Today I feature a friend, blogger, renowned columnist and civil rights activist NATHANIEL TAN with his splendid view/wish/dream of a better Government in our beloved Malaysia.
Now if only someone can translate this post to Bahasa Malaysia, that would be great! A long post perhaps, but a must read for all agents of change for a better future for all Malaysians.
The future is now.It's time to throw out all the old ways of doing politics – and spearhead a new democratic movement driven by next-generation ideas.https://www.thestar.com.my/opinion/columnists/all-the-pieces-matter/2020/07/26/the-future-is-nowIT'S happening.I don't think there'll be any announcements around the corner, but it feels like things are cooking. Last week I wrote that Malaysia's future hinges on breaking with our past. Today, I hope to describe more carefully exactly what that might look like. I believe that the many problems with government stem from the way existing political parties are structured, and prevailing political culture. I for one am tired of trying to influence politicians from the outside. They don't listen. The older generation seldom does. It's not something either of us should lose sleep over. Significantly changing the way the government behaves requires being in government, but changing political culture can be done by founding our own democratic movement. I use the terms “democratic movement” and “movers” in this article to describe a movement and organisation that intends to contest in elections under a common logo, but otherwise leaves behind many, many aspects and characteristics of political parties and politicians as we know them. I'm certain many will say these ideas are hopelessly naive and impractical, but to paraphrase The Man of La Mancha, perhaps madness is seeing the world as it is, and not how it should be. To say ideals are impossible to reach is to give up before starting, and to hand Malaysia back to those who have bled it dry. We are all fallible humans, but that is no excuse to avoid building a strong moral compass – one that we can turn back to, even when we go astray. Coming back to the question at hand. If political culture and structures are indeed the root of the problem, then we must be clear about exactly how, and how we can do things differently. For today, I will sketch out three main areas: the role of core values and ideology; internal structures; and replacing the zero sum approach to elections.
Old: Current major political parties here are effectively built around race, religion, individuals, or some combination thereof. In the era where Umno and the Barisan Nasional model were dominant, racial narratives driven by race-based parties were like a massive center of gravity which reshaped other political parties around them. Even parties that were not founded on racial ideology like DAP and Gerakan started being shaped fundamentally by the race game. This has become coded into their DNA to the point where changing how these parties operate and are perceived is fast becoming near impossible. If a party exists for the wrong reasons, it can never go in the right direction.
New: A democratic movement should be founded on clearly articulated shared principles and values. It should be a movement where the slogans are not just slogans, but something felt deep in each mover's heart. A democratic movement is not about'defending the rights' of any one particular subset of Malaysians; it must be about defending all our rights together. A democratic movement is not about making person X or person Y Prime Minister. People will come and go, but the quest is not about individuals; it is about ideals-and ideals endure. The first task then is to gather the right group of movers, and to sit down to hammer out exactly what those shared ideals are-no matter how long and difficult the process.
Old: Almost all political parties have similar structures. There are Presidents, Deputy Presidents, Vice Presidents, Women's and Youth Wings, and so on. People invest a lot of money into winning these'lucrative' posts because a Deputy or Vice President of a political party can claim that their seniority entitles them to become say Education or Defense Minister. Such ministers control massive budgets, which they often use to feed a patronage network within their parties, in order to ensure that they have the internal support to remain Deputy or Vice President. This is an extremely toxic cycle of money politics and feudal patronage that ensures that the Education or Defense minister is expert in neither Education nor Defense, but an expert in playing party politics. This single phenomenon and the ripples it creates may in fact be the biggest problem in our current system and structure of politics.
New: A democratic movement should only have functional posts, where internal competition is minimised. Instead of posts that are generally non-functional and exist to unproductively indicate rank and hierarchy, there should only be posts with specific, necessary functions and portfolios. The central committee that decides most day to day operations of a democratic movement can consist of a small group of individuals of essentially the same'rank', who have clear SOPs for resolving differences of opinion. Should these be designed well, then in the context of contesting elections, the only question that remains is to identify a candidate for Prime Minister (since this is unavoidable in our current electoral system). On this note, in a democratic movement driven by individuals that have bonded and built enough trust in one another over time by struggling for the same ideals, it won't matter whether person A or person B is chosen to be the leader, because we all are committed to the same goals. Besides functional portfolios such as communications, finance, and so on, another innovative idea is to found a movement that has something akin to a shadow cabinet right from the start. Shadow ministries need not be led by individuals alone, but can be led by committees of competent experts, from which the movement will commit to selecting future ministers from. The idea is to demonstrate a seriousness about new ideas for governance, rather than treating ministerships as political rewards to be doled out by the Prime Minister alone in a last minute process devoid of any transparency.
Old: In our current system, politicians are incentivised to tear down and demonise their political opponents at every turn, no matter what. This creates a toxic, adversarial, and most importantly, counterproductive zero-sum political atmosphere, where it is always a free for all season to'whack' one another. Indeed, the words 'partisan' and 'party' appear most likely to be related to the word “apart” – cementing the notion that old politics is in essence about divisiveness. Does it always have to be that way?
New: A democratic movement should recognise that everyone in Malaysia has a part to play. Yes, we may compete against one another in elections, but that does not mean we should spend every waking hour trying to 'kill off' one another. We could instead use that time and energy to talk about how all involved can do their part in contributing to a better Malaysia. I expect politicians will scoff and laugh, believing this to be impossible. As the saying goes, however, (wrongly attributed to Nelson Mandela)-it is always impossible, until it is done. I believe a young, fresh breed of democratic movers can move beyond this blind partisanship that overrides everything else, and practice a new way of doing things – one that doesn't involve tearing down future electoral opponents at every opportunity. All the above ideas will strike many as hopelessly naive. As the saying goes (correctly attributed to John Lennon), you may say I'm a dreamer. Whether or not those of us working on these ideas are in fact the only ones will pretty much depend on you.
New: A democratic movement should be founded on clearly articulated shared principles and values. It should be a movement where the slogans are not just slogans, but something felt deep in each mover's heart. A democratic movement is not about'defending the rights' of any one particular subset of Malaysians; it must be about defending all our rights together. A democratic movement is not about making person X or person Y Prime Minister. People will come and go, but the quest is not about individuals; it is about ideals-and ideals endure. The first task then is to gather the right group of movers, and to sit down to hammer out exactly what those shared ideals are-no matter how long and difficult the process.
Old: Almost all political parties have similar structures. There are Presidents, Deputy Presidents, Vice Presidents, Women's and Youth Wings, and so on. People invest a lot of money into winning these'lucrative' posts because a Deputy or Vice President of a political party can claim that their seniority entitles them to become say Education or Defense Minister. Such ministers control massive budgets, which they often use to feed a patronage network within their parties, in order to ensure that they have the internal support to remain Deputy or Vice President. This is an extremely toxic cycle of money politics and feudal patronage that ensures that the Education or Defense minister is expert in neither Education nor Defense, but an expert in playing party politics. This single phenomenon and the ripples it creates may in fact be the biggest problem in our current system and structure of politics.
New: A democratic movement should only have functional posts, where internal competition is minimised. Instead of posts that are generally non-functional and exist to unproductively indicate rank and hierarchy, there should only be posts with specific, necessary functions and portfolios. The central committee that decides most day to day operations of a democratic movement can consist of a small group of individuals of essentially the same'rank', who have clear SOPs for resolving differences of opinion. Should these be designed well, then in the context of contesting elections, the only question that remains is to identify a candidate for Prime Minister (since this is unavoidable in our current electoral system). On this note, in a democratic movement driven by individuals that have bonded and built enough trust in one another over time by struggling for the same ideals, it won't matter whether person A or person B is chosen to be the leader, because we all are committed to the same goals. Besides functional portfolios such as communications, finance, and so on, another innovative idea is to found a movement that has something akin to a shadow cabinet right from the start. Shadow ministries need not be led by individuals alone, but can be led by committees of competent experts, from which the movement will commit to selecting future ministers from. The idea is to demonstrate a seriousness about new ideas for governance, rather than treating ministerships as political rewards to be doled out by the Prime Minister alone in a last minute process devoid of any transparency.
Old: In our current system, politicians are incentivised to tear down and demonise their political opponents at every turn, no matter what. This creates a toxic, adversarial, and most importantly, counterproductive zero-sum political atmosphere, where it is always a free for all season to'whack' one another. Indeed, the words 'partisan' and 'party' appear most likely to be related to the word “apart” – cementing the notion that old politics is in essence about divisiveness. Does it always have to be that way?
New: A democratic movement should recognise that everyone in Malaysia has a part to play. Yes, we may compete against one another in elections, but that does not mean we should spend every waking hour trying to 'kill off' one another. We could instead use that time and energy to talk about how all involved can do their part in contributing to a better Malaysia. I expect politicians will scoff and laugh, believing this to be impossible. As the saying goes, however, (wrongly attributed to Nelson Mandela)-it is always impossible, until it is done. I believe a young, fresh breed of democratic movers can move beyond this blind partisanship that overrides everything else, and practice a new way of doing things – one that doesn't involve tearing down future electoral opponents at every opportunity. All the above ideas will strike many as hopelessly naive. As the saying goes (correctly attributed to John Lennon), you may say I'm a dreamer. Whether or not those of us working on these ideas are in fact the only ones will pretty much depend on you.
NATHANIEL TAN is a strategic communications consultant. He hopes the human rights of Md Rayhan Kabir will be fully respected, and can be reached at nat@engage.my. The views expressed here are solely his own and do not necessarily reflect those of Sunday Star .
1 comment:
Spot on. If only zorro was alive.
Post a Comment