The chicken and the egg

I believe we are moving towards better system like UK. We are in the move to balance up two-party system. But first, we have to win the election and PR to enforce MCLM as third force and act as referee for two-party system. Since both parties are not as mature as UK, they might use dirty tricks to kill each other. MCLM will be used to monitor both parties come clean and fair (written by jacko2012, October 06, 2011 13:44:29).

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

I want to write just a short piece today. I am busy with my studies so that means I can afford little time with cheong hei articles. (Someone asked me what cheong hei means. It means long-winded).

The comment above by jacko2012 is just one example of many such comments (and I mean MANY). I thought I would pick that one up (not that that one is special or above the rest) to demonstrate what many -- and I mean MANY -- readers like to comment.

It is always: yes, I agree. That is what we must do. That is not what we are currently seeing in Malaysia. But first we need to change the government. First we need to kick out Barisan Nasional. First we need to vote Pakatan Rakyat into government. And then we can talk about all that.

But that is just it. We are looking at the chicken and the egg syndrome. Which comes first, the chicken or the egg?

While you may argue: yes, I agree. That is what we must do. That is not what we are currently seeing in Malaysia. But first we need to change the government. First we need to kick out Barisan Nasional. First we need to vote Pakatan Rakyat into government. And then we can talk about all that.

I would like to argue: we must first do all that BEFORE we have any chance of seeing the government change.

For example, I am saying that we need electoral reforms.

You then say: forget it. This will not happen under Barisan Nasional. Wait till we change the government. Then we can talk about electoral reforms.

But then that is just it. Without electoral reforms we shall have no chance in hell of changing the government. Barisan Nasional, which has been in power for almost 54 years (earlier as the Alliance Party), will continue to be in power for another 54 years.

So which comes first, the chicken or the egg? Do we push for electoral reforms NOW or wait until after Barisan Nasional is kicked out and Pakatan Rakyat comes into power? Can Pakatan Rakyat win the election without electoral reforms? If we can change the government without electoral reforms, then why do we need to embark upon electoral reforms after successfully changing the government?

Do you get my point? And the same applies for all the other issues as well. We can’t wait until Barisan Nasional is kicked out before talking about it because ONE of the criteria to see a change in government is to talk about this NOW.

For example, how many voters (who are not happy about Hudud) are prepared to vote for PAS first, and then later, after Pakatan Rakyat becomes the federal government, we will argue and fight about Hudud? They will want the Hudud matter resolved BEFORE they decide whether to vote for PAS or not.

So you might say: yes, I agree. That is what we must do. That is not what we are currently seeing in Malaysia. But first we need to change the government. First we need to kick out Barisan Nasional. First we need to vote Pakatan Rakyat into government. And then we can talk about all that.

However, one million other voters will say ‘no way!’ and will either vote for Barisan Nasional or will boycott the election and not come out to vote at all. And this applies not only to the Hudud issue but to many other issues as well.

So don’t be shiok sendiri. Just because you place ABU (anything but Umno/asal bukan Umno) above all else, and are prepared to ‘talk only after PR comes to power’, does not mean that 10 million other voters also share your view. They would rather tread carefully. And if they are not sure, they would rather not vote for you.

So that is my very short article for today. And yes, I know, 80% of the comments will be about whether it is the chicken first or the egg first while they ignore the more important message in my article. I have grown accustomed to readers who argue about the colour of the rope rather than whether so-and-so committed suicide by hanging or was murdered.