by A KADIR JASINA KADIR JASINI was born in 1947 in Kedah. I came from a rice farming family. I have been a journalist since 1969. I am the Editor-in-Chief of magazine publishing company, Berita Publishing Sdn Bhd. I was Group Editor NST Sdn Bhd and Group Editor-in-Chief of NSTP Bhd between 1988 and 2000. I write fortnightly column Other Thots in the Malaysian Business magazine. Books: Biar Putih Tulang (1998), Other Thots Opinions & Observations 1992-2001 (2001), The Wings of an Eagle (2003), Mencari Dugalia Huso (2006), Damned That Thots (2006), Blogger (2006), PRU 2008-Rakyat Sahut Cabaran (2008), Komedi & Tragedi-Latest in Contemporary Malaysian Politics (2009) and Membangun Bangsa dengan Pena (2009).
Why some political parties lost the plot Filth of UMNO and Evil of MAHATHIR never ever changes it can hide, camouflage itself, but will never deliver benefits.That's what is happening to the land of all virtues and 7% growth rate. The nation which boasts of a great functional democracy, looks dwarfed before countries like Myanmar and Zimbabwe .
With a quivered lip and a smile that can't be hidden, they can say, oh my God, this is you? Your journalists, your ministers and your judges phew!! Defeat is the distance between a bedtime story and a wake-up call. The former starts with Once upon a time and lulls the voter to sleep. The second is an energiser that addresses a fresh dawn.Three political parties have become victims of their own success: their narrative has run its course, and they have not been able to find a! further chapter to their saga.The fear of "revenge killings" is so deep that the politicians, otherwise so vocal in demanding a probe into many other scandals, are keeping their mouths shut, least a bruised journalist take on them at "an appropriate time".
Just see the grandeur of our scandals: THE UMNO STORY is the simplest: the fairies have abandoned its fairy tale. It began as the party of LIBERAL MUSLIM ELITES WITH THEIR KETUAAN MELAYU The robust economic and social resettlement of the dispossessed, evident by the 70s, paradoxically, liberated them from the party which helped them. After the high-drama blip of the ANWAR IBRAHIM SAGA the UMNO reinvented itself as a champion of a psychological rather than an economic need.
Najibs Lucky Number
ON his part, the Prime Minister, Mohd Najib Abdul Razak, has to be supremely confident and 100 per cent sure that the BN has recovered to think of an early general elections.
Number 11 is said to be Mohd Najibs lucky number, hence the widespread prediction that he will hold the GE sometime next year.
If he holds the GE next year, this will be the shortest Parliament in history. The current Parliament is just over three years.
Unless he is so very sure that the BN will do better, he is taking an unnecessary risk. On the other hand, waiting for the full term may also pose a danger as the economy could worsen and his transformation plans may not produce the expected results.
So, with the mainstream media and friendly pollsters giving him a high mark for popularity and performance, Mohd Najib may be tempted to call for an early GE to obtain his very on mandate instead of continuing with the mediocre mandate of his predecessor.
Irrespective of when the election is held, one new equation has set in. This has to do with the sudden rise in the number of new voters, presumably you! ng first timers and the change in the media landscape.
There has been a big fall in the following of the pro-BN mainstream media in recent years. Coupled with the rising influence of the new media, it could take the battle for the hearts and minds of the voters to whole new level. Whoever is in control of the new media, could end up with the bonus.
read this related article The Mahatirfication of malaysian judisciary the exclusive story DONT THINK LIKE POLITICIANS, JUDGES TOLD BUT judges ARE state actorsWhat after this?Maysia is going through moral turmoil.Mahathir the man to be impeached for corruption and power abuse was rewarded to be de-factor chief who would supervise all corruption cases for ensuring punishment for the guilty is the one who himself is facing charges and when the voters asked the reason for this, the attorney general had the cheek to rebuff malaysiansin these words: "If impeccable integrity becomes an eligibility criterion, then all judicial and constitutional appointments will be open to question.
"Nothing. The media empire, the grand old houses of money and power protect each other. They have the platform to reach millions, but not a single one has tried to discuss it threadbare with the same savage ferocity they show in ripping apart their ideological opponents after having tasted a good French wine in a vineyard. They often use papers and channels for their political vendettas and abuse every other person they dislike without showing any civility. Then their outfits shut their doors for the other voices.
No, the censorship is not by the state. It's by the media houses. They invite guests to their shows and use them to have their own "super Oprah" image projected at the cost of the other voices and other viewpoints.New media journalists have been accused ! of wrong doing, including having inappropriate conversations with a corporate lobbyist and acting more like power brokers in recordings released as part of an investigation into an audacious multibillion swindle considered the biggest scandal to hit MalaysiaBy batsman
I was intrigued by Hakim Joes challenge to Karpal Singh whether he (Karpal) had witnessed PKR elections first hand and been around for the vote count. At the same breadth Joe claims that PKR electioneering culture is inherited from UMNO, so I wondered if Joe had witnessed UMNO elections first hand and been around for the vote count to make this claim.
Still, it seems to me that there is a strong link between organisational structure and culture. Looking at history, we see that with a New Army of about 2,500 men, Cromwell was able to defeat the English king with an army of over 7,000 men at Naseby. By comparison, more than 1500 years earlier, in a different part of the world, great armies of over 100,000 men on each side (sometimes with 600,000 men on just one side) regularly and frequently clashed in the battlefields of China.
Obviously it takes a lot more to raise an army of 100,000 men than an army of 2,500 men. Could this explain why Asians in general are so much more placid and obedient than Europeans and why Europeans are so much more aggressive and rebellious? It was built into the cultures respectively through organisational structure.
For the Europeans, it was relatively easy to defy your king while to the Chinese, defying the Emperor means one has to have enough money to raise armies of hundreds of thousands of men or one lost ones head.
The question is if the PKR is organizationally a carbon copy of UMNO, could n! ot its r omantic idealism in giving its members the direct vote the greatest folly and tragedy in Malaysian politics?
Obviously power in UMNO is based on patronage and is feudal in nature. Its organisational structure therefore reflects this. The big chieftain cannot deal with tens of thousands of members directly through patronage. He needs to depend on sub-chiefs and the sub-chiefs must depend on mini-chiefs through a whole chain of feudal patronage. In a sense that is why UMNO needs so many vice-presidents. (Perhaps if Joe had witnessed UMNO elections first hand, he might be able to provide more detail and information for us to consider.)
As a comparison, Red Indian chiefs can at most control 100 300 braves. To muster greater numbers for a big war, allied tribes speaking roughly the same language or dialect need to be persuaded to join the fight and a great war chief elected by the war council. This was a cumbersome affair and control and command was confusing and tedious. So it was that Red Indian culture remained tribal and eventually suffered genocide.
The early Republican Romans had essentially the same structure (with big landlords instead of big tribal chiefs), only more efficient and more structured, with laws and formal institutions to control things. Later power was invested in an emperor, but as with the Chinese dynasties, control fluctuated between periods of peace and plenty punctuated by war and instability every 100 - 300 years or so, the difference was that powerful Roman generals could seize power sometimes without even killing the overthrown emperor, while in China, the emperor and his whole clan and family had to be wiped out and another family installed.
So it is that a culture based on placidity and obedience must have murderous intent as its counterpart, while a cultur! e based on rebellion and defiance could also be humane and loyal to its laws.
So it is that when PKR gave members the direct vote, PKR chieftains panicked because they had not bothered to reach out to ordinary members directly. They were big chieftains without Red Indians. They depended on the mass media to create a reputation based on their deeds at the national level and often it was just publicity seeking comical deeds. It was hoped that such deeds could attract the support that they needed to stay in power.
The results of PKR elections may support this conclusion. The voter turnout was miserable, showing that the ordinary members had not been properly organized and motivated and that the big chieftains were divorced from the grassroots. Those that bothered to turn out were subjects of their patrons and since one patron cannot reach out to tens of thousands of subjects directly, only a handful turned out and since these were fanatically motivated to support their masters, fist fights depended on hair triggers such as suspected wrong procedures for elections. Ordinary members voting without undue critical interest should not be so emotionally charged. The middle men (sub and mini patrons) were missing from the equation.
In addition, we now have a fair idea of what happens during UMNO elections at the branch and divisional level - lots of open hanky panky happens, but since these are committed by the dominant patron, most voters close both eyes. The situation became tensed only when 2 dominant and mutually unfriendly patrons contested. Unfortunately PKR has taken into its ranks people unfamiliar with all this patronage and hanky-panky culture, so there was horror and unending questions on the smallest transgressions.
It seems to me that this is the only (maybe a bit long winded) explanatio! n for so many problems arising from so few voters in so short a time. If you can provide some sane alternative explanation, please do so to get us all out of our misery.
So it would seem to me that to change organisational structure at the stroke of a pen based on romantic ideals is a famous folly and a great tragedy without considering changes to be made in culture as well.
It would seem to me that PKR should not be accused of hanging on to obsolete feudal UMNO culture and traditions, but should instead be accused of being too wishy washy and too romantic in trying to move ahead too fast for its own good, even before organizing and preparing the grassroots for such a difficult and complex endeavour. (Such a mistake is not a rare one and can be found in all sorts of situations throughout history, one famous one would be the Cultural Revolution in China.)
Add in possible black ops sabotage and expert opinion forming by expensive consultants hiring hack writers, the situation can reach hysterical proportions which apparently it looks like it did.
It would seem to me that PKR big chiefs are trying to rule by decree rather than by painstaking organization at the grassroots level. Such a method of leadership assumes that the grassroots are able to react well and capably to such decrees. Obviously such an assumption is false.
So if you guys want to throw around wild accusations and sling around filthy mud, please, at least sling the right kind of mud. heeheehee