Categories
Liberty Politics & government

[1568] Of refusing to dance with Sophie

A refrain from voting effectively disenfranchises refraining voters from decision-making processes. When options sit along a political spectrum and the refrain causes candidate standing farthest from specific voters is elected into office, it is highly likely that issue raised by that specific voters will be ignored in favor of issues raised by the supporters of the candidate. As I have explained earlier, this makes voting imperative, especially when the participation rate is high and when the voting outcome affects the voters. Thus, Hobson has been taken out of the equation. While the importance of voting has been established, I have yet to answer the question of how does one vote under the current Malaysian circumstances. Sophie still stares at us.

To do so, we have to establish our goal, be it libertarian or some other thinkings. With two points identified, we then will be able to determine which path to follow.

To answer my dilemma — which many share, I am sure — we cannot solve it by working from the stage of reality to the stage of ideal. To convincingly answer it, we have to take our goals and work it backward.

The libertarian goal is the maximization of liberty and that is my goal. The typical caveat applies but this is not an entry about the definition of libertarianism and so, we shall leave it there and confidently move on.

Prior to the dissolution of the Parliament in February, we had an influential government with a shockingly strong mandate. Subsequent events in the past several years have proven that the mandate had enabled tyranny of the majority; the inferiority of majoritarian democracy to liberal democracy was proven albeit painfully. I have repeatedly emphasized the superior of a liberal democracy to “democracy, Malaysian-style” and so, I will say no more of majoritarian and liberal democracy.

I repeat, an extremely strong Malaysian government resulted in the minimization of liberty. So strong it was that liberties supposedly guaranteed by the Constitution have been grossly violated from time to time. Worse, the Constitution and policies could be amended according to Prime Minister’s mood of the day. A case in point: the extension of the retirement age of the EC chairman.

Given the status quo and the ultimate goal of libertarianism — or at least, the prevention of tyranny of the majority — the immediate goal for the 2008 Malaysian general election is clear. The immediate goal is the reduction of the power of the state. With history suggesting that BN will form the majority in the Dewan Rakyat by default, this translates into voting against BN.

That however does not quite cut it for me. I am facing a choice between having to choose UMNO, which is part of BN, and PAS. Does voting for PAS enhance my liberty?

Ideologically, it does not but pragmatically, it does enhance liberty due to rationale against tyranny of the majority.

At a stall last week, I had a supper with a several individuals and one of them was the respected lawyer Haris Ibrahim. He said, “this is not the time for a debate” in response to question by a Christian whom asked why should she vote for PAS?

Mr. Haris further stated, “do the arithmetic. PAS will not be able to form the government.” PAS is contesting only about 60 seats and it is only expected to win at least 40 seats. With 111 seats level marks the 50% threshold — if PAS is interested in forming a government; assuming BN would sit in the opposition — PAS will have to collaborate with other political parties which do not share the goals of PAS, including DAP.

Compare this to the current unmitigated Islamization process done by BN, led by UMNO.

Unlike UMNO, PAS limited influence can be controlled. UMNO’s influence on the other hand is too enormous to manage. Just observe BN; despite the presence of MCA and MIC as well as other junior partners, UMNO is free to dictate the direction of the coalition while dissent is swiftly punished. Fascism is the word of the day. If I may say so, intolerance for dissent is the reason why parties instead of individuals dominate Malaysian politics. Until these parties are humbled, individual-based politics will not thrive.

The only way I could think of to starve off creeping Islamization is the introduction of political competition in the legislature. This leads to the same conclusion yet again: the reduction of the power of the state.

Finally, when PAS knows that it is getting protest votes from those that do not agree to its Islamism and if PAS is interested in keeping and building its influence, it will have to continue to cater to these voters, which does not the traditional voters of PAS. Eventually, PAS agenda will be toned down.

Thus, the Sophie’s choice is solved without appealing to the rationale of the lesser of the two evils. What I have done is realizing an aspiration to achieve the noblest of all goals with clear conscience. I refuse to dance with Sophie.

Categories
Sports

[1567] Of revamping Ajax

Time off politics.

AFC Ajax is undergoing change.

Major change:

The board of AFC Ajax discussed the report with the club’s Members’ Council and members of honour on Tuesday evening. Much to everybody’s surprise, member of honour Johan Cruijff showed up at De Toekomst.

The outcome of the meeting was surprisingly spectacular: the club’s executive structure will be changed in accordance with the report. The board of AFC Ajax (chairman John Jaakke, board member of technical affairs Hennie Henrichs and board member of finance Joop Saan) will step down at the end of the current season.

The Members’ Council asked Johan Cruijff to effectively re-design the club’s technical policy and appoint people for the key positions. Much to everybody’s surprise, Cruijff said ‘yes’: 27 years after he returned to the club as a player, and 20 years after he left the club as a head-coach, Johan Cruijff will do official executive work for Ajax. He will not be the new chairman or technical director, but he will totally re-design the club’s technical structure on a ‘project basis’. In other words: Johan Cruijff will be the architect of the ‘new Ajax’.

The future of the current Board of Directors is highly uncertain. Remarkably, general director Maarten Fontein was not there when Uri Coronel presented his report. According to his lawyer, Fontein was “not invited” for the presentation. Chairman John Jaakke denied that Fontein will be fired, but on the same day football magazine Voetbal International published a draft for Fontein’s notice, which was ‘leaked’ by an unknown employee of the club.

Johan Cruijff can fire technical director Martin van Geel, but refused to comment on the positions of Fontein and Martin van Geel. “They’re not in my way,” he said. [Board to resign; Cruijff to re-design Ajax. Menno Pot. AjaxUSA. February 20 2008]

Finally, change in Amsterdam!

This is sorely needed. This season so far has been marked with missed opportunities and frustration, which is not too different previous recent seasons. Currently second and 9 points behind PSV, even the second spot is not guaranteed for Ajax as the season progresses slowly toward the end. Immediately below Ajax is NAC Breda, Feyenoord and Groningen. The only consolidation is that Ajax has done relatively better than Feyenoord. The bad news is that, other clubs outside of the traditional big three are threatening to break the monopoly.

Ajax certainly has the quality to perform in Europe but somehow or rather, the team has been terribly underperformed. This mocks the status of Ajax as one of the big clubs in Europe. Hopefully, this change is the first step toward a return to the glorious 1990s.

Categories
Activism Politics & government

[1566] Of Tony Pua vs. Chew “May 13” Mei Fun

Are you voting for another May 13? Vote for Chew “May 13” Mei Fun!

If you are voting for a better future, vote for Tony Pua.

[youtube]6QXAVZF1Zuk[/youtube]

Remember, we must learn from history but history should not fully dictate the future. In front of us a path of boundless possibilities. Tony Pua is able to walk together with us to a better future. Mrs. Chew only brings us to a miserable past.

Indeed, for Islamic state, vote for MCA! MCA does not have the courage to speak up against UMNO. If you are a fan of Islamic state, vote for Chew Mei Fun!

This blog endorses Tony Pua for Petaling Jaya Utara Parliamentary seat whole-heartedly (although at a forum, he side-stepped my question on power of the state. And skillfully at that!)

In fact, tomorrow, both Nik Nazmi and Tony Pua, two candidates which this blog explicitly endorses, will be giving speeches together tomorrow at Kelana Jaya. In fact, they are speaking at a function together, tonight. Well, what can I say?

This blog endorses the working relationship Nik Nazmi and Tony Pua maintain with each other!

For tomorrow, both will appear at:

Venue: C-G-05, Dataran Glomac, Jalan SS6/5B, Kelana Jaya (Map)
Time: 21:30
Date: March 2, Sunday

For more information, visit Nik Nazmi’s blog.

If you are wondering why a libertarian like me actively supports Nik Nazmi and Tony Pua, whom are probably social democrats, despite some policy disagreement, come to the event and talk to me!

Remember, vote for change. Vote for Nik Nazmi for Seri Setia state seat! Vote for Tony Pua for Petaling Jaya Utara Parliamentary seat!

Categories
Activism Politics & government

[1565] Of send Nik Nazmi into public office

Malaysian politics is immature and most politicians of older generation do not have the maturity to develop Malaysian politics. Our political scenario is one of bankruptcy. It is stuck in the 1960s and 1970s. Our policies are outdated and if we continue on this path, the whole world will leave us behind. South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore have left us behind when once, Malaysia was in the same league with these countries. Unless we change, we will find others like Vietnam up ahead while we will be left languishing behind, competing with Ghana and the likes. Even the Arabs are catching up when once, Malaysia was instantly recognized as the most modern of countries with a Muslim majority along with Turkey. The horrifying thing is, these seasoned politicians, especially from BN, are proud that we are competing with backwater African countries instead of modern East Asian and European states!

First world infrastructure, third world mentality, they say. Indeed.

Ironically, it will take younger generation politicians with fresh ideas to give our politics the maturity our country urgently needs. It will take new politicians to develop first world mentality by implementing good policies to cope with the changing world.

This is why this blog endorses the candidacy of Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad.

Public domain.

Enough of politicians whom are stuck in the past, with their outdated mode of thinking, with their inflexibility. Enough of politicians that still resound the specter of May 13 to gain support. We are the future and we deserve better. We need new policies to meet new challenges and achieve greater height.

We want ideas, not threats, not freebies, not feel good news but ideas.

Categories
Politics & government

[1564] Of make yourself irrelevant by not voting

Two doors.

Behind a door is an evil and behind another is yet another evil but of a different species. Which door would you choose to venture through?

In many cases especially in politics, it is about choosing the lesser of the two evils. Sometimes, we talk so much about choosing the lesser that we overlooked the third option: not choosing at all. Indeed, many voters have expressed their unwillingness to make a decision when presented with two evils. I was part of them for awhile until I began to take a step back and look at the bigger picture.

I deplore being having to choose between two evils but that is the case I will be facing for the upcoming election. There are only two candidates contesting in my constituency; one is from UMNO and another is from PAS; being having to choose between a racist and an Islamist party is a real turn-off.

Presented with limited options, I had to ask myself, do I need to vote at all?

Regardless the options, I do feel strongly about voting. I blame this on MTV, with its incessant messages extolling the virtue of voting. I bought so much into it that if I were given a chance, I would not hesitate to vote in the 2004 US Presidential Election. What made the urge greater was the options presented by the day; between Bush and Kerry, my choice was clear. Living in a liberal bastion of Ann Arbor and close to the Bible Belt made the decision easier to make.

I feel strongly about exercising my right to vote because I believe those whom consciously fail to vote practically relinquished their moral authority to discuss matters of collective importance, from state to the federal levels. Rightfully, every individual has a say in the governance of a state, especially so if those individuals are taxpayers. They have a stake in setting the direction of their state and refusal to vote should not affect that. Yet, a normative statement is not a positive statement. Positively, failure to vote means one disenfranchises oneself from the system.

An event in Iraq provides a clear example how failure to vote causes one to be irrelevant. In January 2005, Iraq had an election to appoint various representatives into its national assembly. The Sunnis mostly boycotted the process and as a result, the Kurds and the Shiites dominated the house.[1] Regardless how the boycott affected the legitimacy of the election, the house was formed to draft a brand new constitution for the war-torn country. Due to limited participation from the Sunni, the Kurds and the Shiites could have a free hand in writing a new constitution, the supreme law of Iraq.[2]

The rationale for refusal to participate in Iraq in 2005 is different from the Malaysian scenario but the effect is still the same. Those that refuse to vote make themselves irrelevant to the system. Unless, of course, if you are planning for a bloody revolution. Yet, a free election is a revolution in its own way.

All that does however only explain why it is imperative to vote. It does not tell how one breaks the false dilemma of choosing between two evils. I will touch on that soon.

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

[1] — Read Iraqi legislative election, January 2005 at Wikipedia. Accessed February 28 2008.

[2] — The Sunni Arabs’ January 2005 election boycott and the simultaneous campaign of intimidation of Sunni Arab voters by the insurgency resulted in only seventeen Sunni Arabs elected to the 275-member Assembly—a very low number compared to the proportion of Sunni Arabs in Iraq, conventionally estimated at 15 to 20 percent. By contrast, the Kurdistan Coalition List won seventy-five seats and the predominantly Shia United Iraqi Alliance won 140—an absolute majority that in theory, if not in fact, gave the Alliance the ability to write a constitution without the involvement of any other political grouping. [Iraq’s Constitutional Process II: An Opportunity Lost. Johnathan Morrow. United States Institute of Peace. December 2005]