When I was growing up in the ‘90s, my schoolmates and cousins were mostly glory hunters supporting Manchester United or Liverpool.
As tempting as it was to say I supported Manchester United, I never gave in to becoming a Red Devil. I would faithfully stick with the team supported by everyone in the family – Singapore.
As Singapore no longer competes in the Malaysian football league, I could have made the mainstream choice of supporting 11-time consecutive Malaysian Super League champions, Johor Darul Ta’zim.
However, I found myself supporting my wife’s beloved home state – Terengganu. Besides the fear of having to sleep outside, my liking for Terengganu arises from the intense and imaginative football of Terengganu FC coach Nafuzi Zain, and the passion of its faithful fans.
PKR leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim surprised everyone with his bold announcement that he would contest for the Tambun Parliamentary seat against incumbent Datuk Seri Ahmad Faizal Azumu in the upcoming 15th General Election.
As I sat with some friends, talking about this brash move, the immediate question in our minds was – who will prevail?
I was punch-drunk when asked the question. I was like, ‘Who cares who wins?’
We should be examining our political bearings, especially how we see the constitutional future of Malaysia, and how the election candidates provide an ideal expression that resonates with our political identity.
But no.
Apparently, the general voting behaviour seems to be similar to how you decide which football team to support.
We talk of a new political landscape. Yet, many voters continue to wander around, reading old maps and voting in those who seem to leave them feeling dazed and lost.
Many political observers are mystified by the disconnect between ministerial competence and public support. Democracy is clearly dysfunctional. The system is broken. The voters are, to a certain extent, bonkers.
Democracy is a system that thrives on proper checks and balances. Democracy shines with a worthy loser. So what if you voted for the party that lost? It’s not like you’re going to wake up the next morning with a terrible disease.
For many years, our opposition parties are wrongly pictured as dull and dysfunctional. This miserable representation is derived from having an all-powerful majority coalition.
An opposition is only useful when it has greater scrutiny towards legislation and the performances of the ministers.
The absence of a ‘clear majority’ government bestows the opposition the capacity to effectively stab the moral sense of ministers, to ensure they are looking over their shoulders, and are in their best frame of mind and behaviour at all times.
The opposition’s involvement in policy-making would also be more significant. The condition encourages productive disagreements, which promotes a leaning that suggests, rather than criticises; that improves, rather than condemns; and to be agreeable, when consensus is for the public good.
What seems certain for now is that the decision to have the polls during the monsoon season will potentially result in thousands of people deeply affected by the incoming floods, and won’t be getting their say across.
For the brave and bold who manage to paddle their way to the polling stations, the lack of political education would only mean that an ‘informed’ vote may simply be derived from a ‘safe choice’ – historical glories.
This is the personal opinion of the writer and does not necessarily represent the views of Twentytwo13.