To Save Our Country, We Need To Save Ourselves First

How are we to save our country requires deep philosophical thinking and perceptive analysis beyond mere politics.

Will there be more bloggers/people discussing the big picture behind the systematic crisis that caused Teoh Beng Hock’s tragic death? Or will we continue to focus on the trees and miss out the forest?

Many intellectuals are puzzled by the state of affairs of Malaysia. There is a political mystery that needs to be solved first at the human level.

If our leaders are rational and sensible people, it would never be in their interest to take advantage of citizens (half of whom voted for them) under NORMAL circumstances. What is even more puzzling is why is the governing regime unwilling or unable to heal the disease that is undermining all our democratic institutions of rule of law and independence of judiciary (i.e. no follow ups/actions taken from recent Royal Commissions of Inquiries)?

However, there is a political economic theory that says that under certain unique circumstances, even rational people will act and behave against their long-term interests.

[Mancur Olson, the American economist and social scientist, explained in his book "The Rise and Decline of Nations: Economic Growth, Stagflation, and Social Rigidities" that at first, people will act in their own interests, not in the interests of their group. Once they have harnessed their individual incentives to the group, if they ever do, the groups then act in their own interests, not in the interests of the larger society. Olson also noted the tendency of individuals to opt for the free rider strategy, i.e. they will attempt to benefit from the public good without contributing to its provision. This free rider strategy is often adopted by leaders at the expense of the public's welfare.]

I think the real reason is because by 2012/2013, these leaders intuitively know that the world will be a different landscape (including the real possibility they will be voted out) so it is quite rational for them to take as much advantage, financial and political mileage, as they can now in order to intimidate, demoralise and indoctrinate the people into passivity and acceptance of the current political situation.

Having said that, it is my view that PM Najib is a rational man. But whether he is rational for himself, his party or for the rakyat is the billion dollar issue which all Malaysians needs to probe and resolve.

The dilemma for Malaysia is how the short-term interests of politicians can be realigned with the long-term interests of the larger society (rakyat). Do we have to wait every four years to decide whether to fire or rehire our public servants?

Instead of correctly calling for a change of leaders/political regimes (the Pakatan Rakyat solution?) or a reform of our institutions as Tengku Razaleigh had recently written, it would be far more powerful and effective to call for a change of mindset and heartset in every Malaysian.

When everyone looks into themselves, they will accept the rationality of a sharing a common vision that aligns the diverse interests of smaller groups (e.g. political lobby groups) with the larger society.

Open the floodgates of intellectual discourse and we will soon find the root disease is in the false ideas and selfish motives hidden behind our public personas. Lastly, we need humility and the grace of God to lead us out of our present political and social problems.

Painting by Rufino Tamayo: "Friend of the Birds"

The Shadow Cabinet: A New Era of Hope or A Pandora's Box ?

Finally, we get to see the potential candidates for Pakatan’s shadow cabinet.

To resolve the doubts public voters are now having about the credibility, competence and viability of the fragile coalition, Pakatan should put these three committee members per ministry to openly discuss their views/policies (cross examined by the media or Internet media like Malaysiakini and Malaysian Insider in a video telecast forum) and allow the public to vote online who is the most competent and fair to the rakyat in responding to issues such as:

1. Malaysia's Economic Conundrum: The global economic downturn and Msia’s new model to survive (sorry, Najib has won half the battle on this front by dismantling NEP on 30th June, in spirit if not fully in letter). So Pakatan has to work doubly hard on the new economic model.

2. Malaysia's Social Political Conundrum: The social problem of race and religion that is hampering the rakyat from moving forward. To what extent are these minister committee members open to a more flexible, intellectually free society or a more restrictive, closed society based on the narrow religious restrictions of one particular domineering faction of Muslims (no need to mention the partylah) ?

Finally, each member should come clean on the hidden agenda of unity talks - power for one race or ensuring good race relations in a complex society like ours?

Just as the Internet has revolutionized political news coverage in the past year, Pakatan should use any impactful technology it can get hold of to reach out to key voters who wish to look into the insides of the brains and hearts of our next leaders.

Having said that, I am sorry to say that, judging from the recent crises in Pakatan Rakyat, the insides of their leaders' brains/hearts is more like a Pandora’s box. While I don't subscribe to Greek mythology, it is ironical that at the bottom of the box, there is hope.

As at today, I doubt Pakatan can be trusted to lead any nation, much less any corporation at the rate they are going. Which is why the mandate to rule should be given back to online voters and citizens.

A High Income Society Needs A First Class Mentality

The Prime Minister's speech at the Invest Malaysia conference 09 needs to be read between the lines despite the welcome news that the 30% Bumiputra equity requirement will be lifted (except for newly listed companies who will need to offer half of the 25% public shareholding spread requirement).

Reading Najib’s concluding speech below, there is a trace of irony in his vision for a high income society...one foot in the new era and the other foot in the old era. It is as if he is saying, yes, we will liberalise under the new market-friendly economic model on the one hand but, still we need to take care of those left behind on the other.

A high income society must have a first class mentality and spirit of excellence, no hold bars competition and ensure that losers and cheaters pay the price of defeat. We must change from a Malaysia Boleh society to a Kiasu society like Spore. How else to compete with China, India and kiasuland? (My comments are in blue)

" In conclusion, if there was one message I wanted to leave with the investment community, it is that there should be no doubt that Malaysia welcomes foreign and local investors and participants. We can only achieve high income by creating more opportunities for growth rather than protecting our narrow turf. We can only achieve our social equity goals (the only effective way to having an equitable society is by providing incentives for people to work hard and learn from their failures) by expanding the pie (indeed, we know how much the pie has shrunk because of misuse of Malaysia's resources and taxpayers money).

A high income society must be socially inclusive. It must provide incentives for those who "have a lot" and YET (yes, we know this was coming) be fair to those who "have a little". It must lead to high returns for companies and entrepreneurs who invest, better and higher incomes for those that are employed and greater capability for those who require assistance (clutches again for the undeserving) to help themselves or to get help from government (in other words, money from taxpayers to be distributed without our consent to the undeserving).

Above all, a high income society must be one where every Malaysian feel they have a place and a promising future under the Malaysian sun (nice thing to say but how to make us feel comfortable under the sun when there is the scorching heat of race-based politics promoted by UMNO/BN?). It is toward this ultimate goal that I dedicate the energies and efforts of this Government. I hope as investors, you too will continue to play your part (we shall see how you perform first. At present, we are making lots of money investing in the more vibrant markets of China and SEA), and walk along with us in this great Malaysian journey."

A Strange Tale of Two Countries: Kiasuland & Bolehland

Let's go back to history when Singapore was kicked out of the federation of Malaysia in 1965.

One country which had no resources started thinking that the Kiasu spirit will strengthen the people's competitiveness. They then worked hard and turned a strategic weakness into a strength: thus the emergence of a developed kiasuland with the highest GDP per capita in Asia (US$35,445 versus Japan's US$34,678 and nearly five times larger than Malaysia's US$7,522 based on 2007 nominal GDP data).

The other country which had plenty of resources, timber, rubber, palm oil, petrol, gas, etc found that it could afford to be a bit complacent and lepak. Thus the bolehlah attitude pervaded the whole civil service and infected the corporate and personal culture of the people.

So when Tun Dr Mahathir made mocking remarks about Singapore Mentor Minister Lee Kuan Yew's visit to Malaysia, I think TDM should realise this twist of destiny:

The morale of these two countries is that bolehland will always be lagging behind kiasuland merely because of different attitudes of mind and spirit. Nothing to do with physical resources or whether water was transacted at 3 sen per 1,000 gallons (made under two agreements in the 1960s).

Change Will Come Soon To Malaysia, Mr Lee

While I agree with many of the injustices and inconveniences cited by ex-Malaysian George CN Lee, there are many equally if not more rational reasons for many Malaysians to stay.

Incidentally, George Lee made his decision to migrate two years ago and this means that he left before the political tsunami of 8th March 2008. This is a crucial factor because many things were getting from bad to worse before the General Elections and a peaceful protest from voters against the present government was achieved. It was a not just a slap in the face but a real warning to Barisan Nasional.

We need to think rationally and not react emotionally when faced with a corrupt and unjust political machinery. There is no need for panic or desperation.

Malaysians and ex-Malaysians who have strong intentions and good reasons to migrate from Malaysia to greener pastures are like the Hong Kongers who before the handover to China in 1997 thought the island will go down the drain of communist rule. Many migrated to Canada and other popular places.

I agree Malaysia is different from Hong Kong, we are already in a big mess economically and politically. Yet, those who say that the country won't improve for the next thousand years, let them put their money where their mouths are and sign a declaration they will not return for good when Malaysia makes major strides in democracy and living standards.

This is the problem with today's commentators and political analysts: they see the wonderful past of Msia in the 1960-1970s or the great life they enjoy overseas compared to Msia's present state. But they never have the courage, the persistence and the vision to see that change is coming fast in a short time.

Everything is moving fast in the 21st century and change that benefits all citizens is not a choice but a fact of life with the Internet, the political tsunami and winds blowing through Asia.

The same thing can be said about China today. I can foresee the day the communist government will fall and a vibrant democracy arise. Detractors may shout: "Not in a thousand years!" I say quietly to them, just watch and pray, change will come soon.

Better Late Than Never in Policy Turnaround

The IMF projects Malaysia's GDP to contract by 3.5% this year compared to the Malaysian government's forecast of -1% and +1%. Meanwhile, IMF's forecast for Sinagpore is -10%, which is in line with Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew's comments a month ago.

Thus, PM Najb's move to remove the 30% bumiputra equity requirement in 27 sub-services sector (Computer & Related, Health & Social, Tourism, Transport, Sport & Recreational and Business Services) is commendable and marks a first step towards real economic reform for the country.

Removing the NEP policy and the political agenda behind it is essential. But what is more essential for bloggers/the media and the public to understand is that distibution of human and financial resources based on race is economically most wasteful and greatest disincentive for economic wealth.

Allocating economic resources based on race/class(Marxism)/religion/or any other superficial feature is a guarantee for economic inefficiency and waste. There are huge opportunity costs (RM140 billions or 20% of annual GDP?) that Malaysia's affirmative action policies (as distinct from but not unrelated to cronysm) have incurred.

So Najib's move should spark a fresh wave of analysis why Malaysian policymakers need to recognise the absurdity and stupidity of economic disincentives and to allocate its resources in the market efficient way. Everyone benefits from a bigger pie.

Thus, I sincerely hope the policymakers are not just making the right noises but taking concrete steps towards real reform.

How China Can Be The New America

In terms of Gross Domestic Product, China is already heading towards a future where its GDP will match the GDP of America. If China's real GDP grows by an average of 7% while the US GDP grows by 3%, then China's economy will be as large as the US in 20 years, i.e. 2028.

However, in terms of economic structure, the growth model that will propel China into that scenario will be markedly different from the growth model that has driven China's growth rate in the last 15 years. With the global economy deleveraging and America/Europe in a synchronised recession, which foreign market will be strong enough to buy Chinese consumer products?

Invariably, China needs to make a quantum leap from a state capitalist, export-oriented economy into an entrepreneur-driven economy. In order to achieve that within the next 5 to 10 years, Chinese policymakers should (1) liberalise price controls over fuel and utilities, (2) allow freedom of political dissent, (3) establish democratic freedoms such as a two-party parliamentary system and (4) encourage intellectual discourse and religious freedom without any censorship.

If Chinese policymakers are serious enough about supercharging their economy, they need to ask themselves what type of economic and social environment is conducive to nurture and groom the likes of Bill Gates, the Steve Jobs, the Warren Buffets and the Thomas Edisons of this world?