Yin and yang.
As I mentioned in my previous (and more uplifting) post Omnia Vincit Jambuism I get to like a bloke I didn’t before, but I am disappointed with a group I had admiration for.
Alas, this second post is about the latter, the gloomy bit.
The Democratic Action Party of Malaysia (DAP)!
I have in general supported the DAP because of its ideology of equality, meritocracy, integrity, good governance, transparency, accountability and democratic process as well as the resolute and courageous stand and honesty of its leaders.
Proper, prudish and prudent as they may be, those qualities have been what attracted me to them.
Alas, when I read Malaysiakini headlines Join us, DAP urges BN reps it broke my heart to see the DAP joining the slimy ranks of frog hunters, embracing the disgusting tactic of encouraging party defections, a tactic that is subversive to the democratic ballot box.
The DAP is virtually saying “Join us and f* those people who voted for you on your BN ticket.”
In the 1994 Sabah state election, when Pairin’s PBS won by 2 seats, poor Pairin found himself becoming instead the leader of the opposition, thanks to UMNO subversive frog enticement. The UMNO-BN campaign in Sabah in that year was headed (in accordance with BN protocol) by a certain DPM.
His slimy legacy continues today, and while DAP’s Karpal Singh has maintained his principles against that shameful, sinister and subversive practice (to the democratic process), I have noted with growing trepidation that Lim Kit Siang had remained conspicuously mum while the champion of so-called political reforms (oh, such brazen blaphemy!) boasted openly about the pending success of his deformed politics.
I wrote about my concerns to a DAP MP but alas, the politician must just be too ‘busy’ (or too embarrassed) to even respond to a concerned supporter.
When I was a kid, my mum had always warned me about ‘mixing’ with bad hats – I should have passed her homily on to Uncle Lim, a man I had admired and still hope to continue to admire.
But while I had supported the DAP in the last 2 elections, my continuing support is not unconditional. Many of my politically like-minded friends have also voiced their concerns at a DAP drifting away from its principled roots.
Examine Uncle Lim’s political career – a man who had striven unceasingly, over decades, to reduce the BN’s 2/3 majority, with many wondering whether he would ever see that in his political career. We all had supported and prayed (even me the atheist) for his dream to come true before he retires.
Alhamdulillah, Hallelujah, Krishna Sakti, and Omitofu, he has been so blessed in the year of 2008.
Then, as an added icing to the cake, his old Project Tanjung was also surprising realized, which saw his DAP gaining majority rule in Penang and his son serving as Penang’s new Chief Minister.
We have been ecstatic he has achieved his dreams and more, without needing to compromise on the DAP principled stand. He certainly deserves all but alas, having attained his aspired goals why is he now keeping quiet, unlike his colleague Karpal Singh, on the shameful froggie wheeling and dealing.
Plato taught us 'I shall assume that your silence gives consent.' Now whether his silence has sent an unwanted signal or not, a branch of the DAP has now joined the sleazy slimy snakeoil salesmen in the political gutter.
To be truthful, instead of rejoicing on for him, some of us are had cringed with embarrassment each time he remained silent besides a former UMNO leader whilst the latter boasted about his UMNO-ish ways a la Sabah 1994, to seize power through the back door.
Could it be what Lord Acton had warned us, that ‘power corrupts …’, have affected the DAP (with the possible exception of Karpal Singh), for to remain silent in the presence of such disgraceful publicly-voiced intention to subvert the outcome of the ballot box is to signal acquiescence, agreement and approval?
One of my DAP-supporter mates tried to explain away the DAP's abberration from its known principled stand, stating that it has been the Sarawak branch, and afterall, haven't I said before that 'Lain padang, lain belalang'?
I retorted that the DAP should always be the principled DAP we had come to admire (till now), and not be excused when it has done the unthinkable, regardless of which branch. It might have been a case of 'Lain padang, ...' but even then, it shouldn't '... main belakang' of the outcome of the sacred ballot box.
Meanwhile, from Malaysiakini Top Blog corner, I see that Uncle Bernard of Zorro-Unmasked blog has lamentably posted To hell with principles, showcasing his frustration with the 'principles' of democratic process and the supremacy of the ballot box, when he perceives an evil corrupt and incompetent UMNO taking us down Jalan Zimbabwe.
While I respect Uncle Bernard, I caution him on his (no doubt a singularly rare) angry outburst, for what have really brought us thus far, with 5 PR state governments and a BN denied its 2/3 majority, have been ‘principles’, yes, the aim to do the right things, unlike a rapacious UMNO-led government.
Abandoning the ideology of ‘principles’ would not only be a gross betrayal of the voters, but precisely the way how the addict would typically start his or her downward spiral, you know, just a wee innocent puff, a lil’ harmless sip and a tiny party experiment with the ganja or heroin, and before he/she knows it, the wee/lil’/tiny whatever has escalated into sharing of HIV-AIDS contaminated needles in a shitty downtown toilet.
Yes Plato also told us that 'He who steals a little steals with the same wish as he who steals much, but with less power.'
Political power is addictive, but what keeps the good politician on the straight and narrow are principles. If we are merely at Lord Acton’s 'power corrupts; …' let us quickly take stock of ourselves and stop further decent into the UMNO-ish '…and absolute power corrupts absolutely.'
One man had been there before but we shouldn't allow him to drag us down into the same cesspool.
If you are impatient with processes, recall another man whom many hate (even till today), and have accused of gross impatience and his ‘to hell with principle and process’ bulldozing ways. What you have proposed is actually the same, and unwittingly justifying his actions.
So ..... what would be the difference between his alleged 'sins' and your proposed 'to hell with principles' action?
Just remember that C.S Lewis warned us, 'No clever arrangement of bad eggs will make a good omelette.'
… and don’t be bought over by the belief of King Frederick II of Prussia who too boasted, 'I begin by taking. I shall find scholars later to demonstrate my perfect right.'