Decades ago, the communist bogey was used to frighten even Hollywood stars, and anyone found as much as sympathising with the Reds or worse, with links to the communist world would be chastised without any mercy at all. Some of the best known personalities in the US film world then found how steep the price was.

But what's happening today, a decade after the dismantling of the Berlin Wall with the reunification of the two Germanys, preceded by the break-up of the former Soviet Union presided over by president Mikhail Gorbachev?

In a new Russia and other estwhile member nations of the Soviet bloc, communists are accepted as part of the political life; they can set up political parties, contest the elections and indeed many of them have been elected to the new parliaments or state assemblies.

Even in Southeast Asia once when an individual was labelled a communist in the so-called democracies, he or she would likely be thrown into jail without as much as being given the opportunity to face a court of law. There were laws banning communism and communist parties.

Indonesia went further than outlawing its communust parties: it obliterated all signs of communism, and this meant requiring the major immigrant race, namely, the Chinese to embrace more or less an Indonesian identity in several ways, including changing their names, going only to Bahasa Indonesia medium schools and speaking only in Bahasa Indonesia.

Now there is a great deal of tolerance when communism is discussed. The reason is simple - few would want communism anyway. It is not an ideology that is compatible with the new life in a democracy, in a new economy.

Even in China, communism probably exists only in name. One of the reasons the Beijing regime is dead against the Falun Gong is that it has commanded a following that is almost double that of the membership of the Chinese Communist Party which has about 50 million official members.

The Falun Gong represents a different threat, as far as the Chinese leaders are concerned: it could transform itself into a political organisation that would be a threat to the Communist Party. But over time, attitudes will change, as they must, when what is required to establish a good government is not loyalty to the party but whether universally accepted rules are accepted or observed.

Financial crisis

And after the mid-1997 economic and financial crisis, several troubled economies in the region blame the US billionaire George Soros. Indeed, Malaysians as much as other Southeast Asians whose financial systems were severely disrupted because of actions by financial speculators like George Soros have good reasons to feel angry.

Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad is right perhaps in taking Soros to task and not to take too kindly to anyone, much less any organisations within the country, for receiving funds from the US billionaire, directly or indirectly, that may be seen as helping to undermine his authority.

Perhaps there is a new bogey. Once when the West floated the Domino Theory which was actually also believed by the free countries of Asia, including Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand, the spectre of communism overrunning the whole of Southeast Asia then was real.

This was particularly so after the fall of Cambodia to the Khmer Rogue, the defeat of US forces in South Vietnam (leading to the reunification of the two Vietnams under a communist regime) and the establishment of the Pathet Lao regime in Laos.

There was genuine fear then in the rest of Southeast Asia. But what has happened since? The Communist parts of Southeast Asia as well as Myanmar are now members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean). Leaders of the Indo-China states talk about building their economies, and not about promoting communism.

They see as threats those foreign companies and investors who repeatedly ask for incentives and nothing else in order to bring some of their investment dollars, not very big ones, so they can set up some factories, create some jobs, and then take much of their profits home. This is a form of economic imperialism that is much feared at the start of a new millennium world after the communist bogey threat is lost.

Independent news

In this context therefore it is quite understandable why when the name George Soros is associated with what is widely perceived as an independent news and media organisation like Malaysiakini.com, there is genuine concern.

Perhaps the so-called mainstream media should not make a play of that, as it is as much in their interest as that of the free and independent organisations to encourage freedom of the press. It is unfortunate that the Far Eastern Economic Review has chosen not to issue a definitive clarification even after the Bangkok-based Southeast Asian Press Alliance made it clear none of Soros' money has gone to Malaysiakini.com

It is not that taking money from Soros for any good cause is wrong - the problem is because of the widespread perception about the US billionaire not only within Malaysia but throughout this region and indeed in many parts of the world it could implicate the editorial integrity and independence of a free press that Malaysia's Internet news portal represents or is trying to represent.

It is unfortunate too that in spite of the official explanation from Seapa in Bangkok, Review managing editor Michael Vatikiotis has not gone one step further: If it is a matter of personal or corporate pride or an arrogance that is sometimes characteristic of some Western-style media, even if it means not defending the truth, then a lot of harm would have been done to the cause of a free press in Asia.

TONY THIEN is a freelance writer based in Kuching.