Mahathir’s disregard of his legacy is a dangerous notion

 

In May 2018, Dr Mahathir Mohamad made headlines when he came out of retirement to become prime minister again, as the world’s oldest sitting head of government at the age of 93.

This was after the Pakatan Harapan coalition defeated Barisan Nasional, the successor to the Alliance party, which cumulatively had ruled Malaysia for 61 years.

In his earlier stint as prime minister, Mahathir served five terms in office from 1982 until his retirement in 2003.

I remember listening to a radio talk show soon after he was appointed in 2018. The host asked a guest what Mahathir’s legacy would be: building the world’s then tallest building, the Petronas Twin Towers during his first watch as prime minister, or returning to politics at such a ripe age.

The guest replied by saying that both were achievements of a rare individual and they must be remembered, besides the fact that he transformed Malaysia into a globally recognised nation.

So when Mahathir recently told BFM he was not bothered about the kind of legacy he will leave, his remark rattled some people. Coming from someone who is still looked upon as a national icon by the young and old, his words were indeed shocking and disheartening.

“I don’t care about my legacy. I’m quite sure when I’m dead and gone people will run me down and all that. It’s not important, I’ll be dead anyway,” he had said.

It can be construed, rightly or wrongly, that one can do as they please when in power as they don’t care how they will be remembered.

Now, this is dangerous stuff: leaders of parties with power will resort to the most immoral, unfair, dissolute and cruel acts without any sense of shame or conscience if they do not really care about what they bequeath.

The words of wisdom from our parents have always emphasised one thing – be a true human being and leave behind memories that your descendants will be proud of.

Based on history I am convinced that politicians, especially those at the top, hand down an important legacy after they leave office.

That legacy is even more important in today’s highly connected world, where one’s actions are recorded on the internet and can be made available with just one click.

Shouldn’t political leaders then have a strong interest in cultivating a positive, broad and enduring legacy because their actions will have an influence on policy debates long after they leave office?

Yes, there may be little empirical analysis of how politicians’ legacies are interpreted and used by the mass public but the media often discuss the legacy concerns of politicians.

If one cares to read, view or listen to the media on national development and direction, speakers frequently mobilise memories of past politicians in their discussions of current events.

Such invocations of past politicians tend to bolster the persuasiveness of contemporary arguments when made in the context of policies to either support their current decision or to reject proposals.

You may argue that politicians are perceived to lose significance upon leaving office so their legacies do not matter. But we are also often told of politicians’ legacies as a source of influence that endure even long after they retire.

Mahathir’s memories especially during his first stint as prime minister for 22 years had left a lasting memory in the minds of millions of Malaysians, fortunately on a positive note.

Many had hoped that he would return to correct some of the bad memories that he had left behind but unfortunately that does not seem to be the case. Some say his legacy from his second term as prime minister is in tatters.

So are the legacies of most politicians now, who are responsible for the political mess that Malaysia is in. I guess the thought that they will leave behind bitter memories never crossed their minds before they embarked on some dubious political moves.

Disregarding, or in Mahathir’s words, “not caring” for legacies will lead to hubristic acts without any conscience. This in turn will result in unethical behaviour whether in politics, the private sector or in society.

If we think of a legacy only as achieving a reputation or leaving a name on a building, or in terms of just financial wealth left behind, that is not it.

We may choose to work towards being remembered for the right reasons or we may choose to neglect it. But either way, politicians had better know that what they will leave behind is important to our children and grandkids.

The consequences of human action are inescapable and so too their legacy. - FMT

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.