Apart from being known for its communal nature, Malaysian politics suffers another division. While its communal division is observable at the inter-party level, the other division occurs at the intra-party level.
If one is to scan through the Malaysian political landscape, to the best of my knowledge, each and every one of Malaysian political party is divided into the main branch, the women branch (Wanita) and a branch for young men (Pemuda) and women (Puteri) each. The main branch is dominated by veteran males and these veterans are the de facto heads of the party.
I do not favor this kind of division. It heavily biased to the incumbents, especially old male incumbents. This results in young politicians receiving limited exposure to real policy making processes. On top of that, the current system is heavily biased to the males as women are expected to be active in their own branch rather than the whole party. Given its male-biased setup, the situation is the worst for aspiring young female politicians. As insulting as it sounds, this system seems to suggest that those not in the main branch are incapable of providing leadership.
Further, this setup is a major reason why Malaysia will not see a woman prime minister. As long as the system stays favored by the majority, men will dominate the national political scene.
This division, at risk of making myself redundant, separates each segment of the party’s population and strongly discourages interaction, or rather competition among, for the lack of better term, biological based groups. This active discouragement directly increases security for incumbents and veterans in the main branch of the party. Women, young men and young women are expected to be active in their own branches instead of the the party all over and thus, the lack of challenges to those in power. While there are individuals in the three groups that exert influence over the whole party, the number is fairly limited and is more of an exception rather than a rule.
I do not hesitate to venture that the restriction to competition is one possible reason why there is a lack of high quality politicians among political parties in Malaysia. The effectiveness of good democracy in guaranteeing meritocracy is blunted by the current system. Those with the best qualification are bogged down to relatively useless functions in a party that typically engage in emotional rhetoric and nothing else.
Yet, there is a benefit of having these various branches; it creates training opportunities for young newcomers. That training provides valuable experience that could be utilized once the time is right. But surely, similar training could be obtained through active participation in the main branch.
Further, I am in the opinion that those positions in inferior divisions are redundant. Perhaps, limited proper posts in the party in the face of the need to satisfy followers, these redundant positions become an important tool to garnering and maintain support. In way or another, the system reinforces Malaysian feudalistic politics.
For all the points stated and more, a real reformist party needs to eliminating these divisions. Bring down the walls, create a competitive atmosphere inside the political party and trust me, the party will come out stronger. Apologies to Mr. Friedman but the political parties of the future is flat.
