Tag: Barisan Nasional

Categories
Politics & government

[1966] Of and then there are the independents

The concept duality is helpful in understanding context a particular issue is set in. Without the idea of cold, how does one define the idea of hot? Without evil, how does one appreciate good? Without tyranny, how does one taste the sweet nectar of liberty? While such monochromic perception has its advantage in rationalizing the world, one must not take it too far lest one falls victim of false dichotomy.

To commit such elementary fallacy is especially easy in a highly politicized environment with heightened blind partisanship. Blind partisanship begins with prejudice taking over as the prevailing sentiment as trust and assumption of good faith vanish. With humanity’s amazing ability at selectively accepting evidence only when it is convenient to do so, our capability to confirm our prejudice even as we are unaware of our own effort at the confirmation bias should not be underestimated.

However fallacious the process is, the so-called evidence provides the foundation for paths to the mind be shut. So strong the foundation becomes that criticisms along with evidence to contrary become a squash ball to a wall. The ball bounces off and the wall stands so proudly, rightly or wrongly.

So strong they hold on to their prejudice — and emboldened by their confirmation bias — that everything now is colored in only black and white in the dullest of manner. But dullness is of no concern when one is right or rather, when one feels that one is right.

It is a kind of intellectual arrogance, except that intellectual arrogance is a property of those who are rigorous — slow perhaps for all evidences has to be considered objectively and mental model has to be set out right but rigorous nonetheless — in their thinking process. Intellectual arrogance is of no property of simpletons who resort to logical fallacies just because fallacies are easy to do. That arrogance is of no property of those who seek to merely confirm their bias.

As their colorful world turns monochromic, it is all about us versus them. The like-minded people versus the different others.

Close as I might come, fret not for I am here today not to burst into a raving recluse lunatic that I am sometimes as I sit in a corner embarking on a soliloquy amid a world which at times appears beyond saving. I am not here today to expound organic politics and to soil divine rights despite the enjoyment that I derive from doing so.

No. No.

I am here today to celebrate valiant individuals and to ridicule dronish collectives. I am here today to demonstrate as arrogantly as I find possible why my arrogance will trump monochromic arrogance. I am here today to admonish those who horrendously unjustifiably adopt arrogant monochromic worldview that there are only two groups in the world; that it is all about us versus them; that it is all about Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat.

Yes, today is not all about abstract idea while the mind wonders in the clouds. Today is about a very real issue.

While BN does exhibit some waning in terms of arrogance, only a blind cow would think BN is finally beginning to adopt a humble outlook. Ignore the slogans from the top echelon of BN leadership because the true measure of an organization’s sentiment is to be seen at the grassroot. No sincerity from the leadership in advocating change can supplant the unmoving signal from the grassroot.

The grassroot of BN, specifically UMNO, are unambiguous in its signal. As the Democrats in the United States used to say prior to November 4 2008, they want more of the same. The grassroot of UMNO still have not learned enough lessons to comprehend that globalization is here and that globalization is going to dismantle their precious affirmative action by hook or by crook. The time is up and to hide behind that crumbling wall is folly.

When Reagan said out loud in Berlin in 1987, ”Mr. Gorhachev, open up this gate. Mr. Gorhachev, tear down this wall!” the communists understood that the end was near. If somebody is to say the same thing to the grassroot of UMNO, do they understand it at all?

For them, what worked in the past will work forever.

Whatever arrogance BN manages to dust off its back, Pakatan accumulates. After a wild success, many in Pakatan feel that they are beyond criticism. Even if those criticisms are justified, they implicitly assume that voters really have no choice but to stay which Pakatan because Pakatan is the lesser of the two evils.

Oh, the arrogance is so suffocating that I just wish a general election to come quick for me to prove that Sophie’s choice is but an eroded disk brake of no use any longer. Pakatan does not get a get-out-of-jail-free card any more. The time for free ride is over. No more handicaps. It is time for free and fair competition that is the essence of a proper democracy.

For far too many, in BN and Pakatan as well as their sympathizers, this environment of heightened blind partisanship has encouraged them to adopt a monochromic worldview; a worldview of us versus them. So strong they hold on to their view and so paranoid at that that any opposition towards their position is automatically categorized as ”˜them’, ”˜the other’. It is all about us and them. The other is Pakatan if they are BN; the other is BN if they are Pakatan.

I say this from personal experience. Every time I criticize Pakatan, I am called a BN lackey and everything I criticize BN, I am called a Pakatan apologist, or something to the same effect.

I cannot accept this outrageous accusation for I am independent of Anwaristas and Umnoputras.

No. I will not take that for since when this country of over 26 million Malaysians is cleanly divided between BN and Pakatan?

There are those that do not belong to either party but care nonetheless about the country. To them, to fight for the country does not necessarily mean automatically aligning to either party. No party has a monopoly over the country and these people know it. These people are the independents.

The independents are known for swinging. They walk around for options and shop only they are satisfied with the goods, very unlike blind partisans who will continue buy the same old good from the same vendor, regardless of quality of the good.

Yes, sir. The independents shop around and the independents are no blind partisans.

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 April 29 2009.

Categories
Liberty Society

[1957] Of should we pay income tax?

Why do some people refuse to pay income tax?

Perhaps the word ”˜some’ understates the gravity of the matter. The Ministry of Finance just recently shared that out of approximately two million Malaysians within taxable income bracket, only just over about half of them paid their due last year. This has prompted the Internal Revenue Board to hunt down those who have not paid their income tax yet.

It is likely that a majority of them do not actually explicitly refuse to pay their taxes. It could be a simple oversight, for instance. Indeed, there are multiple possible reasons contributing to non-payment but I am only interested in those who actually explicitly refuse to pay income tax. It is so because this question is crucial in understanding how much trust citizens have for the State, the direct benefactor of such taxes.

Before we explore the original question together further, it is imperative to understand the reasons for taxation.

From classical liberal perspective, there is no doubt that the biggest reason of all is to support the State for rendering services which in effect protect citizens and those within the jurisdiction of the State. That protection at minimum means protection of individual rights.

If the State fails to do so, the obligation to pay taxes evaporates. In fact, failure on behalf of the State to protect these rights eliminates a reason for such a State. This later calls for the creation of a new State capable of discharging its duties better, lest the dissolution of the previous incompetent or tyrannical State leads to an unstable state of anarchy.

This is part of a social contact between citizens and the State as embraced by classical liberals, henceforth libertarians.

Within Malaysian context, the State or the Barisan Nasional-led federal government in many cases has failed to protect various individual rights. Worse, the State itself has in the past threatened and actually infringed on the rights of its citizens.

To be fair, the current administration has so far refrained from doing so and seems to have given some commitment to continue the trend of restraint. How long will that restraint persists is anybody’s guess. We are after all still too early in the days of Najib administration to be confident of anything.

Notwithstanding the question of fairness, the Najib administration is still a BN-led government and the BN-led government has developed a very bad reputation among various groups in Malaysia.

That bad reputation affects classical liberals’ willingness to contribute to the State’s coffer in no little way. Why should libertarians contribute to the State which has the reputation of infringing on private citizens’ rights? To contribute is idiotic and libertarians are not so idiotic.

The unwillingness of libertarians to pay taxes is enhanced further on the economic front. This tax money will in one way or another financed State’s enterprises which will inevitably compete against private enterprises. Why should business owners support their competitors? I will not pursue this point further in hope that I do not digress from the main point and that I do not complicate the flow of thought here unnecessarily. I believe a focus on civil liberty will be sufficient to demonstrate my point clearly.

Admittedly, there are not so many libertarians in Malaysia and therefore, a libertarian explanation does not come even near in explaining comprehensively why so many people refuse to pay their income tax.

The more all encompassing answer probably relates to trust citizens — or more specifically individual taxpayers — maintain for the BN-led government. When seen from this angle, the libertarian answer forms as a subset to a larger explanation.

The trust is associated with the manner which BN-led government manages the tax money. Here, again, the reputation of the BN-led government does not shine and sucks in unsavory adjectives.

Corruption is seen as rampart. Observe the Auditor-General reports highlighting multiple suspicious dealings which include a screwdriver with an astronomical price tag. Has any action been taken to allay such suspicion? Have any culprits been taken to task?

The answer is a resounding no.

More recently, three prominent UMNO members were convicted of corruption by their own political party. Surprisingly, they were allowed to contest for party positions. One of them even went on to win an important party post. Another continues to hold a Chief Minister post.

If the party that leads the state government is seen as corrupted, there is no reason to expect the state government is clean. The same logic goes for the federal government. Does this encourage trust?

The answer is yet again a resounding no.

And then there is the abuse of power, characterized by the slogan ”Satu lagi projek Kerajaan Barisan Nasional”. There is a tendency among BN politicians to obfuscate the difference between the State or the government and political party. This tendency can be seen during by-elections when the BN unabashedly spends millions of ringgit of public money as part of its campaigns, be it in form of direct cash handouts or newly paved road.

BN has no qualms in using state machineries for its benefits. They without guilt consider government machineries as their own private property.

During the last UMNO General Assembly, a delegate made parallel the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission to a dog turning around to bite its master’s hand. That is a highly inappropriate statement and yet, it is hard to imagine if UMNO members attending the assembly saw any problem with that statement.

The best example of obfuscation yet is the nature of Radio Televisyen Malaysia. Despite being a public institution, it is woefully a mouthpiece of BN. To understand further how badly the function of RTM has been abused by BN, a comparison with the National Public Radio in the United States of America and the British Broadcasting Corporation in the United Kingdom is necessary.

Both the NPR and the BBC are public institutions like RTM. Unlike RTM however, both the NPR and the BBC serve public interest, not the interest of the ruling political party. This can be proven by its independence and largely neutral reporting as far as local politics are concerned.

RTM lamentably is just one institution which has been abused by BN. There are others like KEMAS, the police and the civil service. Many times whenever I listen to members of these institutions speak, I wonder if I were listening to the government or to BN.

So, given the corruption, the abuse of power and disrespect for individual rights, why should taxes be paid? These money are paid to fund wrongdoings.

When a group of people believe that the government does not belong to them and instead belong to someone else which they do not identify with, the group of people will hold that they do not have a stake in the government or the State. When they do not believe that they have a stake in the State, then they will have no moral obligation to support the State, i.e. pay taxes.

Even if this group paid their taxes, it is only akin to paying protection money to some parasitic thugs.

The antidote for this is simple: convince a majority of taxpayers that they do have a stake in the State. This can be done by making public institutions independent and free of political bias. Make these institutions accountable to them and not to political parties. Such setup is working in the US and the UK and there is no reason for it not to work in Malaysia.

Trust me, income tax collection will go up leap and bound if people feel they do have a stake in the State. More so if they actually feel proud about their State.

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 April 20 2009.

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

nb — a lot of people at The Malaysian Insider failed to differentiate between positive (descriptive) and normative (prescriptive) statements. This article is a positive article, not a normative article.

Many thought that I was advocating for all to not to pay income tax (normative). On the contrary, I am only offering a reason why nearly a million people do not pay their income tax (positive).

A person try to imply that I am against the idea of taxation. No, I said not such thing. This article is not an opposition to the idea of taxation in general. Again, it is only an effort at suggesting several reasons why many individuals do not pay their income tax. It is not an advocate of shirking from responsibility of every citizens.

Remember the positive-normative dichotomy. If you failed to comprehend the positive-normative dichotomy, then you might misunderstand the message.

Categories
Politics & government

[1953] Of Najib’s BN is trying to outflank Pakatan Rakyat

When Najib Razak said by-elections are distracting attention from things that matters like the economy, he might risk contradiction if he had said Barisan Nasional would participate in the Penanti by-election, made possible by the resignation of former Deputy Chief Minister of Penang, Mohamad Fairus Khairuddin. By indicating that BN may forfeit the by-election, Najib Razak may have taken the battle to another plane where the odds suddenly shift against Pakatan Rakyat.

It is hard to imagine how BN would win in Penanti, despite the possibility of seeing Pakatan on the defensive due to the scandals associated with a number of Pakatan politicians, specifically attached to Parti Keadilan Rakyat. This is so because Penanti is part of Permatang Pauh, the Parliamentary constituency of the wildly popular Anwar Ibrahim.

BN may have taken a fatalistic perspective towards the outcome of Penanti by-election and that is a fair position to take. At the same time, further defeat at the hand of Pakatan will contribute to downward momentum suffered by BN, despite talks of renewal by BN and BN-backed media. Further defeat will work against the BN media, further distancing created image promoted by the mainstream media and reality on the ground.

And so, skipping the by-election is a good option for Najib Razak. Indeed, with it, he kills two birds with one stone.

It is so not only because skipping the by-election puts a stop — notwithstanding time horizon — to the expanding divide between created image and reality by eliminating a possible further proof for BN unpopularity. The act also gives BN and more than anything else, the Najib administration a chip to shore up its position of concentrating on the economy, which is taking a beating despite sporadic good news appearing here and there.

By skipping the by-election and appearing above politics, the Najib administration takes over a moral high ground of fighting for the benefits of the people, the country. While doing so, BN can continue accusing Pakatan of interested only in politicking and not the greater good. This is especially easy to do if Pakatan continues to assault BN on issues of Perak.

That is almost unfair to Pakatan since Perak was wrestled by BN from them and therefore, Pakatan has every right to continue to politically assault BN in Perak. One has to remember however that there are increasing number of individuals becoming tired of such politicking. Already, the phrase voter fatigue is out and about, indicating that Malaysians may have finally approached a politicking saturation point.[1]

This is really a chance for BN to outflank Pakatan. For Najib Razak himself, it is chance to prove that he is a statesman instead of a mere politician. Whether this is real or apparent, that is hard to say but tactically, his maneuver is an effort to achieve that statesman status.

Pakatan should be mindful of being outflanked because that is not the only effort based on outflanking by the Najib administration.

Already the Najib administration tries to appear to be liberal despite the illiberalness of UMNO grassroot. His rhetoric appears as such, talking about a more open society. Najib’s rhetoric may appear empty, fuzzy and cloudy but it does show some effort at becoming a more open government, however small the steps that is.

Liberal attitude, specifically regarding open society, has been the domain of Pakatan. Even the conservative PAS — despite the debate in PAS on the matter — is regarded as more liberal than UMNO with respect to freedom.

If UMNO in particular can prove that it is liberal enough — meaning, not as in a real liberal’s wet dream but just enough to show its commitment to a more open society — UMNO and in general BN may be able to eliminate a reason why many individuals vote for Pakatan.

Whether that gap can be closed or not, the intention or at least the appearance to do so is there. Pakatan must take heed of this trend, lest they may find themselves at a disadvantaged position come the next general election.

Because of this, if BN decides to forfeit Penang, Pakatan should not celebrate too hard. In fact, Pakatan watch out to its sides to secure its flank because Pakatan Rakyat is probably facing a new BN smarting for past mistakes, even if that smarting process is going at a slow rate.

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

[1] — “By and large, there is fatigue among voters,” says Ibrahim Suffian, chief of opinion research firm Merdeka Centre. However, he says that this by-election is notable as it could be the first where a state assembly representative has resigned on account of integrity issues. [As Penanti by-election looms, polls fatigue a concern . Lee Wei Lian. The Malaysian Insider. April 16 2009]

Categories
Politics & government

[1945] Of that channel called TV3

In the aftermath of March 8 2008, TV3 kept repeating general election results from Sabah and Sarawak, seemingly in denial that something big happened in the Peninsula. They preferred to transmit limited happy news amid a torrent of bad news.

The same trend is being repeated again today. In Buletin Utama produced by TV3, possibly the foremost evening news program albeit suffering from declining popularity, the ticker kept repeating news in what might be an endless loop: BN won Batang Ai in Sarawak. BN won Batang Ai. BN won Batang Ai…

No mention of the current trend in Perak and Kedah. We of course know that BN is losing big time there, just like on March 8.

Categories
Liberty Politics & government

[1820] Of no one must monopolize free speech

The Pakatan Rakyat seems to have the exclusive domain over free press and free speech these days in terms of reputation. The perception has to be dismantled quickly if we wish not to escape a lie only to fall into another lie.

Pakatan Rakyat — especially DAP and PKR — rightly so deserves the association with free speech. The Barisan Nasional government unabashedly uses state apparatus to suppress free speech supposedly guaranteed by the Constitution, with the components of Pakatan Rakyat as the victim of suppression, particularly in the past before March 8 unraveled its chapter.

There has been some liberalization since thanks to the persistent struggle for greater freedom by many. The Barisan Nasional government still abuses state apparatus but threat posed them has receded significantly, ushering a new era of freer Malaysia. Much is to be done but clearly, we are seeing a liberal climate for us all to enjoy.

While enjoy we will, the price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

The clear and present threats to free speech — suppressive laws, litigation and coercion for instance — are always identifiable without much effort. One that is less obvious is when those with the reputation as advocates of free speech started to use it to their advantage with detrimental effect to others. With the Pakatan Rakyat component members finding themselves in power, they are susceptible to do so to slowly betray the principle which they are associated with. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

One can despise free market philosophy all they want but the safest bet one can make is that we all have our own interests and we do promote those interests to our own benefits. The fact that liberals understand this what makes liberalism so successful compared to any of its rival up to date. It is simply human nature and other systems fail simply because those systems try to impose idealism made in the heavens rather than work with reality on the ground for the advancement of humanity.

Those in Pakatan Rakyat are no different about having and promoting their self-interest.

There is nothing wrong in having self-interest and promoting it. It is self-interest that have brought humanity tremendous wealth and knowledge unmatched at any point in the past. What is wrong is when that self-interest is pursued in a way that violates others’ right. With respect to the issue at hand, it is others’ right to free speech and the maintenance of free press.

Despite their association with free press and free speech, the component members of Pakatan Rakyat lately have shown worrying tendency of barring journalists from news organizations unsympathetic to the politics of Pakatan Rakyat.

DAP sued Utusan Malaysia and a few others about a satire; the satire is distasteful, no argument about that but it is clearly only a satire, no matter how provocative it is.

In Kelantan, the PAS controlled state assembly barred a Berita Harian reported from its premised due to unkind reports. And who can forget how Zulkifli Nordin of PKR who stormed a forum demanding it to be halted; he has yet to be punished by PKR for what he done.

All this discourages free speech and free press and therefore competition of information.

In the past, supporters of Barisan Nasional were derided as believing in their own lies. At the moment, I am beginning to see supporters of Pakatan Rakyat believing in their own lies.

The best example was when Anwar Ibrahim claimed that there is a capital flight after the World Bank released a report showing FDI outflow overtook FDI inflow when in fact, the truth of the matter is that rather than capital invested in Malaysia flowing out, Malaysian firms are investing abroad.

The case of Teresa Kok claiming she was intentionally maliciously misattributed by Utusan Malaysia when in fact she did say what Utusan Malaysia reported is yet another example. Only that in this episode, free speech caused her to paddle back. Yet, some DAP supporters defended Kok only to suffer embarrassment when Kok found herself in an impossible situation to deny it. Without competition of information, Kok would not have apologize and would have gotten away with it.

As for me, I am unwilling to live in a lie after escaping from one. I am only interested in securing my liberty and not the self-interest of politicians from either Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat.

I am not entirely sure if some in Pakatan Rakyat believe in fair competition. Increasingly, it seems that they believe in fair competition only when the odds are against them. When in power, the ideal of liberty is conveniently thrown out of the window.

The antidote to this is the encouragement and maintenance of competition of sources. Any effort to limit competition should be viewed with utmost suspicion and nothing less.