|
A campaign is currently underway to show the Malays that the outcome of the recent general election has resulted in their rights being eroded. If the Malays can be successfully convinced that this is so, then, come the next election, they will swing back to Umno.
NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin
It’s quite interesting that people see what they want to see. And what is even more interesting is that you can make them see what you want them to see. In the end, they do not actually see what they should but what you want them to. Basically, as what Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad is fond of saying, people have this herd mentality similar to any other creature, two- or four-legged. And herds can be led in any direction you want it to go.
Before we dwell into that, allow me to relate the story of Brian Epstein, the manager of The Beatles who turned this Liverpool quartet into one of the world’s greatest bands and who introduced the ‘Mersey Sound’ to the world. Brian, son of a Jewish furniture store proprietor, was the manager of a record shop who ‘discovered’ The Beatles. One day, some kids came into his record shop and asked whether they carried the record ‘My Bonnie’ (lies over the ocean) by The Beatles. The Beatles? No, they do not carry that record and neither has he ever heard of The Beatles.
Brian decided to find out who the hell The Beatles are and he discovered them playing at a tiny club called The Cavern. He immediately realised their potential and got them to agree that he manage them. The first concert that he organised, he planted some girls in the front row with instructions that as soon as The Beatles start singing they are to scream, swoon, go berserk, faint, etc. They did just that and the entire hall was soon caught up in a frenzy. Since then, no live concert is the same without the screaming, tearing at the singers’ clothes, fainting, crying, and all manner of emotion. Yes, Brian started this pop-rock ‘culture’ and it has remained ever since and is still part and parcel of a live show almost 50 years on.
In short, you can make people respond the way you would like them to, and if there are enough people acting in a certain manner, then others will follow suit: the ‘herd’ mentality syndrome. Yes, people are emotional, at least most people are, but you can control their emotions and make them do what you want them to and yet make them feel that they are doing what they have themselves chosen to do. People do not really have control over their emotions as much as they think they do.
Internal Security Act detention is a case in point. You can mentally prepare yourself for the worst but in the end you will still lose the mind-control game. They can even warn you beforehand, “Today we are going to make you cry”. Okay, you have been warned. You know that today they are going to play with your mind and make you cry. So you brace yourself for what is about to come. In spite of all that prior warning and preparation, before the day is over they will have you in tears. You try to fight it but you can’t. They ‘own’ you and your mind is under their absolute control. They can play with it, manipulate it, make you do things you do not wish to do, and you have no way of resisting your captors. And I am speaking from experience.
Magicians can do what they do because the hand is quicker than the eye. As long as they can get you to concentrate on one hand, then the other hand is free to perform the tricks. And rest assured you will concentrate on what they want you to concentrate on. You know it’s a trick. You know that when they raise their right hand that is only because they are about to do something with their left hand. But you will still focus on the right hand that is meant to distract you rather than the left hand, which will be the hand performing the trick.
Now, let us look at yesterday’s article in this same column, Prostitutes galore. Read the comments below that piece and get a load of what each person sees and notice how each person sees different things.
Some see porn. Some see racy/sexy pictures. Some see art. Some only see the pictures and never even noticed the article below it. Some see insults to prostitutes. Some see insults to Malays. Some see insults to Chinese. Some see stereotyping of Malays. Some see stereotyping of Chinese. Some see blaming the Chinese for corruption. Some see an attempt to distort the NEP figures. Some see an attempt to justify the NEP. Some see the Chinese manipulating the NEP. Some see RPK suffering from post-election fatigue. Some see the need for RPK to take a short break. And so on and so forth.
Different people see different things. But most importantly, people see only what they wish to see. However, you can also make people see what you want them to see and they will not be any wiser and think that is what they really see rather than they have been made to see this.
How many people saw the ‘hidden’ message in that article? In the first place, do they even realise that there is a hidden message or did they take the entire article at face value? If they did see the hidden message, then what was this message? Was it about Malay girls becoming prostitutes? Was it about condemning girls who become prostitutes? Was it about most Malays are prostitutes anyway? Was it about Chinese are also prostitutes? Was it about Chinese are hypocrites who pretend to be outraged about the NEP but are actually the ones exploiting it to the hilt? Was it about the only reason the Malays can do what they are doing is because the Chinese help them and enable them to do it?
Yes, what, what, what?
One thing you will notice, and which stands out like a sore thumb, is that most people saw only one thing in that article, whatever it may be that they saw. And they focused on that one issue and went all out and whacked and expressed their views at great length. This happens every time without fail. My articles run into three, four, five, six or seven pages, and the articles talk about so many things. But all these other points go unnoticed and are totally ignored. The one point, which makes up less than 1% of the article, will be the brunt of their dissatisfaction.
It is like going to a buffet and there are 200 different food items on the table. One item, however, the oysters, are not that fresh. There are 199 other food items -- prawn cocktail, salad, rojak, ten different types of mee, five different types of bihun, six different types of laksa, lamb, beef, fish, chicken, duck, pizza, you name it and the buffet table has it. But this one item, the not too fresh oysters, will be what you focus on and will be the brunt of your complaint.
People seldom look at the glass as half full. They prefer looking at it as half empty. Even if the glass is 95% full that is still an issue. To them, it is 5% empty. One psy-war expert from Germany, Peter Schroeder, summed it up very well when he conducted a three-day course in Melaka, which I attended. “Never mind whether it is in Germany, France, England, Italy, the US, Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, Asia or Malaysia. Always remember one thing,” he said. “Voters, meaning people, are very selfish and greedy.”
Peter then went on to say that the voters are not interested in supporting you. They only want to know what the benefit to them would be if they vote for you. If they benefit, then they will vote for you. If not, then forget about getting their votes.
Okay, so what does all this tell us? Firstly, people don’t really know what to see (meaning, stupid). Secondly, you can make them see what you want them to (meaning, gullible). Third, people will see whatever will benefit them (meaning, selfish). Fourth, people will see the majority view (meaning, herd mentality).
Confusing? Well, let us then take one example. More than half the world believes in God and also believes you can ‘talk’ to God (meaning, praying). Hardly anyone believes God can talk to you. So, if you speak (pray) to God, then you are religious. But if you tell people that God speaks to you, then you will be labelled a lunatic. This means the thin line between being religious and being mad depends on whether you tell people what they also believe, the majority view, or you tell people what they don’t believe, the minority view.
And this is why we have that story about the Emperor’s clothes. As long as you follow the majority view then even a naked Emperor appears to be wearing clothes. And even if you can’t see it you will pretend you do just so that you can go along with the majority. You do not want to be the minority in the majority.
The bottom line is, people can be conditioned to believe or disbelieve. Now, say they condition you to believe that PAS is an extremist party and that if they ever come to power they will ban pork/pigs as well as liquor and gambling. So you oppose PAS because you don’t want them to come to power whereby they would then ban all these things.
Then, say I ask you whether you gamble and you reply that you don’t. Is there any problem, then, if gambling is banned? Sure, you don’t gamble, but you can’t support the banning of gambling although it does not affect you personally. You are opposed to the banning of gambling on the principle that the rights of gamblers should not be infringed.
Okay, what if 90% of Malaysians support the banning of gambling whereas only 10% are for it.
“Never mind. The rights of the minority must also be respected.”
Let’s use this same argument for another issue, prostitution.
“Should prostitution be legalised?”
“No!”
“Why not?”
“Because prostitution is a social ill and a sin.”
“But so is gambling.”
“Gambling is different.”
“But 20% of Malaysians support prostitution so what is so wrong if your neighbour turns his house into a brothel with 50 China dolls sitting in the front yard waiting for clients?”
“We must think of the sensitivities of the majority.”
“What about the rights of the minority who support prostitution?”
Yes, this can go on without any agreement being reached. In short, morality depends on your view of what is moral and what is immoral.
Okay, back to pork/pigs.
“We can’t support PAS because PAS will ban pigs/pork if they come to power.”
“Is that what is happening in Kelantan?”
“I don’t know but I think so.”
“Have you ever been to Kelantan?”
“No!”
“Then how do you know PAS bans pork/pigs?”
“I heard.”
“Selangor has approved a RM100 million pig project. Why do you oppose that project?”
“Because it will create an environmental problem?”
“But what about the rights of the pig farmers who need to earn a living?”
“We need to consider the environment and not the needs of the less than 1% of the people who are pig farmers.”
“But the Selangor government that approved the pig project is the PKR-DAP-PAS government. Don’t you want a government that has PAS participation to approve the project just to show that PAS is not against pig farming like they say?”
“The environment comes first.”
“Should not the environment then also come first in Kelantan?”
Yes, this can go on and on. And as can be seen, values change depending on whether it is beneficial or unbeneficial to you. You ‘see’ pig farming as a right when it comes to political considerations. It is, however, a nuisance when it comes to your own backyard. How do you reconcile the mind of the voter? You can’t. And that is why Barisan Nasional needs to spin the ‘truth’ so that voters can be made to believe the government’s version of what is true and what is false.
And this has to start from school. If the Chinese can be made to believe that MCA defends Chinese rights, the Indians can be made to believe that MIC defends Indian rights, and the Malays can be made to believe that Umno defends Malay rights, then Barisan Nasional will stay relevant. But if no one requires any defending of their rights that would be the day Barisan Nasional is sent to the trashcan.
A campaign is currently underway to show the Malays that the outcome of the recent general election has resulted in their rights being eroded. If the Malays can be successfully convinced that this is so, then, come the next election, they will swing back to Umno. But if the Malays can be made to believe that their rights are in fact better protected under the present ‘Chinese’ government (to echo Barisan Nasional’s propaganda), then Umno would have lost the Malays for good.
So come on people, Malays and non-Malays combined. Let us demonstrate to the Malays, Chinese, Indians and ‘others’ that they are better looked after by the Pakatan Rakyat government. We need to remember that even if 100% of the non-Malays vote for the opposition, while 100% of the Malays vote for Barisan Nasional, then the ruling coalition and not the opposition will form the government. This is called gerrymandering.
Most importantly, however, we need to demonstrate that the new politics of Malaysia is based on the fact that no race needs to be ‘protected’ because all races get a good deal regardless of skin colour. Once Malaysians accept that as gospel, the race politics of Barisan Nasional will crumble and they would have to reinvent themselves to stay relevant or get wiped off the face of this earth forever.
 |
The Blogs 
which i always enjoy reading. 
: In stark contrast to Umno, Selangor MCA lends support to the new state government over the centralised pig farming project, and showed that it will not oppose for the sake of opposing. 
. 
