The Fallacy Of Democracy

As I have promised in my previous post, I will write on the core topic itself. This time, regarding democracy in Malaysia. I hope those who read these are mature readers.

"A system of government by the whole people of country, especially through representatives they elect ; A government that allows freedom of speech, religion and political opinion, that upholds the rule of law and majority rule and that respects the rights of minorities; treatment of each other citizens as equals, without social class divisions" quoted from Oxford dictionary, a literal dimension of the definition of democracy.

Democracy....such a beauty, albeit an illusion. Behold, I shall reveal the reality of the world, the perversion of democracy, fueled by violation and abuse of power and left unchecked.

To what extent do you think Malaysia is a democratic country? I for one, think that save the fact that we are not sharing property, our country does not differ much from a communist country. Freedom of speech for instance, to your information, all newspapers, local TV channels, radio channels, schools, universities are under close scrutiny of the current government. Oh, we are slightly better than China, at least our internet access is not governed.

Universities & University Colleges Act (UUCA), another ideal example of the limitation of our freedom of speech, specifically targeting the students. The following is the amendments made for UUCA back in 2008
1) Section 2 of UUCA
Part-time and graduate students will now come under the Act. Previously they were exempted.
2)Section 15 of UUCA
- Students can join outside bodies but are still banned from joining political parties. Similarly, student
organisation can be affiliated to other organisations, but not political parties.
- Students and student organisations are barred from expressing support for, or opposition to, any political
party.
- Disciplinary actions can be taken against errant students.

Sources : http://www.y4c.org.my/?p=165

Why can't students take part or express their political views regarding their country? Perhaps the underage, but what about those students that are legitimate voters in terms of age? Based on the current trend, made apparent by the dissatisfaction caused by what our current government has done over the past few months (Perak especially), clearly the newer generations are the new 'thinkers', although these thinkers are relatively few by nature. By implementing UUCA, the government has effectively blocked away the new thinking and hope on winning the support from the easily swayed older generations, especially those that are less educated.

The current government's usual tactic of gaining support is through their last-minute-work, such as improving road conditions, meeting the demands of the public & donation for schools here and there etc. Typical. However, the elders nowadays are increasingly influenced by their children's modern thinking. Moreover, the recent upheaval in Perak where the citizens' wish of disbanding the Parliament and commence a new election is denied has clearly lighten up the mind of many. Najib claimed that he is not afraid of a new Perak election. Think of this, if he is not afraid, why has he been delaying and denying the election from the beginning? Why did BN have to snatch the rulership from Pakatan in Perak through their 'rightful' means? Why did BN has to pull Sivakumar out of the Parliament? It doesn't make sense to me. What do you think? I'll leave the interpretation to you guys.

UUCA is but a small issue in comparison to the infamous Internal Security Act (ISA). According to ISA, anyone who pose a threat to national security will be detained without trial for indefinite period of time. ISA is in fact a tool to be abused. Why are people so afraid of criticising and pointing out facts about the government and the so called 'sensitive' issues? It's all because of ISA. In practice, anyone who pose a threat to our current government will be detained without trial. A powerful tool indeed, erecting an inpenetrable barrier in front of our current government. According to my lecturer back in A-Levels, newspapers and medias are allowed to criticise the government for the sake of the public's welfare. Here, unfortunately, we don't. We are the subject of our government in fact, where unquestioned loyalty is demanded. I pity Teresa Kok, worse case, detained for no apparent reason.

In addition to ISA & UUCA, our education system has been made such a way that our way of thinking is moulded by the government. We blindly follow the footstep guided by our government (the mould), uncertain and unwary of the truth of our society and the forces at work. I gotta admit, the government has done a splendid job in educating the people to become pro-government. Of course, 52 years of rulership, they ought to sway the people in their favour in order to secure the throne. New thinking, such as mine, might be regarded as deviance and thus unacceptable. I'd wonder if I am now a threat to the government. lol.

All these factors, supplementing and augmenting the possibility of continuous racial discrimination. In America, albeit informal discrimination are still visible, yet all Americans know deep in their heart that everyone is equal in before their constitution. However, here, we are much like the secondary citizens of our own country, given the formal racial discrimination within the constitution. Such irony. We have no place nor say even in our own country, yet the government kept emphasising that we are all equal regardless of race and religion, and expect us to get along. But the truth is different races can get along, but people with different rights, wealth and power within a society simply cannot get along, generally. Just as Karl Marx stated, Bourgeoisies (property owners) and Proletariats (workers) are simply locked in a conflict for eternity. Although his theory of socialism is proven wrong in past history, but personally I agree with his views regarding the societies that practices capitalism.

I am no racist, nor do I hold personal grudge against the Malays. However, think of this, they claim that they are the rightful ruler of the country, yet their ancestors arrived from Indonesia. Despite that fact that the Chinese & Indians came later, but they lost their empire, their land. The coloniser took hold of Malaya, doesn't that indicate that Malaya had become a contested region? Furthermore, we gained our independence together, all 3 races, each race played a part in it. Yet the Malays are deemed supreme amongst us, and implemented laws to protect their rights as well as regarding special rights issue as 'sensitive'. So, what's the logic? Tell me. Back to the definition of democracy, do they respect the rights of the minorities? Or perhaps we are neither majority nor minority and stuck somewhere in between hence we are not promised our rights? Once again I leave the interpretation to you guys.

Once again I would like to clarify the definition of racism. Racism does not indicate a personal grudge or distaste towards the other races. For example, " I don't like the whites." The common reply in Malaysia will be, "Dang, you're such a racist!" This is a misconception. The problems between different races in Malaysia, be it grudges or hatred or whatsoever, is an ethnicity problem, not a racial problem. The true definition of racists are those who deem other races as inferiors and thus are hostile to them. So, be careful of how you use your words. Term it wrongly and you will become a laughing-stock of the truly educated ones.

If democracy is indeed a system whereby the country is governed by the people of the country, albeit through the elected representatives. I don't see a reason why our Prime Minister is elected within the ruling party itself, or worse, the dominating party within the ruling parties itself. If our country is truly a democratic country, why can't we adopt the American election system and let the citizens themselves vote for their favourite leaders? The political and legal systems are direct replicates of the UK systems, blindly followed, or perhaps to achieve certain hidden purposes? (Hope you guys know what i mean by 'hidden purposes') But of course, to allow a public election for a prime minister would mean that every citizens of the country would have an equal right to be eligible as candidates. This, they will not allow for that they are not yet prepared to give up the ruling power to other races.

We are denied of our freedom of speech and political opinions by UUCA and ISA, denied of our birthrights by a formal, written constitution that enable open discrimination. We are denied of our rights to elect our own ultimate leader or ruler of the country, the Prime Minister. These are the mockeries of democracy. So, do you still think our country is a democratic country? I agree with my lecturer on this. Malaysia is a democratic country in structural terms, but not in essence. A long way ahead before the actual democracy takes place. Now, tell me what you think.