Whither the Indian middle-ground politics?

COMMENT I was seated in an Umno office once when a MIC member unwittingly interrupted my meeting with the branch secretary. He made his way into the office cautiously, delivered a package and lifted the secretary's hands before planting a polite kiss. The secretary did nothing more than to wave him off.

I was made to understand later that the three MIC members whom I saw camping at the main entrance of the branch office remained permanently there and hardly ever returned to the MIC branch office that is located a short distance away from the Umno office.

The modus operandi, according to my source, was to linger around the Umno office so that they would get first word on small contracts, such as tarring the road or fixing a light on the main street in a largely semi-rural population.

They would then execute the job once the project had been approved, even before they are given any advance payment and later linger around to claim the money for work done. In short, they were constantly rolling on a deficit, their political inroads rather limited to finding work rather than actually helping fellow constituents.

The constituency where this practice took place is one where Indians make up 23 percent of the electorate and would be a deciding factor in the coming elections.

The Umno man I spoke to admitted that Indians are indeed the party's biggest catch in the constituency. He was, just like national-level BN sentiments, convinced that Indians are returning to the BN fold in the coming polls.

But I wanted more than rhetoric. I asked him for proof. He dived into the pool of files, soaked in stale cigarette smoke, and picked out one, exasperated. It was a list of ad-hoc beneficiaries of the MP's allocation for the constituency. Unmistakably, Indians were the majority in this list, receiving handouts ranging from RM100 to RM500.

The Umno man looked at me apologetically, "I hope you don't get me wrong," he pleaded. I asked him to make his statement.

"Indians, all they want is aids like this. One man meets an accident and he wants money to buy a metal plate for a broken leg. We even give money to them for house renovations."

Piecemeal approach

There is no policy for the Indians in this part of Malaysia, at least not specifically. They are given plenty of attention, yes.
But there is a scattershot approach for those who turn up at the office whenever they feel they have a concrete reason to demand some cash.

Even the opposition candidate in the area seemed rather hesitant when I raised the topic of Indian voters to him. He was, understandably, confident that Indians, who voted overwhelmingly his favour back in 2008 due to the Hindraf momentum, would remain with him. But something that he said stood out from the rest.

"Indians, you can't conduct ceramah for them like you do for others. They are better off when you just focus on them."

Yes, suckers for attention. Indian voters need that specific attention and that specific education about why they should vote for the opposition. The easiest way to talk to them however, seemed to be money.

Recently, MIC members allegedly approached a group of old MIC supporters from areas surrounding a small town and told them that the party will be bringing them on a "trip to Putrajaya and Twin Towers".

This generation of voters are the ones who have been told since their younger days to "vote for thedacing."

Buses ferried thousands of these veteran MIC supporters to Kuala Lumpur, only to told that due to traffic congestion, they would be diverted to a prime minister's function instead.

They were left reeling in the afternoon heat, with little food provided, to make up the numbers while waiting for five hours for the event to conclude. Some, to my knowledge, even fainted in the sweltering heat.

They were fuming. Regardless, ad-hoc cash handouts such as Bantuan Rakyat 1Malaysia (BR1M) will go a long way to appease the electorate. In fact, some still think that "if we vote out BN, who will pay our salaries?"

The Hindraf split

Then we come to the topic of Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf), something that for once, managed to get Indians in Malaysia all riled up and passionate.

The movement, at its height in 2007, was credited with generating the momentum that translated into BN losing its two-thirds majority in the 2008 elections. That was probably why Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak instantly stopped the demonisation of Hindraf once he came into power in 2009.

But the Hindraf we have today has been split to a variety of factions. While Hindraf is still active under P Waythamoorthy, the movement's most recognisable face P Uthayakumar has gone largely silent and runs the Human Rights Party (HRP) on his own.

Another widely recognised Hindraf face, S Jayathas, is now a low key human rights bureau member in PKR.

The divide in this movement seems to reflect the ground sentiments of Indians in the country - volatile, uncertain and unable to consolidate their efforts for a common cause.

Hindraf seems to have deviated from its original path. After spending years demonising Umno-BN as an extension, the movement has softened its stand of late as it attempts to get either one of BN or Pakatan to endorse its blueprint.

While I do not see anything wrong in opening "line of communications" with PM Najib, I do, however, take issue with Hindraf's stand that it would throw its support to any party endorsing its blueprint.

In its attempts to remain an important cog in Malaysian politics, Hindraf is slowly allowing itself to be used as a tool, with many of its members and supporters believing that Pakatan had turned its back on them.

While Malaysians will forever keep in their memories the 2007 Hindraf rally, my contention with Hindraf's arguments is the same as I have with BN's arguments - you cannot live on your past glories.

You need to improvise and consolidate your position to go according to current times as six years is a long time in the current political climate.
You cannot expect the blind, nerve-pumping momentum that helped you six years ago to do the same again in an era where the government has become far too cautious to neglect the demands of any racial group.

It was at a protest once when I asked a Hindraf supporter why some prominent leaders of HRP (Hindraf was still considered outlawed back then) did not come to lent their voices.

The reply was rather curt, "They keep calling everyone mandores (Tamil for powerless messengers). We need to get things done sometimes, and not antagonise everyone. We asked them to stay away."

Too many cooks

Yes, things need to get done and Hindraf was good in its role as an NGO in its early days. As an Indian-centric movement, it was a good catalyst, but it is undoing all of its good work by merely putting up its blueprint to the highest bidder.

Najib's engagement of Hindraf also goes to show how insignificant MIC has become.

While MIC had spent years maligning Hindraf cause while talking about allocations to build more temples and schools, Najib has bypassed the party that supposedly represents the interests of Indians in the country to finally hear Hindraf out.

"Just because the priest is not right, you should not criticise the temple," said a MIC national leader once when I opined to him that MIC is well past its its sell-by date.

The question is, how many priests are ruining the temple?

The Indian electorate's narrative in Malaysia is as scattered and volatile as these stories seem to suggest. Sometimes, we, Indians, tend to overlook the fact that we are but seven percent of the Malaysian population.

Despite our small numbers, we have the most parties that somehow attempt to represent us. We have MIC, People's Progressive Party (PPP), Indian Progressive Front (IPF) and Malaysia Makkal Sakthi Party (MMSP) to name a few.

While these parties jostle for a share of the political pie, they have translated very little results in educating Indians in the semi-rural areas, who remain dependant on ad-hoc financial aids to send their kids to schools, pay bus fares and, as pointed out earlier, to renovate homes.

Disconnect with grassroots

I once had the company of an opposition MP who lamented how big a headache the Indians in his constituency were giving him.

"They ask me to pay for everything - daughter's marriage, school fees, someone in the family ran away. They want RM100, RM200. The husbands drop the wives off at my service centre and they come in hoping for sympathy.

"I have a hard time making them understand this 'Look, if I give you this money, I need to start giving to everyone for the same reason. I'm answerable to all people here, not just you.'"

His aide, hands in his head, chimed in "I don't know when we will lose this habit of putting our hands forth and asking for money from others."

As damning as it may be, that's the reality for many Indians in this country. This habit is the collective failure of politicians from both sides of the divide.

BN Indian leaders appear content to keep Indians as dependant entities who will rejoice when given money, the Pakatan's Indian leaders are so detached from the Indian grassroots that only a handful of their top leaders can converse in Tamil comfortably with the stateless people they want to represent.

In the midst of these two extremes, there are few Indian leaders who can thread the middle ground - a leader who has the ambition to uplift the community but has enough street knowledge, demographic knowledge and the oratory skills to educate the Indian electorate on self efficacy.

One thing is for sure, GE13 will not solve the woes of Indians in this country. Because the change this community must derive has to come from within the community itself, and not externally.

But voting patterns will go a long way to tell us whether the community is able to consolidate largely in one direction, or not.

---

RAM ANAND is a member of the Malaysiakini team.