ReCom.org
Portal Page Forum Wiki Social Groups Scholarship Holders Infobase Site Map About
Go Back   ReCom.org > Forum > ReCom Cafe > Malaysia Today

Malaysia Today Discussion about issues related to Malaysian politics and economy.

Tunku Aziz: Give Najib a chance

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Nicholas92 Male
ReCom Staff
ReMag Writer
 
Nicholas92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 363
  #1 Old 18-05-2012 Default Tunku Aziz: Give Najib a chance

Sigh, I was really, really hoping this wouldn't happen:

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/m...ys-tunku-aziz/

Quote:
KUALA LUMPUR, May 18 — Former DAP vice-chairman Tunku Abdul Aziz Tunku Ibrahim has made an impassioned call to the people to support the leadership of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak.
Give Najib the chance and time to see his transformation programmes currently being implemented, come into fruition, he said.

Tunku Abdul Aziz who quit the party on Monday to defend his stand against holding the Bersih 3.0 demonstration on April 28, repeated his view that the transformation programmes were good for the country.

“What the prime minister has done now is the right thing and we need to support him,” he said, adding that Najib’s transformation process for change would certainly take time.

“By definition, the process will take a little bit of time,” he said while stressing that this included Najib’s administration on improving the democratic process of the country.

Asked for his views on whether Najib’s leadership would receive the support of the people in the coming general election with the changes he has made, Tunku Abdul Aziz said: “I am not a political analyst and I do not know how to speculate. But the process will take time, given the chance. “

“In the past, we have been screaming that the government did not do this and that, but now, the government is listening, that is why I say, there was no need to protest... (now) they want Bersih 4.0... what else do they want?,” he asked.

He said the protest was held to attract the attention of the people. (The aim of a protest is to draw attention and raise awareness).

“Do you think the government did not see what the people wanted? In the assembly, 98 per cent protested to change the law but there were two more per cent... they have other agenda... to create a riot,” he noted.

Tunku Abdul Aziz also referred to the action of certain opposition political parties, which seized the protest from the non-governmental organiser to create a riot, so much so that several policemen and members of the public were injured.

Asked for his opinion on Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Tunku Abdul Aziz said, since he became a columnist for The New Sunday Times, he did not agree with his style of politics and that he had written an article, “Stop the theatrics, Anwar, let Malaysians get on with their life”.

The article touched on rumours that the federal government would fall to the opposition on September 16, 2008, with a large number of BN members of parliament jumping to join the opposition.

“Hopping is not my game... I despise people who do that... we contest under, let’s say, Umno banner and later hop to Anwar... I do not agree. If you want to jump, resign and hold a by-election to contest on an independent ticket, then we will see who will win,” he said.

Tunku Abdul Aziz, a corporate figure and activist against corruption, was the vice-chairman of Transparency International.

He assisted in setting up Transparency International-Malaysia, joined DAP after the March 2008 general election and was appointed vice-chairman and later made senator in July 2009.

However, his term as a member of the senate representing DAP was not extended by the party leadership after he made open statements against Bersih, which was supported by his party and Pakatan Rakyat.

On whether he would review his decision to leave DAP, Tunku Abdul Aziz made it clear the decision was final.

“(As) I have said (before), if I get out, I am out... end of story,” he said.

When asked whether he received any comments or feedback from other Malay DAP members after deciding to leave the party, he replied in the negative.

On former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s comments that he was surprised that Tunku Abdul Aziz joined the DAP, he said he joined the party in his struggle against corruption and promote integrity in the government and business sectors.

He had served in the corporate sector and was a Bank Negara adviser before becoming an activist, said Tunku Abdul Aziz.

“I joined DAP, not to become a politician... if I had wanted to become a politician, I would have joined after college... if I wanted to join Umno, I would have done so, a long time ago... I thought I am better without being politically linked... non-partisan,” he said.

He said at the moment, he would take a long rest, shut off his telephone and spend time breeding ornamental fish. — Bernama

I've been giving him the benefit of the doubt so far - his views on Bersih were perfectly logical, his non-existent background in politics prior to this easily explains why he was so at odds with the party's views, and why he quit. And he may even be right to feel 'insulted' at being offered a place at the Penang Institute (which is DAP-connected, by the way).

But now to come out and ask that Najib be given a chance? It's not that I want to adopt an absolutist, anti-Najib attitude no matter what, but given his background in anti-corruption and his age, I would think he'd have seen enough of politics and the way things work to be a lot more sceptical that Najib would be able to pull off his reforms.

It's even more glaring to me because just a month ago he was happily condemning the BN government and insisting Pakatan be elected at DAP ceramahs.

The only, *only* other explanation I can think of is that he'd already been fed up with DAP internally before this, with Bersih being the breaking point. But it still doesn't quite justify how he's suddenly appearing to support Najib. If he keeps his word then he won't jump to Umno, but he could still be 'BN-friendly'.

Sigh. I was really hoping that this case wouldn't just give fanatics more justification to run down every person who quits Pakatan as a 'traitor'. And I still find it a little hard to believe that someone with Tunku Abdul Aziz's credentials (it's a damn impressive record) could have somehow been bought over.

If he has, I really want to know what that price was.

Anyway, thoughts? Is this a sign that he'll be more pro-BN in the future? Or is he just being slightly jilted, and incredibly naive?
Nicholas92 is offline   Reply With Quote
henry_yew Male
The Iron Boot
ReMag Writer
Forum Moderator
 
henry_yew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,567
  #2 Old 18-05-2012 Default Re: Tunku Aziz: Give Najib a chance

We have a lot of "lalang" in politics. If the wind blows from the east, it sways towards west, if it blows from the west, it sways to the east, just very much like the character Christine Daae from The Phantom of The Opera. Pujuk sikit-sikit, melayang ke Phantom. Pujuk sikit-sikit, melayang ke Raoul.
__________________
[]
henry_yew is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to henry_yew For This Useful Post:
nicholas93 Male
ReCom Staff
ReMag Writer
 
nicholas93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 136
  #3 Old 19-05-2012 Default Re: Tunku Aziz: Give Najib a chance

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholas92 View Post
Sigh, I was really, really hoping this wouldn't happen:

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/m...ys-tunku-aziz/




I've been giving him the benefit of the doubt so far - his views on Bersih were perfectly logical, his non-existent background in politics prior to this easily explains why he was so at odds with the party's views, and why he quit. And he may even be right to feel 'insulted' at being offered a place at the Penang Institute (which is DAP-connected, by the way).

But now to come out and ask that Najib be given a chance? It's not that I want to adopt an absolutist, anti-Najib attitude no matter what, but given his background in anti-corruption and his age, I would think he'd have seen enough of politics and the way things work to be a lot more sceptical that Najib would be able to pull off his reforms.

It's even more glaring to me because just a month ago he was happily condemning the BN government and insisting Pakatan be elected at DAP ceramahs.

The only, *only* other explanation I can think of is that he'd already been fed up with DAP internally before this, with Bersih being the breaking point. But it still doesn't quite justify how he's suddenly appearing to support Najib. If he keeps his word then he won't jump to Umno, but he could still be 'BN-friendly'.

Sigh. I was really hoping that this case wouldn't just give fanatics more justification to run down every person who quits Pakatan as a 'traitor'. And I still find it a little hard to believe that someone with Tunku Abdul Aziz's credentials (it's a damn impressive record) could have somehow been bought over.

If he has, I really want to know what that price was.

Anyway, thoughts? Is this a sign that he'll be more pro-BN in the future? Or is he just being slightly jilted, and incredibly naive?
His views on Bersih were not perfectly logical. He claimed that DBKL owned Dataran Merdeka, that 'it was "irresponsible" of opposition lawmakers to support the holding of the rally at Dataran Merdeka because he believes the act would violate the law' and claims that 'he had "all (his) adult life" been a defender of individual freedom and human rights'. DBKL manages Dataran but certainly does not own it, and either he's a pretty lousy defender of individual freedom and human rights (he thinks change still can and should come through Parliament) or he's talking cock. If Gandhi, Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr. and Rosa Parks followed his 'logic', the Indian masses would still be oppressed, apartheid would still be practiced in South Africa and African-Americans would not be enjoying the rights and liberties they do today because the champions of these causes feared that their actions would be in violation of the law. Einstein purported that 'Insanity is doing the same thing, over and over again, but expecting different results.' His notion that the democratic process has any sway over dictators in not just naive, it is borderline insane.

Support Najib because his Transformation Program is good? Is that a frakking joke? In my book, a reform proposal that may or may very well not be good does not come within lightyears of making up for the monkey business that BN did, do, and will do in the foreseeable future.

I think his actions prove beyond reasonable doubt that he is not a principled, but naive politician. A principled person who has appeared to be championing transparency and seemed to be nonpartisan for the majority of his adult life does not simply perform a 180-degree mid-air somersault and become a mascot for another person who is a compulsive liar, who is implicated in murder, corruption, cronyism, corruption, abuse of power, corruption, dismantling the democratic process, corruption and the list goes on, merely because he perceived that a political party had not been fair to him. Behold! This greatest of corruption crusaders throwing his support behind a vile, corrupt autocrat.

As for his motivations, I care not what they are. Principles are non-concrete ideas. Actions are the proof of the pudding, the test of the mettle.

'Ooh, you see, I have this scheme for how you guys can make more money and stuff, so I can steal more from you without bankrupting the nation. Pretty genius stuff, if I may say so myself. But I don't have to, cause I have this dude, who's all 'robbery is bad' saying that my plan is the right thing.'
__________________
Oh well, whatever, nevermind.

Last edited by nicholas93; 19-05-2012 at 12:07 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
nicholas93 is offline   Reply With Quote
bush
ReCom Staff
Wiki Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,686
  #4 Old 19-05-2012 Default Re: Tunku Aziz: Give Najib a chance

He has all the rights in the world to voice his opinion.

As for Najib, well Anwar was formerly part of the system before he fell out of power. Not many people in PKR are clean in the purest sense, many were part of the UMNO machinery prior to 98. Who was the big boss then? Mahathir. All of them have the legacy of Mahathirism. The cleanest ones are probably those folks from PAS and DAP.

That said Anwar or Najib? Looking at the recent developments and the bentuk ragam of each of their cohorts, Anwar is doing a better job than Najib. Najib has this scopene-altantuya unofficial scandal, the anwar-saiful-prostitute debacle and the bad handling of bersih 2 and 3 plus a whole lot of stuff that are not good for a public relations. Doesn't matter his agenda, if the people can't trust you, you're done as a politician.

Anwar on the other hand played his cards well. Got slandered and people saw it as what it was. PR might not be good administrators in the states where they rule but they at least have got the trust of the people, their public act is clean and consistent with what they have said. People hear their message and see their actions, the consistency of these two things builds and enforces trust. Simple principles of leadership.

If Najib wants to win, he has got to clean the dirt off himself. Now that the french courts are probing dangerously close to him, the wise thing that he should do is cooperate otherwise he will be seen as trying to hide something. You can say that you're innocent and do things that stir suspicion. Cakap tak serupa bikin will be his downfall no matter how good his reformist agenda is.

That said, while I like najib's reformist policies, he hasn't won my trust to give him my vote. Moreover, because the trust is not there, I don't think he can deliver what he has promised, no matter if it's due to his lack of room to manoeuvre or his reluctance to fully implement his policies, though I suspect the latter.

My vote will go to the opposition.
bush is offline   Reply With Quote
nicholas93 Male
ReCom Staff
ReMag Writer
 
nicholas93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 136
  #5 Old 19-05-2012 Default Re: Tunku Aziz: Give Najib a chance

Quote:
“By definition, the process will take a little bit of time,” he said while stressing that this included Najib’s administration on improving the democratic process of the country.
Well, that's all fine and dandy, sir. But just how come we seem to be moving backwards with our democratic process and with our economy too? Are you gonna quote Gandalf, "It's the deep breath before the plunge"? Or Harvey Dent's, "The night is darkest before the dawn"?
__________________
Oh well, whatever, nevermind.
nicholas93 is offline   Reply With Quote
podrunner Female
Super Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 27
  #6 Old 19-05-2012 Default Re: Tunku Aziz: Give Najib a chance

Quote:
Originally Posted by henry_yew View Post
We have a lot of "lalang" in politics. If the wind blows from the east, it sways towards west, if it blows from the west, it sways to the east, just very much like the character Christine Daae from The Phantom of The Opera. Pujuk sikit-sikit, melayang ke Phantom. Pujuk sikit-sikit, melayang ke Raoul.
Agree!
I really think Christine's heart belonged to Phantom.
podrunner is offline   Reply With Quote
bush
ReCom Staff
Wiki Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,686
  #7 Old 19-05-2012 Talking Re: Tunku Aziz: Give Najib a chance

Quote:
Originally Posted by nicholas93 View Post
His views on Bersih were not perfectly logical. He claimed that DBKL owned Dataran Merdeka, that 'it was "irresponsible" of opposition lawmakers to support the holding of the rally at Dataran Merdeka because he believes the act would violate the law' and claims that 'he had "all (his) adult life" been a defender of individual freedom and human rights'. DBKL manages Dataran but certainly does not own it, and either he's a pretty lousy defender of individual freedom and human rights (he thinks change still can and should come through Parliament) or he's talking cock. If Gandhi, Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr. and Rosa Parks followed his 'logic', the Indian masses would still be oppressed, apartheid would still be practiced in South Africa and African-Americans would not be enjoying the rights and liberties they do today because the champions of these causes feared that their actions would be in violation of the law. Einstein purported that 'Insanity is doing the same thing, over and over again, but expecting different results.' His notion that the democratic process has any sway over dictators in not just naive, it is borderline insane.

Support Najib because his Transformation Program is good? Is that a frakking joke? In my book, a reform proposal that may or may very well not be good does not come within lightyears of making up for the monkey business that BN did, do, and will do in the foreseeable future.

I think his actions prove beyond reasonable doubt that he is not a principled, but naive politician. A principled person who has appeared to be championing transparency and seemed to be nonpartisan for the majority of his adult life does not simply perform a 180-degree mid-air somersault and become a mascot for another person who is a compulsive liar, who is implicated in murder, corruption, cronyism, corruption, abuse of power, corruption, dismantling the democratic process, corruption and the list goes on, merely because he perceived that a political party had not been fair to him. Behold! This greatest of corruption crusaders throwing his support behind a vile, corrupt autocrat.

As for his motivations, I care not what they are. Principles are non-concrete ideas. Actions are the proof of the pudding, the test of the mettle.

'Ooh, you see, I have this scheme for how you guys can make more money and stuff, so I can steal more from you without bankrupting the nation. Pretty genius stuff, if I may say so myself. But I don't have to, cause I have this dude, who's all 'robbery is bad' saying that my plan is the right thing.'
lightyear is a measure of distance.......=P
bush is offline   Reply With Quote
Nicholas92 Male
ReCom Staff
ReMag Writer
 
Nicholas92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 363
  #8 Old 19-05-2012 Default Re: Tunku Aziz: Give Najib a chance

Quote:
Originally Posted by nicholas93 View Post
His views on Bersih were not perfectly logical. He claimed that DBKL owned Dataran Merdeka, that 'it was "irresponsible" of opposition lawmakers to support the holding of the rally at Dataran Merdeka because he believes the act would violate the law' and claims that 'he had "all (his) adult life" been a defender of individual freedom and human rights'. DBKL manages Dataran but certainly does not own it, and either he's a pretty lousy defender of individual freedom and human rights (he thinks change still can and should come through Parliament) or he's talking cock.
I disagree. Just because a view isn't one that one can accept, does not mean there is no logical pathway to arriving at that particular conclusion.

Tunku Aziz was talking about the ends of the rally - his objection was not to having it at Dataran *at all*, but to having it there after a court order had been issued to bar protesters from entering.

You can challenge the court order and say bad decisions are to be fought against. But it's not wrong to disagree and question this. What defines when a law is 'bad', then? It's a slippery slope. I took his remarks as meaning that whether the law had been applied rightfully or not, the organisers and people should take the higher ground and err on the side of caution, rather than take to the streets and risk police backlash, as he probably thought was likely to happen.

And how does believing change can come from Parliament make someone a lousy defender of individual freedom and human rights?

Take the context of his upbringing. He's a rules-man, who was likely brought up to play things straight. He's part of the royal household of one of the states (forgot which) and he was raised to follow the rules above all else. Again, you might say that to always follow the rules is a bad thing (I'd agree) but it's not our place to say that a person who believes either way is better or worse. That's unfair.

It makes perfect logical sense to me, then, that as someone who doesn't do street demos or play outside the rulebook he would be wary of

Quote:
If Gandhi, Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr. and Rosa Parks followed his 'logic', the Indian masses would still be oppressed, apartheid would still be practiced in South Africa and African-Americans would not be enjoying the rights and liberties they do today because the champions of these causes feared that their actions would be in violation of the law. Einstein purported that 'Insanity is doing the same thing, over and over again, but expecting different results.' His notion that the democratic process has any sway over dictators in not just naive, it is borderline insane.
Again, different approaches. Just because it's been done before with a good end result, doesn't make it the one and only right way. It's like saying "If Bill Gates or Steve Jobs never dropped out of university, we wouldn't have Microsoft or Apple, and therefore everyone should follow this 'logic'." The statement is self-evidently wrong, because while in those instances the logic did apply, obviously it does not and cannot apply in all cases.

If everyone followed the 'logic' of going against rules, then subject to everyone's interpretation of what a bad rule is we would have a hell lot of chaos. The examples you cited are, ultimately, the exceptions rather than the rule.

Quote:
Support Najib because his Transformation Program is good? Is that a frakking joke? In my book, a reform proposal that may or may very well not be good does not come within lightyears of making up for the monkey business that BN did, do, and will do in the foreseeable future.

I think his actions prove beyond reasonable doubt that he is not a principled, but naive politician. A principled person who has appeared to be championing transparency and seemed to be nonpartisan for the majority of his adult life does not simply perform a 180-degree mid-air somersault and become a mascot for another person who is a compulsive liar, who is implicated in murder, corruption, cronyism, corruption, abuse of power, corruption, dismantling the democratic process, corruption and the list goes on, merely because he perceived that a political party had not been fair to him. Behold! This greatest of corruption crusaders throwing his support behind a vile, corrupt autocrat.
Principle and naivety are not mutually exclusive. I actually believe he is both (well, not so sure about the principled part, but what I mean is that he can hold to his beliefs and still be principled).

And if he has indeed been bought over to the other side, I don't think that makes him naive - that would make him corrupt, and lacking in integrity.

And I'm not conjuring his 'champion of transparency' background out of nowhere. He was a founder of Transparency International-Malaysia, a member of the World Bank High Level Advisory Group on Anti-Corruption in the East Asia and Pacific Region, and he was a special advisor to then UN sec-gen Kofi Annan. So you see why I think this is at least not necessarily a black-and-white situation of someone turning traitor. It's like if Kofi Annan himself suddenly endorsed Gaddafi - you can't say it's impossible, but you'd sure scratch your head a lot about it first.

Quote:
As for his motivations, I care not what they are. Principles are non-concrete ideas. Actions are the proof of the pudding, the test of the mettle.

'Ooh, you see, I have this scheme for how you guys can make more money and stuff, so I can steal more from you without bankrupting the nation. Pretty genius stuff, if I may say so myself. But I don't have to, cause I have this dude, who's all 'robbery is bad' saying that my plan is the right thing.'
Totally agree that actions are the things that speak most. Totally making sense of *what* those actions are saying, however, is another thing. I do not say he has principles simply based on my perception on what he's said, but what he's done - actions, if you will. One does not go through all the trouble of setting up a local TI charter and working extensively with the UN without having been serious about what he's doing. Najib is another person entirely - MP from a young age, then all he's been doing is the usual political party work. It's much easier to dismiss.

Quote:
Originally Posted by henry_yew View Post
We have a lot of "lalang" in politics. If the wind blows from the east, it sways towards west, if it blows from the west, it sways to the east, just very much like the character Christine Daae from The Phantom of The Opera. Pujuk sikit-sikit, melayang ke Phantom. Pujuk sikit-sikit, melayang ke Raoul.
Ahh Phantom. I read the disgustingly abridged version in Form Two, I remember. I mean, I know la a 14-year-old may not be able to handle the proper whole novel, but the abridged one was a joke - 15-minute read, I kid you not. LOL.

As for lalang...don't let Najib hear that. Or he'll launch another 'operasi' to weed out that lalang, if you know what I mean.

Last edited by Nicholas92; 19-05-2012 at 01:33 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Nicholas92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Zulhelmi Male
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 154
  #9 Old 19-05-2012 Default Re: Tunku Aziz: Give Najib a chance

Hmmm... Why we are being SUPER criticized about Tunku Aziz against DAP? I mean really, why we are NOT criticizing ourselves for being against the government when we used to support them?

People's opinions can change from one moment to another, due to many circumstances. I don't think this reflects his characteristics of being naive or stupid etc. It's just that his thoughts and needs are not aligning with DAP anymore so he decided to quit. Just like us when our needs and opinions are not aligning with the government, we decided to quit on them. But at least Tunku Aziz has his concrete reasons to quit DAP and support Najib, unlike some people out there who blindly support the opposition or the government. I support or
Zulhelmi is offline   Reply With Quote
nicholas93 Male
ReCom Staff
ReMag Writer
 
nicholas93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 136
  #10 Old 19-05-2012 Default Re: Tunku Aziz: Give Najib a chance

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholas92 View Post
I disagree. Just because a view isn't one that one can accept, does not mean there is no logical pathway to arriving at that particular conclusion.

Tunku Aziz was talking about the ends of the rally - his objection was not to having it at Dataran *at all*, but to having it there after a court order had been issued to bar protesters from entering.

You can challenge the court order and say bad decisions are to be fought against. But it's not wrong to disagree and question this. What defines when a law is 'bad', then? It's a slippery slope. I took his remarks as meaning that whether the law had been applied rightfully or not, the organisers and people should take the higher ground and err on the side of caution, rather than take to the streets and risk police backlash, as he probably thought was likely to happen.

And how does believing change can come from Parliament make someone a lousy defender of individual freedom and human rights?

Take the context of his upbringing. He's a rules-man, who was likely brought up to play things straight. He's part of the royal household of one of the states (forgot which) and he was raised to follow the rules above all else. Again, you might say that to always follow the rules is a bad thing (I'd agree) but it's not our place to say that a person who believes either way is better or worse. That's unfair.

It makes perfect logical sense to me, then, that as someone who doesn't do street demos or play outside the rulebook he would be wary of
I am saying that it does not make perfect sense when the same things are done repeatedly and one expects different results. I am not questioning his reasons solely because I disagree with him. Ask yourself just how much improvement in the democratic process has come from the Parliament in nearly 55 years of rule? His opposition to a street rally is fine with me. It's his rationale that confounds me.

Quote:
Again, different approaches. Just because it's been done before with a good end result, doesn't make it the one and only right way. It's like saying "If Bill Gates or Steve Jobs never dropped out of university, we wouldn't have Microsoft or Apple, and therefore everyone should follow this 'logic'." The statement is self-evidently wrong, because while in those instances the logic did apply, obviously it does not and cannot apply in all cases.

If everyone followed the 'logic' of going against rules, then subject to everyone's interpretation of what a bad rule is we would have a hell lot of chaos. The examples you cited are, ultimately, the exceptions rather than the rule.
Gates and Jobs dropped out of college for perfectly logical reasons. Gates had better things to do with setting up Microsoft and Jobs couldn't afford tuition. I am not saying it's been done before with a good result and therefore it is the only and the right way. You say that this does not apply in all cases, well disobeying bad laws is the same. Some basic, bad laws that cannot be interpreted in many ways are prime candidates. Article 10 of the Constitution of Malaysia states that only Parliament has the right to deny anyone their freedom of expression and freedom of association. Is this a case of Tunku following the law and not the constitution? That is perplexing. Obey the law, but not respect the constitution?
Quote:
Principle and naivety are not mutually exclusive. I actually believe he is both (well, not so sure about the principled part, but what I mean is that he can hold to his beliefs and still be principled).

And if he has indeed been bought over to the other side, I don't think that makes him naive - that would make him corrupt, and lacking in integrity.

And I'm not conjuring his 'champion of transparency' background out of nowhere. He was a founder of Transparency International-Malaysia, a member of the World Bank High Level Advisory Group on Anti-Corruption in the East Asia and Pacific Region, and he was a special advisor to then UN sec-gen Kofi Annan. So you see why I think this is at least not necessarily a black-and-white situation of someone turning traitor. It's like if Kofi Annan himself suddenly endorsed Gaddafi - you can't say it's impossible, but you'd sure scratch your head a lot about it first.
I'm not saying you conjured up his background. I meant it literally. And that is why I am as bewildered as you are about his actions. I don't see how anyone can do what he has done without turning tail. I believe he is naive and maybe was principled. Just saying that his actions in this case are not those of a 'principled and naive' person. More like a bitter ex-spouse or something.

Quote:
Totally agree that actions are the things that speak most. Totally making sense of *what* those actions are saying, however, is another thing. I do not say he has principles simply based on my perception on what he's said, but what he's done - actions, if you will. One does not go through all the trouble of setting up a local TI charter and working extensively with the UN without having been serious about what he's doing. Najib is another person entirely - MP from a young age, then all he's been doing is the usual political party work. It's much easier to dismiss.
How much corruption has TI-M actually stamped out? He sure gave lots of speeches against corruption, but how is TI-M's track record? I cannot fathom why this mighty defender of transparency is suddenly backing Najib and his Transformation Program. If I were in his shoes I would let someone else, some other economic expert evaluate and espouse the merits of the reform proposal so that I could avoid the backlash from opposition supporters and being labelled a frog and having the principles that I hold so dearly being called into question and maintain my dignity and integrity. How is a highly principled man not offended enough by the antics of Najib to not want to have anything to do with him?

P.S. I meant 'principled and naive' not 'principled and not naive' by 'principled, but naive'.

Quote:
If everyone followed the 'logic' of going against rules, then subject to everyone's interpretation of what a bad rule is we would have a hell lot of chaos. The examples you cited are, ultimately, the exceptions rather than the rule.
I believe Bersih was an exception and not the norm. I am not proposing anarchy here. But it is pretty clear for everyone to see that that rule was bad.
__________________
Oh well, whatever, nevermind.

Last edited by nicholas93; 19-05-2012 at 10:33 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
nicholas93 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Biasiswa Tunku Abdul Rahman 2007 ping879813 Education 3 21-05-2013 11:46 PM
Info: Yayasan Biasiswa Sarawak Tunku Abdul Rahman shuwenteo Scholarships 1 21-03-2012 12:24 AM
Anwar Ibrahim vs. Najib Razak - PKR Survey Finds Najib More Likable Nicholas92 Malaysia Today 1 22-12-2011 08:27 AM
Info: FMM Tunku Tan Sri Mohamed Study Loan shuwenteo Scholarships 0 10-05-2011 07:52 AM
Discussion: The Tunku's Great Ideas shuwenteo Scholarships 0 12-04-2011 03:38 PM


All times are GMT +8. The time now is 07:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

ReCom stands for Reborn Community. It has no affiliation with other organizations that may share the same name. The views expressed in this website solely represent the authors point of view and do not necessarily reflect the views of ReCom Anchors and other ReCom users.


 

Page generated in 0.18529 seconds with 17 queries