Basic Principles in a Political Coalition....

We hear a lot of wranglings in PAKATAN, internal conflict and disagreements, which are often highlighted by the mainstream media. Keadilan-PAS-DAP seemed to be always gunning at each other, challenging each other, provoking each other.That does not seem to be the case in BARISAN. However, once in a while we see things even in BARISAN, going in opposite directions. But, the differences are quickly dispelled.Both coalitions are what coalitions in politics should be- a political marriage of interest and convenience.

In theory the marriage is supposed to result in a strong government with a good representation of all segments of society in the electorate. Conflicting interests, demands and ideologies would be discussed within the coalition and a decision acceptable to all would be taken, thus keeping the conflicts and disagreements within the coalition, preventing them from rocking and splitting up the public as a whole.Thus, it is most natural and even necessary for conflicting interests and demands to be discussed WITHIN the coalition. It is in there that the war will be fought and a compromise attained, to be announced or presented to the electorate as a policy of the coalition party. If, after the announcement, some members of the coalition chose to disagree and continue to attack the decision of the coalition, they should be considered as 'defaulters' and 'turncoats'. Individual member party in the coalition should then take action on the 'defaulters'.

So, why are we so concerned with conflicts and disagreement within the coalition? They are supposed to be the problems of the coalition party to be handled by its leaders. Why are we so concerned with the disagreements between Keadilan, PAS and DAP on certain issues of governance since what really matters is the final policy adopted by the coalition? If you as a member of Keadilan, PAS or DAP don't agree with the policy announced and adopted by the coalition (PAKATAN), then it's a matter which must be resolved between you and your party. This goes for members of UMNO,MCA,_MIC etc in BARISAN as well. If BARISAN had less disagreements in the coalition, less wranglings and less discussions, it does not necessarily mean that every member in the various component parties agree with the policy adopted. Trainers in group dynamics will attest that less vociferous and heated arguments in a group often indicates that the decision of the group may not be supported by all its members. The rowdier and more heated the discussions, the higher is the chance for getting better support from all.

If the concept of coalition parties as assumed above is correct, then we should expect higher levels of discussion and disagreement within the coalition, BEFORE coming out with a policy statement. If on the other hand a coalition is merely a marriage of convenience, it will certainly end up on the rock, sooner or later. The concept of a coalition should be thoroughly understood by political parties and their leaders if the coalition is going to last and serves its purpose well. BARISAN has withstood the test of time in that regard but although not much of the internal struggle is known, little discussion and disagreement could mean that much is being swept under the carpet. PAKATAN on the other hand should adopt the true principles of coalition more if the coalition is going to last and serves its purpose. Otherwise, it will break up even before the GE13 contest.

English as a Second Lamguage.

Many of the third world countries have adopted English as the second language. That includes Malaysia. For msny countries it's the language of the elites, the educated and admirers of the western culture.It's almost impossible to accept English as a common medium of communication without accepting the culture that comes with it.

English used to be a compulsory subject in all secondary schools using English as the medium of instruction. Fail English in your final year examination and you fail to get your School Certicate or now known in Bahasa as the SPM (Sijil Persekolahan Malaysia). It was also difficult to get a job without a "C" or a credit in English as shown in your School Certificate results. And many students failed to get it although they did pretty well in other subjects.

The requirement was changed to a "C" in Bahasa Malaysia after Malaysia became an independent nation. The policy-change shifted attention from English to Bahasa and surprisingly many Malay students failed to get a credit in their mother tongue. The National University of Malaysia or UKM came into being with Bahasa as the medium of instruction and the National Language Agency began the uphill task of updating and improving the language to cope with the need of development. Like Indonesia, several English words were adopted with some changes in the spelling, to express concepts and ideas not
familiar to the Malaysians. As Malaysia entered a new era of development, more and more English words entered the Malaysian vocabulary, some of which were Malaysianized while others were not, resulting in near chaos. Some of the local words introduced by the National Language Agency to be officially used as the English equivalent were not commonly known to Malaysians and never became as popular as their English origin. The mix of Bahasa and English in the everyday parlance of the educated Malaysians then became rather confusingly ludicrous, especially to those not educated in the English medium.


Bahasa Malaysia became the official language of the country to be used in all official functions and the use of English words was widely accepted when the Malay equivalent could not be found. The standard of written and spoken English in the country then began to deteriorate since the Malay-English mix became so common and quite acceptable.The pronunciation of the English words with a Malayanized slang and intonation was also accepted while all grammatical rules in the English language were thrown to the wind. This also happened in the schools and regretfully in the institutions of higher learning including the universities with English as the medium of instruction but allowing Bahasa to be used as an option.

And so today, the standard of English as used by many Malaysians including young teachers, is found to be lamentable if not abnoxious. Malaysian English (or Manglish) has become popular to the detriment of using English as an effective and proficient way of communicating at the international level. Some of the new graduates from our universities using Bahasa as the medium of instruction could not even communicate in English, thus unable to express the concepts, ideas and terminologies introduced by today's civilization and way of life. For a while science and mathematics have been taught in schools through the English medium. But that has neither improved the ability to communicate in English among the students nor their grasp of the subjects. It also contradicts the goal of establishing Bahasa as the national language.

Now the government is not only recruiting English teachers from England (and soon from India) to help Malaysian students master the English language again, but also intends to make English a compulsory subject in their studies like the time before independence. It seems that we are going back to the "good old days" when a student in an English medium school could be fined for speaking in Bahasa. It is as though that after more than fifty years of independence Malaysia has not been able to train their own experts in the English language. Maybe the TV program 'Mind Your Own Language' should become a compulsory watching subject in the schools now.Otherwise we will specialize in broken English while people in other countries with English as a second language speak fluent English but with a local pronunciation and intonation.

Resurgence of the Kampung

At one time villages or the kampungs in Malaysia were famous as places of quietness and serenity, places free from the hustle and bustle of city life, places of recluse and self-indulgence. Then rural development began to change the scene, turning the kampungs into fair grounds for economic resources and opportunities. Rice fields and horticulture were given up in favor of exploiting rubber and palm oil production.The young people moved en masse to the towns and cities leaving the old folks and the very young in the village. to be taken care of by their grand parents for the parents were too busy earning a living or making a fortune in the cities.


We began to see old traditional houses left to rot and land holdings becoming secondary jungles. As we enter into the first decade of the 21st century, more and more traditional houses along the main roads (what more in the rural depth) became vacant and left to the pleasure of white ants since the grannies occupying them had passed away. Sons and daughters of the new era were not interested in going back to the villages to take care of the old properties. Only when the land left by their parents or grannies are packed with fruit-tress such as durians, rambutans, mangoes, mangoestein etc would they go back during fruiting season to get their supply of free fruits, which in the towns and cities would cost them a bundle.


Many have also bought their own houses in the town and city areas where new housing communities are springing up like mushhrooms, The interest in going back to the village slipped even further down their list of priorities.

But as the cost of houses and land in the city area skyrocketed towards the end of the first decade of the 21at century, and also the cost of almost everything including food and fruits, the attention of the ex-emigrants from the villages began to refocus on their places of origin. Tired of what the cities could offer as entertainment with costs rising twice of threee time ( take the cost of cinema tickets for example), they began to go back 'home' for rest and recreation. Many are floored to see the dilapidated remains of their old homes and birthplaces and began seek new place to build a 'summer' home or a 'retirement' home if they had not been able to buy one in town.Even with the rising costs in the villages for building houses and for domestic expenditure, they are much lower than what you have to pay in town.

And so began the rural resurgence - old and young ex-emigrants from the kampungs going back to the kampungs to salvage properties claimed by the jungle or the white ants. On weekends you can see several cars now in the compounds of the dilapidated homes with works being undertaken to repair the old homes or build anew in the same or nearby spot.More interestingly we can see the urbanized old and young people clearing up the compound of the old homes now overgrown with wild elephant grass, thorns and ferns, raking up and burning away the rubbish, using knew and old farming equipment. And while they works, we can see their own offspring sitting in the shade - if the old house is still not for for occupation - with their handphones or I-pads. A very heartening and sobering scene indeed for the old folks who had remained in the village all their life.


The old village forks are happy to see the kampungs coming up alive again, even if only on weekends and during public holidays. But when all the ex-emigrants of the village returned home to their birthplace, who will be left to populate the town and cities? At the rate the cost of housing and landed properties is going up, more ex-village emigrants will certain go back home (balik kampung),leaving the towns and cities to the rich business people....

Freedom of Thoughts and the Press

Freedom of the Press in Malaysia received a very low rating by the Reporters Without Border (RWB) report for 2013. It's rated lower than the freedom of the Press in countries like Zimbabwe,Fiji, Oman, Cambodia, Vietnam etc. The reason seems to be that the mainstream news media (MNM is owned by the government and while pro-government news is played up, news and views from the opposition parties are played down or even stopped from reaching the public. Though the informal news media as provided by the Internet is now very active, the information from this source is always taken with a pinch of salt.

Does a lower level of Press freedom also mean less freedom of expressing views and thoughts by the public?

The mainstream news media (MNM) certainly set the standard for freedom of speech and expression of thoughts in any country. When the mainstream news media (MNM)itself is clearly biased by being too pro-goveernment,people's thinking can also become biased. They can see that MNM is not presenting the whole truth about anything and that there's too much of propagsndizing going on. This becomes more and more obvious as other informal news media come out with the opposite of what the MNM prints. The more propagandistic the MNM becomes the greater will be the distrust generated among members of the public.

By the same token views contrary to or opposed to those expressed by the MNM will be suppressed or, if carried by the informal media, will be nullified.Truth becomes more and more illusive unless the views expressed by the MNM is accepted as such without any doubt. Everything and anything which runs contrary to those expressed by the MNM will be condemned, censored or proclaimed as false and untrue. The public and the ordinary men-in-the-street will little or no chance of airing their views which run contrary to those accepted by tne government.

Such a situation will certainly banish public debate on any controversial national policy, program and government's action. All discussion will be confined to explainingg and extolling the government's stand. The public will become more and more sceptical of all government programs since there is no critical review at all, or otmherwise become very gullible. Critical thinking will become dead since it will be dangerous to do so. Even in schools, colleges and universities critical thinking wiil be shunned and suppressed as it is considered dangerous. Gatherings to discuss policies, programs and issues would not be allowed if held bey parties not supportive of, what more opposed to the government.

What will the nation become then? What will a nation become when there is no critical thinking to stop the government from undertaking policies and programs which are considered wasteful and counter-productive? There will inly be 'yesmen' and zombies.

Truth will only emerge when there is contraversy, critical thinking and public debate on anything that affects the life of the people in the nation. Otherwise, when it finally does emerge, there can only be regrets and disappointment.

Let's not allow our nation to drift in that direction. Let's have more freedom of thoughts and opinion, and freedom of the Press. The mainstream news media should be more tolerance of views and opinion contrary to those adopted by the government while the informal news media should be more objective and factual in presenting their arguments and criticism. Only then could freedom of thoughts and critical thinking be promoted in the nation.

Focus on Problems to Solve or Benefits to Enjoy...

As GE13 draws nearer for Malaysia, the campaigns ( overt or covert) become more intense and heated.There seemed to be two competing focus of attention highlighted by the leadership on both sides of the platform, and one common malady. That malady is of course, character assassination, using verbal attacks on the personality of the leaderships. to impinge or discredit the party they represent. That has been going on election after election. Malaysian politics never seemed to rise above that level, although the Malaysia public may have become sick of it.

There are so many national issues that need to be dealt with and yet the media is often filled with personal attacks and allegations on the character of political leaders. Of course, there are truths about character deficiencies and even moral turpitude which must be told. But there is a limit, beyond which, the allegations or criticisms become nothing but pure insult. Do our politicians know and respect this limit, I wonder.Even bedroom habits and preferences sometime enter the public forum....


The two competing focus of attention seemed to be on the urgent socio-economic issues facing the nation in this transformation period and the need to deal with them, as opposed to the need to retain the peace and benefits of development that we've enjoyed so far without making any fundamental changes.

It seemed to me (and hopefully I'm wrong) that the current leadership is focussing too much attention on the latter. The public is flooded with reminders on what has been achieved so far, the progress, comfort and luxuries that have been brought in by the past and present government, the peace and stability so far enjoyed, the new cash and financial assistance given to families with an income less than RM3000 per month, the assistance given to school children etc, and are duly warned that they should not jeopardize all those by making an irresponsible decision in the next election.

Of course, all governments must rest on its laurel and track records to win the election. But harping on them all the time without bringing up the issues that the country faces in the near future, the problem that have arisen out of current development through no fault of the government but merely as a natural product of social changes, and previous faults or shortcomings (to be admitted as an act of humility) which need to be remedied, will raise a question of complacency and self-indulgence.

It must be mentioned that every time the current leadership praises itself and what it's doing, some members of the public will sniff and snort. Certainly there are weaknesses in the current state of affairs, and that's why a political transformation was required. What changes are therefore to be made, and what has been seen to be done?Or are we going to have more of the same thing?

I certainly think that the government should reduce its self=praises and smugness and get on to some serious self-criticisms, to ensure the public that 'complacency' is not in the government's vocabulary. Self-praise can only make the public more suspicious. Go to the villages today and one can see a lot of impressive development. Yes, but there are villages where the chidden's playing ground are overgrown with "lalang", drains and ditches are clogged and smelly, roads are full of potholes, etc. When you see this and the complacent smiles of the headmen, then listen to the self-praises of the top leadership in government, we know that he is not getting all the information that he should from the ground level. This has been the cause of BN's defeat in the past and should be immediately corrected, over and above the political transformation that is taking place.

Working knowledge, Work Discipline and Work Attitude

All of us can work in the field that we have a certain level of skill we've been trained in or acquired through work experience. The skill and knowledge level is reflected by the remuneration scheme we've been admitted into.

But not all workers in the same remuneration level produce the same kind of work output in terms of quantity and quality. Even after going trough the same training, work experience and technical equipment. Why is that so? More interestingly, some workers with less experience and training or even academic qualification can produce better work output than those with better training and higher qualifications.

After years of observation, reflection and reading the management literature I can now distinguish three distinct aspects of work i.e., work knowledge and experience, work discipline and work attitude. Yes, administration and management gurus have known about this and discussed these aspects of work before. But always took them together and not single them out as separate abilities, requiring separate training and incentives.

We've often heard and seen workers who are very good at their work but observe no discipline and work only on what they like, doing the rest in a lackadaisical manner. We see on TV police detectives who always solve the case but left a lot of things topsy-turvy causing the boss to go bonkers? They break all sorts of rules and regulations and can get away on TV but never, you bet, in the real world. On the other hand there are the strict disciplinarians who observe all the rules in the book but become a stumbling block to useful investigation and necessary action to be taken immediately. As bosses they often frustrate the action-oriented workers and drive them up the wall. These bosses are often very obstinate and persistent, putting even very effective workers in trouble, until some higher-ups give reprieve them.

What management guru2 have often focused on is work-attitude. Yes there are all sorts of attitude towards work but a good work discipline is considered able to be able to overcome some negative attitude. Not really. A worker who really loves to help his or her clients and consider them as friends will continue to be different from one who treat them as potential victims to be skinned alive, no matter how much training he or she undergoes.Such workers consider a client who asks a lot of questions as trouble makers, not an intelligent member of the public.

So,are the so-called modern training programs geared towards treating each of these aspects of working, separately? Giving more technical and academic training for workers with poor work discipline and work attitude will be a mere waste of resources while workers with the wrong attitude towards customers and clients can never improve even with strict disciplinary control. We see many of these workers in the government sector because turning the potential clients away is no loss to the department and nobody cares.

Growing fruit trees ....

Growing fruit trees in an orchard or a big housing compound is no problem. The only problem is we seldom do it if we are not a farmer by profession. Just how many fruit trees have you planted and tended to fruition in your life?

I grew up in the village and therefore love to plant fruit trees. But my home on the outskirt of KL consists of a SemiD house and a small plot of land in front and by the side of the house, separating it from the neighbor's. Not satisfied with the small space at my disposal to plant the flowers and the trees that I like - my wife soon commandeered the former concern - I did buy an acre of agricultural land outide the city to become my sweatshop. Yes I filled it with all sorts of fruit trees including cikus, mangosteen, mangoes ( which never fruit because the land is said to be unsuitable),langsat and dukong, while some durian, rambutan, and cempedak tress have already been grown on the land when i bought it. I've already been enjoying the fruit of my labor.

But the fruit trees I grew in my little compound in front of and by the side of my semiD dwelling, raised some different issues. First my wife claimed that the roots of the mango and rambutan trees planted some 10-20 feet away from the building is causing cracks in the concrete foundation, drains and skirting.As a result two mango tress, already bearing sweet and juicy fruit had to be demolished.Only one rambutan tree, constantly bearing fruits that can easily outclass any in the market in terms of taste and fleshiness, remained, amidst the flower trees she had grown. The dead leaves from the tree were constantly bothering her while any crack in the concrete drains was attributed to the tree roots.

A new problem arose when our neighbor chose to extend his home up to the fencing. The leaves and branches of my rambutan tree grew above his roof and almost touched the window of the upper floor. The dead leaves and twigs began to mar the roof. Lately, some monkeys also began to visit my rambutan tree to feed on the sweet and succulent fruits. More complaints about rubbish and disturbances. The neighbor insisted on cutting away the trees entirely but I only agreed on trimming it, leaving no branches or leaves overhanging his roof. The result is as seen in the pic. How easy it is to do away with a tree when it took me years to let it grow. Two other mango trees in the compound of another house in my hometown, had also been demolished by my wife after some heated argument.

Why do people hate to have fruit trees in the compound of their home? They prefer to plant all sorts of flower trees, some getting as wild as those in a secondary jungle. But they love them. But not fruit trees. They prefer to buy the fruits at an exorbitant price in the market rather than grew the fruits themselves.I believe most city homes, even single-

story terrace house with a little compound, can accommodate a fruit tree or two, if kept properly pruned and trimmed.