An interesting analysis of the recent UMNO general assembly by Nur Jazlan Mohamed, UMNO Supreme Council member, Member of Parliament, and considered to be one of the few progressive UMNO members. Its worth a read in full. Among others he raises a point which relates to my question to the Deputy Prime Minister.
…But his message doesn’t seem to resonate with the majority of the delegates and even among his bench of Supreme Council members who may have come to a conclusion that another event of racial and religious strife in the country is the best way to retain Malay power.
Arkong has not been forgotten in Chiang Mai.
Last night Saturday 10th December a silver pickup truck with a Bangkok number plate, and emblazoned on all sides with hand written signs in Thai such as Free Ahkong and Freedom in English at the front, was seen driving along the main street and around the Chiang Mai moat.
Are there any other public displays against 112 taking place elsewhere?
And by the way, I belong to the group that UMNO’s modus operandi would hate the most: I can read Chinese, Malay and English, and have access to media targeted at different communities. This is how we can see through the lies and incitement pitched against each other by the ruling parties in BN.
From the way you described DAP, I can speculate your prejudice, which could be typical of the UMNO leadership. That is, DAP = Chinese = self-centred community. Speaking as a Malaysian of Chinese decent, I find that kind of logic an insult and reflecting one who refuse to accept the reality that Malaysia and Malaysians have lived on for more than five decades! I identify myself more as ‘anak bangsa Malaysia’, which is against UMNO’s survival objective, than Chinese of the mainland China.
The question from Greg is not at all unintellectual. We all can look at the Perak state coup, the tolerance of the authorities (even tacit support from the Home Minister!) of various racial/religious incitements, including the infamous cow-head incident at Shah Alam, Najib’s own declaration of defending Putrajaya at all costs, etc.
If you are sincere, go ask your bosses to explain their actions and words. Malaysians are watching keenly if we will eventually lose the last piece of our remaining institution, our democracy.
How many cabinet meetings before PM Yingluck and her crew realized that more and more provinces at Northern Thailand were sinking . . . and one cubic meter of flood water could indeed drown her if she just sat still and not MOVE.
Were Yingluck and those PT ministers truely that dumb?
If not dumb, then the Yingluck cabinet were distracted, unfocused and just plain incompetent. That much was admitted by the FROC and by the Thai Agriculture Minister Theera to explain their confused scatterred too-late-too-little response to The Big Flood.
I mention the Sanyo (#47) above to highlight that if the Yingluck crew continue on with their bungling incompetent way, then the Sanyo exodus could definitely be a . . . . . flood.
Marzuki says: “No government will want to lose the election and become the opposition. But it is not for him or the party to decide. It’s the people. Once the people decide – whether BN will remain in power or become the opposition in the next election – all parties must accept the decision. Anyway, this is what democracy is all about. People decide through the ballot boxes and all parties accept the decision.” How does this claim sit with the UMNO-orchestrated royal overthrow of the duly elected government in Perak in 2009, by the denial of the then incumbent Mentri Besar of the opportunity that he sought (and to which by ordinary democratic constitutional theory he was entitled) to test his support either on the floor of the State Assembly or via a direct popular vote? It’s all unimpeachably democratic, provided you have a sufficiently flexible notion of the contested term “democracy”.
This was a good first cut dialogue. ANU should consider how we (UCSI University) can collaborate to extend the dialogue into other more meaningful fora. I was personally enlightened by the DPM’s command of English; much more polished than he has ever been! His was a good official version of what happened! It is also what is taught in history books. Nevertheless, those readers who want to understand May 13 more should read Kua Kia Soong’s book by that title too!
Yes I suppose BN can rule better with better sense and judgement. However they have not shown any for the past 50 or so years have they. The DPM’s speech is telling, he talks of the history where the non malays hold economic advantage yet, they were challenging the political powers too. So there is a definite hint at why Umno BN wants to stay. The malays do not have economic advantage so they want to hold the political advantage .
They are not sure how it will pan out if the others have political advantage too. Well that is a question in my head too. However we need change whatever form it takes. Whether BN starts changing itself and morphs into an open and honest serving Government and the people are priortiy , at the top of the triangle or another Govenrment comes in to serve the people . Is there time and how much damage has been done ?
I will not use the word “power” anymore as it distorts the very fucntion of Governnance and service of the public. To morph into a new entity , the PM will have to make miracles happen and discard those who have do not understand service of the people the crux of Governance. However will the people respect him enough is the question , to make these changes needed.
What BN faces are one of two choices:
To make drastic changes for the need of a nation no longer trusting them /suspicious of them which is very hard to do , or
when the Oppostion wins , they will accept that they will be in Opposition mode. They need to understand the real fucntion in Opposition which is a Government in waiting and ready to take over the care of people if the situations so demands. To counter check the Governments use ( abuse ) of powers.
Thanks again for the insightful comments. I find myself in partial agreement with Greg and feeling like I need to say much more to clarify my position to Marzuki.
I think Greg has a good point. He points to a fact pattern that evidences a tendency to subvert the outcome of democratic processes via emergencies. However, I’m not sure that this evidence conclusively points to the conclusion that something similar will eventuate if Barisan loses the next elections.
As for Marzuki, I think you miss my point but maybe that is my fault for being insufficiently clear. So let me try to clarify where I stand, to the extent that such clarification is possible in this kind of fora.
Let me clarify that I am not making any claim about the legitimacy of the current government. But let me explain why I have this view at the end of my comment.
As for the issue at hand, my present point is only that there is a deep tension between ethnocracy and democracy. The former is involves a politics of domination whereas the latter involves a politics of non-domination. This is not to say that there is no space at all for democracy in Malaysia or to say that the ruling government is hostile to democracy. Rather, it is to say that the logic of ethnocracy will militate against democracy. Dissent is tolerated only to the extent that it will not threaten the primacy of the ethnocratic political paradigm. Again, I believe this tallies with how politics works in Malaysia, which explains why political scientists classify Malaysia as “semi-democratic” or “soft-authoritarian.” I think Harold Crouch clearly explains this point in his book on Government and Society in Malaysia (1996, Talisman Books). The patterns he identifies there haven’t significantly changed.
However, there is a deeper dimension to this point. As I said, the tension between ethnocracy and democracy is structural so that the tension generates dynamics that go beyond the government of the day. This is because the long history of ethnocratic politics has now produced sociological consequences that work to limit even the government’s desire for more democratic rule. It must now deal with the rise of ethnocratic groups that are in fact more ethnocratic in their aspirations than the government.
I do not think that pointing to the fact that the DAP is itself constituted in a way that reflects a particular ethnic allegiance is an adequate refutation of my point. It is not apparent to me that the DAP is seeking Chinese political hegemony. And if it were, then this would make it an ethnocratic party, not a democratic party. So your invocation doesn’t alter the truth of what I am saying — there is a deep tension between ethnocracy and democracy.
To return to the point about the legitimacy of the current government. I think it is naive to invoke the history of general elections in Malaysia as a litmus test for legitimacy. Elections alone do not evidence democratic legitimacy. Otherwise Russia and Zimbabwe would also count as democracies. Any plausible conception of democracy requires much more than the mere casting of a vote.
Likewise, the fact that violence does not generally follow elections isn’t necessarily evidence of democratic legitimacy either. All it shows is that people are more willing to engage in social cooperation than to engage in open social conflict, even in cases where they may be unhappy with the legitimacy of an electoral process. So this fact is not conclusive evidence that they think that an election result is legitimate.
But let me state why I am agnostic on the question of whether the present government is or is not illegitimate. To say that I am agnostic means I simply do not know. I do not know because I think that no political party has yet made the right kind of case to show how its views mesh with what democracy would require in the Malaysian context. And that is because the terrain upon which political debate takes place in Malaysia is flawed — the terrain isn’t sufficiently democratic to see which political paradigm would in a genuine political test.
Now, I am not making some crude claim about the government’s reluctance to be democratic.
Again, my point is about how there are deeper structural problems that block democracy, blocks that go beyond what the current government is or isn’t willing to do.
just for your information. There are 2 events that were held yesterday and today to Free Ah Kong and call for a reform of the article 112 or the lese majeste law.
The first one was held in front of the criminal court in Bangkok. You can read the article and see pictures in Prachatai here (in Thai) http://www.prachatai.com/journal/2011/12/38263
It was attended by over 100 people.
The event today was a peaceful march from the victory monument to Ratchaprasong interjection. Also attended are Suluck Siwaraksa, Prof. Pawin (the free ah kong campaign initiator), etc. It was quite a successful event as we have seen a good turn-out and a big number of media people. so keep watch for many articles to come tomorrow!
First with my engineers hat on;
“But the connection between the IMEI number and a particular handset is by convention only. It can be changed, and used as a matter of course to be changed in Thailand, until quite recently.”
It is much more than a convention. It was designed to be a hard and fast link between the physical handset and an identifying code that can be held in a global database in Dublin and should never change. I doubt very much that Thai operators were juggling IMEIs “as a matter of course”. Where did you read that?
Other important identifiers used in the network are the IMSI that is held by the SIM and shouldn’t usually change and the MSISDN which is the actual phone number on the SIM and can be easily changed.
Now discarding the engineer’s hat, I wholeheartedly agree with everything else you say;
1. Where is the SIM carrying the IMSI/MSISDN identifiers sent in the offending messages ? Who owns it ? Who bought it ?
2. Where is a witness who saw Akong sending the offending messages or even discussing such things?
3. Anyone who can use google can find out that IMEI can be hacked
4. The judge admits that all they have is circumstantial evidence and then pronounces some Kafkaesque logic to allow it as the sole basis of conviction.
It does stink to high heaven and unfortunately I also agree with Nich when he says things will probably get worse yet. The fundamental issue driving this is the looming succession. Plus Chalerm is a nasty piece of work who should not be allowed in any self-respecting government.
Okay, got it Vichai. You were not attempting to be accurate but intended to mislead in order to make a point (that actually requires no evidence as it is just an allegation).
I think you are reading too much into PM’s and DPM’s speeches at the UMNO General Assembly. To make a parallel between both speeches and the words uttered by Nazis against the Jews or Hutus against the Tutsis is a too far fetched. I think it is better for New Mandala readers to read the speeches by themselves rather than just reading highly opiniated writing here. I believe rationality will prevail.
It’s quite difficult to try to pit ethnic politics against democracy in Malaysia. The demarcation line is very thin. For example, Democratic Action Party (DAP), though the word ‘democratic’ is engraved in the party’s name, is predominantly Chinese. One may therefore ask, does DAP pursues purely democratic ideals or ethnocentric objectives? Barisan Nasional doesn’t use democracy in its name and everybody knows that it comprises race-based political parties. But that doesn’t mean Barisan Nasional is incapable of making democracy, or semi-democracy, or whatever you want to name it, works in Malaysia. We have conducted 12 general elections since the first federal election was held in 1955. Though Perikatan/Barisan Nasional won all federal elections, losing some states to the opposition is quite normal. And more importantly, elections in Malaysia, with exception of the one held in 1969, have never been marred with racial or religious violence, though racial issues figured quite predominantly in almost every election. What we Malaysians enjoy since the past 54 years is freedom to cast our vote for whichever party/candidate we like and have the peace of mind that no violence will erupt before, during or after election. We stand by our record that so far nobody dies in election because of electoral violence. Malaysians die either because they drive too fast or eat a lot. Barisan Nasional remain in power because people vote them into power. Likewise, the opposition won five states in the last general election because people vote them into power. So what’s the reason for saying that when people vote BN into power it is illegitimate, but when the opposition is voted into power it is legitimate? Both happened in the same election…
@Nick Nostitz,
Just one concluding comment about the use of the Thai army.
When the flood waters hadn’t quite inundated the outer suburbs the army commander made some very strong statements about how the Thai army was out in complete force helping the population to its utmost.
Later when the outer suburbs were totally flooded and Bangkok was under threat, he miraculously found 10,000 more troops just to protect the inner city. The fact that he had 10,000 soldiers that weren’t committed previously appalled me. If you would care to read what news there was at the time you would find there was also a huge amount of army equipment involved that had been “in reserve”. For what?
All soldiers take orders, the problem I found was there were no officers giving them and I saw just one NCO in all that time. There was no communications set-up at way stations as is the norm. There were no officers or senior NCO’s supervising. The excuse that the soldiers were tired doesn’t wash with me because that all comes back to planning which is done by senior officers and there was no planning. It was if the whole flood relief effort was just a public relations exercise to show “the flag” after the armies disgraceful behavior during the protests.
However, what I did notice was the presence of the Thai police at every way station 24 hours a day and every area that might flood or had flooded and that’s what I expected from the Thai army.
A relevant article that fans of PTP will probably not like:
Meanwhile, Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yubamrung says his panel cracking down on websites deemed offensive to the monarchy will not amend Section 112 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which deals with lese majeste offences.
“We will focus on the crackdown. Website content found to defame the monarchy will not be made public, as it is not appropriate.
“We will not amend any Section 112 or any [related] law,” said Mr Chalerm.
Does he actually mean this, or is it just raising a false flag to disarm the royalists? If he means it, will Yingluck and the UDD actually allow him to go through with it? I think he means it . . . but I don’t think he’ll get his way.
Watching the interview on Thai television on YouTube, this woman comes across as a complete nutter. The interviewer seem a little incredulous at times at this crazy woman before her.
A few snippets:
– She joined the most “democratic” party !!!!!!!!!
– When you negotiate with foreigners you need to have “a sword in your pocket” !!!!!!
– It’s only a tiny minority who are dissatisfied with the institution – “khun pen khon Thai reuplao?”….
Talking of being a Thai, fortunately I find her completely unrepresentative of “khon Thai” in general, the challenge for Thailand is to ensure extremists like her are dismissed to the margins like, for example, the British National Party are in the UK.
The quote about Yingluck having the ‘anatomy of a woman’ but ‘think like a man’ is funny. A woman having charecteristics traditionally thought of as maculine is still a woman and would not take kindly to misogyny.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Will UMNO give up power?
An interesting analysis of the recent UMNO general assembly by Nur Jazlan Mohamed, UMNO Supreme Council member, Member of Parliament, and considered to be one of the few progressive UMNO members. Its worth a read in full. Among others he raises a point which relates to my question to the Deputy Prime Minister.
Thailand’s latest lese majeste disgrace
Arkong has not been forgotten in Chiang Mai.
Last night Saturday 10th December a silver pickup truck with a Bangkok number plate, and emblazoned on all sides with hand written signs in Thai such as Free Ahkong and Freedom in English at the front, was seen driving along the main street and around the Chiang Mai moat.
Are there any other public displays against 112 taking place elsewhere?
Will UMNO give up power?
And by the way, I belong to the group that UMNO’s modus operandi would hate the most: I can read Chinese, Malay and English, and have access to media targeted at different communities. This is how we can see through the lies and incitement pitched against each other by the ruling parties in BN.
Will UMNO give up power?
Marzuki,
From the way you described DAP, I can speculate your prejudice, which could be typical of the UMNO leadership. That is, DAP = Chinese = self-centred community. Speaking as a Malaysian of Chinese decent, I find that kind of logic an insult and reflecting one who refuse to accept the reality that Malaysia and Malaysians have lived on for more than five decades! I identify myself more as ‘anak bangsa Malaysia’, which is against UMNO’s survival objective, than Chinese of the mainland China.
The question from Greg is not at all unintellectual. We all can look at the Perak state coup, the tolerance of the authorities (even tacit support from the Home Minister!) of various racial/religious incitements, including the infamous cow-head incident at Shah Alam, Najib’s own declaration of defending Putrajaya at all costs, etc.
If you are sincere, go ask your bosses to explain their actions and words. Malaysians are watching keenly if we will eventually lose the last piece of our remaining institution, our democracy.
The toll of flooding on lives and politics
How many cabinet meetings before PM Yingluck and her crew realized that more and more provinces at Northern Thailand were sinking . . . and one cubic meter of flood water could indeed drown her if she just sat still and not MOVE.
Were Yingluck and those PT ministers truely that dumb?
If not dumb, then the Yingluck cabinet were distracted, unfocused and just plain incompetent. That much was admitted by the FROC and by the Thai Agriculture Minister Theera to explain their confused scatterred too-late-too-little response to The Big Flood.
I mention the Sanyo (#47) above to highlight that if the Yingluck crew continue on with their bungling incompetent way, then the Sanyo exodus could definitely be a . . . . . flood.
Will UMNO give up power?
Marzuki says: “No government will want to lose the election and become the opposition. But it is not for him or the party to decide. It’s the people. Once the people decide – whether BN will remain in power or become the opposition in the next election – all parties must accept the decision. Anyway, this is what democracy is all about. People decide through the ballot boxes and all parties accept the decision.” How does this claim sit with the UMNO-orchestrated royal overthrow of the duly elected government in Perak in 2009, by the denial of the then incumbent Mentri Besar of the opportunity that he sought (and to which by ordinary democratic constitutional theory he was entitled) to test his support either on the floor of the State Assembly or via a direct popular vote? It’s all unimpeachably democratic, provided you have a sufficiently flexible notion of the contested term “democracy”.
Will UMNO give up power?
This was a good first cut dialogue. ANU should consider how we (UCSI University) can collaborate to extend the dialogue into other more meaningful fora. I was personally enlightened by the DPM’s command of English; much more polished than he has ever been! His was a good official version of what happened! It is also what is taught in history books. Nevertheless, those readers who want to understand May 13 more should read Kua Kia Soong’s book by that title too!
Will UMNO give up power?
Yes I suppose BN can rule better with better sense and judgement. However they have not shown any for the past 50 or so years have they. The DPM’s speech is telling, he talks of the history where the non malays hold economic advantage yet, they were challenging the political powers too. So there is a definite hint at why Umno BN wants to stay. The malays do not have economic advantage so they want to hold the political advantage .
They are not sure how it will pan out if the others have political advantage too. Well that is a question in my head too. However we need change whatever form it takes. Whether BN starts changing itself and morphs into an open and honest serving Government and the people are priortiy , at the top of the triangle or another Govenrment comes in to serve the people . Is there time and how much damage has been done ?
I will not use the word “power” anymore as it distorts the very fucntion of Governnance and service of the public. To morph into a new entity , the PM will have to make miracles happen and discard those who have do not understand service of the people the crux of Governance. However will the people respect him enough is the question , to make these changes needed.
What BN faces are one of two choices:
To make drastic changes for the need of a nation no longer trusting them /suspicious of them which is very hard to do , or
when the Oppostion wins , they will accept that they will be in Opposition mode. They need to understand the real fucntion in Opposition which is a Government in waiting and ready to take over the care of people if the situations so demands. To counter check the Governments use ( abuse ) of powers.
Will UMNO give up power?
Thanks again for the insightful comments. I find myself in partial agreement with Greg and feeling like I need to say much more to clarify my position to Marzuki.
I think Greg has a good point. He points to a fact pattern that evidences a tendency to subvert the outcome of democratic processes via emergencies. However, I’m not sure that this evidence conclusively points to the conclusion that something similar will eventuate if Barisan loses the next elections.
As for Marzuki, I think you miss my point but maybe that is my fault for being insufficiently clear. So let me try to clarify where I stand, to the extent that such clarification is possible in this kind of fora.
Let me clarify that I am not making any claim about the legitimacy of the current government. But let me explain why I have this view at the end of my comment.
As for the issue at hand, my present point is only that there is a deep tension between ethnocracy and democracy. The former is involves a politics of domination whereas the latter involves a politics of non-domination. This is not to say that there is no space at all for democracy in Malaysia or to say that the ruling government is hostile to democracy. Rather, it is to say that the logic of ethnocracy will militate against democracy. Dissent is tolerated only to the extent that it will not threaten the primacy of the ethnocratic political paradigm. Again, I believe this tallies with how politics works in Malaysia, which explains why political scientists classify Malaysia as “semi-democratic” or “soft-authoritarian.” I think Harold Crouch clearly explains this point in his book on Government and Society in Malaysia (1996, Talisman Books). The patterns he identifies there haven’t significantly changed.
However, there is a deeper dimension to this point. As I said, the tension between ethnocracy and democracy is structural so that the tension generates dynamics that go beyond the government of the day. This is because the long history of ethnocratic politics has now produced sociological consequences that work to limit even the government’s desire for more democratic rule. It must now deal with the rise of ethnocratic groups that are in fact more ethnocratic in their aspirations than the government.
I do not think that pointing to the fact that the DAP is itself constituted in a way that reflects a particular ethnic allegiance is an adequate refutation of my point. It is not apparent to me that the DAP is seeking Chinese political hegemony. And if it were, then this would make it an ethnocratic party, not a democratic party. So your invocation doesn’t alter the truth of what I am saying — there is a deep tension between ethnocracy and democracy.
To return to the point about the legitimacy of the current government. I think it is naive to invoke the history of general elections in Malaysia as a litmus test for legitimacy. Elections alone do not evidence democratic legitimacy. Otherwise Russia and Zimbabwe would also count as democracies. Any plausible conception of democracy requires much more than the mere casting of a vote.
Likewise, the fact that violence does not generally follow elections isn’t necessarily evidence of democratic legitimacy either. All it shows is that people are more willing to engage in social cooperation than to engage in open social conflict, even in cases where they may be unhappy with the legitimacy of an electoral process. So this fact is not conclusive evidence that they think that an election result is legitimate.
But let me state why I am agnostic on the question of whether the present government is or is not illegitimate. To say that I am agnostic means I simply do not know. I do not know because I think that no political party has yet made the right kind of case to show how its views mesh with what democracy would require in the Malaysian context. And that is because the terrain upon which political debate takes place in Malaysia is flawed — the terrain isn’t sufficiently democratic to see which political paradigm would in a genuine political test.
Now, I am not making some crude claim about the government’s reluctance to be democratic.
Again, my point is about how there are deeper structural problems that block democracy, blocks that go beyond what the current government is or isn’t willing to do.
Thailand’s Fearlessness: Free Akong
Free Ah Kong Rally in Chiang Mai was also held the same as in Bangkok.
Read more here:
http://prachatham.com/detail.htm?code=n3_10122011_01
Thailand’s Fearlessness: Free Akong
Hi all,
just for your information. There are 2 events that were held yesterday and today to Free Ah Kong and call for a reform of the article 112 or the lese majeste law.
The first one was held in front of the criminal court in Bangkok. You can read the article and see pictures in Prachatai here (in Thai) http://www.prachatai.com/journal/2011/12/38263
It was attended by over 100 people.
and more pictures https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10150517268574416.435079.510039415&type=1
and https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10150413426972895.355868.657712894&type=1
The event today was a peaceful march from the victory monument to Ratchaprasong interjection. Also attended are Suluck Siwaraksa, Prof. Pawin (the free ah kong campaign initiator), etc. It was quite a successful event as we have seen a good turn-out and a big number of media people. so keep watch for many articles to come tomorrow!
There is a picture album here from a friend of mine who also attended the march:
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.2533578251822.2127539.1024504690&type=1
Thailand’s Fearlessness: Free Akong
John Francis Lee # 32
First with my engineers hat on;
“But the connection between the IMEI number and a particular handset is by convention only. It can be changed, and used as a matter of course to be changed in Thailand, until quite recently.”
It is much more than a convention. It was designed to be a hard and fast link between the physical handset and an identifying code that can be held in a global database in Dublin and should never change. I doubt very much that Thai operators were juggling IMEIs “as a matter of course”. Where did you read that?
Other important identifiers used in the network are the IMSI that is held by the SIM and shouldn’t usually change and the MSISDN which is the actual phone number on the SIM and can be easily changed.
Now discarding the engineer’s hat, I wholeheartedly agree with everything else you say;
1. Where is the SIM carrying the IMSI/MSISDN identifiers sent in the offending messages ? Who owns it ? Who bought it ?
2. Where is a witness who saw Akong sending the offending messages or even discussing such things?
3. Anyone who can use google can find out that IMEI can be hacked
4. The judge admits that all they have is circumstantial evidence and then pronounces some Kafkaesque logic to allow it as the sole basis of conviction.
It does stink to high heaven and unfortunately I also agree with Nich when he says things will probably get worse yet. The fundamental issue driving this is the looming succession. Plus Chalerm is a nasty piece of work who should not be allowed in any self-respecting government.
The toll of flooding on lives and politics
Okay, got it Vichai. You were not attempting to be accurate but intended to mislead in order to make a point (that actually requires no evidence as it is just an allegation).
Will UMNO give up power?
Greg,
I think you are reading too much into PM’s and DPM’s speeches at the UMNO General Assembly. To make a parallel between both speeches and the words uttered by Nazis against the Jews or Hutus against the Tutsis is a too far fetched. I think it is better for New Mandala readers to read the speeches by themselves rather than just reading highly opiniated writing here. I believe rationality will prevail.
Will UMNO give up power?
It’s quite difficult to try to pit ethnic politics against democracy in Malaysia. The demarcation line is very thin. For example, Democratic Action Party (DAP), though the word ‘democratic’ is engraved in the party’s name, is predominantly Chinese. One may therefore ask, does DAP pursues purely democratic ideals or ethnocentric objectives? Barisan Nasional doesn’t use democracy in its name and everybody knows that it comprises race-based political parties. But that doesn’t mean Barisan Nasional is incapable of making democracy, or semi-democracy, or whatever you want to name it, works in Malaysia. We have conducted 12 general elections since the first federal election was held in 1955. Though Perikatan/Barisan Nasional won all federal elections, losing some states to the opposition is quite normal. And more importantly, elections in Malaysia, with exception of the one held in 1969, have never been marred with racial or religious violence, though racial issues figured quite predominantly in almost every election. What we Malaysians enjoy since the past 54 years is freedom to cast our vote for whichever party/candidate we like and have the peace of mind that no violence will erupt before, during or after election. We stand by our record that so far nobody dies in election because of electoral violence. Malaysians die either because they drive too fast or eat a lot. Barisan Nasional remain in power because people vote them into power. Likewise, the opposition won five states in the last general election because people vote them into power. So what’s the reason for saying that when people vote BN into power it is illegitimate, but when the opposition is voted into power it is legitimate? Both happened in the same election…
Flood flavours
@Nick Nostitz,
Just one concluding comment about the use of the Thai army.
When the flood waters hadn’t quite inundated the outer suburbs the army commander made some very strong statements about how the Thai army was out in complete force helping the population to its utmost.
Later when the outer suburbs were totally flooded and Bangkok was under threat, he miraculously found 10,000 more troops just to protect the inner city. The fact that he had 10,000 soldiers that weren’t committed previously appalled me. If you would care to read what news there was at the time you would find there was also a huge amount of army equipment involved that had been “in reserve”. For what?
All soldiers take orders, the problem I found was there were no officers giving them and I saw just one NCO in all that time. There was no communications set-up at way stations as is the norm. There were no officers or senior NCO’s supervising. The excuse that the soldiers were tired doesn’t wash with me because that all comes back to planning which is done by senior officers and there was no planning. It was if the whole flood relief effort was just a public relations exercise to show “the flag” after the armies disgraceful behavior during the protests.
However, what I did notice was the presence of the Thai police at every way station 24 hours a day and every area that might flood or had flooded and that’s what I expected from the Thai army.
Mallika Boonmetrakul: an appalling Thai Politician
A relevant article that fans of PTP will probably not like:
Does he actually mean this, or is it just raising a false flag to disarm the royalists? If he means it, will Yingluck and the UDD actually allow him to go through with it? I think he means it . . . but I don’t think he’ll get his way.
Mallika Boonmetrakul: an appalling Thai Politician
Watching the interview on Thai television on YouTube, this woman comes across as a complete nutter. The interviewer seem a little incredulous at times at this crazy woman before her.
A few snippets:
– She joined the most “democratic” party !!!!!!!!!
– When you negotiate with foreigners you need to have “a sword in your pocket” !!!!!!
– It’s only a tiny minority who are dissatisfied with the institution – “khun pen khon Thai reuplao?”….
Talking of being a Thai, fortunately I find her completely unrepresentative of “khon Thai” in general, the challenge for Thailand is to ensure extremists like her are dismissed to the margins like, for example, the British National Party are in the UK.
Yingluck and Thailand’s women
The quote about Yingluck having the ‘anatomy of a woman’ but ‘think like a man’ is funny. A woman having charecteristics traditionally thought of as maculine is still a woman and would not take kindly to misogyny.
Flood flavours
“Andrew Spooner”:
True. The logical question here is why Thailand has not bothered to build a proper infrastructure over the last decades beyond Bangkok and vicinity.