Share This

Showing posts with label Malaysia GE13. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Malaysia GE13. Show all posts

Monday 6 May 2013

Malaysian Chinese tsunami !

Barisan Nasional keeps its hold on power thanks to the Malay breakwater that held back a Chinese wave that swept over the country. 

A CHINESE tsunami swept over the country last night. It ripped through all the seats that had a significant Chinese electorate and devastated Gerakan and MCA in the peninsula and SUPP in Sarawak.

The tsunami was basically about the Chinese electorate going for change. The result was that the DAP emerged the big winner, making new gains everywhere, including in Johor.

But it was evident that the Pakatan Rakyat slogan of “ABU, or Asalkan Bukan Umno (Anything But Umno)” had also resonated with the urban populace in general because Pakatan regained Selangor with a two-thirds majority.

The Chinese tsunami also helped to carry many of the PKR candidates in many of the mixed seats.

However, the tsunami could not quite make it to Putrajaya.

At about 1am, a solemn-looking Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak announced that Barisan Nasional had a simple majority to form the government.

At press time, Barisan had attained 133 seats, still short of the 138-seat majority won by his predecessor Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

Najib was clearly disappointed but he spoke in a calm and steady voice as he urged everyone to accept the election result as part of the democratic process.

The Malay electorate, especially those in the rural states, continued to back Barisan. It is a small consolation to Najib that the Malays have returned to Umno in a significant way.

The Malay wall held back the Chinese tsunami and Barisan won back Kedah. It also held on to Perak, which was a subject of speculation until close to midnight.

At press time, Barisan won Perak with 31 state seats against 28 by Pakatan. But Pakatan continued to dominate in Penang with an increased majority.

PAS managed to hold on to Kelantan with a much reduced majority, which showed that Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat's appeal as a religious figure still commands support in the state.

As predicted, PAS won the least seats among the Pakatan parties and DAP is now the dominant party in Pakatan with the most number of seats. It can also lay claim to having defeated a top Umno leader, namely former Johor Mentri Besar Datuk Ghani Othman in Gelang Patah.

The Pakatan wins also mean that Johor and Sarawak are no longer the fixed-deposit states for Barisan.

The zero sum game of politics means that DAP's gain is MCA's loss because both parties contested in Chinese-majority seats. MCA won only seven parliamentary seats, far short of the 15 that it won in 2008.

MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek tweeted late last night that the party would not be accepting any government posts.

This was in keeping with the pledge made that the party would not accept posts in the Government if it did not do better this time.

A big question mark hangs over the future of MCA as well as Gerakan and SUPP and they will have to do much soul-searching after this.

The Chinese rejection of Barisan is a big blow to Najib, who went out of his way to persuade them to come along on his economic and political transformation journey.

The Chinese have rejected a moderate and inclusive leader, who has made more overtures to the Chinese than any other Prime Minister before him, and Najib and his coalition will have to reassess all this in the months to come.

There will also be soul-searching on the part of PAS, given its loss in Kedah and the defeat of several of its top leaders, including its deputy president Mohamed Sabu in Kedah and vice-president Salahuddin Ayub in Johor. Another vice-president, Datuk Husam Musa, lost in Putrajaya.

One of the most disturbing aspects of the election result is that the ruling coalition is dominated by Umno and the Malays while the opposition Pakatan is dominated by the Chinese-based DAP.

The impact of this will become clearer as the dust settles over the most closely-fought election ever.


Comment
By Joceline Tan

The Star/Asia News Network

Related post:

Update Malaysian election GE13 ressults

Update Malaysian election GE13 ressults

To update latest results:



Tuesday 26 March 2013

Malaysian race/religion based politics is dangerous!

Generation Election 13: ‘Victory’ at any cost


 
Pilihanraya Umum 13 PRU 13 General Election 13  

The DAP strategy of targeting MCA candidates could make the Chinese community the unwitting victim.

THE 2008 general election was significant as a “political tsunami” – the Opposition achieved its best ever gains, with the promise of an emerging two-coalition system.

That election would have been even more historic had it also achieved what many thought it would: end communal politics for good.

But it failed miserably, with no political party blameless. Perhaps it was too much to expect qualitative change in addition to quantitative change (seat numbers in state assemblies and Parliament).

Communal politics has been a bane of this country for as long as there have been elections.

That remains a fundamental reality into the foreseeable future.

For Barisan Nasional (and its predecessor the Alliance) as well as the Op­­p­o­sition, race-based politics is practised if not always acknowledged. It takes far more to turn that around than many have imagined.
Whether party membership is defined by ethnicity or not, one race or another dominates and characterises each party.

Parties that are multiracial in theory are just less transparent in their ethnic politics.

However, what turns an unfortunate situation tragic is when those parties most vehement about having “turned the corner” of communal politics are also doing the most to perpetuate it.

PAS as the Islamist party has set new standards in trying to ram Islamist-style restrictions down the throats of all Malaysians – Muslim and non-Muslim. It now does so with more gusto and less hesitation.

PKR as another Muslim and Malay-majority party chooses indifference and complacency in the face of the PAS onslaught.

It has even supported the idea of turning Kelantan into an Islamic state.

The DAP prefers silence and inaction amid PAS’ swagger. Elsewhere it would wield its non-Muslim credentials, sometimes to the point of playing the Christian card.

None of this helps to tone down Malaysia’s sweltering communal politics. And since this reinforces the problem in Pakatan itself, it could prompt more of the same in Barisan as well.

The DAP’s latest move sees party adviser Lim Kit Siang contesting the Gelang Patah seat in Johor. It would be the latest “stop” in a long and roving parliamentary career.

MCA, which has half (seven out of 15) of its parliamentary seats in the state, sees Johor as its stronghold.

MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek condemned this as DAP’s strategy of “Chinese killing off the Chinese”.

Both Chinese-based parties are natural rivals whose mutual rivalry has now reached a new high.

DAP leaders may dismiss this alarm as predictable melodrama, but it contains a hard kernel of truth.

The DAP’s drive for power is not above pitting Chinese candidates against other Chinese candidates, which is likely to reduce further the number of ethnic minority MPs.

Johor is also Umno’s home state. There is virtually no prospect of the DAP snatching the state from Barisan.

However, DAP efforts to unseat MCA parliamentarians in Johor could produce a strong Malay-based Umno in the state government contending with a Chinese-based DAP in the Opposition.

That would be bad and dangerous for politics, race relations and the Chinese community’s representation in governance. It would be a regression, precariously setting an unhealthy precedent.

In recent years Malaysian political discourse became more multiracial as both Government and Opposition coalitions became more racially mixed.

With both Barisan and Pakatan led by Malay-majority parties, political differences were distanced from racial differences.

In the absence of thoroughly multiracial politics, that seems the next best option. The prospect of political fault lines coinciding with ethnic fault lines, raising the possibility of an ethnic conflagration as in 1969, has thus become more remote.

But the risk of returning to such political volatility remains. Respon­sible leaders of every party need to be cognizant of these realities.

Besides, the cause of shedding the racial element in party politics cannot be furthered by recourse to more racial politics.

Under a veneer of multiracial rhetoric, the DAP has been known to practise communal politics in its seat choices and allocations.

Lim’s foray into Gelang Patah to battle the MCA incumbent there is the latest example of this approach. Instead of creating a more multiracial two-coalition system, this communal cannibalism could promote an unhealthy and perilous two-race system.

Apparently, the DAP’s objective is simply to unseat MCA candidates, seen as soft targets since 2008, regardless of the cost to the people. That can only come at the expense of deepening racial politics in electoral outcomes.

Perhaps the DAP’s Chinese candidates are thought to have better chances in challenging MCA’s Chinese candidates than Umno’s Malay candidates. But that is still a tricky calculation depending on the circumstances at the time.

Thoughtful and responsible leaders may not consider that a risk worth taking, much less a cost worth paying.
 
BEHIND THE HEADLINES  By BUNN NAGARA

Related posts:

Malaysian Chinese at a Political Crossroads forum; Chua-Lim Debate, all hype but no climax 
Is the Two-Party-Sytem becoming a Two-Race-System? Online spars started ahead of tomorrow Chua-Lim debate!  
Malaysian Chinese Forum kicks off with a bang; Chua-Lim showdown!  
Malaysian Politics: Chua-Lim Debate Sets New Standard 

Thursday 24 January 2013

Is there ethics in politics?


DR Mohd Farid Mohd Shahran of Ikim in “When the world of politics is devoid of ethics” (The Star Jan 22 - See the attachment) believes there is still room for ethics in politics.

In the real world, especially in developing countries, the ethics of Plato and al-Farabi are only good for an utopian society.

While man is not born power crazy, those who enter politics are goaded by power to resort to unethical means.

Morality is hard to preserve and practise in politics.

English philosopher Francis Bacon said: “It is hard and severe a thing to be a true politician as to be truly moral.”

Unethical behaviour seems to be the order of the day as the general election looms near.

Almost everyday we read of mudslinging on both sides of the fence. Everything under the sun is being politicised as the stakes are very high.

French philosopher Voltaire remarked: “The pleasure of governing must certainly be exquisite if we may judge from the vast numbers who are eager to be concerned with it.”

Had Voltaire been alive today, he would qualify his statement by saying, “It is not so much the pleasure of governing, but the power that comes with it, making the vast numbers who are eager to be concerned with it.”

As Dr Farid said: “Politics, in its true meaning, is praiseworthy”. But the “realpolitik” meaning is different. Mao Zedong once said: “Power comes from the barrel of the gun”.

Jonathan Swift said: “Politics as the word is understood, is nothing but corruption.”

Despite the negative connotation of politics in its general form, politics as a profession can have high ethical values if the very system in which politics arise have strong values as seen in most developed countries.

Singapore is a shining example where the ruling party has great difficulty finding candidates to stand for elections as the people do not see it as a way to become rich overnight.

Singaporean politicians are known to observe and practice the highest ethical principles as espoused by Plato.

The observance of ethical political principles in Malaysia still has a long way to go as noted by Dr Farid where “small issues can potentially be magnified into a big scandal.”

“The various issues raised by political parties range from major ones such as fair economic distribution and political justice, to the most trivial or personal matters such as the way leaders and their family members dress”.

So far, general elections in Malaysia, unlike in some developing countries, have not resulted in the use of heavy weapons to gun down people.

And when the election results are announced, people accept it in good faith and continue with their daily chores while waiting for the next general election. Meanwhile, they hope the party that won will honour its manifesto.

One of America’s founding father’s Thomas Jefferson said: “I have no ambition to govern men. It is a painful and thankless office.” Thomas Jefferson was a man of high ethical values.

Do we have men like Jefferson in Malaysian politics?

Certainly there are many men and they should be given the task of providing true leadership along the political principles of Plato and al-Farabi.

By HASSAN TALIB

When the world of politics is devoid of ethics

 

Much too often, personalities are the biggest casualties as they are ruthlessly tarnished. All the dirt and grime is dug out and paraded for the nation to see despite their many prior good contributions.

WITH the general election around the corner, the heat of the Malaysian political climate is gradually increasing.

The number of political gatherings, ceramah and demonstrations by political parties multiply by the day and continue to increase.

The various issues raised by political parties range from major ones such as fair economic distribution and political justice, to the most trivial or personal matters such as the way leaders and their family members dress.

It looks as if Malaysians have become a very conscious lot concerned over everything overnight. Small issues can potentially be magnified into a big scandal.

Not only is the intensity palpable within ceramah and gatherings, a similar tone is also evident in cyberspace where heated debates and exchange of views have overwhelmed the social media such as blogs, Facebook and Twitter.

While such a phenomenon is regarded as normal, the negative culture attached to it is best eschewed.

To render support for one’s own party, some leaders and fanatical followers would resort to unethical means such as making false claims and unfounded allegations that include character assassination.

In response to such accusations, the opposing parties will stage similar counter attacks. As a result, emotions simply overrule reason causing the situation to get out of hand.

Understandably, the principle that guides extreme political groups is that politics is a war in which all kinds of weapons must be deployed to exterminate the enemies.

In engaging power politics, the prince, says Machiavelli, must be “adaptable and know how to do wrong when he must”.

Naturally, such an approach will have a more divisive impact on society.

People become more divided and emotions override everything else, particularly level-headedness.

Much too often, personalities are the biggest casualties as they are ruthlessly tarnished. All the dirt and grime is dug out and paraded for the nation to see despite their many prior good contributions.

Thus, questions remain: Is this the way politics serve its purpose in administering human life? Must society undergo this unhealthy process to elect a leader? Must we necessarily be divisive before arriving at political maturity when the amount of damage done is irreparable?

The answer lies in how the meaning of politics should be properly understood.

More importantly is the understanding of the role of ethics in political activities.

Politics, in its true meaning, is praiseworthy.

Philosophers and political thinkers as early as Plato, through his idea of the “Philosopher King”, had proposed a political system where wisdom and virtues must be the bases of governing states.

Although his idea is also criticised as utopian, the principle that Plato tried to put forward is very important, that is, a true political system must be guided by knowledge and virtue reflected primarily in the character of the leaders and politicians.

In other words, ethics, according to Plato, must be the basis of politics.

Just as men must live virtuous and good lives, a state must also be built on strong ethical ground. If the state is unfavourable, says Plato, the individual citizens would find themselves unable to lead a good life as it should be lived.

This organic relationship between ethics and politics from Plato stemmed from his idea that a state must be a microcosmic reflection of man. Since a state is run by humans who need to be furnished with good ethical virtues for him to be good, a good state must also be refined with virtuous characteristics.

Echoing Plato is al-Farabi, a celebrated thinker from the Muslim tradition whose work, The Opinions of Inhabitants of the Virtuous City, underlines that a state should be properly ruled by virtuous leaders and followed by virtuous people.

“The excellent city resembles the perfect and healthy body where all of whose limbs co-operate to make the life of the animal perfect and to preserve it in this state.”

Among the qualities needed by a ruler, according to al-Farabi, are intelligence, good memory, keenness of mind, love of knowledge, moderation in matters of food, drink and sex, love of truthfulness, magnanimity, frugality, love of justice, firmness and courage.

Arguably for some, real politics can never take ethics as its principle.

Such a view is justified if only man is naturally born with the attribute of being power crazed.

However, this has not been so since man was created by God in the best of mould as affirmed in the Quran: “Verily we have created the human being in the best of form.”

Furthermore, mankind can take pride in some of its leaders and rulers with good qualities and virtuous characteristics decorating its history. In Islam, for example, Prophet Muhammad and the four-guided caliphs continue to be revered as leaders par excellence for all Muslims. Another outstanding and exemplary leader at a later period was Umar Abd Aziz whose short rule, nevertheless, left a tremendous impact.

So rigid was Umar’s standard of ethics that he was said to have even refused to use up the candle in his office to light the room when discussing personal matters.

In sum, while we all can agree and understand Einstein when he said, “Politics is more difficult than physics”, we hope that, just as physics has contributed immensely to benefit the life of the human kind, politics would be able to do likewise.

BY DR MOHD FARID MOHD SHAHRAN, SENIOR FELLOW CENTRE OF ECONOMICS AND SOCIAL SCIENCE 
IKIM VIEWS - The Star Jan 22, 2012

Related post:
The cause of unethical activities

On Ethics and Politics :
 Is man not capable of love if he embraced the morality of self-interest? Only the man who loves himself and who knows his values is capable of loving others, albeit not indiscriminately.



Rightways