Malaysian Politics As I See It

by ABANG KOJAK

Evolution of Politics And Its Reasons for Existence

The evolution of politics is inevitable due to changes in the life and times of people. In tandem with these changes, domestic politics evolve due to pressures within the international sphere.

For example, increase of oil prices and economic crises force goverments all over the world, rich and poor, to grapple with loss of confidence from its peoples.

This is evident in the case of Gordon Brown’s Labour Party leadership in Britain, as Britons are forced to deal with higher cost of living.

Nicolas Sarkozy’s government in France is also not spared from the people’s demand to have
their basic rights protected from the effects of an economy in crisis.

The same scenario in Italy, as Italians are losing jobs to weakened economy. Much anger is felt across countries in Southeast Asia as price of goods rise as a direct effect of the oil price hike.

Philosophy tells us the importance of politics to protect the lives of the people.

Politics takes form of a mandate given based on social contract of the majority to leaders in their quest to protect the rights of the people, to drive prosperity in their countries so that living conditions continue to improve from time to time and that the people can live in contentment and peace.

In reading Nizam Al-Mulk’s The Book of Goverment or Rules for Kings, one is increasingly aware of the importance of having accountable leadership for the very reason that politics must exist.

One needs to remember that if politics is used for only personal gains to obtain wealth will not benefit in the long run as it could backfire on such leaders as the people would rise against them.

It should, therefore, Nizam’s book be made a reference to all leaders and those interested to immerse themselves in politics.

In that, for as long as politics and the business of doing politics continue to evolve, its main aim cannot be cast aside – politics exist to serve and protect the people!

Perception of Politics vs. Trust?

Crisis of perception often occur due to events involving political actors. This is exemplified by the 6-year imprisonment of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim for sodomy, which was said to a by-product of Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad’s political conspiracy.

However, it is imperative that political perception must be corrected by channelling the correct information to the people. What happens if the information fails to correct the people’s perception?

Then this is no longer the crisis of perception, instead, it has become an issue of trust.

The crisis of the peoples’ trust is the crux of the problem, when even given much explanation about the issue does not dissuade them from continuing to believe that there is a political conspiracy afoot.

Hence, how does one manage political perception in this day and era? Media is the available forum to correct the people’s perception.

In order to play an effective role, the media must maintain its avenue as the source of correct information.

The question lies with the current mainstream media – is it a viable source of information?

Today’s emergence of blogs provide an immediate challenge to the ability of conservative media channels to provide information to the people regarding many issues.

Come March, as the new leadership takes over, this aspect must be given utmost priority. Media practioners can no longer adopt the World War II mental paradigm.

Those chosen must lead the nation’s top media organisations towards an efficient way to “deal” with the people’s trust.

Another question arises – are the current practices of journalism adequate and suitable to deal with the explosion of the technology of communication and information?

Political Alliances in Malaysia

Racial diversity in Malaysia is a great influence on the politics of the nation. There is no party which successfully gained 50% of Parliamentary seats without considering this major factor, making it compulsory for alliance formation in Malaysian politics.

After Independence, the Malaysian government cannot be formed by any political party in isolation.

This issue becomes the forefront of the political upheaval in Perak which witnesses the fall of Pakatan Rakyat’s rule after the ‘hopping party’ incident.

As far as political alliance formation practices go in Malaysia, without a doubt, Barisan Nasional (BN) has stronger foundations as compared to the opposition’s set up.

The success of this alliance lies within its voluntary policy. Even though none of the component parties obtains absolute gains, partial gains make up for losses while at the same time, such alliances becomes a mechanism for conflict avoidance.

Jeremy Boissevain’s study in Friends of Friends: Network, Manipulators and Coalition, 1974, observes: All of us have problems which we at least attempt to resolve via friends and friends-of-friends with whom we may even form temporary alliances.

Boissevain makes another interesting observation: Everywhere people compete with each other and search for allies to help them achieve their goals. People everywhere thus engaged in politics, for they compete directly, via friends and friends-of-friends for valued scarce resources, for prizes which form the important goals of their lives.

The observation explains why the ties within the Pakatan Rakyat is so brittle. The example of Perak has illustrated that the Pakatan Rakyat leadership paid a heavy price for playing the ‘blame game’ after its political representatives hopped parties.

This also points to the fact that between DAP, PAS, and PKR, the differences of their political agenda is miles apart.