news

Jokowi's son Gibran is Prabowo's vice-president, if that helps.

I don’t know enough to give a confident answer about the particular politics but I can give a general picture.

I think there is just a lack of organization, or in other words, a concrete movement that are able to organise around class and apply any semblance of pressure in Indonesia. As much as it has experienced some level of industrialization, it suffers from this top-down level push and so ultimately the economy suffers from uneven development and there is no consensus being built to actually holistically build up the productive forces for example. It’s emblematic of a lot of Global South development, where conventional wisdom suggests a technocratic elite is all is needed for a country to be successful. You just need the technical know-how of industrial capitalism, they say, but without considering the underlying mass organisation needed to protect it from imperialist attack. That’s why financialization and rentierism (mislabelled as “corruption”) has sunken its teeth into many SEA economies.

Jokowi’s reign was quiet on the media end, but many of the Indonesia’s problems, whether economic, or national/ethnic/religious, still boils under the surface, just like in India or Nigeria. I am unsure if the distinction and description you provided between the two presidents is fully justified, but ultimately, to be an annoying communist, it’s because of capitalism.

I’ll refer to an article by Arah Juang, that published articles in both Indonesian and English.

The People Are Strangled by Taxes! The Political Elite’s Privileges Are Skyrocketing! Crush the Political Elite!

The Prabowo-Gibran regime continues Jokowi’s accelerated remilitarization efforts. In general, Indonesia’s political elites have a weak faith in democracy and are cowardly in confronting the military. The 1998 Reformation, or democratic transformation against militarism, was incomplete. Political elites, including the National Mandate Party (PAN), the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), the National Awakening Party (PKB), the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS), and others, betrayed the 1998 Reformation. The ABRI faction was abolished, but many other elements remained, from extra-territorial commands to various military businesses and companies.

The strengthening of militarism also served to protect this policy of allocating power. Similarly, various new legal instruments were created to support it, such as the RKUHP (Criminal Code), the RKUHAP (Procedural Code), the TNI (Indonesian National Armed Forces) Bill, and policies related to general elections. Meanwhile, various legal instruments were created to strengthen the distribution of economic power to political elites, such as the Job Creation Law, the Minerba Law, and so on.

…Protest after protest that continuously erupted. August 13, 2025, Pati residents held a large-scale movement, organised by the United Pati Community Alliance, in front of the Regent’s Office. They demanded the cancellation of the PBB-P2 or Rural and Urban Area, and,  Land and Building Tax  increase and the removal of the Regent’s position. Tax protests then spread to other areas, with demonstrations occurring in at least Bone, Cirebon, and Cianjur.

On August 25, protests began in major cities, primarily protesting high taxes and the privileges gained by members of the House of Representatives (DPR). Demonstration took place in Medan, Jakarta, Pontianak, and Surabaya.

Regarding the issue of democracy in Papua, on August 27, 2025, Sorong residents organized a demonstration at the Sorong Police Headquarters. The Indonesian National Armed Forces (TNI) deployed 150 personnel, including two armored vehicles, to the protest site. Police sprayed the crowd with tear gas.  By the end of the demonstration, at least 12 Sorong residents were arrested and several demonstrators were injured. Authorities also shot a motorcycle taxi driver who was inspecting conditions on Jalan Sudirman.

…The readiness and accuracy of a revolutionary organization in responding to and leading such movement do not depend on its spontaneity but rather on the constructed historical character of that revolutionary organization. Which includes the correctness of its struggle program, its ideological perspective, and the traditions of leadership cultivated within the organization. If a revolutionary organization is built on the basis of only promoting normative issues or simply participating in actions, it is will likely get trapped in merely follow the steps of spontaneous movements. Likewise, if a revolutionary organization becomes stuck only theory work without ever practicing leadership, it will struggle to provide leadership in spontaneous movements. It is precisely during this non-revolutionary period that the work of building a revolutionary organization becomes crucial and important as it will be too late to build once the movement, uprise, or revolutionary situation occurs.

By then, the revolutionary organization must be in a state of readiness to launch action at any moment. This is a situation where something that took years to build can drastically change in a few days or even hours. However, to be tactically flexible, one must truly possess what can be called tactics. Without a strong revolutionary organization,  tested in political struggle across all situations and times, it is impossible for a systematic action plan to be considered a tactic. Tactics must be guided by strong principles and executed steadfastly, qualities derived from a strong and tested revolutionary organization.

Said Iqbal’s alignment with the authorities was displayed during May Day when he gave access Prabowo to speak, hold hands, and danced with workers. Said Iqbal’s statement misdirect the blame and perpetrators of the violence. Workers themselves have repeatedly experienced violence from political elites. The labor movement was sabotaged by the New Order military regime, as well as labour movements being attacked, as seen in the history of Omah Buruh and Saung Buruh. In essence, the state of these political elites is a tool of violence against workers and the people. There, resistance against them, including the use of violence, is a method of struggle for workers and the people.

Various groups often categorized as “civil society”– such as NGOs and several yellow unions, as well as students and Indonesian diaspora alumni, have adopted a reformist stance against the current radicalization of the people’s movement. They hope that Prabowo, the House of Representatives (DPR), the National Police (Polri), and the Indonesian National Armed Forces (TNI) to remember they represent the people’s voice, obey the rule of law, stop repressive behavior, demand transparency, accountability.  Their rhetoric often culminates in intellectualised pleas ending with slogans like: “We Are Waiting. Prove The People”s Voices Are Heard.” These citizens or “civil society” actors seek change through strict adherence to the law and the rules set by political elite.

… Indeed, we must not be naive, assuming that political elites, regardless of faction, or even imperialist, regardless of country, will simply sit idly by. They will do everything in their power to ensure the movement aligns with their own interests, from outright massive repression to exploiting labor and co-opting people’s movements.This exploitation can be achieved through propaganda in the mass media and through infiltration of organizations and mass demonstrations. To some extent, they may benefit from the struggle for democratization. For example, regional political elites rejoiced the 1998 Reformation because it created opportunities for them to gain power in the regions after the fall of Suharto’s centralised militaristic regime.

The 1998 Reformation also demonstrated a similar trend: political elites, particularly those “outside” the New Order military regime, jostled for power by exploiting the 1998 Reformation for their own gain. However, the struggle for democratization ultimately benefits workers and the people. The more complete the struggle, the stronger the workers and the people confronting the political elites. While, the political elites will consistently uphold the historical waste such as militarism.

The article goes on and I do recommend giving it a full read.