Not everything has sexual connotation

Not everything has sexual connotation

I do not know how the saloons in KB are set up. I do not think it is any different from those in KL or Penang or any other town in Malaysia.

If they are like what is in KL, with glass frontage and bright interior, thenI do not see any reason to stop male from cutting female hair and vice versa.

(pic from wheatonmd.org)

Why must everything be deemed to have sexual connotation?

Is PAS shooting its own foot again? When you are running a race, you dont stop and purposely saboatge your own foot when you are neck to neck with someone else, and the finishing line is just around the corner.

At this eleventh hour, it is best politically to maintain status quo and not come out with any controversial ruling or decision.

I hope PAs leadership should ponder about what I said in my last post: “Will PR become the proverbial rabbit” which was published in MalaysianInsider and  carried by MalaysiaToday, Malaysia Chronicle and LKS’s blog.

Will PR become the proverbial rabbit ?

As the end of the year approaches, there is still no sign of any election being called. Now it looks like the general election (GE) will only be held after the automatic dissolution of our Parliament in late April 2013. Another possible date is perhaps March 2013.

Malaysia’s political landscape cannot be more different from that of the United States. Yet the recent presidential election there reinforces one important fact. That even if a person or a party cannot win the majority of the biggest ethnic group, the person or the party can still win the election by winning an overwhelming majority of the minorities.

President Barack Obama won because of the votes of the minorities. He carried almost 93 per cent of the African-American votes, over 70 per cent of the Asian and Hispanic votes, but got only 39 per cent of the votes of the White majority. In contrast, his opponent won the majority of the white votes at around 59 per cent but still lost the election.

Based on this, I think it is possible for Pakatan Rakyat to win the next general election in Malaysia, given that majority of the Chinese will vote for the opposition. What is needed is to make certain that the majority of Indian votes go to PR. Most of the Malay votes (my estimate is over 60 per cent) — the Malays form the biggest ethnic group in the country — will be for BN.

Bearing this in mind, I think it is politically unwise for PAS members to publicly suggest that should PR win their party president should be made the prime minister.

The support among the Chinese and Indian Malaysians for PR should not be taken for granted. One of the reasons for the level of support shown is that many of these people believe that even if PR comes into power with little government experience, it has at least a very experienced leader in Anwar Ibrahim and he can be accepted by all the ethnic groups.

While many Chinese had no qualms about voting for PAS candidates in the last election, it was because they supported a coalition in which PAS is only an equal partner and not the dominant one that would head the group. If the PAS president is to be the next PM, PAS would be perceived to be the dominant force inside the coalition, a prospect which may not be unlike that of BN having Umno as the dominant force. If that is the case, expect fewer of these people to support PAS in the next election, thus weakening the prospect of PR forming the next government.

PKR, on the other hand, is seen to be more moderate and multiracial. As such, its leader Anwar would have much more appeal and would be better accepted by all groups.

Those PAS members reminded me of the Taiping Rebellion of China in which a rebellious group which started as a reform group against the Qing Dynasty degenerated into a group of leaders fighting more for the spoils of war rather than the cause, when that war was not even half won.

I suggest that PAS members put more effort into winning the votes rather than harping on about who should be the PM. By doing so, they are actually doing a favour for BN; a situation akin to shooting one’s own foot.

I think generally PR should not be too complacent at this stage. By all indications, they have a chance to win, but the prospect is still an uphill battle, even though the uphill slope now is not as steep as before.

Remember the story of the tortoise and the rabbit. The rabbit, while on the way to victory, became too complacent and thus lost the race to the humble tortoise.

This is a lesson which PAS members as well as their president should take to their hearts if they do not want PR to become the proverbial rabbit.

This article is also available in TheMalaysianInsider .

Happy Deepavali

Wishing all Hindu Malaysians :

             Deepavali valthukal

We need A Better System — ABS and not AES

One of the reasons why I started blogging is because of a deterioration of certain social behaviour among Malaysians.

I remember that a magazine, I think it was Reader’s Digest but correct me if I am wrong, categorised Malaysians as the third rudest country in Asia some years back.

This is especially obvious on the road. Many Malaysians drive as if they own the roads, not only ignoring traffic rules but also common courtesy as well.

Dashing across red lights, double or triple parking, going into a one way street against road direction, ‘stealing’ parking spaces from motorists who have patiently waited for the spaces to be vacated…. there are just too many instances of rude behaviour on the road. Some time back, someone bumped into my stationary car waiting at a traffic light junction, because the driver was too engrossed looking down at his hand phone. Luckily there were only some scratches which can be polished off with a good polish.

I have now made it a habit that whenever I see (via my rear-view mirror) some drivers behind my car speaking or  messaging on their phones ,  I will take the earliest opportunity  to change to another lane to avoid the real possibility of being banged from behind.

All these are of course multi-factorial — upbringing, lack of moral education, peer pressure, parental behaviour etc. But as shown in some countries, stricter enforcement does show good result in curtailing this sort of road madness. And with strict enforcement, behaviour slowly changes and a proper driving culture can slowly evolve.

But while I am all for the stricter enforcement for road offences, and I think the government may have good intention behind the recent implementation of the AES, I have grave reservation on how things are being done under the new system.

For one , I do not agree with the outsourcing of enforcement to private companies. While the reason for the stricter enforcement is to tackle the  bad driving attitude and to encourage the evolution  of a good driving culture, it should never be outsourced to outside companies. This is because companies are commercial entities the sole aim of which is profit, and profit only.

While the intention of the government is not to punish but to educate through stricter enforcement, the profit oriented goal of the private companies would be to try to ‘trap’ more unaware drivers so that more profits can be generated through fines.

This results in all the anomalies as reported so far: failure to place eye-catching warning notices of monitoring devices, location of AES in ridiculous locations, drivers getting summons for offences they have not committed, ridiculous snail-paced speed limit for certain stretches  and so on.

So while we should have stricter enforcement, it should be done by our police and maybe JPJ officers. What is needed is to raise the productivity and professionalism of such enforcement units.

If enforcement can be outsourced, I dread to think of what would happen next? Would security be outsourced too to mercenary units, who are loyal to only the highest bidders for their services? Just a thought.