Collective Behavior and Social Movements in the Late-August 2025 Demonstrations: Solidarity and Mass Violence in the Case of Affan Kurniawan

Authors

  • Erizal Faculty of Da’wah and Communication Science, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University, Indonesia
  • Ninda Zahra Wahyudi Faculty of Da’wah and Communication Science, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University, Indonesia
  • Regita Alma Danita Faculty of Da’wah and Communication Science, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University, Indonesia
  • Marie Muhammad Wildan Faculty of Da’wah and Communication Science, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University, Indonesia
  • Dwiandra Firdaus Faculty of Da’wah and Communication Science, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55681/jige.v7i1.5207

Keywords:

Collective Behavior, Social Movement, Moral Shock, Media Framing

Abstract

This study investigates the dynamics of collective behavior and social movements that emerged during the late-August 2025 demonstrations in Indonesia, focusing on how structural grievances, triggering events, and media framing shaped the escalation of public mobilization. The research aims to explain why the protests, which initially centered on opposition to proposed parliamentary allowance increases, quickly expanded into a nationwide movement marked by strong expressions of solidarity and episodes of mass violence. Special attention is given to the death of Affan Kurniawan, an ordinary citizen who became an unintended victim during crowd-control operations, and whose case transformed the public’s emotional and moral engagement with the demonstrations. Using a qualitative approach that combines interviews with civil society actors, analysis of organizational documents, and observations of mainstream and digital media content, the study identifies several key findings. Structural economic and political tensions created fertile conditions for mobilization, while the death of Affan Kurniawan acted as a powerful moral catalyst that broadened participation across diverse social groups. Civil society organizations played a crucial role in coordinating information, framing human-rights concerns, and maintaining the momentum of public engagement. Meanwhile, contrasting media narratives contributed to divergent interpretations of the protests, influencing public sentiment and state responses. The study concludes that interactions among grievances, symbolic events, and communication networks significantly amplify the scale and emotional intensity of contemporary social movements. Strengthening transparency, accountability, and rights-based approaches in protest management is essential to prevent similar escalations in the future.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aspinall, E. (2013). Popular mobilization in Indonesia. Asian Journal of Social Science, 41(1), 1–20.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

Della Porta, D., & Diani, M. (2006). Social movements: An introduction. Blackwell.

Denzin, N. (1978). The research act. McGraw-Hill.

Earl, J., Hunt, J., Garrett, R. K., & Dal, A. (2010). Social movements and the new state of mobilization. Sociological Inquiry, 80(3), 429–456.

Gamson, W. A. (1992). Talking politics. Cambridge University Press.

Goodwin, J., & Jasper, J. (2011). Contestation and the emotional dynamics of protest. Oxford University Press.

Jasper, J. M. (1997). The art of moral protest: Culture, biography, and creativity in social movements. University of Chicago Press.

Koopmans, R., & Olzak, S. (2004). Discursive opportunities and the evolution of right-wing violence in Germany. American Journal of Sociology, 110(1), 198–230.

Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). SAGE.

Lim, M. (2018). Roots, routes, and routers: Communications and mobilization in Indonesia. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 48(3), 1–20.

McAdam, D. (1996). The framing function of movement tactics. In Comparative perspectives on social movements. Cambridge University Press.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. SAGE.

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097.

Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences. Blackwell.

Smelser, N. J. (1962). Theory of collective behavior. Free Press.

Snow, D. A., & Benford, R. D. (1988). Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobilization. International Social Movement Research, 1, 197–217.

Tapsell, R. (2021). Democracy and disinformation in Indonesia. ISEAS.

Tilly, C. (2004). Social movements, 1768–2004. Routledge.

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications (6th ed.). SAGE

Downloads

Published

2026-01-31

How to Cite

Erizal, E., Wahyudi, N. Z., Danita, R. A., Wildan, M. M., & Firdaus, D. (2026). Collective Behavior and Social Movements in the Late-August 2025 Demonstrations: Solidarity and Mass Violence in the Case of Affan Kurniawan. Jurnal Ilmiah Global Education, 7(1), 394–401. https://doi.org/10.55681/jige.v7i1.5207