Permatang Pauh and its ramifications

I’m thinking in parallel directions at the moment – and today’s probably the best time to collect my thoughts and formalise the deliverables before being asked to execute stuff I am ill-prepared for.

First, on the technology front. I like the theoretical framework for managing disruptive innovations, as opposed to sustaining innovations, which has a nice alignment to the innovation-led economic growth model and the schumpeterian principles associated with it as espoused by DNR. I would need to provide a primer and the linkages to the white technology space for GIH as a view towards identification of potential investments and the way towards managing the ecology and circumstances towards technology deployment. I would also need to work further on the precepts and concepts and see the relevance and the applications towards the pre-defined tech space. It looks very exciting – and it really is up to me to spread the enthusiasm and bring people on-board.

Secondly, other responsibilities within GIH requires that I spend time to discuss with relevant people, create workable networks, ask good questions, be prepared with questions on all issues, maintain a wide scope of curiosity, and have my own opinions on the workability of resolutions. Not many seems to be able or want to participate on other’s turfs, and it should for then the collaboration, the critical questions come to the fore and brings the best out of people.

Thirdly, other responsibilities – do not relegate or negate the responsibilities you hold to others.

Now comes the hard part as I seek to redefine myself. I’ve always been surviving on other people’s thoughts and opinions- seeing as it is I have difficulty expressing my own views as well as dealing with criticisms and disagreement with my views. The redefinition requires that I make explicit my thoughts, and the best way to do it is to ‘lapik’ the thoughts appropriately and seek sincere advice. Perhaps, previously I had thought of myself too highly and refrained from seeking advice and it needs to be changed now that I’m leading a team, and a high-performing one at that, where every nuance is open to feedback, criticism and debate. It can only be something good and taking evasive action, and being an unwilling participant within this context can not only mean being ostracised, which I know from experience the unhappiness associated with it, or even worse having the ideas, thoughts and wants being rejected for not meeting necessary standards.

So, first things first.

Let’s talk about the political scenario.

The personality-driven culture, on both sides of the divide, is driving Malaysia to the brink of disintegration. It’s a legacy of the Malay feudalist structure, one still prevalent in the kampungs, and to a certain extent, also within the Indian community. Society can only progress when its democratic institutions are intact and beyond reproach – which is currently not happening with all the mudslinging implicating too many of its most important pillars, the judiciary, the AG’s office, the police and the IGP, politicians who even in the best of times will not enjoy the reputation of being the cleanest people around, and let alone the many NGOs who are vulnerable to criticisms, clampdowns, intimidation from the political power of the day.

Within this context, the power struggle DSAI is bringing into the mainstream of Malaysian society requires us to look into the possible outcomes – sort of scenario planning if you will. Clayton Christensen relates the anecdotes of a professor saying how he hates gravity when he dropped some stuff to the floor, but quickly appended his statement to include how we would need to work and move with that reality in place.

In the end, we should be looking at empowering democratic and social institutions – and that should be the focus of the voting public. The conundrum to that is that taken to extremes will present a liberal posture, inviting an increased fragmentation of society. The liberal young in the Malaysian society currently will not be able to exude the controls to ensure Malaysia’s continued existence, particularly in the domain of Malay-muslim’s political dominance which represents a sort of final frontier towards proliferation of Islamic ideals, although various events pertaining to erosion of morality and civility, proliferation of violent crimes, breakdown of family values are occurring in many a muslim family. The inability of the liberals to relate to the feelings and thoughts of the elderly and the typical Malay generation I can point to my experiences in the GIH, or even among the many in the private sector – overseas Malaysians too seem to contribute towards this phenomenon.

Left unrestricted, in the end, all we get is a jumbled mish-mash of ideas that’s no good to anyone – and perhaps a return to the paternalistic society with TDM as its icon. What we need is a strong leader with the ability to relate to the vast majority of its population, with the ability to manage the expectations of the liberal elite. In the end, DSAAB is not that person. PAS may have a very strong set of elite Muslim professionals, yet its image problem is being manipulated and opposed too easily by its so-called “partner” in DAP – led by the Lion of Jelutong who’s ideals are imported wholesale from socialism and Singapore. The only solution, realistically is DSAI, despite his many problems. Should he be the PM? Yes. But in what manner? Should be in the manner which does not create further disintegration in society.

But as they say, it is always darkest before dawn…