Sheesh, I can’t remember where I last saw election statistics a few weeks ago (anyone have an idea?), but from what I saw, it appears that about 40% of Malaysians voted for the Opposition. And yet we don’t have a corresponding representation. Are you still certain that critical mass is the answer - and how large a critical mass? With the election circus in play, I’m not sure anything less than a 70-80% vote for the Opposition will mean anything.

Are we going to get that? I’m not so confident about saying yes… which brings me back to the question: what other means are there for you, as a citizen, to push forward or secure your interests? None, unless you’d consider joining Barisan Nasional.

re kabinet rakyat…sure…can i be the ‘minister of natural resources ;D’ not that i am corrupt but hey, i’ve always had a heart for the environment ;D

There’s only so much NGOs can accomplish, and with our hopeless government at the helm, they can’t do much. BN isn’t interested in listening to anyone unless that listening serves its interests. The ballot box is really the more potent threat to them.

@john: well, the corollary of focusing on NGOs is to admit (at least what I believe) that opposition parties cannot supplant the current government. My argument is that to rely on opposition parties to express the interests of people on the ground, when opposition parties are not able to replace the government, is to rely on an ineffective vehicle for said interests.

Hence the shift toward NGOs which, although apolitical, still do represent interests. What I’m saying is: let the incumbent maintain its place in governance because that’s what it wants, while channeling citizen participation into NGOs who will then lobby for its own interests. If opposition parties are ineffective (not really their fault, tho’), then we must look for other options, is what I’m saying.

(a bit defeatist, I think, but maybe a more pragmatic solution?)

As an aside, I disagree that NGOs can form the main thrust of a movement for change. Ultimately, in a democracy (or pseudo-democracy like Malaysia), it is political parties that have the true power to effect change by contesting for power. NGOs form a critical component of change, but they cannot form the brunt of change as long as they remain apolitical in nature.

P.S. I see you license this blog under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike licence. Thumbs up: http://www.infernalramblings.com/articles/Global_Socio-Politics/145/

;)

That being said, I think what you’ve said is fair: there’s a difference between what ideas a small, privileged slice of the population (like us bloggers - we are privileged in many ways in respect to other Malaysians) and what politicians must clearly see on the ground in joe public’s constituency. While I don’t think the more prudent amongst us are ready to storm the Bastille just yet (haha!), I think I do agree with you when you warn against romanticizing civil action or even politics.

As for a more active participation, what I can say is that a few bloggers have been tossing around ideas behind the scenes, some still active in the blogosphere, some not anymore. I can’t speak for them, and I do know their interests lie beyond politics and more in the realm of civil action, but at this stage nothing has materialized as yet.

As for the new Kabinet Rakyat effort, I’m willing and I’ll make time for it. I’m sure the others such as Desi, Howsy, Lucia, Lulu and Mavericksym are willing (perhaps if it is less focused on specific parties and more on a collective effort?) Sigma is willing, and perhaps freelunch2020. I think it’ll be prudent to bow to the experienced participants in politics to sketch a brief map of the territory.

It’s always going to be a question of how far you want to take this, right?

my thoughts are here: most of us involved in opposition politics want nothing more than to affect positive change.

it does us no good to try an act superior to non-member voters - what we want is for others to be able to see that the ideals we are fighting for are the same ideals the masses believe in (an end to corruption, a united Malaysia, etc..).

You say that we lack roadmaps, internal cohesion, ideas, good marketing strategies, etc.. All that is certainly fair comment. We aren’t afraid to accept such criticisms, and while we would love nothing more than your participation (through the party, NGOs, etc), what can we possibly have to gain from asking you to put up OR shut up?

But just for some context: surely you’ve had the experience of feeling like your critics don’t know what it’s like to be you. How difficult it is to be you, shoulder your burdens and still have to do your best.

The relationship between the Government and the Opposition may offer some insights. Yes, we are willing to hantam the Government at every opportunity. I think what lends us what credibility we have is that we are perfectly willing to take over. Assume the burdens, face whatever challenges the current gov’t says they are facing, *and* do a better job of running the country.

In that sense, we hope for the same in our critics. If you really feel that Anwar or Kit Siang cannot make it, then come on in, bring in the people power you rightly esteem so highly, and move the party in the direction you see fit. If you feel that choir is unconvertable, start your own party. Or start your own NGO (it’s a *little* less romantic than it seems tho). Anything.

John and I have debated whether the country more sorely lacks ideas & roadmaps or political will. I argued that political will was more the bottleneck than ideas (though why turn away ideas?? All efforts welcome!) . Similarly, as Nik alluded to, it’s not as if we are in denial of our alleged shortcomings - shoddy campaigning, internal politics, lack of finesse, etc. These are problems that are obvious in the same way that corruption and racism are obvious problems.

We’re working on it, working hard. When people criticise us on these points from the outside, our insides plead for them to get on board and make all the things they are advocating a reality. I see political will as the obstacle to being rid of corruption; similarly, I see increased participation from motivated folks to be the obstacle of opposition advancement. If there’s no sincere interest to be a part of that advancement, then maaaaaaybe there’s no sincerity in the criticism either?

You don’t have to join the party if you don’t want to. You don’t even have to vote for us if you don’t want to. But to cliche-ly quote the great soul: *be* the change you wish to see! Yes, punditry will always exist, but in only being a pundit, are you living up to your potential?

If you’re waiting to get ‘introduced’ to the scene - be it political, ngo, etc - please feel free to get in touch with me. Nothing would make me happier than to find a good match for you and your activist inclinations.

*

On that note, with regards to the kabinet rakyat proposal, can i ask for your help boss? The site I had envisioned would run best with a small group of volunteers. I don’t have all the e-mails of the ppl above who’ve expressed interest, but I’d love to have an e-mail list compiled for when the time comes (insyallah soon!).

if anyone’s interested, i can be reached at nat[at]jelas.info :) really looking fwd to hearing from you all :)

warmest,
nat :)

i recently e-mailed Nik and others a brief layout for this online Kabinet Rakyat which you’ve alluded to. if all goes well, i hope to have it up within a week or so? hoping to have more news ready by friday. even got a good domain name ready :P :)

sounds like i can count on you guys to help run the thing right?! :)

maybe more responses soon :)