By Nathaniel Tan,
I was encouraged by the initial feedback – both positive and negative – to my article, reproduced below, on why Pakatan may need a Malay agenda.
Allow me to do my first blog post in response to a Twitter conversation, hehe :)
I view it as one of the biggest cancers that afflicts our nation.
I hate it so much so, that I may be willing to consider options some consider less savoury in order to seek it’s longer term elimination.
Of course, this speaks to the question of whether ends justify means.
With regards to the particular case at hand, I have concluded that a “Malay Agenda” for Pakatan can be justifiable – and not a case of sacrificing principles or playing into the enemy’s hands.
The primary issue to me is this: is any type of Malay agenda racially exclusive in nature and thus immoral?
To my mind, the answer is no, and for twofold reasons.
Firstly, perhaps a “Malay Agenda” is not really any different from a “Fisherman’s Agenda”, a “Perakian Agenda”, a “Feminist Agenda” or for that matter, a “Malaysian Agenda”.
All of these deal with segments of society, merely divided along different lines. Such an agenda is thus perhaps just one of many agendas – agendas which, when put together, are designed to uplift the whole of society.
Secondly, a core question is: what is the content of this Malay Agenda? Is there a difference if it is a supremacist, crutch-centric view, as espoused by Umno – versus say, a revolutionary and remedial one focused on using integrity and justice as the core drivers of non-exclusivist advancement as well as a new approach to interethnic relations?
Some might say that such a move constitutes a compromise fueled by nothing more than political necessity.
I agree that political circumstances inform this idea, as does a need to break Umno’s zero-sum politics and pave the way for true multiracialism.
I think if a Malay agenda can be pursued without sacrificing at heart the principles of a just and united society, I’d be all for it.
To me, if that brings us even a day closer to a non-BN government, who knows how many lives may be spared from police brutality, or indefinite detention without trial.
For non-Malays, supporting such an agenda (one notably different from Umno’s) could also be a sign of reaching out and bridging the divide that has separated us for too long.
Perhaps all this will be clearer once such an agenda is actually articulated, and perhaps I shall endeavour to do just that come next column :) In the meantime, here’s the original. Thanks again for all comments, more welcome :)
JUNE 5 — Hulu Selangor and Sibu imply new lines of political division for Malaysia, and the signs may not all be good.
A crucial by-product of these by-elections is the manner in which national political dynamics will evolve in response to the voting results.
There is a growing perception — if not one much discussed in the public sphere, understandably — that the majority of the votes for Barisan Nasional (BN) in an election will come from the Malay and rural segments of the population, while Pakatan Rakyat (PR) maintains a strong grip on the Chinese and urban segments.
A growing urban/rural political divide may have colourful repercussions for the nation’s political landscape.
Even as it is, a cursory glance at a map of the 2008 general election will show green, red and light blue dominating the urban centres of the nation, and huge swathes of dark blue covering a much larger area of the country.
Should this trend continue in the manner that it has in these last two by-elections, we may enjoy the irony of watching BN become a “Parti Kampung” of sorts, while PR slowly evolves into a “Parti Kota.”
All nations have political divides that run along some lines, and I suppose this particular one is not as bad as some others. At worst though, we may have the kind of urban/rural divide that is a large part of the current Thai crisis.
More worrying however, is a perceived deepening political divide along ethnic lines.
Despite Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s best efforts at “bribery”, the Chinese votes have yet to swing towards BN in any meaningful way whatsoever. It appears that decades of feeling like second-class citizens and the promise of a more just society under PR make for an overwhelming combination.
The trouble begins when politicians and political parties reflect on the by-election results and ponder their futures.
I recall that, in the early aftermath of the by-elections, there were already voices calling out for Umno/BN to stop trying to pander to the Chinese votes, and concentrate instead on their base of Malay votes — perhaps assuming that if they maintained a solid majority of the Malay votes, they can still easily obtain a simple majority in Parliament.
This may not seem particularly palatable, but in terms of pure electoral logic and given the structure of our political system, we cannot expect such reasoning to be dismissed out of hand.
Najib may not be particularly inclined to go down this path, but that may not prevent strong factions within his party from pushing this agenda. Should they succeed, and Umno swings further to the right in response to such electoral realities, who knows what the repercussions may be for the country?
Although my thoughts are still gestating with regards to the long run (enough to fill a book?), in the short run, many have been wondering what Pakatan can do to reverse the Malay voting trend while maintaining their current bases of support.
Speaking as a non-Malay, an idea I had was for Pakatan — and maybe PKR specifically — to come up with something like a “Malay Agenda” of their own.
Yes, it may initially sound like something counter to the line we’ve been taking, but I think fellow non-Malays should adopt an open mind and explore such possibilities.
In order for Pakatan to take over and implement its truly multiracial vision, it may have to compete with one of Umno’s strongest assets: The perception that Umno has Malay interests at heart.
Of course, many Malays — more noticeably in urban areas — realise that this is the furthest thing from Umno’s mind. Nonetheless, Pakatan may need to have a viable alternative to this perception to sway the middle ground outside its traditional bases of support.
A Pakatan/PKR “Malay Agenda” need not be exclusivist and supremacist ala Umno, but could perhaps instead focus on fixing the damage done to the Malay community by Umno, by emphasising integrity, independence and fulfilling the true potential of Malays — something Umno has not only failed to do, but actively worked against in order to maintain its political relevance.
I truly believe that without the rent-seeking, cronyism and endemic corruption Umno has put this country through, the natural diligence and talent of both Malays and Malaysians would have brought us all so much further than where we are today.
The articulation of such a vision would serve to allay fears that Pakatan is not “Malay enough” or that Pakatan is synonymous with the weakening of the Malays, while the details of the vision itself will — when scrutinised — show itself to be perfectly consistent with all Pakatan has said before.
Hopefully, non-Malays will understand the context and need for such an agenda, and recognise its role in bringing all of Malaysia closer to a more just society.
Of course, my attempt to email such suggestions to the relevant people weeks ago has yet to find traction, but I’ve already fleshed it out a bit, so if anyone else out there thinks the idea bears some merit, let’s talk!
I was encouraged by the initial feedback – both positive and negative – to my article, reproduced below, on why Pakatan may need a Malay agenda.
Allow me to do my first blog post in response to a Twitter conversation, hehe :)
Aisehman 23 hoursEliminating race based politics has perhaps been one of my most consistent and persistent goals – insofar as I have had any since being involved in this line of ‘work’.
dats right RT @bongkersz: @Aisehman @NatAsasi so agree on that note. why play into their hands? why play the game?
bongkersz 23 hours
@Aisehman @NatAsasi so agree on that note. why play into their hands? why play the game?
Aisehman 23 hours
@NatAsasi the day Pakatan unveils its Malay Agenda is the day UMNO kisses your hand in gratitude for handing them GE13 on a silver platter
bongkersz 23 hours
RT @Aisehman: Y Pakatan may need a ‘Malay Agenda’ http://bit.ly/aqJW2y @NatAsasi bro, dat is taking d defeatist route. An abject surrender.
Aisehman 23 hours
Why Pakatan may need a ‘Malay Agenda’ http://bit.ly/aqJW2y @NatAsasi bro, dat is taking the defeatist route. An abject surrender.
I view it as one of the biggest cancers that afflicts our nation.
I hate it so much so, that I may be willing to consider options some consider less savoury in order to seek it’s longer term elimination.
Of course, this speaks to the question of whether ends justify means.
With regards to the particular case at hand, I have concluded that a “Malay Agenda” for Pakatan can be justifiable – and not a case of sacrificing principles or playing into the enemy’s hands.
The primary issue to me is this: is any type of Malay agenda racially exclusive in nature and thus immoral?
To my mind, the answer is no, and for twofold reasons.
Firstly, perhaps a “Malay Agenda” is not really any different from a “Fisherman’s Agenda”, a “Perakian Agenda”, a “Feminist Agenda” or for that matter, a “Malaysian Agenda”.
All of these deal with segments of society, merely divided along different lines. Such an agenda is thus perhaps just one of many agendas – agendas which, when put together, are designed to uplift the whole of society.
Secondly, a core question is: what is the content of this Malay Agenda? Is there a difference if it is a supremacist, crutch-centric view, as espoused by Umno – versus say, a revolutionary and remedial one focused on using integrity and justice as the core drivers of non-exclusivist advancement as well as a new approach to interethnic relations?
Some might say that such a move constitutes a compromise fueled by nothing more than political necessity.
I agree that political circumstances inform this idea, as does a need to break Umno’s zero-sum politics and pave the way for true multiracialism.
I think if a Malay agenda can be pursued without sacrificing at heart the principles of a just and united society, I’d be all for it.
To me, if that brings us even a day closer to a non-BN government, who knows how many lives may be spared from police brutality, or indefinite detention without trial.
For non-Malays, supporting such an agenda (one notably different from Umno’s) could also be a sign of reaching out and bridging the divide that has separated us for too long.
Perhaps all this will be clearer once such an agenda is actually articulated, and perhaps I shall endeavour to do just that come next column :) In the meantime, here’s the original. Thanks again for all comments, more welcome :)
*
Why Pakatan may need a ‘Malay Agenda’JUNE 5 — Hulu Selangor and Sibu imply new lines of political division for Malaysia, and the signs may not all be good.
A crucial by-product of these by-elections is the manner in which national political dynamics will evolve in response to the voting results.
There is a growing perception — if not one much discussed in the public sphere, understandably — that the majority of the votes for Barisan Nasional (BN) in an election will come from the Malay and rural segments of the population, while Pakatan Rakyat (PR) maintains a strong grip on the Chinese and urban segments.
A growing urban/rural political divide may have colourful repercussions for the nation’s political landscape.
Even as it is, a cursory glance at a map of the 2008 general election will show green, red and light blue dominating the urban centres of the nation, and huge swathes of dark blue covering a much larger area of the country.
Should this trend continue in the manner that it has in these last two by-elections, we may enjoy the irony of watching BN become a “Parti Kampung” of sorts, while PR slowly evolves into a “Parti Kota.”
All nations have political divides that run along some lines, and I suppose this particular one is not as bad as some others. At worst though, we may have the kind of urban/rural divide that is a large part of the current Thai crisis.
More worrying however, is a perceived deepening political divide along ethnic lines.
Despite Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s best efforts at “bribery”, the Chinese votes have yet to swing towards BN in any meaningful way whatsoever. It appears that decades of feeling like second-class citizens and the promise of a more just society under PR make for an overwhelming combination.
The trouble begins when politicians and political parties reflect on the by-election results and ponder their futures.
I recall that, in the early aftermath of the by-elections, there were already voices calling out for Umno/BN to stop trying to pander to the Chinese votes, and concentrate instead on their base of Malay votes — perhaps assuming that if they maintained a solid majority of the Malay votes, they can still easily obtain a simple majority in Parliament.
This may not seem particularly palatable, but in terms of pure electoral logic and given the structure of our political system, we cannot expect such reasoning to be dismissed out of hand.
Najib may not be particularly inclined to go down this path, but that may not prevent strong factions within his party from pushing this agenda. Should they succeed, and Umno swings further to the right in response to such electoral realities, who knows what the repercussions may be for the country?
Although my thoughts are still gestating with regards to the long run (enough to fill a book?), in the short run, many have been wondering what Pakatan can do to reverse the Malay voting trend while maintaining their current bases of support.
Speaking as a non-Malay, an idea I had was for Pakatan — and maybe PKR specifically — to come up with something like a “Malay Agenda” of their own.
Yes, it may initially sound like something counter to the line we’ve been taking, but I think fellow non-Malays should adopt an open mind and explore such possibilities.
In order for Pakatan to take over and implement its truly multiracial vision, it may have to compete with one of Umno’s strongest assets: The perception that Umno has Malay interests at heart.
Of course, many Malays — more noticeably in urban areas — realise that this is the furthest thing from Umno’s mind. Nonetheless, Pakatan may need to have a viable alternative to this perception to sway the middle ground outside its traditional bases of support.
A Pakatan/PKR “Malay Agenda” need not be exclusivist and supremacist ala Umno, but could perhaps instead focus on fixing the damage done to the Malay community by Umno, by emphasising integrity, independence and fulfilling the true potential of Malays — something Umno has not only failed to do, but actively worked against in order to maintain its political relevance.
I truly believe that without the rent-seeking, cronyism and endemic corruption Umno has put this country through, the natural diligence and talent of both Malays and Malaysians would have brought us all so much further than where we are today.
The articulation of such a vision would serve to allay fears that Pakatan is not “Malay enough” or that Pakatan is synonymous with the weakening of the Malays, while the details of the vision itself will — when scrutinised — show itself to be perfectly consistent with all Pakatan has said before.
Hopefully, non-Malays will understand the context and need for such an agenda, and recognise its role in bringing all of Malaysia closer to a more just society.
Of course, my attempt to email such suggestions to the relevant people weeks ago has yet to find traction, but I’ve already fleshed it out a bit, so if anyone else out there thinks the idea bears some merit, let’s talk!
No comments:
Post a Comment