Concrete Before Abstract: Winning Voters to Win Power
I have been extremely vocal in calling for the opposition to get its act together, and prepare itself to govern the country. I have called for it to prepare, not to have this calling to power thrust upon it, but to openly and actively seek to thrust itself upon power, to fight for change in this country. Yet, many in the opposition seem to reject this call. They seem to believe that power will thrust itself upon the opposition as long as it continues down its present course. I beg to differ.
What do we call it when a person repeats a course of action in the hope of getting different results? Insanity. What do we call it when a party repeats a course of action in the hope of getting different results? "Taking a principled and courageous stand." The road to hell is paved with good intentions, my friend, and if you take up residence in Kamunting as a guest of His Majesty a few dozen times but can't do a thing about the situation our country is in, you might want to reconsider your holiday plans.
It is not that I disagree with the stances many of our opposition parties have taken, or that I doubt their moral rectitude, or that I don't respect the guts it must take to be hauled in under all sorts of reprehensible and draconian detention laws. It is not even that I would not vote for the opposition - certainly, I'd vote for nearly anybody who wasn't running on a Barisan Nasional ticket. Rather, it is that I know that the opposition can't win the votes that count.
What good is my vote? I live in the city - an area marginalised by the voting system implemented under our Constitution. (My vote may be worth two or three times less than a typical rural voter's.) I'm a well-educated member of the bourgeouisie. How typical am I of the electorate? How typical am I of the voters whose votes matter? I am not typical of them at all.
A typical voter is likely to have received minimal education, and is probably a member of the lower strata of society. He won't care about lofty ideals such as the belief that all men are created equal. He won't be able to conceptualise the effect of abstract issues such as transparency and accountability on his daily life. All he cares about is his rice bowl.
When I criticise the opposition, I don't mean to encourage people to vote for BN instead. That's the last thing anyone should be doing. If you can't find a palatable alternative, then don't vote at all, or better yet, make your voice heard and spoil your vote.
The simple reality of things is that in our country, most people still are not receptive to a change of government, simply because the opposition has never shown itself worthy of being the government. This is a fact. It is not meant to discourage support for the opposition; it is a criticism meant to make the opposition take a long, hard look at itself, because if it doesn't improve, it will never go anywhere and my vote will be wasted on it - I might as well throw my hands up and spoil my vote, and maybe emigrate, since if we don't change the government soon, our country won't be worth living in for much longer.
I know this is something that might be hard for diehard opposition supporters to swallow, but look at why we're supporting the opposition. Is it because we actually believe in their leadership, or is it because we're just fed up with the "leadership" we've seen in the government? A competent political party does not live on hatred of the other party alone. It lives on the belief that this party can lead the country to a better future, and this is something our opposition parties have completely failed in.
After all, we don't believe in the opposition's leadership. We just believe that a donkey's ass (as in a donkey's behind, not a donkey's donkey) would be a better leader than all of the BN MPs stacked together. That's why most of us are behind the opposition. The opposition has always mobilised its "support" based not on actual support for the party and its leadership, but on opposition to the government and its "leadership".
It is easy to talk about thrashing the government and about how we'll explain its abuses to the people - but just try explaining your rationale for voting opposition with a straight face to the typical Malaysian. It doesn't even have to be someone in the kampung; just try doing it with a guy you find on the street or meet on a Malaysian online forum. Outside the confines of the cloistered political blogosphere, people are not taken in by your arguments for voting opposition.
Now, why is this? Is it because they are diehard BN supporters? Is it because they don't care about politics? No. Oh, yes, they might say they don't care about politics, but politics is about the decisions that affect our daily lives. And I think everyone cares about their daily lives. It is just that they think that the opposition has failed to prove that it is capable of improving our daily lives. Part of this is based on false perception, but an equal part, if not more, is based on the reality that the opposition has never been capable of coming up with ideas and policies that the common man can relate to.
Recall, it is not that the common man is unaware of Barisan Nasional's abuses. He is. He just cannot conceive of the opposition being a better government than BN, as ludicrous as it sounds. BN has completely failed at leading our country, and essentially runs it on an ad hoc basis. The main business of government here is not government - it is plundering the country. They just implement policies as an aside to maintain their legitimacy. But yet, they have the support of the people because under them, the common man has been able to earn a living. His rice bowl has not been broken. His children can go to school. Why should he be upset, despite the literal racism and figurative raping that is ongoing in our halls of government?
What the opposition has to do is prove that it can improve the daily lives of the people. There are a lot of common grouses that can be exploited for this purpose. Just look at the things Dr. Bakri Musa highlighted in his book The Malay Dilemma Revisited - simple things such as MARA's failure to educate the Bumiputra, and its failure to enhance Bumiputra entrepreneurs' competitiveness.
Improving these things is not difficult - Bakri himself presents a lot of ideas for fixing up institutions like MARA. And of course, we have simple issues that mean a lot - like the fact that you have information technology teachers assigned to history classes, and physics teachers assigned to biology classes. This is a surprisingly common occurrence, even in urban schools - whacking the government on this and proposing an education policy that would properly provide for the training of teachers would be something that can win a lot more votes than criticising the Prime Minister for purchasing a new luxury yacht.
Bread and butter issues like these are not hard to find. Look at the crime situation - the middle and upper classes are increasingly locking themselves up in "gated communities", and at the rate things are going, in a few generations we might have to helicopter out of our homes like the Pakistani elite. Promising more police officers and a revamp of the police force is something everyone can relate to, and is a real bread and butter issue that BN has not addressed. Or look at the horrid state of public transport in our country, and the terrible town planning that focuses more on who can bribe the planners than on what is best for development. Again, a simple bread and butter issue that can be fixed, if only the opposition was not so focused on more abstract things like calling for the repeal of the Official Secrets Act!
Again, please don't misunderstand - I am not saying that these abstract issues are things not worth fighting for. They are. But do you want to deal with these issues as a powerless opposition party, or as the government? If you want the former, then by all means, continue down the present course (and please don't complain if I call you insane). But if you want the latter, you have to confront our country's bread and butter issues before you can even think of tackling the abstract issues of governance. It is only through such confrontation that you can convince the voters to put you in power, and it is only then that you can implement your agenda for tackling both the bread and butter and the abstract issues.
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 "Toppling UMNO/BN: An Agenda for Change": | |
|---|---|
|
johnleemk
Infernally Rambling Thoughtless Mind Head Administrator Posts: 949 IP Logged | Posted at 11:11:00 am Aug 28, 2005
UPDATE: More on this proposed party can be found in the replies below. Okay, it's pretty much clear now that politics in Malaysia cannot move forward without real multiracial parties, an unbiased media (or at least, a media consisting of many people with different biases for balance) and a decent opposition that has a plan, a direction, and some principles it will adhere to and not compromise on for a little more power. A lot of bloggers at other sites seem rather pumped up about brainstorming ways to achieve these aims, but the most they end up doing is talking about talking how to reform the government/opposition. So, if you please, I'd like to have a real discussion on how to reform Malaysian politics. (Although I'm quite pessimistic we'll see much change in our lifetime; the most we can do is plant the seeds for the next generation to reap; right now, the existing generation of adults is simply too set in their ways to change much.) I propose the formation of a new political party. A party that is for the people, of the people and by the people. A party where the little man can speak and know what he says can have a real impact on his daily life. The elite of our country cannot form this party. They have no interest in promoting change. This party has to come from the middle class. The middle class has a latent but large amount of resources - physical, mental and intellectual. All this will go to waste if we continue to stay at the periphery and let the big guys squabble for the right to ride the gravy train. On the other hand, the poor are incapable of promoting much change because of their low resources. Even if they have intellectual brainpower, it has not been developed much due to their little capital available for educational purposes. It is up to those of us, those of the middle class, to step into the breach and save our country. Malaysia is falling apart. Nobody can deny that. Peek into the pages of any newspaper, even the NST or Berita Harian. There is ample evidence that if we maintain the status quo - and doubtless, UMNO and BN intend to maintain it - Malaysia will die a slow and agonising death. We have a country built on division and corruption. Either we tear it down and rebuild a magnificent edifice we can be proud of, a building to rival the veritable skyscraper of Singapore, or we let our dilapidated gilded hut of a country rot and collapse fifty to a hundred years from now. It's up to the middle class to promote change. It's in our interest, and in the interest of every Malaysian, rich or poor. |
| Last five replies (35 comments not shown): | |
|
marvin
Member Posts: 6 IP Logged | Posted at 3:50:44 pm Jan 27, 2007
Grads in Malaysia are a hopeless bunch. Judging by how the education is being handled, there's no wonder why the end results are usually lame and half witted. No doubt we have intelligent young people who are either visionary or charismatic. But we lack people who have the combination of both and more importantly young people who are idealistic. Idealism is the most important essence to a revolution. Your idea of a Malaysian utopia needs a revolution to be realized. The public in Malaysia do not possess ideological sense because they don't read, they follow their leader, specifically today, it's their feudal lords. Capitalism, socialism, nobody understands that. What's more important to them is to ensure they would live comfortably for another day. A charismatic figure, who is idealized, who is extreme in his belief, who relates to the public, who makes the public think, so like him, they can foresee the gloomy future. This charismatic figure, because of his idealistic nature, risks to lose everything if he doesn't succeed. You know, like an ol' Senor Ernesto Guevara minus the marxism and guerilla side. Unless the BN government really plunder the nation like Ferdinand Marcos did Philipines, it's unlikely that a generation of this sort idealist would be born. But certainly not impossible. Best case scenario, a new libertarian socialist party led by a Malay. Party is anti statist, anti royalist, anti feudal, secularized and headed towards decentralized government. People may not be prepared for the party's ideology but supports it because they believe in the leaders and believe that without a change, the country will dwindle into a state of carcass. Ultimately only that ONE person is needed and the rest will follow suit. I'm inspired by the writings in the Republic Of Virtue by Dr Azly Abdul Rahman. Is it likely? |
|
johnleemk
Infernally Rambling Thoughtless Mind Head Administrator Posts: 949 IP Logged | Posted at 4:55:02 am Jan 28, 2007
I agree that there is a dearth of grads with idealism and ability - but at the same time, they are not non-existent. I am also essentially optimistic about the ability of the brainwashed populace to cast off the shackles of BN - provided there is an opposition party which can show how ably it will govern the country, and knows its stuff. As Khairy noted in his opinion piece, the opposition has always been incompetently running on a platform of not being BN, instead of a positive policy platform for change. If the people truly believe they will have a better future under a new government, they will vote for it. That is why I agree that "Ultimately only that ONE person is needed and the rest will follow suit". The important thing is that the idealists and intellectuals should not be shackled by their ideologies and be able to handle politics. Many social activists in PKR are idealistic, but they cannot really fight for political power because all they know how to do is hold demonstrations. Similarly, intellectuals who are too detached from reality will never be able to compete politically. |
|
tanstaafl
Member Posts: 9 IP Logged | Posted at 10:31:06 am Jan 28, 2007
Being 15, you can take the long view and personally, I believe that's the right approach to take given the circumstances provided those currently in power don't cut this off at the knees before you get anywhere or some other events occur before meaningful change is achieved. I concur with your conclusion that a new party is needed for the reasons that you have clearly set out so I won't re-hash them. Insofar as the list of goals are concerned, I would like to add a couple more - Separation of State & Religion - might require a change to the constitution? Separation of Politics from Business - which I've always felt eventually leads to corruption For funding is concerned, I believe that the only viable sources locally are amongst the middle class professionals. Most of the so-called corporate tycoons will have no interest in supporting a party that seeks to upset the status quo and their own livelihoods. Incidentally, I suggest a change of name to this topic. The current one is too narrowly focussed. How about "Proposals for Political & Social Reform"? |
|
johnleemk
Infernally Rambling Thoughtless Mind Head Administrator Posts: 949 IP Logged | Posted at 12:08:50 pm Jan 28, 2007
Separation of State & Religion - might require a change to the constitution?It depends on how far you want to go. Personally, I think we'll never succeed at getting Islam removed as the official religion, and I'm not sure we even want to go there. Rather, the focus should be on restoring the original intent of the Constitution, which was merely to permit some Islamic rituals at official functions (e.g. doa) without making Malaysia an Islamic state. (Tunku Abdul Rahman himself said this when speaking in Parliament in defence of the practice of serving alcohol at government functions.) Separation of Politics from Business - which I've always felt eventually leads to corruptionThis is something I agree with, but it is difficult to hammer down specifics about this. Even the most advanced democracies in the world haven't been able to tackle this problem, so unless we can come up with something innovative, I'm not sure it'd even be worth trying to do more than address this on a somewhat ad hoc basis. (That's pretty much how the Americans handled the Jack Abramoff scandal when Abramoff, a professional lobbyist, was caught bribing politicians.) For funding is concerned, I believe that the only viable sources locally are amongst the middle class professionals. Most of the so-called corporate tycoons will have no interest in supporting a party that seeks to upset the status quo and their own livelihoods.I agree. I think it would be actually possible to subsist on a similar budget to that of, say, the DAP. The DAP/PKR actually have a lot of potential despite their limited resources - it's just that they haven't been very effective since the DAP is constantly plagued by infighting while PKR has been focusing too much on social activism. Deployed appropriately, their limited resources could probably pose a serious threat to the government, since they've already been regularly winning about 30 to 40% of the popular vote. Incidentally, I suggest a change of name to this topic. The current one is too narrowly focussed. How about "Proposals for Political & Social Reform"?Hm, true...but the name of the topic has a certain bite to it. Maybe I'll change it to "Toppling UMNO/BN: An Agenda for Change". |
|
tanstaafl
Member Posts: 9 IP Logged | Posted at 1:50:27 pm Jan 28, 2007
State & Religion - on second thoughts, this is a tricky one As far as separation of State and Business is concerned, let's go back to the fundamentals and agree that it is not OK for political parties to own businesses or to channel government contracts and projects to those businesses, cap contributions, blacklist / prohibit companies in which elected officials or their families have an indirect interest from participating in any government projects extending up to a period of up to 5 years after ceasing to be an elected official. Hell, I'd even be happy if people would actually react to some of this crap instead of just saying "oh, that's how we do business in Malaysia". Hard to reform when patronage is institutionalised :P |
