Let’s All Sit Down and Clear the Mess Up

The solution is for a more open dialogue between the public, MCLM and any interested political parties. If MCLM has a better candidate either offer him/her to stand under your ticket or simply withdraw from the seat and let the MCLM candidate stand as an Independent. But since PR did so well in 2008, arrogance has set in and they are becoming more territorial (remember the overriding objective).

By AsamLaksa

I remain amused on the arguments concerning the Third Force and MCLM. I have written a light hearted article about it before. I think the problem is that it is a concept that many people are not familiar with or have negative pre-conceptions.

The Third Force is a very loose term that no one can define in the Malaysian political scene. The title has been transferred from one group to another without any dissolution of any prior group. It has also been taken up by those who have little idea what it really means, only that it’s an alternative to two already established ‘forces’. Will the real Third Force please stand up?

A third force should not simply be an alternate group. It should offer a real choice to what is already on offer. For example, BN is felt to marginalise ethnic Indians in Malaysia and on the opposing side you have PR wanting to elevate all needy citizens including ethnic Indians. Where does HRP which claims to fight for all needy but mainly seen as for the ethnic Indians come in? Well, HRP is not a third force because it wants the same thing as PR thus not really providing a real alternative choice.

It is the same with MCLM candidates. So far all of them appear ideologically inclined towards the aspirations of PR. There is no real alternative choice as they could have been PR candidates albeit under a different flag. No thanks to early hype about them being the Third Force.

This is not the case so much with UK’s Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrats in their last election where each party had very different agendas and policies, each a real alternative choice in regards to this. However reality is different once the Tories and Lib Dem form a coalition due to unforeseen compromises. But if any one party wins outright it would have been a very different story.

Now, what’s with the obsession with a 2 party system? I am not fussed whether you have 2, 3 or 27 party system. But let’s be rational, I want a stable government. So, numbers have to be reasonable. To me it’s not so much about having 2 strong fronts but about how reasonable the parties are. If the 2 parties are entrenched in factionalism, you will have more divisions and instability as imagine party A wins majority this round and then party B wins next round dismantling what party A did before and when party A wins again…

I think Malaysian politics have gone wrong in the sense that politicians regardless of their background should have only one overriding objective in mind: nation building.

Why are some politicians still harping on whether 1Malaysia has anything to do with One Israel? Waste of time and a poor diversionary strategy. 1Malaysia is a good concept and I applaud such a move. It will work if it is carried out sincerely and with real political will. Sadly, BN politicians are the biggest culprits in sabotaging it. Instead of implementing policies working towards the ideals of 1Malaysia, the very own government act to widen the chasm and make it an empty slogan. If I were PM Najib, I would remove these saboteurs because this is the one thing that has the hallmark to earn him a positive legacy, not the caricature of a leader that he is now. Islam Hadhari v.2?

I am not that surprised that MCLM appears divisive. MCLM attempts to introduce a novel idea to the already confused scene: It’s about the candidates, stupid. One problem with acceptance by the political fraternity: even if the MCLM candidate appears ideal for them, the MCLM candidates are not party members and that may upset the party grassroots. Here I blame the political immaturity. Good candidates should be nurtured regardless of where they come from (remember the overriding objective). If a candidate has nothing solid to offer but rhetoric, kick him/her out. Party leaders should carefully scout candidates, work with those who are not already party members and clean up internal politicking which is a barrier to attracting more members.

One problem MCLM faces with the public is the lack of creativity. Nobody wants a three cornered fight. I accept that keeping straight fights in elections is a sound political strategy, especially against the BN juggernaut. However, you got to be flexible to facilitate a real straight fight. You can’t stop 20 people running for the same seat but you can collectively decide to support one.

The solution is not difficult, just not easy to stomach for many. I like the MCLM candidates because they have good track record and appear more sincere. If the Malaysian Senate is more credible, I think they would make good senators as the senate should be the conscience of the nation keeping check on the excesses of parliament and the public.

Nevertheless, the solution is for a more open dialogue between the public, MCLM and any interested political parties. If MCLM has a better candidate either offer him/her to stand under your ticket or simply withdraw from the seat and let the MCLM candidate stand as an Independent. But since PR did so well in 2008, arrogance has set in and they are becoming more territorial (remember the overriding objective).

So, what now? I propose more open dialogue between all interested parties for nation building. Leave your political allegiance behind and come together to get Malaysians out of this mess.