Wednesday, May 22, 2013


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on May 22, 2013

1. Street demonstrations can bring down Governments. This we know from the Arab Spring. But we should also know that setting up a new Government to replace the old Government is not as easy.

2. There will always be people who will not agree with the new Government, no matter if the Government is democratically elected or not. The losers in the bid for power will always accuse the winners of cheating and frauds of all kinds. They will demand for new elections, or a re-count or whatever.

3. If their demand is not agreed to then they will take to the streets in continuous and even violent demonstrations, supplemented with strikes and sundry disorders. They know that if the demonstrations are big enough, the police cannot act against them. If the police try, they will resist and become violent. If the police react with violence than their foreign backers will accuse the police of brutality.

4. In many instances the police had to withdraw or they may be directed to withdraw. They become disinclined to carry out their duties. Some people would take advantage of this by committing minor crimes. The people would feel insecure.

5. If on the other hand new elections are held, and the former losers win, the new losers will accuse the winners of cheating, of fraud etc. They will hold street demonstrations and strikes and do everything possible to bring down the Government. And so it would go on.

6. The net result would be continuous turmoil in the country. There would be no growth. Poverty will spread. The country may have to beg for aid or borrow. In the end it loses its independence.

7. But of course this is a small price to pay for the right to bring down governments through democratic street demonstrations.

8. Perhaps it would be better if governments are chosen through street demonstrations. It would probably be less fraudulent.

Thursday, May 2, 2013


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on May 02, 2013

This article appeared in the New Straits Times of April 30, 2013

1. Malaysia has enjoyed more than half a century of peace and stability and high growths under BN coalition Governments. The seizure of power by the Malay majority upon independence as predicted by foreign observers and some locals did not happen.

2. Instead under the Tunku they promoted a sharing of power and wealth between the three major races through a coalition, the Alliance. The Alliance won 51 out of 52 of the 98 Federal Legislative Council seats contested in 1955. The Tunku as Chief Minister agreed with Sir Cheng Lock Tan’s request and gave one million citizenship to unqualified Chinese and Indians, diluting the Malay majority from 80% to 60%.

3.  In 1963 Singapore joined the new state of Malaysia. The PAP did not believe in sharing power. It promoted meritocracy, rule by the elites, by suggesting that Malaysia was not ruled by the cleverest and the most qualified but by Malays. This was intended to stop Chinese support for the MCA and antagonise them against the Malays and UMNO.

4. In 1964 elections the PAP contested with the Malaysian Malaysia slogan to reflect its meritocratic creed. It won only one seat. The Chinese in the Peninsular, under the MCA rejected the PAP.

5. The people of the Peninsular, in rejecting the PAP demonstrated their belief in the concept of “kongsi” or sharing espoused by the Alliance. Singapore and its chauvinistic meritocrats had to leave Malaysia.

6. But a Trojan horse was left behind in the form of a political party named DAP. The similarity of name is not accidental for the DAP was to continue the fight for a meritocratic Malaysian Malaysia. The fight against “kongsi” between the races was to continue.

7. Despite a claim that the DAP is multiracial, its leadership and the overwhelming majority of its members belied the claim to this day. The strategy was to antagonise the Chinese against the Malays by suggesting that the Chinese were second-class citizens.

8. This campaign was quite subdued when the Barisan National Government won strong support from people of all races in Malaysia. But as soon as the Government appeared to be weak the DAP extremists were let loose and the attacks against the Malays became blatant to the point of claiming that the Malays are as much newcomers to Malaysia as the Chinese and Indians. There should therefore be no special treatment for them. The DAP conveniently forgets the special treatment accorded to the Chinese and Indians in Malaysia.

9. The growth and prosperity of this multiracial country depend largely on Sino-Malay cooperation or kongsi. The Barisan National exemplifies this kongsi spirit. To break this kongsi the DAP must antagonise the Chinese against the Malays.

10. Through all the elections in Malaysia the people of Johore have personified the kongsi principle. In every election the Malays would support the MCA Chinese and the Chinese would support the UMNO Malay candidates resulting in Johore delivering 100% BN victories.

11. Now Kit Siang has decided it is time to break up the kongsi. True the Chinese majority in Gelang Patah is smaller than the other constituencies Kit Siang had contested. But Kit Siang hopes with the support of PAS he can split Malay votes, so as to defeat BN. Now UMNO is contesting Gelang Patah with little hope of getting Chinese support.

12. Kita Siang does not agree with the Islamic state and Islamic laws proposed by PAS but that party’s ability to break Malay unity in Johore would benefit DAP. Kit Siang knows that PAS would never be strong enough to impose its version of the Islamic laws in Malaysia if Pakatan wins.

13. Kit Siang is more wily than any of PAS’s leaders. He also knows that PAS needs the support of the Chinese in order to defeat UMNO. He holds the trump card in any “pakatan” of the opposition.

14. Johore is a Barisan National bastion. If it is broken then he could put an end to the MCA’s cooperation with UMNO under the old “kongsi” or sharing concept. Instead there would be meritocracy in everything where the winner takes all and the devil takes the hindmost.

15. A win for Kit Siang will be victory for racism and rule by the elites as is found in a nearby country. It will spell the end of good relations in Johore between the races.

16. Victory for Ghani Othman will mean a sharing of power and wealth of this country between all races and tribes in multi-racial Malaysia.