Categories
Politics & government

[2004] Of Ms Fui does it again…

This is the kind of use of statistics that I absolutely abhor.

In the 1990 general elections, PAS’ support base stood at 375,867 votes. Last year, it reached 1.14 million, an almost threefold increase in 18 years. The huge increase in PAS’ support in last year’s general elections came mainly from its new supporters — the non-Malays.

By comparison, BN’s votes increased from 2.98 million in 1990 to 4.1 million last year, an improvement of only one-third. [BN vs Pakatan: Chinese reaction to PAS is the key. Fui K. Soong. The Straits Times via The Malaysian Insider. June 8 2009]

It is so bad, I think it is self-apparent. The logical gap is too wide to hide.

Spot the problem. Or problems.

Mind you, this is a CEO of an MCA think tank…

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

p/s — hints.

What was the percentage of Chinese who voted for PAS in 1990? In 2008?

What is the growth rate of total voters?

What about 1999?

Ong Kian Ming more or less raised this question in my Facebook account: how many seats PAS contested in 1990? in 2008?

Categories
Mudslinging

[1636] Of is MCA think tank drunk?

Why I ask?

FOR a long time Barisan Nasional’s communal approach has been translated into policies that have guided the nation’s governance and economic management. As a result, we are now laden with a hotchpotch of economic policies which are obviously in conflict.

We have in existence an old system from a socialist ideology of using price controls and subsidies to ”deliver to the poor”. We take a neo-liberalist stand to government-linked companies (GLCs) by providing them with immense and expansive immunity to regulations and real market competition, while the rest of the business community struggles in an unlevel playing field. As a country, we are not sure if we are for ”free trade” or ”fair trade”. For the man on the street, we have not even decided if the world is flat or not (economically speaking). In essence, we seem to adopt economic models that sound good at that time. [MCA must regain its vision. Fui K. Soong. The Sun. April 30 2008]

I repeat, “We take a neo-liberalist stand to government-linked companies (GLCs) by providing them with immense and expansive immunity to regulations and real market competition, while the rest of the business community struggles in an unlevel playing field.” That comes from Fui K. Soong, the chief executive officer of an MCA think tank known as Insap.

Question: since when neo-liberalism supports government intervention in the market, much less shielding government-link companies from competition?

No wonder MCA lost badly. If the think tank could not differentiate neo-liberal from statist policy or at best, misusing the term, I wonder what kind of advices it dispensed to MCA before the election. I think, if MCA wants to regain its vision, it could start by kicking Insap out.

Categories
Humor

[1521] Of how to spot a fake medium by MCA

Something to amuse your day with.

KUALA LUMPUR: MCA has come out with a book to expose conmen who use religion as a tool of deception.

MCA Public Services and Complaints Department head Datuk Michael Chong gave away the book to reporters at a press conference yesterday.

The book, in both English and Chinese, contained guidelines for people on how to recognise a true medium as well as 20 pointers to distinguish between a crook and a real medium. [MCA guidebook on how to identify fake mediums. The Star. January 22 2008]

What? Is there such a thing as a true medium?

MCA is nuts! I definitely will not vote for somebody that sells snake oil, “fake” medium or MCA, all the same!

Categories
Liberty Politics & government

[1295] Of a vote for MCA, et al, is a vote for Islamic state

What seems to be ancient history now, there was a time when DAP and PAS as well as PKR chanced sitting together amicably to face a general election. With an ambition to setup an Islamic state, PAS became the bane of DAP. BN played their cards well by employing guilt by association fallacy and DAP performed badly in that election. Come 2007, this is the chance for DAP — or even PKR if they have the balls — to turn that table against BN.

Malaysian Deputy Prime Minister Najib Razak said:

Islam is the official religion and we are an Islamic state. [Malaysia Not Secular State, Says Najib. Bernama. July 17 2007]

I personally disagree with that assertion but I am tired of playing the same game over and over again that by now, I do not feel the urge to rebut the DPM’s statement. I nevertheless take comfort in knowing that many in the blogosphere, from Jeff Ooi to Haris Ibrahim have done a good job in rebutting the DPM. So, if I were to rebut the DPM again, it would be a redundant work. Instead, I wish to share a delightfully marvelous politically strategic opportunity to create a major schism between members of BN.

Of course, of course. The non-Malay, non-Muslim members of the Barisan Nasional have no doubt condemned or at least begged to differ with Najib’s statement. If they, MCA, MIC, Gerakan, etc, really disagree with Najib and by extension UMNO, they should sever their political ties with UMNO. Words mean nothing without action.

Yet, it is unrealistic to have them to distance themselves from UMNO. Power attracts and things like this are not strong an impetus for them to refrain from tasting the honey that UMNO provides, the honey that makes slaves out of them.

The real gold mine is the supporters of MCA, et al. These people need to be convinced that a vote for MCA, et al, is a vote for Islamic state. The association of MCA, et al, with UMNO itself is suffice a reason to convince those supporters that MCA and others within BN are supporting the formation of an Islamic state.

Do you hear me?

This is the golden opportunity to undress the facade of harmony projects by BN. It is the crack for the alerted to make benefit of. Hear ye, hear ye. There is a crack; large enough a crack and race-based political parties will be obsolete!

Repeat after me: say no to Islamic state. Say no to MCA. No to MIC. No to anything that is BN. A vote for them is a vote for Islamic state where liberty will be disrespected with sheer impunity.

Categories
Economics Politics & government

[1134] Of Malaysian political parties on the economic spectrum

Within Malaysian politics, I do think economic philosophies have taken a back seat to the point that typical left-right classification of political parties is meaningless. Nevertheless, I would like to classify Barisan Nasional, DAP, Keadilan and PAS accordingly. I will leave the others alone since I do not think the rest are worth talking about at this point.

First stop is the Barisan Nasional, the coalition that has ruled this part of the world for more than 50 years; BN itself is older than Malaysia. Labeling BN is no easy task because, in my opinion, the parties of the coalition band together for power more than anything else. Classification is not made any easier when, the most important party, UMNO for instance, has pursued liberal economic policies as much as it has advocated some left leaning ones. More often than not, UMNO economic policies are ethnocentric which perhaps could fit into typical protectionist policies. UMNO and in my opinion, even MCA and MIC for that matter, are too pragmatic to simply fit into a class. Another component party, Gerakan, on the other hand is pretty liberal. Regardless of Gerakan, given how much central planning is observable in this country and the fact that Malaysia is a mixed economy, I would say BN sits somewhere in the center with slight variation from time to time.

If the act of classifying BN is tough, trying to do the same thing with Keadilan is harder. While BN is a coalition of parties with diverging economic ideals where pragmatism has taken over, at least, if one goes through of the component parties, one might be able to recognize each party’s leaning. The same method unfortunately will not work with Keadilan because Keadilan is a party by itself. Instead of a coalition of parties with different backgrounds, Keadilan is a party of individuals with different backgrounds. They have liberals in classical sense, they have communists, socialists, Islamists; you name it, they have got it. I do not know how Keadilan manages to get liberal and socialists along with Islamist under one roof. A greater mystery is how Keadilan manages to keep them from ripping each other apart. Therefore, I am unsure which direction Keadilan would be taking and I bet Keadilan as a party itself is unsure which path it would want to embark on. The best word I could uses to describe Keadilan is populist. Some people that I know in Keadilan themselves are contented to be mere populists.

Contrary to the two, DAP is easy to label. Without doubt, it is a socialist party. Or, if you like it, a social democrat party.

Finally, PAS. I am happy to say it out loud that PAS has no economic policy; they are too busy policing morality that they have no time for the economy. Nevertheless, Islamic economics does support welfare state arrangement to some extent. Yet, I am hesitant to take that into account as far as PAS is concerned because PAS is pretty clueless about the economy.