by Dr. Chen Man Hin
MARCH 8TH 2008 was a defining day for Malaysia. The voting results clearly sent out messages by the voters.
The first message indicated that the people want
A NEW MALAYSIA WITH GOOD GOVERNANCE AND A NEW SOCIETY OF RACIAL EQUALITY, FREEDOM OF SPEECH, RELIGIOUS FREEDOM WITH EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES IN EDUCATION , EMPLOYMENT AND IMBUED WITH A VISION TO TURN MALAYSIA TO BE A LIBERAL MODERN GLOBAL NATION.
Since March 8th there has been a noticeable difference in society. The people are happier and more optimistic because they feel that change is in the air. They see the changes happening.
The political map has changed. There are now five new states under opposition rule, This is the beginning of a two party system of government, as in advanced countries like Australia, Canada and USA. it is accepted practice in these countries to have states controlled by opposition parties.
The new opposition states have immediately implemented new populist policies like stopping waste of public funds, simple lifestyle for chief minister and mentris besar, ban on application of land by elected DAP MPs and SAs, weeding out corruption.and an amnesty of fines for humble traders and hawkers.
THE SECOND MESSAGE message which is fundamental and show a radical change in the thinking of Malaysians on politics.
This change was voiced out aptly by Malaysia think-tank director-general Wan Saiful Wam Jian. He said
“The results indicated the voters had broken the ethnic and religious barriers. Voting no longer based on ethnicity or religion any more.
“Voting also shows we are heading more towards a Malaysia that is suitable for all Malaysians regardless of race and creed as in Perak where the Malays had voted for the DAP and Chinese for PAS…”
This is one message which PM Dato Abdullah and UMNO should take note. Umno should reform and initiate party reforms and take a multiracial approach in future. instead of sticking to its Malay agenda, reform and change to a policy of Malaysian agenda which would serve the interests of all Malaysians.
Wan Saiful Wam Jian also hinted that the challenge for political parties was to offer alternative policies which were no longer based on ‘defending Malay rights’ or ‘we’re an islamic country’. The debate should be on who can promote Malaysian rights best and on issues such as improving the school system and hospitals.
Political debates must revolve arouind policy issues rather than sentiments.
These are the messages of the people who want a change, and from the director general of Malaysia think tank, which UMNO should take heed.
UMNO must be aware that the popular votes of the opposition in peninsular Malaysia is 52% for the opposition whereas only 48% supported Barisan National
UMNO is no more the top dog in parliament, as it has only 79 MPs compared with the figure of 82 for the opposition coalition of DAP, PKR and PAS. Its old partners MCA and MIC are in tatters. UMNO should eat humble pie and accept the new political reality. It must be prepared to reform its old ‘Rip Van Winkle’ policies.
The people want a “Malaysian Agenda” not a Malay Agenda to lead the nation to peace, unity and prosperity.
#1 by kickbutt on Sunday, 30 March 2008 - 9:11 pm
It is not good to beg.
#2 by catharsis on Monday, 31 March 2008 - 7:21 am
kickbutt …that is a good one- even if it is slightly below the belt- it is just a minor tickle not so much of an ouch yet
Cheers
#3 by lextcs on Monday, 31 March 2008 - 12:21 pm
a new malaysia should have a non malay prime minister if he is qualified enough and having the support from all malaysians alike. Just like Obama, he should be given a chance to effect a change in our plural society. Can we see this happening in the immediate future? To be totally honest, I cant see it as long as we are playing along the coloured lines. Then there is the royalty lines too. Nobody would dare to point a dart at someone above the law would they? So Mr. Chen, im afraid you and me may not see the NEW malaysia.
#4 by lextcs on Monday, 31 March 2008 - 12:32 pm
This change was voiced out aptly by Malaysia think-tank director-general Wan Saiful Wam Jian. He said
“The results indicated the voters had broken the ethnic and religious barriers. Voting no longer based on ethnicity or religion any more.
“Voting also shows we are heading more towards a Malaysia that is suitable for all Malaysians regardless of race and creed as in Perak where the Malays had voted for the DAP and Chinese for PAS…”
Yes, we the voters broke ethnic barriers in our choice of candidates. But when will the choice of our leaders based on ethnicity be broken down? Have not the Rulers in those states got the guts to choose his mb based on a different race and religion for the best of his state? The question we all must ask ourselves is if there is a malaysian version of Lee Kuan Yew in our midst can he be the next prime minister? If not why?
#5 by One4All4One on Monday, 31 March 2008 - 9:16 pm
Our Constitution didn not give preferential treatment to UMNO, did it?
SO, why should UMNO being treated as if it is above all others?
Just like any political parties in the country, it has to work as hard and as fairly.
Throw some lights here.
#6 by lextcs on Tuesday, 1 April 2008 - 11:49 am
Mr Kit, will u, are u, could u be LKS to Malaysia what LKY is to spore, what DengSP is to China ?
#7 by kickbutt on Tuesday, 1 April 2008 - 7:41 pm
“…please don’t treat me like I have nowhere else to go.”
Who does?? That’s your freedom of speech. Exercise it!
#8 by limkamput on Tuesday, 1 April 2008 - 11:44 pm
how do you describe a person who continues to talk to himself – mentally challenged. Can not use mad, because that will be politically incorrect, which will make him even more mad.
#9 by limkamput on Tuesday, 1 April 2008 - 11:48 pm
I have to take leave to replenish my oxygen. The world will be a better place if we can get rid of some wasters of oxygen.
#10 by limkamput on Tuesday, 1 April 2008 - 11:56 pm
Most paradoxical and most ironical! Those who label others for being invective, weasel and know all are themselves guilty of all these. Tell me, who is humble here. What I see here is the seas of self indulged know all personalities who think whatever they said are beyond reproach and criticism. And when criticised, one just has to see the venom in their attack on others. Yet, they are here talking like saint – so paradoxical and so ironical.
If one of the blogger here can be labelled as a headmaster, then I would like to label one of the frequent visitor here as the Supreme Court judge. At least I think the headmaster was doing his/her job if he/she was able to point out views that are factually wrong or illogical.
What about this Supreme Court judge? To him, he must have the final say in everything. Take for example his perverted view on ISA. To him, there is nothing wrong with the ISA; it is the abuse and arbitrary use of ISA. He just can’t see his own illogic. How can he say there is nothing wrong with the ISA when the act itself has provided for abuse and arbitrary use of power by the executive branch? Because of 9/11 and because of US Patriot Act, he sees nothing wrong with ISA. He just can’t see the abuse and arbitrary use of power is part and parcel of that legislation.
#11 by LadyGodiva on Wednesday, 2 April 2008 - 4:34 am
I smell the foul ordor of a dead rat in the room!
#12 by catharsis on Wednesday, 2 April 2008 - 7:12 am
There is no RIGHT and no WRONG when we look at the context it was made in……………………
#13 by catharsis on Wednesday, 2 April 2008 - 7:14 am
I also smell some bad breath from a kettle
#14 by lakilompat on Monday, 21 April 2008 - 2:48 pm
How to reinvent a new Malaysia. Now, BN or federal govt. is campaigning the make Malay fight for the Malays rights. Malaysia is made up of Malays, if all Malays unite and decided to genocide all the chinese and indians, well that’s what UMNo is trying to do.
A New Race based Malaysia by UMNO?
#15 by kokhaw on Tuesday, 17 June 2008 - 11:57 pm
When everyone is so fancy about democracy, has anyone really realise about the weaknesses about democracy?
The same goes to parliamentary government. Is parliamentary government the best government model?
No, they are not. There are still many weaknesses that need to be improved. Generally, democracy is majority say. This is only good when majority is good and has high wisdom.
If majority likes war, then, democarcy constitutes to war, a case like US.
Another example such as Indonesia is majority malays. In case if majority is one sided and put other people as slave, is democracy still good?
While for parliamentary government. What is the qualification of someone who doesn’t know about engineering and doesn’t have engineering background to handle and control an engineering department? If someone who doesn’t know well on certain industry, but play role in deciding the rules and regulations for that industry, is this the right or effective way of doing work?
In view of all these weaknesses, shall we pull ourselves out of the circle and consider something which is more convincing for a better tomorrow?
Well, I have thought about these some time ago and I wish to share with all the buddy here on my opinion. I have named the new ideology as the ‘Wisdomism’, which I think it is a newer ideology which is better than democracy. I have posted it onto my website as follow:-
http://www.greatians.com/wisdomism.htm
Please do feel free to put your comments here. TQ.