Politicians & "Doublespeak"

The fight for Permatang Pasir is heating up to unprecedented levels. The heat may not be felt on the ground as much as in cyberspace. This is the new reality of Malaysian politics. For those in urban areas with good access to the Internet, technology has made every by-election a kind of general election.

It has also made whatever politicians say easy to record. This means politicians have to do something which they have never done before (and apparently can never do) - be consistent. On both sides of the political divide, this has resulted in tragic-comedy.

In Malaysia, the task of the politician is very difficult. He/she has to speak to different communities in the most sensational way possible. In Shah Alam, for example, some say that if a certain party comes to power, pork would be sold openly in the streets. They know that this may not be a credible statement but it will at least grab headlines, thus proving their credentials as champions of race and religion.

But when in Bangsar, the same politician can be most civil, drink coffee whilst being interviewed by magazines, chat shows and aspiring movie-makers. Words like accountability, transparency, good governance are used generously.

Those in the blogsphere should not be naïve and expect politicians to be guided by principles, ideology or morals. Politicians are not cynical but they are driven by pragmatism. Politics is about the aspiration to power.

Once in power, like Dr Mahathir Mohamad was for 22 years, then we can see the practical demonstration of beliefs. In the case of Mahathir, it was to push the country forward materially with little regard for institutions or contrary opinion.

For most politicians in Malaysia, the power to put ideas into reality is what drives them. At first, they may have a genuine wish to reform or improve the country, to make things better. But for some, especially those who have held public office for more than a decade, power becomes the end itself.

So, the question of morality or ethics no longer matters. Only their political survival matters, even if they have been president of a political party longer than a quarter of the nation!Ability to bury contradictory facts But like in any human society, there would be anomalies. Tok Guru Nik Aziz Nik Mat is one clear example of a man of convictions, preferring to live modestly and does not get turned on by material things.

But those who doubt that he is a politician will never be able to regain Kelantan for he is capable of doing whatever necessary to remain in power, so long as these acts do not contravene his beliefs.

What makes a convincing politician is the ability to believe in whatever he or she is saying at a particular time to a special group of people. The best way is to reduce very complex situations toeuphemisms, to concentrate on only one aspect and bury contradictory facts under as much bluster and bile as possible.

This was the case with the proposal against building a Hindu temple in Shah Alam. For those who continue to accuse Shah Alam MP Khalid Samad from PAS of being a traitor to race and religion, no Hindu temple should be built in any neighbourhood where Hindus are not in the majority.

Thankfully, we get a better picture of the whole issue when Khalid explained that it was not his decision alone to relocate the temple, that no new temple was being built and that the alternative site was in an industrial park, not suited for women and children. Moreover, the present site would serve three neighbourhoods with 1,000 Hindus.

Khalid's clear-minded explanation does not matter. The political point has been scored. He is betraying the religion because he wants a Hindu temple built in a Muslim-majority neighbourhood. Never mind that if that rule was followed, no temple or church can be built in Shah Alam; which clearly contravenes the Federal Constitution's guarantee of freedom to practice one's religion.

Nonetheless, these novice politicians are well on the way to becoming accomplished practitioners of political double-speak. The best examples of double-speak are often delivered with a grin and a smirk. They contain some grains of credibility, just enough paranoia and clear conviction in the “truth”, at least for the moment.

BN still telling Malays the same thing

At the centre of BN's campaign in cyberspace is the claim that the “Chinese are taking over the country”. This is perhaps the most ingenious way of distracting the Malays from what is actuallyhappening on the ground.

The tactic here relies on the power of memory and some 40 years of conditioning. In the 1960s, most Malays living in urban areas would have experienced the “great” wealth disparity between the middle-class Chinese and their “poor” conditions. Nobody can deny this when Malays collectively owned less than three percent of the national wealth.

In reality, what they were not told was that in the 1960s, owing to colonial policies, the Malays were left out of the commercial economy. This feeling of being "beggars in their own land" continues to be a powerful emotion especially for those above 60 years old. Of course, the electorate was not told that urban poverty was felt by all ethnic groups. If all the Chinese were rich, there would not be pauper hospitals or homes for the destitute.

Now, in 2009, after nearly 52 years of independence and some 40 years of “Ketuanan Melayu” (dating from 1969) plus 22 years of Mahathirism, the BN is still telling the Malays the same thing: “the Chinese are taking over the country”, "pork will be sold openly in the streets of Shah Alam", "Chinese can read Malay but we cannot read Chinese so all Chinese dailies should be translated into Malay", "PAS is a puppet of the DAP", "the Malay leaders of Pakatan are traitors to race and religion", "we are different because MCA, MIC and Gerakan, they know their place".

Unfortunately, time is the ultimate enemy of double-speak. What Malaysians experience on the ground is no longer the same as in the 1960s. As one Internet newspaper explained, for the man on the ground living in Permatang Pasir, the politicians “have forsaken” him.

Is it any wonder why Shahrizat Abdul Jalil is talking about broken drains? She also added that the voters know that the state government needs federal support for material progress.

The problem with such a statement is that it reinforces what people already know. Politicians only visit a place like Permatang Pasir when it suits them. Issue veiled threats and, at the same time, offer “opportunities” for progress. In a Malay-majority constituency, some politicians add racial bluster to get extra attention whilst others bring up heaven and hell for added measure.

One does not know how the voters of Permatang Pasir will vote but in cyberspace, all this double-speak provides some comic relief as we think about our collective future and ways to make sure we can make ends meet. Obviously, this bunch does not have the wherewithal to lead us anywhere.