Tag: UMNO

Categories
Liberty Politics & government Society

[2243] Of discuss, debate but do not threaten

Opinions abound and they are bound to hit some sensitive nerve. When it hits, there goes another police report. There goes another demand for an ISA arrest.

The right-wing group Perkasa has been at it for some time now, calling for the arrest of various individuals for challenging what the group considers as Malay rights. Leaders of MCA and MIC meanwhile have lodged police reports against Perkasa for calling for the abolition of vernacular schools. An Umno politician recently said that nobody should question the existence of these schools because the founding fathers had agreed to it — nobody should question it; neither such an ultimatum nor threat has any place in a democratic system that cherishes freedom.

Some debates are engaging in that there are outstanding ripostes to brilliant arguments as opposing sides try to outwit each other. An exploration of ideas happens along the way to awe both participants and spectators. They are well-researched and well-argued. Malaysia requires this kind of debate for it to take the next step into the future confidently. We have the infrastructure and the institutions to take that step. What we lack is the culture. The exchange of threats reflects that.

The ones taking place in Malaysia are unimpressive by any measure. There is no witty riposte. There is no brilliant argument. There are just people who disagree with each other so badly that they want to silence the other. They are unable to conjure attractive thoughts to undermine the others’ arguments. They are not creative enough to convince the others and the spectators why they are right and the others are wrong. All they can muster is ”shut up or else.”

Worse, some of these arguments are made by members of the ruling coalition. One would expect more from them, given that they are driving the car.

When an argument is really a thinly veiled threat, it betrays something about it or those who make it. It is a weakness of intellect or laziness in thoughts. The gears in their heads stop running and their muscles begin to flex.

If this was the dominating atmosphere on the fringes, it could all be ignored safely. They can flex their muscle all they want in dark corners populated by cuckoos. But all this is happening in the center of the public arena.

It is because it is taking place in the centre that this lamented trend cannot be tolerated. It creates a climate of fear that crowd freedom out from the center.

No one in Malaysia needs any reminders that multiple issues need resolutions. These are old legacy issues and problems we inherited from our founding fathers.

None can claim to know what the eventual sustainable solutions are. What is true is that the way for us to begin to imagine those solutions is by being free to debate all issues with reason, not by resorting to threats.

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 August 27 2010.

Categories
Politics & government Society

[2151] Of barking up the wrong tree

How many times have we heard the statement that if so and so did not exist, certain problems would go away? Specifically, one side would blame UMNO and Barisan Nasional for racial and religious problems in Malaysia, while the other would blame PKR and its allies for the instability in the country.

The truth is that politicians and political parties get too much credit for the various issues the country faces. As controversial issues erupt, the blame game begins in earnest. The usual suspects get apportioned with the blame at the slightest chance by the other side, as if there were quota to fill. The controversy revolving around the use of the term “Allah” is a case in point.

At this juncture, where venom is thrown so easily as to make the atmosphere too toxic for fruitful exchange, the air needs clearing. This can be achieved by recognizing the sources of issues and identifying proxies for what they are.

Granted, politicians and political parties — especially those in government — have disproportionate power to influence politics. There is no doubt that there are cases where the blame clearly belongs to one side.

Yet, the relationship of politicians and political parties with society is not characterized by one-way traffic. It is a two-way street. In many cases involving grander issues like race, religion, democracy or liberty, for instance, the causal flow to the other side is greater than the direction that blame-gamers typical take.

However imperfect our democracy is — condemn it as crass majoritarianism all you want — it is a democracy nonetheless. This means the views of real individuals, with real wants and real needs, along with real hope and real fear — like you and I — get represented in the system. Elected individuals in Barisan Nasional, Pakatan Rakyat and others as well, largely represent diverse opinions that exist within Malaysian society.

Even if they are not elected, individuals still have voices of their own. There is no reason to discount these voices as irrelevant when it resonates so well with other individuals.

From this perspective, these individuals are effectively proxies within the issues. To put it another way, they are mere reflections of what the society at large thinks. Without issues — the concerns lingering in our society — these proxies will not exist.

Hence, to accuse these proxies as the sources of our problems is effectively an effort to dismiss real issues that real people care for as merely artificial issues created by special interest groups. Such accusations pretend that the other side does not have real concerns.

That path will essentially result in a misdiagnosis of the problem. Based on that misdiagnosis, any solution provided to address the problem will disproportionately take the proxies into account while disproportionately discounting the issues. In the end, the intended result will likely be unsatisfactory because it will address the proxies and not the issues.

Realize that if these proxies are somehow immediately removed while the issues remain unresolved, different players will take over the proxies’ places to champion those issues. If Barisan Nasional were to be done away with, would racial issues disappear? If Pakatan Rakyat were to removed, would the demand for equality suddenly vanish?

It is naïve to answer in the affirmative.

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 January 14 2010.

Categories
Politics & government Sci-fi

[2098] Of one data point

I am unsure if I am recalling this accurately but at back in my mind, amid cobwebs of vague memories, I somehow remember reading an Asimov’s short story in a stuffy old library at the Malay College in Kuala Kangsar. You will forgive me if it is not even Asimov’s writing. It may well be a work of some other science fiction author. What I do have vivid recollection is the subplot of the story, however. Through the retelling of it, I hope that it may cause others to refrain from committing hasty generalization.

The story is set some time in the far future, maybe on Earth, maybe on Trantor or at some other place, I do not know. What is important is that the realm of human knowledge has expanded greatly. This includes in the field of statistics and in particular, sampling methods used to ascertain public opinion.

Sampling methods used today in real life suffer from certain errors arising from randomness and uncertainty. Notice how each time a respectable polling agency in reports result of a survey, it includes the margins of error of the findings, or more accurately, the standard errors, along with the averages. In the science fiction, statisticians of the future have developed a way to eliminate, fully, the errors associated with sampling.

In fact, the field of statistics in that fiction has reached a stage so advanced that the opinion of the public can be gauged accurately by simply sampling a person, who is a member of the public. In other words, all that is required to make general inference about the society is just one data point.

A sample size of one and that is it.

One.

Only one.

1Malaysia!

Oh my, I do not know how that gets in there.

Anyway, unfortunately in real life, reliability of a sample and therefore, the ability to generalize its statistics for inferential purposes decrease as the sample size decreases, more so at some range closer to zero. We are still finding ourselves a long way from living a statistician’s wet dream.

Yet, all too often in Malaysia today, individuals are quick to generalize the result of a by-election to describe national mood. It is perhaps acceptable to make an inference out of a series of by-elections held within a certain timeframe but it is dangerous to make a claim that a by-election signals a countrywide trend. It is dangerous because it is misleading.

A by-election only gauges the opinion of a certain type of individuals and these individuals are certainly not representative of the whole country. The voters in Bagan Pinang, from instance, are quite different from voters of Manei Urai, Datok Keramat, Damansara Utama or Likas. Although the national issues that they care about may coincide, their attitude toward the same issues is not the same due to their worldviews. And then, there are local issues. It is definitely safe to say that local issues that they face are different enough that one-size-fits-all approach is doomed to failure.

These voters, taken as whole, may provide some concrete statistics on the direction of national politics but individually in isolation, they are not so helpful.

With respect to Bagan Pinang, there are many other differentiating factors that further make result of its by-election unique to itself. As an example, not many areas have an army camp resides within its boundary. Another is its status as resort town, or rather, a resort town full of abandoned projects. Suffice to say, Bagan Pinang is not Malaysia.

Therefore, I have to disagree to sweeping statements made by multiple persons after the election. In The Star, Isa Samad was quoted as saying “The people of all races have spoken and this is an endorsement of the Prime Minister’s 1Malaysia concept.”[1] Deputy UMNO President Muhyiddin Yassin meanwhile said, “This is a significant victory and more importantly the people’s endorsement of the Prime Minister’s policies.”[2]

Perhaps, the people they are referring to are restricted to the voters of Bagan Pinang only. If it refers to Malaysians as a whole, then these two politicians and others who share similar tendency to generalize in so grandly a manner will have a hard time rationalizing trends in other areas.

This is not to say information from Bagan Pinang is worthless. It is not to say information that Bagan Pinang provides with national politics in mind is worthless. Rather, information from this by-election should be contextualized by taking into account several past and future by-elections held at different places if it is to make national sense. Without such contextualization, the one data point of Bagan Pinang might as well be a noise, or an outlier.

In the meantime, save a national election itself, the best barometers of national mood are countrywide surveys done properly. Unless, of course, we are living in a world created by that science fiction.

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

[1] — Isa thanked the people of Bagan Pinang for the victory, saying it was a win for Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak’s 1Malaysia concept.

“The people of all races have spoken and this is an endorsement of the Prime Minister’s 1Malaysia concept,” he told reporters.

Isa also thanked the Barisan machinery for working tirelessly during the by-election.

“I’m also happy that the Malays, Chinese and Indians are now with Barisan. I hope this will have a domino effect for Barisan in the future,” he said. [Polling Day Live Coverage: Isa wins with thumping majority. Sarban Singh. Zulkifli Abd Rahman. The Star. October 11 2009]

[2] — A beaming Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, who was present when the official results were announced just after 8pm, said the people had endorsed Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s 1Malaysia concept.

“This is a significant victory and more importantly the people’s endorsement of the Prime Minister’s policies. I congratulate the people of Bagan Pinang, including the Indians and Chinese, who came out in full support of Barisan,” he said at the tallying centre at the Port Dickson Muncipal Council hall. [Thumping win for Isa. Wong Sai Wan Sarban Singh. Zulkifli Abd Rahman. A. Lechutmanan. The Star. October 12 2009]

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 October 12 2009.

Categories
Politics & government

[2090] Of when the majority chooses perversely…

Much has been said about the candidacy of Isa Abdul Samad for the Bagan Pinang by-election in Negeri Sembilan. I wonder how much marginal originality I can write after all that. Yet, I am writing about it.

This piece is not so much to attack Isa Abdul Samad. Others have done so and I will let others who are more aggressive in their stance to take up that position. I have no appetite for harsh words when life has been kind to me. I am happy at where I am and I am not willing to go into a trance of strong words.

Rather, I am concerned with the conditioning that may come with such candidacy and its possible acceptance by voters.

A primer is necessary as a foundation of what I have to share.

UMNO disciplinary committee found Isa Abdul Samad — a former chief minister of Negeri Sembilan — guilty of corruption in 2005. This was a time when euphemism of money politics was used in place of a more direct term for reasons all may speculate. While found guilty, the issue was not brought up to the federal authority for prosecution and therefore, there was no criminal charge when the situation demanded of it.

But that was a time when UMNO could do whatever it wanted. It was pre-March 8 2008. The state was UMNO and UMNO was the state. Much like how the Communist Party of China is the People’s Republic of China and vice versa, there was no differentiation between UMNO the political party and Malaysia the state. Therefore, Isa Abdul Samad got off the hook.

He, as in the words of former Pahang state representative of Pekan, Mohd. Ariff Sabri Abdul Aziz of UMNO, the former chief minister “was punished with the harshest of punishment for a politician — banished from the flock, forced to resign from all official posts.”[1] Perhaps, yet it is maybe the harshest punishment for a politician, but not as harsh as a punishment for a criminal.

In our imperfect world, politicians in the position of power with influential connections tend to get away from justice. The weight of the law is frequently not applied as firm as it should to such person of power. It is worth iterating this: Isa Abdul Samad got off the hook.

Regardless of that, there is a need to move on and his story is one of old. Issue died and it should be allowed to stay dead. After all, there is an issue of punishment and accommodation and perhaps, no matter how lightly he was punished, the society can accommodate him as long as he repents. Whether he did repent is something I am only willing to assume good faith.

Of more greater importance is the perception of corruption that the candidacy brings.

Like it or not, Pakatan Rakyat is focusing on the tainted past of the UMNO candidate. The checkered reputation of both UMNO and Isa Abdul Samad make it all too natural for Pakatan Rakyat to harp on. It is a magnet. Repeat the scenario in any other country, the issue to play is staring at one’s face. If Pakatan Rakyat had fielded a candidate tainted with corruption, Barisan Nasional would have done the same thing: attack the legitimacy of the candidate. Attack his capability to become a trustworthy lawmaker.

All of us deserve second chances. I know how badly I wanted a second chance. I got it and I cherish every moment of it here in Australia. Isa Abdul Samad may contest on the premise of second chance. Yet, the timing is most unfortunate for him. If UMNO really needed to field him, UMNO must sort out its reputation as a corrupt party first. Only then, a second chance for Isa Abdul Samad can come uncontroversially.

With regrets, or with great joy, depending on which side of the political divide one is on, UMNO has yet to clean up its house. And so, the fielding of Isa Abdul Samad — assuming he is deserving of a second chance — does not do justice to the former chief minister.

As a result, UMNO candidate and UMNO itself become a symbol of corruption, if it is not yet a symbol of one. Rather than the former chief minister reaching out for a second chance, he only strengthens UMNO’s unsavory reputation and while doing so, sullies his own sullied reputation.

This is sad because it is in the interest of all Malaysians to see the creation of competitive democracy; competitive in a way in a progressive manner, not to the bottom. UMNO simply is not living up to a standard required for a progressive competitive democracy that fights on advanced issues like the economy and the environment and not instead struggling on very basic issue of legitimacy of a candidate.

Even that, however, is not the issue at hand.

The issue at hand is that Bagan Pinang is a stronghold of UMNO and UMNO is to widely expected to win.

I am not sharing this because I am partial to Pakatan Rakyat. I am in fact quietly relishing the expectation that PAS will be beaten. My attitude towards PAS, especially against its conservative side, is one of quiet hostility. i distrust PAS, as I distrust many socially conservative individuals with power and tendency to move against individual liberty. I can say this because I am not a card-carrying member of the party that I sympathize with and my position is of mine alone.

I am writing this because, if Bagan Pinang chooses UMNO, it creates the perception that the electorates are tolerant of the culture of corruption that UMNO has not only come to identify itself with, but also strengthens with the candidacy of Isa Abdul Samad. When the electorates come to that point, one has to wonder whether the culture of corruption has spread so wide beyond UMNO and into the heart of common voters.

One would hope that voters who would vote for UMNO are UMNO members, who reason is no match for blind loyalty. Else, truly, corruption has become a way of life. No longer is corruption seen as a wrong, but rather it is being nonchalantly shoved aside and ignored.

If it is the voters and the majority at that, then truly, the perverse has won. The rot has truly spread.

That is what I fear.

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

[1] — Very likely, the findings of the disciplinary board are meant for internal discipline. The dos and don’ts it listed were meant as club rules and those who violate them, were punished in accordance to forms of punishment provided for. In Isa’s case he was punished with the harshest of punishment for a politician- banished from the flock, forced to resign from all official posts. Having served the punishment, we, the moral police now want to step in and punish Isa once again? We took his flesh and now we want his blood too? To make things worse, we do that via the tortured definitions of morality. The depraved past vs. the pristine future, penny wise and pound foolish etc. [The immorality of the moral high ground-2. Mohd. Ariff Sabri Abdul Aziz. Sakmongkol AK47. September 30 2009]

Categories
Politics & government

[2067] Of focus on Islamic credential is both exclusive and plastic politics

A contest between PAS and UMNO within conservative Malay settings is more likely than not a race to the bottom. It inevitably degenerates into a deplorable inquiry regarding which between the two political parties is more Islamic than the other. While doing so, PAS effectively resorts to exclusive politics that is clearly inconsistent to its assertion that PAS is for all. If the Islamist party is really for all, it needs to adopt a more inclusive approach in engaging UMNO.

In the past, the question of who could enter heaven became a campaign material. Back in January 2009 during the Kuala Terengganu by election, the implementation of hudud gained currency as an election issue.
The most recent example of exclusive politics happened when the top leader of the party, Nik Aziz Nik Mat labelled Islam as practiced by UMNO as plastic.

UMNO did employ the same tactic of inclusive politics with respect to Islam. When PAS finally gathered its weight to say no to the idea of both sides cooperating with each other, UMNO accused PAS of doing a great disservice to the Muslim community.

In the beer controversy in Selangor, UMNO ridiculed PAS for kowtowing to DAP and while doing so, questioned the Islamic credential of PAS.

The ugly debate is an exercise at exclusive politics because it prevents non-Muslims as well as secular Malays from relating to PAS, and UMNO for that matter. While the mudslinging between PAS and UMNO on their Islamic credential can be hilarious at times, it is ultimately damaging to both.

Previously when information could be contained, exclusive politics worked. A party could appeal to local electorates and ignore the rest. Messages could be tailored to be inclusive at one time and exclusives at others. Inconsistency was not much of a great concern, especially so for UMNO since they controlled the media.

These days however, as the common wisdom goes, information flows freely. As a result, any entity with national aspiration does not have the luxury of playing to such exclusive politics. Continuous emphasis on Islamic credential as it is happening has the potential of eroding the possibility of realising national aspiration, which, for PAS, ultimately leads to becoming part of the federal government.

It terribly mocks the slogan ”˜PAS for all’ that it campaigned on earlier and in many cases, as the liberal elements in PAS try to project to wider Malaysian audience.

The truth is that this emphasis on Islamic credential, at the manner at it is done, with apologies to Nik Aziz Nik Mat, is plastic. The punches and counterpunches on Islamic credential are all about form and less about substance.

It is plastic — empty, worthless — because beyond that rhetoric lie no concrete solutions to problems besetting Malaysian society. It does not address the economy, crime, corruption, health and a gamut of other factors that affect the life of Malaysians.

Worse, that debate, as we are witnessing through the press — traditional or online, establishment or otherwise — is more often than not an attempt at negative campaigning. That creates a victim and that victim is Islam itself. Unfair as the association may be, it is hard for the common masses to not to generalise when individuals who claim to represent the religion, on both sides of the fence, failed to be mindful of their words, even as they enter the month of Ramadan.

The route that should be preferred by both sides is one that contains inclusive messages with substance.

PAS should really concentrate on matters that everybody, regardless of religious or irreligious beliefs, can relate to without much consternation. Such matters can be about good governance coupled with concrete policies that can benefit all that it wishes to pursue while being part of the Penang state government.

Surely, good policies that incorporate such universal values and its implementation come far closer to realising whatever ideals Islam promotes than the act of claiming to be a better Muslim and deriding others while at it. Universal concepts and values such as justice and trustworthiness better fit for the idea ”˜PAS for all’. These universal values are present in Islam and PAS can capitalize on it.

PAS already has a working formula. The liberal element in PAS — liberal in a sense more liberal than the rest in PAS and not liberal in classical terms — for instance has focused on the concept of justice rather than harp on the divisive controversial issue of Islamic state. They realised that the idea of Islamic state is only a mean with non-exclusive and non-exhaustive form, while equality and justice is an end and a substance.

That, as some would argue, is the essence of ”˜PAS for all’.

PAS should consult its liberal element on that.

It should not be confused between means and ends. To confuse the two is to confuse between form and substance, and doing so, engaging in exclusive and plastic politics that is all about appearance.

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 August 24 2009.