People are hurting, this isn’t a game

FIREBRAND Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s judgment of people has, at times, seemed questionable. Now, it looks dreadful.

Dr Mahathir has upset that worthy, even, noble purpose of an open debate by saying Malaysians are not mature or educated enough to understand a discourse involving politicians.

Quite simply, Dr Mahathir is out of touch with public opinion and the level of maturity among Malaysians.

To imply Malaysians are not mature or educated enough to understand a debate is condescending.

To insinuate debates would only “make the situation worse” as Malaysians are far too sentimental and emotional to appreciate arguments that are presented rationally, is equally patronising.

“The Malaysian public is not yet that mature. This is not America. And even in America, the debates all expose how stupid the candidates are, that’s all,” the former prime minister told reporters after meeting Malay rights leaders in Kuala Lumpur on Monday.

So, we are all stupid now to listen to ‘stupid’ politicians? Or perhaps, we are all still kids?

If Malaysians are not mature enough to watch a political debate, are we then not mature enough to participate in democracy?

Personally, boredom and indifference were all I encountered during the televised debate between MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek and DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng last Saturday.

Both leaders failed to make their case to us – the voters. The topics discussed in the debate were not the most controversial issues of the time.

After all, people are far more concerned about the cost of living and the essentials of life: food, shelter and their young.

Instead, it was more a political ceramah as both politicians seized the opportunity to speak well of their leanings and expose the shortcomings of the other.

Neither of them said anything invigorating. They stuck to political rhetoric. Nothing we didn’t know. No new ideas. No eloquent attacks on injustices. No show of enormous compassion for people's pain. No willingness and ability to articulate deep truths.

Were they being evasive? Were they being dishonest? Were they being dreary? I think it's one of those three.

We praise high standards, we demand high standards but, as we are now only too painfully aware, this debate fell badly short of those standards.

It seemed a battle of egos. Both leaders were parochial in their approach and pounced on each other’s political lines rather than preying on national issues.

They ignored a multi-racial, multi-cultural stance even if the topic was “Chinese at a Crossroads: Is the Two-Party System Becoming a Two-Race System?”

This isn’t a game and doesn’t bode well for 1Malaysia. To be sure, the debate will never be a benchmark for political debates.

The worth and forbearance of the audience have been ridiculed. The Q & A session was the biggest failure of the debate. Some people who asked questions were barefacedly abusive. The moderator failed miserably in keeping the debaters on point.

Still, I am not about to fall for the notion that leaders like Dr Mahathir know best and that we should follow blindly.

So what next? You can detect a common thread that there’s excitement debates in the civil society have just started. The noise alone will prove there is still some life in such debates.

Such debates provide the perfect platform for parties with opposing principles to push their ideals and ideas to the masses.

Dr Mahathir, Sir, I think you’re an extraordinary person, and I must apologise for blowing a gasket but you must agree that the possibilities for such debates are enormous if they can next be produced with the highest degree of maturity and tolerance.

Malaysians, especially the young, are ready to take part or watch debates without getting emotive. I dare say most of us are mature enough, more so because we are hurting.


Frankie is Editor-At-Large at The Malay Mail. Feedback: frankie@mmail.com.my