Of late, we hear pseudo-authoritative proclamations by this or that ‘pundit’ or commandments from news editors urging us to resolve at once our political disputes and set them aside for good so that we can shift our ‘focus’ (presumably in precious short supply) onto the economy.

Whilst it is true that it would be desirable to obtain a speedy but fair resolution to the political impasse in Perak, let us not fool ourselves that trade-offs must be made between complex political manoeuvring and the management of the economy (that is, that we must choose between one or the other).

It is folly to believe that human society is only capable of doing one thing or another at any given time. If one feels that the ongoing politicking is tiresome and exasperating, then say so and say it out loud.

Pundit X could instead remark: ‘The political problem involving prominent politicians in Perak is admittedly draining. But while that proceeds towards its solution, I am confident or would like to be confident that in the background, our economic policymakers quietly continue to apply their thoughts to formulating policies and the relevant authorities labour on to implement these policies in response to the unfolding economic crisis.’

Now this is the type of honesty we could all do with. Let's caution against excess, to be sure, but let's also be realistic about outcomes and explicit with the motives. As court battles loom in deciding who runs Perak, surely our drove of economists and related officials aren't going to drop at any time their pens and papers and leave unfinished business to share popcorn over the ‘FRU-versus-the-people’ reality show on TV.

Note that neither the shoe-hurling episode in Taiwan’s parliament nor the arrest of Taiwan's ex- president Chen Shui-bian under corruption charges derailed Taiwan's economy or landed its reputation in the sorry company of the world's basketcases.

Likewise, a little legislative tussle of our own (we do not want it to happen but if it does happen), a rain-tree state assembly or a former premier getting charged for corruption or, say, for tampering with the judiciary need not trip up the economy or shame us.

Economic crisis or otherwise, the economic system trundles along on the production- consumption hamster wheel and is subject to government intervention on the macro-scale from time to time.

This spinning of the wheel can co-exist with political bickering that does not interfere with the economy.

Whether Barisan Nasional runs Perak in lieu of Pakatan Rakyat or vice versa, this has no bearing as to whether the oilman wakes up in the morning to go afield to squeeze out black gold for Petronas (or its select beneficiaries) or whether he decides to join a circus as a human chimp.

Rreal chimps being endangered and their trade banned under Cites, the willingness to pay for realistic chimp substitutes skyrockets — the whole thing is economics, as can be seen, and quite unrelated to political wrangles.

While politicians seek out a settlement in a prolonged constitutional crisis, producers can proceed to produce and consumers may proceed to consume (that is if they wish to consume, now, or withhold spending till prices bottom out). In short, the politics of Perak need not destabilise or ‘detract attention’ from the economy.

The political contention in Perak may be painful and controversial but democracy is never born by easy virgin birth. Politics need not be seen as hampering the economy here unless.

i. It leads to states of emergency or a situation arises where production or retail is halted/disrupted or

ii. State revenue collection or expenditure is hamstrung.

As long as there are no such spillovers (and I doubt the Perak issue will lead to either (i) or (ii), if no one behaves heavyhandedly), then let matters take their course, peaceably, as frustrating and complicated the path to resolution may be.

Let us not compromise and settle for an unfair outcome out of the misplaced, premature fear that taking the longer, fairer route would end in economic doom.