Supporting BN Is Hard On The Internet

My hat's off to Kenny Sia: just when you think the blogosphere's lost to the opposition alone he does the noble thing and gives the limelight to both sides of the political divide. While these two interviews affirm my current stand on the political situation in Kuching (and probably Malaysia), both did a bit to widen my view on some of the problems faced by SUPP and DAP alike.

I like Alan Sim. Comparing the two interviews on kennysia.com, Alan comes off as the more mature person. The more intelligent one: the one who makes sound arguments and tackles topics with a clear eye on the big picture. He's the guy the debater in me likes - at the back of my head the little voice that yaks whenever a lousy argument comes up was silent, actually nodding at the things he says.

Alan: ... not many, eventhough I realise that out of every two person I think one of them is gonna be on the other side. In general, people are still quite polite. That should be the kind of culture that we should encourage. We can have political differences. We don't have to get too personal about it. That's my view.

Hell, Malaysia needs more people like him. And it's a pity he has to keep mum on certain issues, because the interview gave the impression that he wanted to say more but couldn't. His replies in the kennysia interview were vague and they glossed over the undercurrents of unease in our society. Which was sad. Want to bring about change? Difficult if your party is restrictive by nature.

And it's funny that while Alan's interview was hampered by the limits of his party line, DAP's Chong Chieng Jen came off worse. Yeah he was entertaining in his video, and yeah he did gave good examples of how he helped change government policy (the 1st silicone sale, in particular, must have been very satisfying for him), but his replies are more reactionary and less policy oriented. Alan shows a good understanding of democratic principle, Chong makes jokes about our CM's pubic hair. Chong will probably win. The rakyat loves this kind of mudslinging, they don't consider candidate policy.

And that is the sad thing about Malaysia.

I've made my political stance clear on this blog, and BUGS, and everytime I do my friends blow me over for not being democratic enough. They can't believe I give credence to the current administration and not support DAP 110%. They shake their heads in disbelief and tell me 'you don't know anything la, you ... I know better', and they go all out, arms asunder, brains left behind, hot on the campaign trail for The Rocket. I respect such passion. I really do. It's like football fan riots: their friends start going crazy and they catch hold of a catchy phrase, and soon it is widely accepted truth because the whole crowd is repeating it mindlessly.

The truth is hell will freeze over before I support a candidate like Chong. Harken the following:

Are the lives of poultry in Semenanjung Malaysia more important than those of the children in Sarawak? Note: 2 Ministers replied to the Emergency Motion on birds' [sic] flu while only 1 Deputy Minister replied to such motion on Hand Foot And Mouth disease in Sarawak.

I have a folder, you know, in my room, where I keep examples of stupid statements made by Malaysian politicians. This is going in straight with the best of them. There are three logical flaws in the above statement, all of which came screaming into my head as I read it.

1. The number of Ministers responding to motions do not reflect the Government attitude towards respective diseases.
2. Bird flu is a global threat, with international pressure applied on Malaysia to set up regional control measures. HFM isn't likely to cause a deadly epidemic. Bird flu mutates with every host and has even overcome Tamiflu inoculation.
   
3. Exactly what does Bird Flu prevention have to do with the relative importance of poultry and children? I am interested to know, Chong. Please educate me.

Elections don't do me any good. On one hand BN's corruption is aired (the stink!); on the other the opposition shouts accusations and hurls personal attacks, often with little or superficial intellectual content. It's a lose-lose situation for a cynical kid to be in. Fatalism suddenly seems more attractive an option. Hell - if I believe in fate it doesn't matter who wins, right?

I'll get back to my school work now. At least there, in my book, the answers are in black and white.

Crime and Stupidity

The following happened on the road to Kota Samarahan, from the Stutong Roundabout. It resulted in my first criminal offense. The story goes like this:

I am at the T-junction leading out from SMK Tabuan Jaya, and I stop and look to my left. The Stutong Rondabout-Kota Samarahan road is long and straight, used by many vehicles, often at high speeds. I stop and look: there is a CRV overtaking a slow moving motorcycle hogging the centre of the road. I wait for the CRV to pass, and then make my turning.

This is my first mistake.

I see a motorcycle out of the corner of my eye and I look at him. He seems as if he has just swerved to avoid hitting something (read: me) and his face is contorted in anger. He gestures at me, and his mouth moves. I cannot hear what he is saying. I do know, however, that he is furious and I did something wrong, so I mouth sorry and make hand gestures to communicate my apology.

Let me describe this man. He is middle aged, meaty and dark skinned. He might be Chinese, or maybe Dayak, pot bellied, and he has a pouch around his waist. His motorcycle is old. His clothes are typical kampung fare. At this point in the story he is healthy, whole, and angry. His motorbike is in fine condition.

I look ahead and drive at a slow speed, because there are other vehicles ahead of me. I feel horrible, but I have said my apologies (or gestured them), and as the man pulls back to tail my car closely I think the matter resolved. I am scared and guilty, and I quickly store this experience to the back of my head, in the 'mistakes to learn from' folder.

This is my second mistake.

The matter is not resolved. The man now accelerates until he is parallel to my window, and he brandishes his finger at me in a threatening manner. He wants me to pull over. I am now frightened. I sign my apology again, mouthing sorry, and I pray for the best. I also lock my car doors.

The man continues to stay parallel to my window, and then he speeds up until he is in front of me. He begins to slow down. The thought that springs in my head is 'Road Bully.' Other stories of friends who have been pulled over and forced to pay for accidents they did not commit flash through my head. And I realize the implausibility of the whole situation: I did not even hit him! He has no cause to make me pull over! (Note that this is merely my impressions of the whole situation: he might not be a road bully, he might just want to give me a friendly lecture about road safety.)

Here are the thoughts that flashed through my head. The first is four arm breaking techniques of the kime-no-kata^[1]. The second is that I am going to be beaten up, judging from the body language of this man. The third is the 'unfairness' of the whole situation: I had not hit him, I had not injured him, and I had 'apologized' (the terms in the quotation marks are highly relative: but they are the thoughts I had then and there).

We are now moving at a very slow speed. I do not panic. Paul later tells me my frame of mind is worse than panic: I am less than human; I am not me. I saw a threat. I neutralized it.

My final mistake.

I bump gently into him. It is a jarring shock that vibrates through the entire car, and it shocks me most of all. I bump into him again, and his bike falls. He is on his feet instantly and he lunges for my door knob. It is locked. He punches my car, BANG. I switch to 1st and shoot away.

*

I picked Paul up and we went to Kenny's birthday party shortly after. I was more than afraid, and my friends told me we were both in the wrong. They also suggested the man was out of his mind, that he assumed the P sticker to be a license to bully, and that both of us were impulsive.

But you see the thing about friends is that they comfort you and support you. It takes an adult to put things into perspective. Adults tell you flat out that you are wrong.

When I arrived home my parents tore me apart. It was hit-and-run, it was a crime, I should have slowed down and talked to him. My mum offered the best alternative: to stay in the car and call them to come, and then wind down the windscreen a little and talk to the man. She was furious with me, in a way only parents can be - it was like me at 5 breaking a china doll 'because it looked pretty.'

Hindsight is always 20/20.

My mum talked about this alternative as if it was the most normal, the most logical thing to do, but the right thing is usually the last that comes to you in times of crisis. I saw a threat, I calmly took steps to nullify the threat: this is not human. This is the action of an F22-Raptor. It was Rambo. It was wrong.

There are so many alternatives to hitting him:

1. I stop and he comes out and after being yelled at for half an hour we drive off.
2. I stop and he comes out and I come out and he accuses me of denting his bike (or some other far-fetched accusation) and demands me to pay.
3. I step out and he comes out and he is so angry he damages my car. The only logical thing to do after this (considering both his body language and my state-of-mind), is self defense. Branching from this are four possibilities: 1) I would be more hurt than him, 2) he would be more hurt than me, 3) he kills me (in anger) 4) I kill him (in technique).
4. I slow down and wait for him to get off his bike and then drive off.
   
5. The most logical (and therefore the most improbable alternative: I stay in the car and call my parents, which is right even though neither vehicle has been hit. But judging from his face and body language I would not be surprised if he smashes my car up, which leads us to alternative 3 anyway.

Concerning self defense: Osotogari has a high mortality rate on cement. Anger gives him much strength. Either way is not good for me.

I did not panic. I was not angry. The state of mind I was in could be best described as steely detachment, which locks my emotional side out of my decision making. It is what I feel before a competition.

I am very wrong: I do not pretend that I am not. He might mark my vehicle and come after me. Or lodge a police report. Either way I am ready to accept whatever consequences might come my way, though I pray for personal safety.

What would you have done in my place?

^1. The kime-no-kata is one of the old kata of judo, where there are elements taken directly from the Samurai art of combat. It is one of two self defense katas; but unlike the Goshin-jutsu, whose aim is submission, the kime-no-kata's techinques aim to permanently cripple, paralyze or kill an opponent.