‘Not two-party but two race political system’
Applying the term ‘two-party system’ to the Malaysian political framework is a misnomer because we are two politically constructed races – ‘bumiputera’ and ‘non-bumiputera’.
The recent Feb 14 raids on couples for khalwat were conducted in Petaling Jaya, Selangor – a Pakatan-ruled state where the two parliamentary constituencies of PJ Utara and PJ Selatan are under Chinese Pakatan MPs. What does this say?
Helen Ang, Free Malaysia Today
Is the two-party system becoming a two-race system? My hunch is ‘yes’.
But before I explain my reasons, I should first like to clear the air on the premise underlying today’s Chua Soi Lek-Lim Guan Eng debate.
Applying the term ‘two-party system’ to our political framework is a misnomer. The two-party structural model is A versus B – such as in America, Republicans vs. Democrats; in Britain, Labour vs. Conservatives/Liberals.
This duopoly implies that Party A and Party B are discrete, cohesive units, for instance, the ‘GOP’ (nickname for Grand Old Party) in the US or the Tories in the UK are entities characterized by a single discernible party ideology, for example, capitalists eschewing high taxes and big government.
Pakatan Rakyat can hardly be said to be ‘one party’ standing on a clearly defined and common ideological platform when the raison d’etre for PAS is seemingly to establish hudud, and for DAP ‘Malaysian Malaysia’, now morphed into ‘Malaysian First’. Ask any PAS member and he will answer without hesitation that he is Muslim first.
Meanwhile, the Barisan Nasional is not one party but comprises 14 parties and recently added three affiliate members, namely Gabungan Wawasan Generasi Felda, Bekas Anggota Kemas Malaysia and Persatuan Kontraktor Melayu Malaysia.
Hence what Malaysians have in mind is rather a ‘check and balance’ format with the two coalitions being almost equally balanced in strength so that they can keep a sharp eye on each other and curb any excessive abuse of power.
The ‘two-party system’ is beneficial if Umno Malays can check PAS Malays to prevent the latter, for example, enforcing regulations prohibiting the sale of alcohol or passing laws banning concerts and entertainment, and correspondingly the PAS Malays should check the Umno Malays from taking communal ‘rights’/’privileges’ to an intolerable level.
If the system becomes two races lined up on opposite sides – a Chinese opposition checking the Malay establishment – then you can well ponder on the fate of our country.
Commonsensical Malay get-together
Umno and PAS held their ‘secret’ unity talks not once but several times. The pull factor must have been very great for them to keep trying and trying albeit the backroom-dealing ultimately not yielding result.
If their talks had been successful, a two-race system would be a done deal. And furthermore, an Umno-PAS consolidation makes a lot of sense.
An Umno-PAS coalition can rule Malaysia on the basis of Malay-majority seats alone. This would allow them to push Malay-Muslim interests without effective intervention.
Umno and PAS members speak the same language, profess the same religion, and originate from the same kampungs.
On the other hand, what do PAS and DAP members have in common? Not language. Not religion. Not culture or tradition nor shared history. And they look so different and dress even more differently.
Recently a DAP Member of Parliament facilitated a press conference for a Chinese assaulted by Malay KFC workers. The 26-year old victim required an interpreter which led Malays to wonder why someone turning for help to the ‘Malaysian First’ party is so lacking in confidence to speak the national language, and whether the victim is from the Republic of China.
Public sentiment over the KFC dust-up quickly divided along ethnic lines. Following on the heels of the ‘fight chicken’ was an online call to boycott the product in the vein of an earlier Bread War (Gardenia vs. Massimo) which was similarly racial in nature.
Another KFC-like episode in future will assuredly elicit an identical race-aligned response.
Is this racialised reality on the ground replicated in our political system? In the BN it is. Whereas DAP is tying itself in knots trying to convince voters that in Pakatan it’s not.
However Penang which is led by DAP has a Chinese chief minister, Malay deputy chief minister (I) and Indian deputy chief minister (II).
The circumstances of this debate between the party secretary-general and the MCA president too shows up the DAP cognitive dissonance. The organizers have revealed that it is Lim Guan Eng who requested that the debate be carried out in Mandarin.
Lim claims his party is multiracial but he opted for a language that is alien to three-quarters of the Malaysian population (Chinese are 24.6 percent).
How fares DAP with the Malays
Previously Lim had been quick to accuse Hindraf as being “racist” when the movement chose to keep its focus on Indian issues. Nonetheless Lim is debating the president of the Malaysian Chinese Association on the future of the Chinese under the ambit of a day-long forum titled ‘The Chinese at a Political Crossroads in the Next General Election’ to be televised live on a Chinese satellite channel.
The Indians can see through the DAP quite clearly. Therefore it is naïve to assume that the Malays are unable to detect the deceit.
Despite the DAP’s almost psychotic forays to fish Malay support, the catch has been meagre.
Thus far the party has netted two rejects – former state assemblyman Mohd Ariff Sabri Aziz, who was not nominated by Umno to re-contest his Pulau Manis seat in the last election and Aspan Alias who is unable to boast having held any significant Umno position before.
Note that the two men are never labelled ‘frogs’ for their crossover because DAP supporters practice double standards. (Refer to Lim Boo Chang who has sued Ng Wei Aik, Lim Guan Eng’s political secretary for frog-calling).
