The Opposition Needs A Plan
One constant feature of Malaysian politics is the grouching of the opposition parties and their supporters about the Barisan Nasional government. There is a veritable treasure trove of issues with which one can hammer the government, and it is no wonder that this is exploited by the opposition. However, the atmosphere of hate engendered by negative politics is, in my opinion, not conducive to winning elections.
Elections are won or lost based on who has the better plan and ideas for developing the country and moving it forward. This maxim holds true anywhere on the planet where generally free elections are held. In Malaysia, the opposition seems wholly incapable of presenting its own plans and ideas. It has a hodgepodge of proposals, but these rarely (if ever) coagulate into one grand plan for advancing the country. These proposals are rarely (if ever) presented to the voters in a way that starkly shows just how far their lives will be improved if they are implemented.
That is not to say that there is no place for good old criticism of the government. The opposition has done a terrific job of keeping the government on its toes. However, that is simply not good enough. Hate does not win elections - a plan wins elections. Also, when you present an alternative to the government's policies, you have more than enough of an opportunity to criticse the government's policies. There is no zero-sum trade-off here - you can have both a plan and criticism of the government.
Currently, we have far too much criticism and not enough planning. Just look at the blogosphere. Check out Jeff Ooi's Screenshots, Lim Kit Siang's blog, or Malaysia Today. These sites all have one thing in common - they do a brilliant job of criticising the government and its various plans (or lack of plans), without ever presenting much of an alternative to the government's plans. The commentators on these sites tend to be even worse - focusing single-mindedly on how terrible the government is, without even considering the calibre or quality of the opposition. Sometimes when I read the comments, I get the feeling that these people would vote for the opposition even if they were led by a pink fluffy rabbit.
Pointing out the government's flaws is not necessarily bad in itself. Certainly, it can often be enough to persuade many to vote against the government. However, it is rarely enough to persuade a majority to vote for the opposition. When people vote for the opposition, they are generally registering a vote of protest against the government instead of actually voting for the opposition. I believe that this is what dissuades many people from voting for the opposition - they can't stomach the thought of voting for a party without a plan, whose only platform seems to consist of pointing out flaws in government policy without presenting any new initiatives of their own.
The key to BN's success has always been its strength on concrete, tangible issues such as the economy. People, especially those in the villages, could not care less about the ISA or the Sedition Act or what have you. All they care about is whether you can bring them greater prosperity and development. Thus far, BN has generally delivered on that count. It has not delivered as much prosperity as we would like, mainly due to all the corruption going on in our halls of government, but it has delivered some modicum of prosperity. The opposition must seize this opportunity by presenting a coherent and visionary plan for delivering more economic success than BN has.
It is not enough to run on abstract things like "transparency" or "freedom of speech" alone. We must show how these abstract concepts tie into that very concrete object called economic development. We must demonstrate how an open system is superior to a closed one because of the way it permits errors to be pointed out.
Furthermore, it is not enough to simply promise that your plans will bring about development. You must show the tangible products of development. Show how by creating greater transparency, we will no longer have to wait half an hour for the bus to arrive late at the stop. Show how by halting handouts, we will be able to build so many more schools, highways, railraods and hire so many more teachers, engineers, policemen for the same amount of taxes we pay.
The opposition needs a concrete plan. The opposition needs to go beyond being the opposition. It needs to start planning as if it is the government, because only then will voters be able to be convinced to vote for the opposition. That is the day when a two-party system in Malaysia will become feasible. That is the day when we will have a future that is no longer as bleak as the dark clouds that seem to hang over our country now.
Infernal Ramblings is a Malaysian website focusing on current events and sociopolitical issues. Its articles run the gamut from economics to society to education.
Infernal Ramblings is run by John Lee. For more, see the About section. If you have any questions or comments, do drop him a line.
Comments
Thoughts? Comments? Discuss this and other ramblings at the forums.
(Alternatively, contact the author privately.)
| Related comments from forum thread "The Malaysian Opposition is Useless": | |
|---|---|
|
johnleemk
Infernally Rambling Thoughtless Mind Head Administrator Posts: 948 IP Logged | Posted at 11:20:19 am Aug 28, 2005
Let's look at the opposition parties we have, shall we? Keadilan was created to serve as an outlet for Anwar's numerous political supporters to call for his release. Once Anwar's release was secured, the party lost its way. They have no idea what to do next. Much like most opposition parties, Keadilan was gestated with only the purpose of opposing in mind. None of the major opposition parties have any real plans to tackle the country's issues should they obtain power. Their manifestos extend only as far as opposing the majority of the policies the ruling party currently has in place. Keadilan, much like the DAP, also compromised its values by joining the Barisan Alternatif, which was lambasted by more than a few for being built around Barisan Nasional's communalism (PAS/Keadilan for the Malays, and DAP for the non-Malays). Joining hands with PAS, a purely Malay party (at least in terms of membership) represents a serious compromise of Keadilan's principles, if Keadilan is indeed built on a foundation of multi-ethnic politics. Let's not get confused: I believe it's long been overdue that we do something about communal politics in Malaysia. However, I do not believe it is right to expect the lame duck opposition to get started on this. There is no strong leader among Keadilan or the DAP who can build a solid platform with strong principles. All the current parties have skeletons in their closets as well; the DAP is based on Singapore's PAP, which isn't all that popular here; Keadilan was designed to rescue Anwar, and that was all it was ever meant to be; PAS has the whole Islamic state thing which isn't exactly desirable among many voter; and the BN parties? It's needless to even list down the stigma associated with BN. However, hastily jumping from the frying pan into the fire isn't all too desirable either. Let's not be rash; voting for a party without a plan is just as bad, if not worse, than voting for a party consisting of politicians who plan to steal, but also one or two who actually have a plan once in a while. DAP and Keadilan should stop acting like petty people with nothing better to do than criticise, and lay out a clear roadmap for where they will lead this country if (and hopefully when) they take power. They cannot expect to be opposition forever, for as long as that is all they expect of themselves, that is all the voters will ever expect of them. |
| Last five replies (6 comments not shown): | |
|
freelunch2020
Member Posts: 17 IP Logged | Posted at 12:59:25 pm Mar 5, 2007
"Merging Parti Keadilan Rakyat and the Democratic Action Party" hmmm i think desi and us will just have to agree to disagree. i feel that perhaps turf wars exist in ALL PARTIES including PKR. as it is now as i've posted on my blog, it's Azmin vs Ezam + Syed Husin + Tian. and it's evident from a lot of events, if u become a 'regular' of sorts. u can kinda make out the factions. re DAP internal politics. i've not met anyone or seen for myself so i am not inclined to say anything although LGE has gotten a lot of bad press but he was also the person who stood up for the 15-yr-old girl who was allegedly raped by none other than the chairman of GABEM, Tan Sri Rahim Thamby Chik. LGE's intervention cost him 18 months in jail and being stripped of his professional accountancy qualification. so, john, i suggest we check out the ground and draw our own conclusions. i guess everyone will just have to find the party that suits them. desi will continue to talk about anwar's magical powers while we will continue to point out his and his party's flaws. but i do agree with desi that starting your own party is akin to reinventing the wheel as youth would need to learn from seniors. so being within an existing political party while forming a forward-thinking faction is the way most ppl does it -- even mahathir who was considered a reformist when in his early career. also, a senior politician has advised me to join a party most suitable cos none will be perfect and form a base with like-minded people there. i am really excited about this kabinet rakyat thing. at least it will show that we are not just talking about "brilliant ideas" but doing something. much thanks to nat tan of bangkit who has joined PKR under Tian. |
|
johnleemk
Infernally Rambling Thoughtless Mind Head Administrator Posts: 948 IP Logged | Posted at 4:08:16 am Mar 6, 2007
The trouble with the opposition is that these turf wars are the main news about them. Of course, the MSM has every reason to play up these turf wars to make the opposition look bad, but even alternative media highlight these things a lot. In other countries with free presses, the media doesn't dig up much dirt on these turf feuds because these parties know how to keep these things quiet and focus on their bigger agenda. It doesn't seem to be the same here. And as for Lim Guan Eng, I think few would question his motives. Like his father, he has gone to jail to stand up for what he believes is right. It's just that perhaps he, like his father, considers himself indispensable to the opposition/DAP. Politics should be about ideas, not people. |
|
kufar
Member Posts: 23 IP Logged | Posted at 9:27:40 pm Mar 13, 2007
Quoted from: johnleemk These "turf wars" are not wrong eventhough you view them as wrong. I for one find "turf wars" as interesting especially as politics is about personalities, characters and not just ideas. Nobody with a brain will vote for a human being who has bad personality like Anwar Ibrahim who is a convicted criminal who went to prison. Also, don't forget Anwar is an immoral man, a practising homosexual. Quoted from: johnleemk Making personal attacks and destroying a character is fun and part of freedom of speech and expression. If you think Parti Keadilan Rakyat supporters worship a man who is corrupt, homosexual and having dictatorial tendencies as their God, we should sterotype all P.K.R. supporters in this way to ruin them. Quoted from: johnleemk Why would any person (except those who are PKR. and PAS propagandists) question the motives of Lim Guan Eng? DAP is the only reputable political party in Malaysia. As for Lim Guan Eng going to jail, he was framed by the Muslim government that held a Kangaroo Court. This Kangaroo Court sentenced the innocent Lim Guan Eng to prison on fabrigated charges. However, with that said, I believe Anwar Ibrahim conviction was true as Anwar was tried before an impartial judge who evaluated all evidence presented by the sound witnesses and finally sentenced the Islamic fascist dictator to jail for corruption. That is why Anwar Ibrahim is banned from contesting the general election until 2008. There is a 5-year ban for those who are convicted of a crime which covers holding positions in any organisation registered under Societies Act, Companies Act or Government (which includes Parliament). Quoted from: johnleemk You fool, politics IS about PEOPLE not just ideas. Political activities are centered around personality (people) and idea (ideology). Nobody who has a brain will vote for the racist Islamic fascist dictator Anwar Ibrahim who must be hung like Saddam Hussein. |
|
kufar
Member Posts: 23 IP Logged | Posted at 10:25:14 pm Mar 13, 2007
Quoted from: freelunch2020 There is nothing wrong in "reinventing the wheel" for even the author of Linux OS reinvented the wheel rather than using Microsoft's Windows OS. Besides, a political party is an organisation based on an ideology that unites people, and in malaysia, all existing parties are _socialist_ either national socialist (ie. PAS, PKR and UMNO) or democratic socialist like the DAP. There are absolutely _no_ Conservative or Liberal political parties, nor any Green political party. Quoted from: freelunch2020 It is impossible to reform PAS, which is a hardline national socialist (Nazi) party that has implemented apartheid in Kelantan towards Chinese. I've spoken to many Chinese living in different areas throughout Kelantan and they all have intense hatred towards PAS and vote every election for Barisan Nasional. UMNO Kota Bahru MP Zaid Ibrahim defeated Barisan Alternatif (which is PAS-led) because he is a non racist. The best parties that exist today are DAP and Barisan Nasional, while the worst parties are Parti Keadilan Rakyat and PAS. A new party must never commit the mistake DAP did in 1999, which was working with PAS. It must colloborate with DAP and Barisan Nasional to fight with Barisan Alternatif but at the same time remain an opposition party (ie stay outside the BN). Quoted from: freelunch2020 Who is this senior politician? What party does s/he belong to? You do need to define "most suitable" so we know exactly what you mean when you use that word. If you ask me what is my political ideology, I would say that every general election I commit myself to strategic voting (tactical voting). My first preference is DAP and second preference is BN. If a parlimentary seat has DAP, I will vote for it regardless of straight fights or 3-cornered fights. If a parliamentary seat has PAS or PKR, I will certainly vote for BN. Quoted from: freelunch2020 There is no such thing as "Kabinet Rakyat" as in all democratic countries such as United Kingdom or New Zealand, the Prime Minister (who is elected by the parliament cabinet) appoints the Cabinet (which makes up the executive branch of government). A Kabinet Rakyat is surely un democratic as direct elections for the Cabinet posts is immoral because a good election has small number of electorate per electoral constituency. Cabinet and Prime Minister MUST follow British standards - be appointed by parliament and that happens now under BN (which has an overhelming two-thirds in the parliament). PKR proposal is a gimmick. They actually want to strip parliament of its power to elect the Prime Minister and the Cabinet. Quoted from: freelunch2020 Nat Tan is a nut case and that is why he is called "Nat" (nut). bangkit.net and jelas.info are pro-PAS web sites, which prove that Mr Nut Case (aka Nataniel Tan Chee Bhai) is an Islamic fascist. He must be hung in the gallows publically like Iraqi president Saddam Hussein. |
|
cyrix
Member Posts: 5 IP Logged | Posted at 8:30:23 pm Mar 21, 2007
LKS actually brought up the possibility of a merger sometime after the 2004 elections but the proposal was shot down by PKR. Why? Because right now for the merger to go ahead, the onus is on PKR to agree with it. It was PKR's insecurities which was the reason for its rejection of any merger proposals. PKR and Anwar wants to be the main Opposition party, but their current election performance is an obstacle to that, since it only has 1 seat while DAP has 12. Can we blame LKS and LGE if they disagree that PKR should be the 'senior merger-partner' if DAP is currently so much more successful election-wise compared to PKR? So I think that this is what must happen before a merger is feasible. Firstly, PKR must concentrate more on taking on UMNO in those rural/semi-rural Malay seats, instead of those urban-Chinese seats. Sure, its much easier for Opposition parties, especially the secular ones to win in those seats, but it doesn't help strengthen PKR's barganing power in the event of a PKR-DAP merger. If PKR can show DAP that it is capable to winning those vital Malay-majority seats, then only will DAP start considering letting Anwar lead them. So that's why I think that the next election is of utmost importance to PKR in terms of their future survival, merger with DAP, and of Anwar leading the Opposition. |
