Secularism can't wed religion

Another of Terence Netto's take on Pakatan, wakakaka, in his Malaysiakini article Pakatan's Mexican Standoff involving our dearest beloved PAS and DAP.

batu api looes74 brought this about

But before that perhaps it may be worthwhile taking a peep at Islamic PAS and its claim of Islamic values, for after all the Islamic party represents one of the main proponents (or opponents, wakakaka) in Netto's Mexican standoff.

Well, TMI has just reported PAS goes to war with itself ahead of party polls, a sort of fratricidal jihad or perhaps (a new term) a seppuku-jihad, either of Japanese -style self-disemboweling or of Arab style self-amputation of PAS' own organs?

TMI tells us: ..... the Islamist party finds itself imploding over infighting between rival factions – those in favour of cooperation with Pakatan Rakyat (PR) against those who are not. [...]

The infighting in the country’s largest opposition party has become so vicious that people now wonder if the trust they put in PAS in the 13th general election (GE13) in 2013 was misplaced. [...]

It is because the stakes are so high this time that the infighting between factions has sunk to new lows compared with previous elections.

There are now several Facebook accounts set up to smear rivals and name-calling, with the latest ploy being an audio recording purportedly of some leaders conspiring to overthrow PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang.

The ulama assembly on February 21 reflected how dire things had become, as the gathering of normally reserved and mild-mannered ulama (Muslim scholars) descended into bouts of name-calling.

Hmmm, infighting between factions has sunk to new lows and Facebook accounts set up to smear rivals and name-calling - are these new images of PAS' Islamic values?

No doubt each faction would be claiming it has divine imprimatur to so act.

And, I wonder whether the divine imprimatur includes the right to bullshit a la Deucalion?

And me being a bloody suspicious person who believes in Cicero's Cui Bono, I have to admit I've been checking on the identities of vendors of yellow plastic tubs in Kelantan, which you may not realize can be utilized as extemporaneous sampans during unexpected divine-incurred floods, wakakaka.

So that's where our dear Islamic PAS (and its boast of Islamic values) is currently at, where its cybertroopers are smearing rivals' names and possessing other tactics described as 'new lows'.

Okay, returning to what I have wanted to blog about, namely Netto's Mexican standoff, I'm afraid Terence Netto has been wrong in his assessment of the PAS vs DAP stoush.

First of all, let's examine what's a Mexican standoff and how it would apply to Pakatan. Originally a Mexican standoff was a combative situation but with three opponents, each trying to kill the other two, but it's a screwed up situation where whoever shoots first, say No 1 at No 2, will be shot by the 3rd, wakakaka.

So visualize PAS shooting first (and killing) DAP, which will allow PKR to be in position to shoot at (and kill) PAS, wakakaka - PKR's wet dreams?

Okay, just play that deadly triangular musical chair for a while, and we'll all arrive at the same conclusion that whoever shoots second will be the sole man standing, so "... after you, Pak Haji. No no after you, Ah Hnia, aiyah Royal MB first lah ..." wakakaka, at least it breeds courtesy.

Now, while gnam gnam Pakatan has three component parties which might have rang true for such a standoff, alas, PAS and DAP may be in conflict but PKR has been acting 'dunno' (unless it's about seat allocation wakakaka), thus hardly a Mexican standoff in its original meaning.

But wait, all's not lost yet for Netto's term. A modern meaning to Mexican standoff refers to only two (not three) confrontational opponents, for example, PAS and DAP, wakakaka, but with both not having any significant advantage over the other ........ and even if there is, neither would admit it.

Additionally, Mexican standoff as understood in modern terms would deem both PAS and DAP having equal power, unlike UMNO and MCA, wakakaka, but what about Ah Jib Gor and Muhyiddin?

Okay, shall we agree this sounds like the Mexican standoff that Netto probably has in mind for the current PAS-DAP disagreement over the former's insistence in implementing hudud in Kelantan and also though to a lesser extent, the former rejection of DAP's proposal to have a 3rd tier election of local councils.

Being a DAP supporter (though not all the time, wakakaka) I am of course biased, believing PAS wants hudud implemented more as (I suspect) an intimidatory instrument to buttress its absolute authority among Muslims, while not wanting local elections because the party faithful will be deprived of non-elected appointments to local councils in urban areas and thus denied the fringe benefits of a ruling coalition.

Mind, though DAP promotes itself as a secular political party, I have to say I've not been impressed by a few individuals in DAP who have been perceived as unduly generous with exclamations of gratitude to the Almighty. I would urge those individuals to curtail, curb, nay, cancel proclamations like 'Praise the Lord' and 'Jesus loves us'.

Yes, don't piss me off with your non-secular exuberance or you won't be any different from PAS, what a thought, or even worse as you'll be hypocrites, wakakaka. So kindly keep your Hallelujah out of politics and your party affairs.

Next, the modern understanding of Mexican standoff is supposedly marked by both PAS and DAP being unable to advance their position to their respective advantage eg. retention of Pakatan as a still working and cooperative coalition but without or with (wakakaka) hudud implemented ...

... nor for both parties to withdraw without suffering any respective disadvantage eg. 'face' and political support. To wit, both are then supposedly f*** kau kau into an almost permanent stalemate, to both's respective disadvantage.

Now, on to Netto's assessment (and mine on his in brackets or parentheses) that:

... there is a certain symmetry to the arguments of both members which, on examination, suggests Pakatan won’t disintegrate.

Therein for Pakatan’s supporters lies the cheeriness of this cheerless situation.

(... known otherwise as Netto's Paradox, wakakaka)

The reason for optimism is not vacuous; the antagonists clearly don’t want to leave the opposition coalition on their own volition though one party is implacably opposed to the other on a fundamental issue.

I'll come to this point shortly.

Normally, divergences on matters of fundamental principle are pact-breaking or coalition-wrecking, but this gulf between two of three members on a core issue is apparently not enough to sunder Pakatan.

This is where I disagree because PAS will never ever rescind from its hudud intention while DAP will never ever accept PAS' wish to implement hudud, no matter how much PAS promises that it won't affect non-Muslims.

As we and aviators know from science, no two objects or two conflicting ideology can occupy the same space at the same time.

where ALL men and women are equal before the law

It's not just DAP but we non-Muslims are rejecting PAS as a political party because we have already witnessed gross interference in our non-Muslim lives in notorious cases such as proselytizing body snatching (though I suspect such act might have been more for inheritance under Islamic laws which would have benefited a Muslim sibling rather than, under civil laws, the non-Muslim widow) and ...

... proselytizing cradle-snatching (shame on those responsible), non-Muslim shops in KB forced to close on Friday noon for 2 hours despite the business being conducted wholly among only non-Muslims, motorcycle pillion riding prohibition for women (I am not even sure whether this applies only to Muslim sweeties? but then I don't buy PAS assurance syariah laws apply only to Muslims as described above), ...

... dress codes, unisex hair dressing salons, intrusions into non-Muslims public festivals and entertainment such as Valentine's Day, Thaipusam and wakakaka koe-tai, etc.

DAP can ignore our apprehensions to their peril a la 1999 - ask Lim Kit Siang and the children of the late Karpal Singh on how the nons could turn their collective wrath against even their DAP iconic heroes.

Netto's argument has pointed to the following as an example of how or why he has deemed that both PAS and DAP wish to remain in Pakatan:

... The latest iteration of this Mexican standoff came from Takiyuddin Hassan (right), PAS MP for Kota Baru and Permanent Chief Secretariat of the Kelatan Syariah Criminal Code who said:

“Pakatan does not belong to DAP, Pakatan does not have a leader, if (DAP) disagrees, it should leave Pakatan, why ask us to leave, and they cannot make us (PAS) leave.”

My dear Terence, it's more about 'face'. There is a social and moral stigma among us Malaysians on expulsion.

Yes sir, no one wants to be expelled like, say, Anwar from UMNO. I believe had Anwar resigned with dignity from UMNO as did Zaid Ibrahim, I would have been one of his strongest supporter, wakakaka. Instead he clung on until there were deep claw marks on the door sill of UMNO headquarters and even went to court in a futile attempt to retrieve his UMNO party position long after he had been kicked out.

There's undeniably benefit for both sides in staying on as a threesome team, where DAP will encourage Chinese voters to put their faith and trust in PAS (how to now?), and vice versa for PAS with Malay voters.

But alas, the relationship is far far FAR too toxic, and the ultimate loser will be the DAP if it continues to consort with PAS. So it's not the classic Mexican standoff where withdrawing from such a standoff will result in disadvantages.

DAP may suffer some tactical losses in disassociating itself from the Islamic party but will strategically strengthen itself among its traditional supporters from the smearing propaganda of BN.

Now, whether PAS or DAP leaves Pakatan is not important, and to a great extent depends on PKR, as to whom it will side to make the outcome 2 to 1.

Yes, I would dearly love to see PKR decides on this, wakakaka.

We know DAP has been playing bridesmaid to the PKR bride while no doubt PAS sees itself as the groom, wakakaka. But secularism cannot wed religion.

Whatever, whoever, whichever, it's not politically wise for DAP to work any longer with the Islamic party because if the DAP refuses to recognize the unfortunate situation it is currently in, it will suffer what Lim Kit Siang and Karpal Singh suffered in 1999.

MCA and Gerakan will be orgasmically rapt if DAP leaders choose to believe in a possible salvage ops for a threesome Pakatan with PAS still in the coalition.

To the Chinese voters no political personality is sacrosanct and so iconic that he or she will be immune to being made short shift of if the voters are annoyed with his or her political stand, policy, performance, conviction and attitude towards serving them.