JAN 30 — A political party or coalition is inclusive if it enjoys adequate membership support across all key communities in the country and its leadership is premised on a power-sharing formula. I maintain the argument that if democracy is to thrive as a force for good in Malaysia, each side of Parliament must be made up of constituency representatives who belong to a sustainably inclusive party or coalition.
Why is inclusiveness relevant? Because we still have a very strong sense of cohesiveness towards our respective communities. Non-inclusive parties and coalitions are only supported by some communities but not others, and as such create communal divisiveness and instability.
Barisan Nasional is generally composed of non-inclusive and divisive race-based parties, like Umno, MCA and MIC. But together, they form a stable and complementary coalition because they manage communal interests through an accommodative power sharing formula. Fifty years of unbroken rule seems to suggest that Barisan and its predecessor, the Alliance, are good examples of sustainably inclusive coalitions. But sustainable inclusiveness does NOT necessarily guarantee popularity or effectiveness. It simply denotes stable acceptance of such a coalition by all communities in Malaysia for it to offer itself for political office.
Pakatan Rakyat has two major non-inclusive parties in the coalition. DAP is non-inclusive because although it desires a secular egalitarian society, it has negligible Malay support or membership. Pas is non-inclusive because it desires a theocracy, and effectively has no non-Malay support or membership. But because collectively the coalition has membership support and leadership representation across all key communities, Pakatan can also be said to be an inclusive coalition.
But is Pakatan Rakyat’s inclusiveness sustainable?
The answer must be no. As it stands, there is no clear stable power-sharing formula between its stakeholders, and the political manifestos of its member parties are at odds with each other. It takes little to force divisions between its component parties. And when the differences become irreconcilable, the coalition will collapse, and these parties will revert to what they were before; i.e. separate and distinct non-inclusive parties that have contradicting political aspirations. In short, they will become instruments of communal division.
Any attempt by such distinct non-inclusive political parties to form a federal government will clearly be futile. But Malaysia’s ability to achieve nation-building successes would also be obstructed if these parties were to continue to make up the Opposition as unaligned non-inclusive parties as opposed to as a single sustainably inclusive coalition. This is so for the following reasons:
? Societal instability caused by communal divisiveness, which ensues as a result of support for these disparate non-inclusive parties, creates a degree of legitimacy for the government to take liberties with its executive authority to address such disequilibrium in a manner that could be construed as being incompatible with democracy and the rule of law.
? It is impossible to really understand the true motives of government when such liberties are taken under a shroud of opaqueness. As a consequence, each member of the public will judge such actions solely by reference to his or her prejudices and biases. This could result in the perpetuation of a dishonest and dictatorial government in power, or conversely, the transference of such power to an alternative coalition that has no real capability of effective leadership; simply because the electorate chooses to vote with the heart and not the head.
? No matter who is at its helm, BN (Umno in particular) will be incapable of developing the right resolve to learn and improve itself, or to develop and implement government policies that make the most sense, because its priority is to guard against the threat posed by these separate non-inclusive parties, which it believes could otherwise destroy the very way of life for which it stands. No matter what good ideas might surface, it will, as a result, continue to pander to the conservative elements therein, and acquiesce to everything that they do to retain the status quo. In the longer term, it will continue to alienate good talent.
? A lack of an alternatively inclusive coalition to compete against BN for the affections of a minority community weakens the bargaining position of the component party representing such a community within BN. It is therefore unsurprising for senior MCA leaders to refer to the relationship between Umno and MCA as being that of “a master and a servant”.
? Any cause that is supported, initiated or championed by any non-inclusive party will lack the credibility of being supported by all communities. So a cause championed by DAP will generally be perceived as being primarily in the interest of the non-Malays, and against the interest of the Malays, even if untrue. This situation unnecessarily exacerbates communal tension, even when wholly unintended.
? Finally, the continuance of such sectarian politics is akin to having a cocktail of inflammable gases collecting in an enclosed space. All you need is a spark, in a highly pressurised or panic-laden situation, and you will have a major conflict on your hands. A worsening economic environment and the growth of increasingly disenfranchised communities might be the perfect circumstances for a spark to be ignited.
Just imagine instead, if we had a truly sustainable and inclusive opposition party or coalition that represents the interests of, and is acceptable to, ALL Malaysian communities, both in form and in substance. Imagine if that party/coalition was so stable and mature in its power sharing and so complementary in its ideals, that given the opportunity, it could easily form an alternative government without any communal volatility aroused. And if one day, it is seen as no longer acceptable to the electorate, it too could itself be replaced by BN to form the following government. Almost magically, many of these issues that would otherwise have arisen because of the presence of non-inclusive parties would simply disappear.
To begin with, the societal instability created by communally divisive non-inclusive parties disappears. As such the liberties taken by the government in the name of maintaining a societal equilibrium can no longer be justified nor utilised. Hence the behaviour of both the government and the Opposition will become more transparent and subject to scrutiny and the rule of law. BN and Umno will no longer be able to afford to focus solely on protecting the status quo, and will look to reinvent itself in a way that allows them to democratically win the affections of the electorate. Competitive democracy will self-regulate leadership conduct. Any cause taken up by the Opposition will be seen as being in the interest of all communities. Minority communities will enjoy proportional bargaining power, in that democratically competitive forces will ensure that their interests will be adequately taken care of by both BN and its sustainably inclusive alternative in the Opposition.
Regardless of whether you support Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat, and what race or religion you might belong to, if you hold moderate and tolerant views about how this country is to be led, then the logic of an inclusive multiparty democracy should make sense and appeal to you.
It is only those who hold extremist non-inclusive views, whether in supporting secularism, the concept of a theocracy, or race-based nationalism that will resist tooth and nail any initiative to get the country moving towards such an inclusive multi-party system of democracy. Because they know that such a system would signal the end of their narrow non-inclusive brand of politics, which today has the capacity to hijack any attempt to build a united Bangsa Malaysia.
Each political party needs the courage to jettison extremist and non-inclusive views that might prevent it from developing sustainably inclusive partnerships with others in order to collectively represent the interest of all Malaysians. In particular, insofar as enabling Pakatan Rakyat to become a sustainably inclusive alternative to Barisan Nasional, a) Pas must be willing to abandon its insistence on hudud and the implementation of a theocracy, b) DAP must be willing to discard those ideals that make it repugnant to the Malay community, and c) PKR must be willing to remove any extreme Malay nationalist elements therein.
If these parties are not able to take such steps, then backing Pakatan Rakyat, as a democratic force for good, will be pointless. The solution might instead need to come further down the time horizon, by the creation of an alternatively truly sustainable inclusive political party that can really do what is needed to appeal to all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or background, in the wake of Pakatan’s eventual demise.
I beseech everyone who stands behind the notion of moderation in Malaysia, no matter which party you support, to recognise the criticality of a sustainably inclusive multiparty system, and to work together to ensure its deliverance. Our children’s future depends on it.
Suflan Shamsuddin is author of “RESET: Rethinking the Malaysian Political Paradigm” published by ZI Publications Sdn. Bhd.
Show/Hide comments
Show/Hide comment form
It does not matter if we end up with Robespierre. Getting rid of the corrupt regime come first.