#Like this HAPPENED with Jokowi

[ikeameatballspoisonedme]

Bruhhh the Indonesia 5 year internet culture lag is so real like this is 2016 tier #VoteTheBlue

[trifargo]

metaphor(a) elections AU

this is some indo elections/pemilu nonsense. literally Do Not Read this dawg. not indonesian? scroll away and pretend this do not exist...

a write up on what actually happens in my AU, or if you want to call it... the series of drawings of me murdering capres 01...??? i don't originally want to write this, and prefer to leave the interpretations be to whoever enjoys indogov pemilu to a deeper extend (i even allow expansions)

but now that there are obscure ideas entering my head, and how probably this AU is flexible enough to the political climate... may as well write it i guess LOL...

i have a dumb brain juice, if you see present and past tense mixed wrongly, that's on that. i don't give a damn about this insanity i'm upon to write

as the name says, this AU is built upon on a metaphor - the phrase "pembunuhan karakter" (lit. character assassination - defamation). while most of the AU here is about ABW, it's pretty much applicable to every other politicians (or even citizens!) that went through defamation. it just happens to be A Lot about him due to the 8945945 goofy ahhh slanders he's getting (he even has his own meme). wdym guy is being considered both as a baptized christian and extremely religious arabic lackey LOL

the reason why i decided to write this is due to how i'm assigning some rhythm songs (read: literally only arcaea and phigros, as these are the ones i play the most ATM (i swear, i have played more rhythm games other than those)), which is... these are obscure stuffs!!! so i'm writing it.

each main act (read: what i have drawn) gets a rhythm song as the "main theme". as of now (hopefully the only thing i WANT and WILL write here), there are 4 songs for it. so... 4 acts, i guess.

ACT 1: the murder (attempts) [marenol - leaf] (TW: self harm, drug abuse, gore)

"if you can't kill them, kill their reputation, kill their name, kill their character." - prabowo on the slanders about "rigging the elections" he received

the kroco (troops) of the big boss (the president) got ABW after an attempt to fight the big boss with ganjar, and is now attempting to murder him (don't ask me how come he's kidnapped, make it up yourself!!!). but for whatever reason, he doesn't die. can't be killed, even.

now, while you probably already know why, i want to put a quick write up about the AU's weapons to "murder" and some other mechanics. there are 3 kinds of weapon:

red colored: has funky, metaphoric shape, mainly red colored, glows. this weapon, while could make you bleed and leaves physical injuries that are much, MUCH HARDER to recover and dissappear, will not kill you - the most fatal blow will only send you into a coma. this weapon is manifested by yourself. didn't thought what precisely manifests it though, due to my reluctance on dabbling deeper into pemilu '24 fandom

white colored: pretty much is like the red colored ones. the only difference is on the appearance and ownership. it shapes like regular, normal inanimate objects, all-white colored, and doesn't glow. these are lent by someone, AKA not made manifest by yourself. consider it like the "fake form" of the red colored weapons. originally, this is meant to symbolize how jokowi throws the blame that should have been directed to him to someone else, and how he used his "subordinates" to mess someone up. but everyone can do that now, i guess.

normal/real-life colored: exactly the same with the real-life counterpart: WILL KILL YOU PHYSICALLY. just your daily life, non-magical objects.

can you recover from the coma/get the injury marks away? how long does it last? the answer is, yes. you can recover from it. coma lasts until you're recovered. someone in coma/injuries can be recovered nearly completely by the help of their peers. how their peers will support you to recover from your coma, and how their peers can convince the people that they can wake up - clearing your name from the defamation. and you have to believe that you can wake up from the coma too, deep in your coma slumber - your peers' support could be useless if you don't believe you can make it.

as for the song - by context, marenol is an antidepressant that, while is powerful at not making you depressed anymore and all happy, has a side effect: making your dreams a death nightmare. you'll dream about dying in various ways.

well... that doesn't sound really paralel-able with this section of the AU, other than, uh, multiple deaths that don't actually kill you. but hey, song vibes very well, so what can i say. the fact that guy just letting the slanders be in the name of free speech prooobably can be attributed to the depression-free aspect of the medicine.

ACT 2: crossroad/persimpangan jalan [disorder - hyun, yuri]

"when you have a character made out of your identity - your own true reflection - no one can kill that character, as it is the true reflection of the real persona in you." half-assed translation of anies' response on the massive defamation done to him

OKAY. so i got A LOT of questions and misconceptions on one thing about this AU: "is ABW immortal? can you make him "dead" due to the supreme court outcome?" the answer is no!!! 😭

first, to notice, all the weapons here are red or white. no real-life colored ones. so he (or anyone) won't die by these. second, as of why these weapons doesn't seem to affect him at all:

depends on how often have you been through this. the more often you go through it, the more you can mitigate and get used to it ("alah bisa karena terbiasa")

the quote above: he believes strongly that the defamation won't tarnish his name. yes, you can be "immune" from the coma effects of these weapons, by believing in yourself, that the defamation done to you will not affect you, and push through. and... peer support too, i guess. so, say, if ABW one day gives up on believing so, then these weapon will send him into a coma. simple.

now that he's alive and nothing can really be done... the boss and his higher subordinates will have to do something else!

the moment the two stars overlapped, I disappeared

while the big boss and ABW actually used to work together (trivia: anies was part of jokowi's 2014 TKN), he probably don't want ABW anymore (re: his short 2-year ministry of education and culture tenure -> "mentri buangan"), and directs all the blames for his program issues to him instead.

after swallowing the pain towards the path I must not take

contradictive, as the path ABW took now is the path a lot of people think he should take - the path to oppose the government. but still, it's painful to go through, according to whatever the hell that guy's going up against to do his jakarta governor programs (see: E1 circuit, reclamation AGAINST LUHUT???)

when I lose myself and wander

now that the elections over... dunno, but it seems he still wants to attempt the presidential race again. he'd need something to keep his political momentum, though. he has some choices he can attempt, but what would it be?

i would be looking for you who would be out of existence, forever

according to some rumors (tempo mag?), prabowo offers a ministry position, or whatever it is to him. a crossroad is presented at ABW. which road will he take: accepting the offer and be part of the future government, probably a dream to be with the big boss again (that's probably impossible to reach now - or refuse it and stay as an opposition (or maybe gelandangan politik, who knows)?

ACT 3A: route if he accepts the offer [desive - misomyl]

"the light is in your hands. hasn't it always been like that?" - desive's tagline

but what if he doesn't believe so, or has given up?

this is insane (everything about this AU is, though), but i have an animatic of this route with this song in my mind. clock ticking as he waits for his next round of murder attempt and goes through it (0:00 - 0:35) , injury time/interval to offer the position (0:36 - 1:28), accepts it and goes through medication to heal it (1:29 - 1:52), and finally be reborn - but as an anomaly* to his fans, who sees him as the supposed "symbol" of change (1:53 - end). some even speculates, maybe as his successor, even (funny! but not impossible either! some say he's close to prabski and just a malu-malu kucing kind of guy!)

*also i don't actually know precisely the story of the character attributed to this song yet (ayu), but apparently, she's someone who is meant to eat anomalies in her world? what if he joins the rezime to eat the anomalies from the inside

ACT 3B: route if he refuses the offer [logos - polysha, miyo takashiro]

"whispers of sorrow leaked into the clear water and dissolved. having lost many clue, its arcane code... is still unresolved?" - logos lyric

for whoever looking for someone other than mf ABW in this AU, they're here!!!1!

he gets kicked out from the torture room because well, there's nothing left can be done. useless, for now. "let him be, no one would trust him with such godly amount of injuries." the big boss said. they landed somewhere outside the boss HQ, where he found his silly amin peers that tried to rescue him, imin and tom. he gets his injuries temporarily healed up (will still need to go to the hospital to recover from the blood loss).

but then, ABW asks something to these 2: he wants to rescue someone else that's stuck in the HQ - ganjar. enter the gama gang.

when they fought the big boss, they lost, got stabbed by some kind of long massive sword. they fell to a blood pool made from the blood of everyone else who were sent into a coma before. they fell to different places however, and for whatever reason, only interested in beating ABW's ass?

tip tap dripping the drops keep on drawing the ripples tic tac flowing the time only that one echoed in while emptiness

stubborn wish, but they do it anyway. so they reentered the room again to go to the big blood pool area to find ganjar. and surprise, they find him with mahfud and whoever-is-the-thomas-of-gama in the deeper areas of the pool. a flood, even. and some trashes and debris around. it's meant for 1) how the demak flood is blamed into him when he's not in his tenure anymore*, and 2) how the MK responsed to the amin/gama indictment's evidences as "we're not your trashbin (due to the evidence given being weak)".

*there could be more, but... i'm not sure. i don't feel like metaphoring more of his slanders into the AU, given how undertalked his slanders/scandals are (U-20, wadas) and ending up making some people feel that he's actually "running away" from being blamed, aka he does have faults in it. unlike ABW who is, ya rabbi, can you stop talking about him FOR ONE SECOND? so i digress. do whatever you will, though.

run away from the dazzling dawn walk to west while stumbling on the way, I met you all alone your face was depressed, and ...about to cry

mahfud didn't precisely know how to wake nor heal ganjar up, because well... he seems to be someone who has the least issues and conflicts with any of these people. maybe other than the ma'ruf VP issue in 2019, idk. thus, at this point, the only person that knows exactly how to save him is... well, fellow defamation victim, anies himself. so he gave some pep talk/affirmation words to wake him up from his coma. not sure about the methods bc again, didn't think deep enough into it.

and... yippee, he woke up! now they gotta escape because... whoopsie, the guards found them. "why are you here bro, GET OUT OF HERE NO ONE WANTS YOU IN DA YARD!!!!" so they ran, yet... bam. they got hit by them. they manage to get out though, at least. just, with injuries now...

aftermath

in this AU, gama gang's story ends the same in both routes. ganjar and mahfud later part ways, as they realize that this is all they can do the most. except ganjar is probably planning to invade the big boss' smaller HQs with his red bull gang (PTUN).

amin, on the other side, ends differently. in this route, ABW woke up and found himself in a hospital, bed rested, with tom next to him (he has mostly healed from the injuries, quite minor). he wondered where imin is.

and speak of the devil, imin came in to visit, but his injuries are 100% healed instead, doesn't seem to be someone suffering from being hit by a massive hammer. in their convo, they found out that when everyone was hit by the hammer and got kicked out, imin was brought to the big boss' place instead, and was offered a position, in which he accepts. so he's all healthy and on the govern's side now. they also decide this is where they part ways. as imin leaves, he told the two that they can let him know, if they want to join the government someday. he can help arrange it. ABW and tom just sat there with unreadable expression.

stupid ass long write up, hope you don't read this insanity at all. but that's all there is to the series of images. feel free to use this for whatever you want, consider i orphan this for real. claim it as yours, even... couldn't care less

[anggrosaurus]

regrets

the last time i wrote something here was when i was only 21, just a month short of 22. now im 31, 7 months away from being 32😅.

from now on, im gonna copy all the notes ive written in my phone here so that i wont lose them. i hope that one day i can share these notes with, idk, my future self? my offspring, if there's any? somebody else? never mind, its not too important. but i wish that someone will know the existence of this blog other than myself. idk if its even necessary. but, now let me begin.

so the world today is not the one i've been hoping to see when i was 21. prabowo won and jokowi has turned out to be an asshole. kinda regretted supporting him for the past 2 previous elections but okay. at least prabowo wasnt our president back then. work sucks but i choose not to care. people suck but its been always like that everytime. life sucks but good things happen. feelings change, happiness come and go. im stuck but ill go.

im still a kpop fan but now ive turne to seventeen. im not married yet because im still afraid but sometimes i want to. i dont even know what i want. i dont want kids but i always curious if i can raise a good one. might as well going to umrah again to ask for a different thing. Allah has granted my wish to continue my master this year and He gave me 5 LoAs already. i abandoned my dream uni because im lazy but maybe Allah knows best. i tried istikharah and i dreamed of meeting BP Lisa. my office mate told me that it meant i need to go to oz instead of other places. so okay😂 sometimes the regret of abandoning still hits me. tonight it hits me again. i need to buy a new tws. im getting distracted all the time. gotta improve myself before school starts.

also shouldve worn braces since eons ago. should shed my weight since many years ago. i procrastinate too much sometimes i regret not doing things.

university students are doing mass protests in the US. kids from the ivies and other prestigious unis. idk if unimelb children are doing the same. kinda regret not pursuing columbia even though ive been wanting it since my avid exo fanfics reader era. i remember wanting to go there because i liked kim jaeseop aka ukiss aj so much back then. idk where he is now. also the Office Antics fanfic that i read idk which exo member graduated from columbia in the story. but i felt so heavily influenced. things were kinda difficult at the beginning of this year. had a hard time making decisions whether i should just go with unimelb or if i should apply for cornell and columbia as well.

[boktavian300]

Expert perspective on how Democrats affect Prabowo according to Denny Ja

After the 2019 Presidential Election, Indonesian politics was again horrified by a variety of interesting events. One of the most interesting events is the dilemma of Democrats in deciding support for presidential candidates and vice presidential candidates in the 2019 Presidential Election. After going through various internal debates, the Democrats finally decided to support Jokowi-Ma'ruf Amin. But before deciding this support, the Democratic Party was reportedly having a fairly hot meeting with presidential candidate number 02, Prabowo Subianto. During the meeting, Denny JA who was the founder of the political survey institution, Denny JA Survey & Consulting, also attended and became an eyewitness. Denny JA introduced himself as a "second person" after Prabowo's family and claimed to have a lot of good relations with Prabowo's extended family for years. Denny JA also gave his perspective on how Democrats influenced Prabowo's attitude in the presidential election. According to Denny Ja, Prabowo initially wanted to be supported by the Democratic Party. However, Democrats have a fairly high bargaining position and intend to stem the current so that Prabowo is not too extreme in politics. "Prabowo is indiscriminate in seeking support. Finally he met with Democrats. Both parties consider each other," said Denny Ja. Denny Ja added that Democrats did not side with just one camp, be it Prabowo or Jokowi's camp. Democrats uphold the value of democracy and place national interests above everything. So Democrats must be careful in making decisions. "The most important thing is national interests, regardless of who winners of the 2019 Presidential Election," said Denny Ja. Denny Ja also admitted that the Democratic Party realized that support for Jokowi would strengthen their party's position going forward. Jokowi is seen as a peaceful figure, promoting unity values, and has a moderate nature. "Jokowi offers peace, unity, and hard work. That is what is sought by political parties. So finally the Democrats chose to support Jokowi. Surely with careful consideration," said Denny Ja. In a meeting with Prabowo, Democrats stated that they would still be at the forefront to fight for democracy and reject all forms of betrayal of democratic values. Denny Ja said that Prabowo also understood the Democratic position that wanted to strengthen democracy in Indonesia. "Prabowo realizes that Democrats are not only talking about politics but also about national interests. There is a big vision there," said Denny Ja. Denny Ja asserted that Democrats do have a fairly high bargaining position. However, this was done to stem the current so that Prabowo was not too extreme in politics. "We know that Prabowo was rather hard in speaking. Democrats want to help to refine Prabowo's political approach, so it is not too extreme. This is what happened at the meeting," explained Denny Ja. In receiving the support of the Democratic Party, Jokowi said that he would uphold the values of unity and would not distinguish anyone who supported it or not. Jokowi also mentioned that democracy must always be maintained and strengthened. "We should be grateful that there are still parties like Democrats who struggle to strengthen democratic values. I will uphold the value of unity, and be ready to work with all parties to maintain the integrity of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia," Jokowi said. Denny Ja concluded that Democrats did choose to support Jokowi-Ma'ruf Amin. But this was done after going through various careful considerations. A high bargaining position is done to stem the current so that Prabowo is not too extreme in politics. "We are grateful that the Democratic Party finally chose to support Jokowi-Ma'ruf Amin. Democrats chose to remain a bridge of unity and strengthen the values of democracy in Indonesia," concluded Denny Ja.

Check more: Expert Perspective: How Democrats influence Prabowo according to Denny JA

[velvialifestylesummit]

The digital trend of international currencies to be regulated and monitored by a monetary panel with the designated elites for the standardisation of digital currency should be enacted to subsume the eminent consulting members including Barack Obama, Elun Musk, Donald Trump, President Jokowi, Boris Johnson, Angela Merkel, Hilary Clinton, Sergei Lavrov, Medvedev, WenJiaBao, Wang Yi, Bill Gates, Jerome Powell, Scott Morrison and Tharman Sham, PM SAUDI ARABIA MBS and PM SINGAPORE LEE HSIENG LOONG. This is to tackle the unregulated cryptocurrency where the marketplace tends to be the hedging fund to absorb the hot monies unleashed from the troublous banking institutions with unprofessional investment expertise like the Silicone Valley Bank. As happened to the scandalous mismanagement of Sapura Energy Malaysia under insolvency, the unrestricted liabilities of the bipartisan regime including the pendulous Biden Administration seems to avert the periodic anarchy of America through fundraising imploration. The daily payment for shopping and other transactions to be scanned by the AI digital account holder device should be provided for the digital monetary issuance in 2023. As triggered by the economic movement and monetary fluctuations, the unsteadiness of stock indexes and unbearable inflation rate can be avoided by the standardisation of one digital currency in the world. This is the monetary system to be adopted by Third International to cope with the longstanding insuperable economic dilemmas including hyperinflation and impoverishment amid the culminating inflation dilemma in the UK.

[melbournenewsvine]

Speaking of Indonesia: The Kanjuruhan Football Disaster

Siswowidodo’s photography by Antara. Indonesian football experienced its darkest day on October 1, when more than 130 spectators – including 35 children – were killed after police fired tear gas into the crowd at the conclusion of a match between local rivals Arima Malang and Persibaya Surabaya at Kanjuruhan Stadium in Malang. Fans who fled tear gas, which police fired after some fans entered the stadium, were killed in smashing stairs and at exits that were in some cases closed or partially closed. Other football leagues around the world observed a minute of silence in the wake of the tragedy as a sign of respect for the victims, in one of the worst global football disasters in the game’s history. Within Indonesia, vigils were held across the country for the masses who died in Kanjuruhan. President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo has asked a fact-finding team to submit a report on the disaster within a month, and professional patrols in the country have been suspended. The police decision to use tear gas has been criticized almost universally. How can we explain the police’s decision to use tear gas at the completely run out of Kanjuruhan Stadium, and what are the investigations and possible accountability after the death of so many fans? What was the match day experience like for football fans in Indonesia, and what will be required to ensure that the events of Kanjuruhan do not happen again? In the wake of this national tragedy, Dr. Dave McRae discusses these issues with Usman Hamid, Executive Director of Amnesty International Indonesia, and Yogi Setia Permana, PhD candidate at KITLV in the Netherlands and author of a 2017 study on football fan groups and local politics in Malang. In 2022, the Talking Indonesia podcast was co-hosted by Dr. Gemma Birdie of Monash University, Dr. Dave McCray of the University of Melbourne’s Center for Indonesian Law, Islam and Society, Dr. Jackie Becker of Murdoch University, and Tito Ambiu. Check out the new Talking Indonesia podcast every two weeks. Catch up on previous episodes here, subscribe via Apple Podcasts or listen via your favorite streaming app. Source link Originally published at Melbourne News Vine

[peoplecallmenv]

Indonesia has take a part

War of Russia and Ukraine was a phenomenon for Indonesia, something that happens outside Indonesia, being viral, and rarely happening like a war is a phenomenon.

Seeing Jokowi visits Ukraine to meet the president Zelensky makes me and Indonesian people proud because Indonesia has take a part of the phenomenon.

But other than that, I hope the war and every war end soon.

[whitelipz]

PRO-D

“It takes courage to change people’s hearts” one of the quotes from Green Book movie which tells story of black people who has a courage to fight againts their habits. being differents does not always has negative connotation. people who has a courage to do something different are people who deserved the title of Pioneer. Dr. Don Shirley, an African-American who has a courage to perform a concert in the Southern United States where in the 18-19s century the Southern United restricted the rights of black people and the occurrence of racism.

Profesionally different (Pro-d) give limited meaning to the subject, it isn’t like Donald Trump or Hugo Chavez in carrying out their political practice but like Barack Obama who made new breakthrough in us politics. it also leave a long term impact whereas different-unprofessional leave a short term impact. An initial step that brings goodness to the next generation, that’s what i call Pro-D.

as an undergraduate student, differences also often occur. Executive Council of Student of Indonesia’s University (BEM UI) who have a courage to criticize Jokowi or a female student who have a courage to run as a candidate for leader, even though in reality the chance for women to win in voting is still low compared to men who run for leadership. Megawati's first step as the first female President in Indonesia made the chances of candidacy of a different gender higher. The nomination of a female leader is still considered as a taboo thing in the scope of campus, work, and government.

“how to change a tradition?” that’s the question i’ve been asked to myself and the part “it takes courage..” is the answer of the question. Courage is something that not everyone has, it’s undeniable some people want to make a significat differences for their live but in the practical world it’s easier said than done. the courage in execute something, socializing, and in politics are still hard to find in Indonesia. Courage is the right answer to erase a long-standing tradition in the hearts of Indonesian people, through courage something that is considered as a taboo thing will become a common thing.

Being the chief executive of one program of the Department of Marine Science and Technology, IPB University is also the first step for me to become a leader among women. There is no difference in how to lead good and right between men and women. The courage to take something that has never been done is a decision I will never regret. I have mastered various theories on how to lead well and how to be a good leader, but to implement the theory into a reality of life is hard than i think it’d be. How unite people to work together, discuss, and actively provide suggestions and criticisms is something that needs to be considered, but my first step in becoming the chief executive of an event is a courage in making decisions. Theory will not be enough in this dynamic life, implementing everything in the form of real things is a real deal that happen to me.

Being different with courage is the most basic thing to make changes, be responsible, and continue to consistently voice the differences that make a difference still considered as unusual is the things that matter most. A person's professionalism is judged by how he/she is able and consistently does what he/she is good at and can have a significant impact on the people around him. A person's consistency in something can provide a community assessment which consequently can be followed by the community. Making a change by being someone who is professionally different among thousands of people is the most patriotic thing even if it’s only a small thing.

Today, many people aren’t brave enough to do something different even it’s something in matter of facts is true. Limited education status, experience, and position are things that influence a person in making decisions. The inability of someone to express an opinion is sometimes not a lack of knowledge but the status they have. Being brave requires a lot of consideration, including the psychology of the subject. The question of who and how is something that often arises in the mind of someone who has limited status.

It is undeniable, a person's self-confidence can arise because it’s seen from what they have. How can Donald Trump brave to nominate himself for President even though his background in life is far from the political sphere. Trump's fame and fortune helped bring out the courage to come up with something unusual-, a presidential candidate with no political background. However, the differences that Trump shows are only limited to the passion for extremism within him, without any professionalism regarding the field he wants to enter.

The existence of norms in aspects of life makes us know the limitation of an action, as in the United States political norms, namely tolerance and restraint oneself. Person's decision to be different also needs to be limited by the laws and norms that surround him. Knowing all the limits that have been regulated by law and accompanied by the norms that apply in society makes everything we want to do is stick to Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution.

Starting from Don Shirley to Barack Obama who brought wide influence by utilizing courage, consistency, and in accordance with applicable regulations and the professionalism they brought, resulted in a new view that was followed by countries in the world. As time goes on, the expanse that we walk on will turn into a building that only benefits to 1-5 of people or Central Park that benefits to 8.4 million of New York City residents.

[southeastasianists]

Since the middle of last month, Southeast Asian countries have been experiencing an exponential rise in Covid-19 related infections and deaths. To flatten the coronavirus curve, governments have introduced a range of restrictions on travel including closing borders, banned or limited numbers in public and private gatherings, introduced social distancing, prevented people movement and introduced lockdowns, preventing resident population mobility and assembly.

Although this has the support of the general public, the worry is some governments in Southeast Asia are simultaneously taking political advantage of the situation. Measures are being imposed at politically sensitive times that impact the timing of elections and post-elections transitions giving authoritarian regimes the opportunity to extend their reign or make a comeback.

On Thursday, Thailand declared a state of emergency to address the health crisis. However, the ban on public gatherings is a convenient measure that stifles the opposition and their reform agenda for a country. Massive protests across university campuses which erupted after the new Future Forward Party was disbanded in January 2020 were the outcome of serious rumblings of discontentment among the youth. Now, the bans on large gatherings will effectively quash this momentum. Free expression by media outlets can be curtailed under this state of emergency should the government decide to censor criticism.

Similarly, in the Philippines, on March 24, President Rodrigo Duterte was granted emergency powers to combat Covid-19. This has become for concern given his propensity for authoritarianism. Congress has wisely extracted provisions from the draft bill that would allow for excessive use of such powers, which critics fear. However, Mr Duterte's track record on abusing human rights does not breed confidence.

In Cambodia, Covid-19 has given Prime Minister Hun Sen the opportunity to announce he is exploring using Article 22 of the constitution to put the country in a state of emergency. Meanwhile, ordinary Cambodians and opposition activists have been arrested for sharing their concerns about the virus over social media.

In Malaysia, the elected government of 2018, collapsed in January this year, resulting in the re-emergence of the corruption-plagued old guard anchored by the United Malays National Organisation (Umno) that had run the country for six decades. In the political tussle over whether the "back-door" government has sufficient support in parliament, the usurpers to date have been able to side-step this question by delaying the sitting of parliament and directing attention to containing the coronavirus. Presently, Malaysia's Movement Control Order, which was initially implemented until March 31, was extended to April 14. This affords the Umno-supported old guard crucial time to consolidate power as large political gatherings are forbidden for people-led pressures against this back-door government.

Singapore elections have to be held latest April 21, 2021. Following the release of the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee report on March 13, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong of the People's Action Party the next day said the city-state could either hold elections early or wait for things to stabilise. Since then, opposition parties have been making public statements that it would be irresponsible to hold an election during this period of pandemic. Opposition parties, in particular, are concerned that the ruling party might introduce measures to limit campaign activities and gatherings at rallies thereby impacting their political chances.

Myanmar officially reported its first two Covid-19 cases on March 23. While it is seen as too early to predict a re-timing of the elections scheduled for November this year, the country's immediate concerns centre on returning migrant workers across the border from Thailand and the movement of people internally. This offers the junta a pole position as the force to implement movement orders, offer up its doctors to support medical aid and demonstrate proactive action to cancel large scale military related activities. In this way, the junta can shore up its image and political position in the run up to the polls. This will make it hard for Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy to attain the 75% sweep of seats in parliament to make constitutional amendments and to do away with the military's 25% of seats in parliament.

In Indonesia, as the number of cases increases daily, critics claim that the government has not been transparent and has been slow in responding. Mishandling of the crisis and incantations of "prayer" as a preventive tool are set to impact the democratic credibility of Jokowi's administration, which narrowly won elections in 2019 against military-friendly forces.

In Vietnam, lockdowns of affected areas around Hanoi have been implemented. As Vietnam chairs Asean this year, the annual civil society gathering scheduled for October, the Asean People's Forum, is likely to be postponed or held in an abridged version.

Laos recorded its first cases in late March and has announced its looking to China for examples for its control measures. Perhaps bringing full circle into the spotlight the increasingly positive view in parts of Southeast Asia of the authoritarian approach of China to the coronavirus outbreak that started in Wuhan.

To ensure that states' uphold the protection of democracy, civil society, the media and the international community must closely monitor the machinations of authoritarian regimes and the sleight of hand to exploit Covid-19 containment measures for political advantage. If this happens, these authoritarian regimes will have a chance to entrench and stretch the duration of their regimes. This will be the democractic fallout of the coronavirus crisis.

[dzikigenta]

Thursday, April 09th, 2020; by many acting of flattened curve of covid19, scientists and governments in indonesia had different conceive. Since outbreak spreading of covid19 on first march governments still obstinately maintain non-striction on people of going out despite at least 04 patients had got positive test of covid19. Not only their decision of flattening its virus grim, but the had not yet prepared the dark situation may be would have happened latter.

On first january, harvard university already reported the possibility of indonesia got some cases of covid 19 but many of governments just relayed and argued that indonesia was the only one country in Asia whom secured from it. There are some reasons like Ma'ruf Amin ever said "indonesia secured due to our ulama' consist praying to the god", health minister declared with his witty "just relaxed, we had not received any report" then it was dissolved on march 03r. All did not have proper preparation to deal.

On half-last march, president Joko "Jokowi" Widodo confessed that he urged people no going out or lounging out through if they don't have any purpose "Physical Distancing" for flattening the virus, using mask surgery in crowded. But he insisted to not quarantining some areas, such as Jakarta, outgrowing body immunity to prevent the virus. Then in the last march Mr President urged to not go exodus (mudik in local term), due to it might spread virus through out their homeland. An instance taken from Ridwan Kamil's report which was an 72 year-old stroke patients had positive test due to his children visited from jakarta.

Preparation of indonesia governments remarked less scope with this occupation. They forwent to ban people exodus reasoned. Luhut Panjaitan as maritime affairs and investment minsitry declared "government will never ban people to get exodus..." and he added "... rather than we curb him to go their homeland they will do it any way",, he argued that our consideration is just swerving our economy to get collapse and through exodus it may be restable indonesia economics, due to Idul Fitri muslims will consume more feast and buy new cloth in that Idul Fitri. He still pleaded the scientist that indonesia temperature are humidity and heat will presumably weakening the virus.

On the contrary, In Vietnam responsive of virus disease has primary decision. Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Puch immediatly signed the Decision No. 173.QD-TTG, categorizing the virus on Class A that rapidly contagious and have high mortality. This declaration was settled on the sixth cases was reported. The preparations was already conducted at once in chine aknowledged Corona. Communist Party deal with containing it at somehow will occupy, the response extend widely travelling nation, resorted budget to funding people during physical restriction around 111.55 million dollar, includes cost of workers and social subsidy.

[socratoteles]

Older than Cobain

It is safe to say that I am older than Cobain now. Looking back, as I exited the famed 27 Club, I can empathize with his pain and angst, the existential dread that come from the simple fact of existing in this unhappy world and sudden realization that one day I will perish.

There are no obligatory essays over the past two years because life had just breezed over at that period. Having your energy drained from just doing your job on a daily basis would get you that, no matter how close that job to your dreamed, idealized ones you have been obsessing over since those teenage years.

In a sense, it is not necessarily bad. I am kind of old enough to recognize that life is not all about fiery sparks and carpe diem and adrenaline-ridden moods every day. Most of our lives will be lived in a daily repetitive routine and it is not a sin to get comfortable with. At the end of the day, it is a tremendous blessing to have a roof over your head, a bed to sleep in and a job to pay for the bills.

But that siren call was proved to be dangerous. The death of the beloved B.J Habibie – Indonesia’s third president – had triggered in me a thought that should have always been lingering ever since I was out from my mother’s womb: that I am a mere mortal who bows to the laws of thermodynamics and one day death, sooner or later, will be the end of me.

It was precisely because life has been good in recent years it exacerbated that mortifying thought. What am I doing here? What have I done? How close am I to the goals I had aspired?

I remembered going to bed feeling fearful of not being able to wake up, such contrast from those early years when my mom used to say “If you can’t wait for tomorrow, go to bed quickly”.

A mess of words printed over papers or posted in the internet will be my legacy and proof of my existence until time immemorial but eventually I will be just a name inscribed in a piece of wood or stone while Earth will continue to orbit the Sun long after I died.

I wondered at that time whether it was worth it, all this hustle under a capitalist system. Amid warming planet, unending conflicts and other horrifying tragedies occurring on a daily basis on this pale blue dot, we are pretty much fucked anyway.

I remembered feeling utterly hopeless because if there is afterlife, I will go to hell for simply being not a faithful practitioner of my religion, if there isn’t any, life is already hell anyway. Such is the pain of existence; I did not ask to be here yet here I am. I would like to avoid death but I will die.

It was as if I am living under this great scam because other people seemed to be just fine and moving forward with their lives peacefully, while I sweated over to manage my mental health and utterly terrified for the future.

But the miracle in this internet age is to find out that you`re not alone in facing whatever problems that come to your attention. This excellent essay in Aeon brilliantly showcased similar feelings that I’ve recently experienced, which the author described as existential shock.

In his essay, James Baillie wrote a spot-on analysis that on the subject of death; most people thought of it as a fact that will happen to someone else, not them, which to me explained why only after 27 years the thought of dying, that precise moment when your soul leaves your body, brought shudders throughout my body.

The solution, or parts of it, was to know that all living beings are equal in a sense that they will die, that nothing will be spared eventually. At least that’s what I found out. Also, there was no use to obsess over and being insecure about the future because it will come anyway.

In addition, the oracles of Delphi got their mantra right. There is no harm to know more about myself.

Following that tough ordeal, I learned that the freest humans are those who live without regret since death will come for us eventually.

There are still things to be thankful for, that out of a gazillion alternate universes that exist out there I live within this specific version where I can watch Justin Vernon sang Skinny Love on stage and still be able to give and receive love from friends, families, and lovers are among the things to be thankful for.

That’s the side effect from my first major existential crisis during my 27th: it had me feeling grateful. Perhaps it showed that I can still feel things, after all. And it forced me to appreciate every passing moment because of its fleeting passage and it will unlikely be repeated.

All my life so far could be split into two different sides of pendulum. The first swing had me as wisdom-gathering, retreating hermit from all worldly affairs because sometimes it was overwhelming and hurts just to have feelings in this chaotic universe.

The second swing would catapult me into this outgoing, adventurous and impulsive guy who cared for nothing but the present because that is the true gift of life.

I recently spent too much time on the first swing. It took me around five years – essentially, the first term of Jokowi administration – to move on from bad breakup.

Perhaps it’s high time to go out and enjoy the world again so that the heart that beats will not waste away.

[myroomisblue]

Change Has Come: The Populists Narrative in the Philippines

Abstract:

This article tackles the charisma of populism, its effects to the voters’ behavior, the type leaders it produces and how it affects with the democracy of the state. Focusing to analyze the slogans, campaign statements of the candidates, narratives they used through the lens of discursive institutionalism. Populism endangers democracy for the threat of how Philippines are bound to support leaders that promises to be better from his predecessors.

Introduction:

Low satisfactory level of trust and satisfaction with democracy, is the common breeding ground of populism. Populism is a political ideology, a thin-centered ideology, which focuses on the narrative that the society is divided into homogenous and antagonistic, pure people versus the corrupt elite. Populism depicts the people as “good” while the elites as “evil”. This feeds with the notion that politics should be about the interest of the people. (Akkerman, 2013) In a democratic state, populism outlines it to consider the public as its center. Corruption by the elites restrains and limits the sovereignty of the poor. The public masses are the core of the society.

This political ideology can be considered as neither an ally nor an enemy, dependent on a state’s status of democracy.  An ally can be an instrument to strengthen the democratic force by defending the interests of the popular sovereignty, by properly representing their sentiments on a political arena. Thus, hearing the voice of the populace while ousting an oppressive force. An enemy for its effects cannot solely be distinguished as destructive or beneficial, just like any other political ideologies (liberalism, nationalism, or socialism).

There is a common breeding ground for populism to cultivate. A state having a democratic crisis, such as blatant abuse of power by the officials and upper class, thus leading to a worsened situation of inequalities. Public could only hold as much; these populists enter the frame, branding to restore the democratic process. An important factor that stimulate populism is the collective emotion of the poor that the current political system and administration is passive in responding with their demands.  However, these strong emotions triggered by the populists can either lead to democratization or de-democratization of the state (Stavrakakis, 2017).  

This paper will tackle about the populism in the Philippines. The types of leaders it produces and its effect to the electoral processes and voters’ behavior of the state. Comparison between Joko Widodo of Indonesia and Thaksin Shinawatra of Thailand, the other populists Southeast Asian democratic countries, will be done as well. This analysis uses the lens of discursive institutionalism in unwrapping the charisma of populism. The “new” institutionalism that gives importance to concepts, narratives, culture, and context, as a legitimatized lens in producing policies and principles, that directs course of actions between private individuals and public servants.

Discussions and Key Findings

Indonesia: Joko Widodo

In Indonesia, connection between oligarchy and populism is visible. For populism aids in sustaining the ranks and power of the formers in a democratic strategy. The competition between the elites are tight, thus the aid of those charismatic populists is needed. Suharto’s New Order rule which lasted from 1966 to 1998, its authoritarian regime cultivated the rise of populism. In 2014, Joko “Jokowi” Widodo offered a change in Indonesia’s politics; wherein politicians’ authority is now based on the demand of the common people.  There is another candidate, Prabowo Subianto, these two both represent different futures of Indonesia. One campaigns for corporate institutions to be managed by the state and adheres with nationalistic ideas while the other is more unto market ideas and interests of the middle class. Jokowi won because Subianto embodies the kind of politician Indonesia is trying to break free from.  

Jokowi centered his presidential campaign on fighting against corruption.  Thus, promises to eradicate self-interests that could hinder making of policies, which are beneficial to the common people. Jokowi did not have a powerful and established political party based on his back. His political machinery was based on his ability and charisma to entice the public about his reforms and promises of an effective governance. Improvement of public health institutions and policies alongside education are some of his platforms, all of these while promising to combat and topple down corruption.

Indeed, this was not a piece of cake for Jokowi, he faced institutional and structural hindrances during his term. Extensive cut in fuel subsidies in the state’s 2015 budget marked the initial success of Jokowi. This was used to increase the funding addressing social ills such as issuance of public health cards to poor Indonesians to gain access to health care. He started on allocating budgets to infrastructure, public works, shelters, transportation, and to the agricultural sector.

 Later in his career, Jokowi was connected into political networks which includes the business sector, through this he acquired financial support during elections and gained favorable coverage from the media. He maintained his power through allies, technocratic appointments were replaced by powerful figures in politics, business and military, belonging from the old political class. These allies even include former generals who are involved in controversies, such as Ryamizard Ryacudu and Wiranto (Hadiz, 2017).

Referred as “A New Hope” by the Time’s Magazine, the Southeast Asia’s Obama seems to have lost the hope of the people in regenerating an effective government. Jokowi, like Rodrigo Duterte, has no experienced in national politics before he ran for presidency. His first years in the term gained mixed emotions for his economic and social reforms are allegedly toppling down Indonesia’s democratic institutions that were hardly established during Suharto’s regime. The new wave of politics promised by Jokowi during his campaign period was now replaced with inner cabinet members that were composed of traditional politicians and military officers. Indonesia’s police were also accused of being partisan rather than preserving the peace and order of the state.

Jokowi and Duterte offered something new during their campaigns. Both utilized the narrative of being different and unique. They combat against those in power through the sympathy of the people. Using their words, statements, and simplicity, to garner trust and promise effective governance which was centered in the demands of the populace. Both campaign strategy, political machine and branding worked for both won the elections. In the case of international pressure, Jokowi refused to bow down from international forces by executing foreigners involved in illegal drugs through firing squad. Things turned in the opposite side lately, reports about restriction of freedom of expression from the LGBT+ community and other religious denominations, and controversies about the neutrality of the police are now arising. All these taints the hope that is Jokowi’s democracy.

Thailand: Thaksin Shinawatra

In 2001 elections, Thaksin’s initial platform and campaign was to focus on aiding small entrepreneurs. His media exposure was a dramatization of his own life, his rags to riches story, with a perfect amount of mixture in legends concerning Thai-Chinese migrants. Thaksin is a modernist; thus, he always appears wearing suit, and uses English words and Bill Gate’s quotes to impress and reiterate his point.  

Thaksin’s political slogan portrayed a reformer and a modernist, “Think new, act new for every Thai”. With this alone, a promise of a transition to an effective government is evidently and strategically worded. During his campaign, he did not tackle any concrete plans to resolve social ills, instead he released a short general statement that encompasses a greater goal, ‘‘To bring happiness to the majority of the country.’’. Unlike Jokowi who laid various plans in addressing the social inequality of his country, Thaksin focused on forwarding Thailand to be competitive with other nations.

Controversies arose resulting to press attack on public media platforms. This was due to his issues against mismanagement of violence, corruption, government favors for his personal business, privatization of state-owned corporations and his administration’s fight against avian influenza. These all happened during his first term, thus a politician wanting to be elected will find ways to make his name relevant again. Thaksin went on a tour across the country. He targeted provincial officials and leaders for support. He listened to the sentiments of people about problems in the locality and demands for funding. He quickly approved projects and expanded the funds that were requested by the people. He launched mobile cabinet meetings to conduct discourse with the locals and their officials. Through these political strategy and utilization of political machines he successfully paved his way to a second term.

During 2005 and 2006 general elections Thaksin Shinawatra’s popularity soar high due to public’s acclaim and endorsements. He gained a high status of personal popularity and for the record no other Thai politician was able to achieve this massive fame. Thaksin’s was strongly popular and supported by rural migrants in the capital and Thailand’s rural north and central regions. Populism started in the state during Thaksin’s term, thus signifying the record-breaking acceptance of the common people of this political leader.

To further his populist ideology, Thaksin together with officials and ministers spent a week in one of the state’s poorest district. Meeting about systems to eradicate poverty in the area that can also be imitated by other districts as well. These actions returned the trust of the people in Thaksin’s administration. He dramatically executed the notion that the government is for the people and by the people by bringing to them personally the officials that could legislate and make policies that could better their lives. Resulting to a massive popularity and high approval rating from the public. His public execution of poverty-eradicating experiments was portrayed by the media as a reality show. He managed to dodged the anger of the people by properly doing his work.

In this time, Thaksin changed physically. He no longer wears suits, and his speeches are not mixed with English words anymore. He appealed to the masses as humble and simple as he can be. He used his own dialect with a simple humor, and now mentions his personal and intimate life more. He changed his words into a more relatable structure, and according to his supporters, the prime minister’s message can be always summarized as: “I give to all of you”. Thaksin appeals to the emotions of the populace by transforming himself to a more approachable persona. One that is willing to listen to their demands and sentiments (Phongpaichit, 2008).

Philippines: Ramon Magsaysay, Joseph Ejercito Estrada, Manuel Villar, Rodrigo Roa Duterte

Ramon Magsaysay is the 3rd president of the Republic of the Philippines. It is safe to say that Magsaysay created an impact to the hearts of the nation. He is the first president who opened the doors of the Malacañang Palace to all Filipinos. Thus, his first executive order is the removal of the word “Palace” and refer to it as Malacañang. Signifying his sincerity in catering all walks of life inside his own residence.

“Magsaysay is my guy” a very famous slogan that was used during his campaign. Magsaysay is the type of president who was not very fond of staying in his office. Magsaysay is known to have travelled across the country to hear the sentiments of the people, personally. He disguises himself during fieldworks. This was to avoid any attention in order for him to inspect discreetly and have a surprise visit to check if there are any anomalies such as corruption and etc. This strategy is so effective and earned him the title as the “Pangulo ng Masang Pilipino.”    

Magsaysay lives up to his name; as “Magsaysay” in Tagalog literally means to tell a story. He personally listens to the stories of the ordinary. Therefore, to make this possible he uses a C47, which he named as Mt. Pinatubo. This became his very own medium of transportation; for flying in air is more accessible and convenient for a president who travels in Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao from time to time. C47 is a military cargo plane which was transformed into a presidential plane. Magsaysay changed the definition of being a public servant into a person who loves the people, and the nation. Some also call him as the “Pinakadakilang Presidente ng Pilipinas”.

This political branding can also be seen in the tactics of Rodrigo Duterte. In his Exhibit A, Davao City, there are also rumors in which he patrols the city at midnight. They say that he was riding his motorcycle to ensure that local government policies are implemented. There are also stories that claims, Duterte rides and even drives public utility vehicle, such as taxis, to hear the sentiments and concerns of the ordinary people. Like Magsaysay, who was treated as a Father Image during his time, Duterte is often referred as Tatay Digong.

Action star turned politician; Joseph Ejercito “Erap” Estrada became the 13th president of the Republic of the. The term “Erap” was coined, as a reverse of the Tagalog word, pare, which means buddy. He used his fame as an actor (a leading man and an action star) wisely. Known as the champion of the masses, and often as savior in his films, Estrada used this image and transcended it to the real world. Jeep ni Erap was one of his political branding during his campaigns. He uses the national vehicle of the country to promote his name. Jeepneys are common in the Philippines, it is often used by ordinary people as a mode of transportation. Thus, in every way, Erap Estrada makes sure that all affiliated to him, are the ones that screams his attitude of being pro poor.

His presidency has a lot of controversy. Although it was reckoned to achieve the biggest margin of victory, it was also the shortest term recorded. Erap Estrada served the term for only 935 days, that is less than three years in total. He was also the first impeached president of the Philippines, and the grounds of his impeachment include, (1) Bribery, (2) Graft and Corruption, (3) Betrayal of Public Trust and,  (4) Culpable Violation of the Constitution (ABS-CBN, 2016). The second EDSA People Power Revolution took place in order to call for his impeachment. Situation turned upside down, the once loved by the masses, was now being protested to step down from power.

In the 2010 presidential elections, Erap Estrada decided to run again. Upon declaring his candidacy in Tondo, Manila, which is deemed symbolic for this is his hometown, the place where the young Erap grew. In his speech, he emphasized the relevance of the ordinary Filipinos and the abuse and cruelty of the elites. “Saksi kayo. Saksi kayong lahat, na minsan ako’y lumubog din. Binaha ako ng mga kasinungalingan at maling paratang ng mga elitistang gutom; hindi sa sikmura kundi gutom sa kapangyarihan at kayamanan.” He fueled his political campaign with an image of a hero for the masses. He used an ideological square that frames the US (Estrada and the ordinary masses) vs. THEM (elites) narrative. He feeds the people with a statement that tackles the goodness of US and the negative traits of THEM. Erap Estrada uses statements which implies a future positive life with him as a president, “Gagawin ko po ang lahat para makatulong sa masang Pilipino na patuloy na naghihirap sa ilalim ng rehimeng ito. Ito ba ang pamahalaang ipinagmamalaki natin o ipagmamalaki natin sa ating mga anak, at apo?” He uses discursive structures in his speeches that emphasizes his being people-centered narrative.

In this speech of Erap Estrada, he made himself relatable; focused on his great deeds as a past president. He discussed his personal, family, and married life with the people. This gives an illusion that he belongs to the same class as them. He used the words, “ang inyong lingkod para sa mahihirap”, to describe and portray himself. Thus, narrating his past experiences in a teleserye manner; representing himself as a poor protagonist that speaks about injustices against the ruling elite class, “Ito pong laban na ito ang magiging huling laban sa pelikula ng aking buhay… ibalik ang dangal ng mga api. Ibalik ang pag-asa sa mga mahihirap, ang mga tinig ng masang Pilipino.”. He uses words to glorify the support given by the public to him while aiming for humility, “si Erap po ay kailanma’y di makakabayad ng utang na loob sa nga mahihirap”. However, Erap Estrada’s populist approach did not work for the second time around.

“Nakaligo ka na ba sa dagat ng basura?” Another 2010 presidential candidate, Manuel “Manny” Villar, used the narrative of being pro poor. Villar and Estrada are both born and raised in Tondo. The rags to riches story of Manny Villar became the center of his political campaigns and slogan. However, this failed him to acquire the presidency. Villar’s narrative is somewhat confusing and did not appeal to his target class. During the campaign period, he emphasized the struggles of being poor, while belonging to the upper-class elites. His campaign jingle, Naging Mahirap, summarized his platform. Villar promised to provide the poor their basic needs such as education, work, and shelter. He highlighted that he too once belonged to the lower class, yet he was able to succeed and work his way towards the top. Villar, unlike Estrada, did not show his detestation towards the elite. Nevertheless, he combined the narrative of having nothing and achieving everything, with the emphasis of hard work. He appeals to the poor as someone who can help them attain a better life, as to how his jingle ends, “Si Manny Villar ang magtatapos ng ating kahirapan.” This sounded insincere to the voters for how can he claim to be the savior of the masses if he himself belonged to the upper-class of elites who are being portrayed as the antagonist of their lives? Both Erap and Villar, lost to a reformist whose mother recently passed away and at the same time is the face of Philippine democracy.

Years after the re-establishment of democracy and battle cries of the poor against the injustice, a strongman from Mindanao, won the presidential elections in 2016; making him the 16th president of the Republic of the Philippines. His win represented the detest of the majority towards the liberal-democratic regime of the country (Teehankee, 2016). Duterte’s campaign is unusual. He went on tour around the country, campaigning about Federalism. He was not even one of the presidential candidates at that time, yet people are already urging him and clamoring for him to run. He continued this setup and eventually became the substitute candidate of his political party, Partido Demokratiko Pilipino – Lakas ng Bayan.

Duterte utilize a different platform in campaigning for his presidency. Aside from the traditional visits and handshakes, Duterte’s team managed to put in their favor the influence of social media. Posts about him being a good mayor of Davao City emerged from every social media platform. He did not used as much as traditional media such as televisions, for he always insisted that he has no money to pay for these advertisements. The negative emotions of the people towards the reformist administration of Benigno Aquino III, resulted to a substantial number of volunteers that willingly campaigned for Duterte.

Duterte was portrayed as relatable as possible during these times. He often wears polo shirts, even had a stolen photograph of him wearing a shirt that has holes in it. He uses slippers and ordinary sandals. This came off as a representation of his simplicity and humility. A great number of sixteen million people voted for Duterte. He won garnering the majority of the votes. Tapang at Malasakit, these words can be seen at different tarpaulins, posters, and boards about Duterte. This became his campaign slogan, and after filing for a certificate of candidacy, the call for federalism immediately transformed in a presidential campaign.

In photographs, Duterte and his allies are always seen with the gesture of fist bump. This became his trademark, where a lot of people uses this too, when taking photos, and posting it on social media. Boosting the support and campaign for Duterte. This fist bump trademark encompasses his image of being a strong man. During his speeches, he promises to eradicate illegal drugs in the country for the first three months, which of course is proven impossible to this day. Unlike other candidates, he was not afraid to speak casually to the people. He did not disguise himself as someone who is prim and proper, instead he voices out his opinions openly, while throwing in dad jokes and some cussing. He shows that he is relatable and approachable. Backed with the sentiments and statements shared and posted by the people of Davao. Like Estrada who mentions Tondo a lot, Duterte often mentions the city of Davao in his campaign. He puts it in a way wherein he can transform and change the Philippines just as how he turned Davao into one of the safest cities in the world.

Duterte is not afraid to show his true self to the people. There are photographs of him, depicting that he is tired, he cries, and he makes mistakes. This tactic swoons the public. The sixteen million voters empathized with him. The political context of the Philippines at that time depicts that the people were tired of witnessing the rise and the power ‘Imperial Manila’ holds. Thus, a city mayor from Mindanao, who offered his services having a concrete example, garnered the trust of the people to lead them for the next six years. Ramon Magsaysay’s tour around the country was made similarly by Duterte during campaign period. He too appeals to the masses by hearing out their sentiments personally and refuses to engage with any unnecessary and grandeur setup. He was often seen dining in carinderia and uses a mosquito net in his home. In the growing fear of criminality, Duterte promised to keep every Filipino safe.

Does populism produce good leaders?

Jokowi, Thaksin, Magsaysay, Erap, and Duterte, all have this one thing in common. These men are all charismatic, and all aimed to be relatable to the public. Populists target to call for a direct democracy, in which the highest political leaders of the land will personally engage with the public to hear their sentiments, problems, and demands (Akkerman, 2013). This becomes effective for they fuel their political campaigns with the narrative of the poor being excluded and exploited by the evil elites. Thus, they are not heard by the politicians currently seated in the position. A state with this status is likely to elect a populist leader. Although Duterte did not particularly focused with the poor versus rich narrative, but instead he promised safety and order towards the people. He reiterated that the lives of the law-abiding citizens are needed to be protected and safeguarded.

These leaders juxtapose the relationship between the people’s sovereignty and the hate against political corrupt elites. Thus, resulting to a narrative of people-centrism and anti-elitism, that politics must emerged from the general will of the people (Geurkink, 2019). Populists always say that they represent the cries of the real people, those who are being neglected by the government and the society. This political ideology respects key factors in representative democracy such as electoral processes, for through elections, they legitimized their power to aid and side with the poor (Mueller, 2019). They are considered populists for the record-breaking and unsurmountable amount of support and positive popularity they acquired due to their charisma and wits that perfectly captured the emotions of the people. How they present their narratives to convince people that they are advocating and campaigning for the public’s interest.  

Narrative of being pro-people whilst castigating the elites, gained these populists a political power. It became a cycle of continuous cry for help. The desperate move of the people to believe the words of a politician, to entrust in his hands the power to govern and make decisions that will hopefully better the lives of the oppressed class. Filipinos are on a constant loop of finding and searching for a leader who is good for what he is supposed to do. Maybe because of the mediocre level of ability the past officials have, the Filipinos will take the bait and vote for whoever promises them a good life. People got tired of polite and respectful narratives from those traditional politicians, thus the campaign of a man who is entirely not associated with the Imperial Manila held high hopes.

All populists mentioned in this paper was able to achieve their desired position, with Manuel Villar as an exemption. But throughout the course of their careers, it is safe to say that everyone had their own downfall. Issues about corruption, propagation of self-interest tainted their administration. They failed to keep up with their promises. These populists had a time in their term when they effectively exercised governance and eradication of inequality, however, the façade that they show can only last for an amount of time. Populism produced leaders who are good in presenting that they are good, while not necessarily doing effective actions.

How Populism affects voters’ behaviors and the electoral process of the country?

The tendency to vote for a populist is higher when the trust of the public in the current administration and government is low. The public sees populism as a protest against the existing unfair political representation. Political dynasty and weak party system were replaced by populist mobilization in this era of new presidential bandwagon. Patronage has now shifted into populism.  Political trust is the expectations of the public, the way they feel about how the current government fulfills their obligations to the people. Next is the external political efficacy, how the general people observe the activeness of the state to respond with their individual demands and opinions. Lastly are the populist attitudes. These are the three political attitudes set to categorize the factors on why an individual choose and vote for populists (Geurkink, 2019).

The 1998 presidential elections turned to have the biggest margin of victory in the history of Philippine presidential elections and the sixteen million votes for Duterte. These paved the way of Erap Estrada and Tatay Digong to gain the highest political position in the land. The populist narrative entices the public, as shown to high voters’ turnout during the victory of these candidates. Depiction of the goodness of the masses and the corruption of the elite, serves as the answer to the battle cry of the oppressed. The charismatic ability of the populists to create strategies together with their political machineries gave an edge to attract the public by presenting concrete solutions to their demands, in which the ruling elites do not care about.  

Duterte enticed the voters within Manila due to his calls of a strong and strict implementation of law and order. Even though he adheres to populism, Dutertismo can also be classified as a protest of the elites, and upper middle class. Unlike Erap, who capitalizes from the sentiments of the poor. The presidency of Duterte is elite-driven, many volunteered to support him during his campaign; monetary donations and support flooded this movement.  Duterte gained the attention of the public because of his maverick attitude, he shows that he is insensitive to the opinion of the masses. He speaks his mind and continued to speak relentlessly amidst criticisms, and negative image portrayed by the international and local media.

Duterte did not solely focused on the poor versus rich narrative, instead he attacked the reformists way of governing and administrating. He managed to switch the good and evil narrative by portraying the law-abiding citizens of the country as the former, and everyone that do not fall in this category as the latter. He successfully shifted the focus of criminality to illicit drugs and highlighted his campaign to presidency as someone who can eradicate this completely by three months. Similar to Jokowi, Duterte also did not backed down from the pressures of international media; his straightforward approach to the United States in terminating the Philippines-United States Visiting Force Agreement.

Conclusion

There is a trend in the Asian region where nationalism is used by strong leaders as a narrative to strengthen their legitimacy. Duterte is using this to attack the reformist narrative of liberal democratic regime of the post-Marcos era. “Change is coming” the dissatisfaction and frustration of the Filipinos during reformist’s administration became one of the factors of Duterte’s win. His offer to be a different kind of candidate, steering away from typical campaigns, using new media, spread his name and popularity. Philippines was ranked as one of the countries with the greatest number of social media users, Therefore, an effective medium for a political campaign to showcase sincerity and credibility. People deprived of good governance tends to patronage those who present themselves as able to restore the strengths of true democracy.

In the power that Duterte has, due to his wide support from the public. Policy making are derived from his personal views and principles; which are all influenced by his simple stories. Following the pattern of Duterte, he was successfully voted because of his platforms to create strict enforcement of law and order; therefore, a strong and tough persona must be imposed to realize these changes. A narrative that could entice the public to support a president can be a huge component in his success. A convincing simple story line that captures imagination, feelings, and emotions can ensure a populist of the support of the people. A well-crafted discourse between a politician and the voters will develop into a connected among them.

Duterte is different from the populists that the Philippines experienced. He did not used the us versus them narrative to depict the social stratification of the land. Instead, he gave a concrete example that can prove his claims of being a strong leader with an iron fist that could impose law and order. Davao City was used as an exhibit to showcase what can be done if he becomes the president of the Philippines. Completely turning a chaotic and disorganized city into a progressive and developing urban area.  Words and statements are relevant factors in populism. How an individual market himself to be relatable and as someone who will be true to his words.  Appealing to their emotions, by saying the exact words the public wants to hear from a leader.

Isn’t it ironic as to how these populists transform to the very opposite persona they vowed to castigate? Jokowi had the controversy of having a cabinet that is composed of the same (kind of) people during Suharto’s era. Thaksin handled the situation strategically when issues about putting his self-interest above Thailand. Philippines’ first impeachment on the grounds of corruption and betrayal of public trust, Erap Estrada’s administration resulted to the second People Power in the country. This is a historical movement of the Filipinos to let those who are seated to know that their actions are not in line with their promises. The people of the Philippines are resilient. It is a country that glorifies the hardships of the ordinary rather than demanding the accountability of those in power.

Populism’s threat to democracy depends on how strong and effective this type of government is to its state. This political ideology is directing to a leader-centric state and will also tolerate supermajority. Its danger conveys to its ability to form a dynamic statement that is implied to direct at separating emancipatory, inclusive and equitable conception of democratic values, for the popularity of the leader is enough to justify his actions. These values that are compromised were the moral aspirations of the common democratic populations, these includes the governing of laws and public exchanges. Successful populists claims can diminish the power of the people and at the same time threatens their grasp of political values, realistically and academically (Mueller, 2019).  

Populists utilize the power of the people to further their causes, may it be for self-interest or general welfare. Branding and marketing themselves to be relatable and at the same time be the answer to the problems of the poor, the light at the end of the tunnel. Philippines’ long experience with the patron-client relationship can be related to its behavior towards charismatic leaders. This shifted to the new trend of presidency. Filipinos are so used to the client-patron relationship that if someone who is deemed to be strong and can entice the people, will positively get the vote. Even though questionable deeds are done by this individual, it is difficult to remove the persona and narrative he has instilled to the people. US versus THEM narrative strategically incorporated within populism can guarantee the votes of the Filipino people, having Estrada on 1998 and Duterte as an example. But usage of this political ideology will only be effective depending on the time that it is used. Duterte used this narrative with the drug dealers, corrupt, and other criminals as them, while he ensures the safety of the us, the ordinary Filipino masses, who just want to live in a peaceful and orderly state. The hunger and anger of people towards unjust treatment and passiveness of politicians must be present, for the statements of “better future” to work.

[ban9yan]

GULALI ILAHI (Cotton Candy’s God). Have you ever seen like this??? It was just happened in 1-2 minutes. 20 Sep 2020. Place : Paralayang Hill, Lawu Mountain, Central Java, Indonesia. #solongangeni #kotasolo #kotasolo_fp ______________ . #natgeotravel #natgeoindonesia #phonephoto #iphonesia #phonephotography #phonephotography_id #phonesia #wonderfulindonesia #tentangsolo #pesonaindonesia #instanusantara #geonusantara #travellerkaskus #natgeotravelindonesia #genpiindonesia #fotografisecret #cameraindonesia @jokowi #wonderful_places #airbnb #discoverearth #folkgreen #travelingourplanet #serikat_FI #lifefolkindonesia #landscapephotography #landscapephotomag #landscapescapture (di Paralayang.segoro gunung ngargoyoso) https://www.instagram.com/p/CFgFP8UhIil/?igshid=1h7b6ibj62asf

[ericfruits]

Indonesia risks repeating an environmental disaster

For peat’s sake Indonesia risks repeating an environmental disaster

A new agricultural scheme may add to the emissions already billowed out by forest fires

AS THE PRESIDENT’S helicopter flew above the swamp forests of Central Kalimantan, a province in the Indonesian part of Borneo, older residents may have felt a sense of déjà vu. Joko Widodo, popularly known as Jokowi, had arrived on July 9th to inspect the site of a new agricultural zone of 1,650 square kilometres—more than twice the size of New York City. Twenty-three years earlier, President Suharto, the strongman who ruled from 1966 to 1998, travelled by chopper to the same area to admire the 10,000 square kilometres of peat forest being converted into rice paddies. Like Jokowi, he worried about being able to feed his people, so set about turning Central Kalimantan into Indonesia’s “granary”.

The Mega-Rice Project (MRP) was a mega-failure. It produced hardly any rice; the peaty soil, it turns out, lacks the requisite minerals. Instead of spurring farming, the draining of the waterlogged forest with a 6,000km network of canals fuelled fire. A few months after Suharto’s visit, the dried peat burst into flames. It was the biggest environmental disaster in Indonesia’s history. A study published in 2002 found that burning peat in 1997 on Kalimantan and the nearby island of Sumatra generated the equivalent of 13-40% of the average annual global emissions from fossil fuels. The MRP was abandoned in 1999 but its legacy endures in the infernos that have ravaged Kalimantan almost every year since.

As work begins on the new plantation, is history poised to repeat itself? The government says it has learned from the past. Nazir Foead of the Peatland Restoration Agency says that tractors will steer clear of what remains of Central Kalimantan’s pristine peatlands. Just over half of the land earmarked for farming is already used to grow rice; the rest is covered in “shallow peat”, no more than 50cm deep, and so can be cultivated without cataclysm, he says.

Environmentalists are not convinced. The government has yet to confirm the exact location and size of the new plantation or publish any environmental assessments. The planning ministry says the details will not be finalised until September. The deputy defence minister says it could be as big as 8,000 square kilometres. Estimates of its cost range from 5trn rupiah ($340m) to 68trn. Iola Abas of the Peat Monitoring Network, an NGO, worries that peatland may be a casualty of rushed, shambolic planning and a lack of transparency. Even if farmers do steer clear of the peat, she worries that if they drain the land they will lower the water table, leaching moisture from nearby peatland.

“Once peat is drained, it remains a high fire risk,” says Kiki Taufik of Greenpeace, an environmental NGO. Smouldering swamps belch vast amounts of carbon. The government reckons that over a fifth of national emissions are from peat fires. Last year the fires that swept Indonesia emitted 22% more carbon than the conflagration in the Amazon rainforest did. In 2016 Indonesia was the world’s fifth-biggest emitter of greenhouses gases, largely because of deforestation, says the World Resources Institute (WRI), another NGO.

But the government argues it must go ahead with the plantation, and quickly, in case covid-19 brings about food shortages. There is no sign of that happening, says Rainer Heufers of the Centre for Indonesian Policy Studies, a think-tank. Even if it does, the new plantation would not help much. The land is not terribly fecund, as the MRP showed. And topping up the country’s silos is pointless unless the rice is brought to market and sold to the hungriest at affordable prices, says Tezza Napitupulu of the WRI. If the government really cared about hunger, says Mr Heufer, it would concentrate on boosting local yields, which are low by international standards, and make it easier to import food.

The government is unlikely to do so. For decades the political elites “have been chasing this ideal of food self-sufficiency”, says Jenny Goldstein of Cornell University. Prabowo Subianto, the defence minister, is one of its greatest champions. In July Jokowi put him in charge of the plantation as part of his new duty to safeguard “strategic national food reserves”—a task that has little to do with defence. One must hope Mr Prabowo is as keen to defend Kalimantan’s peat as Indonesia’s food security. ■

This article appeared in the Asia section of the print edition under the headline "For peat’s sake"

https://ift.tt/31Puk6h

[indo-mzungu]

WP (13/07/2020) - Rememory

1. Find You (New Jerusalem) - Petter CottonTale

2. Landed - Drake

3. Rememory - Supa Bwe feat. Chance The Rapper

4. Redemption - Samm Henshaw

5. When I Get There - Peter CottonTale, Jamilla Woods, Jeremih, PJ Morton, Maurice Brown, Jon Batiste, Cory Henry

Deliver me from people. Deliver me from connectivity. Sad that this writing was just to express uneasy and fucked up thoughts about irritations by another. Words soaked and covered in disguise just to prevent others from rethinking guilt. But more so to prevent conflict. No worries though, it’ll be posted days from now. A strategy one would say as the same as Jokowi’s anger presented the week later.

Its been months! Many times have I been triggered to write, but it wasn’t enough just because of the lack of intention and desire. This one’s about the struggle, the battle, the fight. Many me know me as the son of a figure. And for that reason “I am capable”. That statement just shows how closed-minded and inflexible a person can be. Doesn’t mean its a no-brainer. Just ridiculously clueless. But then the more that I think about it, the more that I realize that the problem is not with me. Its not a duty for mindless people to be clarified, and hell its not my duty to clarify for them. 

Change is hard I admit. Personally, sometimes the feeling of no feeling at all is subdued by the feeling of guilty, sorry and regret. Its hard to speak of God when on the other side you speak the opposite. Lacking Integrity but rather full of betrayal and hatred. I ponder to understand why I re-tolerate. When they strike directly and indirectly why show sincerity. When will they learn, or rather when will I learn. Habitual assumptions you disclose hurts as fuck. If I returned the favor, you’d act a the “experienced victim”. 

Regardless, I’d always do nothing and plunge into the flow. I’d still try to treat everyone with decency and the conceited smirk.

Having physical check ups by after more than 6 months cleared me up mentally. The sounds of light rubbing and unheard clicking are as if you were born a new person. Free and unhypocritical, yet forgetful. Continue writing this after posting it is just to testify that what happened doesn’t offend or displease anymore. To the extent that “aight, we good”. Big Up Peter CottonTale for telling tales without tails of discomfort, but rather experience, ambitions and purpose. Music is life.

Left it all behind I'm not looking back, no more He picked up all the pieces And made my life brand new You can feel it too Now I'm feeling freer than I've ever been  Something like a high-five  I know it's gonna take some time

Too many backspaces writing this, just to prevent mortification. May God provide clarifications to all. 

[southeastasianists]

It’s commonly argued that populism threatens democracies in ASEAN and elsewhere, but this allows the threat of unaccountable elites to slip under our collective radar. This is unfortunate, because elites could threaten ASEAN democracies more than populists.

Democracies are more than just elections (which ASEAN has lots of); they also include checks and balances like the rule of law, separation of powers, and independent media. These checks and balances are subject to domestic, regional and international oversight and pressure, which can – and have – increased their quality over time.

Various ASEAN leaders, from Shinawatra and Hun Sen to Duterte and Jokowi, have been labelled populist, rightly or wrongly. In political science, one can argue that politicians in representative democracies must pander to the wishes of the people (i.e. be a populist), so their recent rise could be a cyclical feature of democracy’s historical arc.

Today’s Southeast Asian states have many categories of elites, with elected politicians being the most visible. However, other groups of elites such as commercial titans, the very rich, academics, aristocrats in feudal structures or professionals such as lawyers or management consultants all exercise power or influence, albeit more invisibly. To place this in context, we have the military elite in Myanmar and the religious elite in Malaysia, Brunei and Indonesia. “Social elites” is a good umbrella term for this heterogeneity.

Social elites interact with political elites for many reasons: technical or strategic advice, networks, campaign financing, or even lobbying. Often, the political elites are the social elites through dual roles or a revolving door, most recently in Indonesia with a tech CEO being appointed Minister. All this is legitimate, although the unfortunate reality of corruption immediately highlights the first challenge with these interactions.

The Threat of Elite Capture

Elite capture happens when social elites inappropriately enter the government’s policy process. Like every citizen, they have every right to participate in the policy process. However, they often play a disproportionately larger role due to intimate access, opportunities to propose or influence policies, campaign financing, or simple conflicts of interest.

Getting the rich or smart to advise governments can be helpful, but it is also a double-edged sword. In democracies, political elites are held to account by built-in checks and balances. None of these transparency or accountability tools affect social elites; often, we don’t even know who the elites are.

In the partly-free democracies of Southeast Asia, the decisions of governments can be more easily influenced (or captured, subverted, hijacked, or whichever term one prefers) by unaccountable elites. This is dangerous to democracy.

Populism threatens democracy for different reasons. Firstly, it adopts a form of identity politics, which borders on racism, is poisonous for human rights and may result in conflict. Secondly, populism tramples over minority rights by largely appealing to the majority. Thirdly, populism may promise popular (but irresponsible) policies just to win elections without considering any long-term impact. These real dangers should not be underestimated.

Elite Capture is a Greater Threat

Compared to populism, however, elite capture is more threatening to Southeast Asian democracies. First, elite capture is nearly invisible at all times, whereas populism is out in the open. Neither politicians nor social elites are incentivised to publicise their interactions. Society is also handicapped due to the media’s inability to scrutinise interactions that can be reasonably labelled as private.

This handicap is more severe in ASEAN, with its relatively low press freedom. Even if there is effective scrutiny, it is difficult to isolate the effects of one social elite from the politicians’ original positions, or from another stakeholders’ advice. It would also be unfair to automatically mark all interactions as illegitimate. All these limitations keep elite capture invisible or make its effects difficult to pinpoint.

In contrast, populism’s threat is visible; its positions and philosophies can be attacked publicly. It has a name and a face, with political parties and leaders vying for attention in the public domain. Populism must continually subject itself to domestic, ASEAN and international scrutiny. In elite capture, a single domestic society cannot even accurately identify who to counter, much less counter them effectively without their ASEAN or international partners.

Second, elites are not subject to regular elections like populists are. To enter into power, populists must first get elected. While their promises could be intrinsically popular and therefore receive strong public support, other political parties, the Election Commissions, the media and citizens can challenge them. Populists might not even win. Even if they win, one can argue that democracy has won because the vox populi has decided. At regular intervals, populists can also be thrown out of office.

None of this happens in elite capture, because no one ever votes for advisers to the President in the first instance. Even if we are unhappy with the performance of the elites (with a huge assumption that we can even see whose performance to be unhappy with), we cannot vote them out in the next election.

Third, populists – but not elites – are subject to checks and balances while in power. The executive power of populists is constrained by various institutions like the opposition, judiciary, legislature, media, civil society, citizens and international community, all of which can shut or slow them down. None of these institutions exist to oppose elite capture.

The very nature of elite capture seeks to hide not only their existence, but also their impact. Our democracies have not yet consciously built structures or institutions to directly counteract their influence. Existing checks and balances were conceptualised and built over time to counteract demagogues, populists and dictators. They do not have the structure, subtlety and skills to counteract elites who operate indirectly and more in the shadows.

Fourth, elites foster inter-generational inequality, while populists cannot. The policies, changes or regulations that elites want for themselves often coincide with what is best for their heirs or estates. This desire for legacies manifests itself through actions to shape society and systems in ways that benefit their children the most.

This is evident when elites support efforts to eliminate or reduce inheritance taxes or reduce taxation and regulation in general. Quoting individual responsibility, elites have advocated for policies that encourage the state to leave them and their interests alone. While we can treat their justifications neutrally, we cannot treat the consequences with indifference.

In contrast, populism does not have inter-generational inequality built into its credo. Indeed, populism is based on destroying inter-generational inequality. As they must repeatedly bring their anti-inequality case to the electorate, they cannot foster such inequality even if they wanted to.

Fifth, we cannot exercise any nuclear option of forcibly removing elites. Rightly or wrongly, Southeast Asia has removed politicians through protest before, notably Marcos in 1986, General Ne Win in 1988, and Suharto in 1998. Short of street protests and elections, we can legitimately remove populists from power through impeachments, votes of no confidence, or hung parliaments triggering fresh elections. These are all theoretically prescribed in the constitutions and laws of most Southeast Asian countries.

Our democracy also prescribes libel, slander and hate speech laws to constrain irresponsible individuals. Elites and populists alike are covered by these laws, but elites are not the ones shouting from the parapets.

None of these nuclear options are available to remove elites, even if we all wanted it. The reasons are simple: we simply cannot identify who to protest against. Even assuming it is politically acceptable to target “the elite” as an amorphous entity, it is not fair, or just, to tar all elites with the same brush.

Indeed, a society will find it hard to criminalise influence. If we do, then the slippery slope requires elected politicians to not have any family, friends or mentors who could influence them. Even if tools exist to remove elites, it’s impossible to distinguish between offering a reasonable solicited opinion and inappropriately influencing policy.

In humanity’s two million years of existence, we have only had democracy for 70 years. While populism can be dangerous, it is out in the open and can be negated by right-minded people and institutions. Elites on the other hand, can lurk in the shadows and cast their influence without being visible or accountable. When designing Democracy 2.0 in ASEAN, we must consider the invisible threat of elite capture and build new tools to fight it.