I refer o the Malaysiakini article Why it is now or never

Like many Malaysians, I am reveling in the tsunami that has changed the political landscape of Malaysia. Having said that, like many Malaysians, I am also slightly wary at the haste in which change is being brought upon us for the sake change, with rumours of the impending crossover of MPs being a prime example of such a circumstance.

Kim Quek states in his article that one should not claim the moral high ground when criticising the crossing-over of MPs as Malaysia is not a democracy in the first instance, and that the system is inherently corrupt and by implication, can be bypassed.

Such statements make me wonder if it’s the beginning of a slippery slope. If it is acceptable for opposition politicians to regard judicial findings of their choosing as fallacies, surely the same principle will apply to the rakyat that it represents. Should the rule of law be circumnavigated by the common folk, as we all ‘know’ that the system cannot be trusted? Where do you draw the line?

And if it's all about the rakyat, then do bear in mind that 51 percent of the popular vote in the last election went to BN and the biggest component party in Parliament is still Umno. 51 percent versus 49 percent is a small majority, but a majority nonetheless (yes, I know that there will be arguments of vote-buying, but unless it's been proven in court, then it's all just theoretical isn't it?). Surely this would translate as a mandate for them to govern for another 5 years come what may?

What of the role of playing the effective opposition, which is arguably just as essential?

Has the opposition demonstrated that it has the capability to govern at a national level and to keep the peace?

If it is truly the rakyat’s interest that they have at heart, then what’s wrong with waiting to establish a formidable and coherent opposition (and by default, a shadow government) to prove to us that they are a viable alternative?

BN does not hold a two-thirds majority anymore, and that gives plenty of maneuvering room. Why the haste? What is being chased?

Kim Quek negatively describes the recently revealed budget. Such critical eyes are needed to keep the government in check, and as the government in waiting, the opposition should also provide the rakyat with an idea of the policies that they have in mind.

From an economic point of view, will Pakatan Rakyat be Keynesian? Or are they disciples of Hayek? Will they opt for a social capitalist concept instead? Or something else altogether? Anwar once told Aliran that he believes in a free market, but on another day he said he believed in Keynesian ‘pump-priming’. It would be educational for us to know the direction in which this change is heading towards.

After all, one of the main differences between Anwar and Mahathir in the late 1990s was the former’s preference for trade liberalisation. Do we think our economy is mature enough to hold its own?

Or from a social point of view, will concerts be banned in all 14 states when Pakatan takes over? Or only in select PAS-controlled states? In which case, why the absence of a uniform policy covering all states?

Would that herald the beginning of the disintegration of the federation into varying sectors, based on ethnic composition or the whim of the component party with the most sate seats?

Frankly, I would rather vote Pakatan in as an entity on its own as opposed to it being dependant on MPs who crossover. What is the logic of being dependant on the very same people that you choose to criticise and abhor?

Attempts to lure others into their ranks in order to achieve a majority - is that not going against the will of the rakyat, who have voted for BN MPs, knowing full well the party that they represent?

Look at the zeal in the criticisms directed at Ezam Mohd Noor for betraying PKR; how will BN MPs who switchover be any different? They did it out of conscience? So did Ezam, if you ask him.

It’s acceptable because BN has been doing it for years? Does that not go against the whole raison d’etre of PR ie it is not BN?

If it’s all about principles, then one should work on principles. Otherwise, it is back to the tired old game of politics and we will end up choosing the better of two evils.