8/2/2019 Article 139

1/3

Democracy in Malaysia: Discourses and Practices

Edited by Francis Loh Kok Wah and Khoo Boo Teik

Richmond, Surrey / Curzon / 2002

By Donna Amoroso

This is a well-argued collection of essays that survey the state of Malaysian political

practice and provide insight into the discourses underlying it. The authors are academics,

many of whom also participate in the various civil society efforts that fall within thepurview of the book. The result of this dual commitment is a theoretically informed,

scholarly book that is nicely focused and accessibly written, dispassionate and of real use

to those who seek to understand the prospects, realities, and limitations of Malaysian

democracy.

Three essays on discourse anchor the volume, setting Malaysian politics within the

context of developmentalism (Francis Loh Kok Wah), the Asian values debate (Khoo Boo

Teik), and Muslim politics (Syed Ahmad Hussein).

Loh poses some uncomfortable questions about the relationship between democracy andmiddle class society (which of course have relevance beyond Malaysia as well). He

acknowledges that democracy talk has become a significant counter-discourse, but

argues that it is seriously limited by the middle class priority of sustained growth broughtabout by economic but not political liberalization. Replacing the previously dominant

discourse of ethnicity, developmentalism focuses on the individualspecifically the

consuming individual, whose freedom, ethnicity, even identity are increasingly

privatized. The powerful nexus of rising prosperity and new consciousness is visible insuch things as credit cards and shopping malls (what to do with new wealth) and stock

ownership and life insurance (how to secure wealth into the next generation). Havingattained identity and lifestyle through personalized, not social, achievement, individuals arenot inclined to controversial political involvement that can adversely threaten them.

It is not that the middle class is unreachable through any social channels. In fact, it isreached every day by the mainstream media which has long internalized a culture of

responsible development journalism. Mustafa K. Anuar discusses how advertising

techniques and more business news and lifestyle features woo middle-class readers and

serve state interests by diverting newspapers from investigative journalism andcontroversy. But Mustafa notes the widespread public distrust of mainstream media during

the Anwar Ibrahim crisis and the accompanying growth of an alternative press as a sign

that mainstream media do not have unlimited power. Zaharom Nain turns the businessfocus onto the media itself, arguing that increasing concentration of ownership, combined

with tightened government control (surveyed in both articles), has resulted in more of the

same even as media outlets have multiplied. While he argues that audiences do notpassively accept what the media feeds them, he is wary of approaches that assume uniform

access to alternative forms of explanation and knowledge. Zaharom is not sanguine about

alternative or new media, noting how opposition newspapers have been curbed once they

8/2/2019 Article 139

2/3

attain effectiveness and surmising that internet sites have been left alone because they

reach a small audience.

Any discussion of Malaysian democracy will have to contend early and often with

Mahathir Mohamad, who has worked hard for over half a century to shape Malaysian

political thinking and practice. This collection does not disappoint, as co-editor Khoocontextualizes Mahathirs recent offensive on behalf of a Malaysian democracy that

differs in essence from western liberal democracy. This Asian system is a notably

passive exercise for the citizen, whose participation is invited only in periodic elections inwhich the choice is always framed thus: return to power the government that has delivered

economic development through political stability or risk all by electing irresponsible

oppositionists. Khoo locates the development of this ideology in the late 1980s through mid

1990s, amid the collapse of communism, the rapid development of Asian economies anddeindustrialization of western economies, and uprisings against authoritarian regimes. Not

merely a reactive discourse to thwart democratization, Khoo sees Mahathirs ideology as

the value-spiritual-attitudinal corollary of a transfer of capital and technology .... the

ruling ideas of a new class of national capitalists which the Malaysian state, underMahathirs leadership, has closely nurtured.

Observers of Mahathir agree that his long-term tenaciousness is matched by pragmatism.

Indeed, Saliha Hassan writes that Mahathir doesnt bother too much about democracy, but

focuses rather on what is good for the country. That would seem to allow at least a littlespace for the development of civil society NGOs, if not the political NGOs surveyed here,

whose advocacy of plurality, human rights, checks on executive power, openness, and

accountability Mahathir tends to see as part of the problem, rather than the solution.

Nevertheless, Saliha points out that the state often does find value in allowing NGOactivity, in co-opting NGO messages and leaders, and in encouraging those who support or

complement state agendas. In light of the states strong ability to articulate positions and

accrue legitimacy to itself, Saliha argues that NGO fragmentation, lack of mass base, andfrequently narrow (class, ethnic, or religious) focus must be overcome in order to develop a

common social framework.

Another self-proclaimed trait of Mahathirian government is efficiency and Malaysia can

claim to do better than most of its neighbors, but there is nonetheless growing dismay with

nonfeasance and malfeasance of bureaucratic duties by the countrys public

bureaucracies. Lim Hong Hai aims to determine what accounts for the epidemic of self-enrichment, low moral standards, and mutual interference by political and non-political

branches of government in each others realms. He argues that while ministers can control

the bureaucracy, there is no effective control of the ministers. The ballot box operates, butbecause power has never changed hands, it doesnt exercise the kind of check on

ineffective or corrupt government that it should. Interestingly, this shows that a strong

state, especially with a strong executive, can lead to the same highly discretionary andpersonalized style of administration lamented in the regions weaker states. Lim dismisses

the prospect of reform occurring through highly publicized control agencies (themselves

controlled by the ruling party), arguing that it will depend on broader reform of the political

system.

8/2/2019 Article 139

3/3

What is finally most valuable about this collection, beyond the strong analysis and

excellent coverage, is the hint of what Malaysian democracy might entail in the future.Syed Ahmad Hussein examines the changing relationship between ruling Muslim elites and

Islamist defiance of their authority within the broader context of shifts in Middle Eastern

and North African dissident and government trends. For some time, the Malaysian state hasbeen pursuing Islamization policies as a way of shoring up legitimacy and presenting a

model of moderate, progressive Islam. As the crisis of authoritarianism deepened in

the 1990s, Ahmad argues that Islamists moved toward a democratic critique of Mahathirsgovernment. The result may be an emerging convergence of democratization and Islam.

If it continues and deepens, this trend could offer a fresh challenge to Mahathirism, which

has lately found new mileage in identifying Islamists with extremism. It might also contest

the privatization of freedom seen by Loh, for the Islamists insist on community even asthe community becomes middle class and consumerist.

Most intriguing, the Islamists themselves face uncomfortable truths and opportunities if

they move toward a defense of democracy, specifically, that of including the previouslyunincludedwomen. Maznah Mohamad details the wholesale splintering of the Malaysian

womens movement among nationalist, class, and religious groupings, ethnic- and non-ethnic-based parties, mainstream and peripheral organizations. With mainstream

movements beholden to male hierarchies and peripheral movements marginalized from

power, womens organizations have been quite effectively stymied. Where success hascome, as in the 1994 passage of the Domestic Violence Act, it has entailed all types of

womens organizations working together on an initiative with government backing,

spending as long as necessary (in this case 10 years) to arrive at consensus. That this is a

highly contingent confluence is confirmed by the difficulty of building on the DVA insubsequent years. But recently, another contingency occurred with the Anwar crisis, which

highlighted the role of women in politics and the Islamic opposition (PAS). As a result, the

1999 general election became an unlikely venue to push for reform, including theintroduction of the Womens Agenda for Change and the first fielding of a female

candidate running on a womens rights ticket.

Did Malaysians in the 1990s get the government they desired, as Loh contends? This

valuable collection of essays by Malaysian social scientists provides thoughtful evidence.