By: Nancy Mayesi
In recent times, Indonesia’s digital space and streets have been enlivened by a movement called “Dark Indonesia”. This movement has sparked public attention, especially among the younger generation who are increasingly aware of social and political issues. The emergence of this kind of protest movement is certainly an indicator of the life of democracy, where freedom of expression and aspirations are maintained. However, behind the seemingly idealistic spirit, there are serious concerns about the possibility of political interests riding on this movement.
The phenomenon of social movement riders is not new in the context of Indonesian democracy. History shows that public unrest is often exploited by certain groups to push their political agendas. The Dark Indonesia Movement is not immune to this potential. When the narrative that is raised begins to shift from substantial issues to attacks on certain political figures or state institutions without a strong basis in fact, then the authenticity of the spirit of struggle itself must be questioned. This shift in focus can mislead the public, obscure the main issues being fought for, and even create unnecessary social tension.
One of the early signs that a movement is losing its way is when its main objectives become blurred. For example, if the initial demands relate to energy transparency or environmental policies, but in the course of development, it actually turns into a disproportionate anti-government campaign, then it is worth suspecting the infiltration of political interests. Such a shift not only harms the initial struggle agenda, but can also cause polarization and horizontal conflict in society.
The public does not need to be provoked by the provocative narrative echoed through the Dark Indonesia movement. Because economic activities are running normally, people’s purchasing power is maintained. This indicates that the “Dark Indonesia” narrative does not reflect factual reality, but rather is more of an attempt to form a baseless negative perception.
Amidst the rapid flow of digital information, society is now faced with a major challenge in sorting facts from propaganda. Social media, which should be a space for open discussion, is often misused to spread viral video clips or narratives that have not been verified. As a result, public opinion is easily formed without a thorough understanding of the context of the issue. Many individuals, especially young people, are tempted to join actions or support movements simply because they are exposed to emotional content, not rational analysis.
In this context, it is important to remember that democracy demands not only freedom of speech, but also responsibility in expressing opinions. Social action based on data and a constructive spirit is needed. However, if this spirit is hijacked for short-term political interests, then public trust in the democratic process will be tarnished. The disadvantaged are not only the government, but also the people, who lose a healthy and solution-oriented space for aspirations.
The General Chairperson of the Central Board of Tunas Indonesia Raya (PP TIDAR), Rahayu Saraswati Djojohadikusumo, said that the Dark Indonesia narrative was voiced by groups who were unhappy with the current government. She invited Indonesian youth to continue to think critically and not be easily influenced by pessimistic narratives that could erode the spirit of nationalism. Government policies, according to her, have gone through a long process and input from experts. In the long term, these strategic steps are believed to lead Indonesia towards the grand vision of Golden Indonesia 2045. Therefore, the younger generation needs to continue to make positive contributions according to their respective fields, rather than being dragged into the political games of certain parties.
Amidst the increasing social tensions caused by the agitation of this kind of movement, the role of the media, academics, and community leaders becomes very important. They must be at the forefront in maintaining the neutrality of public space, verifying information, and providing political education to the wider community. Without the active involvement of this balancing group, the public discussion space will be easily controlled by groups with hidden agendas.
Social movements are indeed legitimate and necessary as a mechanism for correcting public policies. However, these movements must maintain their purity from the infiltration of manipulative political ambitions. Only with a commitment to transparency, ethics, and political literacy can movements such as Indonesia Gelap contribute to the progress of the nation, not the other way around, becoming a tool for destroying public trust in democracy.
Therefore, the public must be careful and not get caught up in the euphoria of protests that have no clear direction. Appreciation of the spirit of change remains important, but vigilance against the potential for political riding is much more urgent. Indonesia needs a genuine people’s movement, not a movement controlled by political elites for momentary interests.
By upholding healthy democratic values, people can voice their aspirations without being trapped in a misleading narrative game. Through a critical attitude and collective responsibility, every social action can be directed to become a real force of transformation, not just a political echo full of interests.
*The author is a researcher in the fields of politics and media