FEB 20 — The media, the online community and members of the public have been enthusiastically discussing, analysing, reviewing and criticising the highly-anticipated debate between MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek and DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng.

As a member of the audience, I recognise the significance and impact of the open debate. However, I am sorry to say that the performance of the debaters is just middling.

Like my previous concern, the debaters had either promoted their parties or attacked each other’s political line and performance throughout the debate. The only common point was that they had intentionally or unintentionally avoided questions and the main topic. Sometimes they gave an irrelevant answer, and other times, they found a way to sing their own praises.

The debaters did not have much interaction over the main topic of “Chinese at a Crossroads: Is the Two-Party System Becoming a Two-Race System?” They just touched the surface and, most of the time, tried to avoid it. Therefore, the debate might be considered a small step forward to set a good precedent, but not good enough to become a model.

However, taking into account that both Dr Chua and Lim are English-educated, and since it was the country’s first open political debate in Mandarin, the debaters’ courage and demeanour on the stage indeed deserve warm applause from the public.

Meanwhile, the quality and tolerance of the audience have been greatly criticised. The Q&A session was the biggest failure of the debate. Some people asked questions in English or Bahasa Malaysia, even though they knew that it was a debate in Mandarin, while some were shamelessly abusive.

The debate on the stage was “smoothly” held, but the war of words off-the-stage has just started. Discussions on the Internet were even overwhelmed by irrational remarks. Just like what I have said, the winner and loser of the debate can hardly be decided. Most of the audience members already picked a side before attending the debate. They listened selectively and made their own judgements based on their stands.

The origin of open debates should be traced back to the US television debates and its biggest role is to provide a fairer and more transparent platform, so that representatives of confronting political parties can show their eloquence and charm. It can also help politicians to approach the public, while adding a little fun to serious political issues.

The debate between Dr Chua and Lim is over, but debates in the civil society has just started. It might be the biggest windfall of the debate.

We are looking forward to more similar debates in the future, and more importantly, we hope that the standard can be improved to become more mature, tolerant, diverse and rational, so that voters can truly assimilate the essence of democracy, instead of merely watching an interesting and funny political show! — mysinchew.com

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The Malaysian Insider does not endorse the view unless specified.