Umnonomics or How to be Really Rich Really Quick in Malaysia.

1)Lets privatise profit making companies like Plus and Telekom

2)Lets takeover loss making companies like MAS and Proton

3)Lets have monopolies on essential goods like rice,sugar,water,flour.When those companies cry loss,let’s subsidize them

4)Let’s lessen taxes and levies on large corporations and lets increase taxes on citizens.To be extra sneaky lets make those taxes less noticeable…like sustainable energy tax,GST etc.Because the lower the disposable income,the more we can BR1M their votes.

5)Lets insert emotion into the economy.Whenever a crony asks for funds,lets give them a million bucks for a keropok lekor vending machine.But when good ideas come through MDEC,lets give them hell when they apply for 100k.Never mind its insulated competition versus currency inflow, if people ask,we’ll just make it racial then people will shut up.

6)Let’s have APs for everything from cattle to fruit to cars..you know to make even more money.When people ask lets just say its to protect the local market.This way we protect both our cronies who import stuff in,and our cronies who get huge grants to produce inferior products and sell them back to Malaysians.Everybody wins.

7)Lets put our greasy governmental fingers in everything from plantations to banks to cattle.When things screw up,we’ll just get our cronies to buy them up.To make things more interesting,lets own MULTIPLE companies of each sort.That way,we’ll compete with each other,government agencies doing the same function,our cronies and the two or three foreign companies who care enough to stand all the bullshit 1-7 to do business here.Probably coz the poor CEO married a local.When we merge them we can call it smart partnerships,synergies or something catchy.That way no one will question the job cuts.

8)When the people start to feel the pinch and start questioning questionable policies like why we buy back water from Singapore,why are essential items so expensive here compared to everywhere else,why cars are so damn overpriced or why do foreign maids have a minimum wage but not locals…..lets just do a demo at Komtar( to blame the Chinese),Masjid Negara (to blame the Jews) or Merchant Square(to blame Anwar).Or we can just release a sex video from the National Archives.

This elections,vote with your brain.Vote for your pocket.Vote Cresent,Vote for Moon.Vote for Rocket.

Mahathir

Mahathir stripped the Royals of their power and now talks about defending the Royal Institution?

His son owns Asean’s largest brewery and he’s talking about how unIslamic supporting DAP is?

He changed the constitution more times than all five PMs combined and he’s talking about defending laws and rights?

He dissolved Umno and restarted his own Umno Baru,destroyed three of his deputies,accused Tunku of being a sellout,forced his succesor out of office and he’s talking about ‘giving way’ and ‘graceful exits’?

He single handedly destroyed the judiciary and is now talking about how the courts are biased?

You talked about Bangsa Malaysia then went on to endorse Perkasa and called for stripping of citizenship of people who just want a better election system.A system you helped screw up.

So I apologize,Tun,if I cannot accept your argument that if Kit wins Gelang Patah,Malaysia as we know it will somehow be destroyed.You pretty much already did that yourself without much help from DAP.

Panda v Hornbill (2013) or 10 Reasons why MCA Chose a Panda as their Mascot

This is not a panda

Hot in the heels of stupid statements,free food, anti hudud tirades, street demos and lame duck speeches, MCA has launched their latest weapon against Pakatan Rakyat,specifically the DAP.

Behold….the mighty ………panda.

Firstly I was upset,because I love pandas, the Panda is a pretty cute creature and is totally uncharacteristic and un-MCA like to use a panda. They seem more suited to use a chicken, a goat or maybe a banana.Yes, a banana would be great,a banana with blue spots to symbolize the party colours of MCA.

The MCA president has said the Panda is a reminder of the good relationship between Malaysia and Communist China. Yes, Communist China, the country thats still Communist and whose ruling Communist party attended the UMNO General Assembly, together with the Sulu Sultan’s reps.But hey, Hidup Panda!

Something YB Lau Weng San wrote on his Facebook status yesterday made me think…. he mentioned “I wonder why they chose the Panda as their mascot, Pandas don’t even live in Malaysia” Yes, YB you’re absolutely right. In fact, thats one thing in common some MCA people have with pandas-they don’t live in Malaysia either. In fact, some have Australian PRs.I suppose that’s their way to promote Malaysia My Second China  Home Programme.

So anyway, I did some thinking and came up with the following

10 Possible Reasons why MCA Symbolically Chose a Panda As Their Logo

1. Pandas are slow. They’re so damn slow, you need to show them how to have sex, though I doubt the good people at MCA have this problem.
2. Pandas are often used as pawns in diplomatic efforts involving people of Chinese origin (e.g. Taiwan, Japan…) Its called Panda Diplomacy.
3. Pandas are lazy, non productive and highly subservient to whoever feeds them
4. Pandas have two black eyes, symbolizing two proverbial punches in the face from their angry Panda electorate.
5. Pandas are nearing extinction.The panda has been referred to by biologists as a living fossil.
6. Pandas have spatial, short tem memory
7. Pandas shit 40 times a day.MCA talks shit around the same number of times in the same duration of time.
8. When mating, the female panda assumes a crouching position and the male panda mounts her from behind.This behaviour has also been observed in at least one MCA president.
9. Pandas generally do nothing but sit on their bums all day. This behaviour has been observed as well in MCA members. Its called pre election hibernation.
10. No one takes pandas seriously.

The Empress Dowager of the Wen Dynasty of Han was buried with a panda skull.Coincidentally, the Emperor had a mistress whose name is….I’l let you all find that one out by yourselves 😀

 

 

Overzealous, Misguided Civil Servants

I’m quite honestly fed up with civil servants who think its part of their job description to act as mouthpieces for Barisan Nasional. We’ve seen this done subtly in the past, but its become more and more pronounced at present.The pattern of behaviour used to be mild leaning towards government (usually by denials of this), to openly declaring support to political personalities to now brazenly backing political parties and making political statements that quite clearly smacks of bias and unbecoming of government officers.

There are three organs of the government. Civil servants fall under the Executive. The Civil Service (except members of the armed forces and police) though allowed to be political party members, are not allowed to hold party posts.Political membership aside, the civil service as a whole should not, cannot and must not be seen to be biased. If the impartiality of the civil service is suspect, the very concept of separation of powers, arguably the most important cornerstone of a functional democracy, will be shattered.

Civil servants must not only be neutral, but also be seen to be neutral. There is no harm in participating in the political process, as, naturally, civil servants too are citizens and stakeholders in this country. However it is important that a distinction, and a clear one be drawn between supporting a party as an INDIVIDUAL and supporting the party as a CIVIL SERVANT.

Which brings me to my next point- the directive said to be issued by the Director of HKL, barring stickers and emblems supporting the ‘Opposition’ .If it is true, then the good Director needs to learn a few things before making a fool of herself, her organization or her cushy JUSA position.

1)The General Circular does not forbid members of the civil service from being Ordinary Members of ANY political party.As long as it doesn’t affect their duties,restricting anyone from exercising this right is tantamount to denying them freedom of association and freedom of speech/expression, a right guaranteed under Article 10 of the Federal Constitution.Pursuant to this, the memo should be ultra vires as it contradicts the highest law of Malaysia.Heck, we’ve had active members of the civil service stand for elections on both sides of the fence!

2)PR is only the Opposition at Federal level.In four states,they are the government. Does this mean the Director bans Barisan stickers in Selangor,Kelantan,Penang or Kedah? Does this mean that if PR takes over the reins of the Federal Government, that Barisan stickers will be banned from HKL? If so, you can start by removing the Barisan logos from ‘Satu Lagi Projek Barisan Nasional’ emblazoned everywhere.

3) BN is a party,just like PR is a party. Support for the party is VERY different from support for the government. You are supposed to be loyal to the GOVERNMENT of the day, not the PARTY that FORMS the government of the day.You’re supposed to support national policies, not party policies. For example, you attend the National Day celebrations, not the UMNO General Assembly.if youdo, you do so in your personal capacity.

4)The grounds in which HKL is situated is legally represented by an Opposition MP.

By all means, support Barisan and campaign against the Opposition.But do so when you are OUTSIDE your desk, with your unblemished white labcoat off ,your black Government-issued nametag unclipped,and without the letterhead of your publicly funded institution. Because anything less would be overstepping your jurisdiction and stepping all over your staff’s rights.

So I joined the Blackout.

I’m an Internet addict. One day willfully saying no to 9Gag when there’s nothing wrong with my Maxis connection is like putting Angela Jolie next to me, wearing nothing but Chanel No 5, and telling me to close my eyes.And my nose.

Till yesterday I had my doubts about it, but having buka puasa with some friends I look up to kind of opened my mind. We should do something about it. What we do and how we do it is not as important as doing something about it. People fight their causes with varying degrees of commitment, with different levels of passion, employing different means with varying degrees of risk. But what’s important is that they, is that we, fight for something.

The amount of WhatsApp messages, FB messages and SMSes I got mocking this Stop 114A event was a bit discouraging. But to each his own.Everyone has their point of view- this is mine, and this is how I would answer you.

If you were to say “Why should we suffer?” I would say, we are already suffering.What’s one day without the Internet? Did anyone die? Was BERSIH a fun activity?How was Hindraf? Its not supposed to be fun, if it were, wars would not be fought over democracy,and the Boston Tea Party would have actually been, a tea party.

If you were to say “You’re just letting them win” I would say, “How does that logic work?”. I don’t comprehend- by illustrating a point, in a manner that attracts attention, and compels people to sit up and listen?

If you were to say “What’s the point?” “This is stupid” or “What does this prove?” I would say, “I’m getting used to my life after 114A” . Once they start clamping down, it will be like Operasi Lalang, virtually.Remember what happened after Ops Lalang? How many remained with the lips unsealed?They will knock you down, keep you down till you’re used to it, then lift their boots off your face.By then, silence, subservience and obedience would be your Pavlovian second nature.

If you were to say, “It’s the job of the MPs” I would say, democracy is not a birthright, it’s a daily struggle. It is only as alive as the life you give to it”

If you were to say “I’m exaggerating” I would say, “Pick up a paper from 1955, and pick up yesterday’s news, and see the difference”

Yes, except replying 2 WhatsApp messages, I went offline. That was in my own way, how I showed solidarity, just like how we walked in Bersih and everything else. That’s just my way of agreeing with the cause. If you disagree with this, it is of course your prerogative. If you think I am stupid for doing it, I congratulate you for your higher cognitive function, as I am obviously less evolved than you.

So, I chose to follow my friends to blackout social media for 24 hours.A blackout that caught regional blogs as a news item. A trending topic, and at least 7 people on my social media lists that asked me what it was all about. If you think I was stupid for that, I guess I’m happy to be.

Dissenting the Dissenters.

 

 

Does the act of joining an organization automatically negate your right to your own opinion, or rather, the right to express that opinion publicly? Or does joining an organization compel you to subscribe to not only its ideals, but its position on every single issue as well?

 

That would be the distilled question that rose from the Tunku Abdul Aziz debacle. Having met the guy personally three times, it isn’t difficult to see why DAP worked hard to entice him in. Tunku represents highly educated, Western looking, progressive, elite Malays from an era bygone. Reminiscent of the times of Tunku Abdul Rahman, and Tan Sri Khir Johari.Therein is his strength and also his weakness. While his classy genial nature was appealing to the urban crowd, he could not really relate to the Malay grassroots that DAP was trying hard to impress.

 

The Malay grapevine responds to nationalistic sentiment. The question now is whether the sentiment will be geared more towards race or towards religion. While UMNO has a near monopoly on all things Malay, it is undeniable that PAS has a strong claim on championing the Islamic cause.How does Tunku fit into all this? Well, the simple answer is that he doesn’t.Tunku doesn’t really represent the majority of the Malay electorate, he represents a small portion of the elite Malays.

 

But what about his dissenting view?Dissent has been the cornerstone of not only democracy, but civilization itself. The world became civil once we tolerated dissenting views. The acceptance of agreeing to disagree was what stopped tribal feuds, warring nations and avoided catastrophes. Ergo, it is not an exaggeration to say that the ability or right to dissent is a human right.

 

The fact that Tunku belongs to a political party should not only not negate this, it should reinforce it. Politicians should not be forced to be mindless drones toeing the party line. How can we on one hand ridicule the government MPs for not being allowed a mind of their own and turn around and do exactly that?

 

When even the BN appears to tolerate opposing views from within their own fold, cases in point, Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah (almost everything!), Datuk Lee Hwa Beng (PKFZ), Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat (MRT), Senator T Murugiah(displaced Indians), and even Taib Mahmud and Bernard Dompok (the Allah issue). And since Tunku’s position was on BERSIH, Datuk Lee Hwa Beng attended it (despite BN’s anti-Bersih stand) yet he has not been publicly rebuked.

 

I love the DAP, I think for the most part they practice what they preach. That’s why I joined the party. But I’m still me, with my opinions and views that sometimes run contrast to what the party believes in, and I’d like to think that’s allowed.Especially for one like Tunku. Cheers, sir, and thank you. Wish you have an awesome life ahead 🙂

 

MCA’s debate in the context of MCA (2005)

MCA, the Malaysian Chinese Association, coincidentally shares its acronym with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 , a British Act of Parliament tabled in Parliament in 2005. This act , summarily outlines 5 principles to protect people who lack capacity to make particular decisions, but also to maximise their ability to make decisions, or to participate in decision-making, as far as they are able to do so.Hence, purely as an academic exercise, I thought it would be interesting to look at MCA(the act) form a political parties’ perspective. What happens to a political entity that cannot make decisions for itself any longer, as those decisions are deemed to not make sense to the reasonable man?

The aforementioned principles, are:-

1. A person must be assumed to have capacity unless it is established that he/she lacks capacity.

Now contextually speaking, a person should be allowed to make his or her decisions until his or her decisions do not make sense. For instance, setting up a debate with a certain topic and then veering off the topic, and later having a roomful of people from your party ask questions quite irrelevant to the topic, then lodging police reports about the racist nature of a quote originating from the topic you presumably set.

2. A person is not to be treated as unable to make a decision unless all practicable steps to help him/her to do so have been taken without success.

What do you make out of a political party that has a strong leader who is bent on stamping out corruption, suddenly replaces this leader with a minister who months before that, resigned in shame from having the entire nation see him nude in a home made pornographic video of him having sex with someone other than his wife?

3. A person is not to be treated as unable to make a decision merely because he/she makes an unwise decision.

Granted, the above two may just be unwise decisions, so if MCA(the party) would be an individual in the UK, we should probably still treat him/her as mentally capable.

4. An act done, or decision made, under this Act for or on behalf of a person who lacks capacity must be done, or made, in his/ her best interests.

And therefore we should allow them to exist, for their best interests, which apparently is only known to them.

5. Before the act is done, or the decision is made, regard must be had to whether the purpose for which it is needed can be as effectively achieved in a way that is less restrictive of the person’s rights and freedom of action.

Since we have established there is no point in using MCA on MCA, then we should allow it to make all the stupid (at least in my opinion) decisions it does. After all , I am sure case law tells us, stupidity is not recognized as a mental disorder.

What we can learn from the MIC AGM

1) MIC has no Standards

Because apparently, people who are not good enough to be MPs in the eyes of BN Kuala Selangor, is good enough to be the President of the MIC

2)The Cabinet has no Standards

You may not be good enough for the Dewan Rakyat, but you can try applying for Senatorship, Ministership and be part of the machinery known as Fastsinkingship.This is not peculiar to MIC, as it also happens in other ‘pseudo-members’ of BN like Gerakan and PPP. Coincidentally, all these parties have leaders who did not get elected (and in one case, did not even get chosen to stand for election), but managed to be Cabinet members via the mysterious ‘Jabatan Perdana Menteri’ whose functions and roles are basically whatever the Perdana Menteri fancies or can come up with that sounds important, official and ‘gempak’.

3)MIC Members Don’t Know where Putrajaya is

That is the only logical explanation as to why only half of the delegates turned up, even after the prerequisite for being a delegatewas reduced from being a divisional officebearer to merely a branch head (meaning there iss a 80% chance you are a retired headmaster/mistress)

4)MIC members do not give a F*ck about Elections

Why else will 200,000 members not be registered voters? If voting for/supporting the government is not MIC’s first and foremost aim, what is? Sucking up to the leaders? I did not say it, Palanivel did.

5)MIC Doesn’t Give a F*ck about Indians

Because they won’t allow anything on Interlok,possibly the one major thorn in the Indian community’s side at the moment, to be mentioned in the AGM.An Indian Muslim gentleman is out there fighting so that Palanivel,Subramaniam and Nijhar’s children won’t have to read and come home to Papa asking why they are called Paria, but MIC is not allowed to talk about it in their AGM

6)Indians Don’t Give a F*ck about MIC

Coz we got more important things to worry about than retired headmasters coming together to eat Iddiappam once every two years.

MCA-Malaysians Care Ah?

It has come to this. Bickering over party posts to the point the party splits to three, or maybe more. This is exactly the problem beleaguering Barisan component members that causes individual component parties to fail as organizations and in turn, Barisan to fail as an alliance. How can parties that are not unified, come together with other semi dysfunctional parties as a disorganized coalition and ever hope to unite this increasingly fragmented nation? The problem besetting MCA today can be seen as a microcosm of the problem beleaguering BN as a whole.

Political patronage, political cliques and jostling for positions are by now the hallmark of a Barisan politician. The feudal nature of politics in MCA is not unlike the warlord led factions in UMNO or the somewhat milder but ever present ‘talaivar’ division leader led factionalism in MIC. Almost the same thing can be said about all BN component parties. Factionalism is an integral part of politics, and factions do exist in DAP, PAS and PKR as well. However, in Pakatan, mostly issues and ideologies cause the factions to split.

In Barisan however, factions are about who gets what and the ‘what’s in if for me?’ mentality. It has come to a point where event he newspapers are openly covering the many dinners and such by the various leaders of MCA. No MACC report appears to have been lodged over these ‘dinners’ yet when Penang decides to give out RM100 in aid to old foks, its almost immediately branded as corruption. But such are the ways in Malaysia. Regardless, MCA continues this pretext of being the legitimate voice of the Chinese community of Malaysia.This behaviorial façade lends credit to claims that MCA is increasingly irrelevant to the Chinese community specifically, and the Malaysian community on a broader perspective. We have heard many experts and analysts comment on the odds of the three factions dubbed the Three Kingdoms in winning the upcoming MCA elections. While I personally do not see much value in any of the camps worthy of comparison to the luminaries depicted in their Chinese epic namesake, the intelligence of Zhuge Liang, the benevolence of Liu Bei, nor the cunning of Cao Cao. No,I doubt the three MCA former leaders vying to be its future leader, are not doing it for the sake of unity. Rather to crush his foe and seal his control over the second largest and second richest Barisan component party. But all this analysts, while predicting the wins and losses, have missed a much more important crisis, as compared to the internal crisis faced by the MCA. The crisis is that the Chinese no longer care.

A Desperate Party called Barisan

Traditionally, the DAP has always been the enemy of MCA and Gerakan, and to a lesser extent, PPP and MIC. DAP’s ethnic composition of predominantly urban, working class Chinese and a sizeable number of Indians and a few liberal Malays, was not much of a challenge to the ruling BN.The political behemoth of Barisan hadn’t had to worry about DAP, as the urban non Malay vote alone usually would mean the DAP gets less than 15 seats in overwhelmingly Chinese areas, leaving the mixed seats and rural areas to MCA, and Penang, to Gerakan, its traditional stronghold.It was a good formula,as MCA could still claim to be the legitimate representative of Chinese interests in BN, still having their share of power and the trappings that came with it.

All that changed after March 8, 2008.Suddenly, the traditional battle lines were redrawn. Without their front line allied parties, UMNO was placed in an ackward position of fending off not just their traditional enemy of PAS in the rural Malay heartland, they now have to contend with an urban savvy PAS in the urban mixed seats.A revitalized PKR and stronger DAP, now brazen with a lack of resistance by MCA, MIC and the other component parties of BN, and fuelled by the perception that the people are rallying behind them, now dares take on what it has been hesitant to do- the jugular of BN itself, UMNO.

Having to fight a battle on many fronts is something new to UMNO. After all, 52 years in power has made the party large, unwieldy and vain.Many of their strategists and think tanks never really had to think much before. It was back to the drawing board, or rather for most, going to the drawing board for the first time.Quite at a loss, UMNO attempted the easiest method first- throw money at the PR states. While throwing some cash around works at first, they soon realized this was unsustainable and the demands from their grassroots could not be met. Many so-called fighters in UMNO are motivated by the Ringgit, and financing these fighters was becoming a hassle. To make matters worse, even more money is required to motivate them to take down Pakatan.

Having thought it out, the strategists decided a morale booster is required. The Perak government fell, but it did not get the effect desired. While it did serve as a morale booster for a few UMNO warlords in the North, the rest of its component parties shuddered.How are they going to explain it to the people. Calls for the dissolution of the Perak DUN by a few MCA and Gerakan people rang hollow as people were no longer interested to hear what these parties had to say. UMNO had to then engage DAP, PKR and PAS head on themselves. (..to be continued)