Limited Success and Limited Failure

That’s why there was March 8, 2008. That’s why race-based politics will fade and die. Anyone who ignores them – opposition or government – does so at his own peril.

(Source: The Star, 15th May 2009. Forgetting May 13 by P. Gunasegaram)

Recently P Gunasegaram, managing editor of the Star, wrote about his perceptions of May 13. In his opinion, many of the younger generation were yet to be born when May 13 occurred. As a consequence, many younger Malaysians think of themselves as simply Malaysians, rather than Malay, Indian and Chinese. He gauged his opinion based on a sample of three persons (as evidenced by his article). Perhaps it was meant to be light-hearted. He does have a point, however. The question should be asked, why should May 13th continue to cast a shadow over the younger generation, who were born many years after it had passed -- with no memory of it? It would not be fair for the younger generation of Malaysians, who played no part in the events leading up to May 13.

Yet the remnants of this event continue to follow us. Everywhere, it is reflected in policies, and arcane legislation. Preferential practices and phobia of "the other", continue to plague our society. Inevitably, every generation of Malaysians, born post-May 13, comes round to asking the fundamental questions: Why? How? And for how much longer? Inevitably the youngsters of each succeeding wave get "educated" in the realities of Malaysian life. It would seem that May 13 has become part of the unspoken history, meant to be accepted without question.

In the wake of May 13, it was found immediately that the sharing of wealth was the main solution. Yet that is not all that we share. We share, as fellow citizens, our common history and our common struggles. We face economic problems and political unrest together. Even apolitical problems are experienced by one and all -- water shortages, badly paved roads, corruption, et cetera. As the population of this country continues to boom, it will become obvious that not all who are born in certain privileged classes, will get to enjoy those privileges. In the book Connected 24 Hours In The Gobal Economy by Daniel Altman, its author makes the shrewd observation that by 2050, China may have the world's biggest economy, but there is a huge possibility that its average income would only be half that of the United States. (Ref: Page 69-70). In similar vein, our country may become more and more wealthy, but not everybody will enjoy a raise in material living standards. Observe, for instance, the states controlled by the Opposition, and the remote areas in Sabah and Sarawak where indigenous peoples have lived for generations. Where is their progress?

My two sens opinion is that those in Barisan Nasional need to be more consistent, more receptive to the needs of its constituent parties, and reflect the composition of the coalition in the exco of the coalition. There is a high probablity that the latter will not happen. The coalition was born of a conglomeration of post-Independence parties, encompassing then members of the ruling coalition (comprising UMNO, MIC, and MCA) and those other opposition parties which held considerable sway over the voting public. Thus at the core of the coalition there remains a seething racial composition. Whereas countries with many races aspire to become melting pots, the very definition of the core three parties of the coalition aspire towards purity. By definition of their race-based struggles, they have set up themselves for limited success, and limited failure. By appealing to the struggles of a group, defined by its genetic composition, the core members of the coalition have identified a ready target. There will always be people who care about the fate of their race, enough to join these parties. But the drawback of this approach is that those in the other races may be excluded from the struggles of such a party. The criteria of race necessarily includes, and alienates, at the same time. Thus, to remain relevant, struggles of the core three continue along racial lines. One cannot help but wonder if the words of P Gunasegaram are prophetic in foretelling the future of the coalition.

When one considers the effect of lumping together the core three members of the ruling coalition, together with the diverse, motley group of other members of the coalition, one is struck by the dissimilarity of thinking. Struggles, which should encompass the fate and benefits of all citizens, become, in the hands of certain parties, struggles which should first benefit certain groups before gaining their approval. "I need to champion the needs of my people first", we are often told by our partners in the coalition, "so that I can gain their support in the party. You understand, don't you?" But the fact is that it is a sorry state of affairs when the struggles of a component in the ruling coalition, trumps and surpasses the aims and goals of the coalition, eventually become part of the goals of the coalition. In this, it has often been said that MCA's main partner in politics, is often its biggest hurdle. It must be admitted that there cannot be a majority unless those in the coalition work together, and MCA must work with its big brother to form the ruling coalition. Yet as a consequence, the bloc vote according to the Westminster model means that MCA must support its big brother -- whether they support the motion or not. All problems, if any, are to be solved by closed door, internal discussions. Nobody really knows what takes place in those chambers, except for those personally involved in the discussion. The good doctor, now aged 85, can be seen as the originator of this practice.

It would be preferable if the outcome of closed door discussions become entrenched into the annals of the ruling coalition. In fact with every change in leadership, there also begins a change in direction. The last lineup of the coalition leadership pursued as its rallying cry, Islam Hadhari. This new lineup promotes 1 Malaysia. It does not need to be said that these two campaigns were different from that of the good doctor, who prudently lined up programmes such as privatizing the nation, looking to the East, industrialization, et cetera. Yet the good doctor has had no qualms of mentioning that his successor is a man of flip flops -- "the flip, after the flop." Contrast this with our rivals in the opposition, one is struck by the consistency of their campaigns, which are launched and fought on simple platforms. It is only in recent years that the opposition has begun to squirm and mutate itself in a metamorphosis which reconciles the irreconciliable, and disparate ideas of its founders. One knows not how long the opposition can last. It is also clear that the opposition, rather than having any concrete plans, arising out of their ideologies, continue to gain mileage by bashing the ruling coalition.

Of course, the ruling coalition is not without its faults. Allegations of corruption, misgivings of deprivation, et cetera, can only dent its reputation further. But those present forget that it was this coalition that gained our independence from the British. Along the way, some bad apples may have become mixed in the same basket as the good. What is needed is a retooling, a rescheming, a rethinking, a rebranding, and the reformulation of the joint thrust of the coalition. The needs, and aims, of the coalition must be given first priority. The needs, and aims, of component parties must be subjugated to the aims and needs of the coalition. Unfortunately this means that those in the majority will continue to dominate proceedings. Perhaps this can be solved by giving every party an equal say, irregardless of the number of its members. One should acknowledge the reality that in politics, it is the vote of the general public that ultimately counts -- not the number of members. But then again, detractors will often chide you by saying that without respecting the members, you lose support from that quarter of the voting public.

The racial component in the ruling coalition will continue to be relevant, inasmuch as part of the opposition coalition continues to fight on grounds of religion. By their genetic make-up, there will always be members of the public that identify with the parties. At the same time the opposition must also acknowledge that it appeals to those in the target religious group as well. But this is where they begin to differ. What that component of the opposition coalition is offering, is a system that can regulate the affairs of the state, irregardless of whether you practise that religion. In short, if it can be accepted by all, if this proposed system of governance can be reconciled with the ideals of its partners, then it may well become part of a winning formula. On the other hand, the core three members of the coalition need not fear that they will run out of supporters. There will always be a racial consciousness in this nation. Unless one day everybody decides of one accord to formulate a new race, one not tied to the races of old, this will continue to be the case. As an aside, the formulation of a new race will mean birthing pains, as the ties with the past are cut and put aside. One is reminded of efforts elsewhere to set up a nation state, where the homogeneity of race, language and religion is a uniting factor. Further consideration will show that it is not possible, because human rights will be violated, because the ties to the past are too precious to severe, and because it is our past which defines us. Even in Indonesia, where the Chinese have adopted Indonesian names, they continued to be regarded as a different race. (Ref: Asia Times Online, 2nd October 2008. Sinophobia Smoulders in Malaysia by Hui Yew-Foong.) Further, the old Fuehrer's ambitions to create a nation-state in Germany has been frustrated by the influx of a large immigration population.

Perhaps that is the solution, to ease immigration guidelines. In America immigration policies are carried out with, amongst others, the aim of increasing diversity. If Malaysia were to allow more foreign nationals to make this their home, perhaps a new diversity of thought would begin to flourish. Perhaps, they who have no link to the past, would begin by seeing the system with alien eyes. And perhaps they would have some idea of what might work, from their own experiences. Perhaps this suggestion might be rubbished by some quarters, especially those coming from the core three members of the ruling coalition. It would not be surprising. Whatever it is, it must be admitted that the ruling coalition needs teeth and not become a platform for only one of its component members, switching between champion of a certain quarter and the champion of all citizens with more ease than switching on/off a bathroom light.