A photo collage of incumbent President Joko Widodo and presidential candidate Prabowo Subianto, from their respective Instagram accounts. Both of the presidential candidates used Instagram to show their mass support. On 17 April 2019, 193 million Indonesian citizens simultaneously cast their vote for new leaders at more than 800,000 polling stations spread across the archipelago. According to the Australian think-tank, Lowy Institute, this gives Indonesia the unique distinction of holding the largest single-day elections in a democratic country. On 21 May 2019, the General Election Commission (KPU) announced that incumbent president Joko Widodo (otherwise known as Jokowi) had won another term. His opponent, Prabowo Subianto, has rejected these results and hurled accusations of systemic cheating at the KPU. In the wake of these dramatic election results, Global Voices delves deeper into some of the other unique events that occurred during this year’s election cycle. No ink finger, was the icon of abstention this year. Image courtesy of Facebook page Saya Golput. Used with the permission of the owner. In this election cycle, the color white took on new meaning for voters across the political spectrum. For Jokowi followers, a plain white shirt — which has come to typify Jokowi's style — was the uniform of choice for his supporters. According to some, the word ‘white’ is one of the most frequent words pronounced by Jokowi’s stronghold. On the opposition's side, supporters of Prabowo Subianto from The Islamic Forum (FUI) and the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI), two fundamentalist Muslim groups, urged their sympathizers to also wear white clothing on Election day. Conservative Muslim men from these organizations often wear long white shirts, and the clothing has become synonymous with their group. The color white can also be seen in the symbol of a white hand that represents ‘no ink’. In Indonesia, ink is applied to a voter's finger once they have cast their vote. This ink is very difficult to wash off and thus helps prevent double voting. The slogan behind this is, ‘Golput’, which is short for ‘golongan putih’ (white group). In 2014, 30.14 percent of the total registered voters abstained from voting. During this election cycle, the Golput campaign was at the center of debate as different religious factions spoke out against abstention. Majelis Ulama Indonesia (MUI), Indonesia's top Muslim clerical body, forbade abstention. In addition, notable Catholic priest Romo Franz Magnis wrote an impassioned opinion article denouncing abstentions. However, Indonesian political and military researcher Made Supriatma said that abstention in the election is a political choice: Berbeda dengan von Magnis yang mendakwanya sebagai immoral, saya justru melihat bahwa pilihan ini sangat bisa dipertanggungjawabkan secara moral. Von Magnis menyebut mereka yang mengambil sikap golput adalah orang yang bodoh, benalu (parasite), dan bermental tidak stabil. Namun benarkah golput adalah sebuah tindakan immoral? Pertama-tama, saya kira kita perlu meluruskan apa yang disebut sebagai golput. Ada banyak kerancuan pengertian tentang ini. Banyak orang memahami golput semata-mata sebagai tindakan tidak memilih (non-voting behavior). Kita perlu menggarisbawahi bahwa ini adalah sebuah tindakan. Bukan sikap. Karena hanya tindakan maka penyebab non-voting behavior ini bermacam-macam. Sebagian besar dilakukan bukan sebagai sebuah sikap, bukan sebagai statemen politik. Di atas saya sudah kemukakan bahwa banyak orang menjadi golput karena pertimbangan yang serius. Ini bukan sikap yang diambil membabi buta. Menurut saya, justru berpartisipasi membabi buta mendukung salah satu capres dan ikut merobek-robek hidup sosial di negeri ini adalah bentuk ketidakstabilan mental. Bukankah itu yang terjadi dengan pendukung fanatik kedua capres? In contrast to von Magnis who indicted this as immoral, I actually see that this option is morally accountable. Von Magnis called those who decided to abstain fools, parasites, and mentally unstable. But is it true that abstention is an immoral action? First of all, I think we need to straighten out what's meant by “golput”. There is a lot of confusion with this term. Many people comprehend abstention merely as abstaining (non-voting behavior). We need to underline that this is an action. Not an attitude. Because it is simply an action, then the cause of non-voting behavior is diverse. Mostly it is done not as an attitude, not as a political statement. I've pointed out that a lot of people choose abstention out of serious consideration. This [action] is not taken blindly. In my opinion, blindly supporting one candidate and participate in shredding the social life in this country is a form of mental instability.