The government’s maintained narrative of economic optimism amid mounting social and economic pressures has drawn criticism from Media Wahyudi Askar, an academic in Public Policy and Management at Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM). Media believes the government is overly focused on maintaining a stable narrative rather than understanding the daily realities. According to him, the public has become increasingly critical and can directly feel economic pressures through difficulties finding jobs, rising layoff rates, and declining purchasing power. These conditions widened the gap between the government’s optimism and people’s lives on the ground.
Media explained that the economic growth frequently claimed by the government does not reflect the widespread quality of public welfare. Economic growth figures do not translate to genuinely improved social conditions.
He noted that most of the benefits of economic growth are enjoyed by elite groups with access to capital, assets, and national strategic projects. Meanwhile, middle-class and vulnerable groups face increasingly severe economic pressures daily.
“The economy is indeed growing, but the growth is only enjoyed by the upper class, the ultra-rich, and those who possess capital, assets, property, and shares,” he said on Thursday (May. 21).
According to Media, the government has also failed to recognize that public anxiety stems from real-life experiences, not merely social media perceptions. He explained that nowadays people, including villagers, can assess economic conditions analytically, including issues related to subsidies, taxes, and the rupiah exchange rate.
Under current circumstances, the public finds it difficult to accept optimistic economic narratives when their own experiences run counter to them. Media believes the government’s honesty is a vital insight into the socioeconomic pressures developing within society.
“The biggest problem today is the wide gap between the figures narrated by the government and the realities on the ground,” he stated.
Media also highlighted that the government policies’ direction is not yet grounded in research with people’s actual needs. He explained that many public policies are introduced without strong academic studies and research findings from institutions or universities.
In his view, the state should develop evidence-based policies to address economic challenges more rationally and in a more context-specific manner. He evaluated that policymaking patterns that rely heavily on political speeches risk producing ineffective programs that burden the country’s fiscal structure.
“Policies are created merely from political speeches, and then policies emerge after the speeches are delivered,” he said.
Media also criticized several government programs, including the Free Nutritious Meals (MBG) program and the Merah Putih Village Cooperatives initiative. According to him, both programs need to be reevaluated because they potentially burden the country’s fiscal structure down the line.
He emphasized that the government must be willing to impose moratoriums and redesign policies when implemented programs fail to demonstrate clear benefits to society. Such measures are important to ensure that state spending is directed toward programs that genuinely address public needs.
In addition to criticizing economic policies, Media also highlighted how the government responds to public criticism. He noted that criticism from academics and researchers is often framed as pessimism toward the country. In fact, data- and research-based criticism is an essential part of evaluating public policies.
He believes the government should regard academics as intellectual partners who help the country mitigate social and economic risks, rather than as political opponents. Under current conditions, healthy dialogue is essential to prevent the government from becoming increasingly detached from social realities.
“If the government sees observers and academics as partners in thinking, it will reflect on itself and respond to criticism with data as well. Criticism and pessimism are two different things,” he stressed.
Media emphasized that the criticism voiced by academics stems from concern for the nation’s future and society’s condition. He explained that academics choose to continue working and serving in Indonesia because they still have hope for the country’s future.
Media said that the courage to voice criticism is part of academics’ moral responsibility to safeguard the quality of public policy and democracy. He hopes the government will become more open to feedback and stop viewing criticism as a threat to power.
“If I were not optimistic about this country, I might have chosen to remain abroad. But we returned because we believe Indonesia needs people who are willing to think, criticize, and seek solutions. It takes someone who really loves the country in order to be critical against it,” he concluded.
Author: Triya Andriyani
Post-editor: Jasmine Ferdian
Photos: Firsto and Kompas