International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Sciences 
ISSN 2720-9644 (print); ISSN 2721-0871 (online) 

https://journalkeberlanjutan.com/index.php/ijesss 

 

313 

 CONSTELLATION OF POWER BEHIND COMMUNICATION 
PRESIDENTIAL IN INTOLERANCE ISSUES: CRITICAL 
DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF THE PRESIDENT'S STATEMENT IN 
THE CASE OF MELIANA IN TANJUNGBALAI 

Volume: 3 
Number: 2 
Page: 313 - 331 

1Benny SUSETYO, 2Udi RUSADI, 3Mikhael DUA 
1,2,3Faculty of Communication Sciences, Sahid University Jakarta, Indonesia 
Corresponding author: Benny SUSETYO 

E-mail: susetyobenny@gmail.com  

Article History: 
Received: 2022-04-11 
Revised: 2022-06-15 
Accepted: 2022-07-18 

Abstract:  

Presidential communication has a role in carrying out the political function of 
the president as head of state or government. In practice, presidential 
communication pays attention to efforts to maintain power with ideological 
dominance through direct statements of the president, media quotes, or official 
social media accounts. This power is related to how the president manifests 
statements, attitudes, and actions as a practice of power carried out by political 
leaders. In the package of identity politics that is getting stronger, cases of 
intolerance are suspected to be very influential on the way the president 
conducts political communication. This study will focus on efforts to uncover 
hidden ideologies in presidential communications that contain power practices 
in cases of intolerance in Indonesia. Through a paradigm with an approach, this 
research uses Van Dijk's critical analysis method to find the presidential 
communication text related to the Meliana case in Tanjungbalai and to 
understand aspects of the president's cognition and social context in several 
related statements. This study concludes that the president's communication 
strategy has a double meaning behind the foundation of constitutionalism, 
embracing conflicting groups to get resources from their supporters and 
opposing groups. The president also used a political strategy to raise the issue in 
Tanjungbalai in what Walter Benjamin called a state of emergency with security 
and nationality but at the expense of marginalized groups. 

Keywords: Presidential Communication, The Practice of Power, Identity 
Politics, Constitutionalism, Politics of Exception, State of Emergency.   

 

 

 

Cite this as: SUSETYO, B., RUSADI, U., DUA, M. (2022) “Constellation Of 
Power Behind Communication Presidential In Intolerance Issues: Critical 
Discourse Analysis Of The President's Statement In The Case Of Meliana 
In Tanjungbalai.” International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and 
Social Sciences, 3 (2), 102 – 120. 

 

INTRODUCTION 
Presidential communication plays an essential role in implementing the president's political 

function as the head of state or head of government in a constitutional system. In practice, 
presidential communications pay attention to efforts to maintain power by ideologically 
dominating through direct statements of the president in speech broadcasts, mass media quotes, 
or official social media accounts. This power is related to how the president manifests statements, 
attitudes, and actions as a practice of power carried out by political leaders. Furthermore, the 
practice of power is also related to maintaining and maintaining the value system that is the 
consensus of a society/nation (ideology) as the way that is believed to be the most considered 
good in achieving the state’s goals. Presidential communication has become a crucial element in 
the powerful practice that works in the modern political system. Ryfe (2005) adopted Richard 
Neustadt's view of persuasion as a strategic power that power possesses. Neustadt's thinking 
boils down to the idea that presidential communication is e helpful bargaining instrument for 
acquiring presidential power (Ryfe, 2005, p.4). Neustadt's view is to make it clear that the 
president has predetermined interests. Presidential communication is a strategic political weapon 
that has calculated the risks and benefits to be gained. 

mailto:susetyobenny@gmail.com


 

International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Sciences 
ISSN 2720-9644 (print); ISSN 2721-0871 (online) 

https://journalkeberlanjutan.com/index.php/ijesss 

 

314 

The phenomenon of presidential communication is an area of discussion that can be seen in 
various performances on several more specific themes. Several studies on the piece c 
communication discuss the rhetoric and strategies of presidential communication (conducted by 
Smith & Smith, 1994; Denton & Holloway, 1996; Ryfe, 2005; Farnsworth, 2009); presidential news 
construction (Kurtz, 1998), presidential relations with the media (Hess, 2000; Spragens, 2003; 
Walcott & Hult, 2008), head of government communication strategies concerning political 
scandals and terrorism (Canel & Sanders, 2006, 2010), Presidential Public Relations (Kiousis & 
Strömbäck, 2010; Eshbaugh-Soha, 2011). At the same time, Makeschin (2010) discusses the 
symbolic role of the president as a political communicator in the eyes of traditional constituents 
with religious preferences. Others discussed presidential powers and communications, 
emphasizing gaining public support for dealing with congressional leaders (Buchanan, 1978; 
Kernell, 1986). 

Ideology (nationalist and religious). Meanwhile, from a review of previous journals and 
publications, the results of research that are used as references are related to intolerance and the 
role of Government communication at the regional level in building social harmony ( Al Kafi, 
2014; Sagita, 2018; Lift, 2010). Ahmed's (2009) research, which uses Kenneth Burke's AWK 
method to assess the response of the Bangladeshi government to the strengthening of Islamic 
extremism, is a comparison of this research in terms of processes. In contrast to Ahmed, this 
study uses the method of critical discourse analysis by Teun van Dijk, focusing on the individual 
president's personal communication on the issue of intolerance. Meanwhile, Setijadi's research 
(2017) on the dynamics of the 2017 DKI Pilkada, which describes the strengthening of religious 
identity as a political commodity by the winning team of one candidate, becomes a model for 
analyzing presidential communications in the interest of maintaining security stability and 
internal political consolidation of power which consists of supporting political parties with 
various platforms. 

In dishes become cases of intolerance in Indonesia, Indonesia's democracy has experienced 
a setback in at least the last seven years, especially in the aspect of civil liberties has become the 
weakest point that has led to the deconsolidation of democracy in the third largest democratic 
country in the world (Naipospos and Halili, 2014). This fading of civil liberties is associated with 
intolerance towards minority religious groups (Mujani, 2005). This phenomenon is read in the 
SETARA Institute's notes, which state that within 12 years (2007-2018), there were 2,400 incidents 
of intolerance with 3,177 actions. In addition, there were 398 disturbances in places of worship, 
such as permits were blocked, refused, and their other piece permits revoked, damaged, 
demolished, sealed, and converted (Halili et al., 2019). This report is a special note that although 
normatively, the state guarantees and affirms its commitment to protecting freedom of 
religion/belief, the president's communication has never been expressly manifested in the form 
of statements of attitudes and actions that defend marginalized groups. 

This study will focus on efforts to uncover hidden ideologies in presidential 
communications that contain power practices. The president's communications in sin several rest 
statements quoted by the mass media are different, thus showing the existence of a dual attitude 
of the president as a representation of the state towards the same problem, namely intolerance. In 
the package of identity politics that is getting stronger, cases of intolerance are suspected to be 
very influential on the way the president conducts political communication. The political 
constellation in the government body consists of supporting parties that incidentally have a 
constituent base of majority religious groups and communities. As a result, the president's 
communications must have a high degree of caution to ensure the stability of the government.  

Tanjung Balai case, which was sparked by a complaint by a Chinese resident named 
Meiliana about the sound of the call to prayer being too loud, led to riots at the local level. The 
mob not only pelted the Meiliana family's house with stones but also burned and damaged 
temples and pagodas. In the ongoing legal process, Meiliana was sentenced to 18 months in 
prison on charges of blasphemy charges sentence imposed is the same as that for the perpetrators 



 

International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Sciences 
ISSN 2720-9644 (print); ISSN 2721-0871 (online) 

https://journalkeberlanjutan.com/index.php/ijesss 

 

315 

of the attack and the burning of houses of worship. The case garnered public attention and 
became the focus of the mass media. State officials, community leaders, and human rights 
activists have voiced their positions in this case. However, President Jokowi as a representative of 
the state, seems to be looking for safety when dealing with the power of the masses who are 
urging Meliana to be punished. 

In the case of Meliana, there is no clear statement from the president that shows a fair side 
to the victim as part of a minority group in the local area and nationally. President Jokowi's 
ambiguous attitude is suspected of having two goals, objectively having the aim of safeguarding 
the domestic security situation from the turmoil that will be difficult to control regarding the 
issue of SARA; subjectively related to efforts to maintain his reputation in the elite political circle 
and the popular prestige of the president among the wider community, so that politically it has 
the 'power of persuasion to strengthen political position in the constellation of power and the 
contestation of national leaders his succession. In Walter Benjamin's view, the practice of power, 
which is manifested in presidential communications, should be a means to the ends of justice. 
Therefore, specifically, research will answer two things. First, the construction of the president's 
statement behind the messages conveyed in intolerant cases, especially the Meliana case in 
Tanjungbalai in 2016, as well as what factors influenced and "pressured" President Joko Widodo 
so that he seemed indecisive in handling cases of intolerance; second, the constellation outside of 
formal state power that influences President Joko Widodo's attitude when conveying messages 
regarding cases of discrimination. 

Political Communication Theory. The meeting between communication and politics 
occurs at two points: talk and influence or influencer. Some communication experts write that 
politics is communication or politics can be referred to as communication, in the sense that 
communication includes politics because most political activities are carried out through talk as a 
form of communication, On; the other hand, some political scientists also write that 
communication is politics or communication can be referred to as politics, in the sense that 
politics includes communication, because almost all communication aims to influence as one of 
the political dimensions (Arifin, 2014: 12). Like communication, politics is a process. Like 
communication, politics involves conversation. Here, speech means how people exchange 
symbols – words (written and spoken), pictures, gestures, gestures, temperaments, and clothes 
(Nimmo, 2005: 8).  

McNair (2003) defines political communication as purposeful communication about 
politics, which includes: first, all forms of communication carried out by politicians and other 
political actors intending to achieve specific goals; second, political communication is addressed 
by these actors to non-politicians, such as voters and newspaper columnists; third, 
communication about these actors, and their activities, as contained in the news, editorials and 
other forms of media regarding. Communication and politics are phenomena that are present in 
every practice of power. As Adrian Leftwich (1984 ) emphasizes in Heywood (2004): 'politics is at 
the heart of all collective social activity, formal and informal, public and private, in all human 
groups, institutions, and societies. According to Heywood, three distinctly different conceptions 
of politics can be identified. First, politics has long been associated with formal government 
institutions and the activities that take place in them. Second, politics is generally related to 
public life and public action, as opposed to what is instead of private or private. Third, politics 
has been linked to several contributions of power, wealth, and resources, which occur in all 
institutions and at every level of social existence (Heywood, 2004). 

In the perspective of power relations in political communication, Denton & Woodward in 
McNair (2011) emphasize that the purpose of several communications related to the discussion of 
the allocation of public resources (income), the authority of officials (who is given the power to 
make legal, legislative, and executive decisions), and official sanctions (what actions are 
rewarded or punished by the state). With this conceptualization, it can be understood that 
political communication can be explicitly identified based on how indicator, its content, and its 



 

International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Sciences 
ISSN 2720-9644 (print); ISSN 2721-0871 (online) 

https://journalkeberlanjutan.com/index.php/ijesss 

 

316 

objectives, including oral and written political rhetoric and political actors as individuals and as 
state administrators. It means that political communicators represent group interests to seek 
influence through communication to obtain an allocation of public resources and authority (to 
create, implement, and impose legal sanctions). Rogers & Shoemaker describes opinion leaders as 
certain individuals who can influence one's attitudes and behavior informally by the leader’s will 
through the fostered social relationships. This ability is often associated with credibility, 
attractiveness, and power (Rogers & Shoemaker, 1971:199). The media reproduce the awareness 
of individual communicators into the collect community’s collective consciousness and forms a 
dominant opinion in the public sphere in the discourse battle. Thus political communicators also 
become opinion leaders who enable them, with a certain regularity, to convey opinions on policy 
issues to all parties who become audiences (Nimmo, 2003). 

The idea of dominant opinion in the discourse battle aligns with the Teun A. van Dijk 
Dijk’s8) thought on the discourse of power and domination, whose central element is the ease of 
access and communicative events. According to van Dijk, discourse is like other social power 
resources, where access is not evenly distributed. Even van Dijk categorizes access, namely active 
access and passive access. He gave an example of dynamic access to debates between members of 
parliament in the courtroom. According to him, the member of parliament has active access. 
While passive entry, he gave an example of a note-taker or secretary in the courtroom; who has 
access to information but does not speak unless asked to speak. In this sense, presidential 
communication in President Joko Widodo's statement shows power with active access as a 
political communicator and an authority as Head of State. In this capacity, the president also has 
effortless access to all aspects of life, political systems, and other social systems ( including access 
to information systems and media) within the scope of the Republic of Indonesia.    

Critical Theory. Critical Theory ( Critical Theory ) is a school of thought that launches a 
strong critique of modernism. Magnis-Susseno calls the critical theory a form of human liberation 
from all the shackles of exploitation and oppression (Sindhunata, 2019). The criticism is mainly 
made on the negative consequences of economics and politics generated through the application 
of positive science, incredibly logical positivism (empiricism). Critical theory wants to open up 
intellectual space to critically agree on the social, postmodern society's social, political, economic, 
and cultural problems gives for solving these problems. In this way, critical theory intends to 
restore the dialectical dimension of Marx's teaching, which was reduced to 'Marxism' according 
to Engels (Magnis-Susseno, 1992). 

The critical theory uses Marxist concepts such as exploitation, alienation, ideology, and 
class consciousness to understand the dynamics of marginalization. In reinterpreting Mar,x 
Horkheimer, through Traditional and Critical Theory, invites his colleagues to use theory as a 
mode of criticism to understand and ultimately change the organization of society. The first 
dimension of this new critique is to historically examine how social structures have shaped and 
marginalized certain groups. Second, Horkheimer believed that critical theorists should conduct 
interdisciplinary social research, analyzing politics, economics, sociology, and its story, among 
other disciplines, to holistically understand the relationship of domination in a society (Littlejohn 
& Foss, 2009). In this way, the critical theory uses marxism as a theory to understand inequality 
in a community. 

In various critical theories thinking, three essential characteristics form the core of the 
critical theory. First, the critical tradition tries to understand the accepted systems, power 
structures, and beliefs (or ideologies) that dominate society. Furthermore, the necessary theory, 
which from the beginning has taken sides with the values of justice and humanity, first builds a 
crucial awareness of society intellectually. The critical theory understands the social reality that 
shackles and cages the capitalist system, which despises and is full of injustice (Sholahudin, 
2020). Second, critical theorists are generally interested in exposing oppressive social conditions 
and criticizing the structure of domination reproduced from false human consciousness through 
perpetuated ideology (as Marx called it), reification ("to deify something", as Georg Lukacs does). 



 

International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Sciences 
ISSN 2720-9644 (print); ISSN 2721-0871 (online) 

https://journalkeberlanjutan.com/index.php/ijesss 

 

317 

Hegemony (called A. Gramci), one-dimensional thinking (H. Marcuse), and metaphysics of 
existence (Derrida) (Sholahudin, 2020). Third, the critical tradition creates awareness to combine 
theory and action. As Horkheimer does not separate theory and praxis (Sindhunata, 2019). 
Normative theories act by blending influencing society and marginalized groups to achieve 
change. 

Various schools of thought in critical theory arise because of the dialectical process that 
shows the interests of each character. The Frankfurt School theorist most interested in the 
psychoanalytic dimension of social criticism was Erich Fromm. In his work entitled The 
Development of the Dogma of Christ (1931), Fromm shows that psychoanalysis will sharpen 
Marx's critique of ideology (Sindhunata, 2019). Fromm's thought about ideology as a form of 
social rationalization is based on mental or material fiction attempts to mediate the ideological 
concept proposed by Marx and Freud (Sutikna, 2008). Theodor Adorno focuses on the 
relationship between the environment and humans. Adorno's thinking about 'total negativity' 
assumes that modern humans have sacrificed their lives for instrumental technological 
rationality (Sunarto, 2016). Another critical theoretical scientist, Friedrich Pollock, with his 
thoughts on state capitalism which is believed to easily help democracy free humankind from the 
injustices of traditional capitalism to dominate domestic and international markets outside the 
boundaries of formal law (Olson, 2018). Another early generation figure was Walter Benjamin, 
with his ideas on how two opposing traditions of legal theory known as positive law and natural 
law each evaluated legal violence. In Benjamin's view, violence is natural and has no meaning 
but is a material or instrument that can achieve legal goals when the time is right en 2018). 

Jürgen Habermas, the last figure of the Frankfurt Scho, covers a contemporary embodiment 
of the ccriticritical theorization. Habermas's thoughts were heavily influenced by the radical 
traditions of Adorno, Horkheimer, and Marcuse. Habermas developed the Theory of 
Communicative Action ( TCA ) to complement the weaknesses of Marx's historical materialism. 
As a macro-sociological theory, historical materialism is considered to have two weaknesses for 
critical projects. First, completeness does not guarantee explanatory power; second, careful 
examination of standard essential explanations, such as ideological theory, requires a different 
social theory (Bohman, 1999). Habermas' Theory of Communicative Action succeeded in 
developing a two-level social theory. On the one hand, it includes an analysis of communicative 
rationality in which rational potential is built into everyday conversation; and views of modern 
society and modernization on the other hand (White, 1989). 

In the study of communication, adherents of the critical tradition are generally interested in 
how messages reinforce emphasis in society. In addition to being interested in social action, 
critical theorists also focus on discourses and texts that promote certain ideologies, form and 
maintain power understand and undermine certain groups or classes' interests (interests). Tical 
groups take a more philosophical approach, emphasize the broader social structure in which 
communication occurs, and focus on the issue of “who controls a communication system” 
(Severin and Tankard, 2005: 18-19). The essential part that must be understood in the praxis of 
critical theory is that this theory must be understood as a set of loose theoretical frameworks, all 
of which aim to criticize domination with the ultimate goal of social change. Therefore, there are 
many concepts that critical theorists use to evaluate society, depending on the focus of their 
analysis. 

Questions of privilege and power are considered necessary in communication theory and 
are themes of the c /tradition (Littlejohn and Foss, 2009: 68-73). Prominent identity characteristics 
regarding skin color, nationality, language, religion, gender, sexual orientation, regional issues, 
income levels, and other aspects of individual identity will create social differences that are 
considered very important by adherents of critical traditions. Critical theories are concerned with 
how these differences accumulate power, pressure, and privilege due to certain forms of 
communication in society, thus making the critical tradition important in today's study of 
communication science. 



 

International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Sciences 
ISSN 2720-9644 (print); ISSN 2721-0871 (online) 

https://journalkeberlanjutan.com/index.php/ijesss 

 

318 

Social in society. This study wants to dismantle the mechanism of domination in 
presidential political communication as a symbolic dimension built by the government 
(president, head of state, head of directorment, state actor) who tend to be giddy, doubtful, and 
indecisive in responding to incidents of intolerance and violence with religious backgrounds as 
irregular phenomena. For this reason, a critical paradigm and critical theory are needed to 
uncover the hidden context and ideology behind the president's political communication through 
texts and talks in social and political contexts. Therefore, the use of critical theory in this research 
is a surgical tool against various f hidden intentions that political communicators often carry out 
through manipulating, influencing, and coercing to obtain a specific allocation of power.  

To uncover the explicit and implicit factors in the text of the president's communication on 
the Meliana case, a conceptual framework is needed to dissect both in terms of the text and its 
content. The researcher chose the critical theory because it provides a comprehensive perspective 
in outlining the intent and purpose behind the president's political communication. The nature of 
the critical tradition that considers all problems inseparable from the dimensions of social 
structure is an advantage that helps answer research questions more specifically and sharply. 
Therein lies the strength of the critical theory, namely seeing phenomena from the point of view 
of realism, trying to find more substantial answers and not only being satisfied with positive facts 
on the surface. 

Walter Benjamin's Critique of Power. Walter Benjamin was one of the early Frankfurt 
School and other great figures of the 1920s and 1930,s including Theodor Adorno, Friedrich, 
Pollock, Leo Lowenthal, Herbert Marcuse, Siegfried Kracaueried Kracauer, and Erich Fromm 
(Ferris, 2008). Long before he came into contact with Marx's thoughts, Benjamin grew up to be a 
rebellious teenager when, at the age of 14, his parents sent him for two years of experimental 
education at the Haubinda school in Thuringia (Caygill, Coles & Klomowsi, 2012). The Haubinda 
School is a progressive counter-cultural institution founded in 1901 where Gustav Wyneken, 
known as an educational reformer, was on the teaching staff at that time. Wyneken advocates 
youth solidarity to achieve spiritual and intellectual independence naturally. For Wyneken, this 
can be a way to achieve a cultural revolution in society (Ferris, 2008). After that, Benjamin also 
studied the type of philosophy known as neo-Kantianism, a late 19th-century development of 
critical tradition theory inherited by Immanuel Kant. 

Benjamin's critical philosophical thought was influenced by figures such as George Lukacs 
through his book History and Class Consciousness (1923), which was Benjamin’s experience with 
marxism. Furthermore, Benjamin's criticism grew stronger and found a form after meeting two 
other figures on different occasions. First, Bertolt Brecht, the Marxist playwright and poet best 
known for his theory of theatrical alienation, is also a radical political thinker. Second, Theodor 
Adorno, co-founder of the Institute for Social Research (better known as the Frankfurt School), 
practiced Marxist-influenced social and cultural criticism. After their first meeting in Frankfurt, 
Benjamin and Adorno met again early in 1928 in Berlin and remained friends until Benjamin's 
death (Ferris, 2008). 

The difference between Brecht and the Frankfurt School lies in different understandings of 
how social change should be produced. Brecht seeks immediate answers by exploring the Effect 
of Alienation (Verfremdungseffekt) as a means of experiencing the material conditions in which 
art and culture are made. Brecht intends to change existing media su, ch as theater, opera, etc., no 
longer functioning to support institutions (social and political) or merely consumptive of art but 
to make art a medium that influences social change. Brecht's aim was to re-function institutions 
from places of entertainment to become organs of mass communication. In this way, Brecht 
intends to make changes directly by involving the segments of society that benefit the most. 
Brecht's radical political thought was influential in the years of his friendship with Benjamin. As 
for Adorno, this approach exemplifies the reductive thinking shown by vulgar Marxism. In 
contrast, the Frankfurt School remained committed to the intellectual development of criticism as 
a source of social and political change. These two pulls of influence provided insight for 



 

International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Sciences 
ISSN 2720-9644 (print); ISSN 2721-0871 (online) 

https://journalkeberlanjutan.com/index.php/ijesss 

 

319 

Benjamin to develop a more idiosyncratic Marxism that combined elements of the Brecht and 
Frankfurt Schools. Benjamin has a distinct understanding of how to achieve goals. For Benjamin, 
criticism makes this goal significant, but this same goal cannot always be realized through 
criticism (Ferris, 2008). 

Like most neo-Marxist Frankfurt School thinkers who credit Kant as the first critical 
philosopher, Benjamin agrees with Kant's notion of subject autonomy in shaping knowledge. In 
the view of the Frankfurt School, everything is the result of autonomous human subjective 
knowledge (Sindhunata, 2019). However, in particular, Benjamin makes a difference to Kant's 
idea of basing knowledge on the a priori human mind. Beyond Kant's theory of a priori 
categories, Benjamin values human experience more like knowledge. This view then influenced 
Benjamin in his criticism of power. This can be seen in Benjamin's expression of political thought 
in Lukacs' influence on historical materialism. Lukacs' approach views history as a condition of 
material existence rather than an ideological position promoted by the controlling classes of 
society. Benjamin uses these conditions to expose and critique the ideology at work in these 
positions by initiating a project that aims to reshape what history is (Ferris, 2008) fundamentally. 
History for Benjamin is not just an ideological narrative. Still, it must have material evidence of 
how a society or culture is organized and how that evidence mediates political and economic 
forces. In this view, Benjamin clearly demands material evidence that manifests through 
experience after experience in human history in which the controlling classes rule. 

Benjamin argues that power can be understood by entering into the problem of the 
conditions of possibilities for the reality of power itself to capture its distinctive character, 
existence, and influence on humans. Based on this thought, Benjamin understands that power is 
always present as an experience in all dimensions of humanity (Dua, 2007). Benjamin also 
emphasized that the most fundamental experience of management is an experience of originality 
and an idea that touches and enters the realm of human history that longs for justice. So, the 
condition of the possibilities of power is the human aesthetic experience of justice or, more 
concretely, just power (Dua, 2007). 

In an essay entitled Critique of Violence (1921), Benjamin positions the task of criticism: 
showing the relationship of violence to law and justice. Here, criticism is understood not as an 
assessment but as a means to understand law and justice. Benjamin's analysis begins by giving 
two thoughts on violence. The first is called natural law. According to natural law, violence 
occurs as something that cannot be avoided by humans (in the sense that violence is something 
that humans naturally possess). As a result, its significance can only be judged according to the 
final result it produces (Ferris, 2008). Natural law refers to the divine law that frees up space for 
human movement in a total social area intending to obtain the purification of life. Thus, in 
principle, divine power is pure power. This concept of power explicitly separates justice and 
injustice, good and evil (Dua, 2008). The second is called positive law. This law rejects the use of 
goals to justify violence (Ferris, 2008). Benjamin saw the law as an attempt to ensure that political 
decisions (jointly) are carried out consistently, especially in everyday situations. However, the 
practice will be different when the community is in an emergency. In such cases, society needs a 
political leader who can make drastic decisions, which can be extreme against the law itself (Dua, 
2007). Thus Benjamin views power as a pure means that allows humans to be as creative as 
possible. Benjamin's political theory is a pure means not to establish and assert power but to 
deconstruct it. Benjamin finally put power as the ability to make decisions or separate. 

Practices of Power and Power Relations. The concept of power does not always have a 
single meaning because it is influenced by the assumptions and perspectives used and has an 
understanding constantly evolving based on space and time (Maliki, 2010). Poconstantlyten 
contains worrying qualities and becomes a frightening specter because it can cause bad luck for 
major people (Dua, 2007). The discussion of political science about power is always closely 
related to the concept of the use of power in various forms such as influence, persuasion, 
manipulation, coercion, force, and authority. These forms are seen in every struggle of the social 



 

International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Sciences 
ISSN 2720-9644 (print); ISSN 2721-0871 (online) 

https://journalkeberlanjutan.com/index.php/ijesss 

 

320 

pressures of society (including the state) to obtain and maintain power, exercise power, influence 
other parties, or even oppose the exercise of power. 

One easy-to-understand concept of power can be referred to from Wilby Robson (1954) in 
Surbakti (2010). According to Robson, power is the ability to influence others to think and behave 
according to the influencer’s will. In Robson’s view, power is a form of interaction between those 
who influence and those who are influenced, or one influences, the other obeys (Surbakti, 2010). 
In Gramsci's view (Simon, 2004), this interaction occurs in a civil society social relationship that 
manifests in various organizations that make up civil society and the state apparatus. Gramsci's 
view, as quoted by Simon (2004), states that, in power relations, civil society consists of a complex 
network of various social power relations that dominate each other, such as conflicts between 
investors and workers, domination of the apparatus with a coercive monopoly on civil society, 
local domination, regional domination. Racial domination, bureaucratic, and other forms of 
domination where a specific power is exercised in the form of organizations and institutions. 

Power in the prospective state's perspective existence of a structure monopolizing the legal 
use of physical coercion against groups of people living in areas with clear boundaries. Thus, 
according to Surbakti, the state is a grouping of people based on similar typical biology but on 
the similarity of power structure that governs them (Surbakti, 2010:52). It shows the concept of 
the state as a political society with its four elements consisting of population, fixed territory 
(definitely), government, and sovereignty, which act legally with coercive power to establish 
common consensus and maintain the universal conditions of social order. The state is perceived 
as a coercive force that is effective and permeates the vital joints of people's lives. Still, on the 
other hand, the state is seen in a neutral face because the formation of the state is very dependent 
on the real forces in society itself. 

Where there is power, there is resistance to it. Mutual dominance between social forces in 
society to class struggles and social movements. This conflict affects the character and form of 
state institutions and civil society organizations, resulting in that struggles are not merely 
instruments of the ruling class but reflect the balance of power in society. This process is known 
as positional warfare (Simon, 2004, p. 111). This positional war does not rule out the possibility of 
violent resistance and opposition to the coercive organs of the state. The link between coercion 
and the state is also underlined by the description of Philip Bobbitt (2002) in Heywood (2004), 
who argues that the state is an 'institution of war'. The picture above shows the position of the 
government in the structure of a country, namely being the 'center to regulate' (Heywood, 2004). 
According to Heywood, the government becomes the executor of state power to regulate in a 
broad sense, namely to the governor exercising control over other people. Therefore the 
government cannot be understood separately from the society it governs. 

This study clarifies what Simon (2004) calls a war of positions, or what Philip Bobbitt (2002) 
emphasizes as a state as a 'war-making institution'. President Joko Widodo's statements at the 
beginning of the riots in Tanjungbalai, wringer by complaints from a Chinese Buddhist named 
Meliana, show an ideological position that is at odds with the attitudes and actions of the 
majority community in Tanjungbalai who destroy houses of worship and places of residents. The 
president's attitude to take firm action against the rioters with the background of the SARA issue 
is a declaration of 'war' against 'other ideologies' contrary to the state’s ideology. The same thing 
is also seen in the president's statement that he does not want to intervene in Meliana's legal case, 
even though many observers think that the legal issue is unfair because of the pressure from the 
majority masses. 

These two difIn responding to the same case (cases of intolerance), these two different 
attitudes refer to the president's position as head of government whose function is to maintain 
public order and take collective action, including rolling over other people or groups. In addition, 
because the government operates in a political system involving parties, elections, pressure 
groups, and the media, the president appears to be cautious in responding to people's pressure to 
exercise political control on a national, local Tanjungbalai scale in Indonesia. 



 

International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Sciences 
ISSN 2720-9644 (print); ISSN 2721-0871 (online) 

https://journalkeberlanjutan.com/index.php/ijesss 

 

321 

 
 
METHODS 

 This research method uses a critical paradigm with a qualitative approach. Qualitative 
research is used to investigate, find, describe, and explain the quality or features of social 
influences that cannot be explained, measured, or described through a quantitative approach 
(Sugiyono, 2016, p.15). Critical Necessary research sex examines conditions revealing the hidden 
structures in texts and ideologies portrayed by the mass media. The social influence in question is 
a phenomenon experienced by research subjects such as behavior, perception, motivation, action, 
etc., holistically, and using description in the form of words and language, in a particular natural 
context and by utilizing various natural methods (Moleong, 2014, p.6). 

Critical discourse studies discuss how texts used by one party or group create discourses 
that reproduce social dominance, namely the abuse of power by a group against groups that are 
dominated and trying to fight against the abuse of power through discourse (Van Dijk, 2009, p. 
63). In this study, Van Dijk's discourse analysis framework examined the presidential 
communication text related to the Meliana Tanjungbalai case. In addition to looking at social 
irregularities, Van Dijk's analysis also examines mental representations and the processes in 
language users when producing and understanding discourse and taking part in verbal 
interactions. And the extent to which they are involved in the exchange of knowledge, ideology, 
or beliefs of certain social groups (Van Dijk, 2009, p.64). 

This research seeks to reveal the irregularities behind the president's political 
communication in responding to the problem of intolerance in Indonesia. By analyzing the text of 
the president's communication published in the mass media, the researcher wants to know the 
intent and purpose of the statement concerning the president's position as a public official and 
pandal actor. The researcher believes that the observed attitudes and statements of the president 
are ' virtual reality ' that have been shaped by historical processes and social, cultural, and 
political-economic forces. The researcher believes that the president's direct statement in the 
Meliana case in Tanjungbalai results from the formation of social, cultural, and political-economic 
forces. The reason for choosing this qualitative research is based on the stability of the researcher 
according to his background knowledge and research experience. In addition, the nature of the 
problem to be investigated is also a reason. 
 
RESULT AND DISCUSSION 

Double Faced Communication as a Power Strategy. Presidential communications in the 
case of intolerance in Tanjungbalai that are the focus of this research are: first, in a statement that 
shows President Joko Widodo 's firm stance when he stated: "…there is no place for those who 
are unable to tolerate in our country, let alone with violence." He wanted to show this firm stance 
by ordering the National Police Chief to use coercive measures to take firm action against the 
perpetrators of intolerance. Second, the form of presidential communication in the same case, but 
with different tendencies, namely hiding behind the constitutional basis by not intervening in the 
legal case that befell Meliana, rather than fighting for justice for victims of conflicts and riots with 
SARA nuances. 

Presidential communication is closely related to the practice of power exercised by political 
leaders to gain, maintain, or increase relative power over the people they lead. Power as a 
political element can be seen in the roles played by national leaders, heads of state, and other 
political leaders in manifesting statements, attitudes, acts, and facts, as w well as setting prior 
cities and implementing programs. Power in the context of state administration is also related to 
the interest of maintaining and maintaining the value system that is the consensus of a 
society/nation (ideology) as the way that is believed to be the most considered good in achieving 
the goals of the state through persuasion, mediation, and coercive efforts. 



 

International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Sciences 
ISSN 2720-9644 (print); ISSN 2721-0871 (online) 

https://journalkeberlanjutan.com/index.php/ijesss 

 

322 

In addition, the involvement of the role of social groups outside the government, such as 
NU and Muhammadiyah, is also a method used in the ideological struggle. The relationship 
between the Government, NU, and Muhammadiyah in the context of intolerance shows a 
complex network of power relations that dominate and influence each other and then form the 
mainstream discourse regarding the issue of intolerance. Power and social domination are often 
organized and institutionalized, allowing for more effective control and enabling common forms 
of power reproduction (Dijk, 2008). The relations of these institutions form a social force to 
(within certain limits) exercise control over the actions and ideas of (members) of other groups, 
thereby limiting freedom of action, influencing knowledge, and intervening in the attitudes or 
ideologies of others. These social forces can be in the form of the government, religious 
organizations, and mass organizations, including the social power network (alliance) of the three 
(Government, NU, and Muhammadiyah) on the one hand; or manifest in the majority group in a 
particular area such as the majority of Muslims in Tanjungbalai as the opposite side.    

Power is dynamic and conflictual in the public sphere when social groups compete for state 
attention or control (Dobratz, 2012). In a firm attitude, the presidential authority, through 
coercive means, namely the state police institution (Kapolri), shows itself as the dominant force 
with the necessary resources to resolve conflicts between the groups it dominates. The practice of 
power and how power is maintained shows the struggle of the dominant ideology by the 
government through the use of power. The representation of the struggle for shared values and 
norms involves using high authority from the president, for example, by assigning the National 
Police Chief. 

Normatively, this statement is needed to calm the public, prevent the spread of riots and 
provide direction to the officers on duty in the field. In plain view, this attitude manifests state 
power in ensuring that security gu the law is cau. And security gives given red citizens while 
maintaining the Pancasila ideology as the national ideology (dominant ideology). However, 
another statement regarding the court's verdict against Meliana, where no one can intervene, 
shows the opposite of the intended firmness. The construction of the president's statements on 
various occasions regarding the case of intolerance that befell Meliana in Tanjungbalai shows a 
double-faced presidential communication strategy. In the view of the critical paradigm, the 
differences in attitudes that appear in the president's communication show, in disguise, the 
president's political intentions to negotiate power against influential forces that are pressing. 

The president's firmness in his statement to take action against the perpetrators of 
intolerance is not shown by his attitude and actions regarding legal justice for victims of 
intolerance. When faced with various critical voices regarding the 'unfair' punishment for victims 
of acts of intolerance, the president tends to distance himself from legal policies regarding the 
court's verdict against Meliana. The president's statement regarding legal issues in the Meliana 
case shows a 'safeguard' attitude. On the one hand, condemning the perpetrators of intolerance, 
but at the same time not willing to openly defend the victims of intolerance under the pretext of 
'cannot intervene in decisions'. This statement shows that the president's communication is 
normative by fully respecting the Judi judiciary's process and authority. 

The president's communication in media statements uses the technique of 'self-
victimization' equating his case with Meliana and communicating to the public that he is also a 
'victim' who must accept the judge's verdict in the case of forest and land fires. The president 
emphasized that even a Head of State can be found guilty by the court. This statement fortifies 
President Jokowi from the public's view that the court's decision against Meliana is unfair. 
Jokowi considers his position correct not to interfere with court decisions in the Meliana case. 
Such presidential communication efforts are a strategy to avoid public pressure that demands the 
president to act consistently regarding the issue of intolerance in Tanjung Balai. Instead, the 
president equates his legal position with the victim of intolerance by showing that he has an 
equal status with other citizens before the law. 



 

International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Sciences 
ISSN 2720-9644 (print); ISSN 2721-0871 (online) 

https://journalkeberlanjutan.com/index.php/ijesss 

 

323 

The two statements both hide behind the foundations of constitutionalism and democracy, 
intending to embrace opposing groups. On the one hand, the firmness of attitude in the 
president's statement is addressed to the audience who sympathize with the Meliana case; on the 
other hand, the normative statement not to intervene in court decisions is addressed to the 
majority group. In Heywood's (2004) view, constitutionalism in a democratic society is nothing 
more than an outer shell that hides the dominance of the 'power elite' or 'ruling class. The 
democratic process forces governments to respond to popular pressure, either because political 
parties beat each other to gain power or because pressure groups make unrelenting demands on 
the ruling political elite. The president's actions can be understood in his position primarily as a 
political actor and communicator who resolves conflicts by compromise, conciliation, and 
negotiation. In Defense of Politics (1962), Heywood cites Bernard Crick's view, where politics is 
seen as 'the solution to the order problem that chooses conciliation over violence and coercion. 
Conciliation of competing interests or groups requires that power be spread widely throughout 
society and divided according to their respective claims for the welfare and survival of the whole 
society (Heywood, 2004). 

Observing the president's communication in the case that happened to Meliana in 
Tanjungbalai cannot be separated from the power relations in civil society forming the state, 
which consists of a network of various social forces that fight and dominate each other. This 
relationship is evident when approaching the contestation of the succession of national 
leadership in which social, political, economic, and ideological forces initially separated 
themselves into an increasingly consolidated and concentrated political power. Then compete 
with each other until one of the combined social forces wins so that they can unite various social, 
political, and economic goals and interests. Until finally created the hegemony of a strong social 
group against other lower groups (Simon, 2004). This power relation is also seen in nominalized 
texts/phrases such as 'all', majority', 'minority', indicating the whole, most, and a small part of a 
certain amount; it does not just apply to one or two people. This rhetoric places the position of 
the conflicting parties no longer specifically on individual A and group X but in two broad 
categorizations that represent local and national socio-cultures, namely the majority group and 
the minority group. This shows that the president's interpretation of the Meliana incident in 
Tanjungbalai has a political dimension. Therefore, the narrative presented by the president is 
normative. The aim is to avoid the after-effects of the case and avoid personal accusations against 
the president (accusations of the president being pro-PKI or the issue of the president being anti-
Islam). 

The president's communication that seems ambiguous, indecisive, and tends to be 'safe' can 
also be observed by looking at the political constellation that has occurred since the 2014 
Presidential Election (Pilpres) to the political dynamics of the 2017 DKI Jakarta Governor Election 
(Pilgub). The Anies-Sandi pair in the 2017 DKI gubernatorial election was very thick with 
religious symbolism, even building closeness with religious figures ad the mass organization 
Islamic Defenders Front (FPI) led by Habib Riziek, which was at odds with one of the governor 
candidates as political opponents (Aryojati, 2017). The prominence of primordial identity was 
strengthened when one candidate pair was caught in a case insulting the Koran QS Al-Maidah 
[5]: 51. This massively succeeded in raising the religious spirit of Muslims and sparked a wave of 
pressure from several Islamic organizations in Jakarta and outside Jakarta in several 
demonstrations of peace. This phenomenon shows the strong relationship between religion 
(Islam) and politics (the state) as a symptom of identity politics. It shows that religious identity 
can be used pragmatically to exploit religious sentiments at local and national levels. 

Meanwhile, the legacy of the 2014 Presidential Election (Pilpres) divides the national 
political map into two forces, namely the Red and White Coalition (KMP), consistonsisting of a 
coalition of the Golkar Party, Gerindra Party, PKS, PAN, PPP, and PBB, which carries Prabowo 
Subijanto-Hatta Rajasa; facing the Great Indonesia Coalition (KIH) in which there are PDIP, PKB, 
Nasdem Party, Hanura Party, and PKPI which champion the Joko Widodo-Jusuf Kalla pair. The 



 

International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Sciences 
ISSN 2720-9644 (print); ISSN 2721-0871 (online) 

https://journalkeberlanjutan.com/index.php/ijesss 

 

324 

two camps are politically concentrated in a relatively balanced position of power (Romli, 2017). 
This composition makes President Joko Widodo's leadership position threatened with instability 
in controlling parliament. Meanwhile, the KMP, as a rival political force, is dominated by Islamic 
parties that have ideological voters at the grassroots. This means that, apart from dealing with 
Islamic parties as political opponents, Joko Widodo's camp also deals directly with the Islamic 
voter base. 

 The meaning of SARA and intolerance events in Tanjungbalai with a security scheme to 
maintain stability so that the wheels of the economy and social life continue to run is considered 
appropriate and perfect. However, a settlement at the grassroots level has not yet reached a 
common ground. The process of delegating authority at the lower level is often problematic due 
to the clash of interests at the regional level. It is understandable given the intense public 
pressure, which is allegedly very dominant at the local level. In the Meliana case, there was a 
battle of discourse and ideology that confronted the issue of tolerance and diversity on the one 
hand, in contrast to the domination of the majority who urged the disaddress law enforcement 
against people or groups who were considered to 'blaspheme' sacred symbols and therefore 
forced the apparatus to make Meliana as a suspect in the blasphemy case. 

The majority insistence in Bryan Turner's view (199,3), as quoted by Dobratz (2012), is a 
social practice (juridical, political, economic, and cultural) that defines a person as a competent 
member of society and which has consequences for the flow of resources to people or social 
groups. . That is, this kind of social practice forms the collective identity of the community so that 
it affects the distribution of power in society. Social practices manifest in social movements as 
organized efforts to encourage/push or resist change in society that rely, at least in part, on non-
institutionalized forms of political action (Marx and McAdam 1994: 73). 

The impact in the Meliana case was strengthened when the reproduction of messages 
related to complaints against the sound of the wild call to prayer was rolled out through chain 
messages and social networks. At that time, there was a mobilization of resources that formed 
awareness of the collective identity of the majority group. Collective identity is a shared 
definition of a group based on shared interests, solidarity, and member experiences (Dobratz, 
2012). According to Taylor & Whittier in Dobratz (2012), This collective identity model can be 
applied to various social movements to engage in multiple actions that challenge the dominant 
political and social system. 

Therefore, the Palace's concern was that strengthening collective identity would generate 
quite strong resistance from the Muslim majority group to the president's communication 
message. In conflicts with SARA nuances with the division of the majority versus the minority, 
the role of the majority group is feared to trigger a wider conflict and attack the government due 
to dissatisfaction with court decisions or due to intervention by the president. The impact of the 
dissatisfaction of the majority will lead to a crisis of government legitimacy. In addition, Joko 
Widodo's interests as a political actor have also influenced his 'carefulness' in carrying out 
presidential communications in cases of intolerance. This concerns Joko Widodo's reputation 
among the political elite and approval among the wider community, which is a determining 
factor in ensuring that he gets political resources from his supporters and embraces the majority 
group that has been in plain view of the opposition. 

Law, Power, and Communication of the President. One of the president's communication 
strategies in the Meliana case is to place the issue in a disperse of legal neutrality. It is called 
discourse because what the president says is a language practice that public officials in Indonesia 
always use. Public officials often take refuge in Indonesia’s discourse as a state of the law when 
dealing with cases involving personal or oligarchic interests. However, in practice, 'rule of law' 
has been applied inconsistently. The manifestation of this discourse in legal action differs from 
case to case according to the interests and actors being protected. 

The use of the reason for the neutrality of the law, as reflected in the statement that the 
judge also hammers the president,' departs from the argument that the law is above power. Law 



 

International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Sciences 
ISSN 2720-9644 (print); ISSN 2721-0871 (online) 

https://journalkeberlanjutan.com/index.php/ijesss 

 

325 

is believed to be able to control and regulate the exercise of power. In cases where the law does 
not address power, at least it has some autonomy relative to the practice of power. In other 
words, the law is not an instrument of power. 

In the idea of natural law, power is an instrument of justice. Justice as a goal can be 
pursued  (Dua, 2007). Goals thus become the normative basis for the practice of power, including 
the use of force. Natural law views that humans are driven by a kind of natural desire, namely 
the desire to achieve trans-historic good, namely goodness that is cross-historical, 
intergenerational, and universal (Abbott, 2020). Justice is one of those universal goals. Violence as 
an instrument of power can be used to achieve justice. Benjamin criticizes the natural law view 
that violence is a natural  (Benjamin, 2004)datum. Violence is a raw material, a natural fact of life, 
and,d therefore, can not be interpreted in terms of justice, legitimacy, or legality (Abbott, 2020). 

Positive law rejects natural law arguments; power becomes valg as the goal is good, namely 
achieving justice (Dua, 2017). The positive law argument is that there is no natural good which is 
the universal goal of man. Therefore, there is no basis for humans, especially institutions and 
those in power, to use violence to achieve that goal. There are no universally legitimate means, 
To achieve real truth, t. In the perspective of positive law, both means and ends must have an 
acceptable moral basis. Power as a means of justice or an instrument to achieve other goals must 
have legitimacy. It can be accepted and supported if power is accepted and obeyed because it has 
a normative foundation. Positive law in the form of law and its supporting apparatus is the 
normative basis. 

This idea was criticized by Walter Benjamin, who rejected both natural law and positive 
law arguments. In Benjamin's view, both legal perspectives lead to the same thing, namely the 
use of legitimate means. Natural law discusses the purpose of legitimizing means; positive law 
emphasizes legitimate means in achieving goals. These two legal perspectives trap political 
institutions in using violence and human oppression. 

Law, there using not overcome power. Law is the basis for the legitimacy of power and, at 
the same time, an instrument of power. In practice, power transcends the law. When dealing with 
power, the law experiences powerlessness (Dua, 2017:63). If the law operates under the control of 
power, its function as a means of achieving justice cannot be trusted. In the name of law, the state 
and the institutions of power take action, especially through instrumentation, to support the 
power itself. Thus, it is naive to rely on legal orchestration as a path to justice. 

The use of law as an instrument of power is mainly carried out by the state and officials 
who represent the state through the state of exception mechanism. Carl Schmitt put forward this 
terminology sovereign state overstepping the law in the interest of the public’s safety. Schmitt 
even referred to sovereignty as the right to declare exceptions. What is meant by exception is 
state policy to state that a public issue must be handled in a way outside the normal process of 
democratic laws and regulations. Exception conditions normal politics of exception. The second 
refers to placing a matter above the regular rule of law. In security studies, state actions are called 
extstandardary measures (extraordinary measures)  (Barry Buzan, 1998). Fast procedures 
characterize this action, wide-scale policies, violations of the game’s rules, and democratic 
principles, removing the role of the public game's rules as the main instrument. 

The rationale behind the politics of exclusion is what Walter Benjamin calls a state of 
emergency. Benjamin even argues that a crisis is not an exception but a (Doxtader, 200l). The 
difference between these two orders is very clear. Exceptions refer to policies, including the use 
of force, that is teare temporary due to a momentary need to respond to circumstances ed to be 
dangerous. The rule is a mechanism that is durable, settled, practiced, and reproduced 
continuously by the holder of power. The state of emergency is a form of control because it is 
practiced repeatedly by the holder of power or the state. 

In many cases, a state of emergency can involve another dangerous situation where the 
power holder declares that the state is in an existentially threatened condition. This threat must 
be immediately responded to with swift action even though it must use violence and violate 



 

International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Sciences 
ISSN 2720-9644 (print); ISSN 2721-0871 (online) 

https://journalkeberlanjutan.com/index.php/ijesss 

 

326 

justice. Emergency claims depart from the definition of insecurity (perceived insecurity) by 
power holders, although real threats do not show a strong degree of emergency. 

The politics of exclusion are thus to raise an emergency or emergency status issue. 
Restrictions on public freedoms and emergency status issues are often at the expense of 
marginalized groups. For security, national safety, stability, or other emergencies, the state 
suspends freedom and delays the fair law on citizens. The most affected victims in emergency 
politics are those who do not have access to power. 

The communication process plays an important the declaration of conditions requiring 
exceptions and authorizing the exercise of power over the law. In the communication process, 
language and discourse are used to announce that certain developments place public safety at a 
certain level of risk. Crucial officials form facts about existential threats that pose risks through 
language utterance status of risk status determined through open public discussion and sufficient 
time. This soft risk is determined by using the general assessed. 

In the Tanjungbalai case, the president's communication actions demonstrate the 
submission of the law by power. The process and content of communication are not used at the 
event. Instead, they become a means of protecting the president's power. The president achieved 
not meet what he meant by protections. First, the communication process is not used to 
deconstruct into and reconstruct. Deconstruction into dissecting lies behind the discourse on 
insulting religion, who and what forces support this discourse, and how many such the discourse 
on insulting religion is supported or rejected. Deconstruction allows the Meliana case to be seen 
as part of human interaction, not as an object of legal provisions. 

The aim is to reconstruct a new meaning in the Tanjungbalai case discourse. The president 
can propose a new discourse out contemporary the discourse on insulting religion. The discourse 
that can be developed is that the Meliana case is common in neighboring life. 'Complaints about 
neighborly living' can be developed as a counter-discourse to the claims of 'religious insults'. If 
the discourse of 'neighborhood complaints' becomes dominant, then riots and the destruction of 
Buddhist houses of worship become a 'deviation against the culture of tolerance', which is 
claimed to be the core 'gene' in the body of the Indonesian nation. 

The president did not dismantle and develop alternative discourses in the communication 
process but agreed with the dominant discourse, namely blasphemy. The president does not 
make legal breakthroughs to achieve justice but uses legal reasons to protect his power. Meliana's 
sentence is a 'road to safety' used by the president to escape the pressures of the context of a 
power struggle with his opponents. As described earlier, Meliana being a suspect resulted from 
strong pressure from several leaders of the Al-Makhsum Mosque together with some local 
Islamic organizations. In addition, the North Sumatra Province MUI Fatwa stated that Meliana 
committed blasphemy in Tanjungbalai City and asked the Police to follow up on the law 
enforcement process against Meliana immediately. 

To legitimize the application of the law but ignore justice, the president consciously or 
unconsciously places the Tanjungbalai case as a state of exception in Schmitt and Agamben's 
terms or a state of emergency in Benjamin's words. Although it does not explicitly state the issue 
of emergency, the narrative developed by the president shows a tendency towards the politics of 
exclusion that characterizes the state of emergency. This appears in two ways. First, the president 
saw that the Meliana case could spread social unrest to other places and threaten wider social 
stability. Thus, the Tanjungbalai case is an existential threat to social cohesion, which is the 
foundation of the Indonesian nation-state. A special policy should handle this type of threat. 
Second, this policy is handled by direct assignment of the National Police Chief to handle riots 
indicating the specific scale of action that characterizes an emergency. Complaints about the 
sound of the call to prayer and the riots that followed were thus raised by the president through 
a communication process to the emergency position justifying the violation of justice even 
though the scale of the riots was local and was still able to be controlled by the state apparatus. 



 

International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Sciences 
ISSN 2720-9644 (print); ISSN 2721-0871 (online) 

https://journalkeberlanjutan.com/index.php/ijesss 

 

327 

The relationship between power and legal position becomes interesting to analyze through 
the president's statement as a legal 'victim' in a fire case cannot be seen as a form of the rule of 
law overpower. It can be interpreted that the use of the discourse of equality in law is a strategy 
of power. The president lets the law work to protect power even if it violates justice. Violation of 
justice is justified by the president's success in placing the Tanjungbalai case into a state of 
emergency. The emergency logic built is as follows. The Tanjungbalai case was a riot caused by 
blasphemy. Blasphemy is a sensitive issue and threatens public peace and even the existence of 
the Indonesian nation. Therefore, extraordinary actions must be carried out through law 
enforcement, even though the way the law is enforced violates the sense of justice. Thus, the law 
is used by power in two ways. The first direction is to punish the perpetrators of the riots who 
cause huge losses. At the same time, punishing Meliana with a verdict is unfair if it is measured 
from the losses caused and the impact on public security. The ultimate goal is the preservation of 
presidential power. Thus, power is using the law, although it appears to be subject to legal 
equality on the surface. 

 
CONCLUSION 

In general, this study president's communication through messages conveyed concerning the 
case of intolerance in Tanjungbalai shows a gap or inconsistency. The analysis of the text of the 
president's speech shows a double-faced presidential communication strategy. Using Van Dijk's 
critical discourse analysis, this study finds that the roots of inconsistency come from two 
dimensions of the president's public communication: the dimensions of social cognition and the 
wider, broader text. The inconsistency of statements and actions develops from the psychosocial 
dimensions that Van Dijk calls self-schemas, person schemes, role schemes, and event schemes. On 
the social context dimension, the strengthening of the ideology of Islamism in Indonesian politics 
and the legacy of leadership succession at the local and national levels created political divisions 
between Jokowi's supporters and opponents. Anti-Jokowi groups and opposition political forces 
mobilize Islamic identity by continuously reproducing the image of Jokowi as a figure who does 
not represent Islam and even tends not to side with the interests of Muslims. Therefore, all public 
issues and issues related to Islamic groups must be handled with extreme care and control, not to 
strengthen identity politics that would jeopardize the president's power. 

The way the presidential actor responds to the context by not intervening in the law is the 
president's strategy to avoid the context trap, namely the anti-Islam discourse reproduced by the 
president's opponents and opposition. By distancing himself from the case and leaving it to the 
legal process, the president sends the message that he must stand above all groups. By developing 
a presidential communication strategy with multiple meanings, the president accommodates 
various interests in the context. It defends the minority but also protects the interests of the 
Muslim majority. However, implicitly, the statements and messages above are individual political 
strategies to negate labeling efforts and, at the same time, reduce the expansion of identity politics. 

One of the president's communication strategies to free himself from contextual pressures is 
to elevate messages to a normative level. The trick is to create what Ernesto Laclau calls a political 
frontier: the p: then dry between 'friends' and 'enemies', between 'Indonesians' and 'non-
Indonesians'. The message conveyed that 'Indonesia is tolerant', then those who riot and destroy 
minority assets are 'not Indonesia'. Presidential communication is also carried out by building a 
hegemonic position by articulating plural and competitive identities and subjectivity. An 
articulation becomes a hegemon when it can absorb the various articulations in which the 
hegemon operates. By abstracting the message, majority and minority, stability, hegemony absorbs 
political antagonism but does not negate antagonism itself. Thus, the position of hegemon here is 
not in the sense of dominative but accommodative. 

As part of the discourse of tolerance, the president develops a hegemonic discourse through 
abstraction to prevent dislocations that threaten political stability and guarantee the legitimacy of 
power. As a result, the president's power politics strategy has positioned Meliana as a victim of 



 

International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Sciences 
ISSN 2720-9644 (print); ISSN 2721-0871 (online) 

https://journalkeberlanjutan.com/index.php/ijesss 

 

328 

injustice. The president does not make legal breakthroughs to achieve justice but uses legal reasons 
to protect his power. Thus the president has failed to exercise what Walter Benjamin calls power as 
a means, not an end. The president's political strategy is nothing more than exercising power 
without deconstructing power in Benjamin's concept of power. It makes the president unable to 
escape the trap of worldly power, which is full of ambition and tends to want to dominate through 
the legitimacy of positive law. 

 

REFERENCES 
Abbott, M. (2020). The Creature Before the Law: Notes on Walter Benjamin's Critique of Violence. 

https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020 /1762220/abbott.pdf. 
Agamben, G. (2005). State of Exceptions. (K. Attel, Trans.) Chicago: The University of Chicago 

Press. 
Ahmed, Rukhsana. (2009). The interface of Political Opportunism and Islamic Extremism in 

Bangladesh: Rhetorical Identification in Government Response (2009). Journal of 
Communication Studies Vol 60 2009. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510970802623633. 

Alvesson, M., & Skoldberg, K. (2000). Reflexive Methodologies: Interpretation and research. 
London: Sage. 

Arend, Lijphart. (1994). Presidentialism and Majoritarian Democracy Theoretical Observations in 
Linz and Valenzuela Ed. The Failure of Presidential Democracy Volume I Baltimore and 
London the Johns Hopkins University Press. 

Arifin, A. (2014). Political Image-Political Imagery. Jakarta: Graha Ilmu. 
Aryojati, Ardipandanto. (2017). DKI Jakarta Governor Election: Political Strategies for Study 

Candidates Vol. 22 No. March 1, 2017, p. 15 - 31 
Azra, A. (2004). The Origins of Islamic Reformism in Southeast Asia: Networks of Malay-

Indonesian and Middle Eastern "Ulam?" in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries. 
Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004488199. 

Barry Buzan, OW (1998). Securitization; A new Framework for Analysis. United Kingdom: Lynne 
Rienne. 

Benjamin, W. (2004). Critique of Violence. in e. Michael W. Jennings, Walter Benjamin, Selected 
Writings. Harvard University Press. Vol. 1, pp. 236-252.  

Boisard, Marcel, A., Rasjidi, M. (1980). Humanism in Islam. Jakarta: Star Moon. 
Bratic, V., and L. Schirch. (2007). Why and When to Use the Media for Conflict Prevention and 

Peacebuilding. https://www.sfcg.org/articles/media_for_conflict_prevention.pdf. 
Buchanan, B. (1978). The Presidential Experience. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. 
Caygill, Howard, Coles, A., Klomowski, A. (2012). Introducing Walter Benjamin, A Graphic 

Guide. London: Icon Books Ltd. 
Cornish, Paul, Lindley-French, Julian and Yorke, Calaire. (2011). Strategic Communications and 

National Strategy: A Chatham House Report. London: Chatham House. 
Castells, Manuel. (2009). The Rise of the Network Society, The Information Age: Economy, 

Society, and Culture. Oxford: Blackwell 
Chairul, Zulianto; Veby Juniarti. (2019). Justice For Minority Groups in Human Rights 

Perspective According to Legal Philosophy (Examples of Meliana Case in Medan Accused 
of Blasphemy of Religion)." Law Review 18, no. 2 (2019): 227-42. 
https://doi.org/10.19166/lr.v18i2.1258. 

Denton, RE, & Hahn, DF (1986). Presidential Communication: Description and Analysis. New 
York: Praeger Publishers. 

Denton, RE, & Holloway, RL (1996). Clinton and the Town Hall meetings: mediated conversation 
and the risk of being 'In Touch'. In RE Denton & RL Holloway (Eds), The Clinton 
presidency. Images, issues, and communication strategies (pp. 17-41). Westport, CT: 
Praeger. 

  

https://doi.org/10.1080/10510970802623633
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004488199
https://www.sfcg.org/articles/media_for_conflict_prevention.pdf
https://doi.org/10.19166/lr.v18i2.1258


 

International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Sciences 
ISSN 2720-9644 (print); ISSN 2721-0871 (online) 

https://journalkeberlanjutan.com/index.php/ijesss 

 

329 

Dobratz, Betty A. Power. (2012). Politics, And Society: An Introduction to Political Sociology 
Routledge Taylor & Francis, New York. 

Doxtader, E. (2001). Reconciliation in the State of Emergency: The Middle Voice of 2 Corinthians. 
Journal for the Study of Religion, 14 (1). https://doi.org/10.4314/jsr.v14i1.6153.  

Two, Michael. (2007). The Critique of Power, History, and Law: Hear Walter Benjamin's 
Thoughts on Justice. in e. M. Budiarto, & M. Duka., Applied Ethics: Observing Today's 
Human Problems (pp. 58-80). Jakarta: Our City Foundation. 

Edwards, Paul. (1967) The Encyclopedia of Philosophy. New York 2: 176. 
Eriyanto. (2022). Framing Analysis: Construction, Ideology, and Media Politics. Yogyakarta: 

LKIS. 
Ernest, G. (1983). Nations and Nationalism: New Perspectives on the Past. Ithaca: Cornell 

University Press. 
Esterberg, KG (2002). Qualitative Methods in Social Research. Boston: McGraw-Hill Boston, MA. 
Farnsworth, SJ (2009). Spinner In Chief. How Presidents Sell Their Policies and Themselves. 

Boulder, CO: Paradigm. 
Ferris, David S. (2008) The Cambridge Introduction to Walter Benjamin. Cambridge University 

Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511793257.  
Graber, DA, & Smith, JM (2005). Political Communication Faces the 21st Century. Journal of 

Communication, 55 (3), 479-507. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2005.tb02682.x. 
Halilli. (2016). Supremacy Of Intolerance: Conditions of Freedom of Religion/Belief and 

Religious Minorities in Indonesia 2016. Jakarta: Equivalent Society Library. 
Halili et al. (2019). Fighting Intolerance in the Political Year: Conditions of Freedom of 

Religion/Belief in Indonesia in 2018. Jakarta: Equal Society Library. 
Hardiman, Budi F. (2009). Deliberative Democracy: Considering the Rule of Law and the Public 

Space in Jurgen Habbermas's Discourse Theory. Yogyakarta: Kanisius. 
Haris, Syamsuddin. (2014). Article: Coalitions in Indonesia's Presidential Democracy System 

Factors in the Fragility of the Coalition in the era of President Yudhoyono. 
Hess, S. (2000). The Press and The Permanent Campaign. In N. Ornstein & T. Mann (Eds), The 

Permanent Campaign and Its Future (Pp. 38-53). Washington, Dc: American Enterprise 
Institute and The Brookings Institution. 

Hobolt, SB, & Tilley, J. (2014). Blaming Europe?: Responsibility Without Accountability in the 
European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199665686.001.0001.  

K. Botterill et al. (2016). Securing disunion: Young people's nationalism, identities and (in) 
securities in the campaign for an independent Scotland Political Geography 55 (2016) 124-
134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2016.09.002  

Kaid, LL (2004). Political Advertising. In Handbook of political communication research (pp. 173-
220). London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410610584-15.  

Kernell, S. (1986). Going Public: New Strategies of Presidential Leadership. Washington, DC: CQ 
Press. 

Kiousis, Spiro and Strömbäck, Jesper. (2010). "The White House and Public Relations: Examining 
the Linkages between Presidential Communications and Public Opinion". Public Relations 
Review, 36 (2010) 7-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.08.013. 

Kuhn, Thomas S (1996). Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: Chicago University Press 
Kurtz, H. (1998). Spin Cycles. Inside The Clinton Propaganda Machine. New York: Free Press. 
Little John, and Foss. (2014). Communication Theory. Jakarta: Salemba Humanika. 
Little John, Stephen W. Foss, Karen. (2009). Encyclopedia of Communication Theory / Stephen 

W. Littlejohn, Karen A. Foss, editors. California: SAGE Publications, Inc. 
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412959384. 

 
  

https://doi.org/10.4314/jsr.v14i1.6153
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511793257
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2005.tb02682.x
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199665686.001.0001
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2016.09.002
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410610584-15
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.08.013
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412959384


 

International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Sciences 
ISSN 2720-9644 (print); ISSN 2721-0871 (online) 

https://journalkeberlanjutan.com/index.php/ijesss 

 

330 

Lyotard, J.-F. (1984). The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Geoff Bennington and 
Brian Massumi (Minneapolis, 1984), 81. https://doi.org/10.2307/1772278.  

Magnis-Suseno, Franz. (1992). Philosophy as a Critical Science. Yogyakarta: Canisius. 
Makeschin, Nike, S. (2010). Dissertation: The Imagined (3 Presidency: Political Communication as 

Narrative and Performance - A Case Study of Barack Obama's 2008 Presidential Campaign. 
Mannerberg, Lauren. (2017). The Presidency and the Media: An Analysis of the Fundamental 

Role of the Traditional Press for American Democracy. Thesis. Department of Political 
Science, University at Albany, State University of New York. 

Marx, Gary T., Douglas McAdam. (1994). Collective Behavior and Social Movements: Process and 
Structure. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 

McNair, B. (2003). An Introduction to Political Communication. London: Routledge. 
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203699683.  

McNair, Brian. (2011). An Introduction to Political Communication. London and New York: 
Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203828694. 

Mill, JE, Allen, MN, & Morrow, RA (2016). Critical Theory: Critical Methodology to Disciplinary 
Foundations in Nursing. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research Archive, 33 (2). 

Moleong, JL (2014). Qualitative Research Methods (Revised). Bandung: Rosda Karya. 
Young, Alexander. (2010). Contribution of Teluk Nibung Tanjungbalai Asahan Port to 

Tanjungbalai City's Original Revenue. Journal of Economics and Business Vol. 9, No. April 
1: 17-28 

Mujani, S. (2005). Anti-Americanism in Contemporary Indonesia. Islamic Studies, 12 (2). 
https://doi.org/10.15408/sdi.v12i2.588.  

Myers, Tolela, M., Myers. G.E. (1982). Managing by Communication: An Organizational 
Approach. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company. 

Naipospos, B. T and Halili (2014). From Stagnation Picking Up New Hope. Jakarta: Equal Society 
Library. 

Neuman, BM, & Fawcett, J. (2011). The Neuman Systems Model. London: Pearson Education, 
Incorporated. 

Nimmo, D. (2005). Political Communication: Communicator. Messages and Media, Sixth Edition. 
Bandung: Rosdakarya. 

Olson, Karsten. (2018). Franz L. Neumann's Behemoth: A Materialist Voice in the Gesamtgestalt 
of Fascist Studies. The SAGE Handbook of Frankfurt School Critical Theory. Editors: 
Beverley Best, Werner Bonefeld, Chris O'Kane 

Pujileksono, S. (2015). Qualitative Communication Research Methods. Malang: Intrans 
Publishing. 

Rawls, John. (1997). The Idea of Public Reason: Postscript in J. Bohman and W. Rehg (Eds.), 
Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Politics and Reason, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 131-
141. 

Rush, Michael and Althoff, Philip. (2008). Introduction to Political Sociology. Jakarta: Rajawali 
Press 

Rogers, EM, & Shoemaker, FF (1971). Communication of Innovations: A Cross-Cultural 
Approach. 2d ed. New York: Free Press. 

Rogers, EM (2004). Handbook of Political Communication Research. London: Routledge. 
Ryfe, D. (2005). Presidents in Culture: The Meaning of Presidential Communication (Vol. 9). New 

York: Peter Lang. 
Scacco, Joshua M and Kevin Coe. (2016). The Ubiquitous Presidency: Toward a New Paradigm 

for Studying Presidential Communication. International Journal of Communication 
10(2016), 2014-2037. 

Schmitt, C. (2005). Political Theology: Four Chapters on the Concept of Sovereignty. (G. Schwab, 
Trans.) Chicago: Chicago University Press. 
https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226738901.001.0001. 

https://doi.org/10.2307/1772278
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203699683
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203828694
https://doi.org/10.15408/sdi.v12i2.588
https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226738901.001.0001


 

International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Sciences 
ISSN 2720-9644 (print); ISSN 2721-0871 (online) 

https://journalkeberlanjutan.com/index.php/ijesss 

 

331 

Charlotte. (2017). Ahok's Downfall and the Rise of Islamist Populism in Indonesia (June 2017). 
ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute. 

Severin, WJ, & Tankard Jr., JW (2005). Communication Theory: History, Methods, & Application 
in Mass Media (Translation). Jakarta: Prenada Media. 

Sholahudin, Umar. (2020). Reviewing The Critical Theory of The Frankfurt School: History, 
Assumptions, And Its Contribution to The Development of Social Science Theory. Journal 
of Urban Sociology. Vol.3 (2). 

Sindhunata. (2019). The Dilemma of Rational Human Effort: Critical Theory of the Frankfurt 
School: Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno. Publisher: Gramedia Pustaka Utama. 

Smith, CA, & Smith, K. (Eds). (1994). The White House Speaks Presidential Leadership as 
Persuasion. Westport, CT: Praeger. 

Sparrow, Bartholomew H. (2008) Who Speaks for the People? The President, the Press, and Public 
Opinion in the United States. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 38.4:578-92. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5705.2008.02665.x.  

Spragens, WG (2003). New Media for The Millennium. Federal And State Executive Press Aids 
and Ambition Theory. New York: University Press of America. 

Sugiyono. (2016). Quantitative, Qualitative and R&D Research Methods. Bandung: Alphabeta. 
Sunarto. (2016). Total Negativity: Adorno's Critique of Rationality and Modern Society's Art. 

Target of Art Volume 1 Number 2, September 2016 137 - 146. 
https://doi.org/10.20527/jps.v1i2.1883.  

Sutikna, Nana. (2008). Human Ideology According to Erich Fromm (Combination of Sigmund 
Freud's Psychoanalysis and Social Criticism of Karl Marx). Journal of Philosophy Vol.18, 
Number 2, August 2008. 

Suyanto. (2005). Social Research Methods Various Alternative Approaches. Jakarta: Prenada 
Media. 

Swiffen, Ammy. (2018). Walter Benjamin's Concept of Law. The SAGE Handbook of Frankfurt 
School Critical Theory. Editors: Beverley Best, Werner Bonefeld, Chris O'Kane 

Toynbee, A. (1947). A Study of History. Vol 7-10. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 
Van Dijk, TA (2008). Discourse and Power. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-07299-3. 
Van Dijk, TA (2009). Critical Discourse Studies: A Sociocognitive Approach. Methods Of Critical 

Discourse Analysis, 2 (1), 62-86. 
Vlatkovic, Sandra. (2018). New Communication Forms and Political Framing. AM Journal. No. 16 

(123-134). https://doi.org/10.25038/am.v0i16.259.  
Walcott, CE, & Hult, KM (2008). George Akerson's legacy: Continuity and Change in White 

House Press Operations. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 38(4), 593-608. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5705.2008.02666.x 

West, R., Turner, Lynn H. (2008). Introduction to Communication Theory: Analysis and 
Applications. Jakarta: Salemba Humanika. 

White, Stephen K. (1989). The Recent Work of Jürgen Habermas, Cambridge: Cambridge 
University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511598265Sindhunata 

 
  

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5705.2008.02665.x
https://doi.org/10.20527/jps.v1i2.1883
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-07299-3
https://doi.org/10.25038/am.v0i16.259
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5705.2008.02666.x
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511598265Sindhunata