Indonesians are divided on how to receive Prabowo-Gibran's Makan Bergizi Gratis program. Some are saying this program is a bad thing. Some are saying this program is a good thing.

My opinion is that this program is what's called a ball and chain program. Something that was probably said as a passing by a then-campaigning president. But the program somehow picked up steam. Thus it became a mainstay proposal.

To pull back against the program would mean an acceptance of missteps. But to keep going means that something had to be sacrificed. We'll talk more about it down below.

The target demographics

Who are the main target for MBG? Government says that the program is intended to combat stunting in the country. A closer look at the program, however, told a different story.

Stunting to my knowledge affects children below the age of junior high. When a child steps into junior high, the age is already advanced enough that stunting takes effect rather than able to be prevented.

But the MBG program targets school children. That is children from elementary to high school. Why is that? If the program is touted as a way for the government to combat stunting, shouldn't we focus on only elementary school children?

There is an MBG program for mothers. These are intended for people who carries children or has a small child (not school age yet) and needed nutritional boost. This section of MBG is clear. It's fine.

What we need to put into a microscope is the reason why MBG is targeted at the school children age bracket.

What even is "free food"?

Something that tickles my bone when I thought about this program further is the old adage. There are no free lunches. It may not be a literal interpretation of the idiom, but there really is no free lunch, if you think about it.

Food is a staple of Prabowo's presidency. Because food is also something he tried to campaign as a minister. Food estate is a ministry program he captained.

Why food? I know it'd sound so stupid, but bear with me. What made food so important?

In the most simple sense, our society (the Indonesian society) hangs on subsidized products. This is true in every home. If possible, use subsidized resources.

Subsidized resources means that some part of the product is paid by the government. Meaning we get a huge slice of discount if we buy it. Sounds like free lunch, right?

In reality subsidizing means that the product is intentionally bought by the government at a loss price. The government is making an intentional loss to ensure subsidy is kept going.

People, however, don't put much thought on what this is. It is, and by all means disagree, a ploy to keep the populace under strict governmental control.

The freedom paradox

In order to make an illusion of a free market, Indonesian government would put subsidized products like Pertalite on the same listing as non-subsidized products. Currently Pertalite stood at a clear line of 10.000 IDR. While Pertamax, its non-subsidized competitor rose up ti 17.000 IDR.

As a consumer, which would you choose to fill your tank in a pinch? Subsidy is there to create a sense of division between consumers. People who took to non-subsidized alternatives are automatically seen as an "outsider" to the common market choice.

Now, back to MBG. Imagine if you are a student.

For a while we have looked at an example where "market freedom" (or the bastardized husk of it) is given to adults. Adults who could make the decision and foster a rationalization and defense to stand outside the norm.

What about students? Students below the age of 21? Whom social understanding, economic and political views, and philosophical edges are not yet shaped to a knowledge capable of seeing MBG as what it is.

They could, theoretically, ask their wealthy parents to just give them a healthier, more controlled lunch in a fancy lunchbox. But imagine the optics of that in the sea of other students eating from the tray of MBG.

See what I mean?

It's about forced conformity

Molding adults to confirm to a standard set by the government is difficult. But to mask the shaping in concern about stunting is easy. Of course, nobody could reasonably disagree with battle against stunting.

Needless to say, the stunt here is not exactly stunting in the growth sense. No, the government, through MBG, is trying to halt the stunting of their ever increasing effort to foster a groupthink.

Children are the primary targets because it'll shape them to "be in the norm" and "accept subsidies". Accept the hand of the government, because it's the only way you could be perceived as normal.

If not, if you try to be fancy, then you are an "outsider".