Indonesia’s presidential candidate Prabowo Subianto, second from left, vice presidential candidate Hatta Rajasa, left, presidential candidate Joko Widodo, second from right, and vice presidential candidate Jusuf Kalla, right, take part in the presidential debate in Jakarta June 9, 2014. (Reuters Photo/Supri)
Most politicians are great public speakers. Give them a platform and they’ll talk for hours. But Joko Widodo, or Jokowi, is not one of them. He is an “efficient” speaker, using just enough words to answer the question proffered and no more.
As mayor of Solo and governor of Jakarta his “efficient” and folksy style had been a plus. However, on the national stage and in a country where the great independence-era leader and first president, Sukarno, was renowned for his fiery oratory, rhetorical prowess is highly regarded. Or is it?
Monday’s Presidential Debate (the first of five) pitted the neophyte, slum-born governor with his halting style against the eloquence and bravura of one of Indonesia’s most celebrated and at times vilified aristocratic scions, the ex-general Prabowo Subianto.
With an estimated 50 million watching, most of the country was expecting to witness a rout as the favorite (certainly in terms of public speaking) prepared to knock out the less-than-articulate former furniture salesman. Instead and to everyone’s surprise, the former Special Forces commander ended up tying himself in rhetorical knots as his efficient and still hesitant competitor seized the day.
What happened?
First: Jokowi went into the debate with more to prove. By doing better than expected, this proved to be a bigger accomplishment. Prabowo came out swinging but seemed deflated after a particularly difficult question about human rights. Basically: the expectations were low for Jokowi and he exceeded them. The reverse was true for Prabowo.
Second, Prabowo’s expansive and impressive speaking style is more suited to stadium rallies and not the cut-and-thrust of a debate. The former military man needs time to sketch out his grand and over-arching concepts. He develops and explores ideas. Indeed, to my mind, he’s the most impressively intellectual general I’ve ever come across.
While the ability to expound bold ideas is noteworthy, it’s not necessarily the speaking style that works for debates and in the Internet era, with its relentless push for ever shorter sound-bites, eloquence quickly becomes long-windedness.
Certainly debates are about speed and the quick retort which is exactly where the governor, for all his seeming amateurishness, appeared to succeed.
Jokowi’s vocabulary is definitely not as broad as Prabowo’s. His ideas are also less earth-shattering but after years of facing off with Indonesia’s crazy and unruly media, he remains a resolutely effective communicator: quick-thinking, humorous and forever self-deprecating.
Sukarno was a superb orator, a man whose voice, language and ideas commanded both the stage and the air-waves. In the era where radio was the main form of communication for people not privileged to see him in person, these virtues made him an icon. However, audiences have changed.
We like the “idea” of impressive public speakers: we just don’t want to have to spend the time listening to them. Instead, we want ever condensed and compressed messages: remember 29 million Indonesians regularly use Twitter.
This by no means is a call for the “dumbing-down” or trivialization of politics. Indeed, in a country like Indonesia, where public faith in the republic’s institutions — particularly its politicians — is at an all-time low, big and noble ideas are more important than ever before. It’s just the medium and manner in which they are delivered that must evolve.
The next president will have to work—in addition to improve infrastructure, tackling corruption and dealing with global economic headwinds—to restore public faith. The 2014 presidential elections will be a question of trust and confidence.
Questions over Prabowo’s controversial human rights record during the New Order will not go away. Neither will similar concerns over Jokowi’s apparent lack of national-level administrative experience.
Indonesians are hence confronted with a simple question: who do you trust? Who can you place your confidence in to lead the nation?Can Prabowo prove that he will respect Indonesia’s fledgling democracy? Can the governor display the technocratic savviness that will assuage the doubts about his ability to lead this vast country? Answering these questions will determine which man makes it to the Istana Merdeka.
But, as I have stressed, the game has changed. Brevity is king and politicians who can adapt to this will prosper. All the same, Indonesia is in for one of its most exciting presidential elections ever.
Karim Raslan is a columnist who divides his time between Indonesia and Malaysia.
By Karim Raslan on 09:31 pm Jun 11, 2014
No comments:
Post a Comment