Bananachinese’s Weblog

September 1, 2008

Analysis and Message for the good, bad and ugly MCA leaders

OK. Since Malaysiakini is not yet doing it, I’ll get the ball rolling first.

Yes, the time is right to seriously do a SWOT analysis on those who dare to suggest to us that he’s da man for MCA President.

What’s a SWOT? It is what a businessman would do to check whether the business is eg: healthy or dying or in need of a bailout.

You can do it too, this little tool is also handy for other stuff like summing up a potential girlfriend / boyfriend.

Here’s how to do a simplified SWOT analysis.

Draw a box of 3 columns, mark them 1, 2, 3.

Put the names of those you want to assess in column 1 under the subject title ‘Da Man’.

Column 2 is for you to write all the ‘Strengths’ aka ‘Positive advantage’ that these guys possess. Important note: Don’t force yourself to make up some if you cannot think of any.

Column 3 is to write all the ‘Weaknesses’ aka ‘Negative downside’ eg: ‘MCA sure kaput if this morally depraved/ corrupt/ wanton/ decadent/ despicable character becomes President’.

And now you can proceed to have some educated fun with these chaps:

Ong Tee Keat
Chua Soi Lek
Chua Jui Meng
Fong Chan Onn
+ Any other ‘capable’ leader that I did not mention here…

Merdeka bonus: To help you with the SWOT, here’s an input from an MCA member…

… Also, I find comments made by Chua Soi Lek, Donald Lim, Chua Jui Meng ludicrous. Their comments are but attempts to divert attention of the grassroot from the fault of their own leadership in the failings of recent 12 General Election.

Don’t forget BN achieved the best ever results in the 11th election. How could a party which was so strong in relevance (if you argued a party’s relevance based on its performance) just about four years ago became so irrelevant suddenly. You and I know the result had just got to do with human factor i.e. its central committee team members were so devoid of merits in managing the party!!!

Why the desperate and sudden action now to want to appear to dare speak against UMNO? If these power hungry people feel the party has become irrelevant, surely they would have detected the tell tale signs before the election. Even the last dinasours’ extinction happened over sometime. How could a party become irrelevant in such short time with none of the leaders sensing it? Nobody of these guys argued about MCA sleeping on the job before, why now? Just because the party lost miserably in an election it ought to be extinct or jump ship? You mean to tell me all these oldies don’t know how to tackle the ups and downs in the sport of politics?

I was personally involved in the recent election process. I witnessed for myself the shortcomings from the grassroot to upper leadership including the unpreparedness of candidates in certain constituencies, the ridiculously low level of political knowledge of candidates and their arrogant demeanor. If not for my MCA membership, I would have voted for the opposition myself.

In my most honest opinion, the whole management and leadership team of MCA ought to have resigned and a pro temp committee comprising some current leaders and young members to be formed to determine the next course of action for MCA. This will provide not only a more focused direction for the party but also to avoid the present on going fracas which is further splitting the party’s foundation.

In this respect, I cannot but agree with Tun Mahathir that the present leadership of BN ought to make way to ensure the revival of the party.

It means the President and all those people who work with him and those who are responsible for the policies of the party and the selection of the candidates.

~Angry member

Advertisements

July 12, 2008

The analysis on MCA that Malaysiakini didn’t have

Such an interesting article I found published here. Much more titillating than Malaysiakini’s analysis because it has the potential to go into Part II, III, etc – if this MCA insider zooms the microscope to tell us about the problem ‘makers’.

Tell us who caused MCA to tumble big time, Mary! Are they the Division people? Are they the Division/State chairmen or committees? What are these people’s modus operandi? Pretty please?

This is what Mary wrote (reproduced below). I suspect its the Part I of more to come:

It’s no secret that MCA’s young and bright members are being courted by Pakatan Rakyat (PR). PR needs talents to help its political future.

For purpose of this discussion, I shall use the term ‘Faiths’ to describe the young and bright members of MCA and use the term ‘Comfortables’ for those already installed comfortably in the MCA central, state or division committees. Most, if not all of the Comfortables have been there for some terms already, some since 1970s.

Faiths are those neglected 3rd liners, members who have the fire in their belly. They think as Malaysians, not ‘Chinese’ Malaysians. They are exposed to global ideas and understand the demands of shifting political, economics and social environment worldwide. These young men and women, below the age of 40, have been exposed to progressive systems and ethics through their working experiences with MNCs or GLCs. They speak Malay and English fluently, perhaps some Mandarin. They are aware of the conversations that is going on in the cyberspace and probably operates a blog or more. They have faith in the party’s constitution but lack faith in the unresponsive political style of party old guards. But most of all, Faiths hunger for a system of leadership progression.

Faiths watch how elected representatives perform and cringe in despair over the Comfortables lack in lawmaking.

Comfortables prefer to focus on NGO activities – providing ‘service’ to help people fill out forms, apply permits/approvals, attending to family disputes, pointing their fingers at clogged drains, dirty river, etc. Comfortables were not known to initiate amendment or change to archaic laws or by-laws. Most unfortunately, Comfortables were not heard voicing out ideas or even to engage the rakyat’s input meaningfully in efforts to resolve policies. There was no move or initiatives by the Comfortables to systematically or substantively groom new and current members as party’s future leaders.

Young members know the ‘fact’ that these towkays have not shaken off ‘top-down’ propagandist methodologies to shove, oops, promote their viewpoints. Towkay Comfortables operate with outdated one-way communication in this age of engagement. It is very difficult, nay, nearly impossible to get Comfortables to engage in debates without relegating it into a propaganda session. Ask thinking members, how very difficult it is to try to get them to address policy issues. Most of the time, inquisitive members were treated to the usual ‘tai chi’ avoidance maneuvers.

Sad fact, but it is perceived as true by most members and the public that Comfortables lack ideas and strategy to deal with the changed political landscape. Some may dispute this by saying that the Comfortables have organized many, many activities. Sure. But how these activities contribute to the
political survival of the Party is lost on me. Look at the often used one off publicity gimmicks such as giving away gifts to the poor, organizing dinners or exhibitions. All promoted in the name of service. Most people suspect that free publicity was the ultimate objective for some organizers.

The important question of how do such techniques result in a long term return for the Party were never addressed. I haven’t heard the Comfortables fighting for a leadership bureau to train all members up as future Obama. For me, if a political party has no plan to make leaders out of its members, it has no dream. It has no place in the political arena.

Back to the problem of the Faiths. Although disadvantaged as ‘servicemen’, Faiths know they have a distinct advantage over the installed Comfortables. Faiths are articulate, curious for discourse and solutions to progressive politics, policies and brave enough to participate in addressing hard issues such as Article 121(A). Faiths are not afraid to engage in discussion on national politics with opposition parties. And Faiths keep on banging their heads against the great wall system designed by the Comfortables to keep them out.

One clear message from the 2008 General Election is that Malaysians want progressive lawmakers. Election candidates with strong service background were rejected in the political tsunami along with ‘ineffective’ MPs who were unable/failed to speak up on issues or demonstrated inability to articulate policies.

I say again, MCA is in the business of politics. Therefore it cannot run away from meeting the higher demands and standards of the electorate. The electorate market has indicated a future demand for lawmakers.

Good news is, supply is not short within the party membership. MCA just need to legitimize an internal system to churn up the Faiths, separate the servicemen from lawmakers.

The era of the Comfortables as lawmakers has ended. MCA can still use them by re-designating them to concentrate their specialty as Local Councillors. But for immediate action, just unleash talents of the Faiths to take on the role of lawmakers.

Party members! This party election, make a conscientious decision in casting your vote. Allegiance to Comfortables is less important than saving the party. It is indeed a troublesome choice, but unleashing Faith is the best bet to steer MCA through the uncharted political seas ahead. The leadership better take heed.

Blog at WordPress.com.