Based on Wikipedia, politics is often described as the art of gaining power, whether constitutionally or otherwise. And honestly, throughout 2019, I found myself strangely entertained by everything this “art” had to offer. Public enthusiasm toward Indonesia’s presidential election was enormous, even long before the candidates and their running mates were officially announced. People immediately began speculating, choosing sides, and asking themselves, “Which side am I on?”

As for me, I was simply busy restocking my popcorn and soda.

Well, hi peeps. Welcome.

Indonesia’s presidential election has officially ended, yet the euphoria still lingers. Supporters from both sides remain convinced that their candidates deserved victory, while media outlets continue flooding timelines with quick-count results and political analysis. After all, waiting for the official count takes time, while life itself keeps moving forward. People still need to return to work, continue their routines, and function as social beings.

There are countless things worth discussing about this election, but I will only focus on a few perspectives. I believe that in every field, there are complexities outsiders may never fully understand unless they are directly involved. So this is merely an observation from the surface.

One of the biggest highlights this year was the massive campaign encouraging people not to abstain from voting. With so many first-time voters participating, social media was filled with messages such as, “Abstention is not an option,” or “Use your vote no matter who you choose.” There seemed to be a collective fear that people would ignore their rights as citizens.

But personally, I think the discussion is more complicated than that.

When someone officially becomes eligible to vote, they should also understand what voting truly means — including understanding the consequences of both choosing and not choosing. The candidates had already presented their visions, promises, and future plans. Citizens were given enough information to evaluate every possibility.

So, choosing not to vote is not necessarily a mistake.

It is still a choice.

And in a democracy, choosing not to participate can be just as intentional as choosing a candidate. Both are rights owned by the voters themselves. What matters is that the decision comes from awareness and understanding, not ignorance. That point, I think, is important to underline.

Another issue that drew a lot of attention was the way people expressed their opinions. Many political supporters delivered messages that others considered unethical or disrespectful. Both sides constantly attacked one another using whatever weapons they had — words, accusations, sarcasm, and narratives. Some arguments crossed the line and ended badly.

But honestly, I think context matters.

We need to understand where we are and what situation we are in. At a celebration, people shout and cheer. At a funeral, they remain quiet and respectful. Likewise, politics — especially during elections — is naturally loud and confrontational. Indonesia was in the middle of a democratic “festival,” so clashes of opinion were inevitable.

Criticizing opponents, debating ideas, and attacking arguments are all legitimate in politics — as long as they are based on facts. The problem begins when people spread misinformation, slander, or fabricated issues. That is no longer political expression; it becomes something destructive.

And if we feel entitled to attack others with arguments, then we must also be prepared to receive criticism in return. Fair is fair. No hard feelings.

Differences in opinion will always exist, regardless of who leads the country. That is completely normal. Unfortunately, many people still struggle to deal with disagreement. The moment conflicting views appear, emotions often become the first response.

Is that wrong?

Not really — as long as we understand our limits.

We can disagree with friends, relatives, even family members, without destroying the relationships we have built for years. In fact, discussions and debates can become healthy spaces to exchange perspectives and challenge the way we think. They stimulate the mind. They teach us to listen.

Of course, reaching that level of maturity takes effort.

My point is simple: we are free to express opinions and make choices, as long as we remain within ethical boundaries and do not destroy human connections in the process. Because for me, the highest form of tolerance is the ability to agree to disagree.

I hope you understand my point.

Actually, there is one more issue — probably the hottest and most sensitive of all: religion. But for this one, I will step back gracefully.

You win.
Your arguments are the best.
I quit.

Returning to the beginning, after all the chaos, debates, and divisions created temporary walls between people, there will eventually come a moment when everything settles down again. People reconcile not only with others, but also with themselves. The tension fades, emotions cool down, and life quietly returns to normal.