The 2-Party Political System Re-Visited
By batsman
Many activists, bloggers and commenters believe very strongly that it is sufficient to have a 2-party political system as the target or objectives of the reform movement. Bersih 2.0’s struggle proves beyond the shadow of the doubt that this is still insufficient.
UMNO knows this is insufficient. This is one of the reasons why UMNO is fighting with might and main as well as with dirty tricks to prevent Bersih 2.0 from getting a serious hearing. If Malaysians and Malaysian public opinion start to think that Bersih has a case, UMNO knows there is a very high likelihood that it will lose everything. This is why it will use dirty tricks and everything in its arsenal of legal and illegal tricks as well as it’s cronies in the public service, religious institutions, NGOs and GLCs to prevent Bersih 2.0 from getting a serious hearing.
Why do I say this? Let me explain by using a very simple everyday example. Take a football match. Each side represents the 2-party political system. If this is all it takes then there is no need for a referee. Unfortunately football is no longer football without a referee.
Some people say that it is sufficient to have the voters as the referee. This is like saying the registered adult spectators of the football match can become the referee. At the end of the match, they can take a vote on which side won the match. This is as ridiculous as a football match without a referee. In all likelihood, even the end of the match will be in dispute and no one is sure when the match ended.
The only equivalent of a referee in terms of the 2-party political system is just, fair and uncorrupted laws and professionals who are neutral and without any bias who carry out such a set of just and fair laws honestly and with integrity. Spectators cannot be the referee unless they are football professionals or retired professionals. Most of them have not been adequately trained on the rules of the game and have no experience in being referees. Only an adequately trained and competent professional who has no interest in the outcome of the game is properly equipped for the job of being the referee.
If the referee has an interest in the outcome of the match, he is said to be biased. There are many ways to create this bias in a referee. One of the ways is with money, status and position. So those people with money, status and position are in a position to influence the referee. In the west, this is what happens in their 2-party political systems. The law, the media and public opinion is heavily biased towards those who have money, property and position.
The other way to influence a referee is to influence his values. If a referee can be turned into a racist, then in any match where one side comprise mainly black players and the other side is mainly white (say), the racist tendencies of the referee will ultimately manifest itself in the way he referees the game and calls his decisions.
In Malaysia both money and racism have corrupted our democratic institutions. This makes a 2-party system unworkable in the interests of democracy and in the long term interests of the country and the people. It has to be repaired and reformed to make sure it function properly to ensure the utmost freedom, fairness and democracy for as many Malaysians as possible.
Bersih 2.0 believes very strongly that the electoral system in Malaysia is broken and unable to function with honesty and integrity anymore. It has called for reforms. This is all it is asking for – the repair of a corrupted and dysfunctional electoral system and its institutions. It deserves a chance, don’t you think?
