The Echo Chamber of Outrage:A Funeral for the "Middle Ground"

Prologue: The Fight Between Left vs. Right

You've probably seen it on your FYP. Instantly, the internet split into two roaring armies, each

convinced they were holy. This wasn't just a debate; It was a proxy war for the soul of Indonesia.

On one side, you have Dewi, speaking for the establishment. Think of her as the voice defending order, stability, and the institutions that run the country.

On the other, you have Ferry, the populist critic, the guy whose entire brand is built on questioning those very institutions. The “Lisan Al Gaib”, they said.

But here’s the twist: the real story isn't the fight between them.

It’s the brutal civil war that erupted within their own camps. Activists turned on activists, movements ate their own. And the whole thing collapsed under accusations of being "performative", which might be valid using Bi’s analysis on wokeism (Bi, 2025)

We’ll dissect this phenomena and how this is deliberately engineered to keep everyone fighting the wrong battles, while the real power watch from the sidelines.

Chapter 1: Left Activists vs. Right Activists

At the heart of this mess is a phenomenon René Girard (1977) basically called a "copycat crisis". We want things because other people want them. In this case, that "thing" is the role of being the "true" voice for the people.

When a movement can't beat its main enemy, it turns on itself. Everyone starts accusing everyone else of not being pure enough, of being a traitor.

This is exactly what we saw. The main event was supposed to be rakyat vs. pemerintah. Ironically, what happens now is → activists vs. activists. The right, throws around words like “color revolution”, "DFK" or "anak abah" to paint their critics as enemies of the state. The left fires back with "buzzer 150jt" or "konflik horizontal".

If we look at Girard’s theory: It's actually a predictable slugfest. But the real the plot twist, was the fight club inside the opposition. Activists suddenly became rivals in a ‘purity’ contest. They were fighting over who was the real activist.

The "17+8" movement is the perfect ‘crime scene’. Influencers like Afutami were publicly crucified by their own side, accused of "performative activism"—basically FOMO, faking it for likes.

It was a digital purge. Alliances shattered, critics to the movement becomes another conflict. Fighting each other becomes more addictive than fighting the system.

And for the elites? It’s good news. They don't have to lift a finger; their opposition is busy tearing itself apart.

Chapter 2: The Morality of the Palace vs. the Streets

Why is the fighting so vicious? Because the two sides are living in completely diǕerent moral universes. Nietzsche (1887) said that there are two basic types of morality, not based on good and evil, but on power.

1. First, you have the Master Morality. This is the code of the pro-establishment, or the people who support the palace. This morality is based on reason and universal principles. For them, "good" is anything that keeps things in order. Their sacred words are "stability" and "national unity". Anything that rocks the boat—dissent, protests, questions—is "bad."

2. In direct opposition is Slave Morality, a code built on empathy and emotional connection to the suǕering of others. This is the code of the opposition (17+8 group), the critics, the people on the streets. Born from a deep bitterness towards the powerful. The power of the state is "evil.". The real "good" is the struggle, the fight for justice, and solidarity with the grassroots. Its sacred words are "justice", "#ACAB", “#peoplepower”

Ferry-Dewi feud is a perfect example. They were bashing each other because one's virtue is the other's sin. You can't compromise when you're fighting over your definition of good and evil. Every debate becomes a holy war.

Chapter 3: Both Sides of Morality Are The Same Monster

Here lies the greatest irony: “As the rivalry intensifies, the rivals become more and more alike” - Girard (1977). This is mimetic rivalry. Both sides become mirror images of each other, using the exact same tactics to destroy their opponent. Both Ferry and Dewi, are masters of the same dark art: public framing.

Let's look at 17+8’s camp (Slave Morality: Empathy & Emotional Connection).

They amplify stories like the police brutality cases at UNISBA, while conveniently ignoring the Molotovs thrown by civilians and framing every missing person as "disappeared" by the state—often without conclusive evidence (Bram, 2025).

The narrative control was so intense that it began to consume itself. A prime example is the 'pink hijab' saga, whose image became the inspiration for the 17+8 movement's pink logo.

Activists like 'Salsaer' mistakenly spread the hoax that a video critical of her was an AI fake. The woman was later revealed to be a person known for her vulgar language and support for a rival political camp, and it’s not AI (Noviandi, 2025)

Ironically, lots of critics to 17+8 group was immediately dismissed as the work of a paid "buzzer”. But the strategy itself was self-defeating to control the narratives.

Now, look in the mirror (Master Morality: Reason & Universal Principles).

Dewi and others did the exact same thing. They framed the 17+8 group (Ferry, Jerome, Salsa), as dangerous provocateurs behind potential riots.

This ignores the truth that the 17+8 group may have been the very thing that kept the protests from boiling over into widespread anarchy! They have tried to stop the demonstration from becoming violent. Possibly preventing a Nepal-like scenario.

This is the Girardian endgame. Both sides frame the other as a fundamental threat to the nation. They become indistinguishable in their methods. Rivalry is the issue, not morality.

What’s interesting: Both sides are currently benefiting from the chaos! They all are gaining followers and influence, Nietzsche’s Will to Power is very relevant in this context. And in their obsession with power and destroying each other, they slowly become the same monster.

Chapter 4: The Death of the Middle Ground: Who Gets Screwed? (Spoiler: It’s you!)

While influencers rack up views, the public is the one left paying the price. The result: A nation drowning in confusion, anger, and exhaustion. The biggest casualty is people in the middle ground. People like me, or you.

I personally support 17+8, but I also can acknowledge that few innocent police are being thrown molotovs, or that unknown agents might use this protest!

We can acknowledge both facts and still support the movement, right?

Today, it’s frustratingly hard to have middle ground opinion, when everyone keep framing each other as traitor. Yet at the same time, we have faults too. We’re too busy gatekeeping and conducting “purity tests”, rather than building grassroot movements.

When you're busy arguing about whether Ferry is a villain, or whether Afutami's activism was "real", you're not paying attention to the policies that are actually screwing you over.

The real enemy becomes invisible.

This is where conspiracy theory comes into play: When everyone’s fighting, a good conspiracy theory offers a simple story with a clear bad guy.

It's a coping mechanism for a public that has been intentionally confused and disarmed. And this happens worldwide.

After the assassination on Charlie Kirk, consensus emerged from both the left and the right: blaming the Jews.

The far-right screamed it was 'Zionist deep state’, while the far-left said it was because pro-Israel policies. Suddenly, the oldest conspiracy theory found new life.

This script finds its local adaptation in Indonesia through figures like George Soros, MDIF, or ‘Migas’ Mafia.The plot thickens with Tempo's report, suggesting the entire movement was a scheme orchestrated by unknown subject near Prabowo (Bestari, 2025).

This creates a dizzying hall of mirrors: No one can be trusted. I started to believe in conspiracies too!

Conclusion: The middle ground isn’t just dead—it’s been buried, with both tribes throwing dirt on the coffin while elites write the eulogy.

What’s left is a Girardian death spiral where the opposition eats itself, fueled by a Nietzschean moral war that can never be won. The system is designed to force you to pick a tribe: Master (reason), or Slave (emotion). And neither is better in Girardian’s rivalry.

A divided public is a controllable one. The influencers/leaders opinion don’t matter. The public will always fight to the death for their idols no matter what, as you can see on the comment sections of Dewi and Ferry.

The real tragedy is this: in a country where the loudest voices are busy destroying each other and the public is addicted to the outrage, the real power are profiting from the bloodsport. They're silent, they're winning, and they're counting on you to keep barking at the wrong person.