Mr Tan Zee Kin wrote a very good article about such things and bravo to him, deserves a shout-out and repost too. Mind everyone, I'm neutral to the elections because I don't vote, I can't vote and I'm... simply not a Malaysian. But all this "tsunami" happening from pre-elections to post-elections have also indirectly made me suffer financially, economically, mentally & physically. Yes, it affects me too, cos I stay and make a living here.
Everyone should take a moment to learn to accept the consequences of things happen because of each and everyone living and breathing today is the contribution to the cause of the GE results. Even I indirectly impacted the economy & its future (be it due to friends who support oppositions or gov't or whatever). It's like the methodology of what Christians said: When Jesus died on the cross for 'us', he died for everyone's sins. Even a 1 day old baby has sinned. No one is pure & perfect, according to the bible. (I quoted this not as a disrespect to all religions but just saying its an example. Again, I disclaim that it's NOT against any racism or religion. It's for discussion sake. Don't bite me. Don't like it, close your browser and don't read on).
As I was saying, the cause of GE consequences is a result of each person in & out of Malaysia. Living & Dead. As Tai Zee Kin will later tell you, it's because of the system and our/your forefathers. If you like, you can even blame it on the British (sorry UK/Queen Lizzy, didn't meant to drag Your Majesty into it) etc.
Without further delay, please read the quote of Mr Tai Zee Kin: (Source)
As I was saying, the cause of GE consequences is a result of each person in & out of Malaysia. Living & Dead. As Tai Zee Kin will later tell you, it's because of the system and our/your forefathers. If you like, you can even blame it on the British (sorry UK/Queen Lizzy, didn't meant to drag Your Majesty into it) etc.
Without further delay, please read the quote of Mr Tai Zee Kin: (Source)
Democracy dies now, or Democracy was long dead? - A citizen's overview on Malaysia's GE13 by Tai Zee Kin
(ADVISORY : this is very very very long. please do NOT read while driving. Please try to criticize me ONLY after you finish everything, and by the way, you are NOT allowed to quote one short line and attack me by that, whether you are BN , PR, or other party supporters, and for people with strong political affiliation, you are not encouraged to comment on this post , though legally you are allowed to).
Before this, I didn't want to comment much on this election. Election is the single most complicated and complex event that can happen in a country. No single, or in this context, multiple anecdotes would suffice to formulate a true and fair view or opinion in any election. An election would encompass more than anecdotes. It intertwines among Ideology, legal system, political system, economical factors, culture and religion aspects, morality, and of course, anecdotes of events. Sad to say, I think this election has blinded many people, whichever side they are on. you have Pakatan Rakyat's supporters, sympathizers, and members presenting anecdotes challenging the authenticity of electoral procedures. You then see Barisan Nasional's supporters and sympathizers countering anecdotes, and invoked some culture/religion factors to support their status quo. None of what they've done, (with the exception of few scholarly individuals like MR Rem Dambul https://www.facebook.com/rem.dambul or Wan Saiful Wan Jan ) would sum up the election in a holistic way.
*________________
First, what do you think of this statement (quoted from a friend whom i cannot remember who said it - identify yourself in the comment if it was you)
"The Election is fair, but the system is Not" - in relation to Gerrymandering and also popular votes ( alot of this are views influenced by Mr Rem Dambul)
let's start with Gerrymandering and Popular votes. It is by far the most powerful claim to illegitimize Party Barisan Nasional's right to govern. The constituency boundaries drawing was drawn in such a way that it is harder for certain political parties to win, despite having more individual/indiscriminant supports from individual voter (popular vote winning).
It is very tempting, and to a huge extend, "True" to concede to this argument. However if you read upon what Political Scientist Dr Brian Rathbun (2007) has to say, this is a real conflict between "equality" and "fairness". Popular system (as opposed to the Electoral system), according to Dr Rathbun is mathematically too simplistic and doesn't take into account socio-economical factor, and further claimed that a country that implements a popular voting system, failed in practicing "Democracy" from two aspect :- Legislative aspect (1) and Sociological aspect (2).
before you roll your eyes and start to click away, do consider bearing with me for a little while (i will condemn the government, don't worry).
Take a simplistic (for the sake of the point) example, say, 60% of the electorates are urbanites, while remaining 40% are rural folks. In a popular voting system, government will only need to announce measures/policies/manifestos that would secure the 60% urbanites to win a popular vote. Reducing petrol price (assume that the consumption of petrol is minimal and insignificant in rural areas), Providing low cost housing for urban poors, or, using "English" as main medium of education which would excites alot of urbanites etc, will put the rural folks at a very disadvantaged position. Their voices NEED NOT be heard because they can never affect the winning of a government.
Whereas based on Dr Rathbun's ideology, the Electoral System factors in socio-economical considerations. Greatest theorist and jurist on "Democracy", one like Finis or Rawls pressumably (rawls is more direct) in their writings accorded a more holistic interpretation to democracy - that "Majority wins" is not the most essential aspect of democracy, there are rules against tyrannism, and eveyrone's interest (fundamental human rights) must be taken into consideration. ( Forgive me for quoting these names. I did law in UNI and SAD TO SAY that Jurisprudence was my favourite subject and my thesis/Dissertation was on democracy - spent one whole year writing on democracy alone and got a 68 (2:1) :_( sob
Electoral system effectively takes into account the interest of people not only as "individual", but also factors in sociological (rural urban), cultural (in Malyasia, perhaps Religion is factored in too), economical (poor, middle class, rich) and various others in the form of "WEIGHTAGE".
take another simplistic (please don't attack me for doing this, it's for the sake of the argument) view, KAPAR has 150,000 voters who are middle class and working class. their needs/wants/desire from the government are likened to those of urbanites.
on the other hand, you have people who stays in PADANG RENGAS, with , say, 35,000 voters who are farmers, fisherman, and working class.
Lets assume Malaysia only has 2 constituency, of KAPAR and PADANG RENGAS. in a Popular system, people of KAPAR shall dictate how policies are make through their MP/Government (they will win). the policies will then be purely targeting middle/upper income. People in PADANG RENGAS who are farmers will never get a say. their numbers are too low to make a different.
Look at Electoral System. if Malaysia practices Electoral System, you then can see People from PADANG RENGAS (after factoring in their socio-economical background), be given a say on how policies are made. At the end, you SACRIFICE EQUALITY, but in return you get FAIRNESS. (Rahtbun 2007)
you now then ask, which system should Malaysia , and as a matter of fact, the "World" adopt? Fairness, or equality (in respect to sociological, cultural, and economical background)?
most democratic country uses electoral system, in a WAY or ANOTHER.
READ THIS :
can i shock you NOT with the result of USA Presidential Election in 2000
Republican George Bush won 50,456,002 of the total votes (47.9%)
Democrat Algore won 50,999,897 of the total votes (48.4%)
Cuba teka siapa yang menang sebagai Presiden Amerika Syarikat di tahun 2000.
GEORGIE WON.
why? because an electoral System entails , i reiterate, much more factors than just invidivual votes alone. and these "factors" is what we, as Malaysian, should really revisit.
In Australia, you have few states, each states has different numbers of popularion. however when it comes to SENATE, a powerful upper house which can veto supply bills, every state sends 12 reps from the governming parties (except Northern Territory). Which means in the Australian Senate, you have 12 Senators from the state of Victory, and also 12 Senators from the State of Western Australia, although Western Australia's popular voters (individuals) is significanly lesser than half of the population of Victoria.
Such are two good examples on how the world practices electoral voting system, at the expense of Popular vote :)
Having said that, this system allows the Politicians to ABUSE it's position in the parliament to freely "Interpret" these Socio-economical factors to justify or benefit their position and status quo.
As a result of adapting the Electoralthe constitution allows the Parliamentarians to re-draw the boundaries of constituencies every 10 years, allowing BAD Gerrymandring from happening. When Lord Reid and his fellow commissioners drafted the Constitution of Malaya and singapore in the House Of Lord, he did foresee that such abuse might happened.
The safeguard of this, in his lordship's view, was to impose a measure to prevent abuse.
The "two third majority" 2/3.
2/3 Majority is a DANGEROUS thing. it is of the founding father's view, that with a 2/3 majority, Parliamentarians can SAFELY reflect on the general/overview of the general people, factoring in socio-cultural-economica consideration at their best.
When people gave Barisan Nasional a 2/3, you also gave them a poison that would later on be developed into a vicious cycle of gerrymandering.
Since Barisan Nasional loses it's 2/3 in 2008, they can never then abuse the GerryMandering bit.
However, we must also know one thing.
"HOW COME GERRYMANDRING WORKS SOOOO EASILY in Malaysia?"
Even a lay person can answer you that question
"why Kapar 150,000, and Putrajaya only 6000 voters?"
A COUSIN used to answer me : "Because Kapar all Chinese Indian majority ma, Putrajaya all Malay".
Gerrymandring effort is sooo simple becaue races in Malaysia became the most paramount and determining "Socio-cultural-economical" factoring when constituency lines are drawn.
Please reflect on this aspect. After 55 years, apart from blaming the government from dividing and ruling the races, have we actually put in ANY efforts ourselve to integrate and became 1 ? (maalysian malaysia, 1malaysia)? - ANOTHER TOPIC ANOTHER DAY.
**______________________________________
Next, let's see allegation of "FRAUD and IRREGULARITIES".
I was vry upset by the fact that the indelible ink worn off SOOOO quickly after it was applied. instead of the 7 days, it naturally oxide and worn off in 2 days.
Like you, i was very tempted to shout "FRAUD FRAUD!!!!".
But unlike you i didn't. As a "Citizen Investigator yang bertauliah", I Investigate la!
BERSIH movement, when presenting on the need to use indelible ink, quoted India as example (for the purpose of my investigation, i've called two friends who are indian nationalstaying in delhi, and thai friend). I asked them, if the "indelible ink" they used, were "delible" or "indelible".
Guess what the answers were?
Nadeem told me (too bad he is not in facebook), Zee, if its really "indelible", you call it a TATOO not indelible ink!. It can be washed off very quickly. Nothing stays free from being washed off unless it's printed INTO your skin (tatoo).
Chanaron (who, unfortunately, is not in facebook either) told me it can be washed off easily as well, but he then poised me a cute question "WHY do you want to wash it off anyway? use tooth paste or chrolox if you have to but it's advisable to keep it".
the question is simple.
Indelible ink is never meant to be the only solution or preventive measure to prevent duplicated voting. it was SUPPOSE to make it more difficult for people to attempt double/triple voting.
The primary identification of voting history, is still your Identity card. (in US and UK, driving license, and it's so loose that so many British and american who are crazy supporters actually votes twice, thrice in the same day -bceause of the concept of registration of votership based on property ownership ) - DISCUSS the story another day but basically double/triple voting is a "norm" and "accpetable behaviour" in the UK election and US election. I KID YOU NOT!!!!!!!!!
as my boss Noorhaina Hirawani Mohd Noor correctly pointed out, indelible ink being washed off does NOT substantiate the claim of double/triple voting. The actual CRIME of the SPR is double voting. Not indelible ink being washed off. in Japanese election or Australia election, no Indelible inks are used, and does that automatically means that there are double/triple voting by one same person?
It is, the rakyat's very own perception of "DISTRUST towards the government" that made them think that the indelible ink being washed off is itself a component of electoral fraud.
HOWEVER
SPR MUST be taken to task for their negligence too. they declared that the ink will stay for 7 days, but i suppose no one has their fingers showing blue now even though today is only the 5th day. This is unacceptable, and I am suspecting that the SPR is using LOW QUALITY INK. if i can gather evidence to substantiate my suspicioun, I will call MACC to report CORRUPTION by SPR. but unforunately i do not have evidence. if you do, and would love to contribute to the bettermen of malaysia, send your evidence towww.facebook.com/CitizenInvestigator .
***________________________________
Foreigners voting in Malaysia - of BANGLAS and BANGLADESH NATIONALS.
(My CAVEAT : I DO NOT DISCOUNT THE POSSIBILITY OF FOREINGERS VOTING IN MALAYSIA, AS AGAINST OUR LAW).
THere are three views into this issue : Broad view, Narrow view and Extremist view. It is also advised that you read my previous blog on Bumiputra, for non bumiputra here ---> (https://www.facebook.com/taizeekin/posts/10151559295110306 to understand better on what is about to come )
I start with the narrow view of "naturalized foreigners".
If a foreigner is naturalized in Malaysia according to our Article 14,15,16,16A,18,19 of our Federal Constitution, can you still call him a foreinger despite his look, and the way he speaks?
The first general election of Malaysia was in July 1955, and guess what, the real naturalization of Ethnic Chinese and Ethnic Indian only happened less than 5 years before that, in MASS. guess if there is a "foreigner hunting" exercize happening in 1955, it will be the Malay Citizen hunting for Chinese non citizen and indian non citizen. I INVITE you to imagine that scenario.
If one is satisfied in law to be a citizen of malaysia, regardless of his country or domicile of origin (china, india, bangladesh, myanmar), you treat him/her as Malaysians. don't you?
BROAD VIEW
Netizens claimed that there was 600,000 Bangladesh Nationals voting in our GE. This claim was then re-iterated by certain political party's defacto leader in a wednesday mass gathering in Kelana Jaya.
it can only mean two things :-
1.) the Government gave Identity cards to the exisiting group of Bangladeshi (based on BBC report here http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7936452.stm , there are currently 500,000 bangladesh nationals working in Malaysia.
OR
2.) The government Flies 600,000 Bangladesh Nationals from the Nation of Bangladesh into Malaysia during the election period.
point 1.) seems more plausible to me (i hope to you too) a claim for electoral fraud.
say, there are only 500,000 bangladesh nationals in Malaysia, to make them vote, means every Bangladesh workers in Malaysia are now holding IC.
Is that logical? I would think that it's not, but before you shout "Stupid Zee Kin, what about the Indonesians etc)
OK say half half la. Bangladesh half, Indonesian half.
it also means that every 1 in 2 Bangladesh you see in the street, should have indelible ink last sunday.
you should be able to post video of your security guards, the neighbourhood construction worker, 7-11 worker with indelible ink .
So far, from the Citizen Investigation effort, we only managed to see 19 claims of Foreinger, (mostly claim of Bangladesh national) in the internet.
secondly, if you say that there are 600,000 foreinger voting, there should be at least 100 Bangladeshi being seen/found/caught in each of the 6000 polling station (in total).
did you spot 100 Bangladeshi in your polling station? or 50, or 20? in EVERY polling station?
or you just saw it in the internet, one of the 29 videos/photos compiled?
Logically it doesn't make sense. even if you say, they only concentrate the foreingers in certain polling station, say, 50 grey seats amounting to 1000 that BN needs to win, each would have, what? 1000 Foreign Nationals?
Come On Malaysians. that 29 videos / photos is not good enough. you have between 50-1000 foreigners voting in EACH AND EVERY one of the 6000 polling stations in Malaysia, and you can only catch 29? try harder can?
and to play a devil advocacy against your logic, can these 29 foreigners be "planted" by certain political parties instead, to make you believe of their existence? and by believing in their existence, the issue of numbers and Magnitude DOES NOT matter to you anymore?
I CAVEAT AGAIN : I DO NOT DISCOUNT THE POSSIBILITY OF FOREINGER VOTING IN MALAYSIA, AS AGAINST OUR LAW.
OK OK Ok la, for the sake of Tony Fernandez and MAS, i counter point 2.) also with a simple fact check.
To fly 600,000 foreign Nasionals INTO Malaysia during the election period, Air ASIA and MAS, AS WELL AS Malaysian Airports needs to STOP all their flights for 21 days, and use all their Boeing 737 and Airbus 330 (250 capacity) to travel between Bangladesh and Kuala Lumpur for an interval of 15 minutes per flight. then only you can fly in 600,000 Bangladesh Nationals to Malaysia in 21 days (stopping ALL other flights to ALL ROUTES). Of course, you will come and tell me, how about Penang Airport, KK airport, etc. ok lah. say if Penang airport or KK airport is to help to fly in these foreingers, you will see at least 50% of people in all three airports to be of Bangladesh Nationals for 21 days. and you can only produce, what? 10 photos of bangladesh nationals qui-ing up?
*the MRT project and housing projects already taken 1000 Bangladesh nationals as labour in the past year because.. akhem.. you don't want to do the juob ma. and you only have 10 photos. try harder fellow citizens!
***_______________________
BLACK OUT in Bentong?
to this respect, i would, on behalf of all 4480 Citizen Investigators, ridicule those who believed that there was a black out in Bentong.
To save your time, i have graphical supports in this post, as well as evidences accumulated to refute it. --->https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=167439800089796&set=a.167429203424189.1073741827.167422583424851&type=1
***_________________________
VOTE BUYING
As i wrote this, i got a call from my Brother Tai Zee How who confirmed that the Person seen in the video giving money to another person who showed him a slip, was a "payment allowance" for voters who travelled to vote. Logic will tell you ,there is NO way you can know whether one votes for who, and no person in their right mind would pay money for people who came out to vote, and then tell them "hey, i voted for u, PAY ME". why "voted"? because in the video, the person actually showed the slip!
for more justiciation, check out what Citizen Investigators have found based on group investigating effort.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/CitizenInvestigatorsMalaysia/permalink/186469381507339/
****_______________________
OK, i shall not dwell more on fraud allegations simply because my fingers are tired. if you are really intersted in knowing the findings of Citizen Investigators on fraud allegation, visit facebook.com/citizenInvestigator
The next thing i want to talk about, is "Racial trend".
Najib was quoted saying that this election is a result of "Chinese Tsunami against Barisan Nasional".
I am very saddened by PM Najib's respond because he thinks that I tsunamied against him which i don't think i did (or i didn't?), but then is there any element of truth in what he says? yes and no. NO more than Yes. Yes less than No. No yes or no, it's Yes and no.
simplistic example are like "MCA lose 8 seats, UMNO win 10 seats"
popular example are like "Nett gain in Pakatan popular votes, means Malay tsunamied against Barisan too".
Anecdotal example are like "DAP won all 11 seats in Negeri Sembilan, but in the same state, PAS lose all 10 seats."
If you base your judgment solely on "popular vote swing", then i CONCUR with you. it's not a chinese tsunami, it's a TSUNAMI per se.
But anal political analyst and scientist would tell you , do not use "popular vote swing". use "electoral vote swing". face palm
however, if you decided to give face to political analyst or scientist, you will find out the following facts prompted PM Najib's statement :-
Underlying presumption (i stand correct to be rebutted)
1.) 91% (based on an unreliable resources, feel free to rebut with a more reliable source) of high chinese populated seats (ranked from higest ratio of chinese population to lowest) are contested by DAP
2.) rest mixed seats are taken by PKR and PAS. (malay/Sabah/sarawak indegenious majority/ high sabah/sarawak/ malay indegenious population).
and the result is
a.) DAP won 38 Seats, nett GAIN of 10 Seats compared to GE 12 (28 seats)
b.) PAS won 21 Seats, nett LOSS of 2 Seats compared to GE 12 (23 seats)
c.) PKR won 30 Seats, nett LOSS of 1 Seat compared to GE 12 (31 seats)
DAP gained 10 seats for contesting in 91% (pls rebut if u have better source) highest ranked Chinese population ratio seats, and have a net GAIN of 10 seats, PKR and PAS combined running in the rest, and have net LOSE of 3 seats.
I think that's what NAJIB meant by "Chinese Tsunami". he uses electoral system.
then again, i didn't agree with him.
I THINK as far as RACE is concerned, we go by individual. having that said, it's a URBAN tsunami with Chinese wave and ripple. CHinese factor is just Wave adn Ripples. not TSUNAMI!
As a conclusion, i think i am motivated to share with you two quotes.
1.) The unfairness does not lie in the election, but the system, a system that was crafted by our forefathers and the Reid Commissioners.
2.) The mentality of the Urbanites who voted against the chinese : it's not what they want FROM the government. it's what they want FOR the government.
Sekian, I rest my case , and my finger.
(ADVISORY : this is very very very long. please do NOT read while driving. Please try to criticize me ONLY after you finish everything, and by the way, you are NOT allowed to quote one short line and attack me by that, whether you are BN , PR, or other party supporters, and for people with strong political affiliation, you are not encouraged to comment on this post , though legally you are allowed to).
Before this, I didn't want to comment much on this election. Election is the single most complicated and complex event that can happen in a country. No single, or in this context, multiple anecdotes would suffice to formulate a true and fair view or opinion in any election. An election would encompass more than anecdotes. It intertwines among Ideology, legal system, political system, economical factors, culture and religion aspects, morality, and of course, anecdotes of events. Sad to say, I think this election has blinded many people, whichever side they are on. you have Pakatan Rakyat's supporters, sympathizers, and members presenting anecdotes challenging the authenticity of electoral procedures. You then see Barisan Nasional's supporters and sympathizers countering anecdotes, and invoked some culture/religion factors to support their status quo. None of what they've done, (with the exception of few scholarly individuals like MR Rem Dambul https://www.facebook.com/rem.dambul or Wan Saiful Wan Jan ) would sum up the election in a holistic way.
*________________
First, what do you think of this statement (quoted from a friend whom i cannot remember who said it - identify yourself in the comment if it was you)
"The Election is fair, but the system is Not" - in relation to Gerrymandering and also popular votes ( alot of this are views influenced by Mr Rem Dambul)
let's start with Gerrymandering and Popular votes. It is by far the most powerful claim to illegitimize Party Barisan Nasional's right to govern. The constituency boundaries drawing was drawn in such a way that it is harder for certain political parties to win, despite having more individual/indiscriminant supports from individual voter (popular vote winning).
It is very tempting, and to a huge extend, "True" to concede to this argument. However if you read upon what Political Scientist Dr Brian Rathbun (2007) has to say, this is a real conflict between "equality" and "fairness". Popular system (as opposed to the Electoral system), according to Dr Rathbun is mathematically too simplistic and doesn't take into account socio-economical factor, and further claimed that a country that implements a popular voting system, failed in practicing "Democracy" from two aspect :- Legislative aspect (1) and Sociological aspect (2).
before you roll your eyes and start to click away, do consider bearing with me for a little while (i will condemn the government, don't worry).
Take a simplistic (for the sake of the point) example, say, 60% of the electorates are urbanites, while remaining 40% are rural folks. In a popular voting system, government will only need to announce measures/policies/manifestos that would secure the 60% urbanites to win a popular vote. Reducing petrol price (assume that the consumption of petrol is minimal and insignificant in rural areas), Providing low cost housing for urban poors, or, using "English" as main medium of education which would excites alot of urbanites etc, will put the rural folks at a very disadvantaged position. Their voices NEED NOT be heard because they can never affect the winning of a government.
Whereas based on Dr Rathbun's ideology, the Electoral System factors in socio-economical considerations. Greatest theorist and jurist on "Democracy", one like Finis or Rawls pressumably (rawls is more direct) in their writings accorded a more holistic interpretation to democracy - that "Majority wins" is not the most essential aspect of democracy, there are rules against tyrannism, and eveyrone's interest (fundamental human rights) must be taken into consideration. ( Forgive me for quoting these names. I did law in UNI and SAD TO SAY that Jurisprudence was my favourite subject and my thesis/Dissertation was on democracy - spent one whole year writing on democracy alone and got a 68 (2:1) :_( sob
Electoral system effectively takes into account the interest of people not only as "individual", but also factors in sociological (rural urban), cultural (in Malyasia, perhaps Religion is factored in too), economical (poor, middle class, rich) and various others in the form of "WEIGHTAGE".
take another simplistic (please don't attack me for doing this, it's for the sake of the argument) view, KAPAR has 150,000 voters who are middle class and working class. their needs/wants/desire from the government are likened to those of urbanites.
on the other hand, you have people who stays in PADANG RENGAS, with , say, 35,000 voters who are farmers, fisherman, and working class.
Lets assume Malaysia only has 2 constituency, of KAPAR and PADANG RENGAS. in a Popular system, people of KAPAR shall dictate how policies are make through their MP/Government (they will win). the policies will then be purely targeting middle/upper income. People in PADANG RENGAS who are farmers will never get a say. their numbers are too low to make a different.
Look at Electoral System. if Malaysia practices Electoral System, you then can see People from PADANG RENGAS (after factoring in their socio-economical background), be given a say on how policies are made. At the end, you SACRIFICE EQUALITY, but in return you get FAIRNESS. (Rahtbun 2007)
you now then ask, which system should Malaysia , and as a matter of fact, the "World" adopt? Fairness, or equality (in respect to sociological, cultural, and economical background)?
most democratic country uses electoral system, in a WAY or ANOTHER.
READ THIS :
can i shock you NOT with the result of USA Presidential Election in 2000
Republican George Bush won 50,456,002 of the total votes (47.9%)
Democrat Algore won 50,999,897 of the total votes (48.4%)
Cuba teka siapa yang menang sebagai Presiden Amerika Syarikat di tahun 2000.
GEORGIE WON.
why? because an electoral System entails , i reiterate, much more factors than just invidivual votes alone. and these "factors" is what we, as Malaysian, should really revisit.
In Australia, you have few states, each states has different numbers of popularion. however when it comes to SENATE, a powerful upper house which can veto supply bills, every state sends 12 reps from the governming parties (except Northern Territory). Which means in the Australian Senate, you have 12 Senators from the state of Victory, and also 12 Senators from the State of Western Australia, although Western Australia's popular voters (individuals) is significanly lesser than half of the population of Victoria.
Such are two good examples on how the world practices electoral voting system, at the expense of Popular vote :)
Having said that, this system allows the Politicians to ABUSE it's position in the parliament to freely "Interpret" these Socio-economical factors to justify or benefit their position and status quo.
As a result of adapting the Electoralthe constitution allows the Parliamentarians to re-draw the boundaries of constituencies every 10 years, allowing BAD Gerrymandring from happening. When Lord Reid and his fellow commissioners drafted the Constitution of Malaya and singapore in the House Of Lord, he did foresee that such abuse might happened.
The safeguard of this, in his lordship's view, was to impose a measure to prevent abuse.
The "two third majority" 2/3.
2/3 Majority is a DANGEROUS thing. it is of the founding father's view, that with a 2/3 majority, Parliamentarians can SAFELY reflect on the general/overview of the general people, factoring in socio-cultural-economica consideration at their best.
When people gave Barisan Nasional a 2/3, you also gave them a poison that would later on be developed into a vicious cycle of gerrymandering.
Since Barisan Nasional loses it's 2/3 in 2008, they can never then abuse the GerryMandering bit.
However, we must also know one thing.
"HOW COME GERRYMANDRING WORKS SOOOO EASILY in Malaysia?"
Even a lay person can answer you that question
"why Kapar 150,000, and Putrajaya only 6000 voters?"
A COUSIN used to answer me : "Because Kapar all Chinese Indian majority ma, Putrajaya all Malay".
Gerrymandring effort is sooo simple becaue races in Malaysia became the most paramount and determining "Socio-cultural-economical" factoring when constituency lines are drawn.
Please reflect on this aspect. After 55 years, apart from blaming the government from dividing and ruling the races, have we actually put in ANY efforts ourselve to integrate and became 1 ? (maalysian malaysia, 1malaysia)? - ANOTHER TOPIC ANOTHER DAY.
**______________________________________
Next, let's see allegation of "FRAUD and IRREGULARITIES".
I was vry upset by the fact that the indelible ink worn off SOOOO quickly after it was applied. instead of the 7 days, it naturally oxide and worn off in 2 days.
Like you, i was very tempted to shout "FRAUD FRAUD!!!!".
But unlike you i didn't. As a "Citizen Investigator yang bertauliah", I Investigate la!
BERSIH movement, when presenting on the need to use indelible ink, quoted India as example (for the purpose of my investigation, i've called two friends who are indian nationalstaying in delhi, and thai friend). I asked them, if the "indelible ink" they used, were "delible" or "indelible".
Guess what the answers were?
Nadeem told me (too bad he is not in facebook), Zee, if its really "indelible", you call it a TATOO not indelible ink!. It can be washed off very quickly. Nothing stays free from being washed off unless it's printed INTO your skin (tatoo).
Chanaron (who, unfortunately, is not in facebook either) told me it can be washed off easily as well, but he then poised me a cute question "WHY do you want to wash it off anyway? use tooth paste or chrolox if you have to but it's advisable to keep it".
the question is simple.
Indelible ink is never meant to be the only solution or preventive measure to prevent duplicated voting. it was SUPPOSE to make it more difficult for people to attempt double/triple voting.
The primary identification of voting history, is still your Identity card. (in US and UK, driving license, and it's so loose that so many British and american who are crazy supporters actually votes twice, thrice in the same day -bceause of the concept of registration of votership based on property ownership ) - DISCUSS the story another day but basically double/triple voting is a "norm" and "accpetable behaviour" in the UK election and US election. I KID YOU NOT!!!!!!!!!
as my boss Noorhaina Hirawani Mohd Noor correctly pointed out, indelible ink being washed off does NOT substantiate the claim of double/triple voting. The actual CRIME of the SPR is double voting. Not indelible ink being washed off. in Japanese election or Australia election, no Indelible inks are used, and does that automatically means that there are double/triple voting by one same person?
It is, the rakyat's very own perception of "DISTRUST towards the government" that made them think that the indelible ink being washed off is itself a component of electoral fraud.
HOWEVER
SPR MUST be taken to task for their negligence too. they declared that the ink will stay for 7 days, but i suppose no one has their fingers showing blue now even though today is only the 5th day. This is unacceptable, and I am suspecting that the SPR is using LOW QUALITY INK. if i can gather evidence to substantiate my suspicioun, I will call MACC to report CORRUPTION by SPR. but unforunately i do not have evidence. if you do, and would love to contribute to the bettermen of malaysia, send your evidence towww.facebook.com/CitizenInvestigator .
***________________________________
Foreigners voting in Malaysia - of BANGLAS and BANGLADESH NATIONALS.
(My CAVEAT : I DO NOT DISCOUNT THE POSSIBILITY OF FOREINGERS VOTING IN MALAYSIA, AS AGAINST OUR LAW).
THere are three views into this issue : Broad view, Narrow view and Extremist view. It is also advised that you read my previous blog on Bumiputra, for non bumiputra here ---> (https://www.facebook.com/taizeekin/posts/10151559295110306 to understand better on what is about to come )
I start with the narrow view of "naturalized foreigners".
If a foreigner is naturalized in Malaysia according to our Article 14,15,16,16A,18,19 of our Federal Constitution, can you still call him a foreinger despite his look, and the way he speaks?
The first general election of Malaysia was in July 1955, and guess what, the real naturalization of Ethnic Chinese and Ethnic Indian only happened less than 5 years before that, in MASS. guess if there is a "foreigner hunting" exercize happening in 1955, it will be the Malay Citizen hunting for Chinese non citizen and indian non citizen. I INVITE you to imagine that scenario.
If one is satisfied in law to be a citizen of malaysia, regardless of his country or domicile of origin (china, india, bangladesh, myanmar), you treat him/her as Malaysians. don't you?
BROAD VIEW
Netizens claimed that there was 600,000 Bangladesh Nationals voting in our GE. This claim was then re-iterated by certain political party's defacto leader in a wednesday mass gathering in Kelana Jaya.
it can only mean two things :-
1.) the Government gave Identity cards to the exisiting group of Bangladeshi (based on BBC report here http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7936452.stm , there are currently 500,000 bangladesh nationals working in Malaysia.
OR
2.) The government Flies 600,000 Bangladesh Nationals from the Nation of Bangladesh into Malaysia during the election period.
point 1.) seems more plausible to me (i hope to you too) a claim for electoral fraud.
say, there are only 500,000 bangladesh nationals in Malaysia, to make them vote, means every Bangladesh workers in Malaysia are now holding IC.
Is that logical? I would think that it's not, but before you shout "Stupid Zee Kin, what about the Indonesians etc)
OK say half half la. Bangladesh half, Indonesian half.
it also means that every 1 in 2 Bangladesh you see in the street, should have indelible ink last sunday.
you should be able to post video of your security guards, the neighbourhood construction worker, 7-11 worker with indelible ink .
So far, from the Citizen Investigation effort, we only managed to see 19 claims of Foreinger, (mostly claim of Bangladesh national) in the internet.
secondly, if you say that there are 600,000 foreinger voting, there should be at least 100 Bangladeshi being seen/found/caught in each of the 6000 polling station (in total).
did you spot 100 Bangladeshi in your polling station? or 50, or 20? in EVERY polling station?
or you just saw it in the internet, one of the 29 videos/photos compiled?
Logically it doesn't make sense. even if you say, they only concentrate the foreingers in certain polling station, say, 50 grey seats amounting to 1000 that BN needs to win, each would have, what? 1000 Foreign Nationals?
Come On Malaysians. that 29 videos / photos is not good enough. you have between 50-1000 foreigners voting in EACH AND EVERY one of the 6000 polling stations in Malaysia, and you can only catch 29? try harder can?
and to play a devil advocacy against your logic, can these 29 foreigners be "planted" by certain political parties instead, to make you believe of their existence? and by believing in their existence, the issue of numbers and Magnitude DOES NOT matter to you anymore?
I CAVEAT AGAIN : I DO NOT DISCOUNT THE POSSIBILITY OF FOREINGER VOTING IN MALAYSIA, AS AGAINST OUR LAW.
OK OK Ok la, for the sake of Tony Fernandez and MAS, i counter point 2.) also with a simple fact check.
To fly 600,000 foreign Nasionals INTO Malaysia during the election period, Air ASIA and MAS, AS WELL AS Malaysian Airports needs to STOP all their flights for 21 days, and use all their Boeing 737 and Airbus 330 (250 capacity) to travel between Bangladesh and Kuala Lumpur for an interval of 15 minutes per flight. then only you can fly in 600,000 Bangladesh Nationals to Malaysia in 21 days (stopping ALL other flights to ALL ROUTES). Of course, you will come and tell me, how about Penang Airport, KK airport, etc. ok lah. say if Penang airport or KK airport is to help to fly in these foreingers, you will see at least 50% of people in all three airports to be of Bangladesh Nationals for 21 days. and you can only produce, what? 10 photos of bangladesh nationals qui-ing up?
*the MRT project and housing projects already taken 1000 Bangladesh nationals as labour in the past year because.. akhem.. you don't want to do the juob ma. and you only have 10 photos. try harder fellow citizens!
***_______________________
BLACK OUT in Bentong?
to this respect, i would, on behalf of all 4480 Citizen Investigators, ridicule those who believed that there was a black out in Bentong.
To save your time, i have graphical supports in this post, as well as evidences accumulated to refute it. --->https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=167439800089796&set=a.167429203424189.1073741827.167422583424851&type=1
***_________________________
VOTE BUYING
As i wrote this, i got a call from my Brother Tai Zee How who confirmed that the Person seen in the video giving money to another person who showed him a slip, was a "payment allowance" for voters who travelled to vote. Logic will tell you ,there is NO way you can know whether one votes for who, and no person in their right mind would pay money for people who came out to vote, and then tell them "hey, i voted for u, PAY ME". why "voted"? because in the video, the person actually showed the slip!
for more justiciation, check out what Citizen Investigators have found based on group investigating effort.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/CitizenInvestigatorsMalaysia/permalink/186469381507339/
****_______________________
OK, i shall not dwell more on fraud allegations simply because my fingers are tired. if you are really intersted in knowing the findings of Citizen Investigators on fraud allegation, visit facebook.com/citizenInvestigator
The next thing i want to talk about, is "Racial trend".
Najib was quoted saying that this election is a result of "Chinese Tsunami against Barisan Nasional".
I am very saddened by PM Najib's respond because he thinks that I tsunamied against him which i don't think i did (or i didn't?), but then is there any element of truth in what he says? yes and no. NO more than Yes. Yes less than No. No yes or no, it's Yes and no.
simplistic example are like "MCA lose 8 seats, UMNO win 10 seats"
popular example are like "Nett gain in Pakatan popular votes, means Malay tsunamied against Barisan too".
Anecdotal example are like "DAP won all 11 seats in Negeri Sembilan, but in the same state, PAS lose all 10 seats."
If you base your judgment solely on "popular vote swing", then i CONCUR with you. it's not a chinese tsunami, it's a TSUNAMI per se.
But anal political analyst and scientist would tell you , do not use "popular vote swing". use "electoral vote swing". face palm
however, if you decided to give face to political analyst or scientist, you will find out the following facts prompted PM Najib's statement :-
Underlying presumption (i stand correct to be rebutted)
1.) 91% (based on an unreliable resources, feel free to rebut with a more reliable source) of high chinese populated seats (ranked from higest ratio of chinese population to lowest) are contested by DAP
2.) rest mixed seats are taken by PKR and PAS. (malay/Sabah/sarawak indegenious majority/ high sabah/sarawak/ malay indegenious population).
and the result is
a.) DAP won 38 Seats, nett GAIN of 10 Seats compared to GE 12 (28 seats)
b.) PAS won 21 Seats, nett LOSS of 2 Seats compared to GE 12 (23 seats)
c.) PKR won 30 Seats, nett LOSS of 1 Seat compared to GE 12 (31 seats)
DAP gained 10 seats for contesting in 91% (pls rebut if u have better source) highest ranked Chinese population ratio seats, and have a net GAIN of 10 seats, PKR and PAS combined running in the rest, and have net LOSE of 3 seats.
I think that's what NAJIB meant by "Chinese Tsunami". he uses electoral system.
then again, i didn't agree with him.
I THINK as far as RACE is concerned, we go by individual. having that said, it's a URBAN tsunami with Chinese wave and ripple. CHinese factor is just Wave adn Ripples. not TSUNAMI!
As a conclusion, i think i am motivated to share with you two quotes.
1.) The unfairness does not lie in the election, but the system, a system that was crafted by our forefathers and the Reid Commissioners.
2.) The mentality of the Urbanites who voted against the chinese : it's not what they want FROM the government. it's what they want FOR the government.
Sekian, I rest my case , and my finger.
No comments:
Post a Comment