Ad Hominem in Indonesian Political Debate: A Dilemma in Democracy?

Abstract

To maintain his face during political debate sessions, a political leader often avoids focusing his argument on the issue being discussed. Instead, he often verbally attacks his opponent’s personality with different motivations. This study investigates how presidential candidates in Indonesia committed an ad hominem fallacy during the 2024 presidential debates. The data were collected from YouTube videos and the debate transcripts were downloaded from the internet. The data were qualitatively analyzed to identify the types and functions of ad hominem appearing on the debates. The researcher found ad hominem of abusive, circumstantial, tu quoque, guilt by association types colouring the debate sessions. Meanwhile, the used ad hominem functions as criticising, cornering, and even belittling the credibility or capacity of the debate opponent. The findings also indicate that there is a symmetrical trending pattern between the frequency of ad hominem use in debates and the candidates’ vote gaining, implying its use as (i) a rhetorical tool in political debate to achieve electoral success; (ii) an indicator of political education failure in a democratic society.