THERE is a running fundamental issue at the heart of the new Pakatan Harapan government. It is a trend that we are beginning to see more and more of as the honeymoon period comes to a close.
After years of being an opposition, it seems the top leaders and some ministers have some rewiring to do in the way they approach issues and policies.
Understandably, it is standard and even status quo for an opposition to focus on the populism side of nation building.
As it is said all the time, this new government is about the power to the people and not the elite few. Whilst that sounds great and democratic, there is a vital issue at the heart of this approach to governance.
Politics, in all honesty, was designed to be boring. It was designed to disengage every so often, so the leaders could focus on ruling and the people could continue their daily routines without the social barriers of “who did you vote for?”
But now with social media, and sensationalised news, the population seems to be continuously engaged in politics, and furious over the outstanding corruption of the past years.
This engagement and anger has created a sense of polarisation — both sides see each other as a potential evil, necessary to eliminate. Yet politics is not so, politics, politicians and even policy is always a grey area, there are always two sides to every story, there is no one hero, no one villain.
Rather dangerously therefore, as a result of this heightened engagement, PH leaders seem to continue forming policy around populist sentiments.
It was Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng who admitted that the Goods and Services Tax was a better tax system than Sales and Services Tax. Unfortunately, in that same speech the finance minister reasoned that the new government had to implement SST because the people did not like GST and because it was an election promise.
Sadly, the people and the promise were factually uninformed. Despite its unpopularity, the fact remains that GST was a better tax system. It was more transparent, and companies had less space to escape paying tax. Moreover, the public was uninformed as to the rising cost of prices — it was not because of GST, but because of a global trend of rising prices. Here, just like with many other policies such as fuel subsidies, and the national debt, the government is silent in terms of doing what is factually correct. Instead, they are still too engaged in pleasing the population, a population that did not have the facts on their desks.
The recent November US elections is something Malaysia needs to take note of. In what was staged to be a blue Democratic party wave, many voters who were polled noted that their main concerns were democracy (69 per cent), health care at 48 per cent and environment at 43 per cent.
A promising challenger to Ted Cruz, Beto O’Rourke became one of the key characters leading up to the polls. Yet, despite winning the House of Representatives, many Democrats are still puzzled as to how difficult this accomplishment was.
Despite the outrageous tweets by their president, despite the thousands taking to the streets to protest, despite the scandal with Russia, the Democrats still lost the Senate.
Within the big headlines lies a crucial lesson to be learned for the Democrats. It was almost unquestioned amongst analysts that a democrat in Trump’s world, had to toe the line, that they had to be progressive and aggressive at the same time. This election was said to belong to the more bold and revolutionary democrats, perhaps inspired by Bernie Sanders’ run for president. Yet, just like for Bernie Sanders, a fundamental issue was left unanswered.
To win voters that had previously voted for Trump, a democrat that was bold and progressive would have to force that voter into an uncomfortable position of admitting they were wrong. And when these voters refused to be put in that position, the candidates would likely, like O’Rourke, have to tone down the revolutionary change motto; all the more loosening the campaign.
This approach therefore, worked for some areas that were already anti-Trump but not areas that had voted for Trump. Yet, it was the American polarisation and the media that never stopped talking politics since the day Trump took office, that made this simple concept unrecognised for the democrats.
A lot of things can go wrong when you are too constantly engaged in pleasing those around you. In this social media savvy world, our echo chambers have become our main audiences, fed by opinions that the algorithm knows we would agree to.
This is the danger that Malaysia currently faces. It is a politics of bubbles, misread to be politics for the many. Added with the ingredient of leaders who are still unable to make unpopular decisions for the good of the people, our policies may take the turn for the worse in these next few years.