‘Debate is not part of Asian culture, it is American. Asian countries have their modus operandi … there are street demonstrations in America. But we are not American, and we don’t take to the streets.’

The statement above sounds like Asian values, pronounced dead after the 1997 financial crisis, are now making a quiet comeback. But I would not have raised my eyebrow had it come from Lee Kuan Yew or Mahathir Mohammad, the two most fervent advocates of the idea. The fact is, the paternalistic and shallow words were uttered by Lim Si Pin ( right in pix), deputy youth chief of Gerakan and parliamentary candidate for Batu.

batu nomination 240208 tian chua and lim si pin Turning down an invitation by Tian Chua ( left in pix ), his rival from PKR, for a public debate on national issues such as the rising crime rate and the sluggish economy, Lim said he would prefer walkabouts to gauge public opinion.

For a 38-year-old young leader to resort to the discredited Asian values argument only reveals, rather embarrassingly, the sorry state of Barisan Nasinoal politics. It again proves that one can acquire all the knowledge in all corners of the world but still remain, paradoxically, a ‘happy slave’, to borrow the phrase of Don Herzog.

In the case of Lim, everything that he has said so far in preparation for his electoral debut is boring and sometimes bizarre. The saddest truth is it still does not make it true.

Lim studied in Britain, where the Westminster Parliament is still revered as the Mother of Parliaments. Strange that the seemingly bright and promising young politician would choose to believe it is better for the voters to be denied their fundamental right to make an informed decision through a public debate.

Let’s put Lim’s view to the test, and I shall begin with Taiwan, a country that has successfully unshackled the authoritarian rule imposed by the once fascist Kuomintang (KMT) to become a flourishing democracy over the last two decades.

Just last week, Frank Hsieh of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party and Ma Ying-jeou of the KMT kicked off their first presidential debate on TV. Neither of the candidates had hesitated when the idea was mooted, as they knew any wavering would give the public the impression of indecisiveness and, worse, intellectual vacuity.

Why contest then?

But Taiwan is not the first Asian country to host presidential debates. In December 2002, South Korea made history when the three presidential candidates appeared on TV to explain and defend their positions to the nation. Up to 70% of the viewers watched the live broadcast and, as far as I know, there were no mobs on Korean streets after Roh Moh Hyun won the race.

Many say the denial of universal suffrage in the Hong Kong chief executive election makes mockery of democracy. I agree. But even in a flawed system like this, the candidates still have to fight it out by having an in-depth policy discussion and debate through live broadcasts. Malaysia should not have done worse than that.

For a small-minded person like Lim, the right to demonstrate equals chaos and violence that could wreak havoc on the nation’s economy. For his information, Hong Kong, Taiwan and South Korea, where peaceful demonstrations are a norm, enjoy far bigger economic success than what the BN government brags about at home.

church election forum 280208 donald lim There are some who are prepared to take up the challenge, although they may not be articulate enough to win the argument. Donald Lim (right) and Lim Thuan Seng, hence, deserve a big hand. I now wonder if the deputy youth chief of Gerakan still regard these two BN colleagues of his as ‘Asian’.

Lim may be UK-trained, but his mindset remains very much Malaysian, or BN. He talks about Asia, but has scant idea where Asia actually lies, and how diverse the region is. Perhaps he has read too many books written in the West about the ‘exotic East’ that seek to mystify the Orient, to the extent that he has turned himself in an orientalist who sees his fellow Malaysians - the very constituency that he is fighting to represent - as ‘irrational’ and ‘sentimental’, ‘senseless’ and ‘incapable of reason’.

If such is the case, I would like to introduce Lim to one of the most quoted sayings from the Records of Rite, Confucius’ classic: ‘To study extensively, to inquire thoroughly, to think carefully, and to debate clearly’.

If Lim does not believe in debate, why is he then contesting to get into Parliament? To help turn it into a gigantic rubber stamp, perhaps?