Except for the World News Section, the Borneo Post edition yesterday was full of news and related to the upcoming Malaysian General Election, and at the risk of being considered unpatriotic, the paper appear to have been turned into nothing more than campaign leaflets and newsbits of the ruling Barisan National.
And the Malaysian TV programmes, especially the local news - are no different. Every single nuance of the newsreader lines, almost unabashedly pro government in style and substance. As with the print media, the electronic media in the country has mobilised to become the most effective campaigner for the ruling government.
As apolitical as I am, its hard not to think about the possible long term impact of this specific facet of the country's election culture to the development of democracy in terms of structure and consciousness of the population. To keep the intellectual challenge to the minimum: the impact will be bad and good, positive and negative.
Next to the word negative: I have the phrase "stunted democary" flashing through my mind. In every election, the Opposition appear to have been muted and clueless by the massive avalanche of election-time "news" story. I find it hard to believe that the Opposition is simply irrelevant on every election. Even in the most matured democracies, the political landscape always have spots where correction is necessary for further development of democracy.
Without looking for blame and/or hypothesizing the cause for the state of affairs, I think the ultimate negative impact is for the Malaysian democratic growth to be stunted (remain in its cocoon), and be left behind while other nations grow theirs and become more adept at positioning themselve to benefit from the changing world. Even in a one-party system in some part of the world, one can see how the vigorous political debate from within the party, appear to create ideas that produce tangible results.
It takes some collective effort, independent of opposition politics, to nudge a young democracy away from its "groupthink" syndrome which can hurt itself in the long run.
To some extent, the phenomenon of NGOs appear to fill the void (of creating substantive public discussions), where traditional political party fail. But because NGOs have specific agendas, it does not have sufficient appeal to permeate the consciousness of the population at large. The sum of all NGOs does not make a coherent platform that would be in a position to correct or force a democracy that have been dominated by a single entity to change course.
From what happen in other parts of the world, it became obvious that other agents of creative/destructive change to a democracy is of course, the foreign or external media. But for the most part: its all to clear that external interference is almost with certainty doom to fail for a long time, with predictable impact - before it can become a force for good.
So, the original point should be rephrased: it takes some collective effort of Malaysians themselves to nudge the young democracy from its groupthink syndrome and to pry it out from its feel good cocoon, lest it become too comfortable and stop growing. From this standpoint, it is not enough to exercise the right to vote; Malaysians should also make it their responsibility to help the Malaysian democracy grow to new heights. There are just so many issues, both internal and external that have not make their way into public forum. The media appear satistify to satiate the population with positive inidcations of current and future economic development alone as barometer of good and positive development in the country : the challenge to the supposedly highly educated population is to look at all the issues, including (of course) future economic challenge from rivals in the region and how to grow, if not protect the current quality of life. Most importantly, perhaps Malaysian from all walks of life, should make it their responsibility to try to listen to alternative political views, and to participate in the dissection of ideas and issues.
So much for the negative impact. Without a doubt: there are many good positives that can come from handing out absolute majority to the ruling political part(ies) to continue to administer a young country, such as Malaysia. Stability and continuity in development programmes is one of the fruits of retaining the same administrators and policymakes within the context of public policy. And yes, foreign businessmen, will rather work with an imperfect existing government, rather than having to embed exit strategy as additional risk factors (and cost) in their investment. Even if the opposition were to espouse equally market-friendly economic policies, businessmen will most certainly not want to take chances if their other guaranteed better investment destination. On the bureauratic front, not doubt continuity will allow public spending projects to continue unabated - and I reckon, it would be easier to contain the final cost and completion time of the project. Most importantly, perhaps - all stakeholders, in a multi-religious, multi-ethnic, geographically-diversed, that characterise the Malaysian electorates, will know what to expect on post-election day : that the existing institutions that grant each their piece of the Malaysian dream - will continue to be maintained; and the social contract remains intact. Post election day: the Malays get some of what their struggle is about, the Indians get the same more or less piece of what the fractured community wants, the Chinese may manage to advance their cause to prosper as Malaysian Chinese, and the rest of the indigenous groups in Sabah and Sarawak get assurance of continuing protection for their enshrined rights - and this simple fact is probably at the apex of all Malaysian dreams.
Unfortunately, the choice between following the path of creative "negatives" (vigorous public discourse of the issues) to the path of assured positives: has not yet become a free choice at all, or that there is no conscious effort to make the general election into a time of meaningful reckoning, not of the choices that need to be make but at the very least, of the deliberate effort to advance democracy forward. I suppose its OK if this blog will never be read by the intended audience (or anyone) : at least privately, I feel the carthasis of having exercise my right to think and blog about the Malaysian media during the upcoming General Election.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Friday, February 1, 2008
Kenya 2008
It was only yesterday that Kenya was a peaceful country and good references were made to it from many sectors of the world of commerce, culture and politics. Besides Nigeria, South Africa, Egypt, and Ghana - in the 80s and 90s - one will also likely find students from Kenya - in any college in the mid West. The country was serious about developing their human capital.
Thus the breakdown in law and order after an election to elect the country's President is surprising : one would expect such a vicious outbreak of violence to occur in somewhat less developed democracy, where the phrase "nation building" has just started to be hailed across hailers, radios and TVs - but not in the beacon of African democracy - Kenya !
Reminiscent of Rwanda: the breakdown appear to have a tribal warlordism, and perhaps along Sudan fault-lines, it also has religio-tribal tinge to it. Political awakenings, along religious and tribal lines - factors which are below the surface of electioneering - has got to be the dominant cause for the civil conflict at this time. If the current problem is not address to the root cause into the anthropological realm, the same conflict will rise again and again in future generations.
The simplest explanation for the vicious violence; if CNN were to be believed - is simply that Kenyan political landscape - similar to most third world country - is still dominated along tribal/race. And when the key institutions break down - in this case, the election commission - the tribes/race/religious group, throw out their civilised struggle in 3-piece suits to hip-hop head gear and torn blue-jeans street brawls and machete wielding street soldiers with spontaneous war cries coming from the deepest recess of human raw emotions.
If it can happen in Kenya, and quite recently in Iraq - and most brutally in Rwanda, and one can also point to Sudan: how can it be prevented from happening in other seemingly peaceful and progressive countries ? Is the inevitable political awakenings of minorities; which are often brutally suppressed by the all too familiar tyranny of the majority in any emerging democracy -will also inevitably lead to a convulescent event - before the flaw in the system of governance can be corrected ? New countries (less than 50 years old) which were ex-colonies of the western powers - were carved out more by geography than natural tribal regions (look at Congo, Rwanda, etc) so its fair to say the stability of such countries are held together by fragile threads of the need to co-exist, or else the stability would have been imposed by strong-willed dictator or an oligarchical politics of coalitions.
In the short term, the fires erupting in Kenya need to be put out urgently so the world can be spare of the painful concience - that was Rwanda. In the long term, the powers and the influentials should really look at the rights of minorities and tribes who can easily be marginalised by the ruling majority. If its difficult to champion individual rights as enshrine in the Human Rights Declaration, it should not be more difficult to establish similar charter for minorities - or the world will risk more implosions in other parts of the world after Kenya ?
If the Rwandan tragedy does not become a wakeup call to action for the intellectual/political elites of the world , consider this: Kenya must have hundereds of tribes which could have provided the world with a rich tapestry of human experience if the tribes language and culture are encouraged to flourish by the other Kenyan majority but instead, and lets be honest about it: Kenya ascent as a major tourist destination and the subsequent embrace of democratic model where votes and US$ alone shape the country's destiny - its rich tapestry of cultures has atrophied to the extent that even street brawlers appear to be wearing torn-jeans and bandana head gear !
Now at the risk of offending many: I can extend Kenya to just about any other countries including my own - Malaysia: and point to the danger , or at least the regrets that future generations will experience when - a century from now, hundereds of unique tribal custom and languages would be lost - and every Malaysian would have become "one with the world" and exhibit no other uniqueness of identity other inherited physical features. And if truth be told: for once I absolutely abhor the oft quoted slogan of harmony and tolerance, as basis for social compact: Malaysians and Kenyans, and Americans - should celebrate the diversity in peoples - instead of "barely" tolerating their differences. Then and only then, perhaps - the likes of tragedy that was Rwanda, and potentially Kenya - will permanently be avoided at the root cause, below sloganeering and electioneering !
For a Just World,
Meramat (Feb 2008)
Thus the breakdown in law and order after an election to elect the country's President is surprising : one would expect such a vicious outbreak of violence to occur in somewhat less developed democracy, where the phrase "nation building" has just started to be hailed across hailers, radios and TVs - but not in the beacon of African democracy - Kenya !
Reminiscent of Rwanda: the breakdown appear to have a tribal warlordism, and perhaps along Sudan fault-lines, it also has religio-tribal tinge to it. Political awakenings, along religious and tribal lines - factors which are below the surface of electioneering - has got to be the dominant cause for the civil conflict at this time. If the current problem is not address to the root cause into the anthropological realm, the same conflict will rise again and again in future generations.
The simplest explanation for the vicious violence; if CNN were to be believed - is simply that Kenyan political landscape - similar to most third world country - is still dominated along tribal/race. And when the key institutions break down - in this case, the election commission - the tribes/race/religious group, throw out their civilised struggle in 3-piece suits to hip-hop head gear and torn blue-jeans street brawls and machete wielding street soldiers with spontaneous war cries coming from the deepest recess of human raw emotions.
If it can happen in Kenya, and quite recently in Iraq - and most brutally in Rwanda, and one can also point to Sudan: how can it be prevented from happening in other seemingly peaceful and progressive countries ? Is the inevitable political awakenings of minorities; which are often brutally suppressed by the all too familiar tyranny of the majority in any emerging democracy -will also inevitably lead to a convulescent event - before the flaw in the system of governance can be corrected ? New countries (less than 50 years old) which were ex-colonies of the western powers - were carved out more by geography than natural tribal regions (look at Congo, Rwanda, etc) so its fair to say the stability of such countries are held together by fragile threads of the need to co-exist, or else the stability would have been imposed by strong-willed dictator or an oligarchical politics of coalitions.
In the short term, the fires erupting in Kenya need to be put out urgently so the world can be spare of the painful concience - that was Rwanda. In the long term, the powers and the influentials should really look at the rights of minorities and tribes who can easily be marginalised by the ruling majority. If its difficult to champion individual rights as enshrine in the Human Rights Declaration, it should not be more difficult to establish similar charter for minorities - or the world will risk more implosions in other parts of the world after Kenya ?
If the Rwandan tragedy does not become a wakeup call to action for the intellectual/political elites of the world , consider this: Kenya must have hundereds of tribes which could have provided the world with a rich tapestry of human experience if the tribes language and culture are encouraged to flourish by the other Kenyan majority but instead, and lets be honest about it: Kenya ascent as a major tourist destination and the subsequent embrace of democratic model where votes and US$ alone shape the country's destiny - its rich tapestry of cultures has atrophied to the extent that even street brawlers appear to be wearing torn-jeans and bandana head gear !
Now at the risk of offending many: I can extend Kenya to just about any other countries including my own - Malaysia: and point to the danger , or at least the regrets that future generations will experience when - a century from now, hundereds of unique tribal custom and languages would be lost - and every Malaysian would have become "one with the world" and exhibit no other uniqueness of identity other inherited physical features. And if truth be told: for once I absolutely abhor the oft quoted slogan of harmony and tolerance, as basis for social compact: Malaysians and Kenyans, and Americans - should celebrate the diversity in peoples - instead of "barely" tolerating their differences. Then and only then, perhaps - the likes of tragedy that was Rwanda, and potentially Kenya - will permanently be avoided at the root cause, below sloganeering and electioneering !
For a Just World,
Meramat (Feb 2008)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)