Letter from London – William Chan
MAY 2 – Dear undecided voter,
I know that you want what is best for Malaysia. Yet, I also understand your fears and insecurities for your family’s future. I appreciate that the possibility of a new government after 56 years of incumbent rule may seem daunting. I can sense your doubt and scepticism about the opposition. I appreciate that the constant barrage of unsolicited political views can at times feel nauseating but I would be grateful if you could please hear me out.
I wish to address “three inertias of change” which may hinder the undecided voter’s appetite for change. Once one is able to see though the mephitic rhetoric and the ‘straw-man’ arguments of the mainstream media, I am optimistic that you will recognise that your fears have been misplaced.
1. The pragmatic argument
“The opposition lacks the experience to be in government,” says the pragmatist.
This is factually misleading. Many of the opposition candidates hold advanced degrees in economics, politics and management from reputable institutions. All three parties have had experience running state governments. Moreover, cabinet members are responsible for the high-level policy decision making, whereas the execution and administrative roles are left to the civil service (which doesn’t change irrespective of the ruling political party).
Moreover, the underlying premise of the argument is fundamentally flawed. It is circular to say that one must have been in government before to be able to perform well in government. Imagine if the British had told us that no Malaysian can be prime minister because no Malaysian has ever been prime minister before. Imagine if your boss told you that you could never be promoted because you have never held the position you coveted before.
Conversely, it could be said that it would be beneficial for BN to gain some new experience in opposition. Indeed, with their omnipotent control of the mainstream media – imagine what an effective opposition BN would make. Any misfeasance by PR while in government would be splashed on the front pages of all the mainstream newspapers for all the rakyat to be informed. Perhaps, once in opposition, BN may even learn to appreciate the importance of freedom of speech and transparency in a democracy. BN would also be familiar with all potential illicit mechanisms by which financial leakages and outflows occur – hence, they would be able to monitor PR with intense scrutiny.
“The civil service will collapse if a new government is elected. It will be kucar-kacir,” say the risk adverse.
It is undeniable that with all democracies, there will be a period of transition when a change of ruling party occurs. It also true that, given the length of BN’s grip on power, any potential transition of power may take longer than in other democracies. However, it is entirely fallacious and, in fact, somewhat offensive to think that our entire civil service will crumble at the mere change of ruling party. However, in fact, the two are completely different concepts. We are a constitutional monarchy and not a dictatorship – under Art 132 of the Federal Constitution, the civil servants serve under the pleasure of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and not under the leader of the incumbent political party.
2. The philosophical argument
An argument often made against PR is that it lacks the political cohesion ostensibly necessary to form a stable government – contrast the secular DAP party against the theocratic PAS. The BN have exploited this to its full effect – “Malaysia will become a Christian state” they warn the Muslims, “Johor will become the next Kelantan” they advertise in a mainstream English newspaper (a tad insulting to our fellow Malaysians from Kelantan, if you ask me).
This was a mental block which I initially struggled to overcome and I believe that many share similar concerns. However, having read the literature, I do not think that the diverging ideologies of the respective PR parties are cause for concern. In point of fact, the opposing ideologies within PR will force its, constituent parties, whom hold roughly the same number of seats, to engage in meaningful discourse and compromise rather than having legislation merely rubber-stamped through parliament. The ideological tension within PR produces a moderating effect positioning PR in the centre of the political spectrum. For example, the free market entrepreneurship beliefs of the young generation of PKR leaders could be moderated by the socialism of DAP and the Islamic values of PAS.
In Finland, one of the world’s most legitimate and prosperous democracies, no party has had an absolute majority in the parliament since independence, and multi-party coalitions have been the norm. Indeed, the popular “rainbow government” of the Lipponen era consisted of the radical left wing (Left Alliance) and the right-wing party (National Coalition). Consensus based politics can also temper the harshness of ideologically driven government policies. In the UK, the more Keynesian based Liberal Democrats have, to some extent, blunted the sharpness of the Conservative Party’s fiscal austerity. Indeed having a political party which is overly homogenous in the ideological beliefs of its members can cause it to become insulated and self-delusional.
3. The normative arguments
“The gratitude argument”
This non-sequitur argument runs something like this – through BN we gained independence so we should be loyal to BN. To vote against BN would be unpatriotic and ungrateful.
First, the sad reality is that the BN of today is very far removed from Tunku’s BN of yesteryears that we wistfully read about in our sejarah books. Decades of complacency and decadence has made BN lose its moral compass. The statesmen of 1957 era have been succeeded by opportunistic politicians. In point of fact, if you really are a true believer of the good of BN you would vote against them in the election – like a caring parent would reproach their child if they caught their child stealing. Not being in power will help to root out the corrupt members of BN who are just in it for personal gain. With the opportunities for kick-backs gone, the corrupt will quickly abandon the BN boat – separating the good guy ‘Michael Chongs’ from the mice. Rather than being a desperate party willing to do anything to hang on to power, 5 years out of power will give BN the breathing space to rediscover and to rethink what it truly stands for. Losing this general election would not spell the death of BN, indeed, it would be its rejuvenation and reformation.
Second and more fundamentally so, just because one is grateful for the past actions of a political party doesn’t mean one should necessarily keep them in power indefinitely. Should African-Americans feel obliged to vote for the Republican Party since Abraham Lincoln (leader of the Republican Party at that time) signed the 13th Amendment abolishing slavery? An incumbent party should be judged on the progress that it has achieved during its most recent term – nothing less, nothing more.
It is absurd to think that voting against the ruling party would be unpatriotic. Were South Africans unpatriotic in ousting the apartheid regime? Indeed, a patriotic Malaysian would vote against the ruling party if he believes to be the best for Malaysia or vice-versa. In other words, two equally patriotic Malaysians could vote for two completely distinct political parties. Our loyalty to our country should be given unconditionally and perpetually but our loyalty to a certain political party should only be given when that party deserves it.
Another version of the argument manifests itself as such – we should be grateful to BN for the development that they have brought to our country as without BN, we would have ended up like [insert random destitute country, and avoid any comparisons with countries which have made more progress than us]. As has been said above, the government’s mandate is only for 5 years. The real question to ask is therefore, how much progress has Malaysia achieved in the past 5 years? Do you feel safer walking outside? Has public transportation improved? Has the costs of living improved? Do you feel like your children will have a bright future staying in Malaysia?
“I distrust them both. Both sides are a disappointment. I’d rather abstain from voting,” say the disillusioned.
Whether you decide to vote or not, inevitably, come 5 May either BN or PR will be voted into power. If you are happy with how things have been for the past 5 years and want them to continue this way, then vote BN. If you believe we could be better than we are now, then see what PR can do in 5 years. After all, BN has had 56 years to get their act together. If you are still 50/50, I would have to humbly suggest voting in favour of PR.
For, despite the opposition’s abundance of optimism, most independent think-tanks and opinion polls suggest that BN will likely retain its simple majority, given the media bias and the asymmetry of information, in particular in the rural areas which have a higher proportion of seats per voter. In a fully functioning democracy, it is of fundamental importance that the government knows that ruling is a privilege and not a right. If PR is elected and fails to do better, we will readily boot them out as well come the next election (and I promise to write an equally critical article). Let the politicians fear the power of the people, and not the other way around. In any case, whichever party you chose to vote, I urge you to please exercise your constitutional right to vote – apathy is the Achilles heel of a democracy.
The purpose of this letter was not to dissuade the hard-core BN supporter nor was it for the indulgence of the PR supporter. Neither was it meant to shift the inertia of the apathetic. It was for you, the genuinely concerned but undecided voter, who is yearning for Malaysia to do better but is trepiditious of unchartered waters. I think, in the end, we need to ask ourselves do we want another 5 years of scare and hate mongering and racial divisiveness and more of the same shenanigans – or can we take a leap of faith for a better, cleaner, more honest Malaysia? Remember, courage is not the absence of fear, but rather the judgement that something else is more important than fear. Come Sunday 5 May, I hope that you will have the courage to do what you believe is right.
