President Prabowo and the 'Londo Ireng' Metaphor

On Friday, 24 July 2026, during a speech commemorating the 28th anniversary of the PKB party in Jakarta, President Prabowo invoked the metaphor ‘londo ireng’. The metaphor derives from two words: ‘londo’, referring to the Dutch or foreigners, and ‘ireng’, which means ‘black’ in Javanese. In Indonesian history, ‘londo ireng’ was a term used for Africans brought by the colonial government to serve as soldiers. These Africans were recruited into the KNIL (Koninklijk Nederlands-Indisch Leger, the Royal Netherlands East Indies Army) and used to maintain Dutch control over the Indonesian colonies.

So why did President Prabowo use ‘londo ireng’? He employed the term to describe Indonesians who happily serve and devote themselves to other nations. According to President Prabowo, Indonesians who once fought alongside the Dutch against Indonesia were called ‘londo ireng’. Although such figures no longer exist because Indonesia is now independent, Prabowo used the term metaphorically because he believes some Indonesians still behave like ‘londo ireng’.

In linguistic studies, metaphor is a fundamental element of human thought. A metaphor is not merely a matter of words, but a domain of thinking — whether thoughts about emotions, society, human character, language, or the nature of life and death. Such metaphors build the cognitive frameworks of social knowledge and worldviews.

Novi Eka Susilowati, I Dewa Putu Wijana and Hayatul Cholsy (2023), in ‘Critical Metaphor Analysis: Toward A Theoretical Framework and Corpus-Based Analysis’, explain that a metaphor is an expression that can reveal how a person conceptualises experiences, feelings and thoughts when understanding an entity. A metaphor becomes a linguistic expression whose meaning cannot be grasped directly from the symbols used, but must be arrived at through interpretation of that expression.

In this case, the ‘londo ireng’ metaphor used by a president clearly points to President Prabowo’s own past experiences, drawn upon as a comparison to express a particular intent. Prabowo conveyed his meaning through similarity. Josef Stern (2018) states that a person can communicate their thoughts through similarities, including physical similarities, characteristic similarities, and conceptual or cultural similarities. The ‘londo ireng’ metaphor denotes a physical similarity based on the skin colour of the African KNIL soldiers.

This metaphor would not be a problem if uttered by people chatting in a coffee shop. It becomes problematic because it was spoken by a president — the President of the Republic of Indonesia, Prabowo Subianto. Moreover, President Prabowo explicitly stated to whom the metaphor was addressed. He made clear that ‘londo ireng’ was directed at reporters or journalists who prioritise the interests of other nations over those of Indonesia.

The metaphor is regarded as constructing a negative narrative because President Prabowo is seen as demeaning the journalism profession. If journalists who uncover facts and criticise government performance are regarded as threats rather than as a check on government work, this will clearly damage press freedom and democratic life in Indonesia.

In linguistic scholarship, President Prabowo’s statement through this metaphor is viewed as having the capacity to deny a person’s human qualities and to be deliberately used as an expression of hatred, as described by Prażmo (2020) in her paper ‘Foids are worse than animals: a cognitive linguistics analysis of dehumanizing metaphors in online discourse’. A metaphor can degrade human dignity. The ‘londo ireng’ metaphor produced by President Prabowo and aimed directly at journalists is a deliberate attempt to diminish the role of reporters through labelling with negative connotations.

When such words come from the President of the Republic of Indonesia, the metaphor carries a pejorative meaning because it is considered to breach Law No. 40 of 1999 on the Press. The state, through its leaders — in this case the president — is obliged to create an environment in which the press can work freely, safely, professionally and responsibly. Yet the president’s accusation against the journalism profession through the ‘londo ireng’ metaphor is regarded as baseless and, of course, unfitting for a president to utter.

That is why the ‘londo ireng’ metaphor, initially presented as criticism by President Prabowo of a particular profession, has backfired by becoming a stigmatisation or negative narrative against journalists carrying out their function as a public check. President Prabowo’s statement is judged to be capable of intimidating reporters who carry out critical reporting, and is also seen as disrespectful of press freedom.

In critical discourse analysis, who is speaking and about whom they speak become an important focus, particularly when the speaker is a national leader, especially a president. This is all the more so when the subject is the journalism profession, which demands freedom of expression and fulfils the function of public oversight. The ‘londo ireng’ metaphor has shown us that the utterances of a national leader can reveal whether they stand with or against a profession and the people who practise it.