JAKARTA - Legal and political observer, Dr. Pieter C Zulkifli criticized President Prabowo Subianto's speech at the 2026 Central and Regional Government Rakornas held in Sentul, West Java some time ago.
According to Pieter, Prabowo's state of the nation address not only conveys policies, but also shapes perceptions about the nature of power.
"It's not just about programmatic commitment, but about how power presents itself in the public sphere," Pieter Zulkifli told reporters, Thursday, February 5.
"In a social-economic situation that demands stability and calm, the leader's style of speech becomes part of the message itself," he continued.
Pieter also invited the public to reconsider the relationship between firmness, state authority, and the need for legitimacy in democratic leadership practices.
According to him, in a state of law, authority is not enforced with a challenging tone, but rather with policy consistency and compliance with the ethics of power.
"President Prabowo Subianto's speech actually contains many substantive agendas: industrialization, food and energy self-sufficiency, eradication of corruption, to environmental improvement. However, in the midst of the long exposure, one sentence actually draws public attention disproportionately: 'Don't dare me'. A statement that is out of context leaves an emotional, defensive impression, and tends to seek validation," explained Pieter.
Pieter Zulkifli said that in leadership communication, not only what is said is important, but how it is said. He alluded to Max Weber's statement, a German sociologist, regarding the distinction between charismatic authority and rational-legal authority.
"Rational authority is based on institutions and performance, not on personal gestures or verbal threats. When a president has to assert himself in a 'challenging' tone, the public instead captures the opposite signal: anxiety about recognition," he said.
Pieter said President Prabowo Subianto's speech came from understandable anxiety. The Head of State responded to allegations that he was 'only a good speaker', responding to criticism of policies, even touching on the potential for political and economic resistance.
However, according to him, when the response is framed in a confrontational language in front of regional heads, officials, and law enforcement officers, the message that comes is no longer firmness, but anxiety.
"Hannah Arendt once reminded, established power does not need to be shown through threats; it is the fragile power that tends to harden the voice," he said.
"This is where the problem of communication style arises. The president certainly has the right to be angry, firm, even harsh. However, the public space of the state requires emotional discipline," added Pieter.
Pieter Zulkifli emphasized that in a democracy, legitimacy is not built through symbolic intimidation, but through policy consistency and real improvements in people's lives. He said, when the President said he was only afraid of God and the people, the public actually hoped that the fear would be translated into social sensitivity rather than in sentences that resembled command logic.
For Pieter, the criticism does not deny the big agendas conveyed by Prabowo. According to him, the Free Nutritious Meal program, industrialization, consolidation of SOEs, and environmental projects are legitimate policy promises to be tested.
"However, this is where the irony comes in. When the President is too busy defending himself on the podium, the silent work that should speak for itself is drowned out by rhetoric. As the philosopher Lao Tzu said, the best leaders are those who are almost imperceptible; when the work is done, the people say, 'we did it ourselves'," he said.
Pieter Zulkifli reminded the economic situation that people feel today where the job market is getting narrower, purchasing power is depressed, to a volatile market, making the public more sensitive to the language of power.
Therefore, said Pieter, in this kind of condition, the tone of arrogance, no matter how small, can easily be read as an emotional distance between the palace and the people. Pieter Zulkifli also alluded to the figure of Friedrich Nietzsche who once wrote that the will to power is often disguised as the will to be recognized.
"At this point, public criticism becomes relevant: is the firmness born of conviction, or from the need to be convinced? This writing is not intended to negate the President's good intentions, let alone deny his democratic mandate," he explained.
Pieter Zulkifli emphasized that this criticism was an invitation for correction.
He assessed that a president does not need to seek validation on the podium; true validation comes from the people's kitchen that is back to boiling, from the job market that is back in motion, and from an economy that gives hope.
"Work in silence, let the results speak. In state politics, authority is not born from the sentence 'who dares me', but from the calmness of a leader who knows that the strongest legitimacy is not the applause of the elite, but the trust of the people," he said.
The English, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, and French versions are automatically generated by the AI. So there may still be inaccuracies in translating, please always see Indonesian as our main language. (system supported by DigitalSiber.id)
