A layman's attempt at understanding Dr. Mahathir

Many years ago, during the expose of Abdullah Ang’s occasional freedom while supposed to be in prison, a gentleman commented that AA is like Dr. M - someone who would enjoy it while he could but would not allow others to do the same. Till today, I still wonder why he said what he said as a comparison. But using that as an example, he could be right in his assessment.

Abdullah Ang managed to visit his factory in Jalan Kasipillay, KL while serving his prison sentence. But once, he was freed, it seemed he was the one who spilled the beans on the lax control in Kajang Prison!

Based on this assumption of someone who is jealous of his successor or was envious even with his then prospective successor (Anwar), I noticed that ‘sorry seems the hardest word’ for him and huge ego ensures that nobody should outshine him or at least, not to undo his grand plans for Malaysia, like the crooked bridge for instance.

Basically, nobody is good enough for him, which explained his dumping of four deputies. Why should he be concerned about the quality of the person if the system, as revised by him supposedly had been good in selection in the first place?

As we all know it, our system of selection for the PM post, ensures decision only by anchor party Umno, and any suggestion of ‘PM for all’ is a huge misrepresentation of fact. Since when did we get to decide who should be PM? It was made even more undemocratic when the successor was appointed by the incumbent PM, and the party decided that there was to be no contest for the post!

Some people commented that when Dr. M decided to leave Umno, he was doing what Onn Jaafar did, whereas Tunku Abdul Rahman, and Hussein Onn did not join Umno Baru. Somehow, I feel that he was responsible for TAR’s gentlemanly resignation while now, he is expecting Pak Lah to do the same, again at his insistence. For someone who had held on to his post for 22 years, by changing rules where necessary, I think he had been and is still being domineering, to put it politely.

I can still remember how Tunku criticised him in his ‘As I see it’ column in The Star, until it was closed down and a subservient propagandist version appeared. There was no love lost between Tunku and Dr. Mahathir, even till he was in his eighties. While the French would describe it as ‘Déjà vu’, the English might say ‘what goes round comes around, and the Chinese would think it is ‘karma’ for what he had done to Tunku, so that he gets to taste the same medicine meted out.

Out of the many letters and articles written about his leaving Umno, I have chosen the following:

From Malaysiakini's letters section:

Endgame of the Mahathir myth
Neil Khor May 20, 08 4:27pm

Things are finally coming full circle. For Umno, two complete circles. Many years ago, Onn Jaafar, Umno's first president, decided to open his party to non-Malays as associate members. But his attempt to turn Umno into a multi-racial party ended his own political career.

Malaysian politicians learned a lot from Onn's political experience. They realised that there was much currency in the primordial attraction of ‘race’. The Alliance and now the BN, continue to play up the race card in the hope of winning votes.

Which brings us to Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the ghost of Malaysia's past that refuses to go away. Mahathir has taken to cyberspace. He warns the Malays that if they do not stand up for their rights, if they do not take risks, then Malaysia will be ruled by other people.

Here is a man who promoted ‘Bangsa Malaysia’, Wawasan 2020, who supposedly designed KLCC and who championed global Islamic architecture in Putrajaya asking the Malays to ‘take risks’ and stand up for themselves.

Well, if this sounds familiar it is not because it is a return to his 1960s rhetoric. In those days, Mahathir believed in Social Darwinism. He probably never read Darwin and if he did, showed little understanding of it. Darwin never said that the species that survived was the ‘strongest’ or the ‘best’. Merely the most adaptable. Which brings us to the underlying contradiction in Mahathir's prescriptive cure for the Malays. How are the Malays going to be adaptable if they are not allowed to change? For if they change, culturally fusing with global popular culture for example, will they still be Malay or Malaysian?

No, if Mahathir's rhetoric today sounds familiar it is because it recalls Onn's last days as a politician. Angry and disappointed that the non-Malays did not rally to his non-sectarian cause, Onn began to mouth pro-Malay slogans, in the hope that he would get some Malay support. He did but only in Kelantan.

Mahathir's ‘warnings’ to the Malays ring hollow. There are more Malay parliamentarians today than ever before. I cannot imagine them turning their backs on the monarchy or Islam if such a bill was proposed.

If it is Ketuanan Melayu that Mahathir is worried about, the only tuan that he should really be championing is the one that is in the constitution. That is the ‘Yang Dipertuan Agong’. It is the only place where the word tuan is used anywhere in the constitution.

Mahathir was also the Malaysian PM that clipped the wings of the monarchy. In that respect, he was right. But people still remember the way he went about it. Organising demonstrations against the monarchs. So, how different is Mahathir from Hindraf, since demonstrations are ‘not part’ of Malaysia's political culture?

Mahathir says that the political situation today allows non-Malays to make demands. What sort of demands are we making? Oh yes, better roads, more transparency in the way local government is being run; more enforcement of the laws regarding the environment; flood control measures; enforcement of traffic laws; a better judiciary etc.

Wait a minute, aren't these ‘demands’ shared by our Malay brothers and sisters? Perhaps non- Malays are asking for vernacular languages be made national languages. No, we are not. Perhaps non-Malays are deliberately not learning Malay to hinder national aspirations.

No, Bahasa Malaysia and even Malay literature study have not recorded a drop in schools. Perhaps we want equality in terms of life expectancy? No, we want everyone's healthcare to be better not just ours.

No, Mahathir sounds like an old record because we have left him far behind. Oh, yes, he can still be dangerous. He can try to orchestrate a rebellion. He can incite racial hatred. He can convince some Malays that they are being threatened with extinction. He has a lot of supporters in Umno. Wait, don't we have laws against such actions. Oh, yes, it is called ‘sedition’.

If Mahathir wants to rile up Malaysians he should declare that all shopping malls will be closed. No more hand phones allowed. Astro will be shut down and petrol prices will be increased by 1,000%. That is much more threatening than Malays losing power. If he can do that, all Malaysians will rise up - not just the Malays. But he cannot do all that.

Here is the man who created a culture of forgetting, hoping that his own paradoxes and contradictions will not be remembered. In this other endeavour, Dr Mahathir was partially successful. There are those who remember his political career, recorded all his contradictions whilst most Malaysians do not read history or value the past. In such a situation, a past leader has little place or influence.

So finally, we come to the endgame of the Mahathir myth.