Our "Great Leader"

COMMENT | Let me get this out of the way. Maybe some of you think like this too. I do not care that former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak is not in jail. I am reasonably confident that the process that could put him in jail is underway albeit at a snail’s pace because the nature of his malfeasance, the scope of his criminality and the players involved warrant slow meticulous, legal work. To claim that people are disappointed in Pakatan Harapan because the former prime minister is not in an orange jumpsuit is disingenuous.

Some people are disappointed in Harapan not because the pace of reforms is slow but as the months drag on, it is becoming obvious that Harapan has no intention – unless forced to – to carry out its elections promises. In fact, if they are not backtracking on campaign promises, they are outright claiming that they have no intention of carrying them out.

Now, if removing Najib was the only reason you voted Harapan, then this is not an issue for you. I would argue that if you are a non-Malay, you voted for Harapan even with Bersatu in the mix because you thought that finally, this country could move in a direction where Malay supremacy and religious extremism would be tempered with egalitarian policies that were needed in this fast-changing geopolitical landscape.

This idea that only Mahathir can undo the damage he did displays a profound lack of introspection by people making this argument. In addition, it is naive. The road Malaysia was on was not created by Umno alone but rather, a compliant polity who voted in the BN regime for decades and often demonising the opposition as idealists or worse, claiming that the opposition could not run the federal government.

There is this dumb argument floating around that we should give Harapan more time since BN had six decades (or thereabouts) to “destroy” this country. This argument is not only ignorant, but it is also ahistorical. BN had functional policies at various times (just ask the current prime minister) and the opposition had a decade (or thereabouts) in control of certain states to differentiate itself from the federal government.

We are not talking about political newbies struggling with new-found policy-making power but rather mainstream political cabals which understand how the system works because most, if not all of them, were practising the mainstream politics of BN.

When Youth and Sports Minister Syed Saddiq Abdul Rahman claimed that Harapan may lose the next general election if it pushes reforms too fast, he is merely claiming that those ideas that the non-Malays (and some Malays) believe in such as equality and secularism are anathema to how mainstream political coalitions function in Malaysia.

This is not the fault of Bersatu alone. This is also the fault of the non-Malay coalition partners in Harapan. Everything is connected to race and religion in this country; hence, even when it comes to reforms, which you would think have nothing to do with race and religion, the Harapan government is backtracking.

What do people mean when they say Harapan is like BN? For someone like Terence Gomez, it has to do with the economic institutions of this country and the similarities in policy-making. For others, it is the similar Islamic narratives that fuel a supremacist mindset in the greater Malay community. For most though, it is the protectionist policies – economic and social – that are the bedrock of “ketuanism”.

Pointless to defend

Look, whenever Umno talked about “Malay” rights, they always had this useless qualifier that the “rights” of the non-Malays would not be forgotten. What did the MCA and MIC do? They dutifully nodded their heads and were mocked by the then opposition.
Now Bersatu makes the same claim that Malay rights will be upheld but this does not mean the non-Malays would be forgotten.

And what does the DAP – the dominant non-Malay power structure - and the non-Malays in PKR do? They dutifully nod their heads. If non-Malay rights were not forgotten, then something like recognising the United Examination Certificate (UEC) would not be put in cold storage for the next five years to be “studied with relevant parties” or the Harapan government would not be bending over backwards to satisfy the religious extremists in this country.

This is exactly the “social contract” of the BN regime and now Harapan, which is why protestations that Harapan is not like BN are worthless. Honestly, the MACC going after the former BN regime does not really inspire confidence in me. When they start going after the Harapan establishment, then I know that we have a truly independent institution.

And I keep telling Harapan political operatives who talk to me, there is only so long that you can give them bread and circus. Sooner rather than later, the people will be tired of the constant exposé of the corruption of the former BN regime and those Malays who voted for Harapan will want to know how exactly their lives have improved under a Mahathir stewardship.

What I want to know from the youth and sports minister is exactly which social and economic reforms, if rushed too quickly, would lose the Malay base? What institutional reforms, which if pushed too quickly, would lose the Malay base.

Maybe if the young minister answered these questions, people who have an issue with the non-existence of political will when it comes to reforms would have a better understanding of what is possible in this new Malaysia.

Until Harapan answers these questions, it is pointless defending the idea that Harapan is not like BN. Honestly, if Harapan just said that we were talking about those good ideas of the BN regime and going back to basics before "you know who" screwed it up, there would not have to be these articles defending Harapan's nine-month record. It turning into BN is not the problem especially if one (objectively) considers some of the policies which did work or could have worked.