Der Doktor: Mahathir’s memoir

Even in this blog we can see it. The blogger writes that the man is a political liar and advances arguments. Some of the responses beggars belief. One-liners trying to (a) label the blogger negatively, (b) torpedo the messenger, and (c) obscure the fact that no supporting facts are advanced to take the opposite position. Is this the best our mahathirites can do, one asks timidly? Is this what is meant by Malay culture? Is there any intellect worth defending out there or shall we have to call Mr Spock to beam us up because those who can't win an argument want to make sure the other party's reputation is sullied? As if calling them liberals carries the unacceptable implication they are less Muslims because Islam is conservative?'

I have written a part 1 of an article about Dr Mahathir's memoir. I find it hard to believe that we cannot agree to disagree. I do not contest the many achievements Dr Mahathir brought upon Malaysia. Read again- I dispute his rendition of UMNO politics.

This is not a cheap publicity stunt. It's because I think there are so many self-serving renditions. You can already find them in Dr Mahathir's chapter 1 of his memoir. Those are about UMNO politics and not about family values as in chapter 2. When it comes to UMNO politics, we can't all accept what Dr Mahathir says as gospel truth.

As to saying I have Indian blood but am Malay- you find that in chapter 2 of the memoir. If you distilled the material in chapter 2, Dr Mahathir acknowledges he has Indian blood but is a Malay and proud to be one. This is not a contentious issue. I am surprised its turned into a disputed point. Malays with their infinite capacity for accommodativeness can accept anyone who wants to be Malay subject to the qualifications of being Malay. I never once imagine the late actor M. Zain who starred in the labu labi series to be other than a Malay. He speaks Malay, practices Malay culture and professes Islam. That he had Indian blood, did not bother the pure Malay.

I thought I made it clear in the opening passages of my first article- this isn't an issue at finding fault with one's ethnicity or ethnic origins. Now I know, Penang Malay simply means mamak. Malays may joke about the term, but accept mamak as Malay. No problem there.

It's about, what I interpret to be the political permutations that can flow from such an admission. Hence I said the political chameleon-ness. One is free to speculate the political permutations that come from the admission. And when one has different opinions about the memoir, it's childish to dismiss how we view the memoir by asking us to write our own memoir. And I find it even more infantile at attempts to debunk my interpretation by mocking that I am UMNO from Pekan or that I served only one term as ADUN. How do these things augment or diminish how I view certain aspects of the memoir?

DR Mahathir speaks of a house divided in one of the chapters. He is opening up old wounds when the time now is of reconciliation. The memoir indirectly serves to elevate the status of Tengku Razaleigh since Mahathir acknowledges he is Prime Minister material. He could have been if he ( Razaleigh) were patient. How can we know when went on or what motivated people who were close comrades to go against one another? Certainly we have to listen to both sides. Mahathir tells his side in his memoir. Tengku Razaleigh may not be ready to write his memoir yet, but others who dispute what Mahathir says may have one thing or two to say about it.

If Mahathir continues to blame Tengku Razaleigh for all the ills that are setting upon UMNO now, Tengku Razaleigh may have justifiable reasons to abandon UMNO once more. if he does that, he is simply emulating Dr Mahathir- expelled from UMNO once, destroyed the UMNO he was expelled from, formed a new UMNO, resigned from the UMNO he formed, 2 or 3 years ago.

And if I interpret such actions as a person wanting the cake and eating it- I can't be faulted. Dr Mahathir shifts the goal posts as many times as he want. Some people may even say Dr Mahathir is a selfish person. He has done it according to his favorite song- I did it my way.

If more than 10,000 people bought the book in the first few days- I agree that Dr Mahathir is an immensely poplar person. I am also a fan of Mahathir. But that does not mean that everyone has to take what Dr Mahathir tells as absolute truths. I am not ashamed to say I bought the book so that I can criticize objectively. I am not going to dispute those topics that Dr Mahathir speaks about values, childhood, etc. it's the politics that Dr Mahathir speaks of that are open to debate. So let's confine our debate to Dr Mahathir's politics.

UMNO politics is not a story that ONLY Dr. Mahathir can tell. Since UMNO's story and history is shared by all, everyone else deserves space to tell their version and they may not conform to what Dr Mahathir say. This is to be expected.

It's a different case if Dr Mahathir speaks of family values as in chapter two. We can hardly find fault on the way Dr Mahathir was brought up and how he thinks he will apply them. We, or at least many of us can relate to the story of being brought up by a stern father or father figure or we have no problem relating to the story of sleeping on the mattress laid out on the floor. Many of us slept on 'lembek' as we call them in Pahang, or lecha or just laying out the tikar mengkuang.

The values, of which Mahathir spoke of in chapter 2, are essentially proprietary and probably unique. We can pass no judgment on that.

So those who find my article disagreeable, please reason out your disagreement rationally. One line diatribe can do you no good, other than exposing your own shortcomings. Don't be angry if people consider you mentally deficient. But if you insist people hear your xenophobic rants, I will pass your comments.

That is why I have included comments that do not agree with my opinion. I have already said, I will so long as they do not contain profanities or take personal issues into consideration. Such diatribes as "I am glad you are only a one term ADUN or no longer in UMNO" do not bother me anymore. Itu rezeki saya setakat ini.

As regards opinions on Mahathir's memoir, other bloggers wrote their reviews on the memoir according to their level of understanding and experience. I feel they are entitled to their opinions. I am asking for the same sense of fair play.

There are so many chapters written by Dr Mahathir which I find pleasant and agreeable. I don't accept his version on some of the politics that he raised. Therefore when I see some points which he raised raises in turn some doubts, we can debate about it.

This disagreement does not diminish our reverence to Dr Mahathir and to the many path breaking ideas that he introduced into Malaysia. Chief among these must be a sense of supreme confidence to chart the future based on our abilities. I have no trouble in acknowledging Dr. Mahathir's imprimatur and presence here. He did indeed make Malaysians proud to be Malaysian citizens.

But his rendition of UMNO politics is a different matter. We can't all share his take on what went on in UMNO politics. I am hoping to concentrate only on these debatable issues. Please have an open mind.

For example, when Dr Mahathir said his salvation came from Tun Razak who overlooked his behavior… we find this to be oversimplified version and self-serving. Yes, he became a minister because Tun Razak appointed him. But Dr Mahathir wasn't in Tun Razak's radar in the first place. The late Harun Idris played a pivotal role in exposing the good doctor to Tun Razak. And Dr Mahathir didn't say that his entry into Tun Razak's radar screen was also facilitated by Tengku Razaleigh. Mahathir would hang around in Tengku's Office at BBMB on most occasions when he traveled from Alor Star to KL. Tengku Razaleigh would bring Mahathir into Tun Razak's sight.

So, I would say that DR Mahathir's claim that Tun Razak was his mentor isn't quite whole- Tengku Razaleigh was Razak's protégé in more ways than Mahathir.

In his book Dato Harun's role was overshadowed by Dr Mahathir's eagerness to point out the fact that Harun Idris and his sons helped Tengku Razaleigh to contest against him. Surely, such defiance would jolt the minds of readers to question as to why friends like Harun Idris and Tengku Razaleigh who have been instrumental in rescuing Mahathir from political wilderness would then stand opposed to Mahathir? Dr Mahathir sees no wrong in describing himself as a rebel and a troublemaker but finds it almost blasphemous when people rebel against him and played troublemaker to him.

I am conscious that this is a memoir. Dr Mahathir has every right to state the facts and the stories as he sees fit. I have already stated that this memoir is a personalized and a much nuanced account. It therefore incorporates his own subjective views and his understanding and the version of a particular story he wants to put across.

When his version and his personalized account are at odds with what we, who deserve to enjoy the same rights and privileges as Dr Mahathir has, we have every right to offer a counter narration. Isn't this what democracy is all about? The presentation of choices to people?

I take it as a duty to read the book in preparing to disagree. His chapter 1 is also an uplifting narration. That a commoner can eventually become a prime minister in itself has symbolic significance. As pointed out by Dr. Mahathir himself, all previous PMs came from the elite of society- Tengku Abdul Rahman was a prince, Tun Razak was a chieftain from Pahang, Hussein Onn came from Johore's elite family with close links with Johore Royalty.

I can find no fault when Dr Mahathir says- "but I broke the mold and paved the way for them to head the government of Malaysia. An ordinary person can become a PM of Malaysia- but here is where I must add, that the ordinary person must distinguish himself in terms of being able to contribute something.

Dr Mahathir has indeed broken the mold to present us, what I have written in several articles before and on many occasions- that the selection of a person to high office is no longer because of inherited status, no longer as a result of ascriptive attributes. Anyone then can become a PM not because of who they are- son of a chieftain, son of a king, son of somebody highly ranked. Anyone can become a PM because of what he can do, he can become one no longer restricted by social stratification.

That is uplifting. But it tells nothing about how Dr Mahathir came to be where he was when he assumed the PMship or how he retains his position. In this area we differ.

So before you go paranoid and incoherent in your opposition to my own view of the memoir, you had better read the book first too and be aware that I disagree only on the politics.