It is also a time to express gratitude through our actions—by helping those in need and spreading kindness.

Eid is a day of unity and forgiveness. As families and communities come together in prayer and celebration, we are reminded of the importance of maintaining strong relationships. It is a day to mend broken ties, to forgive past mistakes, and to embrace one another with love and sincerity. The Prophet (ﷺ) emphasized the value of brotherhood and reconciliation, and Eid provides the perfect opportunity to practice this.

Eid is a day of generosity. Before the Eid prayer, we give Zakat al-Fitr, ensuring that those who are less fortunate can also partake in the joy of Eid. This act of charity purifies our fast and reinforces the importance of social responsibility. True happiness comes not just from receiving but from giving and sharing with others.

Eid is a day of renewal. It marks a new beginning, a chance to sustain the habits of Ramadan—continuing our prayers, keeping our hearts attached to the Qur'an, and striving to be better individuals. The true success of Ramadan is reflected in our ability to maintain its lessons beyond the month itself.

As we gather with loved ones, exchange greetings, and enjoy delicious meals, let us remember the true essence of Eid. May this day bring peace, joy, and countless blessings to all. May Allah accept our fasting, prayers, and good deeds, and grant us the ability to remain steadfast in our faith. Ameen.

Taqabbalallahu minna wa minkum—Taqabbal yaa Kareem!

Eid Mubarak!

[Part 1]

[Bahasa]

Eid al-Fitr 2025: A Time for Gratitude and Renewal (1)

Ramadan is a sacred month for Muslims worldwide, marked by fasting, salah, reflection, and community. Ramadan serves as a time for spiritual rejuvenation. Fasting from dawn until sunset is a physical act and a means of purifying the soul. It encourages self-discipline and helps individuals reconnect with their faith. Many Muslims use this time to engage in increased prayer (Salah) and reading of the Quran, deepening their understanding of Islamic teachings.

Fasting cultivates empathy for those who are less fortunate. By experiencing hunger and thirst, Muslims are reminded of the struggles faced by those living in poverty. This often inspires acts of charity (Infaq and Zakat) and community service, reinforcing the importance of compassion and support for one another.

Ramadan fosters a sense of community among Muslims. Iftar, the meal to break the fast, is often shared with family, friends, and neighbors, promoting unity and strengthening bonds. Many mosques host communal prayers and meals, creating an inclusive atmosphere that enhances social ties.

This month encourages personal reflection on one's life, actions, and relationship with Allah. It is an opportunity to express gratitude for the blessings received and to seek forgiveness for past mistakes. Many individuals set personal goals for spiritual growth during Ramadan, aiming to emerge as better versions of themselves.

Fasting teaches mindfulness and self-control. It challenges individuals to refrain from not only food and drink but also negative behaviors such as gossip or anger. This practice can lead to improved mental well-being and a more positive outlook on life.

As Ramadan unfolds each year, it invites Muslims to reflect deeply on their lives, their relationships with others, and their connection to Allah. It is a month filled with opportunities for growth, compassion, and community spirit—a time to renew faith and strive towards becoming better individuals.

Ramadan is a profound time for reflection and learning within the Islamic faith. Fasting during Ramadan is one of the Five Pillars of Islam, which are foundational acts of worship. The practice of abstaining from food, drink, and other physical needs from dawn until sunset teaches self-discipline, patience, and spiritual growth. It serves as a reminder of the importance of self-control and the value of gratitude for the blessings one has.

Ramadan emphasizes the importance of increased salah and spiritual connection. Muslims are encouraged to perform additional prayers, particularly Taraweeh, which are special nightly prayers during this month. This practice reinforces the significance of maintaining a strong relationship with Allah and seeking guidance through worship.

Generosity is a core teaching of Islam that is especially highlighted during Ramadan. Muslims are encouraged to give Zakat (obligatory almsgiving) and Sadaqah (voluntary charity) to help those in need. This act not only purifies wealth but also fosters a sense of community and compassion for the less fortunate.

Ramadan is a time for introspection, encouraging Muslims to reflect on their actions and seek forgiveness for past mistakes. The month serves as an opportunity to repent sincerely and strive for personal improvement, reinforcing the belief in Allah's mercy and compassion.

The communal aspects of Ramadan highlight the importance of unity among Muslims. Sharing meals during Iftar and participating in collective prayers strengthen bonds within families and communities. This teaching emphasizes that Islam is not just an individual journey but also a collective experience that fosters support and solidarity.

Fasting cultivates a sense of gratitude for the sustenance that many often take for granted. The experience of hunger reminds individuals to appreciate their blessings and approach life with humility. This teaching encourages Muslims to be thankful for what they have while remaining mindful of those who face hardship.

Ramadan is known as the month in which the Quran was revealed, making it a time to engage deeply with this holy text. Many Muslims aim to read or recite the entire Quran during this month, reflecting on its teachings and applying them to their lives. This practice underscores the importance of Divine guidance in daily life.

Fasting during Ramadan significantly alters the daily routines of Muslims, creating a unique rhythm that emphasizes spirituality, community, and self-discipline.

The pre-dawn meal, known as Suhoor, is consumed before the fast begins at dawn. This meal is crucial for providing energy throughout the day and often requires waking up early to eat.

The fast is broken at sunset with Iftar, which typically starts with dates and water, followed by a larger meal. Families and communities often gather to share this meal, making it a significant social event.

Many Muslims adjust their work or study hours to accommodate fasting. Some may start work earlier or take longer breaks during the day to rest. In some regions, businesses may operate on reduced hours to allow employees to observe their fasts more comfortably.

Fasting encourages Muslims to engage more deeply in prayer (Salah) and spiritual reflection. Additional prayers, such as Taraweeh, are performed at night, leading to a more structured evening routine centered around worship. Many individuals also dedicate time to reading the Quran and engaging in acts of devotion, which can lead to a more spiritually focused daily schedule.

Ramadan fosters a sense of community through shared meals and communal prayers. This often leads to increased social gatherings with family and friends during Iftar and participation in mosque activities.

Many Muslims also engage in charitable activities during this month, setting aside time for volunteering or donating to those in need.

Fasting can affect energy levels throughout the day. Many individuals find that they need to adjust their physical activities, opting for lighter exercise or rest periods to conserve energy.

Staying hydrated during non-fasting hours becomes essential, leading to conscious planning of fluid intake during Suhoor and Iftar.

The act of fasting encourages mindfulness about food consumption and personal behavior. Many Muslims use this time for self-reflection, focusing on personal growth and setting intentions for improvement. This mindfulness often extends beyond Ramadan as individuals strive to maintain healthier habits developed during the month.

Fasting during Ramadan profoundly impacts daily routines by altering meal times, work schedules, spiritual practices, and social interactions. While it presents challenges such as adjusting to hunger and fatigue, it also offers opportunities for personal growth, community bonding, and spiritual enrichment. The changes experienced during this month often lead to lasting positive effects that extend beyond Ramadan itself.

[Part 2]

Bahasa

Challenges for the Civilian Leaders (4)

Civilian leaders often excel at management and organisational efficiency, prioritising long-term goals and administrative processes. They tend to be more flexible than military-trained leaders, adjusting to diverse governance environments. Civilian leaders bring a broader societal viewpoint, which can be beneficial in addressing civilian concerns. However, civilian leaders may lack the structured leadership cultivation seen in military environments. They may struggle with high-stakes or time-sensitive decisions.

Civilian leaders face a variety of challenges that stem from the complexities of modern governance, civil-military relations, and the evolving needs of civilian workforces. These challenges are deeply intertwined with societal expectations, organizational dynamics, and the increasing demands placed on public service.

One of the most pressing challenges is the erosion of civilian control over the military. Civilian leaders often find themselves reliant on military elites to inform national security policy, which can lead to an imbalance in civil-military relations. This reliance stems from a shrinking pool of experienced civilian policymakers and appointees, exacerbated by extreme partisanship and polarization within political systems. The result is a weakened ability to oversee military operations effectively and align them with broader political objectives. Furthermore, myths about the superiority of military expertise over civilian leadership in strategic defense have eroded public trust in civilian leaders, making it harder for them to assert authority in defense policy.

The myth that the military is inherently superior to civilian leadership in matters of defense and security has developed over time due to a combination of cultural, historical, and societal factors. This perception is deeply rooted in how societies view the military and its role in safeguarding national interests.

One of the primary reasons for the myth's development is the deep respect and admiration many societies have for the military. Soldiers are often seen as heroes who make extraordinary sacrifices to protect their nation, sometimes risking their lives in the process. This admiration creates a perception that military personnel possess unique qualities—such as discipline, decisiveness, and courage—that make them better suited for leadership roles in national security compared to civilians.

Historical events often reinforce this myth. In times of crisis or war, military leaders are frequently celebrated for their decisive actions and victories. These narratives overshadow the contributions of civilian leaders, who may have played crucial roles behind the scenes in diplomacy, strategy, or resource management. Over time, society comes to associate military leadership with success in handling security challenges, while civilian leadership is viewed as secondary or less impactful.

The myth is also fueled by a lack of public understanding about the complexity of modern security challenges. Many people assume that defense issues are primarily about combat and battlefield tactics—areas where military expertise is undoubtedly strong. However, modern security threats like cyberattacks, terrorism, and economic warfare require interdisciplinary approaches involving diplomacy, technology, economics, and social sciences—fields where civilian leaders often excel. The oversimplification of security as purely a military domain leads to an exaggerated perception of military superiority.

Media plays a significant role in perpetuating this myth. Movies, television shows, and news coverage often portray military leaders as strong, competent figures who save the day during crises. In contrast, civilian leaders are sometimes depicted as indecisive or disconnected from "real-world" challenges. These portrayals shape public perceptions and reinforce the belief that military leadership is more effective.

Generational storytelling within families and communities also contributes to the myth's persistence. Stories of bravery and heroism in wartime are passed down through generations, creating emotional ties to the military institution. These narratives often overlook or minimize the contributions of civilian leaders who work behind the scenes to prevent conflict or resolve crises diplomatically.

In some cases, there has been a decline in civilian expertise in national security roles due to fewer civilians pursuing careers in defense policy or transitioning into leadership positions after serving in government. This has led to an increased reliance on military elites for advice on security matters, reinforcing the perception that civilians lack the necessary expertise.

While there is no denying that military leaders bring valuable skills and experience to national security discussions, it is a misconception to view them as inherently superior to civilian leaders across all aspects of defense policy. Both groups contribute unique perspectives that are essential for addressing modern security challenges effectively. The myth persists because of cultural reverence for the military, historical narratives that glorify combat achievements, oversimplified views of security issues, media portrayals, emotional connections to wartime heroism, and gaps in civilian expertise. Combating this myth requires fostering collaboration between civilian and military leaders while educating society about the importance of interdisciplinary approaches to national security.

The myth that the military is inherently superior to civilian leadership in matters of national security and defense policy stems from several cultural, historical, and societal factors. Over time, this belief has been nurtured by both civilian and military communities, creating persistent misconceptions that elevate military expertise while diminishing civilian contributions.

One key factor driving this myth is the admiration for military service as a form of ultimate civic virtue. In many societies, military personnel are viewed as individuals who have made extraordinary sacrifices for their country, often in life-threatening situations. This admiration creates an artificial distance between civilians and soldiers, leading to the perception that military experience is not only noble but also indispensable for understanding complex defense issues. For instance, battlefield experience is often seen as the most authoritative source of expertise on military policy, overshadowing other forms of knowledge such as academic research or diplomatic experience.

Another contributing factor is the assumption that time in uniform provides unique operational insights that civilians cannot replicate. Critics sometimes dismiss civilian perspectives by arguing that those who have not "heard the distant roar of cannon" cannot make sound judgments about national security matters. This belief undermines the value of civilian expertise in areas like cybersecurity, diplomacy, and economic strategy—all critical components of modern warfare and defense planning.

The myth is further reinforced by a shrinking pool of experienced civilian leaders in national security roles. As fewer civilians pursue careers in defense policy or serve in the military before transitioning to civilian leadership positions, reliance on military elites has grown. This dependence has led to perceptions of civilian amateurism and a belief that civilians are less equipped to exercise oversight or make strategic decisions.

Cultural attitudes also play a role. Societies often elevate soldiers above civilians in public confidence, creating a monopoly on trust that can erode civic involvement and diminish civilian contributions to defense policy. This dynamic can result in situations where military leaders override civilian input or where civilians themselves abdicate their responsibility to engage critically with national security issues.

While combat experience undoubtedly provides valuable perspectives, it is not all-encompassing. Military expertise, like any other form of knowledge, has its biases and blind spots. Civilians bring complementary skills and insights that are essential for broad strategic judgment, as evidenced by historical successes like George Kennan's Cold War containment strategy—a framework developed without direct combat experience.

Ultimately, this myth is corrosive to democratic systems. It undermines civilian control of the military—a cornerstone of democracy—and weakens national security by sidelining diverse perspectives. Addressing these misconceptions requires acknowledging the unique strengths of both civilian and military expertise while fostering collaboration between them to ensure balanced and effective leadership in defense policy.

The myth that the military is inherently superior to civilian leadership in matters of national security and defense policy is fundamentally flawed. While military personnel undoubtedly possess valuable skills and experiences, particularly in operational contexts, it is incorrect to assert that they hold a monopoly on expertise in all aspects of defense and security.

First, it is essential to recognize that the complexities of modern warfare and national security extend far beyond the battlefield. Issues such as cybersecurity, intelligence analysis, diplomatic relations, and economic policy play critical roles in shaping effective defense strategies. Civilians often bring specialized knowledge and skills in these areas that military leaders may not possess. For example, experts in international relations or economics can provide insights into how global dynamics affect national security, which is crucial for comprehensive strategic planning.

Moreover, the assumption that military experience automatically translates to superior judgment in all defense matters overlooks the fact that military leaders operate within a specific framework shaped by their training and experiences. While they excel in tactical decision-making under pressure, this does not necessarily equip them with the broader strategic vision required for long-term policy development. Civilians often engage in rigorous academic research and analysis, contributing theoretical frameworks that can enhance the understanding of complex geopolitical issues.

Additionally, the notion that civilians lack credibility or authority in defense matters can lead to detrimental consequences for democratic governance. Civilian oversight of the military is a foundational principle of democracy, ensuring that military power remains accountable to elected representatives and the public. When civilians are sidelined or dismissed as less capable, it undermines this vital balance and risks creating an environment where military perspectives dominate without sufficient checks and balances.

Furthermore, historical examples demonstrate that successful national security strategies often arise from collaboration between civilian and military leaders. The integration of diverse viewpoints fosters more nuanced decision-making processes that consider various factors influencing security outcomes. For instance, during the Cold War, civilian strategists like George Kennan played pivotal roles in shaping U.S. foreign policy without direct military experience. Their insights were instrumental in developing strategies that effectively addressed complex global challenges.

In conclusion, while military leaders bring essential operational expertise to the table, it is a misconception to view them as inherently superior to civilian leaders in all aspects of national security. Both civilian and military perspectives are crucial for effective governance and strategic decision-making. Emphasizing collaboration between these two groups not only enriches policy discussions but also strengthens democratic institutions by ensuring a balanced approach to national security challenges.

Another significant challenge is recruitment and retention within the civilian workforce. Government restrictions on pay scales and career advancement often make it difficult to attract top talent. Civilian leaders must also navigate generational differences and manage diverse teams with varying expectations. Unlike military environments that emphasize discipline and hierarchy, civilian workplaces demand flexibility, emotional intelligence, and cultural sensitivity. Leaders often struggle with motivating employees who may push personal agendas or resist teamwork, requiring nuanced approaches to foster collaboration.

Civilian leaders also face difficulties in balancing priorities. The interconnected nature of government missions creates overwhelming workloads, with many leaders taking on too many responsibilities due to their broad awareness of overarching goals. This inability to delegate effectively can lead to inefficiency and burnout

Additionally, fiscal constraints limit innovation and organizational change, forcing leaders to operate in "do more with less" environments while maintaining transparency and accountability under public scrutiny

Finally, civilian leaders must contend with strategic challenges in modern warfare and governance. As conflicts increasingly impact civilian life directly—through cyberattacks or infrastructure disruptions—leaders must engage deeply in areas traditionally managed by the military. Balancing nonpartisan governance while navigating partisan pressures further complicates their roles

Civilian leaders must adapt to these challenges by fostering innovation, improving leadership development programs, and strengthening civil-military relations while ensuring effective governance amidst societal and organizational complexities.

Probably, the combination of military and civilian leadership styles presents a fascinating interplay of strengths and weaknesses that can significantly impact organizational effectiveness. As societies navigate complex challenges, the integration of these two distinct approaches offers both promising benefits and notable drawbacks.

On the positive side, one of the primary advantages of combining military and civilian leadership styles is enhanced decision-making. Military leaders are trained to make swift, decisive choices, particularly in high-pressure situations where lives are at stake. This decisiveness can be invaluable when quick action is necessary. Conversely, civilian leaders often excel in fostering collaboration and inclusivity, drawing on diverse perspectives to inform their decisions. By merging these strengths, organizations can achieve a more balanced approach—leveraging the military's ability to act decisively while ensuring that civilian insights contribute to well-rounded strategic planning.

Another significant benefit is the flexibility that hybrid leaders can bring to an organization. They can adapt their leadership style based on the context, employing military-style decisiveness during crises while embracing civilian participative methods for long-term planning. This versatility allows leaders to respond effectively to a wide range of situations, from urgent operational needs to complex policy discussions.

Moreover, the combination of these styles can improve team dynamics. Military leadership instills discipline and a clear sense of mission, while civilian leadership promotes teamwork and collaboration. This blend can create a cohesive and motivated workforce that understands both the importance of accountability and the value of collective input.

However, there are also notable challenges associated with this combination. One major drawback is the potential for cultural clashes between military and civilian leadership approaches. The rigid structure of military command may conflict with the more fluid and decentralized nature of civilian management, leading to misunderstandings or inefficiencies in communication and decision-making.

Additionally, incorporating civilian deliberation into traditionally directive military environments can slow down decision-making processes during critical moments. In situations that require immediate action, this delay could have serious consequences. Leaders must carefully navigate this balance to ensure that they do not sacrifice efficiency for inclusivity when time is of the essence.

Another concern is the risk of diluting core strengths inherent in each leadership style. Overemphasizing civilian management techniques in military contexts might undermine discipline and quick response capabilities, while excessive militarization in civilian settings could stifle innovation and creativity.

Finally, there may be credibility concerns among subordinates if they perceive inconsistencies in a leader's application of military or civilian principles. This perception can affect morale and trust within teams, making it essential for leaders to communicate clearly and maintain a consistent approach.

In conclusion, while combining military and civilian leadership styles offers significant advantages—such as improved decision-making, flexibility, and enhanced team dynamics—it also presents challenges related to cultural clashes, decision-making speed, potential dilution of strengths, and credibility issues. Successful integration requires thoughtful navigation of these complexities to harness the best aspects of both styles while mitigating their respective drawbacks. By doing so, organizations can position themselves for greater effectiveness in addressing modern challenges.

Democratic leaders foster teamwork and shared responsibility, encouraging diverse perspectives and creative solutions. This leadership style strengthens workplace relationships and trust among team members. Democratic leaders empower teams to develop problem-solving and critical thinking abilities. However, the participative approach can delay decisions, especially in crises or high-stakes situations. Misapplied democratic leadership may lead to conflicts or feelings of undervaluation among team members.

Democratic leaders face a range of challenges that stem from the participatory nature of democracy, the expectations of diverse constituencies, and the complexities of modern governance. These challenges are compounded by the need to balance inclusivity with decisiveness while addressing pressing issues such as security, inequality, and polarization.

One significant challenge is the difficulty of managing public trust in national security. Democratic leaders often struggle to convince voters that they are capable of protecting the nation, especially when compared to their opponents who may adopt more interventionist or aggressive stances. For example, surveys have shown that voters perceive Democrats as less "tough" on security issues, even though they align more closely with voters' values on these matters. This "security gap" creates a paradox: while voters favor leaders who share their worldview, they also demand a level of assertiveness that Democratic leaders may hesitate to display

Another challenge arises from the slow decision-making processes inherent in democratic leadership. By prioritizing collaboration and inclusivity, democratic leaders often face delays in reaching consensus, which can hinder their ability to respond swiftly to crises. This is particularly problematic in situations requiring urgent action, such as addressing political violence or managing international conflicts

Polarization and identity politics further complicate governance for democratic leaders. As societies become increasingly divided along ideological and cultural lines, leaders must navigate these divisions while fostering unity. The rise of authoritarian tendencies and populist movements exacerbates this issue, challenging democratic norms and making it harder for leaders to maintain stability

Economic inequality is another major obstacle. Democratic leaders must address disparities in wealth and opportunity while ensuring policies remain equitable and sustainable. Failing to tackle inequality can erode public trust in democratic institutions and fuel discontent among marginalized groups

Finally, democratic leaders must contend with external threats such as terrorism, cyberattacks, and geopolitical instability. These challenges require balancing diplomatic efforts with military preparedness while maintaining transparency and accountability. For instance, modern national security strategies emphasize intelligence sharing and infrastructure defense, but implementing these measures effectively requires overcoming bureaucratic inefficiencies and partisan divides

Democratic leaders face unique challenges rooted in the principles of democracy itself—balancing inclusivity with decisiveness, navigating polarization, addressing inequality, and managing security concerns. Success depends on their ability to adapt to these demands while maintaining public trust and upholding democratic values.

So, which one is better: a military-civilian leader or a democratic-civilian leader? The question of whether a military-civilian leader or a democratic-civilian leader is better depends on the context and the specific challenges being addressed. Both types of leadership bring unique strengths and weaknesses, and their effectiveness often hinges on the environment in which they operate and the demands of the situation.

A military-civilian leader combines the decisiveness, discipline, and operational efficiency of military leadership with the broader perspective of civilian governance. This hybrid approach can be particularly effective in high-pressure situations requiring quick decision-making, such as crisis management or security-related operations. Military-civilian leaders excel in environments where strict hierarchy and clear chains of command are necessary to maintain order and achieve objectives. Their ability to handle high-stakes scenarios with resilience and focus is a significant advantage.

However, this leadership style can face limitations in civilian contexts. The rigid structure and directive communication typical of military leadership may clash with the more collaborative and flexible nature of civilian organizations. Additionally, the emphasis on discipline and uniformity might stifle creativity and innovation, which are often critical in civilian governance. Military-civilian leaders may also struggle to navigate complex political dynamics or foster inclusivity, which are essential for long-term stability in democratic systems.

A democratic-civilian leader emphasizes participative decision-making, inclusivity, and collaboration—qualities that align closely with the principles of democracy. This leadership style fosters innovation, empowers diverse teams, and builds trust among stakeholders. Democratic-civilian leaders are particularly effective in environments that require long-term strategic planning, complex negotiations, or adaptability to diverse perspectives.

The main strength of democratic-civilian leaders lies in their ability to unite people across ideological divides and create policies that reflect collective values. Their focus on inclusivity makes them well-suited for addressing societal challenges such as inequality, polarization, and identity politics. However, this approach can also lead to slower decision-making processes, which may be problematic during crises or urgent situations. Democratic-civilian leaders must balance deliberation with decisiveness to avoid inefficiencies.

So, which is Better?

Neither type is inherently "better" across all contexts; their effectiveness depends on the situation: "Military-Civilian Leaders are better suited for crisis management, security operations, or environments requiring rapid action and discipline; Democratic-Civilian Leaders excel in fostering collaboration, addressing societal issues, managing diversity, and ensuring long-term stability"

In many cases, a combination of both styles—a leader who integrates military decisiveness with democratic collaboration—may be optimal. Such a hybrid leader can adapt to different scenarios by leveraging the strengths of both approaches while mitigating their weaknesses. For instance, they could employ military-style decisiveness during emergencies while embracing democratic inclusivity for policy development.

Ultimately, the best leadership style is one that aligns with the specific needs of the organization or society at a given time (Contextual Leadership). Leaders who can balance decisiveness with collaboration while maintaining accountability to democratic principles are likely to succeed in navigating modern challenges effectively.

[Episode 3]
[Episode 1]

Bahasa

Challenges for the Civilian Leaders (3)

The news is like this. In a shocking turn of events, the Indonesian government has officially passed the Asset Confiscation Law for citizens, allowing authorities to seize motor vehicles from those who fail to pay taxes for two years. Meanwhile, the long-awaited Asset Forfeiture Law targeting corrupt officials remains in legislative limbo.
Lawmakers proudly announced their innovative approach to boosting state revenue: confiscating vehicles from citizens struggling to pay taxes. “Why bother chasing corruptors hiding behind piles of stolen money? It’s much easier to take cars from people who didn’t pay their taxes!” exclaimed one enthusiastic member of parliament.

Under this new law, old cars and dusty motorcycles are now prime targets for tax officers. “We’re not just confiscating vehicles; we’re also taking away their hopes of going to the market or work,” added another legislator with a wide grin. “This is a progressive step toward raising tax awareness among the public!”

Meanwhile, corrupt officials who have drained billions from the nation’s coffers continue to roam freely, enjoying the fruits of others’ labor. “We’ll deal with them later,” said a high-ranking official. “Right now, we need to focus on unregistered cars and motorcycles that haven’t paid taxes. They’re much easier to catch!”

On the ground, citizens are already feeling the impact. Many families now have no choice but to walk to work or rely on inadequate public transportation. “We may have lost our car, but at least we’re getting fit!” joked one optimistic housewife, although her face betrayed her frustration.

This regulation has a clear legal foundation in Law No. 22 of 2009 concerning Traffic and Road Transportation and Police Regulation No. 7 of 2021. It aims to ensure the legality of motor vehicles and enhance tax compliance. Before a seizure occurs, three warnings are issued to vehicle owners to renew their STNK, providing ample time for individuals to fulfill their obligations.

While this regulation has a legal basis and clear procedures, its implementation needs to consider social justice aspects, especially for economically disadvantaged groups. Additionally, the prioritization of legislation concerning the seizure of citizens' assets over that targeting corruptors also influences public perception of government policies. The regulation may be seen as unfair to low-income individuals who struggle to pay annual vehicle taxes. They risk losing an important asset without consideration of their economic circumstances.

The deletion of vehicle registration data after seizure makes it impossible for the owner to re-register the vehicle, potentially adding administrative burdens for those wishing to reclaim their vehicles.

Criticism arises due to the focus on seizing citizens' assets being contrasted with the slow progress in passing the Asset Forfeiture Law for corrupt officials. This raises perceptions that the government is stricter on minor violations than on major crimes like corruption.

While the regulation aims to improve tax compliance and manage vehicle data effectively, its negative impacts can be significant for individuals and society.

Confiscation means the owner loses access to a valuable asset, which can disrupt daily mobility and activities. Owners must bear extra costs to reclaim their confiscated vehicles, including fines and administrative fees to retrieve their vehicle registration documents (STNK and BPKB).

If the vehicle registration is expired, insurance claims become difficult or even impossible, leaving owners to cover repair costs themselves in case of damage. Vehicles with expired registration are considered illegal, potentially leading to further legal issues for the owner.

The confiscation of many vehicles may lead to a rise in unregistered or illegal vehicles on the road, which can pose safety and security risks.

The process of confiscating and deleting vehicle data requires resources from government agencies and law enforcement, potentially straining public administration systems.

This policy may create a negative perception among the public regarding tax obligations, especially if it is seen as overly harsh or unfair.

The negative impacts on police institutions due to the confiscation of vehicles for unpaid taxes can be significant, particularly concerning the potential for misconduct among officers.

There is a risk that some officers may exploit the vehicle confiscation process for personal gain. This could manifest as bribery or the unauthorized sale of confiscated vehicles, undermining public trust in law enforcement. If instances of corruption or abuse of power become known, it can lead to a general distrust of the police. Citizens may feel that law enforcement is more focused on revenue generation than on maintaining public safety and order.

The implementation of vehicle confiscation policies requires significant administrative and operational resources. If not managed properly, this could lead to inefficiencies and a diversion of police focus from core duties such as crime prevention and community engagement.

Confiscations that are perceived as unjust or mishandled can result in legal challenges against the police. This not only consumes resources but also damages the reputation of the institution. If officers are pressured to meet quotas for vehicle confiscations or fines, it may lead to job dissatisfaction and ethical dilemmas among law enforcement personnel.

While the intent behind vehicle confiscation policies may be to enforce tax compliance, the potential for corruption and other negative consequences can significantly affect police institutions and their relationship with the community.

Several developed countries, i.e. the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada and Germany, have implemented similar regulations regarding the seizure of vehicles for unpaid taxes or registration issues. However, the specific regulations and procedures can vary significantly between jurisdictions, reflecting local legal standards and enforcement practices.

The credibility of police institutions in developed countries that implement vehicle seizure laws for unpaid taxes is generally perceived as higher than in many developing nations. In contrast, Indonesia faces challenges regarding police credibility, with a significant portion of the population expressing distrust towards law enforcement. Approximately 43% of Indonesians do not trust the police, which can hinder effective law enforcement and compliance with regulations. Factors contributing to this distrust include allegations of corruption, human rights violations, and a lack of accountability within the police force.

Indonesia's decision to implement vehicle seizure for unpaid taxes amid economic hardship raises significant concerns about timing and fairness. While similar regulations exist in developed countries, the socio-economic context in Indonesia makes this policy potentially problematic.

The increase in VAT to 12% in 2025 has already burdened households, particularly low- and middle-income groups, as prices for basic goods like rice and cooking oil continue to rise. Small businesses and individuals are struggling with reduced purchasing power and higher production costs, making it difficult to meet financial obligations.

Vehicle seizure disproportionately affects lower-income citizens who rely on their vehicles for work and daily activities. Without mechanisms for tax relief or installment payments, this policy risks deepening social inequality.

Many families rely on their vehicles for daily commuting to work or running small businesses. The confiscation of a vehicle can lead to a direct loss of income, making it difficult for families to meet their financial obligations.

Families may face additional costs related to reclaiming confiscated vehicles, including fines and administrative fees. This financial strain can exacerbate existing economic challenges, particularly for lower-income households.

Without access to their vehicles, families may struggle with transportation for essential activities such as grocery shopping, medical appointments, and school runs. This can lead to increased time and costs associated with finding alternative transportation.

The inability to travel freely can result in social isolation, as families may find it challenging to participate in community activities or maintain social connections without reliable transportation.

The threat of vehicle confiscation can create significant stress and anxiety among families, particularly those already facing financial difficulties. Concerns about losing a primary means of transportation can impact mental health and overall well-being.

For many lower-income families, the loss of a vehicle can push them deeper into poverty, as they may struggle to find alternative means of earning a living without reliable transportation.

The policy may disproportionately affect lower-income families who may already be struggling with tax payments. In contrast, wealthier individuals or businesses might have more resources to navigate tax obligations without facing similar penalties.

The confiscation of vehicles due to unpaid taxes poses serious risks to family economies, potentially leading to increased financial strain, reduced mobility, and heightened stress levels. Policymakers should consider these impacts and implement measures that protect vulnerable populations from excessive burdens.

Given the current economic instability, implementing such a policy may exacerbate financial struggles for many families. Experts suggest that alternative measures, such as tax forgiveness programs or flexible payment plans, could be more equitable during times of economic difficulty. While ensuring tax compliance is undeniably important, the timing and implementation of this regulation must take into account Indonesia's current economic hardships to prevent exacerbating inequality and fueling public discontent. Although this law is inherited from the previous administration, it carries significant risks for President Prabowo; rather than generating the intended benefits of increased tax revenue, it could spark widespread dissatisfaction among the populace.

Now, let's continue with our topic!

In recent years, Indonesia has witnessed a concerning trend where media and surveyors play a significant role in shaping the perception of political popularity, often manufacturing an image of popularity for certain figures who may not genuinely enjoy widespread public support. This phenomenon is closely tied to the rise of digital manipulation and the strategic use of media to control narratives. Political elites and their campaign teams have increasingly relied on "buzzers"—paid social media influencers or digital operatives—to amplify specific narratives, promote favored candidates, and suppress dissenting voices. These actors create an illusion of popularity by flooding online spaces with coordinated content that portrays certain individuals as highly favored by the public, even when this sentiment is not reflective of reality.

This manufactured popularity is further reinforced by surveys that are sometimes perceived as biased or manipulated. Polling organizations, whether intentionally or under pressure, may present results that favor particular candidates, thereby influencing public perception. In Indonesia’s political landscape, where social media plays a dominant role in shaping opinions, such tactics can have a profound impact. By presenting a candidate as popular or leading in polls, these narratives create a "bandwagon effect," encouraging undecided voters to support the perceived frontrunner.

In Indonesia, buzzerp—paid social media operatives—have become a powerful force in shaping public opinion, particularly during elections. These individuals or groups are hired to amplify political messages, manipulate narratives, and influence perceptions through coordinated online campaigns. Using fake accounts and posing as ordinary users, buzzers flood social media platforms with posts, hashtags, likes, and comments that appear organic but are strategically crafted to sway public sentiment.

Buzzers often disseminate disinformation or misleading content to confuse the public, tarnish reputations, and silence criticism. Their tactics include smear campaigns against opponents, boosting favorable narratives for their clients, and drowning out dissenting voices. For example, in the 2024 presidential election, buzzers were instrumental in creating a perception of widespread support for certain candidates by amplifying their campaigns online.

This practice has deeply entrenched itself in Indonesia’s political culture, posing significant threats to democracy. By distorting the information landscape and suppressing organic discourse, buzzers undermine public trust in institutions and create an unfair playing field for political competition. Despite growing public awareness of their influence, effective institutional responses remain limited. Buzzers continue to operate openly as part of a lucrative industry, further normalizing their role in manipulating electoral outcomes.

Popularity in politics carries both advantages and disadvantages, shaping the dynamics of governance, public trust, and democratic processes. On the positive side, popularity reflects public approval and serves as a measure of legitimacy for leaders and policies. In democracies, popular leaders are often seen as representatives of the people’s will, which reinforces the principle of governance by consent. Popularity also enables leaders to rally support for policies, making it easier to implement initiatives that address societal needs. Additionally, it can inspire civic engagement as citizens feel more connected to leaders they admire or trust.

However, popularity has significant downsides. It can be superficial and manipulated, particularly through media or polling tactics that create the illusion of widespread support. For instance, as seen in Indonesia and elsewhere, media campaigns or biased surveys can manufacture popularity for certain figures, distorting public perception and undermining genuine democratic choice. This can lead to a "bandwagon effect," where people support candidates simply because they are perceived as popular rather than critically evaluating their qualifications or policies.

Moreover, excessive focus on popularity can shift attention away from substantive governance to image management. Leaders may prioritize short-term approval over long-term solutions, avoiding difficult but necessary decisions that could harm their public standing. Popularity-driven politics also risks polarizing societies, as leaders may cater exclusively to their base while ignoring minority voices.

While popularity is essential for democratic legitimacy and mobilizing support, its manipulation and overemphasis can erode trust in institutions and weaken the quality of governance. A balance between public approval and principled leadership is crucial for a healthy democracy.

While popularity is an important factor in democratic elections, it is not the sole criterion for choosing leaders like presidents or senators. Democracies require a more comprehensive evaluation of candidates to ensure effective governance and uphold democratic principles. Beyond popularity, several key qualities and considerations play a critical role in selecting leaders.

First, competence and expertise are essential. Leaders must possess the knowledge, skills, and experience necessary to address complex national and global challenges. Their ability to craft sound policies, manage crises, and lead effectively should weigh heavily in voters' decisions. A leader’s track record, including past achievements and demonstrated problem-solving abilities, provides valuable insight into their potential effectiveness.

Second, integrity and ethical behavior are vital. In a democracy, leaders are entrusted with significant power and responsibility. Their honesty, transparency, and commitment to the public good help build trust between the government and the people. Corruption or unethical behavior can erode democratic institutions and undermine public confidence.

Third, vision and leadership style matter significantly. A strong leader should articulate a clear vision for the future that resonates with citizens' aspirations while fostering inclusivity and collaboration. Democratic leadership emphasizes participation, encouraging diverse perspectives in decision-making processes. Leaders who adopt this approach can inspire collective action and innovation while ensuring that all voices are heard.

Finally, commitment to democratic values is non-negotiable. Leaders must respect the rule of law, uphold human rights, and work to strengthen democratic institutions. They should prioritize accountability and fairness while resisting authoritarian tendencies or divisive rhetoric that could polarize society.

In summary, while popularity often determines electoral success in democracies, it must be complemented by competence, integrity, vision, and a commitment to democratic principles. These qualities ensure that leaders not only win elections but also govern effectively in the best interests of their people.

If one or more of the critical criteria for selecting leaders in a democracy—such as competence, integrity, vision, or commitment to democratic values—are neglected, the consequences can be severe and far-reaching. When leaders are chosen based solely on popularity or superficial traits, the quality of governance often suffers, leading to inefficiencies, erosion of trust, and even democratic backsliding.

Neglecting competence results in leaders who may lack the knowledge or skills to address complex challenges effectively. This can lead to poor decision-making, mismanagement of resources, and an inability to respond to crises. For example, in emergencies where decisive and informed action is required, an unqualified leader may exacerbate problems rather than resolve them

If integrity is overlooked, corruption and unethical behavior can flourish. Leaders without moral accountability may prioritize personal gain or political survival over the public good. This undermines trust in government institutions and fosters cynicism among citizens, weakening the foundation of democracy.

A democratic leader refers to someone who adopts a participative leadership style that emphasizes collaboration, mutual respect, and shared decision-making. Democratic leadership is rooted in the principles of democracy—government by the people—and is characterized by inclusivity and collective problem-solving. A democratic leader can be a military man, provided they operates within democratic principles and structures. For example, military personnel have successfully transitioned to leadership roles in democratic systems, such as Dwight D. Eisenhower, a former U.S. general who became President through democratic elections. However, challenges arise when military leaders retain authoritarian tendencies or prioritize military interests over civilian governance.

A civilian leader is an individual who holds leadership roles within government or public service but is not part of the military. Civilian leaders include elected officials, political appointees, and senior civil servants responsible for policymaking, governance, and national security oversight. Their authority derives from constitutional and legal frameworks, often emphasizing accountability to the electorate or broader democratic principles. A civilian leader can be a retired military man if they have left active service and transitioned into civilian life. In many democracies, retired military leaders often take on civilian roles, including political positions or public service. For example, in the U.S., retired generals can hold civilian leadership roles like Secretary of Defense, but legal frameworks often require them to be retired for a certain period (e.g., seven years under the National Security Act of 1947) to ensure civilian control of the military.

In both cases, adherence to democratic norms and separation from active military duties are crucial to maintaining democratic governance and preventing the politicization of the armed forces. While civilian leadership and democratic leadership overlap in democracies, they are not inherently the same. Civilian leaders can operate under various leadership styles (e.g., authoritarian or laissez-faire), depending on their approach to governance. Democratic leaders specifically focus on participative methods and fostering collaboration among stakeholders.

In the next episode, we will discuss the challenges facing both civil and democratic leaders. Before we go, listen to an Ode by Horace,

Virtus repulsae nescia sordidae

[Virtue, unaware of disgraceful defeat]

Intaminatis fulget honoribus,

[shines with untarnished honor,]

Nec sumit aut ponit secures

[and does not take up or lay down the axe of power]

Arbitrio popularis aurae.

[at the whim of the shifting popular breeze.]

(Odes 3.2.17-20)

[Episode 4]

[Episode 2]

Bahasa