The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines 'politics' as either:
a: the art or science of government;
b: the art or science concerned with guiding or influencing governmental policy; or
c: the art or science concerned with winning and holding control over a government.
Note that 'poli' means means many, ie this art involves a group of people which in turn means that there are relationships involved. These people are bound together by a common goal (ie the need of power and influence) and thus will determine among them, on who gets what if their goal of attaining power or influence is achieved.
Look around us and we will see various organisations exist with politics very much in mind. There are very few rules in politics; one of them is that in politics, no one is permanently a friend or an enemy.
Being in the public administration system that we are today, the Members of Parliament (or MPs) are elected by the majority in the national elections. To borrow the phrase from Abe Lincoln, the "...government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth." Is this so?
One of the dilemmas in democracy is the dilemma of political alignment. I trust that many have watched episodes of 'Survivor' where sixteen people of different socio-economic backgrounds are lumped together for over a month in order to be the sole survivor (by avoiding the dreaded vote in each round) to win USD1 million.
We see alliances formed, broken and mended, all in the name of survival (that is winning the USD1 million). Players resort to lying, cheating, backstabing and what not to win.
I personally, would do the same. It is a game, therefore it should be treated as such. There is such a thing as gamesmanship, thus to play the game as if you are living your life is naive.
What I am trying to point out however is the scenario we see here now in Malaysia. There are people in Malaysia who do not hesitate to resort to anything in order to attain power, even at the price of peace, harmony and mutual inter-racial trust. This Machiavellian approach to governance "...considered the stability of the state to be the most important goal, and argued that qualities traditionally considered morally desirable, such as generosity, were undesirable in a ruler and would lead to the loss of power." The end, justifying the means, they say.
It is a tricky task to balance the needs of the electorate with the needs of the people you are aligned with. Where needs clash, it causes conflict. Either way (and with a healthy dose of spin) the outcome is not pretty unless the right strategy in handling the conflict is used. Ask Lee Kah Choon. Mohamad Khir Toyo. P. Ramasamy. Hishamuddin Hussein. Khairy Jamaluddin. Anwar Ibrahim. Wan Azizah Ismail. Mahathir Mohamad. The whole MCA, Gerakan, MIC and PPP.
The governance of this country is not an episode of a television gameshow and should not be treated as such. Unlike 'survivor', innocent lives and futures of families are at stake. These 'political animals' are the ones who form the root of our malaise. They are the ones that should be bound and hung, for they have sacrificed principles, religion and commonsense, all in the name of politics.
What does art, or science, got to do with any of this?
The King, his family and U
2 weeks ago