The Tamesis
January 12, 2026
jakarta – Symbolism, ritual and drama play an important role in politics.
In a democracy, military parades, televised State of the Union addresses, and the construction of statues and monuments are the glue that holds the country together, if not the devices deployed to prop it up.
In authoritarian societies, rituals and dramas are imposed on the masses, mostly against the backdrop of threats of violence, to instill fear and submission.
In both cases, ritual is a means to political ends.
But in some places or regions, a unique anomaly arises, an anomaly that the American anthropologist Clifford Geertz called a “theatrical state,” a seminal concept he introduced in his now-classic 1980 book. Negara, the theater state of 19th century Bali.
In the early chapters of the book, Geertz argued that “the essence of the Balinese state has always been not directed toward tyranny, because of its inability to achieve a systematic concentration of power, or even toward government in a very orderly manner, which it pursues coldly and hesitantly, but toward spectacle, toward ritual.”
Geertz proposes that for the Balinese and other societies in Southeast Asia, ritual is an end in itself, and ultimately the state, in his own words: “even in its last gasps, is the means by which collective rituals are enacted. Power serves pageantry, not pageantry power.”
It would certainly be disingenuous for us to think that Indonesia might have been a theatrical country for much of its post-independence history.
After all, the country has the ability Lifting millions out of poverty, providing health care to many, and most recently building much needed infrastructure.
But interspersed among the few stories of material progress and bureaucratic prowess are many inflammatory tales of political leaders keen to stir up crowds, build monuments and perform ceremonies rather than perform the real bureaucratic and administrative duties of actually running a government.
In the Sixties, as the country’s economy teetered on the verge of collapse and his anti-imperialist agenda faced serious resistance from Western powers, then-President Sukarno perfected the ritual of holding courts, holding mass rallies and building massive monuments.
Sukarno was a charismatic orator who would deliver long speeches on a variety of topics, but the main themes were national unity and anti-colonialism.
In the late 1950s and early 1960s, few economic resources were allocated to construct the impressive buildings, monuments and statues that have become landmarks of the capital, Jakarta, to this day.
At the height of his power, Sukarno concentrated so much power, yet he seemed to have little interest in running the country, only in its spectacle.
Sukarno’s predecessor, General Suharto, may have been a benevolent technocratic leader when he came to power, but once his authoritarian impulses began to take over, he began to establish the rules and rituals that would soon become the basis of his dictatorship.
The election was a five-year ritual whose outcome was predetermined, and the convening of the People’s Consultative Conference (MPR) would inevitably end with the extension of Suharto’s five-year term.
New monuments, statues, and ceremonies were erected primarily to support his regime’s anti-communist agenda.
Suharto was also a veritable authoritarian leader who ruthlessly and methodically used his concentrated power to pursue a developmentalist agenda, with or without pomp and pageantry.
Post-New Order Indonesian leaders were mostly technocrats. Figures from the early reform era like BJ Habibie, Mekawati Soekarnoputri and even Joko Widodo focused on today’s pressing issues, from implementing democratic reforms and rescuing Indonesia’s flagging economy to tackling the tedious task of building bridges and roads.
President Prabowo Subianto may have begun to break away from this trend.
From his obsession with the number eight to his penchant for staging elaborate military parades or delivering speeches in front of piles of cash seized from corruption suspects, we now know that the pageantry and symbolism are now back in full swing.
Now, after a year of political crisis and natural disasters, we can now legitimately ask whether drama has now taken precedence over certain technocratic approaches to governance.
In March last year, U.S. President Donald Trump imposed a 32% tariff on Indonesian products exported to China, the first major test of Prabowo’s technocratic mettle.
His reaction was dramatic.
Prabowo’s swift response to the economic threat was to convene a televised court in which he praised Indonesia’s economic resilience in the face of global economic headwinds.
However, despite the promises of economic nationalism, attendees left with a promise from the president that he would scrap the local content rules (TKDN) that have become a bone of contention between the country and the United States. Subsequently, the president also pledged to purchase Boeing commercial aircraft from the United States.
Nine months on, trade talks between Indonesia and the United States are on the verge of collapse.
U.S. trade officials’ threats that ongoing trade talks could collapse are enough to show that the president’s public statements don’t necessarily translate into action.
Likewise, in response to the catastrophic floods in North Sumatra and Aceh, the president’s first response was to resort to symbolism and ceremony, from holding a series of meetings to present ideas with key cabinet members to the presidential plane landing in Aceh en route Express solidarity with Pakistan for those killed and displaced by natural disasters.
All the symbolism would surely have more meaning if practical efforts to deal with natural disasters could succeed in supporting victims of floods and landslides.
But anger and despair over the chaos and slowness of relief and reconstruction efforts in Aceh and North Sumatra provinces may be symptomatic of a larger problem of ineffective governance.
We can certainly ask President Prabowo’s government to do better in dealing with the crisis, especially this year, which is only expected to worsen.
But looking at the current performance, we can ask a more relevant question; what if all the pomp, talk shows, and televised rituals are actually the point?
