“YOU can have it any colour you want as long as it is black.”
This quote was originally attributed to Henry Ford (1863–1947), the prominent American industrialist who founded the Ford Motor Company and sponsored the development of the assembly line technique of mass production.
It reminds me of the attitude of the powers that be in regards to the recent Sarawak election. There we were, spending millions of ringgit on the election. No, I am not talking about the alleged millions spent by certain parties to help some people make up their minds. Note I said ‘alleged’ because so far what we have are mere allegations and speculations. I am talking about the millions it cost us to organise the election.
Yes, quite a bit of money was spent to assert our claim as a democratic country where every person of voting age has a right to express their opinion through the ballot box. However, the right to exercise this sacred right is subjected to the fiat of the earthly manifestation of the god of democracy – the Election Commissioner.
In the case of Sarawak, he has declared that unless one is in the army or with the police, this right can only be exercised in the place of one’s registered address. In short, no postal vote for all except the army and the police. Thus, in one stroke, 200,000 (a figure given by the Election Commission) Sarawakians were reduced to mere spectators in the recent event.
When I heard that (the ruling of the Election Commission) my mind drifted to an episode from the Gospel. It was written that the carpenter Joseph had to travel to the town of Bethlehem with his pregnant wife Mary. Why? Because Bethlehem was Joseph’s home town and “At that time Emperor Augustus ordered a census to be taken throughout the Roman Empire … Everyone, then, went to register himself, each to his own home town” (Luke 1:1-3).
Anyway, after the good citizens of Sarawak had cast their votes and the election banners and buntings removed, we had hoped that we could go back to our quiet normal life, a welcome respite after that frenzied 10-day election campaign. However, it was not to be.
Recriminations, warnings and even not-quite-veiled threats came from, of all people, the winning parties. It is very Fordlike – people were given the assurance that they could choose any candidate they like as long he is from you-know-what party. I think old Henry must be grinning in his grave, pleased that his creed is being followed halfway round the world and in another era.
As far as recrimination and warning is concerned, the people who issued them are off the mark. They have singled out the Chinese and the urban population as the main sector in rejecting the existing power’s brand of government. However, as one political scientist, Dr Bridget Welsh, wrote in an article published a few days ago, although there is a growing number of Chinese supporting the opposition in Sarawak, they are not alone as statistics showed that there was a significant switch of allegiance too from the other races.
Comparing the results of 2006 and 2011 elections, the associate professor observed that the swing by the Bumiputera communities is even greater than that of the Chinese.
Welsh also observed that contrary to popular belief, the greatest gains of the opposition were actually in semi-rural areas, which stood at almost 20 per cent followed by rural of 15 per cent and urban areas at 13 per cent. The popular belief being that the opposition made most headway among the urban Chinese. She also further added that the opposition gain among the younger voters is even more significant — a telling 26 per cent.
If there is a warning, it is one that the powers that be should heed. The message seems to be, “grow younger and grow wiser”. Hmm … that is a challenge indeed.
Election time is the time when our differences of opinion surface. To strike fear in the hearts of the populace, some parties predicted (or even promised) dire consequences if the results didn’t go their way. Quite understandably, some people fear that any slight change in the status quo may disrupt our cosy world of peace and harmony. I believe the more serious threat to our peace and harmony is not from the results of the election but from the reaction of some to the results.
Change of government and of people in charge of the nation is the natural consequence (some would say fruits) of a working democracy. A system of government, despite scepticism from some quarters, is still accepted as the best available to man at this moment. However, to those who have been occupying the corridors of power for so long that it seems that their legs have taken root, change or even a possibility of change is an anathema.
The public utterances voiced by some of them in the last week are causing some disquiet. However, as the saying goes, ‘every dark cloud has a silver lining’. The broadcasting of their views also gives us a better understanding of their mindset and we are thus more aware of the challenges faced by our society.
The one thing I observed is that there is a strong sense of tribalism in our community. “Only the Chinese can understand the problem of the Chinese.”
“Only Chinese representation in the government can ensure that the Chinese interest is taken care of.” (The word ‘Chinese’ can be substituted with that of another race as the situation requires.) These have been the mantras that have been bandied around in the last week.
It is the aim of all societies to climb away from primitive backwardness and to move to a more humanist and enlightened stage. In appears that many in our country have given up hope on this noble aspiration. They are the ones who are most vociferous trying to foist upon us their limited world view on the rest of the population. I am saddened by this because I for one have hope that in this multicultural society we can live in harmony and I have faith that our different races are capable of seeing beyond their specific communities to care for others.
In reference to a multicultural society, I notice that one of the much used words is ‘tolerance’. Many leaders take much pride in saying that our different communities have great tolerance for each other. I am annoyed by that. ‘Tolerance’ is such a negative word. It implies that the other party has behaviour that is offensive but for the sake of harmony we ‘grit our teeth and suffer in silence’. In short we tolerate.
During the years when I was active in scuba diving, two of my buddies were Dollah and Karim. As their names indicate, they are Muslim. We used to drive for two hours to a seaside town and go out to sea virtually every weekend. For the whole day, we were at close quarters but never once did I, nor they, have to tolerate each other. The reality is that we never have to tolerate our fellow countrymen of different races and religions because we don’t find each other offensive.
I was sitting in a coffee shop a few days ago. Something caught my eye. There was a Bak Kut Teh (pork-based soup) stall and beside it a Muslim food stall. Need I say more?
Comments can reach the writer via [email protected].