A day after Golkar's 58th anniversary on October 21, 2022, the moment when Surya Paloh was uncomfortable when Jokowi said that we should not be reckless in submitting a presidential candidate, Paloh gathered several professors at the Nasdem Tower. Paloh felt that there was nothing wrong with Anies' presidential candidacy. In addition, Anies had experience in the government, once a governor, which means he understood well the government bureaucracy. Still, according to Paloh, Anies was not a foreign stooge either. In the past, Paloh nominated Ahok, and now he appoints Anies. He wanted his maneuver seen to unite the nation's children from various ethnic and religious backgrounds. Therefore, according to Paloh, only people who personally didn't like Anies said that Anies' candidacy was of reckless nomination.
Nevertheless, nominating Anies as a presidential candidate
was unsuitable for several reasons. First, Anies is a racist! He deliberately
used religious issues to win the 2017 Jakarta governor election. Anies did not deliberately create the religious issue manipulated to attack Ahok as a Christian candidate.
But he intentionally gave his blessing because it was profitable. At that time, Anies should
have been able to at least put a brake on religious issues by urging his
followers not to attack Ahok using religion. Anies should have appealed to his
followers to criticize Ahok regarding government management and other
shortcomings in how Ahok led Jakarta for five years. But Anies didn't do it. He even endorsed the SARA issue. Paloh did not forget about this SARA issue
because he was in Ahok's stronghold at that time.
Second, Anies is another racist! Remember when Anies was
just inaugurated by President Jokowi and then made a speech in front of his
followers? He pointed to indigenous and non-indigenous issues. He was negligent
in referring to Arab ethnic and, thus, Muslims as ethnically indigenous.
Meanwhile, Ahok, destined to be a Chinese ethnic and Christian, is a
non-native. This clash of ethnic and religious diversity is called racism.
Ethnic and religious diversity, on the one hand, makes Indonesia a
multicultural nation and state. Unlike Europe, which is the embodiment of one
nation supported by many countries, Indonesia is a country supported by many
nations. On the other hand, this ethnic and religious diversity is a SARA issue
that is vulnerable to making Indonesia disintegrate. The identity politics that
emerged in the 2017 Jakarta governor election cannot be separated from Anies,
who deliberately converted it into an electoral vote and capitalized it into
victory.
Third, Anies is the foremost racist! Anies had apparently
taken a side with radicals and extremists. Radicals are Muslims who use
religious issues for fundamental political change. Meanwhile, extremists are
extensions of radicals who use violence to achieve political change goals based
on religion. Radicals are like HTI, and extremists are like FPI. Radical masses
like the 212 movements think there is nothing right with Jokowi's government.
Everything went wrong. Change president! Although the movement to replace the
president is unconstitutional. To repair the country, kick Jokowi out of the
palace and create a state and government based on Islam with a caliphate
system.
Fourth, Anies is the antithesis of President Jokowi. Whatever
has been done by President Jokowi so far is wrong to Anies. Jokowi popularised
the slogan "work, work, and work" to encourage his followers to get
to work as soon as possible without dealing with unfruitful discussions. Anies
managed to counter it by creating a "new narrative of work," which
means we need discussion to map the work and how to do it. Without narrative,
work will only be without direction and purpose. When Jokowi's circle echoed
the normalization of rivers, i.e., widening and smoothing the flow of rivers,
to cope with flooding in Jakarta, Anies fought it with antithesis in the form
of naturalization of the river; developing a river ecosystem so that the soil
along the river can absorb the water. When Jokowi's circle chose canalization
to facilitate water flow to the river so as not to inundate the road, Anies developed
an antithesis in the form of infiltration wells. When Jokowi successfully built
flats to move people affected by the river widening, Anies replaced it with the
term "ply house," even with the same goal.
It is unethical that Nasdem is still in the current Jokowi
government coalition. It is true that Nasdem was one of the sponsors of Jokowi
and even became a pioneer before PDIP nominated him. However, assigning Anies, Jokowi's
antithesis, shows that Nasdem is incompatible with President Jokowi's work for
the rest of the government until October 2024. Therefore, resigning from the
Jokowi cabinet is a consequential step. If Nasdem does not withdraw from the
Jokowi government coalition, then again, Nasdem is practicing trade politics;
i.e., continue to take advantage of the cabinet positions (ministry of
communication and telecommunication, ministry of foresty, and ministry of
agriculture) while at the same in favor against Jokowi as the owner of the cabinet.
Paloh's nomination of Anies was a reckless move as President
Jokowi's sneering. It's not a matter of liking or disliking. But this is the
track record of Anies being racist and the antithesis of Jokowi. Suppose
Paloh's goal in nominating Anies is for the purpose of unity regardless of
ethnic and religious background. Why not assign Rizieq Shihab as the presidential
candidate and Ahok vice president? This nomination will bring together two
opposite spectrums into one unity of Indonesia.
Paloh's desire to press Anies for national unity and
integrity appears to be merely political rhetoric. Paloh is racking his brains
on how to raise the Nasdem vote, as it gained only 9% of the vote in the 2019
election. As a nationalist party with the same mass base or similar to PDIP,
Gerindra, Golkar, and Democrats, Paloh is trying to win additional votes from
Muslim radicals, both cadres and sympathizers, through the candidacy of Anies.
Even if Anies loses, Nasdem hopes its vote will increase to over 10%. Moreover,
if Anies wins, Nasdem will increasingly become a playmaker in Indonesian
politics.
Anies himself was once not a racist when he was still an
academic. He turned racist when he faced Ahok in the 2017 Jakarta governor
election, through which he capitalized on the overwhelming votes of 212 movements
to run for governor election. He was then a politician. Like a trader, a
politician looks for profit and will continue to work for gain without having
to see whether the payoff is done in lawful ways. Therefore, Anies, who is no
longer committed to the ideal of academic integrity, but of the practical
politician, just like a trader, is dealt with gaining profit in any possible
way.
In conclusion, the disapproval of Anies' presidential
candidacy was not due to the liking or disliking factor but the recklessness of
the racist and antithesis presidential candidate for the sustainability of
infrastructure development and the diversity of this large multi-ethnic and
religious nation.