It’s the economy, stupid!- The Malaysian Insider
December 10, 2012 — A health director-general is demoted for khalwat, two non-Muslims are summoned for the same, underage girls are legally married off, Hindu altars are demolished by non-Hindu officials in Selangor, fatwas on poco-poco are passed, guidelines on LGBTs are issued, Obedient Wives Clubs are organised and even the use of the word Allah is politicised.
In the meantime, corruption is on the rise, the cost of living is outpacing the growth in salaries, the number of bankruptcies is at an all-time high, affordable housing availability is on the decline, there are no English schoolbooks available for those wishing to continue with PPSMI and the drop in crude palm oil (CPO) prices is having a dramatic impact on export numbers.
In a multicultural, multi religious society, some amount of religious conflict is inevitable, as it is in the rest of the world by and large. But when politics and government place greater emphasis on policing the morals of the community than improving their economic and educational well-being, it is because they believe that is what their electorate wants. But is this true?
In the furore over hudud, khalwat and the like, it is the politicians who have been doing all the talking. But in the case of Lynas or Dong Zong or PAGE, in the face of official apathy, it is the ordinary voter who has been worried enough to take their issues to the streets to ask for justice.
Religion is truly the opiate of the masses. When times are good economically and the future looks even better, religion is largely a personal matter. In the boom years of the late ‘80s to the early ‘90s when the media was supine but real incomes were rising fast, religious matters were largely on the back burner. Every race knew what sensitive issues to avoid while trying to carve a better economic future.
But when real incomes stagnate and the media wakes up, all the economic mis-steps of the government become the focus of public anger. That is when politicians turn to religion to distract and segregate society. The religious bogey is immensely helpful in changing the focus of political debate from the economic betterment of all citizens to which political coalition can best safeguard the rights of various religious combinations.
The Jasmine Revolution and the Arab Spring were not about asking for more moral policing and religiosity in government, but an end to economic and social oppression under brutal, despotic dictatorships. The fact that traditionally conservative Muslim women were in the forefront of these movements is testimony to the level of anger. The conservative Christian Mitt Romney was no match for the gay marriage embracing Barack Obama, simply because the real issue in the election was not religion, but the economy.
The lesson here is that voters today are increasingly demanding that the primary role of government is to help advance the economic agenda through providing citizens with access to world-class education, effective impartial policing, transparent governance and economic opportunities equally, while making sure that all citizens are allowed the freedom to practice their faith as they see fit.
If the Malaysian electorate as a whole is on the same page, expect a major setback for the hudud-first PAS government in Kelantan as well as for the party as a whole. Perceived weaknesses on the economic front as well as the backing from Perkasa should also lead to setbacks for BN at the federal level.
Insistence on Ketuanan Melayu and Malay-first NEP-style rhetoric, which shifts affirmative action from the truly needy to those of a particular race, will not help either. At the federal level it may be a battle between BN and PR, but at the state level the next election will be a contest between all six major parties and their economic and religious worldviews.
Bread-and-butter issues matter now than ever before. Those political entities that have ignored them may be in for a rude shock soon.
In the meantime, corruption is on the rise, the cost of living is outpacing the growth in salaries, the number of bankruptcies is at an all-time high, affordable housing availability is on the decline, there are no English schoolbooks available for those wishing to continue with PPSMI and the drop in crude palm oil (CPO) prices is having a dramatic impact on export numbers.
In a multicultural, multi religious society, some amount of religious conflict is inevitable, as it is in the rest of the world by and large. But when politics and government place greater emphasis on policing the morals of the community than improving their economic and educational well-being, it is because they believe that is what their electorate wants. But is this true?
In the furore over hudud, khalwat and the like, it is the politicians who have been doing all the talking. But in the case of Lynas or Dong Zong or PAGE, in the face of official apathy, it is the ordinary voter who has been worried enough to take their issues to the streets to ask for justice.
Religion is truly the opiate of the masses. When times are good economically and the future looks even better, religion is largely a personal matter. In the boom years of the late ‘80s to the early ‘90s when the media was supine but real incomes were rising fast, religious matters were largely on the back burner. Every race knew what sensitive issues to avoid while trying to carve a better economic future.
But when real incomes stagnate and the media wakes up, all the economic mis-steps of the government become the focus of public anger. That is when politicians turn to religion to distract and segregate society. The religious bogey is immensely helpful in changing the focus of political debate from the economic betterment of all citizens to which political coalition can best safeguard the rights of various religious combinations.
The Jasmine Revolution and the Arab Spring were not about asking for more moral policing and religiosity in government, but an end to economic and social oppression under brutal, despotic dictatorships. The fact that traditionally conservative Muslim women were in the forefront of these movements is testimony to the level of anger. The conservative Christian Mitt Romney was no match for the gay marriage embracing Barack Obama, simply because the real issue in the election was not religion, but the economy.
The lesson here is that voters today are increasingly demanding that the primary role of government is to help advance the economic agenda through providing citizens with access to world-class education, effective impartial policing, transparent governance and economic opportunities equally, while making sure that all citizens are allowed the freedom to practice their faith as they see fit.
If the Malaysian electorate as a whole is on the same page, expect a major setback for the hudud-first PAS government in Kelantan as well as for the party as a whole. Perceived weaknesses on the economic front as well as the backing from Perkasa should also lead to setbacks for BN at the federal level.
Insistence on Ketuanan Melayu and Malay-first NEP-style rhetoric, which shifts affirmative action from the truly needy to those of a particular race, will not help either. At the federal level it may be a battle between BN and PR, but at the state level the next election will be a contest between all six major parties and their economic and religious worldviews.
Bread-and-butter issues matter now than ever before. Those political entities that have ignored them may be in for a rude shock soon.
Comments
Post a Comment