Sunday, July 10, 2011

malaysiakini: Bersih 2.0: The struggle for a dignified existence.... by CT Wong


Bersih 2.0: The struggle for a dignified existence
C T Wong
Jul 7, 2011



This is best of times, this is the worst of times.


It is the best of times because there is a real possibility of all peoples, of all races and all religions, coming together to demand for fairness in election, for a dignified existence.


It is the worst of times because Bersih 2.0 is a mirror. Instead of seeing a chance to correct the electoral wrongs, the power elites manipulate this opportunity to crush the dissenting voice.


Electoral fairness is of critical importance to democracy. Without a fair and clean election, the winning party loses the legal and moral legitimacy to govern. It is a win without honour.


It breeds unchecked corruption and cruelty. It deforms and disfigures a democratic way of life. It humiliates and brutalises the citizens. Hence, citizens have the right and responsibility to correct election fraud so as to regain human dignity.


The main motivation for election fairness is not for usurpation of political power but for a genuine respect for freedom, peace and justice. Without fairness, peace is neither possible nor sustainable.


Also, the very reason we need and cherish democracy is that human beings are fallible.


We all make mistakes, one time or another, one way or another.


Democracy gives us the chance to correct the mistakes - abuses of power, the thuggery and bullying, corruption, inflicting cruelty to one another etc.


Without the freedom of expression, the freedom of movement, the peoples are dehumanised for having to suffer the indignity caused by the mistakes.


The desire to live a dignified existence is as natural as breathing. No power on earth, however authoritarian it is, can take it away.


A mere random survey of the folklore, the mythology of all civilisations - the Chinese, the Indians, the Malays, the aborigines etc - inevitably reflects the flame of this desire.


The violence of repression is effective for a short period, but it is shallow. It does not touch on the roots of social injustices.


The tragedy of Malaysia is that this non-violent desire is distorted as something dangerous, treacherous and sinister, and as a threat to 'national security'.


Hence, public intellectuals are few. Rationality is banished. It is 
extremely difficult even to identify and define a problem. For example, how fair is our electoral procedure ?


What evidence is available to support or refute fraudulent election?


We do not need the sophisticated mathematics of quantum mechanics to tell us the simple arithmetic of fairness in voting.


Why is it that the simple demand for fair election has become a complex issue of 'national threat'?


Why is it that it cannot be discussed, debated and resolved rationally without the threat of genocidal massacre and burning of buildings?


Without arbitrary arrests and detention? Without the threat of physical and psychological torture?


Without the communist witch-hunt? Without diversion into irrelevant and dubious issues of 'waging war against the Agong'?


Without bullying and intimidation from the life-threatening mob? 


Without humiliating and debasing the opponents and the dissenters?


This is dark side of the discourse supported or expounded by the dominant elites. When they could not argue or debate further, they often raise the spectre of a bloodbath or detention without trial.


This is what can be termed as eliminationist ideology. It is not a systematised political philosophy with all the arguments and evidences. But it is something we can feel and see in many a racial or religious or political dispute.


In a nutshell, this is what it practically says: If you can't argue with them, eliminate them: Eliminate the rights and the voices (e.g. ISA and related ordinances), eliminate the peoples ( e.g. the threat of May 13 the genocidal massacre.), eliminate the property ( e.g. the threat of burning the buildings), eliminate the persons (e.g. death threats) or eliminate the national identities (e.g. revoking of citizenship).


There is certain basic ethical thinking and behaviour like non-killing or non-cruelty which are common to all peoples of all races.


However, eliminationist ideology provides a justification for acts which are not acceptable to normal human beings.


It removes or numbs the psychological revulsion of normal people to cruelty. It often carries messages of hate, and behind which is the wings of war.


It is conducted in the name of race or religion or national security.
Once an image of 'enemy' is created, all cruel acts are justifiable, the means justifies the ends. It is addictive. It is intoxicating because it gives green light to acts which are not acceptable in normal times.


It legitimises social inequalities and injustices through unequal power relations. This is a political and also a social-cultural question.


This is a land where all our forefathers centuries ago had brought along with them the great cultures and religions.


But today, we are witnessing the unfolding of primordial 'instincts' of survival, the survival of the dominant political class.


Aung San Suu Kyi had insights into the psychology of power. She asserted in her book 'Freedom from fear" that "It is not power that corrupts but fear.


Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it and fear of the scourge of power corrupts those who are subject to it."


And this fear "stifles and destroys all sense of right and wrong."
And I would add that it also destroys all sense of shame. Corruption and inflicting undue cruelty to fellow human beings are not seen as shameful acts.


Over 200 people have been arrested and some under the Emergency Ordinance.


Our people are witnessing and bearing the brunt of the powerful and unprincipled not to play by fair rules and not to respect human rights. The fear of losing power make power elites not to fight fair and not to fight well.


Criminalising a legitimate aspiration for fairness is hitting below the belt. Intimidation and harassment against the leaders and supporters of Bersih 2.0 is sheer diversion of attention from the genuine desire to resolve the electoral problems.


In fact, this reinforces, if not confirms, the perception of electoral frauds and underhanded tactics used in election. It is understandable in Germany that any mugs or T-shirts bearing Hitler's image is an offence.


But it is an absurdity to criminalise someone who wears a yellow T-shirt that promotes non-violence, in particular in peaceful times.


Our PM Najib Tun Abdul Razak argued that the use of Emergency Ordinance(EO) to detain several individuals including MP for Sungei Siput Dr. D Jeyakumr is "to prevent more serious incidents from taking place."


This is a pre-emptive strike. But, it begs the question: What is 'more serious'?


Where is the smoking gun?


The evidence to justify Dr.Jeyakumar's detention under EO has yet to be seen. Our PM needs to provide more convincing and credible arguments for pre-emptive strikes as it involves punishing people for an offence yet to be committed.


Also, from the insights provided in the Just War Theory, all these important questions need to be properly addressed : right intentions (is there a just cause?), proper and legal authority (is there proper process of legalisation?), last resort (have all alternatives been exhausted?), and proportionality (Are the benefits worth the costs?).


For those who are arrested under the Siamese twin of ISA, they should be released immediately or be charged in open trial as detention without trial strikes at the very spine of human civilisation. And for all others who are detained in relation to Bersih pre-emptive arrests should also be released.


Pre-emptive strikes, if ever justifiable, have meaning only if it is humanitarian intervention. It should be used only to protect innocents from aggression and not to brutalise the citizens for the sake of narrow self-interests of dominant political class.


The simple demand for electoral fairness and a dignified existence has been demonised and criminalised. The concept of election fairness is software.


All the hardware and humanware can be imprisoned. But, the software cannot be imprisoned or crushed.


Violence can be inflicted onto hardware, but not to the software of non-violence. Unfairness in suppressing this desire creates not fear but contempt from the peoples.


Bersih is consists of many elements - non-violent people and non-
violent ideas of fairness - just like a flower has chlorophyll, water and sunlight. It is as absurd to crush the desire for fairness as to crush sunlight.


We need a new culture, a culture of non-violence, a culture that would awaken us to our greed, hatred, delusion and fear.


We need a new Code of Honour where we commit ourselves to fair play. Otherwise, it is a shame for Malaysia to be a member of the UN Human Rights Council.


'Pre-emptive strikes' should be directed at the roots of social inequalities and injustices and not at the legitimate rights of the citizens.


We need to fight fair and fight well, whichever party is in power. It is a moral responsibility to dignify our existence. Otherwise, the citizens shall have to bersih the corrupt and cruel system.

No comments: