Change cannot be painless. Compromise and accommodation are necessary in the early years of any change. You take some, you give some. You gain some, you lose some.
the BN government’s ministers, including the PM and DPM, and other leaders have proven that they do not have the mettle to run the country efficiently and impartially.
Regime change is never easy, but observe how some nations have achieved this smoothly in recent history – South Africa, Indonesia and even some former Eastern bloc nations.
Pakatan has a huge resource of talents and clean leadership. Given the multitudes of problems arising from BN’s rule over the past five decades, surely Pakatan can do better than them.All they need to do is look at the templates in the governments of Selangor and Penang. We have too many doubting Thomases, so let’s have some positive thoughts.
No group will ever be fully prepared to assume the responsibilities of government, and my take is that once the majority decides a change is needed, no power in the existing regime can withstand that. When Pakatan takes over Putrajaya it must form a strong commission to probe all the financial misdeeds and fraud committed by the earlier regime.
the BN government’s ministers, including the PM and DPM, and other leaders have proven that they do not have the mettle to run the country efficiently and impartially.
Regime change is never easy, but observe how some nations have achieved this smoothly in recent history – South Africa, Indonesia and even some former Eastern bloc nations.
Pakatan has a huge resource of talents and clean leadership. Given the multitudes of problems arising from BN’s rule over the past five decades, surely Pakatan can do better than them.All they need to do is look at the templates in the governments of Selangor and Penang. We have too many doubting Thomases, so let’s have some positive thoughts.
No group will ever be fully prepared to assume the responsibilities of government, and my take is that once the majority decides a change is needed, no power in the existing regime can withstand that. When Pakatan takes over Putrajaya it must form a strong commission to probe all the financial misdeeds and fraud committed by the earlier regime.
The commission must be independent. All the stolen and laundered money must be brought back to Malaysia. The crooks must be made answerable to all their thievery.Why should they return only a percentage? Claim all the stolen money 100 percent, if possible. It is the rakyat’s money. Not theirs to keep and enjoy for the rest of their life and for their families
What happens in the unlikely event that Pakatan cannot win control of the federal government after the 13th general election?What are the disasters the people and this country face? How much more suffering and sacrifices the people would have to endure? How much more damage and to what degree this country could withstand it?And what is left for the poor people of Malaysia after another five miserable years under the corrupt regime?
What happens in the unlikely event that Pakatan cannot win control of the federal government after the 13th general election?What are the disasters the people and this country face? How much more suffering and sacrifices the people would have to endure? How much more damage and to what degree this country could withstand it?And what is left for the poor people of Malaysia after another five miserable years under the corrupt regime?
Yes, Pakatan Rakyat is not perfect, but is the Barack Obama government perfect?
Accepting reality doesn’t mean you condone what’s wrong. That’s when you stop being judgmental and begin to better your lot
Years ago, I read a sentence in a book on heart care that stayed with me forever. “Do not run up stairs, and do not run down people!” While the implication of the first instruction was clear, the second took time to unfold its deep meaning. I could not understand then how criticising or condemning others could affect the working of the heart. Today, with experience and deep thought, it is crystal clear. Judging or condemning other people, or even situations, comes from a refusal to accept reality. When things do not play out as per our beliefs and expectations, we become impatient and critical. It also comes from a feeling of helplessness, when situations do not play out as we would wish them to.
A promotion that is denied, a change of department, or a new boss at office; relationship or financial troubles at home — the instinct is to fight back or sulk in frustration, rather than accept and move on. We try to force circumstances and life to conform to our beliefs, which are disconnected from reality. This leads us to push and condemn ourselves as well as others, leading to frustration and unhappiness.
Think about it — our unreal beliefs force us to condemn reality. In the first stages of romance, you focus on the beloved’s virtues and may not even notice the negatives. Time and togetherness expose the negatives. From here on, it is a matter of choice where you want to take your relationship. Most happy marriages are those where the couple chooses to focus on the good and accept the negatives without condemnation. Once the balm of acceptance works its magic, love takes over and helps find unique solutions to problems. In the melee of a competitive world that pushes us to break through circumstances to better our lot, acceptance is a virtue that remains greatly underestimated.
And yet, it can give us immense peace and happiness. Try it out. Think of something you are dead against. Force yourself to accept it as a reality you cannot change. It just is; stop fighting it. Now distance yourself from the negative emotion and think about how you can make things better for yourself despite the reality. Denial immobilises you; acceptance helps you move ahead. Accepting something does not mean you condone it. You may be dead against something and yet decide to accept it. It doesn’t imply weakness. Nor does it mean that you have given up all hope of things getting better. It just means you have stopped judging or condemning. Researcher Ong Kian Ming, I suggest you look at the India experience, where the government changes often and rule with very narrow majorities, frequently with a coalition of smaller parties of opposing policies.
Corruption and misrule and abuse still occur in India, but they are seriously contained and frequent changes of government ensure that nobody stays in office for 22 years and no party stays for 50 years and causes untold damage.
Look at India’s technology and economy, it is a Bric (leading emerging economies Brazil, Russia, India and China) country and an Asian economic giant.
Malaysia with all its natural resources and no natural disasters is however now sliding down the drain. If the rate of abuse is unchecked, I don’t know where we will be in 20 years.
Don’t talk to me about slums in India – with a population of 1.3 billion in a capitalist economy, there will be such slums as there are in Malaysia, only that Malaysia’s slum population may be proportionately smaller.
And talking about opinion splits, the BN has got bigger splits within the coalition than Pakatan.
The disagreements within Pakatan show that they are not a ‘yesmen’ party where one party or individual can ride roughshod over all others, like how Umno can bully all the other component parties in BN, and where the PM is supreme.
In Pakatan, the disagreements can act as an effective check and balance.
Acceptance is the point from where you can begin bettering your lot or that of others. Now you start responding and helping, rather than reacting and castigating. Now you have stopped denying or fighting those you cannot control. You accept the reality and can rationally and intuitively look for solutions that make it better for you, or make you feel better disposed towards it. To succeed, it is necessary to accept and then move on.
Behind the election stalemate gripping Malaysia is a Pakatan Rakyat government-in-waiting powered by an Islamist party that was once the font of paranoia and fear. And for the first time, many Malaysians are willing to embrace such a historic opportunity, which only years ago would have been considered almost impossible.
Anwar Ibrahim, the Pakatan Prime Minister-to-be, is now powerfully positioned to articulate a vision of a new Malaysia when – not if – today’s tripartite opposition becomes tomorrow’s government.
Political and financial scandals make for a wonderful arsenal, but Pakatan needs to wage social stability and economic prosperity for Malaysians.
related articlehttp://suarakeadilanmalaysia.wordpress.com
Framing such a vision and articulating its policies clearly and repeatedly is now the job of the alternative government. Between now and possibly till next April, by when Premier Najib Abdul Razak is by constitutional mandate required to hold elections, PKR, DAP and PAS must target the electoral divide to convince undecided voters and even BN supporters that a new Malaysia will not be scarred by a troubled reawakening of the national psyche and body politic.
PKR, DAP and PAS must together win over those who may yet stand unconvinced that a Pakatan electoral victory in GE-13 will not usher in religious extremism, more racial division, violence, retribution and, by no means least, the economic malaise that all too often courts civil unrest and, if we may paraphrase the ever-alarmist and fear-mongering BN, regime change.
Amid talk that secret research presented to BN shows a 55-year-old government probably retaining anything between 80 and 120 federal seats out of 222, these ‘swing’ voters can render unto Pakatan what is Pakatan’s, and Malaysia’srelated.http://suarakeadilanmalaysia.wordpress.com/2012/06/18/unfazed-mca-leader-ong-tee-keat-is-the-right-candidate-for-pandan-a-voter-view/
A clear and present danger in the minds of many Malaysians is the possibility that PAS will revert to fundamentalism once Pakatan unseats BN.
In a living room just outside Kuala Lumpur, a seasoned journalist says: “Malaysians need to see pictures of Kit Siang and Hadi Awang standing together and convincing people that Islamic extremism is not on the agenda.”
In a café in the heart of KL, the question of whether PAS will turn after Pakatan wins is tabled. An agitator for sweeping reform suggests that “PAS will want to be re-elected after GE-13.”
In other words, PAS cannot afford to revert to its old ways if it wants to stay in government for the long haul. Malaysians need to hear this from Pakatan, in no uncertain terms, and they need to keep hearing it like a mantra. Tackling this fear head-on is so vital, the journalist said, that Pakatan should issue a “policy template”, to which all its politicians must strictly adhere under pain of disciplinary action at party level, if not expulsion.
Becoming Malaysian again
Bridging the racial divide that took a life of its own under the tutelage of Dr Mahathir Mohamed should be almost as important as winning the election for Pakatan.
One searing afternoon recently, an ardent advocate of racial understanding suggested Pakatan “should tell the people” that when it wins government, it will make Chinese manage affairs in a predominantly Malay constituency, send Malays to run an Indian area and so on…“so we begin to understand one another again”, she said.
For Pakatan, this would not set a precedent, but nothing could be more simple, or profound a strategy, if it were pushed further and deeper into the system so Malaysians may once again become simply Malaysian.
Mahathir deservedly rues the possibility that Anwar will treat him exactly like he treated his former DPM. However, Anwar would do well to measure the political expediency of some sort of amnesty for the small fish, who fear not only ouster from government but criminal prosecutions that will net and in all likelihood imprison their closest cronies, friends and family.
At street level, mitigating the fear of a sweeping purge that must run rampant among the rank and file of the Police and military would be crucial to underpinning any promise of a peaceful transition of political power; ditto for the civil service. But there are crimes, and then there are crimes, and justice must seen to be done for the worst cases.
In nearly any other truly democratic system, and to convey its message to the masses, Pakatan would have access to all media platforms, an unrestricted ability to campaign and the sort of taxpayer funding that an opposition is granted under parliamentary tenet.
But this is Malaysia, and the difficulties Pakatan faces in communicating its policies, ceramahs notwithstanding, therefore require that a new government must also bring about two vital changes to the political environment.
First, it must extinguish all state involvement in the mass media. It must forever be unacceptable for any political party to have a financial stake in media organisations like Utusan Malaysia, New Straits Times, Star, Berita Harian, national news agency Bernama and RTM.
Political patronage and ownership of the mass media is simply untenable in any functioning democracy.
Second, Pakatan must guarantee by law that all political parties in a parliamentary opposition are sufficiently funded to function effectively as a check and balance to any future Malaysian government.
It is also imperative that Pakatan navigates the ideological chasm between itself and BERSIH, the ever growing civil society movement whose only goal is thorough reform of an electoral system in which Malaysians have lost all confidence.
Pakatan and BERSIH strengthen one another, but it is BERSIH’s purity of purpose – electoral reform – that has allowed it to draw the support of Malaysians from across the political, racial and religious spectrums.
BERSIH will forever stand independent of political parties, and so it should be, because BERSIH has offered a priceless and novel opportunity in Malaysia – change of government by the will of the people.
Malaysians who have awakened to the power of a free and fair electoral system, and the very real likelihood of regime change just around the corner, will reserve the right to kick out any other government that does not meet the highest standards they shall demand of all politicians, and Pakatan will not be the exception.
WILLIAM DE CRUZ, who is based in Australia, is back home to vote.
Unfortunately though, years of experience tell us – politics always trumps the nation and though one party ‘wins’ – we all lose! shows the world that we are not just a land of thinkers and technical geniuses; that we also have some incredible and passionate political people. Truth be told,Once again, it was politics at the helm and newspapers and news channels had a field day taking opinions and siding with the players on both sides. In everyone’s quest to get a few moments of fame, with big money and bigger egos at play- the sparring still continues. What’s left to see is at the end of it all does the nation win or suffer?
The past week the headlines and rightfully so. Prime Minister of our Nation. Unfortunately it was hogging the headlines for all the wrong reasons. Politics and dirty politics marred what should have been a clean decision based on the best interests of the citizens of the country. Instead the race was on to find someone who’d work in the best interests of particular political parties. Citizens be damned. I am not saying the choices are wrong in any way. I am saying that how the situation became a murky game of dirty politics was terrible. It became a question of egos rather than a question of who would best serve the country. This took precedence over the eventual announcement and that took the shine away from a post that should be respected and revered.
Malaysia’s 13th general election, which must be held by April 2013, has been the most anticipated in Malaysian history, given the megatrends that are occurring in the country and the ability of the two main contenders to manage them.
Barisan Nasional (BN) and Pakatan Rakyat (PR) are the main contestants. BN — currently the longest-ruling coalition in the world — is a 13-party coalition based mainly around ethnic and regional interests. Umno is the single most important political party in the ruling coalition, dominating not only the coalition, but all major institutions in Malaysia except in the state of Sarawak. Najib Razak, son of Malaysia’s second prime minister, has led the coalition since becoming Umno president through an interparty compromise.
PR, in turn, is a new and informal coalition, set up in the euphoria of the opposition’s historical performance at the March 2008 12th general election. None of its three component parties has a clear majority, and all understand that their success is predicated on their ability to work together. PKR’s unelected leader Anwar Ibrahim leads the coalition by virtue of his ability to hold together three disparate groups — the Chinese-dominated DAP, the Islamists party PAS and his own band of largely ex-BN/Umno members.
Five critical megatrends face the contenders at the national level: economic performance, demographic changes, urbanisation, Islamisation and an island/peninsula divide.
The middle-income trap: The popular diagnosis for Malaysia’s stagnating economic performance is that Malaysia is caught in a middle-income trap, where it is unable to compete with low-cost producers on cost, but also by not having the institutions, human resources and technological capabilities to compete with advanced economies in innovative products and processes.
A young nation: 71 per cent of Malaysians are under the age of 40, with 34 per cent aged between 20 and 40.
An urban nation: 71 per cent of Malaysia is now urban, with only Kelantan, Pahang, Perlis, Sabah and Sarawak still being largely rural. Urbanisation rates are below 55 per cent.
An Islamic nation: The pervasiveness of Islam as a political tool and the increasing piety among Muslims have reached unprecedented levels.
Two nations: The politics of Peninsular Malaysia starkly differ from that of the island of Borneo. Political leaders and citizens in Sabah and Sarawak continue to distrust peninsula politicians, and all politics in these two states is local.
These trends translate into electoral issues in the following ways. Most critically for BN, its successful economic strategy is now being questioned on several counts. First, Malaysia’s low-cost, export-oriented economic model has seen wages for 80 per cent of Malaysian households stagnate for the past three decades. These households earn less than RM3 000 a month, in a country where the average monthly income is RM4,025. More critically, the bottom 40 per cent of Malaysian households earn RM1,440 a month. Seventy-one per cent of this bottom 40 per cent are Bumiputeras — a Malay term translated literally as “prince of the land”. The average monthly income of the top 20 per cent of households is RM10,000.
Second, in politicising education, BN has sacrificed quality for quantity. International benchmarks and surveys consistently show that the quality of education in Malaysia, at all levels, cannot match the successful East Asian economies. Eighty per cent of Malaysia’s labour force has no more than the Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM) qualification (SPM is equivalent to Year 10), and the 57 universities and the more than 500 colleges are producing large numbers of poorly equipped graduates. This has led to a poorly skilled labour force and unemployed graduates, with the economy facing severe skills shortages in a tight labour market.
This has had a significant impact on Malaysia’s young voters. The majority of local graduates utilise a government loan scheme. With limited employability and mediocre wages, they end up saddled with enormous debts. The problem is exacerbated by high unemployment. Graduates accounted for more than a quarter of those unemployed in 2007, while unemployment among new graduates was 24.1 per cent in 2008.
The public sector, at the federal and state level, and government-linked corporations (GLCs) have long been used to mop up Bumiputera graduates as part of an implicit contract between Umno and the Malays. With the country experiencing economic stagnation, rising public debt, depleting natural resource rents from fossil fuels, the bloated civil service and GLCs are now a severe drag on the Malaysian economy and can no longer function as a source of employment opportunity for the thousands of Bumiputera graduates. Many non-Bumiputera graduates also suffer the same predicament, as they are locked out of the public sector and the GLCs. Many are also ill-equipped to meet the demands of the private sector, especially in businesses exposed to international competition.
Increasing urbanisation has led to a greater interaction between Malaysians of different races and also between Malaysians and the outside world. Although there is still significant segmentation among the races and social classes in urban areas, this has meant greater interaction at work and global development that have produced varied results. Most importantly, the interactions have has forced Malaysians to focus more on the issues that affect their daily lives, such as the quality of life, the cost of living, or global events such as the Arab Spring.
Urbanisation also challenges the BN’s monopoly on information. In 2010, 65 per cent of Malaysians were using the internet. Cyberspace has been a boon for the opposition and civil society, and is an arena the BN has yet to effectively control. High urbanisation rates, which are driven primarily through rural–urban migration, also connect rural areas and urban centres more strongly through social networks. Families and individuals returning to their rural homes for festivities bring with them the latest political developments, made more accessible by the internet. This is further challenging the BN’s control in rural areas.
Islamisation of the public sphere — despite Malaysia’s secular constitution — has taken a concrete foothold in Malaysian society, due mainly to the contest between Umno and PAS for the Malay votes. Global developments have also influenced this trend. Islamic fundamentalism now pervades all aspects of Malaysian life, both public and private. While Islam had always mattered in the political and social sphere as an ideology, it is now also encroaching into the economic sphere.
Politics on the island of Borneo is based on local issues and mistrust of the federal government. The 2008 general election established the importance of Sabah and Sarawak in forming federal government. Sabah and Sarawak have become increasingly assertive since. As all politics on the island is local, and as a result of their strengthened bargaining position, Sabah and Sarawak — long considered fixed deposits for BN — are no longer a foregone conclusion.
The response from the contenders is influenced primarily by their incumbency — or lack of it.
The component parties of the BN, until the 2008 general election, had long-serving leaders, which impacted severely on inter and intraparty dynamism. The incumbency of these leaders and the BN resulted in a disconnect between entrenched party leaders and grassroots leaders, as well as members and supporters. Interparty competition for resource rents and for patronage has also resulted in leaders leaving the party or being put away in “cold storage”. The incumbency of these leaders has also limited the ability of the parties to attract new members and develop new and dynamic second-echelon leaders. Most damaging has been Umno’s increased strength: this has relegated other coalition partners to minions, effectively making elite bargaining redundant — the hallmark of the BN.
In contrast, PR, despite strong leadership, has marginally more democratic processes, due mainly to limited opportunities to access and distribute resource rents. The Reformasi, Bersih and Hindraf movements, Anwar Ibrahim’s charisma, and most importantly, the government’s inability to manage the megatrends, have seen young people flocking to the PR.
There is growing speculation in Kuala Lumpur that the country might have to deal with a so-called hung parliament, in which no major party has an absolute majority of seats, following national elections expected to be called before the end of the year. That would be a drastic comedown from the decades prior to 2008, … Read more
The two main contenders have framed their arguments for support in a contrasting manner. Umno, through the BN, has argued that social stability delivers economic growth and that only a strong Umno can guarantee social stability.
At the 13th general election, Umno will be arguing that it has the track record in delivering social stability and economic growth. PR, instead, is arguing that good governance and social justice are critical to Malaysia’s continued economic growth and social stability. PR argues that the persistent weakening of the Malaysian economy, and social unrest, are due to BN’s mismanagement of the economy, its divisive racial and religious politics, and the abuse of the rule of law.
The 2008 general election solidified the two-coalition system, and this is unlikely to be reversed. The surprising aspect of this development is that it took opposition parties 50-odd years to co-operate effectively, considering that Malaysians never given BN, on average, more than 57 per cent of the popular votes — with its best-ever result of 65 per cent achieved only in the booming ‘90s, at the 1995 general election.
Malaysians have demonstrated time and again that, despite its hegemony, the BN is not an overwhelmingly popular coalition. While the results of the 13th general election will depend mainly on the leadership abilities of Najib Razak and Anwar Ibrahim to manage their coalitions in addressing issues, neither coalition will remain in power for long—even with the support of a rigged electoral system—if it fails to address these megatrends effectively. — Asia Currents
* Greg Lopez is the editor of New Mandala’s Malaysia section, an academic blog hosted by the College of Asia Pacific, the Australian National University, and a PhD candidate at the ANU’s Crawford School of Public Policy.
No comments:
Post a Comment