Wednesday, July 09, 2008
I Heart Military
Excellent! Malaysia seems intent on going down the path to becoming a banana republic. It really is a positive development. Imagine all the benefits! No longer will we have to vote every five years. It is such a tiresome convention in any case. Better to let our dear leaders make decisions for us. They have our best interests at heart anyway, so what could go wrong? Besides, this democracy hooey is not our culture. We are a feudal people; best to stick to what we know.

Then there is the issue of personal responsibility and independent thinking. These things are overrated and can really be done away with. If we start to think and assume responsibility for ourselves, we might actually come up with ideas that the administration is inept and the social contract, inadequate. Seditious stuff. No, no, both are perfectly formed as they are. No need to open that can of worms. It is to our benefit that our betters have so kindly offered to do the thinking and decision-making for us.

More guns on the street will mean better security too. Once the tanks starts rolling down Jalan Sultan Ismail, we will be safe from all manner of threats to public order, especially protests. Those pesky dissidents are out of luck. Now we will be able to suppress them more efficiently, for who can stand up against the twin powers of the Internal Security Act and the army? In any case, nobody asked those traitors to live in this country. If they do not like it here, they can go back to China and India (or Aceh and Sulawesi). We live by our own rules and no one has the right to question how we do things here.

And if Malaysia decides to do it properly, we might even see military participation in government a la Indonesia’s dwifungsi. Centralisation of the economy would be great. There is too much competition nowadays anyway. Imagine the economies of scale we could derive, not to mention the benefit a healthy injection of military discipline and imagination would confer on our admittedly uncompetitive state-owned businesses. Of course, it would be natural for officers to take a nice cut for themselves for their contributions to the state. That is a given.

Ah, I can almost hear the sound of marching on the streets now. Music to my ears.

posted by Hong at 2:36 pm | Permalink | 3 comments
Saturday, July 05, 2008
What state?
Links to Freedomain, the blog of anarcho-capitalist writer, Stephan Molyneux: the anarcho-capitalist position summarised; the violently coercive basis for government, parts one and two; the argument against government being necessary because it is either moral or ensures our safety; the illogical nature of the welfare state; and a refutation of the claim that participation in state-run societies and consumption of state-provided goods and services by anarcho-capitalists is inconsistent.

posted by Hong at 3:50 pm | Permalink | 0 comments
Déjà vu

For Anwar Ibrahim, who may or may not have had anal sex with either his driver or aide, or both.

posted by Hong at 11:21 am | Permalink | 0 comments
Friday, July 04, 2008
And now for the swimsuit event
Hot on the heels of fresh allegations of sodomy levelled against Anwar Ibrahim by a former aide comes a counter-allegation in the form of a statutory declaration (now retracted) by Abdul Razak Baginda's private investigator which not only links Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak to the Altantuya case but alludes to his first-hand knowledge that she was 'susceptible to anal intercourse'. All other implications aside—that Najib's alleged suppression of information regarding his relationship with the murdered Mongolian is part of a 'clear and consistent pattern of manipulation of the criminal justice system' by government—this sordid tit-for-tat (or perhaps, rectum-for-rectum) play between the two brings into focus one of the fundamental flaws in democracy: the tendency to equate popularity with competence with regards to political candidates.

Everyone talks about the new Malaysian ideal of parity between ethnic groups and choosing a person to do a job not because he is Malay, Chinese, or Indian but because he is right for it. The underlying notion here is that performance matters more than appearance. So why can we not apply this more consistently? The fact that the public holds politicians to some sort of higher standard smacks of hypocrisy and not a little stupidity. Why is it that when, say, an able heart surgeon caught bumming another man or sleeping with his mistress he is still seen as an able heart surgeon but when politicians are caught with their pants down they are vilified and sent into political wilderness?

If we are going to do this democracy shtick, then we should at least do it right. This assignment of moral superiority to elected officials is ridiculous. They are not our social betters, they are merely normal people with normal foibles nominated to positions of governance through the mechanism of voting because, ostensibly, they are fit for the post. They did not somehow rise above us by virtue of having better spousal relations, greater filial piety or higher attendance at mosque or temple. They are there because we put them there to do a job. If they are deplorably bad at it, such as the present administration, they have to go. If they are good at what they do, they should stay. If they choose to poke the chocolate starfish in private, it is really none of anybody's business, so long as their work suffers not.

Those who disagree should take a long, hard look Malaysia's continually declining star and ask themselves if we do not deserve the best we can get, sexual proclivities be damned, rather than contend with the superintendence of the virtuously inept.

posted by Hong at 7:17 am | Permalink | 0 comments