Sunday, June 10, 2012

Leaders & followers

What makes a political society?

Alamak, that’s highly philosophical lah!

Why don’t we get down to brass tacks and omit the hi-faluting bull about national ideology, vision and aspirations, and put credit or blame where they are due – you know, gut level earthy stuff that we can relate to either through our personal observations, reading and listening (to credible people of course wakakaka) or through articles or the pages of history written by equally credible sources.

As for kaytee, I want to just narrow it down to leaders and followers, where followers could be blind, gullible or discerning.

Perhaps the most significant (or controversial) leader our society has had would be Dr Mahathir. To some he’s iconic even until today, a decade after he has ‘retired’, so he claims wakakaka. To others he’s Satanic wakakaka again.

Of course to the anwaristas, he’s the very epitome of Evil.

Why anwaristas? Because Dr M had single-handedly prevented their most revered icon Anwar Ibrahim from ascending to occupy the highest political position in the land.

I believe it’s a pity that anwaristas hate Dr M from that point or more usually, from the incident of the black eye.

Since the aphorism goes, “There’s many a slip ‘twixt cup and lip”, perhaps this statement requires us to go further back in time way before the black eye, or AI’s imprisonment for corruption, or even his ouster from UMNO, to investigate what was that ‘slip’, …

… but alas, I doubt the anwaristas would want to let inconvenient events get into the way of a good story, that of a virtually legendary paragon of virtue, if not democracy or reformasi wakakaka, dealt with harsh injustice because he opposed Dr M favouring his sons.

While there was truth in a father favouring his sons, I doubt that was the main issue but I suppose the anwaristas wouldn't want unnecessary historical findings raised or useless further aphorisms such as “There’s honour even among thieves”?

Thieves? Wakakaka.

But let’s just focus for a while on Dr M, the most admired or most reviled political leader in Malaysian history.

Bloke dragged us into the 21st Century screaming and kicking, but he did it. He achieved many things to add value to Malaysian life, assets and pride. And so on, so forth. When he was in his prime, he himself was the pride of the nation (well, to most of the people anyway). And he did give reasons for Malaysians to be proud to be Malaysians.

Perhaps his greatest achievement was to tame the hitherto untamable, you know who I mean. If you don’t, go ask a hockey coach wakakaka. No one can ever take that away from him, except himself and which in recent times, alas, he has done so (take that achievement away from himself wakakaka).

Some even argue that his proposal for an all inclusive Bangsa Malaysia, to make all Malaysians as Malaysians, as all Americans are Americans and all Australians are Australians etc, was a far greater achievement.

Indeed, when Dr M proposed that, suddenly we stood tall, proud and hopeful, and stated that notwithstanding his mistakes, at least he did one good thing in proposing a unifying supra-ethnic Bangsa Malaysia, where we would be One, a single unified and cohesive Malaysian society notwithstanding our ethnic and religious pluralism, a la E Pluribus Unum or Bhinneka Tunggal Ika.

But alas, that was only a proposal which in recent times, like all his earlier values, he seems to have backtracked from. Hmmm, maybe he’s just trying to prove his ‘Melayu mudah lupa’ is correct wakakaka. 

We have to thus acclaim his ‘de-fanging’ achievement remains his most significant and most admired achievement. He was not only a medical doctor but a political dentist as well wakakaka.

Paradoxically, for all his admired achievements, he is also known for his lamentable excesses, particularly his profligacy in expending Malaysian assets on non-essential mega projects, almost similar though admittedly not as bad as a long departed neighbour, Soekarno. The latter was notorious for building Stalin-era style monstrous monuments and structures which did not alleviate his people’s hunger or needs.

However, I believe that in some (not all) projects, he had a reason to his methods though of course I didn't/don't agree nor support his intentions, because I reckoned then and still do today he had it all wrong.

Dr M was also criticized and condemned for mollycoddling his favoured ones - again I believe there was a reason (his reason) to that. There is a potential post on this by itself but no, not in this one.

I won’t go again into details of what we have read in recent times about him and his premiership such as on what Barry Wain wrote, or about the very painful Forex exercise, but rather that Dr M has backtracked from most of what he had asserted or promised will stay true to course.

Who should we blame for the dark side of his nature or conduct?

Should we blame ourselves for keeping him in the PM’s position for a quarter of a century, or should we blame his three predecessors, such as:

(a) Tunku for kicking him out instead of keeping him within UMNO to control him,

(b) Razak for bringing him back into UMNO, and

(c) Hussein Onn for selecting and supporting him to be Deputy President in UMNO?

If you want to indulge in pontifications and a lot of ‘what ifs’ and ‘if onlys’, then I would suggest you, if you had voted BN, blame yourselves wakakaka.

You deserve the leader you voted for, and this saying still applies today and tomorrow.

It’s human nature to argue one way or another on whether Dr M was a good PM. If you had benefitted from his reign, then obviously I would expect you to praise him sky high, or at least give him a sympathetic verdict. On the other hand, if you suffered from his prime-ministerial tenure, then …. well …. I won’t blame you.

What about Anwar Ibrahim, once his blue eye boy and heir anointed?

AI had enjoyed humongous benefits for 16 years in UMNO (without a single breath of reformasi wakakaka), even unto selection as the heir anointed for the highest political position of the land. In the end AI had also suffered from Dr M's hands.

Of course AI’s supporters and AI himself would say Dr M turned on his blue eye boy to protect his own sons. Those in Dr M’s camp reminded us that AI deserved his expulsion from UMNO for being treacherous in his attempt to oust Dr M out early by using Zahid Hamidi as a stalking horse to accuse Dr M of cronyism and nepotism.

Recall what I had suggested earlier, on who should we blame for the dark side of Dr M’s nature or conduct?

In a similar exercise, who should we blame for the dark side of AI’s nature or conduct? [I’m addressing only those who have doubts about AI’s suitability as a PM-designate - 16 years of silence while in UMNO but suddenly very noisy about reformasi only after he was expelled from that party; then 916 a la Sabah 1994 - so anwaristas are excused from this question wakakaka]

Should we blame ourselves for keeping him as the de facto leader of PKR and the leader-elect of Pakatan wakakaka, or should we blame the following, such as:

(a) Dr M for selecting and supporting him to be Deputy President in UMNO, and

(b) Dr M for kicking him out instead of keeping him within UMNO to control him?

Hmmm, regarding above, maybe there was something Satanic about Dr M after all, wakakaka.

There was a time when manmanlai had anticipated (and hope) AAB would bring him back into UMNO, a return I believe he wanted badly, but HRH the Sultan of Somnambulence, much as many had accused him of low intellect, was not that stupid as to invite a dangerous hungry tiger into UMNO wakakaka, so I can’t place a 3rd dot-point of blame as follows:

(c) AAB for bringing him back into UMNO.

Okay, what about their good sides, that of achievements as PM or acting PM or deputy PM of these two? Wakakaka. You think about it.

Now, on to ‘followers’!

We have totally loyal and blind followers, hopeful followers, discerning followers or ABU followers. If you aren't any of these, then you are not a follower wakakaka.

What sort of followers we are, I believe, are determined in many ways by our attitudes, shaped by our upbringing (including education and indoctrination a la BTN), culture, religion, political beliefs and environment, etc.

We may be followers who would vote based on race, religion, party policies, party performance, or herd mentality (not necessarily driven by race or religion, like ABU or GAN).

I have witnessed volte-face allegiance which (regardless of the direction of the allegiance) surprise, disappoint or has been totally predictable to me.

The way we support or reject political leaders says something about ourselves, whether we are ready for true democracy or a two-party system.

What type of followers are you? Please don't tell me pompously you're a 'freedom fighter', wakakaka.


  1. I'll make a decent sheep of a follower if I know what you are talking about - but why do you call Herr "Anwar" Himmler Mahathir's "blue eye boy" when it was a black eye he gave mein Herr?

    Lord Jim

  2. it was blue, then black, and now green, while Dr M's is red - hell hath no greater fury than a godfather betrayed

  3. Hadyaai wannabe humper is back, as usual without success there wakakaka

  4. For a long time, I thought of Mahathir as a Benevolent Dictator, one of those proverbial Dictators with a "Good Heart" who breaks bones only to preserve good order and protect their vision of the country's future - his Vision 2020.
    Even after he retired, I explained away his interference in current administration as those of a parent trying to provide guidance to his grown children.
    No longer. Mahathir's sponsorship of Perkasa and his frequent outbursts in support of a racist vision of Malaysia's future exposes the "benevolent dictator" to be a lie.
    This is a most malevolent character who has damaged, perhaps irreparably Malaysia's institutions and continues to be a malignant influence on the body politic.

    I'm pretty agnostic about Anwar Ibrahim. I'm certainly not a follower, but I think he has done some good in invigorating and harnessing the opposition to UMNO and Barisan Nasional.
    He's a poor administrator, but that trait has not stopped many leaders in the past from being very successful, provided they know how to appoint capable and honest lieutenants to carry out the executive action side.
    Sadly, he appears to depend on Azmin Ali instead.

  5. Mahathir is still the revered ONE, despite being much maligned by Anwaristas.
    Tun M is appointed Yemeni's Special Economic AdvisEr. He's now in Yemen being feted and toasted.
    What is Anwar? So-called Economic Adviser to Selangor. Hahaha.
    Just in name when TS Khalid knows more about economics than him.

  6. You mean Yemen, the 4th World economic basket case, world's 5th highest infant mortality rate, last refuge of Al-Qaeda ?

    I hardly count that as a credit to Mahathir.

  7. Melayu means.......12:25 pm, June 11, 2012

    I credit Tun Mahathir for turning into reality all the negative stereotypes regarding the Malays.

    Idle, Lazy, always searching for a Free Lunch, Corrupt, Religious Fanatic.....

    BM (Before Mahathir) these stereotypes had some basis, but not for the majority of Malays.

    AM (after Mahathir) the vast majority of Malays are like that.

  8. Yep that Yemen. Believe you me, Tun M will do a great job for them. He's a statesman unlike your leader Nuar.

  9. Maha Thir s/o Iskandar Kutty
    God's Greatest Gift to Malaysia ?
    God's Curse upon Malaysia

  10. You missed out TIBAI ,
    Tolak Individu Bernama Anwar Ibrahim

  11. "Winnable" UMNO" candidates still carry dangerous UMNO infectious disease


    Same with PKR, come to think of it.

    WFT...I might as well boycott GE13 vote

  12. Mahatiu is going to Yemen to be a Special Economic advisor ?

    What a wonderful piece of news !
    Malaysia would be a better place with him out of the way at least for a while.

    It would be great if, along the way, the CIA made some "minor" mistake in its Drone targetting in Yemen.

  13. Bravo! Bravo! Kaytee! You really deserved a standing ovation. Perhaps, you should read this link

    Just admit la, Kaytee. You seem to be infatuatedly obsess with anything Anwar. Is it Anwar who raped your sister's cat long long time ago?

    You see why nowadays Muhyiddin says that Perception has become an issue with BN. Over damaging "firepower" inflicted on fellas such as your nemesis has made folks align with the other party

    Notice that very few people bother to write comments in your blog

  14. Kaytee,
    By the way, I do wonder what kinda "animal" are you? You ain't George Patton, the doer or executioner. Not exactly a leader like him. You have remained in the sidelines all this while till end. Yet, you admonishes "followers". You are certainly not a "Benjamin" as you praise Mahathir for his leadership. I would have believed you if you accorded the same "admiration" towards Lee Kuan Yew. Oh what the Heck, why not bring in Ferdinand Marcos.....Hahahaha!
    Aiyaaa.....By the way, you an't a chinese educated. You never even been to chinese primary school. What's with you on Anwar's decision of having a non chinese educated headmasters entering the service of managing chinese primary schools
    Seriously, what kinda animal are you?

    P.S : These are serious questions because it seem kaytee can't sleep without whacking Anwar. At least, at one point, I don't give a hoot! Perhaps, kaytee to practise "wusa".

    We understand that Anwar Ibrahim might have raped your sister's cat at cheruk tok kun. He was very young. Just let go la

  15. Pity that lonely old man - come back from Hadyaai frustrated with his pedophilic failures and taking it out on my blog - but totally shameless in using various nicks to show he's not alone - sometimes calls himself Freedom Fighter wakakaka - I'm forced to delete his comments because they're either obscene and vulgar or don't contribute to the post but we have to accept he is incapable of that wakakaka

  16. Ah...KT boy , no doubt Mamak Kutty did all Malaysians a great favor by pushing through the 1993 constitutional amendment; but the main reason for him to do so was to avoid being a victim himself.

    Ah Kong thinks Mamak was worried that a gun might be pointed at him or he might even get shot and nobody could do anything about it.
    This is call self-preservation if you ask Ah Kong.

  17. Anon 3.26,
    Mahathiu an accidental drone victim in Yemen?Ha!ha!In truth he's too chicken shit for the Yanks to bother with.But you never know 'cos shit happens and you get your wish!

  18. UMNO blog....Nambikkai...sutu

  19. One thing very crystal clear.
    Dr M worked for the good of the country and still is.
    AI, well, like someone said, leaves a trail of destruction along his path.