Category: Politics & government

Categories
Liberty Politics & government

[2397] Reminded of my misgiving of PAS

I do not believe in specific individuals or organizations. I believe in institutions to make everybody honest, so-to-speak. I truly believe for governance in Malaysia to improve, political competition must flourish at the federal level. The first step is to have Barisan Nasional served some time in the opposition.

While the blood reference is excessive, the spirit of Jefferson’s “[t]he tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants” underlines the need for BN to lose its political power. It is about bloodletting. Power corrupts whoever whom holds it for too long. Hopefully, the bloodletting will flush out the worst within the ranks of BN. They will need to improve and be better than its rivals in order to survive. This applies to everybody as well. The competitive force will keep everybody on their toes.

A near loss is not enough. The so-called Pekan lesson is not good enough. Nobody truly remembers it because it was merely a near miss. BN has to lose.

Despite my harsh criticism of BN, I am not against BN per se. At least, not in the last year or so. I think I have grown out of that pure anti-BN sentiment. Now, it is simply an institutional requirement for me.

Pakatan Rakyat is the obvious candidate to replace BN. Within democratic institutional dynamics, I am supportive of PR.

Since PAS is an essential member of PR, I have discovered that somehow I am subconsciously trying to be more mild and measured in my criticism against PAS. This is all the more important because I increasingly see PKR as the most incapable of the lot in PR. PAS is the party that needs to pick up that slack. I do not believe DAP can do that in the short run. DAP needs to widen its base before it can cover for PKR.

And really, PAS has been moving to the center now, much to my delight. Obviously, my positions are very far from PAS in many ways but the distance is somewhat narrowing. So, it is not just that I am giving PAS a blind eye, there is also less for me to criticize on.

Until this week.

What happened in Kedah with respect to Ramadan dan entertainment outlets reminds me why I am distrustful of PAS in the first place. The PAS-led Kedah government has decreed that several types of entertainment outlets need to close during Ramadan, which is the Muslim holy month.

This is an effort at moral policing.

I reject moral policing through and through and I do not want to be voting for PAS to only to have them biting me. I do not mean to rear a boa that will swallow me whole later.

Voting for PAS has always been problematic for me. I voted for them in the last election. I am not so sure for the next election.

A friend has suggested that I change my address to solve my problem. That is really a creative way addressing it but it does not solve it. It only circumvents it. If PAS becomes part of the federal government, no amount of address changing will solve my problem, unless I move abroad again.

I thought the institutional requirement argument would be good enough for me to vote for PAS. But then I do not want to change from one bad scenario to another. I want a better scenario. I do not want to shortchange myself by eliminating choice. I do not want to guarantee PAS my vote.

I am a nobody. I realize that. So, I should make the following demand with humility. Nevertheless, for me to vote for PAS in the next round, I will need a guarantee from PAS that such moral policing will not happen.

Or maybe, a guarantee from PR is enough. Or least, from either PKR or DAP. Maybe I cannot rely on PKR due to how they have argued that non-Muslims need not worried if hudud is implemented. I am not impressed with that. Besides, their words are becoming less and less of value to me. Only BN has worse reputation.

So, under a system of consensus, I am looking at DAP. I am looking at that one golden vote to prevent the moral police from roaming the streets. If DAP can guarantee the existence such consensus system requiring unanimous agreement (which exists, I think), and that they can guarantee that they will always oppose moral policing on anybody, Muslims or non-Muslims alike, then I will vote for PAS in the next general election.

Until then, I will not, unless someone moderate contests in my area.

(Dr. Lo’ Lo’, the current Parliamentarian for Titiwangsa, will not do. I have seen her debated in the Parliament while I was working with a Member of Parliament in the last few months. I can say that I am not her greatest fan. But I guess, Dr. Lo’ Lo’ will not be contesting the next time around due to her health, hence the point on a moderate contesting. As far as her health is concerned, I wish her well.)

Categories
Politics & government

[2392] Vague principles, contradictory policies

Some ideas are vague for a reason. In Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged, the majority is afraid of commitment and responsibilities. It is simply impractical to have clear opinions or positions. Consistency arising from those opinions and positions is a barrier to success. One has to be pragmatic to be successful. Vagueness allows such pragmatism. To put it bluntly, it creates contradictions.

That is not too far off from the truth in our world. That is not too far off from the political culture in Malaysia. There are vague positions and from those ambiguities, contradictions.

1Malaysia is an example. Despite all efforts to explain it by far too many sides, 1Malaysia is still an ambiguous concept. It appeals to the idea of inclusiveness and equality, yet those with distaste for these very liberal ideas are the ones promoting it. There are of course true blue egalitarians within Barisan Nasional who are also promoting 1Malaysia but when both racialists and egalitarians are able to appeal to 1Malaysia in contradictory terms, the concept itself cannot escape the accusation of being ambiguous.

In the early stage of 1Malaysia, one particular idea was floated around to justify its vagueness. It was ”strategic ambiguity.” It stated 1Malaysia was made ambiguous on purpose so that it could be used to appease all sides. All sides can take ownership of 1Malaysia by applying to it their own definition.

That and its vagueness mean 1Malaysia is both everything and nothing, neither here nor there. Its ambiguity means it is not opposable. Given the feudalistic culture that prevails in Malaysia, in BN and in UMNO in particular, there is an imperative to support it just because it came from the top.

With nothing to oppose and everything to accept, it was good for BN and UMNO in a time when both are just emerging from a relatively disastrous infighting. They needed a rallying call. A vague call seemed fine.

Perhaps in its pretension that BN is a perfect replica of Malaysian society, they might have thought that what works for BN might work for Malaysia. The Malaysian society is more diverse than BN however. And because many Malaysians are outsiders to BN and are less enamored with feudalistic culture, they are more demanding in knowing why they should be on board with 1Malaysia. At least, for those who care, anyway.

After persistent ambiguity, many have become disinterested in defining 1Malaysia. They have moved on. At the same time, 1Malaysia sees relegation from a grand ambition contributing to national identity to a mere economic programme troubled by inconsistency.

Today, in fact, 1Malaysia is all about the Economic Transformation Programs and nothing else. It is about projects. It is about buildings and infrastructure. It is about cold hard cash.

But because the programmes are ultimately derived from the vague 1Malaysia, it suffers from contradiction. The ETP are market-driven but both embrace government intervention; price controls are everywhere. The ETP is privately sector-driven but these drivers are government-linked companies: Menara Warisan comes to mind. The best epitome of inconsistency is the term ”market-friendly affirmative action.”

Again, 1Malaysia in the end is about projects and cold hard cash. There is no principle governing it. Anything goes.

To prove that this is really a prevailing political culture rather than merely one belonging exclusively to BN, members of Pakatan Rakyat themselves are not doing well in terms of ambiguity. The ”negara berkebajikan” introduced by PAS is the latest example.

What is it exactly? So far, the buzz has it that it is Islamic, it is not an Islamic state, it is not the welfare state concept and it is different from the system practised by the BN-led federal government. There is little clarification on why it is Islamic, why it is not an Islamic state, why it is not the welfare state and why it is different from BN policy. Apart from several key terms, it is ultimately vague.

To be fair, PAS must be given time to articulate the idea, especially since the idea is creating a competition to the political centre. Nevertheless, the fact that concept was released before its articulation makes it susceptible to the same criticism directed against 1Malaysia. Unless the articulation lifts the veil of ambiguity soon, ”negara berkebajikan” will be a potpourri of contradictions, much like 1Malaysia.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

First published in The Malaysian Insider on July 6 2011.

Categories
Economics History & heritage Politics & government

[2391] Tunku Abdul Rahman on the development of East Malaysia

As the Malaysian Parliament planned to vote out Singapore from the Malaysian federation, Tunku Abdul Rahman said this in the Dewan Rakyat:

…On the other hand, our relationship with Sabah and Sarawak has been excellent. We are desirous of carrying out extensive development programme in these two States, because we realise that under the colonial rule the development in the two States had been neglected. We know that they had joined us on their own accord and of their own free will, in hope that they would enjoy not only the independence, the prestige, which freedom brings with it but also to enjoy other fruits of freedom. They fit into the pattern of administration with the rest of the States of Malaysia so admirably well; and unless we can carry out some development however small it may be their hope and trust in us will, I am afraid, inevitably lessen… [Hansard. Parliament of Malaysia. August 9 1965]

Categories
Liberty Politics & government

[2389] Bersih finds itself in a quandary with the King speaking up

I give my support to Bersih. As far as the rally goes, that support is based on the idea of freedom of assembly. That however does not mean I fully agree with everything that Bersih does. Specifically, I disagree with its appeal to the King.

Bersih now finds itself in a quandary. The King has just spoken up against its planned protest in downtown Kuala Lumpur.[1]

For a libertarian like me, the King’s speech should not matter. For those in Bersih who makes the King their arbitrator, it does.

Bersih binds itself to the words of the King and not primarily to the principle of liberty. That binding makes the words of the King as an imperative that Bersih must follow, if these monarchists are true to their conviction. And the King’s words have not been favorable toward it. That is the peril of making the King the referee.

Because of the King, I would imagine that there is a conflict between monarchists and civil libertarians within Bersih.

I take comfort seeing Bersih finding itself in a quandry because, again, I disagree with its appeal to the King. I have been so from the very beginning, even back in 2007 in times when many believed that the monarchy was an important balancing mechanism, especially after they observed how the Thai King helped toned down the political conflict in Thailand.

I have argued that that appeal would only politicize the monarchy and bring the monarchy into politics in times when the status quo has a republican bias. At the time, however, my argument ran against the grain. I lost because they said, “look, the model works”.

Not after a while though. These believers of the monarchy as an arbitrator have been discouraged by the sultans of Perak and Selangor. Today, they have been discouraged by the King of Malaysia. The model does not work.

So, while I sympathize with the political fortune of Bersih in light of the King’s statement, but I shall enjoy my little cake nonetheless.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[1] — “The fact is, street demonstrations bring more bad than good although the original intention is good. Instead, we should focus on our main objective to develop this country, and not create problems that will cause the country to lag behind. [Statement by Agong on Bersih Illegal Rally. Bernama. July 3 2011]

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

p/s — have a happy fourth of July.

Categories
Earthly Strip Liberty Politics & government

[2387] The Earthly Strip: Bersih’s popularity

The establishment that is Barisan Nasional is pretty much clueless of what is going on. Not much has changed since the Abdullah administration I guess.

Here is a guide.

The more insulting accusations thrown,  more individuals will get angry and more will go down and protest. This Bersih protest is becoming larger than itself, thanks to the Barisan Nasional government.

That happened in 2007. I went down to the streets to protest not because I was enamored by Bersih, but because restriction to freedom of assembly.

On July 9 2011, it will likely be the same case for me. And reading stuff online, many will adopt similar attitude when protesting. Peacefully of course.