OUR people generally have short memories. There was a time when many of us were outraged at elected representatives from any one of DAP, PKR, PAS and PBS for defecting to the Barisan Nasional.

All kinds of nasty names were hurled at them, with insinuations that these unprincipled and dishonourable politicians were paid to be political frogs, all of whom contributed greatly to the collapse of two state governments.

In 1994, the Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS) – which pulled out from the Barisan in 1990 – won the state elections with a slim majority of 25 seats against Barisan’s 23.

But the fourth-term PBS government lasted only about two weeks before it was ousted following defections of some of its state assemblymen.

Some of these former PBS leaders went on to set up their own political parties, while Joseph Pairin Kitingan had to resign as chief minister on March 17, 1994, before a shocked Malaysian public.

This was unprecedented in Malaysia, and it swung the doors wide open for Umno to set up shop in Sabah, taking with it its race and religious-style politics.

Then, in 2009, when the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) formed the state government, three of its state assemblymen defected to Barisan, causing the PR government to collapse. Naturally, there was plenty of resentment at what was viewed as classic treachery and immorality.

Prior to the defections, PR had 32 representatives while Barisan 27.

The ship-hopping meant that the state then had 28 PR representatives, Barisan likewise, and three independent representatives who pledged confidence with Barisan.

But the movement began with PR because Barisan’s Nasarudin Hashim decided to cross the floor to join PR. Its leaders then jubilantly claimed more Barisan lawmakers would join in an exodus.

Instead, Nasarudin returned to Barisan, accompanied by Deputy Speaker Hee Yit Foong of the DAP, and senior state executive councillors Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi and Osman Jailu of the PKR.

A year later, Malim Nawar assemblyman Keshwinder Singh quit the DAP to become a Barisan-friendly independent assemblyman.

Many political leaders, who are now Pakatan Harapan figureheads, mouthed off angrily then, but now, have seemingly gone mum at the latest round of camp-switching involving Barisan politicians to PH. Just Google if you want a quick history of who these politicians are and what they said then, and importantly, when they were at the receiving end.

That probably explains how although many of us felt cheated and demanded an anti-hopping law be enacted, everything invariably died under a deluge of excuses.

Is it surprising that nothing happened?

Of course not, because politicians have always known that defections make for handy tools.

For them, it’s all about power, and how the end justifies the means, so the people’s mandate counts for little. It could seem a betrayal of our trust, but defections will likely be justified as freedom of association, and something perfectly natural.

In 1978, DAP supremo Lim Kit Siang attempted to move a motion in the Dewan Rakyat to introduce a Private Member’s Bill, the Members of Parliament (Prevention of Defection) Act, which would require an MP to vacate his seat within 30 days and have a by-election upon his resignation or expulsion from the party on whose ticket he was originally elected.

When Lim was queried by readers of a newspaper about the effective measures that could be taken to prevent such opportunistic political betrayal of the people’s confidence, he replied saying the best way was for the enactment of such a law.

Following Datuk Mustapa Mohamed’s defection to Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia (Bersatu), DAP chairman Tan Kok Wai voiced the party’s discontent, saying it was “unhealthy” for PH component parties, including his own, to accept former Umno MPs.

Tan’s comment came two days after Umno veteran and Jeli MP, Mustapa Mohamed, joined the party.

Now, talk is rife of a massive switch over of Umno MPs and members into Bersatu, with the party’s supreme council member, Datuk A. Kadir Jasin, conceding to a possibility of up to 40 MPs being involved in the mass exodus.

He revealed that the 40 Umno MPs met with Bersatu chairman Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and president Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin.

What happens next could well see PKR and Bersatu competing for the entry of elected representatives to alter the equation in PH.

With Tok Pa now in Bersatu, its numbers have gone up to 13 while PKR has 48, DAP 42, Amanah 11 and Warisan 8. If indeed 40 MPs were to join Bersatu, the total could swell to 53, making it the biggest component party in PH.

And assuming there are disgruntled PKR MPs who leave the party after its internal elections, it could put Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim in an uncomfortable position, even if these turncoats don’t join Bersatu and remain independents.

It doesn’t help that the Setiawangsa Bersatu division is rooting for Dr Mahathir to complete his five-year term as Prime Minister, ending next general election. The Setiawangsa division, headed by Dr Mahathir’s political secretary Zahid Md Arip, passed the proposal unanimously last week.

The remarks by Kadir and the motion by Setiawangsa Bersatu have spooked many supporters of Anwar and PKR, and they don’t find this funny at all, especially during the Halloween.

Certainly, supporters of Anwar now expect him to make a similar move to get Umno MPs, or those from Gabungan Bersatu Sabah, to join PKR to “neutralise” Bersatu. The names of several Sabahan MPs have been bandied.

The Prime Minister has repeatedly said he would pass the baton to Anwar, with the latter insisting the PM should be given time and space to govern effectively to steer the country back on track. The PKR leader said this was the reason he refuses to specify a time frame for him to succeed Dr Mahathir as the next prime minister.

“Some people see this transition as fragile, but I don’t. The fragility will come about only if there are major battles waged between me and Mahathir, but I have made it very clear. Number one, he is the Prime Minister, and number two, I refuse to give a time frame,” Anwar said.

It’s obvious Anwar doesn’t want to appear a man in a hurry, while repeating the same assurances. However, without a time frame and being the president of the biggest component party in PH (so far), the partnership in PH will be tested.

No one can deny that the three leaders – Dr Mahathir, Anwar and Lim Kit Siang, and to some extent, Mohamed Sabu, came together with a single aim – to topple Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and the Barisan.

However, none of them had any real love for Dr Mahathir, but they knew he was key to winning the general election.

Let’s not forget that at one point, Dr Mahathir came close to walking out of the electoral pact, and Nurul Izzah Anwar flew to London to convince him to stay on amid tensions over PH’s hierarchy.

Dr Mahathir and Anwar may have their interpretation of succession, but as with all parties, there will always be over-zealous leaders with their self-interests of ensuring their masters remain in power to allow them to continue enjoying the powers and privileges of being in government.

And on the flipside, others can’t wait for their masters to be installed.

The two must now manage the push and pull because once the floodgates open, they won’t be able to stop the one-upmanship for more members, especially elected representatives who could boost their standing.

It’s beside the point whether Dr Mahathir or Anwar genuinely trust each other, the reality is, only either of them can hold the coalition together.

But the new government shouldn’t forget the people who put them there for a New Malaysia.

If PH leaders can’t respect and uphold this democratic right of the people, then what’s the point in holding elections when all we see is more of the Old Politics?

Universal tongue: He may be the ‘People’s Pope’ but the head of the Catholic church, Pope Francis, has to deliver his speeches in Latin, the official language of the church. – AFP

LATIN words are rarely used in Malaysia, except for some legal terms. Those of us old enough will recall that many of our premier schools had Latin mottos.

These prominent schools didn’t want to be known as just another school but be recognised as institutions. They were indeed institutions and lived up to their names, too.

For example, my alma mater, St Xavier’s Institution, has a motto which reads Labor Omnia Vincit, meaning labour conquers all. Those words are woven into the emblem of our school badge!

In fact, the commonly used term, “alma mater,” which refers to a school, university or college, is also Latin, aptly meaning “nourishing mother.”

Our rival school, Penang Free School, has a Latin motto, too – Fortis Atque Fidelis, which translates to Strong and Faithful.

In Kuala Lumpur, the St John’s Institution has its Fide Et Labore, or Faith and Labour, while its rival, Victoria Institution, chose to go English with Be Yet Wiser, To Be A Scholar, Sportsman and A Gentleman.

Another prominent school, the Methodist Boys’ School, uses Ora et Labore to say Pray and Work.

Today, these words are likely to sound alien, and even unpronounceable.

The head of the Catholic church, Pope Francis, as with his predecessors, delivers his speeches in Latin, the official language of the church.

At the prestigious University of Oxford, its degree conferment ceremonies are still conducted in Latin, although it’s near certain that most of the audience would largely be clueless.

Latin is a classical language belonging to the Italic branch of the Indo-European languages.

The Latin alphabet has its roots in the Etruscan and Greek alphabets and was later derived from the Phoenician alphabet. In its earliest form, it was spoken in the area in which Rome was built – Latium. Yes, it’s that ancient.

So, when The Star recently used the word “coram” to refer to a panel of judges, plenty of intrigue and ire was generated about the court reporter having wrongly spelt the word “quorum.”

It could seem like yet another example of the deteriorating standard of English among Malaysians and the English language media, but that wasn’t the case in the end.

The news report had referred to a Federal Court decision that it would not hear a fresh appeal by the National Registration Department (NRD) in the “bin Abdullah” case, and instead, proceed to delivering judgment.

Chief Justice Richard Malanjum, who chaired a new panel which was constituted for the rehearing of the appeal, decided not to pursue it as there were enough judges remaining in the previous panel which had heard and reserved the decision in the appeal.

The report said that there was a coram of three judges and “let this matter be left to the rest of the remaining members of the panel to deliver the judgment. We do not want to rehear this matter.”

Someone posted a picture of the supposed error circled on a copy of the newspaper and sent that submission burning through social media. Very quickly, we had an avalanche of complaints, even though we had used the word regularly in past court reports.

A Google search will reveal that “coram” is used in phrases that refer to the appearance of a person before another individual or group.

It’s a commonly used Latin phrase in the legal circle, although most of us would be more familiar with the word “carrom” rather than “coram.”

But in the age of social media, where we “forward” messages without checking for accuracy or authenticity, the impact can be swift, and dire.

A more familiar legal term to us is “locus standi”, which means a place for standing. However, from a legal perspective, it means whether the person has any standing or right to appear in court.

Another commonly used Latin legal term is sub judice, which means “under judgement” or that a case, or matter, is under trial or court proceedings. So, it’s deemed inappropriate for open debate, particularly by the media.

To comment publicly on cases “sub judice” can be an offence leading to contempt of court. Junior reporters on the court beat learn this phrase early in their career.

And then there is “ultra vires”, which has nothing to do with any kind of virus. It is a Latin term which means “beyond the powers”, while “intra vires” means “within the powers.” Again, it is widely used by lawyers, judges and court reporters, although the average news reader is often blissfully ignorant.

In legal speak, “Habeas corpus” refers to a legal application from the court to seek the release of a person who was unlawfully arrested. It is also Latin in origin.

It’s interesting how many of us aren’t aware that the language is commonly adopted in daily English.

Some examples; contrary (opposite), post (after), bonus (good), aqua (water), status quo (existing state of affairs), et cetera (so forth), quid pro quo (a favour for favour), persona non grata (unwelcome), incognito (to conceal one’s identity) and sic (error). Of course, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s stewardship of his party had the media describing his position as the “de facto” leader of PKR, meaning unofficial leader.

There are more – e.g. or exempli gratia, which refers to an example, ad hoc (to this), bona fide (in good faith), mala fide (bad faith), alibi (elsewhere), versus (against), verbatim (word for word), vice versa (turned position, literally, but it means interchangeable), pro bono (no payment) and even the word “extra” – which is a Latin preposition meaning outside or in addition.

Other words with Latin roots include “arena”, which apparently means big statue, but commonly refers to a centre stage. Today, in the modern English language, it is used to refer to a sports complex. “Circus” also has Latin origins and means a race track.

And the more grizzled of us will remember that while delivering his presidential speech at the party’s general assembly, then Umno president Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad quoted the famous line, “Et tu, Brute” from William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar.

“Et tu, Brute” means “even you, Brutus?”, and was notably uttered by Roman dictator Julius Caesar to his friend Marcus Junius Brutus as he was brutally stabbed to death by a band of conspirators.

Pronounced “et too bru teh,” it was of course, Shakespeare’s artistic license to draw up an interesting quote as Roman historian Suetonius, a century and a half after the assassination. It’s been said that Caesar said nothing as he died, but the flipside is that his last words amounted to a Greek phrase meaning “You too, child?”

But more importantly, it was interesting that Dr Mahathir chose to use this famous line from Shakespeare, suggesting he reads the works of arguably the greatest writer in the English language.

Dr Mahathir wasn’t specific and didn’t identify the person in his address. To this today, it has remained a subject of political speculation, with a few names bandied.

Even if Latin barely seems alive, it has certainly evolved to at least become a part of modern English.

It’s unlikely that Malaysian politicians will be quoting Shakespeare anytime soon. So, wouldn’t it be fair to say they don’t make politicians, writers or even schools like they used to anymore?

As one report rightly put it, “when a politician talks about the vox populi rather than the ‘voice of the people’ or ‘public opinion’, they climb to a slightly higher level of intellectual discourse.”

It looks like Latin isn’t quite so dead after all.

Not all about the booze: The gun salute is one of the customs of the ‘Oktoberfest’ beer festival in Munich. — AP

Like how many other things that were acceptable before have inexplicably run afoul now, the harmless Oktoberfest is also finding itself criminalised. 

WHILE growing up a school boy in Penang, Oktoberfest was celebrated every year.

And when I was old enough to drink, entering adulthood and working life, I joined in beer drinking sessions with my friends and colleagues.

We’d like to think we held our drinks well then. The same can’t be said about holding our bladders well now though.

I don’t recall inviting my Muslim friends to join us, and I don’t think they would have wanted to either. We respect their faith and culture, as they do ours.

But at no time did they stop us or these events. In fact, on many occasions, they joined us for late night suppers, waiting for us to be done outside the pubs in Penang Road.

That was the way it was. In many night spots, the band members often comprised Muslims, and likewise the staff.

When I moved to Kuala Lumpur in the 1990s, there was no such thing of anyone trying to stop Oktoberfest festivals.

There was no controversy and it was just accepted that this was an annual commercial affair.

Of course, the festival doesn’t just serve beers, but also sausages called bratwurst and frankfurter wurstchen, meat, burgers, pastries and cakes, and of course, plenty of Bavarian dancing and merrymaking.

Perhaps, politicians didn’t need to play the religious card then because they felt comfortable and secure in how common sense usually prevailed. But over the last few years, the scenario seems to have changed dramatically.

If it wasn’t for the politicians, we’d have to contend with terror groups, according to the police, that is, who pulled the plug on last year’s Oktoberfest.

Last September, the Better Beer Festival was cancelled because the police had “security concerns” involving the usual suspects, of course, who were planning to sabotage the event.

Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Mohamad Fuzi Harun said the police caught wind of militants and some unknown group’s plan to disrupt the event.

“A security concern was raised following the information received by our intelligence, and to avoid any untoward incident, the police has to step up.

“The people’s safety is our utmost concern,” Mohamad Fuzi said in a statement then.

The Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) said it had rejected the organiser’s application to hold the event, which was received on Aug 28.

But the DBKL announcement came a week after PAS central committee member Dr Riduan Mohd Nor condemned the event, calling it a “vice party” and claimed that it would turn Kuala Lumpur into the “largest vice centre in Asia”, which raised suspicions of DBKL caving in to pressure.

A year later, and PAS is still using that same scratched record. However, we must admit that the Islamist party is consistent, although when it comes to political expediency, it can be flexible, and bends rules to its liking. Once upon a time, Umno was kafir and a sworn enemy, but at the moment, they are BFF, and their once-ally, DAP, is now an adversary. And PKR has been dealt the same fate, too.

Last week, PAS secretary-general Takiyuddin Hassan said the party would never support beer festivals, vowing religious retribution if the events “cause public unrest” and affect the sensitivities of Muslims.

He said his earlier comments on Oktoberfest, on the sidelines of the Dewan Rakyat sitting recently, had been taken out of context and were not published in full in the media.

He didn’t specify the part of his comments which went askew or reveal the identity of the media outlet which ran his remarks.

But Takiyuddin said the PAS-led Kelantan government had never banned the consumption or sale of alcohol, for and by non-Muslims.

Joining in the debate, Sarawak Tourism, Arts, Culture, Youth and Sports Minister Abdul Karim Rahman Hamzah expressed incredulity at how the Oktoberfest has raised red flags.

He said the state had no reservations with the festival, which he described as a cultural event.

“I am just surprised it has become an issue here. In Sarawak, you can see it organised all over in the shopping malls.

“It is not an issue in Sarawak at all. It is only here (in Peninsular Malaysia), where you have many people who are not right in their heads,” he said after unveiling the Visit Sarawak logo at a hotel.

He said Oktoberfest has been celebrated in Sarawak since the 1970s, when German hotel manager, Peter Mueller, introduced it.

“I was still in secondary school at the time, but I already knew all about Oktoberfest,” he said.

Karim said Oktoberfest is only contentious when it is promoted merely as a beer or alcohol festival.

“If that happens, then I believe it is not just Sarawak, but the whole of West Malaysia that must ban it. We are not supposed to be promoting alcohol.

“All religions, I believe, do not promote drinking excessively. For Islam, it is totally forbidden,” he said.

Karim revealed the festival originated in the province of Bavaria, Germany, and that during Oktoberfest, it isn’t just about drinking, likening it to the Gawai festival in Sarawak.

I can understand if the PAS-controlled states of Kelantan and Terengganu ban such an event, but not anywhere else. But thinking about it now, given the demography of the two states, it would be silly of anyone to throw an Oktoberfest party there because it won’t be ringing the cash registers.

But I can’t fathom the Pakatan Harapan-led Johor state government also banning the festival. It defies logic, and politicians whom we expect to speak up had strangely remained silent.

It’s fair and reasonable of DBKL to decide that it would allow Oktoberfest to be held, with the organisers requiring to follow the stipulated rules and regulations.

KL has many entertainment spots, especially in the Bukit Bintang area, so, banning the consumption of alcohol would be futile. Regardless of day, people still drink.

It’s the same in Johor. People will not stop drinking in Johor Baru just because the state government illegalises an Oktoberfest. The night spots will just brand it differently, that’s all.

Now that I am 57-years-old, I have given up drinking completely because it has taken its toll on my sugar level and liver. But will I try to stop anyone from indulging? Of course not! It’s anyone’s right to do so, whether it’s January, October or December.

MORE than three decades into my journalistic career, and I have learned one thing for certain – most politicians will never change, and they can be chameleons, too. It would be naïve of me to expect to meet an honest, God-fearing politician who doesn’t lie, because that would be like hoping to see a unicorn.

It is standard operating procedure for them to blame the media when they fumble with their words or learn their comments have backfired, which typically generate angry responses from their constituents.

Their escape route is to deny or claim they have been misquoted, even though in this digital age, one only needs to Google to trace the pattern and train of thought of someone on a given subject through their sound bites.

When things go pear-shaped though, most politicians develop amnesia, or become linguistic acrobats to get themselves out of a tight spot.

Of course, some media will happily play the game – to put down the competitor – and unwittingly give the politician a free ride to wriggle out of a fix and justify his denial.

In the 1980s, a colleague told me about how a news article of his was refuted by a minister. He was so incensed he confronted the politician and played the recording of the interview to prove he had his facts right.

After listening to the entire tape intently, the minister remained silent but finally told the reporter: “Well, I may have said it, but I didn’t mean it.”

Similarly, I have also challenged politicians from both sides of the divide on what they said, and later denied.

One even said this: “I said it, but I expected you not to use it. Now that you have reported it, I have to deny it to protect myself.”

Then, there was a minister who was fond of leaving his sentences hanging. It was always uncompleted, and when reporters misinterpreted his comment, he would reprimand the media, saying, “I expect you to know what I was saying.”

Also, there was a Prime Minister who denied he was going to dissolve Parliament to make way for a general election. His denial was widely reportedly by the media, but not long later, he carried out the dissolution.

Media personnel find it tiring to pursue contentious issues with politicians. We’d rather let it slide because we have all developed a love-hate relationship with some of them.

It doesn’t matter what political parties they belong to because they are largely cut from the same cloth. Otherwise, it would be difficult for them to swim with the sharks, metaphorically speaking.

So, we have learned to accept such denials as hazards of the job, and that there is little point in losing sleep over it because the average news reader could care less for a dispute between a politician and the media.

Law professor at George Mason University, Ilya Somin, once wrote in an article that Hillary Clinton had admitted she sometimes takes “public” positions that are at odds with her “private” position.

“In other words, she sometimes lies to the public about her true views. Only the most naive observers find it surprising that politicians try to deceive people in this way, or believe that Hillary Clinton is an unusual exception.”

Another commentator, Jonathan Rauch, describes why such deceptions are common, and may even be beneficial in many cases:

“In politics, hypocrisy and doublespeak are tools. They can be used nefariously, illegally or for personal gain, as when President Richard M. Nixon denied Watergate complicity, but they can also be used for legitimate public purposes, such as trying to prevent a civil war, as in Lincoln’s case, or trying to protect American prestige and security, as when President Dwight D. Eisenhower denied that the Soviet Union had shot down a United States spy plane.

“Often, the only way to get something done is to have separate private and public truths. Behind closed doors, nothing is settled until everything is settled. Until the deal is done, everyone can pretend not to have decided anything.

“But the moment the conversation becomes public, plausible deniability ceases. Everyone knows I’ve made an offer. Angry interest groups, adversaries in the other party, and even purists in my own party, start cutting attack ads and lining up challengers to prevent a deal and defeat me.”

By such logic, it is as if to say, lying or offering half-truths is acceptable if it’s done for national interest.

So, what Rauch, an academician, argues is that political duplicity is sometimes a necessary tool to facilitate deals, negotiations and diplomatic manoeuvring.

But what usually happens is, when politicians lie, it often involves capitalisation on public ignorance and their self-preservation.

Any politician who has superlative amounts of ringgit in his personal bank account, or in an apartment, will likely always have an alibi.

The ones caught with their pants down have vehemently and angrily denied their involvement in those lurid videos or pictures, insisting the “actors” and “models” are mere lookalikes.

Maybe because most of us are just ordinary mortals, no generous soul has deposited billions in our name, and neither have we chanced upon anyone who resembles us, our siblings apart, perhaps.

In the case of sex videos, the rule of thumb is to deny, deny and deny. Go ahead and laugh, but that tactic has proven to be effective, because after a while, news turns into archival material.

Voters accept that they are supposed to choose capable and effective leaders to lead them, and not high-moral religious figures, but politicians can be persuasive in influencing the rakyat to get what they want.

It’s par for the course for politicians to be criticised, but when their personal lives come under scrutiny and draw flack, that’s taking things too far. As democracy matures, voters find such tactics offensive and distasteful.

In the same article by Somin, he quoted MIT economist Jonathan Gruber saying deception has proven to be an effective political tool and that laws have been passed with politicians “exploiting the stupidity of the American voter.”

In Malaysia, cynical journalists have a similar saying. We like to describe it as “rakyat diperbodohkan lagi”, or the people have been made to look stupid again or, have been exploited again.

I have seen dyed in the wool supporters using their time and resources to back certain politicians. And sometimes, when disputes arise and emotions flare, they lose all common sense and end up cutting friendships and even family relationship for the sake of the politician.

But how stupid they must feel when parties make pacts, or when sworn enemies close ranks and then hug each other, especially when there are political interests to serve? Unfortunately, this is a repeated scenario time and again.

Of course, leave it to them to come up with the best reasons to justify new political allegiances. The best part? They claim they are slogging for the interest of the rakyat and country. Apparently, it’s never about themselves. Yes, funnier jokes have been told.

It doesn’t really matter if this is the Old or New Malaysia, the harder the politicians try, the more things stay the same, because ultimately, a leopard cannot change its spots.

IF there’s one thing the Umno leadership needs to accept – no matter how painful – is that it’s now in the opposition. They got kicked out, and that’s life.

So, for God’s sake, please start acting and thinking like an opposition party. It may be hard after 60 years being at the helm, since the party has enjoyed the privileges of power, which can be intoxicating.

Suddenly, the motorcades are gone, invitations to events have trickled, telephones are not going off the hook, and the formal suits have stayed in the closet.

Umno leaders should forget about “doing deals”. That was precisely what got the party into trouble – those dubious deals.

Some Umno leaders find it hard to be “out of power”. They need to be in power – even if it means playing second fiddle, or even placing third or fourth in the pecking order. But here’s the bad news – Pakatan Harapan doesn’t need Umno.

They need to stop leveraging on the spin that Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad needs them to keep Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim at bay. It sounds good for them, but the danger is that Umno MPs may start believing in their inflated sense of self-worth.

The PH government has the numbers. They have formed government and are running the country.

Governments in other countries, such as the Kuomintang party, which founded Taiwan, is now in the opposition but was the ruling party for decades, amassing huge assets. And like Umno, it also got embroiled in corruption.

The KMT maybe be broken now, but it still has plenty of assets. When the party fled to Taiwan after losing the civil war to the communists in 1949, it took millions in gold, bonds and antiques, all of which became part of the foundations of the party’s fortunes.

It also inherited assets left by the Japanese during their 50 years ruling Taiwan, but the KMT has come under investigation for public and private assets it seized after arriving in the country.

With its assets recently frozen, it had to cut staff from 800 to under 400 personnel because of insufficient funds. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

Then, there is the Indian National Congress, founded in 1885, and which ruled India for 60 years, yet today, is in the opposition and struggling to remain relevant.

In Britain, the Conservative and Labour parties have been voted in and out of government. Amazingly, in all circumstances, even when alliances were made with smaller parties, the loser ended up accepting the people’s verdict and simply worked towards getting re-elected.

So, it is terribly embarrassing to see how Umno leaders crawled to Dr Mahathir, seeking advice on how to keep his former party alive. I mean, why would he even want to see Umno remain intact?

If that’s not enough, Umno had to use its usual trump cards of race and religion as reasons for the formation of a unity government, comprising mainly Malays and Muslims, to safeguard the interests of the community – after billions of ringgit vanished!

It’s also incomprehensible to be telling Umno leaders in Kelantan and Terengganu, who have fought against PAS since Umno’s formation, that they now must work with the Islamist party.

And in the same breath, try to persuade what’s left of the Barisan Nasional component parties that it is merely trying to reach an understanding with the fellow opposition party.

Umno and PAS are supposed to represent different things. Umno is Malay and Muslim, but is supposed to be moderate, inclusive and has shared power with the MCA and MIC, even in Malay-dominated constituencies.

Of course, these Barisan component parties don’t understand what’s going on because Umno members themselves are clueless about this purported deal with PAS.

And why should PAS want to share power with Umno? It has control of two states. It has exuberantly introduced whipping and gender segregation at public events again, making the two states look like some extremist Middle East country.

The party is happy to equate liberalism with open sex, hedonism, LGBT and everything else it deems sins. And can we be blamed if we feel that Umno is happily singing the same tune and sharing the same ignorance of what liberalism means? And now, we even have a new term – super liberalism. Go figure.

And why shouldn’t non-Muslims feel resentment for PAS when its president questioned Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim for attending gatherings involving other faiths, or for the PKR president-elect to contest in a multi-racial constituency?

If Umno chooses to work with a party like PAS, then it’s heading down a slippery slope, if it’s purely about retaining or winning the Malay votes, because the party is bound to be grilled for what it stands for. Surely, it can’t be the same as PAS.

The DAP and PKR had been in the opposition for years, even decades, with their leaders paying a heavy price for their political convictions, but they continued with their struggles. We don’t have to agree with their politics and what they stand for, but credit where it’s due for their convictions.

And here we are – Umno suffers one defeat, and it’s running around like a headless chicken, which is how the party is being described now.

If it wants to get its house back in order, Umno first needs to reform itself. It is a flawed product, but not entirely a rejected or expired item.

It must appear an alternative. The voters are testing the PH government to see if it’s any good. Why not? After all, they gave the Alliance and Barisan a good 60 years, and they became arrogant and corrupt.

The voters are basically the customers, but Umno forgot that detail and expected the customers to be grateful, which is ironic. But that was exactly how Umno treated its customers.

Malaysians would like to see Umno leaders stop acting like big shots (which they no longer are), admit their mistakes and excesses of the past and, step down from their pedestal and be ordinary Malaysians.

Surely, we want leaders who can speak the languages of the people, understand their needs and sentiments, and just be one of us.

They ought to know that we are tired of having to address them by their titles and being expected to line up to kiss their hands. And for some bizarre reason, we wonder, too, why their identity cards need to carry their fathers’ titles!

So, we now have Tan Sri Awang Ibrahim bin Tan Sri Osman Tengah. If you don’t believe me, check the Mykads of most Umno members.

That’s how ridiculously far we have allowed this scheme of grandiosity to go with our obsession with titles. Now, it’s refreshing to see Cabinet ministers with no fancy titles.

We are watching all these newbies, so, don’t try to con us with pictures of them flying economy class, especially during the first year, and then subsequently, and quietly, enjoying the perks of power.

It’s obvious that the corrupt show their greedy selves in the second term of office.

But all is not lost for Umno. It has 49 MPs and that’s a substantial number. It must come across as an opposition worthy of being voted back into power, or it can continue to use the faces of political minnows, with their aggressive and irrational behaviour that is incongruous with the New Malaysia. It looks like Umno hasn’t learnt yet.

If the leaders can’t think well, then, it has to set up a really good think-tank capable of drafting the best papers and sound bites for Barisan leaders, and even produce policy papers that will put the party in good light.

Unlike the other component parties, Umno is still able to retain some very good youth leaders who can articulate their thoughts well, and with good command of Bahasa Malaysia and English. These fresh faces must surely be in the forefront.

If the warlords who run the divisions continue to have their way – now that the easily available funds are drying up quickly – then the demise of Umno will be near, and if they are still looking for deals, then it will be even closer.

WE may have heralded a New Malaysia, with the euphoria still lingering, but more than three months have passed since the general election which saw the Barisan Nasional government crushed.

A new social landscape, perhaps, but Old Politics still haven’t faded away. As much as most of us loathe the politics of race and religion, the practice is a numbers game.

The politicians who have mastered the game understand the stakes, and they skilfully manoeuvre into positions to ensure their audience is convinced that their interest is protected.

The figures speak for themselves – about 95% of Chinese voters chose Pakatan Harapan (PH) in the May 9 general election and more than 85% supported the now-defunct Pakatan Rakyat coalition in 2013, revealed a report. About 70-75% of Indians voted for PH.

However, only 25-30% of Malays voted for PH, the report added, citing figures from Merdeka Center. It said 35-40% of Malays voted for Barisan Nasional while 30-33% supported PAS.

Although a higher percentage of Malays voted for PH in Johor and in west coast states including Melaka and Negri Sembilan, PH’s overall Malay support dwindled because of its weak performance in Kelantan and Terengganu.

The report, quoting analysts, said the split Malay vote means PH leaders must tread carefully when framing issues deemed sensitive to the Malays, if they expect to gain their trust.

And Umno and PAS will try even harder to woo the Malays by using the familiar baits of race and religion, they said.

Explicitly aware of the apprehension of many Malays, especially over the appointments of non-Malays in key government positions, and the notion that the DAP has an upper hand in the PH government, the Prime Minister and other leaders had to convene for a special bumiputra meeting.

They read the ground sentiment well – that only 25-30% of Malays voted for PH, but which was enough to kick out Barisan, and if this tiny fraction switches allegiance from PH, there’s bound to be trouble ahead.

Barisan, particularly Umno, also understands this figure’s significance, and has been quick to align itself with PAS in the name of race and religion. That’s simply because there is a huge Malay electoral market that buys into such a line of politics.

So, Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad had to provide the assurance that the Government was not out to persecute bumiputras, but instead, wants to ensure that a fair and equitable solution is in place for the betterment of the community.

He reminded the Malays that in the past, many business opportunities had been given to bumiputras under the New Economic Policy, but many sold their contracts and approved permits (APs) for healthy profits.

“As long as we look for shortcuts, we will not succeed,” he said at the Future of the Bumiputra and Nation Congress 2018 earlier this month.

He said such handicaps didn’t help them in the end because they continued to be paupers after spending all the money instead of investing, while those who retained their contracts and APs became successful.

Last week, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim made a clarion call on the importance of Bahasa Malaysia and reaffirmed the position of the national language at Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, the government body responsible for regulating the use of the Malay language and Malay-language literature.

The incoming PKR president urged all leaders and MPs to buck up on their Bahasa Malaysia, chiding those who had not made the effort to master the national language.

“Whether you like it or not, parliamentary proceedings are in BM. Proficiency in the language is crucial.”

But he also said that emphasising BM did not “mean that other languages such as English and Chinese were marginalised but must be mastered as second languages.”

This was a master politician at work, making sure to cover his bases.

Also, he warned of the existence of a so-called “super liberal” group in the country, which he said strongly expressed its demands and pushed for their implementation.

Without making specific references, he said the people from this super liberal group also denounced the views of those opposed to it.

“When we criticise them, we are attacked as if this country belongs to them. I tell them that we represent the majority in the country and we argue that in this country, we are also entitled to voice our views.

“They think that we must accept their views. If I touch a little on Islam and the Malays, they will raise an argument.”

Certainly, Anwar’s words would earn him brownie points among the conservative Malays, who aren’t necessarily rural voters. In fact, they are urban Malay professionals who aren’t happy with what they perceive as radical changes to the status quo in the name of New Malaysia.

Even the Sultan of Johor, Sultan Ibrahim Sultan Iskandar, voiced his annoyance after an official letter by an Iskandar Puteri City Council (MBIP) member written in Chinese and English went viral.

Sultan Ibrahim decreed that any official letter involving the state government or local authorities in Johor must be written in the national language.

“If the councillor does not know how to do his or her job, just resign. This is my warning do not make this mistake again.

“All official letters involving the state government or local councils that use the official letterhead must be written in BM.”

It was later clarified that what appeared on social media “did not paint the full picture” as the councillors had, in fact, written in three languages – English, Malay, and Chinese.

Dr Mahathir has also found it necessary to do a balancing act. First, he issued a statement saying the Cabinet felt the caning of the two women convicted of lesbian sex in Terengganu gives a bad impression of Islam, and that it “did not reflect the quality of justice and sympathy in Islam”.

But he was also quick to follow up with an assurance, especially to the Malays, that Malaysia doesn’t accept LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender) practices and same-sex marriages as the country eschews these Western values.

He said even though the government respects the recommendations made by the Malaysian Human Rights Commission (Suhakam), it would not accept “everything”.

Both Anwar and Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail have also made their stand clear, although their critics have attempted to put them in conflicting positions.

The LBGT issue is a big “no” within the Malay community, likewise with many Malaysians of other faiths. It is tolerated but not to be advocated – that is the line.

And Malay PH politicians walking on the fine line of 30% votes understand that they need to retain this support, and likely, increase it, which will hopefully take shape in the form of new voters turning 18 years old by the next GE.

The New Malaysia has given rise to new hopes, new expectations and new ways of doing things, but in the end, some things will just never change – at least, not overnight – and until then, our countrymen and women must learn to handle all of this more tactfully to pave the way ahead.

Raising eyebrows: Both Hishammuddin and Dr Ahmad Zahid have met up with Dr Mahathir since GE14.

Stranger things have happened post-general elections, but losers seeking the winning party’s advice is certainly curious. 

POLITICS in Malaysia gets stranger with each passing day. As the adage goes, truth is stranger than fiction, and it seems to apply well here.

That saying simply means sometimes what happens in real life is more bizarre than anything that could have been imagined.

Shortly after the general election in May, where the Barisan Nasional was trounced and consigned to the scrap heap, then acting Umno president Datuk Seri Dr Zahid Hamidi raised eyebrows when he called on Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamed for advice.

His party had just been hammered, yet he decided to consult the new Prime Minister and leader of Pakatan Harapan. It was so peculiar for him to do that.

Dr Mahathir revealed that Zahid “wanted to know how to manage Umno. So, I was frank and said Umno had betrayed the Malays.”

Yes, at least, that’s what the man said. Zahid wanted advice on how to manage Umno and he got it from the best man possible.

“I reminded him that we formed Umno to help the Malays, but that Umno had changed and prioritised self-wealth.

“Because of that, Umno is now hated. It’ll be hard for Umno to recover. Once seen as noble, now viewed with disgust,” Dr Mahathir apparently said.

Incredibly, Zahid was not the only loser who queued up to acquire Dr Mahathir’s wisdom. He was, in fact, the third opposition party leader, believe it or not.

PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang and Parti Pesaka Bumiputera Bersatu president Datuk Abang Johari Abang Openg made their moves earlier.

Forgive our naivety in politics, but are we missing something here? These guys had just lost the elections, leaving their parties in disarray (at least Umno), and the first thing they do is run to the man who defeated them for advice on how to run their houses?

Are we reading this right? But then, this is Bolehland, and what is regarded strange can easily be real.

Last week, another top Umno name – Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein Onn – also scooted off to see the nation’s foremost nonagenarian.

It’s uncertain if the purpose of his visit was, likewise, to learn how to save Umno and run the party.

Honestly, why would Dr Mahathir, even as former president, want to save Umno?

No one would have known better had Datuk Kadir Jasin, the media adviser to the Prime Minister, not let the cat out of the bag about the meeting.

“Assalamuailaikum Datuk Seri Hishammuddin, nak tanya, semalam pergi Putrajaya jumpa siapa? (I wish to ask, who did you meet in Putrajaya yesterday?)” Kadir wrote.

Presumably caught off guard by the revelation, Hishammuddin, who is also a former Umno vice-president, however said the meeting was only to listen to Dr Mahathir’s plans for the country’s future.

And last week, Perlis Umno deputy chairman Zahidi Zainul Abidin claimed Umno and Barisan Nasional MPs had met Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia leaders to discuss the possibility of a union.

Zahidi, who is Padang Besar MP, said the purpose of the discussions was to seek the “best option to save the Malays”.

“We are trying to discuss with PPBM to save the Malays. We want PAS, but PAS is not ready, so we are looking for the best option because we want the best for the Malays,” he said at Umno’s headquarters.

According to him, Barisan MPs met PPBM leaders two to three months ago, but he refused to disclose details. However, he said: “We are planning to merge with PPBM but we do not want to quit Umno.

“Some of the MPs agreed to discuss with PPBM while some agreed to discuss with PKR. So, we will see which one is best. We have met PPBM.”

Dispensing with the bravado and hyperbole, what Zahidi is trying to convey is simply that Umno is in trouble and going nowhere. We want PPBM or PKR to hold us, we can’t just quit Umno, but without the two parties, we are dead.

And of course, the narrative must be about saving the Malays – not saving ourselves politically!

Meanwhile, in Bolehland, the Chinese and Indians are upset that Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim is said to be drumming up support by doing a devil’s deal with some Umno MPs to overthrow Dr Mahathir by November in a despicable and devious plot.

Why November? Well, that’s when Parliament meets, but that’s what a friend of a friend told me. I didn’t ask why November either because that seemed like an insignificant detail.

So, here’s when many of us become confused: who is cosying up to Umno? Is it Dr Mahathir to checkmate the ever-impatient Anwar, or is it really Anwar himself? Now, this is when the truth gets stranger than fiction, or so it seems.

But dig deeper, and it sounds more like a group of Umno MPs – who find the gravy train now derailed, and without benefit in sight – cooking up a juicy story to let the various insecure factions in Pakatan Harapan fight over them, for what they are still worth as MPs.

And if nothing is offered, what can be more pleasing to the egos than be heralded as the saviour of the race and religion at the party assembly for their undying proclamation to the party, race and religion?

But don’t be too quick to dismiss the story. It’s only a story, so far, and it hasn’t ended. Whether it’s fiction or otherwise, it will always be strange because this is Malaysia.

It’s only in Malaysia where one runs off to his enemy for advice! Malaysia Truly Amazing.