Are national income totally belongs to you?

Have you ever heard this phrase? "Ini pemberian 'gula-gula pilihanraya' dari kerajaan!", or similarly, "Memang kerajaan kena bagi, itu hak rakyat." Well these phrases has become some sort like a standard issue response especially from the opposition-inclined persons. Basically they still need to negate everything that sounds good from the government even though it might benefited them back.

In discussing further about the 'rights' of the people, is it true that the government is obligated all the time to return the income to the people? To be fair, the answer is true and not true. It is only TRUE if the people are all committed to contribute their effort, time and money to make sure that the government is strong, united and full of resources. When this particular condition is met, then it is the responsibility of the government representatives to work hard and achieve what the people has aspired in order to make sure that they got their deserved returns. Good examples can be seen in some highly modernized countries such as Norway, Denmark, Germany etc. where the people contributed significantly to the government chests through taxes and business gains, in return for the first class facilities and services. But the question remains, how far one prepares to contribute first to the government?

This leads to the answer of NOT TRUE when the government and the people cannot work together for the benefit of each other. How can one expect the government to provide cash aide when majority of them falsify their personal and business tax reports or even evade it altogether? And how one can enjoy the prosperity of a strong economy when one themselves trying hard to condemn it everyday? It is only a miracle when certain government could pull off and continue to provide good healthcare and education systems, national security plus aide for the needy in an environment where their own people continues to be as skeptical, (but still enjoying those perks at their free will) thinking its a God given rights to them!

The reality is that, there are only THREE basic rights entitled for the people as we have discussed before i.e. the rights of free speech, the rights of privacy and the rights to survive. What many believed as their rights to get monetary perks every time from the government they themselves oppose is just a mixed up beliefs that resulted from constant digestion of skewed political propaganda. Instead they should be grateful that the government is not inclined to distribute the national income to only to their supporters, as in the case of some state governments in Malaysia. Even to get covered by an insurance, we need to pay up front significant amount of premium right?

So let's put back our perspective in a correct dimension. Just like insurance, if one expect the government to provide the best for them, then one must prepare to 'invest' the best to government first. Sounds fair right?

  

Power and Choice in Democracy in Selangor: When the majority lost their power because of their own choice.

Politic is all about choice and power. People has the power to choose their representative or leader, and those who are elected, have the power to choose next course of action or rules to be implemented. It is only a matter of whether the people is making the correct choice of leaders to be given powers with. 

History has shown that people tend to make mistakes when they are given the power to choose their own leader. In political science this is considered as one of the three main problems in democracy. It has always been debated whether the choice of selecting and electing leaders should be given to all levels of people or constricted to only few who are considered knowledgeable and eligible.

The same thing goes in Malaysia as well. The people, especially the voters should not get frustrated or angry by the rules chosen by their elected leaders, as they themselves have given them the powers to do so. Whether it is considered as for the collective good or not, they have to bear this unforeseen consequences for the next five years. People should know better whether they have voted using their emotions or careful considerations beforehand.

Lets consider as what happens in Selangor now. On one part the MB is adamant that the beer festival should be allowed despite huge protests from the majority Muslims in the state. On the other hand, the MB also allowed the decision to tear down houses belonging to Muslim families in a mosque compound without much hesitant. This is where the Selangor MB has chooses to exercise the power according to the pressure around him; which clearly emanated from his majority non muslims allies. Although one might argue that the Selangor MB has won the elections because of the support of majority Muslims in the state and should diligently serves them, but it is not the case now. Clearly, the power of choice that the majority Selangor Muslims have during the last election has been turned against them.

Fairly, some might also argue that the PM is employing the power in choosing the rules that are not the choice of people, e.g. GST and the abolishment of subsidies. But one must be able to fully understand the meaning of collective good as well as the lying motives behind those decisions. If it meant to tax more from the rich to help the needy and subsidize more on public healthcare system, national security and education, then we should all go for it. What actually happen is that, political perceptions are being deployed to confuse many to make the correct comparison between these issues.

But then, there is no point of finger pointing and blame game now. Again, we are the one who choose to give them the powers to make the rules.     

Divide and rule: How to rule majority when you are a minority.

Democracy is simple. The one who got the majority supports wins. But it gets tricky when you want to win the majority, but not getting support from them because of the difference in ethnic and religion.. This is where the strategy of divide and conquer applies. You know you cannot win solid majority but you can try splitting them apart to small groups, and thus make your minority support become a solid majority and eventually win the elections.  

This is why one should never get frustrated when our great statesman, Tun Mahathir is cooperating with DAP right now. Although it has been proven many times before, including by the great Tun M and Anwar Ibrahim themselves, that DAP has the tendency of anti Islam and Malay supremacy policy; we must put ourselves in their shoes. In some way, we should be analyzing why these great former leaders tend to please the DAP when they are not with the federal government of BN anymore.

What many people perceived as the treachery act of Tun M on behalf of Malays, we would like to think the otherwise. Malays should realize that Tun M is actually being bullied and taken revenge on; just look at how a frail old Malay man being dragged here and there by those chauvinists and was make to admit that DAP is not Malay-o-phobia and Islamophobia. This is quite a record because for 22 years, nobody in UMNO or BN, government and Malaysia for that matter, can dictate what Tun M going to say and do; yet DAP able to pull it in no time at all. Sadly, most Malays still blinded by the never ending gutter politics among themselves thus let their own great leader degrading. Tun M is actually in subtle way showing to the Malays who actually holds the power in opposition pack and presenting the choice more vivid for those who can think.

Nevertheless, some of the Malay opposition supporters still has the ball to accuse the government of mistreating Tun M. How is this even possible when Tun M is being used as the DAP's mic around the country to white wash their chauvinists image without single interference from the government? Yes we admit that some of the BN cyber troopers are well above the rationality line when they attacking Tun M; but yet it is understandable that it maybe because of the deep frustrations when their father mentor went away to the opposite side. Still, as many has been said before, those vicious attacks from the BN machinery should not give even a minor dent to Tun M compared to what he did for himself aligning with DAP. 

In a liberal democratic country such as Malaysia, we should never stop other people from expressing their personal political beliefs, for what ever reason; if we ever call ourselves as the defenders of democracy. The same goes to Tun M. We should give him what ever legal space for him to express himself. Let the people judge themselves on his actions and lets stop all this personal attacks and name calling. The same goes with the tactics of peudo-events i.e. digging up past dark secrets during Tun M administration. Like what we have revealed before, employing pseudo-events as political communication strategies may greatly backfired. We are actually providing to the people more reasons not to vote for the BN government by telling them that past BN administration has a lot of corrupt cover up practices.    

To be fair, just let Tun M goes the same path as what Gerakan, PAS, and some pakatan leaders has experienced before, if that what he chooses. Sometimes the other way of history learning is by repeating the mistakes. Who knows Tun M may actually doing the kamikaze maneuver for one last time?   

Deploying peudo-events in political communication strategies: A good move?

Pseudo-events.

Pseudo-events is one aspect of political communication that occurs when information supposedly concealed by certain politician is being leaked or revealed. Living in an age of social media today, most politician tend to resort to this kind of communication in order to seek attention and gain prominence. Whether we realise it or not, we have been anticipated in pseudo-events communication in some degrees.

For example, when Pandan MP revealed his donation account details, he hoped to get appraisal among the public for transparency, at least among the politicians, including from his own party. But then much more leaked information has been revealed by his opponent that paints perception that he is using NGO to justify payment into his own company. In some sense, his pseudo-events strategy has backfired and he might face investigation.

The same case can also be noted against a politician who suddenly held an emotional press conference (to get positive media exposure, of course) revealing that he has turned down Oxford and RM5 million bribe so that he could contest in the next general election and subsequently save Malaysia. But this pseudo-events tactic has backfired even before his tears dried up, when the opponent revealed the discrepencies in his own Oxford Uni offer letter. Not only his communication objectives has not been met, he also has open up opportunities for his opponent to attack and labelling him even more.

More classic example of pseudo-events gone wrong can be dug up involving both political divide in Malaysia. Though how tempting it might have to reveal ones secret, just remember that we might get the whole things wrong and eventually shoot on our own foot back. So it is better to contemplate further before we decide to leak the enemy's darkest secret.

Restoring Fairness: Minority in Malaysia marginalized?

What is deemed fair in the concept of democracy? Additional resource for the people who needs more or allowing advantages for those who contribute more? For example, should the government help the Malays more because they need more to reach social mobility, or should the government focus the public fund to the minority rich who (may or may not) contributed more in taxes? This dilemma has sparked a lot of debates because the definition of fairness is still vague until now.

Basically, we can actually measure whether we get a fair treatment from the government based on certain rights we enjoy. People can easily campaign that they are being marginalized, but before we started the complaining, we ought to consider these three basic rights of fairness:

1) Rights of free speech: Lets compare ourselves to certain people in a specific country, lets say the Rohingya in Myanmar. When we claim that the govrenment is unfair to us or our people, aren't we the one who are enjoying the most free speech rights in the world right now? We can freely curse, name calling, cyber bullying, photoshoping the government leaders without having the fear of the consequences. Now lets try do the same in Myanmar or maybe even Singapore. The Rohingyas are not only deprived of the free speech, but they also are being suppressed because of their beliefs. Are the minority in Malaysia experienced the same thing? To think that the rights of free speech in Malaysia is worse, then why was the Bersih movement able to conquer the streets of KL and disrupting normal weekends for five times with zero casualties?

2) Rights to survive: This is simply mean that we can live our lives freely without having the scare of government police or soldiers suddenly come crashing into your house and kill your whole family without any reason. Sadly, this rights also do not apply for people of Rohingya in Myanmar. Not only that they are not recognized as the legal citizens of Myanmar, but they are facing the mass murder by the majority Buddhist or government police and army everyday. This does not happen in Malaysia although some minorities believed they are being oppressed by the government everyday.

3) Rights of privacy: If we can be cosy and do what we like in our own home/space without the interference of the government, then we are actually enjoying this rights. Just imagine the life of Rohingyas are constantly being harassed by the majority and Myanmar government; just because their looks and religion are different. Is the same happening to minority ethnic in Malaysia? The answer is big no as they not only enjoying their own private life but sometimes imposing it back to the majority.

We should always reflect on ourselves before we started complaining about the unfairness. Maybe it is because we are used to being unfair to others that we become selfish and self centered. We easily being swayed by the political propaganda of being treated unfairly or marginalized, when we actually the ones who enjoying and reaping much from the prosperity of the country. What we actually should do is to support the government efforts of helping restoring the fairness and basic rights in certain countries, while look at it beyond the scope of political party, race and religion. Who knows this policy might help liberalizing more democracy in the Malaysia, and eventually affect the policy of fairness for the minority as a whole.