Genuine or Cosmetic Change?

I'm have no idea what proper tittle should be given for this article so I decided to simply write Genuine or Cosmetic change as the title for this article as from my point of view, many of the so called ''change" advocated by the politicians in these country are cosmetic in nature and not genuine change which Malaysians really need right now.

I would like to comment on the effort of Malaysia's political parties, in trying to win votes from voters, have done some pretty remarkable things considering their past histories and so on in changing themselves.

Firstly, the fact that PAS is considering to field a non-Muslim in an election is pretty remarkable. This move is testament to PAS effort to reach out to the non-Muslims voters, further distancing themselves from the hardline Islamic image that they have been perceived by many non-Muslims voters. This should add meaning to PAS creation of the PAS supporters Club which they establish to bring PAS closer to the non-Muslims voters as members now may be chosen to contest for office despite the fact that the club has no full membership status and are not allow to vote in party election.

Then there is the effort by DAP to invite Malays to join the party. The party had set up a new exclusively Malay branches and they are also trying to recruit them in existing branches. The appointment of Tunku Abdul Aziz, the former head of Transparency International Malaysia as the party's vice chairman is testament to DAP's effort in bringing the party closer to the Malays after long being perceived as a Chinese chauvinist party.

Despite all that, the party must do more to shed it's anti-Malay image and the appointment of Tunku Abdul Aziz as Vice Chairman of the party while it helps, will not bring much change of perception among Malays of DAP as Tunku is not rely an influential Malay figure that can help court the Malays to join or vote DAP.

Finally,there's the recent move by UMNO in publicizing the entrance of 40 young Ulama's into the party in which Najib, the UMNO President himself was there to receive their memberships. The move can be seen as UMNO's way of boosting is Islamic image after long being seen as a secular party especially to the Islamist. Even former Perlis Mufti, Dr Asri name appeared although he didn't enter UMNO. This will probably help UMNO steal some votes from is traditional nemesis PAS especially the moderate Islamic-conscious Malays.

In conclusion, I would like to remind all parties that although these changes are a welcoming sign, I am also fully aware that our politicians are masters at making cosmetic changes in order to gain votes. I am not implying that these changes are cosmetic in nature as these moves are a good first step for the respective party. The benefits that awaits them are huge, the political gains aside.

PAS can formulate policies that are Islamic while taking into account the non-Malays feedback and ideas, not to mention a perfect way to have a two-way communication between PAS and the non-Malays in explaining issues associated with the party like the extremist image and so on.

We can learn from Prophet Muhammad S.A.W never alienates the non-Muslims in his administration as they views and concerns are always taken account to in his administration thus creating an inclusive society that unites all Muslims and non-Muslims alike, so there is no reason for PAS not to try to emulate Prophet Muhammad S.A.W in their approach in handling the non-Muslims.

DAP can be really aspire for Malaysian Malaysia with the inclusion of the Malays in it's party struggle rather than judging by the current make up of the party of non-Malays Malaysia or worst, Chinese-Malaysia. The party can push the concept and it's democratic socialist principles higher if the Malays are in DAP so that the party can be more inclusive thus hopefully can be accepted by the Malays at least to a certain extent.( I would like to add that I am against communal politics as it's overshadowing progressive politics where issues that bring us progress like economy, education and so on are at the forefront not race.)

Finally, UMNO can certainly gain by the influx of Ulama in the party as they can suggest how to incorporate Islamic principles in it's political struggle and the administration of the state and federal government. UMNO can be Islamic to the core( not being an extremist, but truly practicing Islam) and not simply pretending to be Islamic as some of it's politicians are trying to do.

The incorporation of Islamic principles can hopefully help UMNO tackle corruption, fund mismanagement, lack of integrity and many moral issues the party and the government that the party led are having problem in solving.

It's struggle to up lift the Malays can also be boosted by applying Islamic principles and values like amar marauf nahi mungkar( the Malays are not criticism friendly as it's often regarded as "biadap'' nor are the Malays the type to offer criticism as it will be called "jaga tepi kain orang" despite the criticism is to invite to do good deeds and avoid evil ones.) and many others.

The developments are certainly a positive one, let us see whether it is purely cosmetic change for political gains or a genuine reform for the betterment of the party's ability to serve the people. They can fool us once, but not twice, unless we are fools, if that is the case, I will offer my deepest regret and sympathy to our fate as a people of a nation where, despite being fools we are either unaware of how foolish we are or simply too ignorant to enlightened ourselves. May God help us if that is the case as fools are powerless to create positive changes for themselves, let alone for society as a whole, so God is our only hope then.

A Reformist

I'm called to write this as recent and past events had shown me that the word reformist is often misused by certain quarters to gain political popularity for their own political agenda. The event, the recent one where UMNO's Youth Chief Khairy Jamaludin claimed that he and Prime Minister Najib are reformist which strucked me as a surprise as how can the prestigious tag ''reformist'' bestowed by history to man and women who change the course of civilization, the likes of Lenin, Gandhi,Jefferson, Elanor, Catherine The Great be simply referred to any Tom, Dick or Khairy( or is it Larry?).

First of all, reformist must bring about real change in a society that, the change itself so powerful that it can overcome a political or economical structure lasting for thousand of years, it can inspire people to throw away common beliefs and wisdoms and accept and new way of thinking and behaving, thus rewriting the social and political landscape.

Lenin is an example of a man who achieved this feat. He overturned the thousand years old Tsar regime which before this is an institutional structure of the Russian society, the old established economic structure of peasants who worked for aristocratic landowners or later capital owners for as long as the Russian society existed also didn't escaped his reforms where they were finally freed from the chain that locked them to the aristocrats as the nation strive for a society without class. Calling Lenin a refomist might be an undersatement as the proper tag should be a revolutioner, as some may consider a reformist as tame if compared to revolutioner, but from my thinking, one must be a reformist first then move on to the next level of revolutioner, thus there's a refomist in Lenin before he move up to being a revolutioner that he is. Khairy, who is a smart guy can evaluate whether such feat is comparable to his or Najib's achievement, but my view is that both of their work combined can't match Lenin's feat.

Mahatma Gandhi is another reformist. Before him there's an India, divided along the lines of religion, race, language and so on and then there's the empirial British who colonized them benefiting from this division which they manipulated well by using the divide and rule way of administration. Beside the already prevalent division, there exists a mental barrier inside all Indians at that time that independence is impossible as the British is unbeatable. Despite all that, Gandhi managed to unite the nation, against all odds, introduce a concept of non-violence resistance which is a revolutionary concept used by other great leaders like Marthin Luther King and Nelson Mandela. He managed to discard the commonly held beliefs at that time that the British are unbeatable and India can't gain independence from them which by discarding such beliefs lead to the independence of India movement where although the other nationalists of the time are calling for the picking up of arms and riffles to fight against the colonialist, Gandhi insisted in non-violence resistance thus going against the tide of the time.

Unfortunately for the self described reformist Khairy and his boss, not only they are advocating more of the same, like they are advocating the continuation of the social order that existed during the British colonial period here with policies that divides rather than unite us, but they are doing so by way of force, manipulation, deceit, using sedition to scare the different races and so on, thus automatically tarnishing the word'' reformist'' by describing himself and his boss as one.

Finally, there’s an act of changing the social landscape to a positive one. That, to my thinking is the major aim of a reformist. In both the example given, there's a change in the social landscape, for Russia, it ended the aristocratic grab of the wealth of the nation where all Russians can better enjoy the wealth of the rich country irrespective of class and for India, despite their differences, they all unite as Indians and gained independence, but nothing can compare to the feat that Nelson Mandela achieved when he ended apartheid in South Africa. Years of slavery and colonialism didn't stop the country that he lead to embrace the whites as their own where together they are joining hands to build a better nation for all of them so that the next generation can enjoy the effort of their forefathers irrespective of their race. The dark past are buried as they toiled for a brighter future.

Here in Malaysia, the past still haunts us, just look at the May 13 incidence as a case in point where instead of burying the dark past and working together for a brighter future like the South Africans are doing, we are living in the dark past, denying ourselves a brighter future thus passing the darkness to future generations. Real reformist will not sit down and let this happen, but UMNO which the party that Najib leads and Khairy belongs are ensuring that the dark past is forever with us so that their party will continue to be relevant to Malays who are scared that the siege by the ''others" will lead them in a state of diaspora thus ensuring the continuation of the party's rule of this country.

In conclusion, it's best that Khairy reexamined his statement and make correction to it as by my thinking, there's absolutely no way that he and his boss can be called a reformist, however for Khairy, he is still young and is not too late for him to change his ways and work towards reforming this country so that he can be called a reformist by his countrymen and who knows, maybe by mankind themselves just like the likes of the heroes mentioned above. Only time will tell if that will happen or not.

Real and Rhetorical Change

The theme of change seems to be the main ethos in the Malaysian political landscape since the March 8 General Election Tsunami. I am of the view that although once popular from Barack Obama's campaign slogan of '' Change'' to Pakatan Rakyat's reformasi, the credibility of the word has since diminished. We can see that in the US today despite some major changes, there are still partisan politics not by-partisan politics that Obama advocated, lobbyists and wall street remained influential over main street and so on. The campaign glitter had somewhat faded, and Americans are now facing reality once again.

Malaysia political landscape also was mesmerised by this word. Anwar mobilised the masses into believing that the Pakatan Rakyat is the agent for change with Reformasi being the theme of the opposition thus leading the opposition to it's best General Election performance.

UMNO, realising the power of that word also joined the bandwagon with slogans like UMNO Mampu Berubah and so on. The government itself introduced the Government Transformation plan and so on indicating change. But lets face it, after more than 2 years can we still believe in the word ''change"?

The reality is much of our politics are still the same. Despite the introduction of 1Malaysia, race still dominates the political landscscape. Just look at how issues are played by both side of the political divide, we will see the dominance of race. Just to prove my point, just pick up a copy of Utusan, the newspaper which is UMNO controlled and you will see how everything is racialised.

Look at what certain statement by non-Malays Opposition members and you will noticed immediately how race was the reason for such statement. So the change that many hope for, the change that wll bring an end to communal politics seems to be nothing more than an empty hope.

Then we look at cronyism and nepotism, are they getting worse or better, well whatever the answer may be, they are still alive and well, both in the ruling and opposition sides. Just look at the Selangor state government owned sand mining company KSSB where there's a discrepancies involving it's management of funds. So the knight in the shining armour in the opposition that the people who voted for them saw turned out to be a disappointment for them.

The issue of corruption remains prevalent. Despite the fact that MACC was given much needed power boost by the government, until it's a fully independent body, it will not be an effective graft busting agency. Just look at it's handling of the PKFZ Scandal, Lingam case and so on.

In conclusion, the real change that the people yearned are not coming anytime soon based on current trend. The reality is just as President Obama said during his campaign, real change occurs from the bottom up and not the other way around. So, if we want real change,the people must be involved irrespective of political leanings and so on. We have seen how the NGO movement in Malaysia has created change for what they represent. Just look at Hindraf and Perkasa to name a few. It's time Malaysians take part in the way the country is governed as only that can make real change happen and not just ''change'' as a mere political rhetoric.