By: Latea Latra *)
At the intersection of collective hope and pessimistic discourse, the narrative of ‘Dark Indonesia’ emerged as an attempt at psychological agitation that misleads the public. This claim is not merely a criticism of policy, but rather a veiled propaganda scheme to create mass fear and shake the stability of the country. The government and a number of academics have warned of the dangers of this narrative, which is not in line with empirical reality on the ground.
The public need not be provoked by such narratives because objective conditions indicate socio-economic stability. Economic activities are still running normally, shopping centers are still busy, and people’s purchasing power is maintained, proof that the national situation is still safe and under control.
Facts support the rebuttal of this pessimism. Coordinating Minister for Economic Affairs Airlangga Hartarto stated that Indonesia’s economic condition is still strong. Airlangga explained that this is based on economic growth, consumption, and credit, to low inflation. Just for the record, the Indonesian economy is still experiencing growth of 4.87% annually ( year-on-year/yoy ) in the first quarter of 2025.
From a social security perspective, Deputy Minister of Religious Affairs Romo HR Muhammad Syafi’i highlighted that the ‘Dark Indonesia’ narrative was spread like a psychological weapon to build manipulative opinions. He urged collective vigilance so that society, especially the younger generation, is not provoked by divisive doctrines. Critical literacy and open dialogue are absolutely necessary to break the dominance of destructive discourse.
Moreover, this movement is expected to also cause demonstrations without substantive basis. Father Syafi’i emphasized that if viewed objectively, Indonesia is showing progress in many sectors, including investment, education, and infrastructure development. Misperceptions can make citizens feel helpless and alienated from the results of development—when in fact, they are the beneficiaries of pro-people programs.
GP Ansor General Chairman Addin Jauharudin added that the narrative of ‘Dark Indonesia’ has the potential to be orchestrated by foreign interests who want to hinder Indonesia’s rise. He stated that when Indonesia rose, foreign parties always tried in every way to hinder it. So this nation must be aware that this issue did not arise organically from the people, but was full of engineering by outside parties. The infiltration of foreign ideology through hidden agendas demands national vigilance.
A similar warning came from Deputy Speaker of the Indonesian House of Representatives Cucun Ahmad Syamsurijal, who emphasized that the risk of horizontal conflict would increase if the “Dark Indonesia” movement was allowed to grow unchecked. Cucun highlighted how this pessimistic narrative could be manipulated by actors with hidden interests—whether opportunistic politicians, economic interest groups, or external forces—to shake public trust. When citizens begin to be skeptical of government efforts and doubt every development program, identity divisions often emerge: who is on the side of the reformers versus who feels neglected, which can ultimately trigger friction between regions, ethnic groups, or sectors.
Within the framework of conflict theory, pessimistic rhetoric plays a catalytic role that provokes group conflict and widens social gaps. When public discourse is poisoned with mass fear, solidarity built on shared values—such as mutual cooperation and Pancasila—is easily eroded. Horizontal conflicts that were initially minor can escalate, triggering undirected demonstrations, vandalism, and disruption of critical infrastructure. Instead of focusing on collective solutions, national energy is divided to defend a narrative that is essentially detrimental to stability and hinders the development process that has shown real results.
Why does this narrative penetrate the minds of many people? Modern humans are indeed vulnerable to experiencing destruction of meaning when the flow of information is unfiltered and fragmented. In such conditions, individuals lose their strong sense of value, so they are easily swayed between facts and sensations. The narrative of ‘Dark Indonesia’ exploits this collective anxiety by presenting darkness as an alternative to truth, provoking negative emotions and covering up evidence of progress that actually exists.
To restore collective meaning and strengthen the foundation of the nation, we must return to objective data and constructive narratives about national progress. Prioritizing official reports—such as economic growth and social stability data—helps establish pragmatic truth. Meanwhile, rational and critical dialogue will build a positive narrative that strengthens the spirit of unity and optimism, replacing the shadow of pessimism with real evidence of shared progress.
It is important to remember that national resilience is not measured solely in the military arena, but also in the field of discourse, how strong the nation is in filtering provocations and maintaining solidarity. As Pancasila upholds unity in diversity, this nation must reject pessimistic narratives that divide, and embrace optimism built on collective hard work. By rejecting ‘Dark Indonesia’, we simultaneously strengthen the belief that Indonesia continues to move forward in the light of progress—although challenges are always present, the light of truth and togetherness will always triumph over the darkness of propaganda.
*) The author is an observer of security and defense issues.