A+ | A- | Reset
Home arrow The Blogs arrow Letters/Surat arrow Running the Election in America – and Ruining it in Malaysia

Running the Election in America – and Ruining it in Malaysia PDF Print
Posted by admin   
Thursday, 05 June 2008 15:57

By Mansor Puteh

It was estimated that the Twelfth Malaysian general election had cost a few billion ringgit and most of it went to the printing of these paraphernalia which ended up in the garbage dumps. Most of the money could have been spent to promote the well-being of the voters by the building of bridges and construction of roads, etc, just to give a good idea of how much the candidates care for the people’s welfare.

Image

It is confirmed that the candidates for the next American presidential election are Barack Hussein Obama and John McCain of the Democratic and Republican Parties, respectively.

Chances are Hillary Clinton who lost in the primaries would be Barack's running mate. It is a good choice for him to choose her over another person, especially a man – since a woman in high heels won't be able to catch up with him, running anywhere.

I am sure all those citizens of the small city in Japan called Obama who had been rooting for their candidate will be happy with this setup; so, too, will Barack's former classmates at the primary school in Jakarta where he had spent a few years in the mid-1970s. He was there when I was also in Jakarta for the first time traveling from there to Bali in 1974.

I cannot help but mention that Barack also studied at the same university I did in New York City – Columbia – with him enrolling two years after I left. So we must have been to the same places on campus and entered the 116th Street and Broadway subway station and entered the door of Butler Library countless times.

And if Barack had Muslim friends and wanted to see them, he might have gone to Earl Hall where our association was, which was beside the Jewish students' association office.

He later went on to pursue his education at Harvard and entered politics in America while I was swayed from it because I felt there was no space for people like me in the local political arena where brains and qualifications don't count for very much.

Once you are trapped in it, you won't want to get out. There is no life after politics in Malaysia. So, no wonder old and vintage politicians who have had their day still clamor for position by whatever means necessary since there is nowhere else they can go.

Former American vice-president Al Gore left office to teach at the School of Journalism and produced a documentary on the environment for which he won an Oscar.

After leaving office, President Jimmy Carter founded an institute to promote global health, democracy and human rights. He has traveled extensively to conduct peace negotiations and establish relief efforts; he is also a key figure in the Habitat for Humanity project. As of 2008, Carter remains a relevant national figure, and has been especially vocal on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. (Excerpt from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Carter)

My bet this time is for Barack to win – and without being chased by a woman but with one running along with him.  It will be the choice most Americans would make in September. What choice do they have? John McCain? His name does not sound exotic and he looks plain and colorless; while Barack has color, and lots of it. He is not just Black; he is also White because his mother is Caucasian. But he is also brown, blue, red, green, and yellow and a host of all the colors that one can find in a rainbow after a rainy day.

Barack will be that rainbow over America and the rest of the world that will shine over us without casting dark clouds like some of his predecessors in the other party had done over the past few decades.

And his administration will do it because all of them believe in the “change we can believe in”, as his campaign slogan stated.

America and Americans are set to create their own unusual history; and it will be a win not just for the pleasure of being able to usher in someone who is more superior to John in more ways than one, but more than that, it is a victory for the moderates in America.

Yes, in America, they too have their 'radicals' and 'moderates'.

The radicals are those who are bent on starting a war at the drop of a hat, while the moderates are the ones who are always trying to stop it and promote true democracy in the world, especially when trying to solve the Zionist Problem once and for all.

In America, they do it differently each time when there is an election. There is no prodding and screaming down slogans and empty promises that the candidates know they cannot meet. With the end of the primaries that had just passed, we have seen how Barack Hussein Obama and John McCain conducted themselves to represent their respective parties.

Was there a time in America when they did not do that? I don't think there ever was. It was not their culture to support the printing industry each time they have an election like what we like to do here, often by spending hundreds, if not billions of ringgit just to show everybody how the candidates look in their touched-up photos, looking like angels, when they are definitely not.

If this not enough, then there are also the gifts that Malaysian candidates often give to the needy including perhaps some cash in envelopes that changed hands during this process.

This has been Malaysian politics for as long as I can remember. And it is also about the tearing and defacing of posters, banners and flags of the opponent parties which has become a favorite Malaysian pastime during any election.

The throwing of mud on election posters had become less these days. I can still remember seeing the photo of my uncle Longche Nayan who was representing UMNO for the Bandar Melaka area in the 1960s with mud on his face.

Doing away with election paraphernalia and unnecessary gimmicks is an American tradition that Malaysia should follow in future, as it helps to save a lot of costs on paraphernalia that only help promote the well-being of those who are in the printing business.

It was estimated that the Twelfth Malaysian general election had cost a few billion ringgit and most of it went to the printing of these paraphernalia which ended up in the garbage dumps. Most of the money could have been spent to promote the well-being of the voters by the building of bridges and construction of roads, etc, just to give a good idea of how much the candidates care for the people’s welfare.

There is no point in them making promises they will not keep. It is better for them to raise funds and spend most of it on serving the community so in the end it benefits both sides.

If you were to look around you in America, you would not notice there is an election happening unless the candidates are campaigning in that town as posters, banners and buntings are reused at each venue.

None of the candidates from either party look desperate or use coarse words on anyone especially the opponents; they try to remain civilized. And their supporters try not to ever clench their fists or grit their teeth and spout nonsensical and idiotic phrases and even expletives loudly. All of them try to go about their business in a cultured manner that befits their status as the so-called beacon of democracy.

In Malaysia, this is all that most of the candidates do and especially those who think they won’t win and therefore can't get to achieve their promises. 

So, in Malaysia, their campaign slogan should be the “lie that they can believe in” to paraphrase the one Barack had been using.

Comments (13)Add Comment
..., Lowly rated comment [Show]
...
written by indianputra, June 05, 2008 16:11:17
Rightfully the developing world and Muslim countries had been whacking America because of the most horrible war crimes of their President, Bush. However real democracy is flourishing in America. Now they have an African American as the most promising next Presidet of USA. Their choice of Barack Obama as the Democratic Presidential Candidate is most refreshing for a democracy.

Will this ever happen in Malaysia? Will Malaysia ever have an Indian or Chinese Prime Minister? Will the Royal States of Malaysia ever have a Chinese or Indian Menteri Besar? And yet we call Malaysia a democratic nation!
report abuse
disagree 3
agree 21
...
written by SamYap, June 05, 2008 16:27:01
Hello En. Mansor Puteh,

Lets get 1 thing straight.

There is racial discrimination in USA. That is an irrefutable fact. In fact during the Democrat primaries, most of the votes were still along racial lines, followed by economic class - rich/middle income/rednecks.

BUT the difference is that to use race as an argument/debate in your speeches in the primaries run up and in the general elections.

Here in Malaysia, we have politicians calling for the blood of non-Malays and all that sort of nonsense. To make matters worse, the race is calling for protection, can you beat that??? In any other country, its the minorities who needs to be protected.

I have to agree with you on one point, that in Malaysia, its not the brains and qualifications which gets you elected. Thats why all the political parties have to resort to banners and posters, screaming about race, shouting about blood, talking about "perjuangan" - who the hell are they fighting? Fighting with their own Malaysians???

Its just boils down to this: we need more education about the larger issues and not petty issues when it comes to national politics and nation building. Until the rakyat understands that, the politics in Malaysia will remain the same.

How many people actually care about national issues?

In fact I didn't even hear any politicians talk about health care in Malaysia during the last election. Healthcare is getting ridiculous and yet no one bothered to make it part of their election speech and promises to improve healthcare.

Its obvious that healthcare will not score points with the rakyat.

So what do you think, En. Mansor?

Comparing Malaysia to USA or Britain is akin to comparing Durians and Oranges!!!
report abuse
disagree 2
agree 21
...
written by aiyomanaboleh, June 05, 2008 16:49:19
No offence intended but I think this is one of your better pieces in MT.

Malaysia in a way is quite similar to the US in that it has racial diversity but the difference is, the people who harp along racial lines are still in the majority. The outcome of the 12th election however indicates that we are slowly moving away from this mindset. It's a small step but a big jump for the well being of the country.

report abuse
disagree 0
agree 7
...
written by Commonsenses, June 05, 2008 17:04:29
guys, while america will have its first black president of the united states soon, we in malaysia are still trapped in racial politics unable to move beyond racism. The USA is making history as its moves into the domain of color blindness. For malaysia god knows.
report abuse
disagree 1
agree 12
...
written by Thambidoorai, June 05, 2008 19:10:40
It took them 232 years since breaking away from the Brits to get where they are now. So, i don't think the two bear direct comparison.

However, I am confident, because of improved education and advances in communication technology, we do not need another 181 years to get there. Possibly, 30 years...i more generation.

Another thing, it is not because americans do not waste money on posters and such. They do. They throw away much much more money spewing half-truths and making vague promises too. They do it on TV and other electronic media.

They don't spend it on posters and not so much on print anymore because these are now ineffective and fast becoming obsolete. Furthermore, you won't throw mud or shit on your own TV or computer screens, will you?
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 6
...
written by LJN, June 05, 2008 20:08:30
Responding to SamYap, it's true there is racial discrimination in America, but it is mostly done by individuals, and not on the institution level (that is, in government, businessses, etc). Americans have been very good at putting policies that are very clearly anti-discrimination, anti-racism, unlike in Malaysia where institutionalized racism is rampant, beginning with the outwardly racist preference for a certain ethnic group for scholarships, business tenders, etc. You would never get away with that in America.
I truly believe that Malaysia has perhaps the most racist institutions in the world. Where else is there laws that says that chief ministers of certain states must be Muslims or Malays? Where else are there a majority group trying so hard to oppress minority groups? Nowhere. You can't say South Africa because South Africa has cleaned up its act.
report abuse
disagree 1
agree 7
...
written by alarcarte, June 05, 2008 21:08:17
Salute to the American people be it from North or South, where there is possibility of black become president and a citizen of Japanese descent in Peru was their president. Go down town to Sao Paulo and see the Racially mix people and couples there, can it happen in MALAYSIA?
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 3
...
written by Mr Smith, June 05, 2008 22:50:32
Interesting read Mansor. It would have been better if you had also compared the role of the media in the elections in both countries.
As for me, I don't need to walk out of the house during the campaign period nor attend one ceramah or look at any poster. On polling day I will go to the polling booth and vote for Opposition.
I have done that eight times. Not because I hate BN, but because the Opposition was never given a level playing field. Neither, would I allow myself be intimidated and threatened by BN.
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 1
...
written by fireduck, June 05, 2008 23:14:23
One error .... Americans choose their President in November. Always November, every four years. Always like clock work. So, what's on in September?

As far as comparison go, the very first step is already a dead one. They get to choose their president via direct vote. That's one man one vote, on who they want to lead them at the very pinnacle position. Do we have even a squeak of who we want to lead us?

Nixon got into trouble with his Watergate, the people impeached him. Do we have such an option? We wouldn't be here discussing if there is. AAB would have been impeached or at the very least recalled .http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2...nia_recall long time ago.

Most Americans do not discuss religion and race matters when they meet. I know because I have one as part of the family. They try to avoid making public statements on these. Here, you are seen to score points with your 'grassroots' supporters if you spew racial or religious vitriol. And funny how you seldom hear of 'grassroots' support in America, but here it is like the comfortable old boys club that you can always count on.

Issues, issues, issues in America. Here in Malaysia, it's never issues. It's personality or party. Never issues or the interest of the nation.

Journalists in America seek out the opposing views to present to the people. Here journalists all sing the same auld lang syne. Over there, the media tells off the politicians. Here, the media is just the ruling party's mouth piece, otherwise they will be put out of service.
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 2
...
written by SamYap, June 05, 2008 23:42:12
Hi LJN,

You are absolutely right, racial discrimination in USA may not be institutionalized like here in Malaysia, but nevertheless race issues looms large in USA and affects almost every aspect of life.

If you are a Christian, thats not good enough, you have to be a White Christian.

Anyway, Malaysia Today's admin had in his/her haste to edit my comment above had inadvertently edited a part incorrectly, the correct statement should read as:

"BUT the difference is, to use racial sentiments as an argument/debate in your speeches in the primaries run up and in the general elections is not cool and would only earn you brickbats and you'd lose votes. "

That at least goes to demonstrate that effort is being made at establishment level not to use race as an issue nor should racial sentiments be allowed.

Malaysians would benefit much if they'd only listen to Obama's victory speech. That is truly a mark of a man who understands the new generation in the new millenium.
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 3
...
written by oster, June 06, 2008 09:30:43
It was estimated that the Twelfth Malaysian general election had cost a few billion ringgit and most of it went to the printing of these paraphernalia which ended up in the garbage dumps. Most of the money could have been spent to promote the well-being of the voters by the building of bridges and construction of roads, etc, just to give a good idea of how much the candidates care for the people’s welfare.


The key question is: where did that money come from.

If you're gonna compare our system the the US, then consider laws like McCain-Feingold, which is a landmark law regarding campaign finance.

Chances are Hillary Clinton who lost in the primaries would be Barack's running mate. It is a good choice for him to choose her over another person, especially a man – since a woman in high heels won't be able to catch up with him, running anywhere.


Sir,

With a sexist comment like that, it doesn't matter how much brains you have, you wouldn't have a chance in modern American politics except as a state legislator.

In America, they do it differently each time when there is an election. There is no prodding and screaming down slogans and empty promises that the candidates know they cannot meet. With the end of the primaries that had just passed, we have seen how Barack Hussein Obama and John McCain conducted themselves to represent their respective parties.


In your idealised view of American politics, perhaps no promises go unbroken. Remember though, that Clinton's (the candidate, not the president) failed to get a promised healthcare plan back in the 90s through. Granted, she wasn't the candidate then, but she certainly tied it in into Bill's campaign.

And then there's Obama's turning back on previous pledges to stay above the fray and not engage in negative campaigning. He did.

Was there a time in America when they did not do that? I don't think there ever was. It was not their culture to support the printing industry each time they have an election like what we like to do here, often by spending hundreds, if not billions of ringgit just to show everybody how the candidates look in their touched-up photos, looking like angels, when they are definitely not.


Are you kidding? TV ads, newspaper ads and the like is par for the course in American campaigns. Where do you think a large chunk of those hundreds of millions in campaign finance goes to?

Doing away with election paraphernalia and unnecessary gimmicks is an American tradition that Malaysia should follow in future, as it helps to save a lot of costs on paraphernalia that only help promote the well-being of those who are in the printing business.


On this, I entirely agree. No one seems to bother once the anti-climax sets in.

It was estimated that the Twelfth Malaysian general election had cost a few billion ringgit and most of it went to the printing of these paraphernalia which ended up in the garbage dumps. Most of the money could have been spent to promote the well-being of the voters by the building of bridges and construction of roads, etc, just to give a good idea of how much the candidates care for the people’s welfare.


There is the issue of the purpose of those funds relating to the reason those funds can be made available in the first place.

The idealistic view is that campaign donations are made to advance (what people think is) a righteous cause, while cynics will say that it's an investment for self-interest.

In any case, campaign funds are only raised when there are campaigns. It's useless to say that those funds could be used elsewhere, when those funds wouldn't exist in the first place if it was for some other cause other than an election.

While the American system has plenty of advantages (e.g. campaign finance laws, a REAL Federation, checks and balances affecting the electoral system etc.), I believe many of the advantages you raise (the inherent civility of candidates that will be lost by September at least, or when the first townhall debates occur) is derived from an idealisation of the American electoral system.

cheers
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 0
...
written by oster, June 06, 2008 09:32:00
written by fireduck, June 05, 2008 | 23:14:23

As far as comparison go, the very first step is already a dead one. They get to choose their president via direct vote. That's one man one vote, on who they want to lead them at the very pinnacle position. Do we have even a squeak of who we want to lead us?


One Person One Vote? Hardly.

Americans don't elect their presidents directly. They elect Electors of the Electoral College, who then elects the president.

Remember how the man who won the popular vote lost the presidency 8 years ago?

written by fireduck, June 05, 2008 | 23:14:23

Nixon got into trouble with his Watergate, the people impeached him. Do we have such an option? We wouldn't be here discussing if there is. AAB would have been impeached or at the very least recalled


Indeed. That it happened in Washington is because of two things we lack:

- Proper checks and balances
- A weak whip, which allows representatives there to act in their own vested interests (or their electorate's) without strictly walking the party line.

written by fireduck, June 05, 2008 | 23:14:23

Most Americans do not discuss religion and race matters when they meet. I know because I have one as part of the family. They try to avoid making public statements on these. Here, you are seen to score points with your 'grassroots' supporters if you spew racial or religious vitriol. And funny how you seldom hear of 'grassroots' support in America, but here it is like the comfortable old boys club that you can always count on.


I'd doubt that statistic though, considering that some polls show that 54% of Americans take religion seriously.

The beauty of America however is that its Freedom allows diversity, which means that no one man can ever truly represent America (like your family member, say).

written by fireduck, June 05, 2008 | 23:14:23

Journalists in America seek out the opposing views to present to the people. Here journalists all sing the same auld lang syne. Over there, the media tells off the politicians. Here, the media is just the ruling party's mouth piece, otherwise they will be put out of service.


I disagree. The difference is not that they have scrutinising journos, but that they have free journos.

That means they are free to be the government mouthpiece, or otherwise.

cheers
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 0

Write comment
This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.
You must be logged in to a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy
 
< Prev   Next >
 
Some Images Hosted With
Thank You ImageShack!
 BLOGGERS AGAINST ISA

Powered and Optimized for:
Malaysia Today by MT-TEAM