Self-appointed, self-righteous custodians

If we want to look at it on the basis of elected then only Barisan Nasional has been elected. The rest, Pakatan Rakyat included, are just ‘dogs barking at a hill’, as the Malays would say. And that would make everyone else illegitimate, hypocritical and self-appointed.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin
'I have been following some of the threads and must admit that like you I also have misgivings about key aspects of the MCLM project.

Fundamentally, I think the screening of PR candidates smack of self-righteousness and is also hypocritical given that nobody elected MCLM in the first place and hence it is not accountable to anyone as much as we would like to think otherwise.

At the heart of this is the middle class composition of what most consider to be civil society, with little or no links with, let alone representation of, marginalised groups or workers.

Given these misgivings and my inability to commit time, I think it would only be fair for me to withdraw from MCLM and concentrate my efforts where I can in the ISA campaign. I would also like to remain unaffiliated politically although my sentiments are with the Opposition.'

**************************************************

That was the message that one committee member sent to another committee member but which was not copied but forwarded to me. So I suppose I am not meant to receive this resignation letter from that committee member.

Anyway, what he said is probably true. MCLM, like SABM (Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia), Friends of Pakatan Rakyat, MyOverseasVote, BERSIH (the Coalition for Free and Fair Elections), Aliran, Just, Suaram, AIM (Anti-ISA Movement), HINDRAF, and the many hundreds of movements, associations and organisations all over Malaysia do appear self-righteous.

As the committee member argued, who appointed them? Basically, they are all self-appointed. How many of the 27 million Malaysians signed a letter giving them the mandate to fight for all Malaysians?

BERSIH might think they are fighting for free and fair elections for all Malaysians. But then five million eligible Malaysian voters do not register to vote and three million registered voters do not vote. Then, four million voters voted Barisan Nasional.

This means less than four million of the 27 million Malaysians would like to see a better-run election. Can BERSIH claim to represent all Malaysians when only 14% of Malaysians want to see the opposition in power while the balance 86% did not indicate so?

Even then we are assuming that all 14% of Malaysians who voted opposition are not happy with the way the elections are managed.

To be honest, nobody elected MCLM just like nobody elected SABM (Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia), Friends of Pakatan Rakyat, MyOverseasVote, BERSIH (the Coalition for Free and Fair Elections), Aliran, Just, Suaram, AIM (Anti-ISA Movement), HINDRAF, and the many hundreds of movements, associations and organisations all over Malaysia.

If we want to look at it on the basis of elected then only Barisan Nasional has been elected. The rest, Pakatan Rakyat included, are just ‘dogs barking at a hill’, as the Malays would say. And that would make everyone else illegitimate, hypocritical and self-appointed.

How many movements, organisations or associations can claim a large membership? How many from the 27 million Malaysians have joined not just MCLM but also SABM (Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia), Friends of Pakatan Rakyat, MyOverseasVote, BERSIH (the Coalition for Free and Fair Elections), Aliran, Just, Suaram, AIM (Anti-ISA Movement), HINDRAF, and the many hundreds of movements, associations and organisations all over Malaysia?

If based on membership then everyone is self-righteous -- except maybe Pekida, which has a huge membership base. And Pekida supports the ISA because, according to Pekida, this is a law that can be used to uphold Malay rights and privileges. So, since Pekida has more members than all the other NGOs combined, in particular AIM, then the fight to uphold the ISA is more legitimate than the fight to abolish the ISA.

And Pekida has elections so its office bearers are voted into office while no one elected the AIM officer bearers since they do not hold elections. And Pekida represents the farmers, fishermen, estate labourers and all those marginalised groups and workers (who are registered members of Pekida) while AIM is a middle-class, bleeding heart movement.

Going by these standards, Pekida that fights to uphold the ISA is more legitimate than AIM that fights to abolish the ISA.