Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Who to Vote For: A Dummies Guide to the Manifesto
Ghostbusters
You Don’t Have to be Loyal to BN
Dam battle in remote Sarawak constituency
It's one bumpy ride in Sarawak
Will PAS betray its voters’ trust?
What Malaysian voters want
Social media comes of age
Why politics is not the answer

Who to Vote For: A Dummies Guide to the Manifesto

Posted: 01 May 2013 03:19 PM PDT

For especially the young voting population which forms a majority of the 3.7 million new registered voters, this upcoming polls seem to be likened to the uphill task of "choosing the lesser evil". There is actually a significant difference between the two proposed manifesto and it will shape Malaysia differently.

Anas Alam Faizli

The most anticipated general elections looms, yet we still hear utterances of political apathy, such as "politicians will be politicians" and "they are all the same". For especially the young voting population which forms a majority of the 3.7 million new registered voters, this upcoming polls seem to be likened to the uphill task of "choosing the lesser evil". There is actually a significant difference between the two proposed manifesto and it will shape Malaysia differently.

Modern democracies like the US and the UK see very distinct ideologies engrained within their political systems. We have left wingers such as the labour party and the democrats, as well as pro-market and business-friendly republicans and conservatives. As a result, once a new alternate government is elected into power, we will see tremendous shifts in public policy and the country's entire strategic direction. This is why for example that the slashing of more than 70 percent of the Carter-era taxation to below 40 percent when Reagan took over, did not come as too much of a surprise. What this gives us are actually very powerful sets of data points which allows for retrospective and empirical assessments of the different policies and ideologies.

It is a bit different here in Malaysia, where neither coalition seemed to be skewed towards either end of the political philosophy spectrum. But there is one thing for sure; that the rakyat's concerns have unanimously evolved to cost of living and safety and security, as found by the latest Merdeka Centre census. While infliction of racial-supremacy and claims for legitimacy continue to be bandied about this election, significant imbalances, wealth and income inequality, and laggard wage growth has lead to a major shift in the Malaysian political direction; from race-based politicking of the post-Merdeka period, to a class-based discourse.

Rakyat-friendly welfare items thus became very important for either side of the political divide, making manifesto-drafting a very populist endeavor. In our quest to be an informed voter, we need go beyond this plethora of physical promises and start reading between the lines.

Malaysia's Factsheet

Before dissecting a manifesto, it is always good to keep some facts at the back of our minds. Only then we can decide which manifesto will benefit all Malaysians holistically, especially in the longer term.

29.6 million people now inhabit Malaysia, the majority being the Bumiputera at 61% of the population, followed by the Chinese 24% and Indians 7%. Our GNI/capita stands at USD 9,970, with 12.7 million employed workers including legitimate 2 million foreign workers. Reports indicate that on top of that there is another 2 million illegal foreign workers residing in the country. By 2011, 827,000 Malaysians are working overseas, while talent initiatives by PEMANDU has brought home less than 2,000.

Our GDP, which is close to RM1 trillion, is made of 47% services, 41% industry and 12% agriculture. National debt is at RM546 billion, which is 53% of GDP, mainly from domestic lenders. Our household debt to disposable income is among the highest in the world, surpassing that of the US at 140%, meaning for every RM1 taken home there's RM1.40 worth of debt.

Welfare states and the average OECD nation contributes more than 20% of their GDP for social spending, largely on health and education, while Malaysia spends 4.1% on Education (ranking her 101) and 4.4% on Healthcare (ranking her 156 in the world). Malaysia also ranks among the largest disparity gap in Asia between the rich and poor.

Malaysia's forecasted revenue for 2013 stands at RM208.6 billion, while RM201.9 billion and RM49.7 billion of operating expenditure and development expenditure are expected. Fiscal deficit is 4% of GDP.

Transparency International reported that there is RM28 billion of money lost to corruption every year and the Asian Wall Journal placed Malaysia highest in the cost of doing business perception.

Bearing all this in mind, which manifesto then is sustainable and will further grow or even sustain our pockets?

2008 - 2013 Report Card

To begin, one must critically evaluate the proven track record between both contesting parties. Let's benchmark using the 2008 Manifesto. In essence, there have been promises kept by BN but it will be quite tricky to measure. Some of the highlighted promises are general, vague and difficult to quantify.

There are straightforward cases like the five economic corridors, which no longer receives the spotlight under the new premiership. Then, there's the question; if Muhyiddin were to take over the helm later, will the Manifesto's promises be continued?

What about GST? PEMANDU has come out clearly to advocate for GST and despite no mention were made in the BN manifesto, it is touted to be very much in the plan. PR meanwhile recognizes that the income profile of majority Malaysians is still unready to stomach GST.

BN came short of the promised 2 million new employments in its 2008 manifesto. Less than 1 million new jobs were created over the past 5 years. Corruption and dubious manslaughter cases still persisted; a number of them made known to public such as the PKFZ scandal, NFC cows and condominium fiasco, Scorpene, diamond rings, Ahmad Sarbani, too many to name here. One may argue that cleaner and transparent government alone would already bring about material returns.

Unbearable rise in the cost of living and price of goods still continues. Whereas there was a promise made to reduce the fiscal deficit, the BN government has been overspending for the past 15 years when in power. To compare with PR's performance, the Auditor General reported that the Pakatan-led states were the best financially managed states with Penang registering 95% reduction in debt and 47% increase in revenue. Selangor deposited RM1.2 billion, its highest record in 28 years. Kelantan too boasted a 58% surge in the amount of consolidated funds.

Manifesto: Barisan Nasional (BN) versus Pakatan Rakyat (PR)

The BN Manifesto is largely business as usual without any fundamental or structural changes to how things are executed in Malaysia. It is the same things albeit more attractive goodies and cash handout! The Manifesto offers promises in 17 categories with over 150 very comprehensive promises. Question is, are they sustainable? Can they be maintained or are they purely election winning strategies? These are questions that needed to be asked.

More apparently is that the BN manifesto lacks the spirit of reform that is badly needed, such as the abolishment of lucrative IPP compensation methods and cessation concessions with ridiculously long contractual terms to the politically affiliated. There was no mention on the abolishment of tolls (which will result in RM5 billion per year returning to the people's pockets) to reduce cost of living, no mention of structural reforms to foreign workers policy. Neither were there proposals to clamp down on cronyism, transparent contract awarding and revisit monopolistic corporate structures that allow for the exploitation of end customers.

In education, BN is proposing the same protectionist policies for the vernacular schools, except that different format schools such as religious, missionary and special needs schools are included. Rather out worldly, it also promises to increase the education standards to the top three ranked in the world, where we now stand in the bottom third. According to the National Education Blueprint 2013- 2025, 15% of our schools lack access to clean water. On top of that, 20% have inadequate science labs and 27% have inadequate computer labs. This needs addressing. PR on the other hand proposes 5 new technical universities and 25 new vocational schools.

In its development and housing proposals, BN promised 1.0 million houses in the span of five years, compared to the rather manageable and more realistic target of 125,000 by the PR government. This is a repeat of Manifesto 2008.

A simple analysis indicates a yearly reduction of roughly RM1,500 in the cost of living if the BN Manifesto is executed; by means of BR1M and other handouts. If the PR Manifesto were to be executed instead, RM5,500 will effectively be reduced. How is this proposed to be achieved by PR? It is via lower fuel prices, electricity, water, lower car prices, free education, more affordable housing, abolishing anti-competitive tolls and monopolies as well as the imposition of a minimum wage of RM1,100 via gradual and steady reduction of independence on foreign labour.

For economic growth, BN has promised 5.3% and the achievement of high income nation before 2020 while PR promised 7% yearly growth.

The difference between the two is subtle yet most defining. Changes will not come from seemingly transformative patchwork of myopic polices that simply add-on to existing processes. It needs political will to revamp underlying inefficiencies and leakages within the systems in place. 1.0 million new affordable housing is noble but is it achievable and who will be the contractors? What are the procurement policies with regards to this massive scale of projects? What kind of incentive systems are in place within the contractors, to ensure the targeted rakyat groups receive quality affordable housing? Will there be exceptions in the balloting and allocation of those houses?

Another example is the reduced car prices and fuel subsidy rationalization, BN proposed to reduce car prices by 20- 30% in gradual stages. Yet, the issue at hand is bigger than this. There is no mention of ways to tackle crony-favouring practices in the awarding and subsequent trading of APs? car price reduction truly in the Meanwhile, the PR addresses this specifically by proposing the reduction of excise duty and auction off APs. BN did not even touch on reducing petrol price, while PR despite questioned as being unsustainable promises a reduction of 40 cents to pump petrol prices, to be financed by removing gas subsidy to the IPPs.

So Who Should We Vote For?

First, consider the baseline, which is the starting point that the manifesto will have to work from. Identifying needs such as tackling inequalities, quality of education and cost of living, consider then for yourself if what we need are core structural changes backed by political will to ensure sustained outcomes however expensive it may seem, or would we rather temporary fixes, which too are expensive, but in no way guarantee that the systems in place will be changed to make way for fresh new policies.

You might not agree with everything BN or PR proposes, but they are at the end of the day political manifestos to win our votes. It is only fair to go through the manifestos in its entirety and not in piece meals limiting ourselves to personal sentiments, and only what our hearts and pockets desires.

If one is contented with one's current situation, afraid of change and is happy to be considered qualified for welfare aids like BR1M angpows, by all means your vote should be for BN. However, if you are willing to step up for the sake of your livelihood and that of your children in hopes for structural and fundamental changes within a cleaner government, a vote for PR might be your salvation. Many already are excited by the prospects of PR, as showcased in the past 5 short years in the four Pakatan-led states.

Albert Einstein famously said that, "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." And you will be insane to hope for a change if you vote for status quo.

Your vote counts! "No man is good enough to govern another man, without that other's consent." - Abraham Lincoln

* Anas Alam Faizli is an oil and gas professional. He holds a master's degree in project management and is pursuing a post-graduate doctorate. He tweets at @aafaizli.

** Datas and figures are derived from EPU, DOSM, HIS 2009, HDR 2011, World databank and BNM. For details, please refer to BLINDSPOT (www.facebook.com/blindspot.msia)

Ghostbusters

Posted: 01 May 2013 02:36 PM PDT

Malaysia's pro-democracy activists might not win Sunday's election. But they could win the battle against electoral fraud.

Deborah Loh, Foreign Policy

Muhamad Nur Jihad is a 25-year-old man with Down syndrome who lives with his father in the Malaysian city of Shah Alam. He's never registered as a voter. So imagine his father's surprise when Muhamad Nur recently received a letter in the mail informing him that he's set to vote in the approaching general election on May 5. Who, precisely, added him to the electoral roll without his knowledge? "This may just be the tip of the iceberg," Muhamad's father, Ruslan Abdul Razak, told the press.

Weirder things have happened in Malaysian elections. Since 1959, voters here have consistently returned to power the ruling coalition, known today as Barisan Nasional (BN). Decades of single-party rule have hindered Malaysia from pursuing the sorts of reforms (including reform of the electoral system) that could have fostered healthy political competition and democratic maturity. And that, in turn, has fostered a long and convoluted history of election fraud -- including a phenomenon that civil society watchdog groups refer to as "dubious voters."

The ranks of the dubious include eligible persons who appear more than once on the electoral roll, who cannot be traced because their home addresses are missing or incomplete, who are listed as residents at addresses where they don't actually live, whose genders in the roll conflict with what's recorded in their identity documents, or who have died from old age but have remained on the roll nonetheless. Some, like Ruslan's son, are people who have never registered but suddenly find themselves mysteriously added to the list of eligible voters. In Malaysia's Bornean state of Sabah, a good many were illegal immigrants, who were given citizenship documents and registered as voters in an elaborate scheme by government officials dubbed "Project IC." In return for the gift of citizenship, it's said, these newly enfranchised voters could be counted on to express their loyalty to the government at the ballot box. The scheme is the subject of an ongoing commission of inquiry.

Part of the problem begins with the way voters are registered. The law here doesn't grant Malaysians automatic voting status. (Voting itself is not compulsory.) Citizens aged 21 and older must register with the Election Commission if they want to vote. But the registration process is a mess. Only paper applications are accepted, and half a dozen different agencies are in charge of processing them. Besides the Election Commission itself, political parties, the armed forces, post offices, and two other units under the Ministry of Information and the Ministry of Rural Development have the power to add voters to the rolls. For this election, 13.3 million people are registered to vote (some 2.4 million of them since the last general election in 2008).

Until recently, educating the public on the intricacies of election fraud was hard. Few laypeople could be bothered to comb through the roll looking for discrepancies, and the technical intricacy of the subject involved made it difficult for many citizens to get interested. One of the earliest groups, Malaysians for Free and Fair Elections (Mafrel), which was set up in 2003, struggled to reach a broader audience due to its lack of resources. But awareness took a quantum leap forward in the run-up to the 2008 election. That was when popular anger began to mount over other election-related problems, like the lack of media access for opposition parties and the perceived subservience of the Election Commission to the executive (even if hard data on alleged electoral fraud wasn't readily available).

When all the votes were finally counted, it turned out that the opposition People's Pact, led by Anwar Ibrahim, had stripped BN of its customary two-thirds majority in the national parliament (though the ruling coalition still retained enough support to keep its control over the government). That remarkable result coincided with the rise of the Bersih ("Clean") reform movement. Bersih held its first street rally in November 2007, followed by two others in July 2011 and April 2012. Demonstrators called for electoral reforms, including a clean-up of the electoral roll and automatic voter registration (viewed as less susceptible to politically motivated tampering). Some also believe that the People's Pact could have scored more seats in parliament in 2008 if not for gerrymandering as well.

You Don’t Have to be Loyal to BN

Posted: 01 May 2013 01:34 PM PDT

It is because the Opposition has been strong since 2008 that the BN Government has been giving out BR1M; so the stronger the Opposition is, the more BR1M there will be.

Kee Thuan Chye

I have a niece who is a government doctor, and recently she asked me a question that was most alarming: "Can we government servants vote against Barisan Nasional (BN)?"

"Of course!" I replied.

Her fear was that if she did not vote for BN, she would be deemed disloyal to the Government. But this is not so.

BN is only the government of the day. It is the officer in charge that takes care of the affairs of the country because they were voted in to do so. They do not represent "the Government" in its eternal sense. Neither do they represent "the country". BN and the country are not one and the same.

If BN is perceived to be doing a poor job of running the affairs of the country, it can be replaced by another coalition with the hope that the latter can do a better job.

Also, if BN is perceived to have been corrupt and making money for its own officers rather than taking care of the interests of the country, it should be replaced.

There is therefore no such thing as disloyalty to the Government.

In fact, by not voting against a government that is corrupt, the voter shows disloyalty to the country. And that is far, far worse.

To quote the American political activist and author Thomas Paine: "The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government."

We should do this on a daily basis, as part of civil society, if we want to be responsible for ensuring that the administration of our country is properly maintained, and many of us do. And apart from that, once every five years, we get to do it through voting.

In this regard, I would like to address what a Facebook friend has asked me to – the issue of his fellow Indians who are now saying they cannot vote against BN because they have received the BR1M money of RM500. He said they feel they have to remain loyal to the coalition because they have benefitted from its handout.

To this, I have to say that the Indians – and any Malaysians of any race, for that matter – need not feel that way. This is simply because the BR1M money does not come from BN. It comes from the taxes paid by the rakyat. It is the rakyat's money. The Indian beneficiaries of BR1M, who must also be tax-payers in one form or another, are getting back their own money.

I hope they will not be fooled by BN's ploy to make it look like the coalition is being generous and helpful and considerate of the less fortunate.

Dam battle in remote Sarawak constituency

Posted: 01 May 2013 12:22 PM PDT

"Use your vote to pick a party that will respect your native land rights"

Leonard Lim, Straits Times

THE words "Stop Baram Dam, Save Our River" are painted in black across the rear of Mr Roland Engan's beige four-wheel- drive vehicle.

It sums up the Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) candidate's message to voters as he traverses this vast and remote federal seat in north-east Sarawak.

A government proposal in 2008 to build a hydro-electric dam across the Baram River will submerge some 25 villages. More than 20,000 non-Muslim bumiputeras, known collectively as Dayaks in Sarawak, would be displaced from the land they have cultivated and lived on for decades.

The ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) says the dam will generate cheap electricity to attract foreign industry, which in turn will create new jobs, towns, roads and a better life.

But for the Dayaks - who have long resented the leasing of native land to logging and oil palm firms by the state - the dam is the latest in a long list of grievances. Their growing resistance makes Baram a battle to watch.

"Use your vote to pick a party that will respect your native land rights," Mr Engan, 39, tells residents during rallies at their longhouses.

The lawyer, whose childhood village Long Je'eh is among those which could be inundated by the dam, tells voters the pace of development in their backyard could be much faster if not for graft.

"We don't need a dam," he adds. "We need better roads."

Travelling around in Baram, which is the size of Pahang but has just 29,500 voters, remains difficult.

Many villages are hours away from the nearest highway and are linked by narrow gravel tracks.

This gives the better-funded BN, which can afford to hire helicopters - said to cost about RM6,000 (S$2,400) an hour - an advantage in campaigning.

As for Mr Engan, he keeps a portable stove in his vehicle to cook instant noodles while on the campaign trail.

It's one bumpy ride in Sarawak

Posted: 01 May 2013 12:16 PM PDT

Money is king in these rural areas – I witnessed at least one shirtless villager, perhaps slightly drunk, jabbing his finger at Mr Engan's team and saying: "You pay me, I vote for you."

Leonard Lim, Straits Times

Probably the most gruelling part of an election campaign in Singapore is climbing up and down dozens of flights of stairs in an HDB block to reach residents on every floor.

Deep in the heartlands of Borneo, where roads are undeveloped and some 29,000 voters are scattered across mountains and rainforest, it is a different story.

Try hitting the campaign trail in Baram, a constituency in north-east Sarawak that is nearly the size of Pahang.

I spent three days following opposition Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) candidate Roland Engan as he canvassed for votes, and endured hundreds of kilometres of bumpy and dusty rides on narrow logging tracks.

Fortunately it is not the rainy season – I was told that the tracks get muddy during such months, opening up the possibility of getting mired for hours.

The longhouses we visited were, for the most part, just a few hours' drive from the nearest city, Miri.

Those in the far interior can be an eight-hour drive away or accessible only by boat along the 466 km-long Baram River.

Government infrastructure in the rural areas is basic, and many villages get water from the river, streams or the rain.

And with longhouses and supplies sometimes hours apart, Mr Engan packs a portable stove in his four-wheel drive vehicle, to cook instant noodles when he gets hungry.

Photojournalist Kevin Lim and I did not have any desires to relive our army days by cooking in the Sarawak jungles, and relied on canned sardines and mackerel.

Campaigning in the rural parts, however, has its perks, especially when it rains.

Mr Engan usually holds a rally at the longhouse he visits. On the nights that I was with him, it began to pour soon after he stopped at one.

But unlike urban voters who would have to endure getting wet, the villagers listened to him in the comfort of their home, leaning against pillars and walls while sipping a drink.

Many had just finished dinner, and ventured out of their living rooms to the ruai (the covered communal area in front of the homes) to show support, or for some entertainment.

The ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition has for decades enjoyed strong support from residents in such rural areas. The residents find that pledging their loyalty comes with benefits.

A staunchly pro-BN longhouse I passed on Sunday was freshly painted a bright pink, while one just five minutes down the road that flew a giant PKR flag was rickety and run-down.

"That longhouse that supports BN? They get a new colour of paint every year," my Dayak driver, Mr Anyie Lah, tells me.

Money is king in these rural areas – I witnessed at least one shirtless villager, perhaps slightly drunk, jabbing his finger at Mr Engan's team and saying: "You pay me, I vote for you."

Will PAS betray its voters’ trust?

Posted: 01 May 2013 10:03 AM PDT

Chinese voters taking a cue from DAP have been urged to vote for PAS. But will PAS 'betray' its voters and impose its brand of hudud, effectively shackling the non-Muslims, if the Islamist party comes to power together with its allies?

Baradan Kuppusamy, The Star

A GROWING number of DAP leaders are speaking up, questioning the party's staunch support for PAS, a religious party that wants to turn Malaysia into an Islamic state.

PAS also wants to implement its brand of hudud, the ancient Islamic criminal code that stones one to death for adultery and have limbs chopped off for stealing, among other punishments.

These leaders are worried that their party's alliance with PAS is helping PAS to grow, win over non-Muslim support and become powerful enough to impose the PAS-style of intolerant Islam on the people.

These policies include no alcohol, Friday as the day off instead of the universal Sunday, a ban on entertainment and singing, moral policing, a ban on cinemas and numerous other instances of how non-Malays have been made to live through when PAS is in power.

These leaders are understandably worried that DAP, of which they have been an integral part for decades, is helping PAS win big in this most crucial of all elections.

They are worried that after winning, an emboldened PAS will start imposing its creed on society as it has already done in Kedah, where a pig abattoir was demolished in 2008, and in Selangor, where PAS shared power with DAP and PKR, and banned the sale of alcohol.

All this while DAP chairman Karpal Singh was alone in opposing PAS' plans for hudud and for an Islamic state.

But he stops short of telling voters not to vote for PAS and thereby advances PAS' dream of turning the country into an Islamic theocracy.

That's exactly what another DAP leader has bravely said, enraging PAS leaders, by urging voters not to vote for PAS.

Johor DAP deputy chairman Norman Fernandez, an outspoken lawyer, said voters "cannot gamble and risk their future with PAS".

He warned voters of the grave danger and risk in voting for PAS because PAS has sought to change its true colours.

PAS has always been consistent as a religious party, he said, adding that it was always propelled by Islamic concerns.

They appear moderate and progressive but their core is always intolerant fundamentalism.

In his article last week, Fernandez said: "I, for one, have finally made up my mind and am convinced that PAS does not deserve my vote" and he urged voters everywhere not to vote PAS and advance their cause.

He was prompted to speak up and risk censure from his own colleagues because PAS leaders, in recent weeks, started to speak up for hudud implementation and Islamic state.

They were speaking up in order to shore up support for their party but their speaking up had angered DAP leaders.

Norman was supported by his colleagues and one of them – Kedah DAP committee member S. Neelamekan – also spoke up, saying the Federal Constitution was clear in that Malaysia was a secular state and not an Islamic theocracy.

He said PAS' incessant calls to implement hudud law was "disturbing" and that such open calls were indeed "dangerous" for Malaysia.

"The only way we can stop this is to stop PAS," Neelamekan said.

"I will certainly not vote for PAS and I urge DAP members and Malaysians to do the same."

In Kelantan where they rule, it is common to see separate lines for men and women, women hairdressers are barred from cutting men's hair and having Friday as a day off.

In Selangor, PAS tried to ban cinemas, police places of entertainment and stop 7-Eleven from selling alcohol, among other things.

These are small missteps but indicate the larger things to come if PAS ever captures Federal power, in alliances with DAP and PKR.

Chinese voters are eager to vote PAS, taking their cue from DAP. It has been urging them to vote PAS as part of the Pakatan Rakyat coalition and change the government. DAP has even come up with the ubah (change) slogan.

But will PAS eventually betray the Chinese voters by resorting to intolerant policies on grounds that Chinese voters support it and therefore support its policies?

The Chinese voters, who make up about 25% of the 13.3 million voters, are keen to throw their votes for PAS as well, besides voting for DAP.

But Chinese voters form the majority in about 40 parliamentary seats and winning these at best they can be an effective opposition.

Will they be sending a wrong message to PAS that Chinese, too, welcome hudud law and also all the intolerance that goes with it?

PAS is already saying that DAP was willing to use its moon symbol when the DAP's rocket ran into problems with the Registrar of Societies.

They are saying that DAP was accepting hudud and the Islamic state when it agreed to use the moon symbol.

DAP leaders like Norman had to make a clear stand between cooperating with PAS and supporting PAS' many policies.

They just can't stomach the idea of their party working hand in hand with PAS, which has resolved to imposing its intolerant values on others.

What Malaysian voters want

Posted: 01 May 2013 09:58 AM PDT

They also want a change in the disastrous way in which Barisan Nasional has messed up our race and religious relations to their lowest level ever.

By Koon Yew Yin, FMT

In the past week since the election date was announced, I have taken part in and attended numerous rallies held by the Pakatan Rakyat parties in Perak.

During these ceramahs attended by thousands of Malay, Chinese, Indians, Orang Asli and other supporters of the opposition in the large and small towns and at the grassroots level, I had the opportunity to watch at close quarters and to see for myself the response of ordinary Malaysians who are throwing themselves into the political battle, many for the first time in their life.

I can honestly say that of the elections which I have participated in or observed since 1957, I cannot recall any election that has stirred up so much energy and excitement among opposition supporters and the fence sitters attending these rallies.

Based on crowd behaviour and conduct, it seems to me that there is something extraordinary that is taking place in the Malaysian electorate. This is the building up of a strong multiracial unity and solidarity amongst ordinary Malaysians attending these rallies or viewing them through you tube and other media channels.

What Malaysian voters want

Malaysians want not only regime change and to throw out the crooks and cronies who have been in power and looted our national treasury for so many years.

They also want a change in the disastrous way in which Barisan Nasional has messed up our race and religious relations to their lowest level ever according to most observers.

This transformation in the Malaysian collective mind set is visible in several ways. It can be seen in the way in which the Pakatan's message of trust and faith in the ability of ordinary Malaysians to rise above racial and religious differences is resonating with audiences.

Equally moving is the fervour and cheers from all sections of the crowd when the Pakatan speakers – including PAS – call for the rejection of racial and religious extremism.

This is such a contrast to the BN's inclusion of notorious racial and religious extremists such as Ibrahim Ali and Zulkifli Noordin in their slate of candidates; and Dr Mahathir Mohamad's insistence that Umno is better off with the support of Perkasa and other extremist elements.

In rally after rally I attended, the solidarity and unity of the multi-racial audience, and the enthusiasm and passion with which they are echoing the need for change in the country is truly a sight to behold.

It is so different from the triple cocktail offered by the BN emphasising racial and religious differences of the PR parties and seeking to instill fear and insecurity amongst voters should they vote for the opposition.

BN's dirty tactics on hudud and fear

It is not surprising that the dominant message – beside the portraits of Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and the local candidate – in the sea of BN buntings and posters that have sprung up in their millions all over the country is "kestabilan".

This is a crude threat aiming to strike fear in voters that all hell will break loose should they vote in the opposition.

Besides fear, the two other key BN messages playing on race and religion are visible in the way in which the government supportive media, especially Utusan Malaysia, the Star and New Straits Times, have been playing up the hudud issue.

Some of the dirtiest political front pages are now appearing in the Star which has repeatedly focused on the hudud issue and election violence to frighten and coerce its primarily non-Malay readers to voting to vote against Pakatan.

READ MORE HERE

Social media comes of age

Posted: 01 May 2013 09:53 AM PDT

ONLINE RECRUITMENT: Both coalitions are reaching out to voters

Santha Oorjitham, NST

IN May last year, Shamsul Fariz was one of the first 10 to respond when Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin tweeted for volunteers in his Rembau parliamentary constituency. Khairy tweeted back with his thanks.

A week later, Shamsul was one of the members of the core batch who met Khairy at his personal office. And today, he is one of 10,000 Barisan Nasional Youth Volunteers (BNYV) across the country -- of whom an estimated 80 per cent were recruited through social media.

Since the 2008 General Election, both the BN and the opposition have used social media not only to get their message across to voters, but to persuade them to commit their time and efforts to the cause.

Both have been cautious, however, and have learned some lessons. Lesson number one might be: never rely on the kindness of strangers.

In Singapore's 2011 polls, the opposition Singapore Democratic Alliance went online to appeal for proposers, seconders and assenters for its bid to stand in the Tanjung Pagar Group Representation Constituency against Lee Kuan Yew's People's Action Party team.

Residents volunteered -- but the team of candidates was disqualified in the end because their seconder did not show up and they missed the deadline. It was the only walkover on nomination day.

"This year, under the rules and conditions for nomination day here, if a candidate's proposer says he or she didn't sign in front of the candidate, the nomination is rejected," says a PKR campaigner. "So we were afraid to ask people we didn't know, whether via social media or other channels."

BNYV national command centre director Zaidel Baharuddin is equally firm on this point: "No one dares to get proposers and seconders for nomination day via social media."

However, some candidates are signing up polling and counting agents online for the 13th General Election (GE13). Fahmi Fadzil, political secretary to former Lembah Pantai member of parliament Nurul Izzah Anwar, says she has found between 400 and 500 agents via Facebook, her website, leaflets and phone calls.

BNYV's Zaidel says social media is neither an effective nor an efficient way to recruit agents: "The best way is the local machinery in each division, which has a list of 'white' supporters -- party members and those who join BN programmes. The local leaders know them...."

Both coalitions also recognise that social media works best through constant, two-way engagement. "It's no longer top down," points out communications strategist Tan Sri Lim Kok Wing. "It is an interactive audience now. They respond. Today, they have a voice."

Tun Faisal Ismail, Umno Youth's new media unit chairman and chairman of the BN Youth Cyber team, says new media has helped politicians to engage voters and bring them into the process. Their favoured tool is Twitter, "the easiest for politicians to use and for people to access in comparison with Facebook".

"Nurul Izzah's team engages constantly through her blog and Facebook," notes Praba Ganesan, PKR's social media strategist. "They don't just announce a date, venue and event. When they wanted to turn the Lucky Garden roundabout into a garden of flags, they asked for comments on social media and, when people responded positively, asked them to help. At least 30 to 50 people came to plant the flags."

BNYV's Shamsul recalls that at their first meeting with Khairy, "we shared our opinions. Most of our ideas were used in the programmes". But, stresses Zaidel, "for social media, we need to give a general idea of what we want to do and what we can do. If it's purely bottom-up, it gets messy."

The major difference between the coalition's social media strategies relates to fund-raising. Basically, the opposition does it and the BN doesn't.

Back in 2008, PKR de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim had no online donation feature although offline donations were welcome via bank-in, says Ganesan. The blogs just provided a bank account number.

In the run-up to GE13, the party's "Demi Rakyat" website had iPay88 payment features, but the credit card feature was disabled in early April. The bank-in information is still there, however.

But for the BN, says Tun Faisal, raising money through social media is "not in our job description".

So far, reckons PKR's Ganesan, political parties are not fully utilising social media to engage voters.

"We've trod very carefully along the lines of what worked before, to add value," he says. "I believe we will see the full impact in GE14."

Why politics is not the answer

Posted: 01 May 2013 09:42 AM PDT

Politicians are trained to sell, not to speak the truth. And we, being the emotional consumers that we are, fall for the sales pitch especially when there's a promotion.

Jonson Chong, TMI

If you think changes in the political arena will bring about changes in our lives, you're right and wrong. There will certainly be changes but not the real changes that matter.

I'm talking about the things that make our lives meaningful and worth living, not about things becoming more affordable or us having higher incomes. Of course, the latter things help to make our lives easier, but they are not the things that give meaning to our lives.

I am talking about the relationships that we have with others and, most importantly, with ourselves. Our dignity and sense of worth should come from ourselves, not from a position or title, or the number of possessions we have in our storeroom.

Today, I wore three watches on my two wrists. It didn't make time more meaningful to me. But the laughs I shared with my wife certainly made my day.

Well, if politics is not the answer, what is? Good question. To me, the answer is education. Let me tell you why.

Politicians are trained to sell, not to speak the truth. And we, being the emotional consumers that we are, fall for the sales pitch especially when there's a promotion.

Why use old technology (BN) when there's a new one (PR). Believe me, if PR wins this round, we will be complaining about them in a couple of years, if not months.

In contrast, education speaks the truth. Well, at least good education. It's about equipping us for life, not about propaganda that will make us vote or buy a certain ideology or brand.

Unfortunately, education has also become a business. Indeed, the contents of today's education perpetuate the mindset in which we are caught.

Alas, we don't often remember what Albert Einstein said: "We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them."

The education system that exists today (to be fair, not only in Malaysia) is a relic of the past. Indeed, it was designed for a previous age. The age of industry.

In the information age, we need a different kind of education. One that equips and prepares our children for the reality of a fast and furious world. It must enable our children to think fast but also to stay calm in the face of speed. In the ferocity of today's reality, they must also learn to be kind, gentle and patient.

If IQ were all we needed for success, we'd be all very happy beings. Unfortunately, only a very small percentage of us are. And if you investigate what else they have, it's much more than IQ. It's EQ plus SQ (spiritual quotient), and God knows what else.

READ MORE HERE

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Khamis, 2 Mei 2013

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan:

Catat Ulasan