COMMENT | I could never tell the difference between a “DAP Chinese” and an “MCA Chinese”. I guess one of the benefits of being an “ultra-Malay” is that you develop radar which detects subservient Chinese in the vicinity.

Umno Youth exco Wan Muhammad Azri Wan Deris has since “clarified” his statements but make no mistake, a win for BN is a win for Papagomo. But if you are “triggered” by Papagomo’s words, no doubt you were also triggered by the Perak Menteri Besar Ahmad Faizal Azumu and his "puak-puak DAP" statement.

The weltanschauung (view of life) of mainstream political operators like Papagomo and the Perak menteri besar are unfortunately not worlds apart. Both seek to use the DAP as a proxy for the Chinese community. Both seek to reinforce racial and religious narratives that seek to confine the role of non-Malay political structures to that of the handmaid of Malay powerbrokers.

The DAP is not blameless in this. By demonising the MCA, what they have done is enabled the “good/bad” Chinese narrative propagated by the likes of Papagomo and the Perak menteri besar.

By attempting to secure the Malay vote, they have trespassed into territories which they have no business in, instead of maintaining a strict secular line. By aligning themselves with Malay powerbrokers who do not share the same values, they have compromised the egalitarian neutral ground.

In my numerous articles decrying the DAP’s subservience to Bersatu and the old maverick, my gripes were not that the rights of the non-Malays were infringed but rather that egalitarian policies which would benefit all Malaysians were sacrificed on the altar of political expedience.

What mainstream Malay power structures and the far-right have done so effectively is to define egalitarianism and secularism as uniquely “non-Malay“ rights, thus in direct opposition to whatever Malay “rights” were being peddled by factotums from the political elites. Pakatan Harapan’s failure is not one of public relations but rather a lack of political will.

Mainstream Malay political dogma is about protecting the entitlement programmes, the state-funded educational opportunities and the vast civil service which is considered employment for the majority race.

When non-Malays say we are “all Malaysians”, what does this mean? Article 153 (which is often misinterpreted, but that is not the point) and various other provisions in the Constitution divide us along racial and religious lines. There is no mainstream ideological basis for this contention, nor is there any evidence that the political class supports such a notion.

All this is in play in the Tanjung Piai by-election in Johor. I disagree with most political analysts that this by-election is some sort of bellwether when it comes to the non-Malay vote. I think most non-Malays are dejected by the way Harapan is slowly morphing into a neo-BN.

A vote for Bersatu and a vote for MCA is more or less the same thing. It gives ketuananism legitimacy. Bersatu winning this by-election merely means that Harapan will continue in its neo-BN policies to ensure its primacy is not threatened.

Harapan will continue the narrative that the Umno/PAS alliance will destroy moderation in this country but will carry out policies that they think will get them the Umno/PAS vote base which is anathema to the moderation that Harapan claims is part of its agenda. MCA winning this election validates the social contract nonsense that is the basis of power-sharing in this country.

MCA will have to demonstrate gratitude to their Malay powerbrokers and continue the narrative that “DAP Chinese” are “bad”, which legitimises the anti-Malaysian rantings of someone like Papagomo. They will also continue the kind of "moderation" (with Umno/PAS) that is advocated by Harapan, which basically means "don't spook the Malays".

Voters thinking that their dissent against Bersatu translates to a change of policy are mistaken. All this does is further the narrative that Malay power structures who do not have control of the majority are at the mercy of non-Malay votes.

I suppose voting for the Gerakan candidate is the only choice for the discerning voter to send a message to both Harapan and BN but I suspect that partisanship will trump dissent.

When the choice for the sane person is either to vote Gerakan or not vote at all, you have to wonder where this country is heading. This by-election could be merely a venting process that may or may not lead to open dissent against non-Malay power structures. The real test will come in the urban areas, which in itself is a horrifying thought.

Unless a sizable section of the electorate who claim they want to change start voting for third party candidates or civil society actors like what is happening in some parts of the world, we will always be in the thrall of mainstream politicians who claim they want to change the system but in reality want to keep the game going.