Speculating on the Direction of Gibran's Loyalists

If mapped out, the self-comforting efforts among Gibran's loyalists can be divided into three main response spectra.

First, a group of loyalists adopts an accepting attitude framed by strategic resolution. This group mitigates dissonance through rationalization and reframing.

Political defeat is reinterpreted as a moral victory. This rationalization is quite clear. High positions are reframed as traps of power, while resignation is celebrated as a chivalrous act.

Gibran is portrayed as stepping back to maintain the stability of Prabowo's administration. At the same time, hints are dropped about gearing up for the contest for president in 2029.

Second, there is the group of loyalists who reject reality and maintain a stance of resistance. Here, dissonance is confronted by fostering a victimhood mentality.

The defeat at the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court is set aside, replaced with a narrative of an “innocent person being wronged.”

Various posts on social media depict that “Mr. Gibran has always been a good person” and “the people still need him.”

His image of personal generosity is used to mask the grief from their legal battle's loss.

The extreme narrative from this group even surfaced as threats of mass mobilization to blockade Jakarta. This can be understood as an emotional outburst rejecting the encroaching legal realities.

Third, there is the group of loyalists who engage in deflection or distraction. Finding it too bitter and complicated to discuss the substance of the court's ruling and the political processes surrounding it, this group opts to avoid the main topics.

They shift the stage of debate. This includes creating a public celebration adorned with meatball and chicken noodle stalls at the Vice Presidential Palace, as well as posting compilations of Gibran’s work during his tenure.

A slightly more extreme reaction involves directing their anger at coalition partners perceived to have political amnesia; sweet after the fruit is gone, or forgetting where they came from.

The peak of this aim to shift their anger is the hope that Gibran's resignation will open a ”Pandora's box” revealing who the real masterminds behind this case are.

Some loyalists attempt to turn the tables by arguing that Gibran's resignation is not the end of the battle but the beginning of uncovering a grand conspiracy.

In this narrative, Gibran is positioned as someone who has restrained himself to maintain elite harmony. When he finally lets go of his position, the political burden is deemed lifted.

Next, the veils surrounding those who previously facilitated his candidacy—as well as those now pushing for his impeachment—will be lifted before the public.

Psychologically, the ”Pandora's box” narrative represents an advanced defense mechanism. It is a way to divert the bitter reality of acknowledging that their idol has fallen.

For comfort and to maintain self-esteem, believing that there is a giant “puppet master” at play, and that Gibran still holds the trump card to expose it, becomes an option.