Pathos,
logos, ethos in presidential candidates
Sirikit
Syah ; A
lecturer at Stikosa-AWS, Surabaya,
Founder
and Director of Media Watch
|
JAKARTA
POST, 18 Juni 2014
The presidential
race has never been so dynamic. We have two candidates, just like in the US,
but here we have the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) and the
Gerindra Party: Joko “Jokowi” Widodo vs Prabowo Subianto.
Electing
legislative candidates and the president has never been so difficult. In the
past, it was easy to vote for the PDI-P (1999) or the Democratic Party (2004,
2009). Everybody seemed to agree on voting for the most “victimized”
candidate. It was Megawati Soekarnoputri in 1999 and Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono
in 2004.
This
year, we are faced with two big, strong, genuine candidates.
Jokowi
represents the face of the ordinary people. The public see themselves in
Jokowi: a kind and humble person. Like Megawati, and perhaps because of the
PDI-P-effect, Jokowi has fanatic and loyal followers.
In the
theory of persuasion, he has the quality of pathos. Everybody has empathy for
him. A figure with such qualities needs no smart calculations or brilliant
thoughts. Take Megawati in 1999: She showed no intelligence, she hardly even
spoke and she looked bad in the presidential debate. But out of empathy, she
was voted in. Megawati represented the “victimized” (by the New Order)
Indonesian people: It’s the power of pathos. Now Jokowi seems to have such a
quality. Wherever he goes, whatever he says, people applaud and cheer him.
Prabowo,
on the other hand, doesn’t have such qualities. He obviously does not
represent the Indonesian people. He is from the elite. His party is new,
incomparable with PDI-P, which has roots all over Indonesia. He has a tainted
past record and he couldn’t even manage a family. He certainly doesn’t have
fanatic or loyal followers like Jokowi does.
But,
within a short period of time, he gained support from unpredicted areas:
Islamic parties, young people and even popular singer Rhoma Irama and former
Constitutional Court chief Mahfud MD.
If
Jokowi has Slank, Prabowo has Rhoma, and both artists are quite equal in
popularity.
Without
having the quality of pathos, Prabowo can be seen as having the possible
quality of logos. People will choose someone on the basis of reason. It’s
about logic. At present, Indonesia needs a leader who can reignite the
dignity of this nation. Indonesians see charisma, bravery, independence, capability
and dignity in Prabowo. Perhaps, with Prabowo as president, our neighboring
countries wouldn’t dare to build on Indonesian soil, nor inhibit (“steal”)
our outer and remote tiny islands. With reason and logic, even though lacking
empathy and loyalty, the people might vote for Prabowo.
If
Mahfud or Anies Baswedan, the founder of the Indonesia Mengajar movement, or
State-Owned Enterprises Minister Dahlan Iskan were also candidates, they
would be categorized as having the quality of ethos. Perhaps they have few
fanatic followers, but their track records might result in success.
Mahfud
has been in several significant positions and he has always come out clean.
Dahlan succeeded in managing a big media corporation, with branches
throughout the archipelago. So, perhaps he would have planted roots in the
remote areas. He knows Indonesia.
Anies
represents the younger generation with an international reputation. Their
ethos proves for themselves. Somebody might not gain a lot of empathy nor
enough reason or logic to be voted for, but there are people who don’t see
pathos and logos, they see ethos instead.
Unfortunately,
the three candidates with ethos failed to enter the race.
We are
now faced with two strong candidates. Both are Javanese but both have vice
president candidates from outside Java. Both have support of Islamic
communities and music fan bases.
The
“clean” people like Anies and Mahfud are split in their political support,
making it more difficult for us to decide who to choose. Mass media moguls
are also split: The group of Aburizal Bakrie and the MNC Group support
Prabowo, Media Group (Surya Paloh) and presumably Dahlan’s Jawa Pos supports
Jokowi.
As an
Indonesian citizen, I am rather galau (slang for anxious) for the first time
in my life. Both candidates have similar degree of good and bad elements.
While
Jokowi lacks national and international experience, plus the potentiality of
becoming a “puppet” president, he has proven to be successful in Surakarta
and Jakarta and he seems genuinely a good person.
While
Prabowo has a tainted history, he brings new hope and promise to a more
dignified Indonesia. I believe I am not alone in having this dilemma.
However,
I invite my fellow citizens to vote; make the effort, by voting, to make
Indonesia better. And whoever becomes our next president, let’s hope he will
be blessed in leading this nation. ●
|
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar