The Folly of Debates
The main problem with UMNO, is its members do not know how to disagree. If one disagrees with the opinions or principles of another, one is viewed with intense animosity. Whereas, that anger and animosity must be directed to outsiders, not within the party. We are like a marauding cat on our own kind, but behave like a meek mouse facing outsiders.
One of the ways to disguise our contempt on our own kind, is to seek public debates. Our purpose is not to establish common grounds of our common struggle which could really reveal the principles we wish to advance. Our intention really, is to humiliate our opponent,. We want to have the chance to expose his smallness using our own pettiness.
Many years ago, Sakmongkol was watching the news on ITN. That was in the
When Peres visited the
Shimon Peres explained: we Jews in
Perhaps, we can learn some lessons here. What is the purpose of debates among ourselves? We all live by the same principles inside the party. We don’t demand respect but earned it through the quiet confident ways.
Rather than verbal jostling, why not publish your thoughts? So that we can analyse them under more congenial atmosphere as compared to the emotionally charged atmosphere that usually accompany debates?
2 comments:
Having public debates is one way of bypassing the no canvassing rule.
I can imagine the glowing tributes to a certain son in law being penned by the media even as we speak.
Tok Pa said that there shouldn't be debates because Umno youth is not mature enough to handle such things. He fears members may be atken in by the form rather than the substance. Damning methinks, but correct.
sak & doc,
i think tok pa speaks plenty truth!
after trawling malaysian blogs and reading their comment boxes several years now, i agree that msians seem easily taken in by form. umno youth is definitely cut of the same cloth.
just look at when...
kj teamed with nazri aziz to debate malik imtiaz sarwar on al-jazz(?), there were quite a number of comments in blogs as well in their comment boxes on how good kj came across... based on his mat salleh accent and how articulate he was in english.
i heard the debate myself on u-tube and i thought mis, who was not just articulate but put forth reasoned and informed arguments, was brilliant while kj and nazri were totally outclassed.
Post a Comment