COMMENT | The recent by-election loss in Kimanis has brought out the usual platitudes from Pakatan Harapan. For the record, I believe that Sabah Umno played the “all politics is local” card better Warisan. We need to redouble our efforts, said embattled prime minister-in-waiting Anwar Ibrahim. Which begs the question, redouble Harapan’s efforts in doing what exactly?

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad said policies take time to implement, which has not stopped the Harapan political apparatus from engaging in all manner of subterfuges and chicanery to impede the process of reform in this country.

The reality is that Harapan has until the next general election in 2023 to demonstrate that they can manipulate the system to their advantage and leverage that for another term. This is the realpolitik of it.

Some people when they write to me say that Harapan is a “new” government and I should not be so critical. Of late, the number of people saying this has dramatically decreased. Look, Harapan is not a new “government”. They have controlled states – vital ones – and they have for years engaged with the federal government. They have political operatives who at one time were part of the federal government or high ranking civil servants.

It is pointless for political operatives to convey to me that I am adding to the “negativity” on social media, which only helps the “opposition”, when Harapan’s incompetence and failure to get its message out - whatever it is – is subsumed beneath the racial and religious politics it demonised Umno/PAS for playing.

It is also for pointless political operatives claiming that there are internal efforts to hamper reforms – which may be true – when the prime minister himself said that the Harapan manifesto is not worth the paper it is printed on.

Former National Human Rights Society president Ambiga Sreenevasan (photo) says she does not recognise some in Harapan who were so fearless before. As for me, what amazes me is the level of hypocrisy in these political operatives, especially the non-Malay ones.

Non-Malay political operatives defined the discourse, especially on social media, with regard to how establishment non-Malay political operatives are defined. Because they did not “stand up” to Malay power structures, they were deemed house negroes, or worse. Any policy debate then becomes problematic. How?

Take education for instance. It simplifies the debate to bite-sized talking points, which the far-right blogosphere regurgitates as evidence that the DAP is fighting the “good” Chinese MCA over “Chinese” education. MCA’s history of nation-building, the kind which involved managing expectations, compromise and yes, complicity, became a big juicy target for a mob fuelled by ahistorical polemics and politicians who promised that the non-Malay communities would not have to beg for scraps from the table.

Furthermore, the level of sycophancy among the non-Malay members of Harapan towards the old maverick has reached epic proportions. DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng dismissing the need for the Harapan presidential council to set a date for Mahathir to retire is the kind of optics which only advances the running dog narrative of the party.

This idea that Harapan is a victim of its own success is a rather dumb justification for political expediency and subservience. It is pointless when Lim said that 60 percent of the manifesto has been fulfilled, and the old maverick claims that Harapan has solved our corruption problem.

Forget about safe seat narratives as the opposition has been winning by-elections even though the federal government is playing the same game of inducements and other forms of electoral vote-buying. This should tell us something about the voting demographics. It is kind of funny. The stereotype of the Umno voter is a “dedak” eater who votes in kleptocratic politicians for the “tongkat”. Well, in all these by-elections, the Malays (and non-Malays) who voted for opposition politicians did not give a damn about the enticements thrown their way by Harapan but instead voted opposition.

This would mean they did not care if the opposition could not do anything for them. This also means you either have to be really pissed off with the federal government or you do not care if voting for the opposition disenfranchises you in some way. Then, of course, there is all this talk of ignorant rural voters. Rural Malay voters understand they have nothing to lose if they vote for the opposition because they understand the game is rigged in their favour.

They know that Malay power structures will not do anything to “punish” them because they hold so much power – unequal power – when it comes to who is running this country. Malaysia has not seen a rise in identity politics because the foundation of Malaysian politics is identity politics.

Recently, Center to Combat Corruption and Cronyism (C4) director Cynthia Gabrial said on corruption reforms: “It’s the same crony capitalism style, privatising public services, selling off government assets, using GLCs (government-linked companies)…” So, is it that difficult to believe that voting demographics, which have no other comparisons to what is possible, would go back to voting for the “safe choice” instead of the continued incompetence and infighting of a coalition which has demonstrated that it can’t even live up to its campaign promises?

Some folks are appalled about how Najib can walk around campaigning for the BN. I have only written a couple of articles on Najib since the historic Harapan win because the attention should be focused on the coalition's regime. Harapan’s continued obsession with Najib could be their downfall. Look, if Harapan falls, Najib is going to be let off the hook.