The Malaysian Insider - DAP leadership to cede office if hudud law part of Pakatan agenda.
Well, Lim Guan Eng has laid the DAP cards openly on the table ...
But I wonder where are those mindless & mute Myrmidons of the man-man-lai Master?
They’re usually virulently vicious & vociferous, those (non-Muslim) anwaristas! Suddenly they have become mute and meek or mindless (or more likely, spineless).
Monday, September 26, 2011
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Dr Jekyll & Mr Zaid
Malaysiakini - Kita roadshow for Najib's 'save democracy' reforms
“sent shock waves ...”
Apt description on Zaid Ibrahim’s declaration to organize “... a roadshow to garner support for Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak's efforts to ‘save democracy’ by way of reforms of a number of laws”, to wit, the dismantling of the hated and dreaded ISA.
As a blogger who has a soft spot for Zaid, because I see in him a man who wants to practise civilised Westminster politics (antipodal to the feral ‘either you’re with us or against us’ Bush-ism politics of many UMNO and PKR people) I've to admit I too was surprised by his proposal.
Now, after that initial surprise, there are more than one way to react to his rather bizarre plan for KITA, where one of course is to straightaway condemn him outright as an UMNO mole or stooge or stalking horse.
The extreme form of this hostile acrimonious feral approach based on hate or political opposition can be seen on many blogs – let me give you a few examples:
Say, for example, you’re a virulently anti-DAP person, where you would go to any extent, even fabricated ones wakakaka, to condemn Lim Guan Eng or any of the DAP politicians like Teresa Kok, Teo Nie Ching, or Hannah Yeo, you could:
• Condemn Lim GE for his administrative inclusiveness by portraying him as a Chinese traitor for favouring Muslims, and at the same time placed a photo of him conducting a sembileh (Muslim ritualistic slaughter of an animal for consumption) at a mosque.
The photo is of course a fraud but you used a technical word for it (photoshop) which most readers wouldn’t know - & you hope for that. Even if they know what ‘photoshop’ means (very unlikely), the effect would still be what scientists call ‘sublimal’ effect, basically influencing (Chinese) readers (without their being aware) to regard Lim GE as a CM who has ‘gone over’ to the Muslims
• In the aftermath of the ADUNs defection to BN in Perak, the Perak DAP had a poster of the 3 defectors placed on the entrance to a DAP party function for its members to walk over, as an act of disgust against those 3 defectors, a silly one as I had blogged in Mean-spirited Malaysians.
But it was widely reported in the news (e.g. Malaysiakini) that Lim Guan Eng, the civilised gentleman he is, took very careful step to avoid doing just that, by stretching his stride over the poster so as to avoid stepping on any of the 3 defectors’ face.
But you have no hesitation labelling that photo as “Hee Yit Foong diletakkan gambarnya di atas lantai untuk dipijak-pijak/Lim Guan Eng sedang berjoget”, thus slyly, sickeningly and sinisterly insinuating that Lim GE had not only stepped on the faces in the poster but danced on them as well.
It’s a disgusting political fabrication no different from the faked photo of Lim GE performing a sembileh ceremony at a mosque, to incite hatred and dislike for Lim.
• You could condemn Teresa Kok, Teo Nie Ching and Hannah Yeo for wearing a selendang (to cover their heads) when entering a mosque as evidence of DAP’s abject submission to Muslims/Malays, thus a betrayal of the Chinese, but when you were hauled in by the police for an alleged seditious piece of writing, you proclaimed loudly and with obscene haste to the world you love Malays because you frequently wear baju kurung wakakaka.
• Because some DAP leaders are Christians, you launched an attack against DAP for having a Christian agenda in Malaysian politics (probably on instructions from UMNO), and regardless of inconvenient facts, label everyone you dislike/hate (or secretly lusted after) as Christian fanatics.
You then go on to assert that foreign-based Malaysian bloggers (e.g. RPK, kaytee wakakaka) have no right to comment on Malaysian affairs, while you a chauvinistic Chinese, who's always posting on the superiority of Chinese culture and Chinese events in mainland China, would in the same breath write to condemn DAP MPs and ADUNs, RPK, Haris Ibrahim, MCLM, analyse that TBH's final note showed he probably committed suicide, and praise MCA.
OK, the above are very extreme shameless, unconscionable, disgraceful lies of hatred, deceit - probably sponsored by you-know-who - and hypocrisy and double standards. But they serve to demonstrate what extent unconscionable double standard hypocrisy based on hate or political interests could go, and what could even be twisted to be perceived as ‘truth’, and what would basically be the alternative view (as in lies from truth).
Now, having said all that, what then can we provide on Zaid’s bizarre proposal to run roadshows to garner support for Najib’s reforms such as the repel of the ISA?
As mentioned, we can of course condemn him.
Or, we could wait and see whether Zaid’s move could be one of the following:
• A subtle way to prod Najib from NATO (no action all talk only) into genuine reforms and to the ultimate dismantling of the draconian ISA.
• A bipartisan endeavour to hasten acceptance of Najib’s declaration and expedite its implementation – yes yes I know the word ‘bipartisan’ is a rare bird in Malaysian politics.
Wakakaka – the above will no doubt infuriate my dear mateys Looes74 and Cruzeiro, the latter calling me ‘braindead’ for being supportive of Zaid ;-)
“sent shock waves ...”
Apt description on Zaid Ibrahim’s declaration to organize “... a roadshow to garner support for Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak's efforts to ‘save democracy’ by way of reforms of a number of laws”, to wit, the dismantling of the hated and dreaded ISA.
As a blogger who has a soft spot for Zaid, because I see in him a man who wants to practise civilised Westminster politics (antipodal to the feral ‘either you’re with us or against us’ Bush-ism politics of many UMNO and PKR people) I've to admit I too was surprised by his proposal.
Now, after that initial surprise, there are more than one way to react to his rather bizarre plan for KITA, where one of course is to straightaway condemn him outright as an UMNO mole or stooge or stalking horse.
The extreme form of this hostile acrimonious feral approach based on hate or political opposition can be seen on many blogs – let me give you a few examples:
Say, for example, you’re a virulently anti-DAP person, where you would go to any extent, even fabricated ones wakakaka, to condemn Lim Guan Eng or any of the DAP politicians like Teresa Kok, Teo Nie Ching, or Hannah Yeo, you could:
• Condemn Lim GE for his administrative inclusiveness by portraying him as a Chinese traitor for favouring Muslims, and at the same time placed a photo of him conducting a sembileh (Muslim ritualistic slaughter of an animal for consumption) at a mosque.
The photo is of course a fraud but you used a technical word for it (photoshop) which most readers wouldn’t know - & you hope for that. Even if they know what ‘photoshop’ means (very unlikely), the effect would still be what scientists call ‘sublimal’ effect, basically influencing (Chinese) readers (without their being aware) to regard Lim GE as a CM who has ‘gone over’ to the Muslims
• In the aftermath of the ADUNs defection to BN in Perak, the Perak DAP had a poster of the 3 defectors placed on the entrance to a DAP party function for its members to walk over, as an act of disgust against those 3 defectors, a silly one as I had blogged in Mean-spirited Malaysians.
But it was widely reported in the news (e.g. Malaysiakini) that Lim Guan Eng, the civilised gentleman he is, took very careful step to avoid doing just that, by stretching his stride over the poster so as to avoid stepping on any of the 3 defectors’ face.
But you have no hesitation labelling that photo as “Hee Yit Foong diletakkan gambarnya di atas lantai untuk dipijak-pijak/Lim Guan Eng sedang berjoget”, thus slyly, sickeningly and sinisterly insinuating that Lim GE had not only stepped on the faces in the poster but danced on them as well.
It’s a disgusting political fabrication no different from the faked photo of Lim GE performing a sembileh ceremony at a mosque, to incite hatred and dislike for Lim.
• You could condemn Teresa Kok, Teo Nie Ching and Hannah Yeo for wearing a selendang (to cover their heads) when entering a mosque as evidence of DAP’s abject submission to Muslims/Malays, thus a betrayal of the Chinese, but when you were hauled in by the police for an alleged seditious piece of writing, you proclaimed loudly and with obscene haste to the world you love Malays because you frequently wear baju kurung wakakaka.
• Because some DAP leaders are Christians, you launched an attack against DAP for having a Christian agenda in Malaysian politics (probably on instructions from UMNO), and regardless of inconvenient facts, label everyone you dislike/hate (or secretly lusted after) as Christian fanatics.
You then go on to assert that foreign-based Malaysian bloggers (e.g. RPK, kaytee wakakaka) have no right to comment on Malaysian affairs, while you a chauvinistic Chinese, who's always posting on the superiority of Chinese culture and Chinese events in mainland China, would in the same breath write to condemn DAP MPs and ADUNs, RPK, Haris Ibrahim, MCLM, analyse that TBH's final note showed he probably committed suicide, and praise MCA.
OK, the above are very extreme shameless, unconscionable, disgraceful lies of hatred, deceit - probably sponsored by you-know-who - and hypocrisy and double standards. But they serve to demonstrate what extent unconscionable double standard hypocrisy based on hate or political interests could go, and what could even be twisted to be perceived as ‘truth’, and what would basically be the alternative view (as in lies from truth).
Now, having said all that, what then can we provide on Zaid’s bizarre proposal to run roadshows to garner support for Najib’s reforms such as the repel of the ISA?
As mentioned, we can of course condemn him.
Or, we could wait and see whether Zaid’s move could be one of the following:
• A subtle way to prod Najib from NATO (no action all talk only) into genuine reforms and to the ultimate dismantling of the draconian ISA.
• A bipartisan endeavour to hasten acceptance of Najib’s declaration and expedite its implementation – yes yes I know the word ‘bipartisan’ is a rare bird in Malaysian politics.
Wakakaka – the above will no doubt infuriate my dear mateys Looes74 and Cruzeiro, the latter calling me ‘braindead’ for being supportive of Zaid ;-)
Flagging DAP's political cringe
The Malaysian Insider - DAP unfurls six-month ban on Manoharan.
While I admire the editor of TMI for his clever headlines, playing on the word ‘unfurl’ to go together with the topic item, that of M Manoharan’s call for the Malaysian national flag to be redesigned, I don’t the DAP party disciplinary board’s decision to whack Manoharan with a 6 month suspension for what has been Manoharan's very legitimate opinion (expressed on his Facebook page).
Manoharan wanted the Jalur Gemilang redesigned because it shows too much of a resemblance to the national flag of the USA - incidentally an undeniable and, to many, embarrassing fact - an association that today is a not only a stigma, but a dangerous stigma, given the hatred for the USA throughout a large portion of our globe.
Now, on what grounds did the DAP disciplinary board find Manoharan’s comments ‘serious’? That DAP MPs, ADUNs and members must not express their own and legitimate opinions? Sheeesh!
The truth, I believe, is that the DAP has demonstrated it suffers from political cringe, afraid of UMNO’s racist attacks on Manoharan’s alleged unpatriotic call.
I reckon DAP must have felt that in the wake of Mat Sabu’s opinion on a piece of Malaya’s colonial history, it may be too much against the party’s endeavour to win Malay confidence in the party’s Malaysian-ness.
So, Manoharan has to be sembileh (sacrificed as an offering) to the Trimurti (gods) of racism, bigotry and intolerance.
I am truly disappointed, but I want Manoharan to know there are DAP supporters and members who believe he has been perfectly within his rights as a Malaysian citizen to propose a redesign of Jalur Gemilang, which by the way, belongs to every Malaysian and not just UMNO members.
Read also: Jalur Gemilang approved by King George VI
While I admire the editor of TMI for his clever headlines, playing on the word ‘unfurl’ to go together with the topic item, that of M Manoharan’s call for the Malaysian national flag to be redesigned, I don’t the DAP party disciplinary board’s decision to whack Manoharan with a 6 month suspension for what has been Manoharan's very legitimate opinion (expressed on his Facebook page).
Manoharan wanted the Jalur Gemilang redesigned because it shows too much of a resemblance to the national flag of the USA - incidentally an undeniable and, to many, embarrassing fact - an association that today is a not only a stigma, but a dangerous stigma, given the hatred for the USA throughout a large portion of our globe.
Now, on what grounds did the DAP disciplinary board find Manoharan’s comments ‘serious’? That DAP MPs, ADUNs and members must not express their own and legitimate opinions? Sheeesh!
The truth, I believe, is that the DAP has demonstrated it suffers from political cringe, afraid of UMNO’s racist attacks on Manoharan’s alleged unpatriotic call.
I reckon DAP must have felt that in the wake of Mat Sabu’s opinion on a piece of Malaya’s colonial history, it may be too much against the party’s endeavour to win Malay confidence in the party’s Malaysian-ness.
So, Manoharan has to be sembileh (sacrificed as an offering) to the Trimurti (gods) of racism, bigotry and intolerance.
I am truly disappointed, but I want Manoharan to know there are DAP supporters and members who believe he has been perfectly within his rights as a Malaysian citizen to propose a redesign of Jalur Gemilang, which by the way, belongs to every Malaysian and not just UMNO members.
Read also: Jalur Gemilang approved by King George VI
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Anwar & Zaid Ibrahim's - chalk & cheese
Should I write about Anwar Ibrahim supporting PAS’ plan to implement hudud laws? Ought I to question his so-called (and quite frankly, very undeserved) title of Asia’s Renaissance Man? Or, perhaps I could write about his complete loss of commonsense when he claimed that rights of non-Muslims (hey, what about Muslims?) will not be affected under a system of law where hands could be irreversible chopped off or people whipped and stoned, especially when we know all too well the quality of our judges?
Asia’s Renaissance Man supporting hudud? Wakakaka!
Or, maybe I should ask whether the DAP is now squirming with such an ally and touted leader of Pakatan? No, am not asking Tian Chua or Eli Wong because those PKR people are utterly hopeless without any spine or independent thoughts, much as I love Eli ;-)
To answer my own questions, alas, no, I won’t because Anwar being Anwar is always tap-dancing around any tulips which would make him personally smell sweet – note his classic evasive weaving 4-face Brahma-nic snake oil salesman talk, with a back door open for escape, where he … stressed … that PR had not discussed the matter and this was only a “personal opinion”.
What I do know is that dearest invincibly anti-DAP Helen Ang would be dancing too, but in rapt delight at DAP’s undoubted discomfort at the ‘out from the left field’ declaration by its unreliable undermining unconscionable Asia’s Renaissance ally wakakaka.
Sorry, Uncle Lim and Lim GE, can’t help you guys – go see Karpal Singh who will surely have a word or two to say about Anwar’s treacherous pulling of the rug right from under the DAP’s feet.
Rather, I prefer to write about Zaid Ibrahim.
But as a refresher, some words first about Zaid that I had written in Pakatan must not avoid the unavoidable as follows:
Zaid committed 3 sins in the eyes of PKR anwaristas:
(1) He didn’t show reverence for Anwar Ibrahim, calling a spade a spade. Anwar has attained such a cult status that to criticize him is not unlike committing blasphemy. There’s no reasoning with his devotees as they are no longer logical or rational, and cannot see anything wrong with him, whether it’s Anwar’s anti-reformasi shame of 916 or the greater humiliating shame of chasing potential tadpoles all the way to Taiwan.
Even my dear Eli Wong was complicit in going to Taiwan on that froggy hunt – shame on her! But such has been the demigod status of Anwar Ibrahim that his followers would even believe the corrupt doctrine of frogs being compatible with political reforms.
That same fanatical blind adoration would place only his family members, Dr Wan Azizah or Nurul Izzah, as acceptable substitutes to the Greatest Man on Earth since Moses, who would deliver them out of the BN-created wilderness, regardless of whether Dr Wan or Nurul, sweet as mother and daughter are, are really qualified. Isn't this BN-type nepotism?
(2) Zaid dared to challenge Anwar's Anointed One, first by attempting to get Nurul, then Khalid Ibrahim to stand against AI’s blue-eyed boy, and finally putting himself on the firing line, only to be frustrated in like fashion as was Chegubard, Jenapala, Gobala, etc, which in turn raised outraged voices of people like Haris Ibrahim and Jonson Chong in disgust at the PKR party polling process (but alas, to a deaf Dr Wan Azizah and an equally deaf what’s-the-name-of that-deer-caught-in-a car-headlights?)
(3) Zaid dared to leave the Greatest Party in the World, and then to strip layer by layer of mythological camouflage off the Greatest Man on Earth since Moses, and worse, in a mature, logical and evidential manner.
Thus, in the Pakatan camp (mainly PKR), Zaid is reviled as … horrors of horror … an anti Anwar traitor. And an anti-Anwar person must be (whether by logic or lack of) an UMNO mole, and f* the facts.
Look, they would say, there’s 'proof', didn't Zaid apologise to Najib when the latter declared he’d repeal the ISA? Look, even his own KITA party members have frowned upon and criticised his apology. It’s absolute proof of his UMNO leanings, if not his display of obsequiousness to Najib.
Really, it’s sad and pitiful to hear/read the recent series of unwarranted and ill-informed criticisms and worse, feral abuses at Zaid. I put it to a clash of culture where some (including his own KITA members) do not understand the meaning of his sportsman-like gesture to Najib.
In our Malaysian culture, imbued with an overdose of Rambo-ish hormones of jaguh-ness on steroids, where the brute is prized over the refine, an apology implies asking for ‘forgiveness’, and if in politics, subordinate servility or a hopeless cringe by a loser. There can be no other explanation.
For those low brow people, there’s no understanding of an apology made in sportsmanlike fairness, like “Hey matey, I read you wrong after all, sh*t man but sorry,. Now, what about a nasi lemak (or in the West, beer)!”
… not unlike losing a non-hostile bet!
But alas, there's no point explaining such to PKR or some KITA people – the culture or etiquette would be beyond their limited intellect.
Read also:
KITA - the example of Zaid Ibrahim
Asia’s Renaissance Man supporting hudud? Wakakaka!
Or, maybe I should ask whether the DAP is now squirming with such an ally and touted leader of Pakatan? No, am not asking Tian Chua or Eli Wong because those PKR people are utterly hopeless without any spine or independent thoughts, much as I love Eli ;-)
To answer my own questions, alas, no, I won’t because Anwar being Anwar is always tap-dancing around any tulips which would make him personally smell sweet – note his classic evasive weaving 4-face Brahma-nic snake oil salesman talk, with a back door open for escape, where he … stressed … that PR had not discussed the matter and this was only a “personal opinion”.
What I do know is that dearest invincibly anti-DAP Helen Ang would be dancing too, but in rapt delight at DAP’s undoubted discomfort at the ‘out from the left field’ declaration by its unreliable undermining unconscionable Asia’s Renaissance ally wakakaka.
Sorry, Uncle Lim and Lim GE, can’t help you guys – go see Karpal Singh who will surely have a word or two to say about Anwar’s treacherous pulling of the rug right from under the DAP’s feet.
Rather, I prefer to write about Zaid Ibrahim.
But as a refresher, some words first about Zaid that I had written in Pakatan must not avoid the unavoidable as follows:
Zaid committed 3 sins in the eyes of PKR anwaristas:
(1) He didn’t show reverence for Anwar Ibrahim, calling a spade a spade. Anwar has attained such a cult status that to criticize him is not unlike committing blasphemy. There’s no reasoning with his devotees as they are no longer logical or rational, and cannot see anything wrong with him, whether it’s Anwar’s anti-reformasi shame of 916 or the greater humiliating shame of chasing potential tadpoles all the way to Taiwan.
Even my dear Eli Wong was complicit in going to Taiwan on that froggy hunt – shame on her! But such has been the demigod status of Anwar Ibrahim that his followers would even believe the corrupt doctrine of frogs being compatible with political reforms.
That same fanatical blind adoration would place only his family members, Dr Wan Azizah or Nurul Izzah, as acceptable substitutes to the Greatest Man on Earth since Moses, who would deliver them out of the BN-created wilderness, regardless of whether Dr Wan or Nurul, sweet as mother and daughter are, are really qualified. Isn't this BN-type nepotism?
(2) Zaid dared to challenge Anwar's Anointed One, first by attempting to get Nurul, then Khalid Ibrahim to stand against AI’s blue-eyed boy, and finally putting himself on the firing line, only to be frustrated in like fashion as was Chegubard, Jenapala, Gobala, etc, which in turn raised outraged voices of people like Haris Ibrahim and Jonson Chong in disgust at the PKR party polling process (but alas, to a deaf Dr Wan Azizah and an equally deaf what’s-the-name-of that-deer-caught-in-a car-headlights?)
(3) Zaid dared to leave the Greatest Party in the World, and then to strip layer by layer of mythological camouflage off the Greatest Man on Earth since Moses, and worse, in a mature, logical and evidential manner.
Thus, in the Pakatan camp (mainly PKR), Zaid is reviled as … horrors of horror … an anti Anwar traitor. And an anti-Anwar person must be (whether by logic or lack of) an UMNO mole, and f* the facts.
Look, they would say, there’s 'proof', didn't Zaid apologise to Najib when the latter declared he’d repeal the ISA? Look, even his own KITA party members have frowned upon and criticised his apology. It’s absolute proof of his UMNO leanings, if not his display of obsequiousness to Najib.
Really, it’s sad and pitiful to hear/read the recent series of unwarranted and ill-informed criticisms and worse, feral abuses at Zaid. I put it to a clash of culture where some (including his own KITA members) do not understand the meaning of his sportsman-like gesture to Najib.
In our Malaysian culture, imbued with an overdose of Rambo-ish hormones of jaguh-ness on steroids, where the brute is prized over the refine, an apology implies asking for ‘forgiveness’, and if in politics, subordinate servility or a hopeless cringe by a loser. There can be no other explanation.
For those low brow people, there’s no understanding of an apology made in sportsmanlike fairness, like “Hey matey, I read you wrong after all, sh*t man but sorry,. Now, what about a nasi lemak (or in the West, beer)!”
… not unlike losing a non-hostile bet!
But alas, there's no point explaining such to PKR or some KITA people – the culture or etiquette would be beyond their limited intellect.
Read also:
KITA - the example of Zaid Ibrahim
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
The demon in us
One of my fave writers, AB Sulaiman, has done it again, with another of his usually penetrating observations in Malaysiakini’s Deficiency in intellectual honesty.
It’s a very well written article, typical of him, and I've picked on one of his points to blog.
He relates to us Utusan’s instigating fabrication in its anti-communist (and anti-Chinese) propaganda through the cartoons of illustrator Hamzah Mohd Amin.
AB Sulaiman tells us that: Among the most controversial of his [Hamzah Mohd Amin] artwork is a depiction of slant-eyed men in tan-coloured uniforms, waving weapons and forcing a group of Malay-looking (therefore Muslim) people to eat pork.
Sulaiman quotes Hamzah Mohd Amin stating: "Today's generation does not know the hardships of life during the communist era. I worked to create the drawings a few weeks ago, so that they will be able to picture the cruelty of the communist and why we hate them. Through the drawings, I hope that they will realise the cruelty of the communists and learn from it.”
AB Sulaiman interprets for us the sinister intention of the illustrated fabrications:
The message in turn was clear enough: The standard stereotype that the communists were inflicting untold cruelty on gentle and pious (Malay-Muslim) citizens. The communists were taken as wholly Chinese: so hate the Chinese! Hate the communists! Also, wake up Malays and defend your agama, bangsa dan negara against the marauding Chinese and communists!
Though AB Sulaiman tells us the Utusan’s (and thus presumably UMNO’s) propaganda was “… all hogwash of course,” he added that “…until the recent past such sentiments were in vogue.”
By “the recent past” AB Sulaiman implies the advent/availability of the worldwide web and its online media, websites and bloggers, etc, and other information exchanging facilities such as Twitter and Facebook, to provide us with alternative views.
Thus “easily available information” is the enemy of liars, propagandists and agitators, and that’s why UMNO and its cronies want to control information.
They were successful in the past by use of various means, including the threat implicit in the PPPA, but today they feel somewhat lost with the new almost-uncontrollable online media - maybe only temporarily until they too emulate and master the West’s wicked media manipulating machinations, where, for example, an Arab assassinating a Westerner or Jew is an evil terrorist Islamic militant while an Israeli assassinating an Arab or even an European or Americans (e.g. Rachel Corrie, Furkan Dogan, Tom Hurndall, Tristan Anderson, Caoimhe Butterly) would be a steely-eyed brave, resolute and brave defender of freedom and democracy or at worst, wasn’t aware of the presence or identity of the person killed.
But I want to add something else, another sad ingredient that facilitates the acceptance of such UMNO-type of hogwash. AB Sulaiman alludes to it subtly but kaytee will specify it bluntly – namely, our innate ethnic prejudice, racial bias or/and bigoted stereotyping.
We want to believe the bad in ‘others’, the worst in ‘them’. It’s not just Malays being biased towards Chinese/Indians but also Chinese thinking the Malays/Indians are the pits, and likewise the Indians vis-à-vis Malays/Chinese.
With some exceptions, we have become so because (a) we were brought up like so in our remarkable Malaysian environment, (b) we have become captive to our own tribal prejudices, and (c) we have been brainwashed by unscrupulous politicians, teachers, etc.
Just one example - I have written on this one before - picture this movie scene where Pakcik Daud, a silver-hair dignified looking, well groomed, handsomely moustached patrician, immaculate in his evening dress (complete with brown polka-dot cravat), comfortably seated on his magnificent armchair in a beautiful bungalow lounge room (or airy colonial styled veranda), puffing contentedly and contemplatively away on his briar pipe – the patrician thinks carefully before he removes his pipe, waves it in a gentle arc to signal he is about to make a pronouncement, then in his cool soft-spoken and soothing articulation, advises on how to resolve a village issue which has plagued the village multi-ethnic residents. His statement is succinct, considerate, fair, balanced, and compassionate.
Cut away to another scene and you get Ah Chong, the local fat flabby flatulent-ridden grocer, sweating away like a you-know-what, in dirty singlet and shorts and with a dodgy dacing, quarrelsome in his loud raucous argumentative voice, gesturing vigorously and rudely, and hawking once or twice in total arrogant biadap-ish disregard for his customers ...
... and there is Arumugam, the village clown squatting in his dhoti, skinny, unshaven, smelly, sly, sneaky, servile, smarmy, sleazy, picking his nose and speaking in inelegant loud rapid-fire Tamil while expectorating globs of red lime coloured sputum all over ...
Guess in which language movie we would likely see the above scenes?
Don’t worry, there are Chinese and Indian equivalents as well.
The point is: Can we arrest our own prejudice, bias, bigotry and stereotyping?
AB Sulaiman has shown us how he as a Malaysian has dealt with Utusan’s evil fabrications.
So what would you Malaysians do when you read an email circular that indulges in the worst possible lies and biased generalisations to badmouth, for example, Malays/Muslims?
The worst racist demon lies quietly within each of us.
It’s a very well written article, typical of him, and I've picked on one of his points to blog.
He relates to us Utusan’s instigating fabrication in its anti-communist (and anti-Chinese) propaganda through the cartoons of illustrator Hamzah Mohd Amin.
AB Sulaiman tells us that: Among the most controversial of his [Hamzah Mohd Amin] artwork is a depiction of slant-eyed men in tan-coloured uniforms, waving weapons and forcing a group of Malay-looking (therefore Muslim) people to eat pork.
Sulaiman quotes Hamzah Mohd Amin stating: "Today's generation does not know the hardships of life during the communist era. I worked to create the drawings a few weeks ago, so that they will be able to picture the cruelty of the communist and why we hate them. Through the drawings, I hope that they will realise the cruelty of the communists and learn from it.”
AB Sulaiman interprets for us the sinister intention of the illustrated fabrications:
The message in turn was clear enough: The standard stereotype that the communists were inflicting untold cruelty on gentle and pious (Malay-Muslim) citizens. The communists were taken as wholly Chinese: so hate the Chinese! Hate the communists! Also, wake up Malays and defend your agama, bangsa dan negara against the marauding Chinese and communists!
Though AB Sulaiman tells us the Utusan’s (and thus presumably UMNO’s) propaganda was “… all hogwash of course,” he added that “…until the recent past such sentiments were in vogue.”
By “the recent past” AB Sulaiman implies the advent/availability of the worldwide web and its online media, websites and bloggers, etc, and other information exchanging facilities such as Twitter and Facebook, to provide us with alternative views.
Thus “easily available information” is the enemy of liars, propagandists and agitators, and that’s why UMNO and its cronies want to control information.
They were successful in the past by use of various means, including the threat implicit in the PPPA, but today they feel somewhat lost with the new almost-uncontrollable online media - maybe only temporarily until they too emulate and master the West’s wicked media manipulating machinations, where, for example, an Arab assassinating a Westerner or Jew is an evil terrorist Islamic militant while an Israeli assassinating an Arab or even an European or Americans (e.g. Rachel Corrie, Furkan Dogan, Tom Hurndall, Tristan Anderson, Caoimhe Butterly) would be a steely-eyed brave, resolute and brave defender of freedom and democracy or at worst, wasn’t aware of the presence or identity of the person killed.
But I want to add something else, another sad ingredient that facilitates the acceptance of such UMNO-type of hogwash. AB Sulaiman alludes to it subtly but kaytee will specify it bluntly – namely, our innate ethnic prejudice, racial bias or/and bigoted stereotyping.
We want to believe the bad in ‘others’, the worst in ‘them’. It’s not just Malays being biased towards Chinese/Indians but also Chinese thinking the Malays/Indians are the pits, and likewise the Indians vis-à-vis Malays/Chinese.
With some exceptions, we have become so because (a) we were brought up like so in our remarkable Malaysian environment, (b) we have become captive to our own tribal prejudices, and (c) we have been brainwashed by unscrupulous politicians, teachers, etc.
Just one example - I have written on this one before - picture this movie scene where Pakcik Daud, a silver-hair dignified looking, well groomed, handsomely moustached patrician, immaculate in his evening dress (complete with brown polka-dot cravat), comfortably seated on his magnificent armchair in a beautiful bungalow lounge room (or airy colonial styled veranda), puffing contentedly and contemplatively away on his briar pipe – the patrician thinks carefully before he removes his pipe, waves it in a gentle arc to signal he is about to make a pronouncement, then in his cool soft-spoken and soothing articulation, advises on how to resolve a village issue which has plagued the village multi-ethnic residents. His statement is succinct, considerate, fair, balanced, and compassionate.
Cut away to another scene and you get Ah Chong, the local fat flabby flatulent-ridden grocer, sweating away like a you-know-what, in dirty singlet and shorts and with a dodgy dacing, quarrelsome in his loud raucous argumentative voice, gesturing vigorously and rudely, and hawking once or twice in total arrogant biadap-ish disregard for his customers ...
... and there is Arumugam, the village clown squatting in his dhoti, skinny, unshaven, smelly, sly, sneaky, servile, smarmy, sleazy, picking his nose and speaking in inelegant loud rapid-fire Tamil while expectorating globs of red lime coloured sputum all over ...
Guess in which language movie we would likely see the above scenes?
Don’t worry, there are Chinese and Indian equivalents as well.
The point is: Can we arrest our own prejudice, bias, bigotry and stereotyping?
AB Sulaiman has shown us how he as a Malaysian has dealt with Utusan’s evil fabrications.
So what would you Malaysians do when you read an email circular that indulges in the worst possible lies and biased generalisations to badmouth, for example, Malays/Muslims?
The worst racist demon lies quietly within each of us.
Monday, September 19, 2011
Jalur Gemilang approved by King George VI
Low brow ethnic pseudo-warrior Muhyiddin Yassin has condemned a DAP Selangor ADUN, M Manoharan, for showing disrespect to (what Muhyiddin termed) as ‘national heritage’ when the ADUN called for a redesign of the Malaysian flag.
National heritage?
Really, any commonsense understanding would tell us that a national flag, while a symbol of national identity, pride and belonging, is not exempt from changes, as shown by a number of countries.
For example, Canada has made one of the most improved changes to national flags to enhance its Canadian identity – see below and understand how the maple leaf design stands out remarkably and uniquely as Canadian, making the Canadian flag renowned as one of the best flag designs – a design which came about through deliberate change.
And like Canada, it’s only a matter of time before Australia and New Zealand will change theirs as well.
Spain on the other hand has switched from and back to its original royal flag, abandoning its Republican motif.
Estonia is now preparing to change its flag, which I suspect is a political move to be more identified (politically, economically, socially??) with its neighbouring Scandinavian countries.
Incidentally, the Jalur Gemilang (leaving out its several minor modifications following the merger of Malaya with Sarawak, Sabah and Singapore, and the subsequent expulsion of Singapore) was – NOW GET THIS – approved by King George VI on 19 May 1950.
And you can bet George VI certainly wasn't the Sultan of Bolehland.
For those who still don’t believe Malaya was a British colony (de facto or otherwise), eat that fact.
The Malayan/Malaysian flag was designed by Mohamad Hamzah who was said to have borrowed and then modified the design from the flag of the British East India Company, a rapacious trading organization.
Even the name Jalur Gemilang came only into being in 1997 when then-PM Dr Mahathir picked it from a list of proposed names for the flag. Wasn't that naming a change in itself?
Manoharan has been absolutely correct in calling for the redesign of our national flag. Let’s follow the Canadian example, but most of all let’s get rid of any association with the British colonial empire, King George VI and the terrible British East India Company.
As for the low brow ethnic pseudo-warrior, who accused Manoharan’s proposal as likely to lead to changes to the Constitution, let me remind that beetle the Constitution has been changed a couple of hundred times already, by his UMNO.
National heritage?
Really, any commonsense understanding would tell us that a national flag, while a symbol of national identity, pride and belonging, is not exempt from changes, as shown by a number of countries.
For example, Canada has made one of the most improved changes to national flags to enhance its Canadian identity – see below and understand how the maple leaf design stands out remarkably and uniquely as Canadian, making the Canadian flag renowned as one of the best flag designs – a design which came about through deliberate change.
And like Canada, it’s only a matter of time before Australia and New Zealand will change theirs as well.
Spain on the other hand has switched from and back to its original royal flag, abandoning its Republican motif.
Estonia is now preparing to change its flag, which I suspect is a political move to be more identified (politically, economically, socially??) with its neighbouring Scandinavian countries.
Incidentally, the Jalur Gemilang (leaving out its several minor modifications following the merger of Malaya with Sarawak, Sabah and Singapore, and the subsequent expulsion of Singapore) was – NOW GET THIS – approved by King George VI on 19 May 1950.
And you can bet George VI certainly wasn't the Sultan of Bolehland.
For those who still don’t believe Malaya was a British colony (de facto or otherwise), eat that fact.
The Malayan/Malaysian flag was designed by Mohamad Hamzah who was said to have borrowed and then modified the design from the flag of the British East India Company, a rapacious trading organization.
Even the name Jalur Gemilang came only into being in 1997 when then-PM Dr Mahathir picked it from a list of proposed names for the flag. Wasn't that naming a change in itself?
Manoharan has been absolutely correct in calling for the redesign of our national flag. Let’s follow the Canadian example, but most of all let’s get rid of any association with the British colonial empire, King George VI and the terrible British East India Company.
As for the low brow ethnic pseudo-warrior, who accused Manoharan’s proposal as likely to lead to changes to the Constitution, let me remind that beetle the Constitution has been changed a couple of hundred times already, by his UMNO.
Sunday, September 18, 2011
Historical revisionism
I’ve been away for two weeks and what have I been catching up with when I come back to blogging?
Historical revisionism!
Historical revisionism may sometimes be okay but when it’s about distorting the truth to hide crimes, like what rightwing Japanese have been trying to do for years, then that would be termed Negationism.
Rightwing Japanese (politicians, members of conservative clubs, etc) have been busy rewriting history to show its brutal invasion and occupation of Asia (from Korea to Burma and downwards to Papua New Guinea) had been mere ‘advances’ at the invitation of the natives to help them from oppression, or that there were no such war crimes as Korean/Chinese/SE Asian ‘comfort women’ for its occupying troops, or that very few Chinese (mostly soldiers) were killed at Nanjing.
Another example of negationism is the Old Testament which was written mainly by Davidic supporters to suppress the real side of King David who was a ruthless murderer and assassin, adulterer, corrupt mercenary, etc, basically a scumbag.
Gary Greenberg, the President of the Biblical Archaeology Society of New York wrote a book titled ‘The Sins of King David’ to show how but for the grace of the existence of biblical records from different groups of priesthood we would be no wiser to the evils of David.
The New Testament is also another contrived writing, to serve the Roman Emperor Constantine better administer his empire, through his version of the Christian religion. One of its victims was Judah, Jesus most trusted and favourite disciple, who through revisionism became the most hated man in Christianity.
So, now in Malaysia, we have questions on whether Malaya (forget about Malaysia) was a British colony?
My question is: does that matter when there are so much issues demanding our attention, issues like rampant corruption, abuse of the law and other public institutions and the unmitigated unceasing unabated pilfering of the national coffers?
So don’t fall into the trap of becoming involved in arguing over useless topics which in fact were deliberately instigated to divert our attention from far greater ongoing crimes.
Post-note: Some years ago there was a move by certain quarters to revise history to show Kuala Lumpur was not developed through the efforts of Yap Ah Loy.
Historical revisionism!
Historical revisionism may sometimes be okay but when it’s about distorting the truth to hide crimes, like what rightwing Japanese have been trying to do for years, then that would be termed Negationism.
Rightwing Japanese (politicians, members of conservative clubs, etc) have been busy rewriting history to show its brutal invasion and occupation of Asia (from Korea to Burma and downwards to Papua New Guinea) had been mere ‘advances’ at the invitation of the natives to help them from oppression, or that there were no such war crimes as Korean/Chinese/SE Asian ‘comfort women’ for its occupying troops, or that very few Chinese (mostly soldiers) were killed at Nanjing.
Another example of negationism is the Old Testament which was written mainly by Davidic supporters to suppress the real side of King David who was a ruthless murderer and assassin, adulterer, corrupt mercenary, etc, basically a scumbag.
Gary Greenberg, the President of the Biblical Archaeology Society of New York wrote a book titled ‘The Sins of King David’ to show how but for the grace of the existence of biblical records from different groups of priesthood we would be no wiser to the evils of David.
The New Testament is also another contrived writing, to serve the Roman Emperor Constantine better administer his empire, through his version of the Christian religion. One of its victims was Judah, Jesus most trusted and favourite disciple, who through revisionism became the most hated man in Christianity.
So, now in Malaysia, we have questions on whether Malaya (forget about Malaysia) was a British colony?
My question is: does that matter when there are so much issues demanding our attention, issues like rampant corruption, abuse of the law and other public institutions and the unmitigated unceasing unabated pilfering of the national coffers?
So don’t fall into the trap of becoming involved in arguing over useless topics which in fact were deliberately instigated to divert our attention from far greater ongoing crimes.
Post-note: Some years ago there was a move by certain quarters to revise history to show Kuala Lumpur was not developed through the efforts of Yap Ah Loy.
Sunday, September 04, 2011
GE 13 - Multi-ethnic crossroad for DAP
Come an election, seat allocation or distribution among component parties of a political alliance in Malaysia becomes a difficult, sensitive, and frequently, acrimonious exercise.
This applies to both BN and Pakatan, except the former finds it easier than the latter, for the simple reason UMNO can just bulldoze its views into unilateral decisions.
The only sector which UMNO had and will encounter most difficulties on this issue would/will be internal, from its own members, as witnessed in the last Hulu Selangor federal by-election and the pre-2008 Ijok state by-election, when much to the chagrin of its (local) UMNO members, it adamantly placed a MIC man each time in the federal and state constituencies as its preferred candidates.
Much as I dislike UMNO for its racist, arrogant and corrupt behaviour, I admire its decisions to place MIC (rather than UMNO) candidates in those Hulu Selangor and Ijok by-elections. That has been its strength, but the downside had been its bulldozing ways which made nonsense of the term ‘alliance’ because UMNO just rode roughshod over its so-called allies, MCA, Gerakan, MIC etc.
An example of this was ironically in the Hulu Selangor by-election where it ignored/dismissed the choice of the MIC President and directly selected the MIC candidate of its own (UMNO) preference.
The most humiliating reality of the so-called (pretend) alliance is that MCA, Gerakan and MIC couldn't even (still can't) nominate any of its party members as the candidate for the allocated seats without the UMNO president okaying those selections - witnessed that Hulu Selangor by-election humiliation for MIC. In other words, MCA, Gerakan and MIC (forget about the other parasite kutu parties) have been rendered into (ethnic) sub-branches of UMNO, not unlike the non-Muslim supporters of PAS wakakaka.
In its greater difficulty in seat sharing/distribution, Pakatan is at least one level more dignified than MCA, Gerakan or MIC had been allowed to enjoy.
In their at-times acrimonious squabble for seats – as witnessed in PKR’s avaricious grab of the Sarawak state seats and its arrogant dismissal of SNAP – Pakatan showed that no party was subordinated to another. That has been its strength, but then its weakness would be in tearing at each other in public eyes, often leading to concerns from its supporters that the alliance is about to disintegrate, and delight for its BN foes that it will.
A month or so ago, PKR again pre-empted its allies in declaring it will be contesting some 80+ seats in the next GE, while just a few days back PAS staked its claim to almost 70. That leaves roughly around 70 for DAP and PSM, and if they join Pakatan, SNAP, SAPP etc.
In terms of gross figures, despite PKR as usual grabbing the lion's share ('tis the nature of the beast wakakaka), it looks on the borderline of ‘okay-ness’, but as they say, the devil would be in the details.
Recently, DAP’s Zulkifli Mohd Noor caused an uproar when he gave PKR a taste of its own (greedy, selfish and power-crazy) medicine. Zul demanded that PKR surrender one Parliamentary and 5 State seats in Penang to DAP’s Malay candidates wakakaka.
One of his detractors, no doubt a PKR person, shouted that the DAP should give Zul one of its won (Chinese majority) seat to Zul to contest, and for Zul to keep off the PKR turf.
Actually Zul did contest in one of those Penang Chinese-majority seats in 2004 but alas for some unknown reasons, not in 2008. I recall my matey Sunline (Poli 101) responded to my query in Facebook that Zul wasn’t feeling well enough for the 2008 GE. Zul could have been the first DAP Malay MP had he re-contested in the Bukit Bendera federal constituency in March 2008.
4 years ago, on 07 May 2007, I posted DAP & PKR - blood brothers? which discussed Zul’s candidature in Bukit Bendera. I updated the discussion one year later after the March 2008 GE, where I wrote:
What ever happened to Zulkifli Mohd Noor who stood as DAP’s candidate in Bukit Bendera in 2004 and won a credible 18,000 votes out of 47,000?
As I had blogged previously, the DAP may have partial claim to their avowed multi-ethnic credentials – for example, they have put up many Indian candidates who have been voted successfully into both federal Parliament and State Assemblies.
Unfortunately none of its Malay candidates were ever successful, especially if and when they stood in Malay majority constituencies.
It was in a Chinese majority Bukit Bendera (Penang) that Zulkifli Mohd Noor made a decent mark, by winning nearly 18000 of the 47000 votes, and that’s no mean feat if we look at the ethnic breakdown. The Chinese majority federal seat had 13.82% Malays, 73.97% Chinese and 11.07% Indians plus a sprinkling of 1.14% Thais, Eurasian, etc.
Even if all 14% Malays in that constituency had turned up to cast their ballots for Zulkifli (which was absolutely unlikely), he wouldn’t get more than 5000 votes. This meant that there was a whole lot of Chinese votes (13,000 plus) for Zul.
I wrote on the possible reasons why Zul didn’t make it in 2004. That could have been due to three factors:
If you want to know more, please read my 2008 post Gerakan & DAP - the missing songkok factor!
Since March 2008, Chinese-majority constituencies have become blue chips for Pakatan politiicans, providing much higher assurance of victory for them, regardless of whether they’re DAP Malay or Indian candidates, PKR and even PAS.
PAS in fact is banking on the Chinese factor for victory in many of its staked 70 federal seats for GE-13. Such is today's lamentable lot for Tunku's UMNO when the Chinese (even MCA members) see UMNO as its least desired or (as the case may be) most despised/hated political representative to an extent that they would be willing to vote for PAS instead.
Even if the constituency doesn’t have a Chinese majority, the more Chinese voters there are, the better the chances of victory for PAS and PKR candidates.
That has been why PAS, PKR and now even PSM are drooling for such Chinese-majority seats, traditionally DAP’s turf even for its Indian and Malay candidates such as Kula, Karpal, Zul, etc.
A very recent example of this ‘drooling’ over a blue chip seat has been being Dr Jeya’s ambit claim for Jelapang. According to an informed source, the principles of seat distribution are:
(1) Incumbent seats to be contested by the incumbent party!
My question on Jelapang, where the 'remarkable' Hee defected from the DAP is: Could DAP reasonably argue that notwithstanding that defection, Jelapang had voted for DAP and not Hee the person, thus DAP is the moral ‘incumbent’. If so then DAP would have both the political and moral rights in contest again in that state seat.
On the other hand, if one can argue successfully that with Hee's defection, DAP cannot be the moral ‘incumbent’ because, for example, voters had voted for the candidate rather than the party (a not completely impossible through rarely/unlikely case in Malaysian elections), then DAP loses the political and moral right to re-contest in that seat.
However, there is great danger in such a 'Hee'-ish argument for PKR (the notorious tadpole nursery) because of the defections or resignations, as the case may be, of its erstwhile MPs, namely ‘golf-course’ Zahrain, ‘Kulim Wonder’ Zul, ‘Gerakan-Daddy’ Tan Tee Beng, ‘Always-Absent’ Badrul Hisham, 'Love-Anwar-then-hate-Anwar-now' Gobala, poly-political-party Wee, etc etc etc.
Should Pakatan support Dr Jeya’s claim for Jelapang (and PKR’s claim for more of DAP’s seat in urban areas in both Peninsula Malaysia and Sarawak), then I have no doubt that DAP’s Zul and other DAP Malay members will be morally right in staking claims for the federal seats of Bayan Baru, Kulim, Nibong Tebal, Port Klang, Wangsa Maju etc, and all the associated state seats within those federal constituencies. Frightening for PKR, ain’t it, wakakaka.
(2) Seats contested by a particular party in the past, gets to contest again in the same seat unless there are exceptional circumstances warranting a change!
Now, what would constitute ‘exceptional circumstances’? Would losing (not making headway) with the voters be one of them, like PKR’s unfortunate lot in Sarawak or nearer at home, Hulu Selangor?
I leave you with these thoughts.
Now, on to the once-impregnable MCA fortress in Johor! Poor MCA is now quaking in itspantsUMNO-provided sarong at the very thought of GE-13. But more interesting for us, who in Pakatan should be allowed to challenge the BN-MCA (or Gerakan) candidates? DAP, PKR, PAS, or PSM? Your thoughts ;-)
Note of Appeal: I hope my brother Haris Ibrahim would forego his MCLM's pledge not to contest in GE-13 and go for the Bentong federal seat against Liow Tiong LIE wakakaka. Dear Haris had once expressed his wish that, should he offer himself as a political representative, he like to stand against LIE.
Back to Zulkifli Mohd Noor and his important and very relevant wish to have Malay candidates contest under the DAP ticket in Penang, which I strongly support, having expressed so in my earlier post Gerakan & DAP - the missing songkok factor!
I’m going to be fair and very bold.
As the DAP has now come of age as a prominent political party, to the extent of striking cold fear into UMNO, which until recently had considered DAP only as a minor irritant and a MCA-Gerakan problem, it should stop putting the same candidate in both a federal and state seat. Its days as a minor party with limited choices of good candidates for federal and state parliaments are over. I’m thinking of Lim Guan Eng as MP in Bagan and ADUN in Air Putih, and Teresa Kok as MP in Seputih and ADUN in Kinrara.
Note: I don’t give two hoots for what PKR or PAS will do with such dual representations by one person. As for PSM, it is still a small party which incidentally has very strict qualifications for its members to become MP or ADUN, so I won’t include it in this call.
Let’s start with sweetie Teresa. Though we need someone capable like Teresa in the Selangor exco, alas, the 'powers that be' plus so-called ally PAS in the person of one pro-Malay unity person didn’t feel comfy with her as the deputy MB of Selangor, all because Teresa suffered from triple 'C' handicaps, being Chinese, Christian & ‘Charbor’ (female).
Given the above, I believe Teresa will serve better by dedicating her exceptional ability to federal parliament, so I would like to see her surrender Kinrara to a new DAP candidate. To be fair to Teresa, while she was/is/will be virtually invincible in Seputih, I recall she expressed her surprise in winning the Kinrara state seat, thus I don’t believe she’ll demand to cling on as the candidate for that state seat.
Now the radical and far more important proposal!
Lim GE must decide whether he wants to continue being CM Penang, a job which he does very well, and whether he is confident he will continue to be one in 2013, which I personally believe he will.
If so, he must surrender his federal role as an MP and thus his constituency of Bagan to Zulkifli Mohd Noor. I am sure Zul will become one of the several DAP MPs after the next GE election.
I want to see Zul in Parliament as one of DAP’s MPs, if not the first one. My Penang Larng (fellow Penangite) has my complete support.
This applies to both BN and Pakatan, except the former finds it easier than the latter, for the simple reason UMNO can just bulldoze its views into unilateral decisions.
The only sector which UMNO had and will encounter most difficulties on this issue would/will be internal, from its own members, as witnessed in the last Hulu Selangor federal by-election and the pre-2008 Ijok state by-election, when much to the chagrin of its (local) UMNO members, it adamantly placed a MIC man each time in the federal and state constituencies as its preferred candidates.
Much as I dislike UMNO for its racist, arrogant and corrupt behaviour, I admire its decisions to place MIC (rather than UMNO) candidates in those Hulu Selangor and Ijok by-elections. That has been its strength, but the downside had been its bulldozing ways which made nonsense of the term ‘alliance’ because UMNO just rode roughshod over its so-called allies, MCA, Gerakan, MIC etc.
An example of this was ironically in the Hulu Selangor by-election where it ignored/dismissed the choice of the MIC President and directly selected the MIC candidate of its own (UMNO) preference.
The most humiliating reality of the so-called (pretend) alliance is that MCA, Gerakan and MIC couldn't even (still can't) nominate any of its party members as the candidate for the allocated seats without the UMNO president okaying those selections - witnessed that Hulu Selangor by-election humiliation for MIC. In other words, MCA, Gerakan and MIC (forget about the other parasite kutu parties) have been rendered into (ethnic) sub-branches of UMNO, not unlike the non-Muslim supporters of PAS wakakaka.
In its greater difficulty in seat sharing/distribution, Pakatan is at least one level more dignified than MCA, Gerakan or MIC had been allowed to enjoy.
In their at-times acrimonious squabble for seats – as witnessed in PKR’s avaricious grab of the Sarawak state seats and its arrogant dismissal of SNAP – Pakatan showed that no party was subordinated to another. That has been its strength, but then its weakness would be in tearing at each other in public eyes, often leading to concerns from its supporters that the alliance is about to disintegrate, and delight for its BN foes that it will.
A month or so ago, PKR again pre-empted its allies in declaring it will be contesting some 80+ seats in the next GE, while just a few days back PAS staked its claim to almost 70. That leaves roughly around 70 for DAP and PSM, and if they join Pakatan, SNAP, SAPP etc.
In terms of gross figures, despite PKR as usual grabbing the lion's share ('tis the nature of the beast wakakaka), it looks on the borderline of ‘okay-ness’, but as they say, the devil would be in the details.
Recently, DAP’s Zulkifli Mohd Noor caused an uproar when he gave PKR a taste of its own (greedy, selfish and power-crazy) medicine. Zul demanded that PKR surrender one Parliamentary and 5 State seats in Penang to DAP’s Malay candidates wakakaka.
One of his detractors, no doubt a PKR person, shouted that the DAP should give Zul one of its won (Chinese majority) seat to Zul to contest, and for Zul to keep off the PKR turf.
Actually Zul did contest in one of those Penang Chinese-majority seats in 2004 but alas for some unknown reasons, not in 2008. I recall my matey Sunline (Poli 101) responded to my query in Facebook that Zul wasn’t feeling well enough for the 2008 GE. Zul could have been the first DAP Malay MP had he re-contested in the Bukit Bendera federal constituency in March 2008.
4 years ago, on 07 May 2007, I posted DAP & PKR - blood brothers? which discussed Zul’s candidature in Bukit Bendera. I updated the discussion one year later after the March 2008 GE, where I wrote:
What ever happened to Zulkifli Mohd Noor who stood as DAP’s candidate in Bukit Bendera in 2004 and won a credible 18,000 votes out of 47,000?
As I had blogged previously, the DAP may have partial claim to their avowed multi-ethnic credentials – for example, they have put up many Indian candidates who have been voted successfully into both federal Parliament and State Assemblies.
Unfortunately none of its Malay candidates were ever successful, especially if and when they stood in Malay majority constituencies.
It was in a Chinese majority Bukit Bendera (Penang) that Zulkifli Mohd Noor made a decent mark, by winning nearly 18000 of the 47000 votes, and that’s no mean feat if we look at the ethnic breakdown. The Chinese majority federal seat had 13.82% Malays, 73.97% Chinese and 11.07% Indians plus a sprinkling of 1.14% Thais, Eurasian, etc.
Even if all 14% Malays in that constituency had turned up to cast their ballots for Zulkifli (which was absolutely unlikely), he wouldn’t get more than 5000 votes. This meant that there was a whole lot of Chinese votes (13,000 plus) for Zul.
I wrote on the possible reasons why Zul didn’t make it in 2004. That could have been due to three factors:
If you want to know more, please read my 2008 post Gerakan & DAP - the missing songkok factor!
Since March 2008, Chinese-majority constituencies have become blue chips for Pakatan politiicans, providing much higher assurance of victory for them, regardless of whether they’re DAP Malay or Indian candidates, PKR and even PAS.
PAS in fact is banking on the Chinese factor for victory in many of its staked 70 federal seats for GE-13. Such is today's lamentable lot for Tunku's UMNO when the Chinese (even MCA members) see UMNO as its least desired or (as the case may be) most despised/hated political representative to an extent that they would be willing to vote for PAS instead.
Even if the constituency doesn’t have a Chinese majority, the more Chinese voters there are, the better the chances of victory for PAS and PKR candidates.
That has been why PAS, PKR and now even PSM are drooling for such Chinese-majority seats, traditionally DAP’s turf even for its Indian and Malay candidates such as Kula, Karpal, Zul, etc.
A very recent example of this ‘drooling’ over a blue chip seat has been being Dr Jeya’s ambit claim for Jelapang. According to an informed source, the principles of seat distribution are:
(1) Incumbent seats to be contested by the incumbent party!
My question on Jelapang, where the 'remarkable' Hee defected from the DAP is: Could DAP reasonably argue that notwithstanding that defection, Jelapang had voted for DAP and not Hee the person, thus DAP is the moral ‘incumbent’. If so then DAP would have both the political and moral rights in contest again in that state seat.
On the other hand, if one can argue successfully that with Hee's defection, DAP cannot be the moral ‘incumbent’ because, for example, voters had voted for the candidate rather than the party (a not completely impossible through rarely/unlikely case in Malaysian elections), then DAP loses the political and moral right to re-contest in that seat.
However, there is great danger in such a 'Hee'-ish argument for PKR (the notorious tadpole nursery) because of the defections or resignations, as the case may be, of its erstwhile MPs, namely ‘golf-course’ Zahrain, ‘Kulim Wonder’ Zul, ‘Gerakan-Daddy’ Tan Tee Beng, ‘Always-Absent’ Badrul Hisham, 'Love-Anwar-then-hate-Anwar-now' Gobala, poly-political-party Wee, etc etc etc.
Should Pakatan support Dr Jeya’s claim for Jelapang (and PKR’s claim for more of DAP’s seat in urban areas in both Peninsula Malaysia and Sarawak), then I have no doubt that DAP’s Zul and other DAP Malay members will be morally right in staking claims for the federal seats of Bayan Baru, Kulim, Nibong Tebal, Port Klang, Wangsa Maju etc, and all the associated state seats within those federal constituencies. Frightening for PKR, ain’t it, wakakaka.
(2) Seats contested by a particular party in the past, gets to contest again in the same seat unless there are exceptional circumstances warranting a change!
Now, what would constitute ‘exceptional circumstances’? Would losing (not making headway) with the voters be one of them, like PKR’s unfortunate lot in Sarawak or nearer at home, Hulu Selangor?
I leave you with these thoughts.
Now, on to the once-impregnable MCA fortress in Johor! Poor MCA is now quaking in its
Note of Appeal: I hope my brother Haris Ibrahim would forego his MCLM's pledge not to contest in GE-13 and go for the Bentong federal seat against Liow Tiong LIE wakakaka. Dear Haris had once expressed his wish that, should he offer himself as a political representative, he like to stand against LIE.
Back to Zulkifli Mohd Noor and his important and very relevant wish to have Malay candidates contest under the DAP ticket in Penang, which I strongly support, having expressed so in my earlier post Gerakan & DAP - the missing songkok factor!
I’m going to be fair and very bold.
As the DAP has now come of age as a prominent political party, to the extent of striking cold fear into UMNO, which until recently had considered DAP only as a minor irritant and a MCA-Gerakan problem, it should stop putting the same candidate in both a federal and state seat. Its days as a minor party with limited choices of good candidates for federal and state parliaments are over. I’m thinking of Lim Guan Eng as MP in Bagan and ADUN in Air Putih, and Teresa Kok as MP in Seputih and ADUN in Kinrara.
Note: I don’t give two hoots for what PKR or PAS will do with such dual representations by one person. As for PSM, it is still a small party which incidentally has very strict qualifications for its members to become MP or ADUN, so I won’t include it in this call.
Let’s start with sweetie Teresa. Though we need someone capable like Teresa in the Selangor exco, alas, the 'powers that be' plus so-called ally PAS in the person of one pro-Malay unity person didn’t feel comfy with her as the deputy MB of Selangor, all because Teresa suffered from triple 'C' handicaps, being Chinese, Christian & ‘Charbor’ (female).
Given the above, I believe Teresa will serve better by dedicating her exceptional ability to federal parliament, so I would like to see her surrender Kinrara to a new DAP candidate. To be fair to Teresa, while she was/is/will be virtually invincible in Seputih, I recall she expressed her surprise in winning the Kinrara state seat, thus I don’t believe she’ll demand to cling on as the candidate for that state seat.
Now the radical and far more important proposal!
Lim GE must decide whether he wants to continue being CM Penang, a job which he does very well, and whether he is confident he will continue to be one in 2013, which I personally believe he will.
If so, he must surrender his federal role as an MP and thus his constituency of Bagan to Zulkifli Mohd Noor. I am sure Zul will become one of the several DAP MPs after the next GE election.
I want to see Zul in Parliament as one of DAP’s MPs, if not the first one. My Penang Larng (fellow Penangite) has my complete support.