Over the past couple of days, I found myself under a sudden wave of attacks on social media. It all started when I posted a brief comment critiquing a programme initiated by Kang Dedi Mulyadi (often shortened to KDM), the current governor of West Java. The programme in question involves sending so-called "problematic youths" to military barracks for discipline and re-education. Aligning with public intellectual, Rocky Gerung, I argued that this approach was a superficial, quick-fix solution that failed to address the deeper socio-economic roots of youth delinquency.

To my surprise, within minutes, my comment section was flooded with responses from KDM’s hardcore supporters. Some respectfully disagreed, but the majority resorted to abusive language and personal attacks.

This backlash caused me to wonder: why do some KDM supporters become very defensive whenever KDM is being criticised? What does this reveal about the dynamics of political fandom as well as populism in Indonesia’s digital space?

Populism as Political Style in the Digital Age

To try to make sense of this, I had to refer to the idea of populism as a political style, which was presented by Benjamin Moffitt in his book, The Global Rise of Populism. Moffitt suggests that populism today is no longer just ideological. It is a mode of doing politics, characterised by three features: the creation of an image of ‘man of the people’, the dramatisation of crises, and also a very direct, performative connection with the masses, that is often carried out through social media.

KDM conforms to this template rather well. Scroll through his YouTube channel or his Instagram page and you will find many videos of him assisting the poor, resolving disputes or consoling families that are grieving. The content is highly emotional, using dramatic music on most occasions and strategically edited to create a feeling of empathy. In doing so, KDM crafts an image not just of a governor, but of a very humble, heroic figure deeply connected to Indonesians, particularly to ordinary Sundanese people, to whom he belongs.

What makes this even more interesting is how his supporters begin to appropriate his public image as part of their personal identity. Supporting KDM becomes more than a political position. It turns into a marker of cultural pride, regional solidarity, as well as personal virtue. In this way, the leader’s digital persona transcends politics and also embeds itself into the everyday narratives of his followers. They do not merely watch his content; they make it part of themselves, so any form of criticism towards KDM feels very deeply personal.

In addition, every social media performance of KDM consistently frames everyday situations as moral dramas, positioning himself as the compassionate saviour in a world full of crisis. This dramatisation of ordinary social problems strongly enhances the sense of urgency among his followers, which in turn reinforces their belief that only a leader like KDM can offer immediate, empathetic, and very decisive solutions. The outcome is a strong emotional bond that blurs the boundaries between governance on one hand and entertainment on the other, creating a more fanatic culture that is more committed to symbolism rather than systemic and policy based reforms.

From Governor to Heroic Idol: The Birth of a Populist Fandom

Even though there are inevitable social and political advantages that these videos bring to KDM, especially in strengthening his chances in the 2029 presidential race, they also create unintended side effects. Over time, a segment of his supporters ceased to view KDM as an elected official who should be subject to criticism, but rather as a flawless heroic figure.

This phenomenon corresponds very well to what we see in celebrity fandoms, especially in K-pop culture. K-pop hardcore fans are known to launch online attacks against anyone criticising their idols. In KDM’s case, the now-popular Sundanese phrase “Jangan Ganggu Bapak Aing”,  which means “Don’t Disturb Our Father”, has become a popular slogan for his digital fanbase.

This phrase reflects the close bond between KDM as a governor with his constituents.  Sadly, it also reveals how KDM’s social media followers react offensively toward those who criticise the policies of their idolised governor. Many have, in fact, become casualties of this slogan, not least a good number of politicians and academics who dared to disagree with KDM's policies.

What is very crucial here is the emotional investment these followers develop. It goes beyond simple political alignment; it becomes a very strong family like attachment to the leader. Criticising him, therefore, is not simply opposing one policy or the other but it is like attacking a close and beloved family member. This highly intense emotional connection is a very powerful engine for digital militancy, as supporters feel a strong personal stake in defending their 'own father' against any form of criticism.

Moffitt’s analysis sheds light on the reason behind such a vehement response to my critique by these supporters. In the digital age, populist leaders tend to adhere to the idea of performative politics in order to create a mass appeal. Their supporters, empowered by interactive social media platforms, are not content consumers but they create and defend the image of their leader. Criticism of KDM is treated not as a healthy part of democratic discourse, but rather as a personal attack against both the leader along with his community of followers.

The Dangers of Digital Populism: Star Syndrome and Anti-Criticism

This development carries serious risks. Populist leaders who become strongly reliant on this style of performative politics can fall victim to star syndrome. Covered by admiration and insulated against criticism, leaders may start prioritising popularity over policy substance. Governance then becomes less about evidence-based decision-making but more about maintaining viral moments and also satisfying an ever-demanding digital audience.

We are already witnessing the early symptoms of this in the KDM phenomenon. His supporters attack critics not on the merits of the arguments, but based on the emotional attachment they feel toward their hero, KDM. Constructive public discourse as a cornerstone of democratic governance is increasingly replaced by very emotionally driven, polarised exchanges.

Adding to this, the aggressive behaviour of KDM’s digital supporters is amplified by the echo chamber effect inherent in social media. Social media algorithms naturally tend to group like-minded users together, creating bubbles where other alternative opinions are not just excluded, but also actively silenced. This shrinks the space for a very broad, critical discussion, replacing it with a highly polarised digital environment dominated by emotional outrage.

Final Reflection

Democracy relies on the public’s ability to question, critique, and debate policies without fear of reprisal. Political leaders must remember that viral popularity is no substitute for good governance and supporters should realise that criticism is an essential part of civic responsibility.

The widely circulated slogan of “Jangan Ganggu Bapak Aing” should serve as a wake-up call. It reflects both the connective potential and the darker side of populist politics in the digital age. The challenge ahead for Indonesia is to harness the democratising power of social media without falling into its penchant to create acts of uncritical hero worship, and silencing dissent.

Moreover, it would be wise for KDM himself to recognise the risks that are inherent in cultivating an excessively loyal and uncritical digital fanbase. If left unchecked, such adulation has a strong potential to narrow his policy options and also disincentivize honest feedback from advisers, civil servants, and the public. No matter how charismatic a leader might be, constructive criticism remains very indispensable for crafting effective and fair public policies.

Equally, this moment is an opportunity for Indonesian digital citizens to reflect on the culture of online political discourse. Instead of embracing a combative, tribal mentality, supporters of any public figure should endeavour to create an accommodating environment that calls for thoughtful debate and pluralism.

In the end, KDM’s ability to connect with people on the margins of society carry real value. However, healthy democracies are not built by unanimous cheerleading, but rather built by communities that are courageous enough to challenge their leaders when necessary. Admiration should never blind us to the point of preventing us from our essential duty of holding our leaders accountable.

Note: On the Cover image, KDM sits and chats with various community groups who have embraced him as 'Bapak Aing' (Our Father) due to his approachable nature and close connection with ordinary people. Credit to ASATUNEWS.