Argumentative Structure and Legitimation Strategies in Prabowo Subianto's Speech on the Free Nutritious Meals Programme
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21009/ijlecr.v12i1.68174Keywords:
Argumentative Structure, Speech of the President of the Republic of Indonesia, Free Nutritious Meal Program, Legitimacy of Education PolicyAbstract
Studies on education policy in Indonesia have primarily focused on program implementation and impact, while the dimension of discursive legitimacy has received limited scholarly attention. This study aims to examine how the argumentative structure in President Prabowo Subianto’s speech on the Free Nutritious Meal Program (MBG) functions to legitimize education policy within the framework of human resource development. The study employs a qualitative approach with a critical discourse analysis design. The data consist of the official text of the President of the Republic of Indonesia’s speech on the presentation of the 2026 Draft State Budget. Data were collected through documentation and note-taking techniques, with the researcher as the primary instrument supported by an argumentative categorization matrix. Data analysis involved identifying argumentative units, mapping the Toulmin argument structure, analyzing legitimacy strategies based on van Leeuwen, and interpreting the findings using Fairclough’s Political Discourse Analysis framework. The results indicate that the argumentative structure of MBG is constructed through causal relations between nutrition, health, and superior human resources, reinforced by quantitative evidence and the framing of the stunting crisis. The policy is legitimized through technocratic rationalization, moral evaluation, and institutional authorization. The novelty of this study lies in integrating three theoretical frameworks to conceptualize education policy legitimacy as a multidimensional discursive process that combines fiscal rationality, collective values, and state-cantered development ideology. The study recommends further interdisciplinary research integrating linguistics, policy studies, and political communication.
References
Aristotle. (2007). On rhetoric: A theory of civic discourse (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Atkins, J., & Finlayson, A. (2016). ‘As Shakespeare so memorably said...’: Quotation, rhetoric, and politics. Political Studies, 64(1), 164–180. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9248.12156
Béland, D., & Cox, R. H. (2016). Ideas and politics in social science research. Oxford University Press.
Bjork, C. (2005). Indonesian education: Teachers, schools, and central bureaucracy. Routledge.
Bundy, D. A. P., et al. (2018). Optimizing education outcomes: High-return investments in school health. World Bank.
Charteris-Black, J. (2018). Analysing political speeches. Palgrave.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications Ltd.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2018). The Sage handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). SAGE Publications Ltd.
Drake, L., et al. (2017). School feeding programs in global context. World Food Programme.
Fairclough, I., & Fairclough, N. (2012). Political discourse analysis: A method for advanced students. Routledge.
Flick, U. (2018). An introduction to qualitative research (6th ed.). SAGE Publications Ltd.
Gallhofer, I. & Saris, W. (2021). Discovering Warrants in Political Argumentation. Informal Logic, 41(4), 641-676. https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v41i4.6765
Gavrishina, I. N. (2024). Argumentative structure of the text of parliamentary speeches (based on the French language). Philology. Theory & Practice, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.30853/phil20240028
Heryanto, A. (2019). Identity and pleasure in Indonesian politics. NUS Press.
Hitchcock, D., & Verheij, B. (Eds.). (2006). Arguing on the toulmin model: New essays in argument analysis and evaluation. Springer.
Hyland, K. (2019). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing (2nd ed.). Bloomsbury.
Ilie, C. (2017). Political discourse and communication. John Benjamins.
KhosraviNik, M. (2017). Social media critical discourse studies (SM-CDS). Routledge.
Kristina, D., Setiarini, N. L. P., & Thoyibi, M. (2021). Textual and discoursal strategies of national leaders to establish their political images in the global arena. Studies in English Language and Education, 8(2), 779–795. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v8i2.18757
Lewiński, M., & Mohammed, D. (2013). Argumentation and political deliberation. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 2(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.2.1.00int
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications Ltd.
Mietzner, M. (2020). Populism and democratic decline in Indonesia. Cambridge University Press.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications Ltd.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). SAGE Publications Ltd.
Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The new rhetoric. University of Notre Dame Press.
Ramage, J. D., Bean, J. C., & Johnson, J. (2016). Writing arguments: A rhetoric with readings (10th ed.). Pearson.
Reyes, A. (2011). Strategies of legitimization in political discourse. Discourse & Society, 22(6), 781–807.
Schiappa, E. (2026). Argumentation the key concepts. Routledge.
Schmidt, V. A. (2014). Speaking to the markets or to the people? A discursive institutionalist analysis of the EU's sovereign debt crisis. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 16(1), 188–209. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-856X.12023
Suryadarma, D., & Jones, G. W. (2013). Education in Indonesia. ISEAS.
Talavira, N. & Potapenko, S. (2023). Defining media speech effectiveness: A case of Ukrainian president Zelenskyy's addresses to national parliaments. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 5(3), 8. https://doi.org/10.59400/fls.v5i3.1990
Toulmin, S. (2003). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press.
Turós, M., Kenyeres, A. Z., Balla, G., Gazdag, E., Szabó, E., & Szűts, Z. (2025). A Toulmin Model Analysis of Student Argumentation on Artificial Intelligence. Education Sciences, 15(9), 1226. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15091226
van Dijk, T. A. (2014). Discourse and knowledge. Cambridge University Press.
van Eemeren, F. H. (2018). Argumentation theory: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Springer.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (2004). A systematic theory of argumentation. Cambridge University Press.
van Leeuwen, T. (2007). Legitimation in discourse and communication. Discourse & Communication, 1(1), 91–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481307071986
Wang, Y., Wu, H., & Cui, G. (2020). Rhetorical structure analysis of prepared speeches and argumentative essays by Chinese advanced English learners. Text and Talk, 40(2). https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2020-2054
Wodak, R. (2015). The politics of fear: What right-wing populist discourses mean. SAGE Publications Ltd.
Zarefsky, D. (2014). Rhetorical perspectives on argumentation. Springer.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Noermanzah Noermanzah, Nafri Yanti
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
