I must admit some admiration for Dr. Mahathir; I know of no other person (alive) so effective and so blatant about lionising himself. I won’t believe that Badawi didn’t see this coming. His recent handling of the AP issue was, if anything, a sign that he was willing to let Mahathir-era cronies wallow in their own holes. His silence over the removal of Tengku Mahaleel and the sale of MV Augusta, however, must’ve been the straw that broke Mahathir’s back. You could hear the rumblings all the way here in JB, and when the government vacillated, and then capitulated, on the bridge issue, Mahathir came out with all guns blazing. So much for a summary of key post-Mahathir events I was keeping track of.
Other bloggers have written about Mahathir’s sudden and surprisingly vehement statements about his protégé and his former cabinet ministers, but what I’ve been interested in is what Mahathir’s done so far. In 1999, Bakri Musa wrote:
As Prime Minister, Dr. Mahathir brags about how he treats the affairs of state as a clinical problem. First he takes a careful history, followed by a thorough physical examination and appropriate tests. Then he would prescribe the most effective remedy. In assessing the problems of Malay backwardness, Mahathir’s history is sloppy, physical examination cursory, and laboratory analysis non-existent.[(1)]
En Bakri goes on to suggest - if not outright declare - that Mahathir’s brand of leadership involved attention to symptoms rather than the causes of problems; in other words, that Mahathir’s diagnoses and prescriptions were aimed at the superficial, not the root causes. It is this idea of superficiality that dogs me whenever I think about Mahathir. I think anyone living in Malaysia could come up with a dozen examples: grandiose brushstrokes on the face of the Malaysian landscape, replete with all the signature amenities of a modern, developed nation - McDonald’s, Petronas Towers, KLCC, and of course, the now-scuppered plans for an odd-angled bridge across the Straits of Johor.
And Mahathir ruled as he pleased, with the (seeming) certitude and self-belief of a doctor prescribing medicine to the poor, sick, villager. A simple refusal to believe he was wrong. Add to that a tendency to confront, be beligerent and stand up to everyone. I suppose it was almost impossible to disagree with him - and after Ops Lalang, after meddling with the judiciary and stripping the Sultans of their dignity, who would? His own protégés, it seems. I almost choked when I read Mahathir lamenting that he kept choosing the wrong people; if he had a choice, he’d still be in power, and that’s the point: no one’s good enough for Mahathir.
Especially, now, not PM Badawi. While I prefer Mahathir’s more modern vision of Malaysia compared to Badawi’s more folksy return-to-basics strategy, I can’t help but believe that the latter’s policies may bear more fruit for more people. An economy founded on a solid agricultural base, from which one can then focus on one’s own traditional strengths has the advantage of developing the large, mired underclass - created in Mahathir’s push to develop an educated, Malay middle class - and providing a sound footing for development. The signs of Malaysia pushed beyond its limits to meet the vision of one man are seen everywhere, in my opinion.
In the drive to urbanized, you have a large, agrarian Malay population clustered around urban and suburban centres with little experience or ability in trades which typically characterize the middle class ethos - from trade and business. Efforts to educate this growing, urban Malay population fall short, either through poorly-planned policies or tendencies to exaggerate socio-economic agendas. Then, in the attempt to create ‘towering Malays’, little thought is given to competence, and more to patronage. All failures. But as En Bakri notes, Malaysia and the growing, educated middle-class Malays prevail, despite haphazard curatives for socio-economic symptoms: positive aspects remain in spite of Mahathir.
That is not what Mahathir believes, anyway. It appears, sometimes, that he’s more interested in his legacy to his people, rather than in the interests of the people. I find it sad, and almost always amusing, when Mahathir lashes out about Approved Permits, not realizing that he had put Rafidah Aziz in charge way back then, or when he expresses misgivings about a parliament without sufficient voices from the Opposition; Mahathir ruled with an iron fist, suffered none to gainsay his decrees. So it’s become very interesting how ministers, and the NST, have been reacting to his latest outburst.
It might be my imagination, but watching ministers come out and support Badawi in public is like watching Mahathir getting punched in the teeth. I suppose this is karma.
- M. Bakri Musa, The Malay Dilemma Revisited, (1999). Here En Bakri was discussing Mahathir's conclusions, in particular, that Malays were genetically inferior - or underdeveloped - as a race. I've found En Bakri's characterization of Mahathir's style as inevitably bound up in his profession as a doctor quite interesting, and very explanatory. (↩)
Comments (5)
For many Malaysians, Dr M was the only PM they knew since they were born until his retirement and so, we have come to respect his courage in defying western controls and fighting for the third-world countries. But as current events continue to churn and possible new revelations to be exposed, we the younger Malaysians may one day be forced to learn that Dr M is maybe not as good as the leader we have loved so much before this. Which is kinda sad.
Do you reckon The Medicine Man will survive the next elections?
@Alan: Which makes it all the more sad; I don’t particularly like the whole traditional sentiment with letting leaders go “gentle into that good night” because that implies a willingness to sweep things under the carpet. The fact that Mahathir continues to “rage against the dying of the light” is an advantage to us all - and this refusal to give in might, at the end of the day, be his last, and greatest, contribution….
@howsy: I had a long answer prepared for your question, then streamyx up and died.. :p Basically, I feel PM Badawi’s chances of survival is directly proportional to how far back people remember, come the general elections. There are other factors in play such as factional in-fighting in UMNO, which could take a toll on PM Badawi, but we’ll just have to wait and see come said elections, I guess.
Dr M might be a lot of things..but it’s the results that matters, after 22 years in power look how far the country has achieved…it’s typical to hear people talk about if things were done differently or if Dr M didn’t do that or Dr M should’ve done this and the country could’ve been better…but that’s all just talk.. Dr M did things his way, some people had to be sacrified politically, some had to endure prison time, some got rich and some remain poor..but in whole Dr M really did put Malaysia on the map.
isn’t this the question: at what price did he put Malaysia on the map, or does it not matter? if you were the one affected by his excesses, would you still hold the same opinion? i don’t think it’s hard imagining your rights and freedoms trampled on the road to ‘progress’.
and it’s not just what he has done. it’s the consequences we have to live with today. because of Mahathir, we have a questionable judiciary which has no independence, and without an independent judiciary, any bill can be passed into an Act, and therefore enforced, without need for intervention by an independent party.
as far as ‘progress’ is concerned, perhaps someone can do a quick calculation on the financial cost - if not the social cost - of all his failed projects? We have lost so many things under Mahathir, and we have gained a veneer of a developed nation. what do we have to show for it? tall twin towers, large race tracks, a barely-used cyber city and a government edifice in putrajaya.
is this progress? or is progress measured by the level of urban migration Mahathir encouraged? what about the level of university education, not to say anything of pre-uni education? Mahathir is the same man who declared Malays genetically inferior in his ‘Malay Dilemma’, and having emasculated Malays, supported the props on which they still depend. What progress?
I respect your opinion that Mahathir has done much, but fail to see anything substantive. I’d say we’ve done well despite his policies. this isn’t new. opposition politicians have been pointing this out for decades, now.