JAN 8 — This article is for Sarawak observers and Sarawakians in general. After the last state election in 2006, many think another state election would be due in 2010. Sarawak is BN’s “fixed deposit”, to quote Pak Lah, and Sarawak’s 31 seats are worth about 13 per cent of the seats in Parliament.
However, BN will probably lose up to three parliamentary seats in the next general election in Sarawak. A lot will depend on whether Sarawak will hold state and parliamentary elections simultaneously. Right now, Sarawak is the only state in Malaysia with a separate date for state elections.
Many experts say that “money politics” or the direct buying of votes is a key feature of why BN is able to hang on to power there. This is especially true in rural areas and among native voters. In this article, I would like to offer a slightly more sophisticated explanation.
Before I do that, I would like to state that my observations are meant to stimulate debate. They are not meant as a general observation of the entire native group or groupings. It is not in any way related to racism or anything of that sort.
It is simply an explanation of how and why money plays such an important role in winning political support in Sarawak. However, having said that, I believe that my observations are valid for the majority of non-Muslim natives living in the rural areas and those who have moved to the urban areas in the past decade.
My theory is actually quite simple and not original. In academic literature, it is sometimes referred to as culture deficit or underdevelopment of capitalism.
My argument is this: the majority of Sarawak’s natives are easily bought off with a few hundred ringgit simply because they don’t understand the full logic of capitalism. In capitalism, in order to move ahead and be independent, you need capital, or in simple terms, savings or credit.
In many of the native groupings, while they understand the importance of money and what money can buy, they don’t fully understand the logic of savings. Hence, they spend almost all their income and they have no savings.
Many native households have multiple loans; from housing and cars to all sorts of debts and HP deals. In some households, more than half of the monthly income goes to servicing the debts. They spend a lot of money on community activities (it is not uncommon to have community gatherings two or three times a week where a lot of money is spent on food and alcohol) and grand weddings.
The end result is that the majority of the group are always in debt and have no savings. This makes them very vulnerable to politicians who come offering a few hundred in cash. The amount we are talking about is small.
For example, to “buy” a 30-room longhouse with maybe 100 voters, all you need is about RM30,000 or less. These people will give you the votes for five years and all for less than RM1,000 per household.
If you try to buy a Chinese family for RM1,000 in an urban estate, they will laugh at you. It is no coincidence that the group that voted against BN in the 2006 elections were the Chinese. I am not suggesting that the Chinese can’t be bought, rather, the Chinese will “sell” at the high end because they are not as desperate as the natives.
For the natives, because they are always short of money, RM1,000 ringgit or even a few hundred ringgit, is a lot of money. The Sarawak BN knows this and uses this to its full advantage. What is a few hundred thousand to buy votes when being in power means you can access timber concessions and NCR land worth millions.
Is there a way out? The younger generation working in urban areas are changing but the change is too slow. Many aspects of the native culture require extensive community gatherings and get-togethers during festivals, family celebrations, and grand weddings — the old people from the longhouse or kampung cannot resist inviting all the relatives — and it is often hard for the young to say no.
The problem is compounded by low wages and the high cost of living in the interior. They are not only constantly in debt, but they can never get ahead since the prices of goods and services rise faster than their income. Those with a bit of savings are those working outside Sarawak, in places like Singapore.
One could almost argue that the native political elite are part of the problem. They openly encourage consumption by organising many gatherings. Most of the time, they only “sponsor” some of the events, leaving their community to pick up the tab for the rest. For them, it’s a form of control by putting their own people in debt so that they can be bought off easily and be dependent on them.
As long as the native population lives beyond their means, are constantly in debt and have no real effective savings, they are vulnerable to vote buying on a massive scale. Unless the opposition can match the vote buying it will be difficult for the opposition to win in rural areas. This is the reason why no matter how angry the natives are over Native Customary Land (NCR) issues, in every election the same angry ones still vote for the BN. Yes, the natives are angry but the same natives need a few hundred ringgit immediately. They will take the few hundred, in some cases, only RM30, and sell their ancestral land through the ballot box.
As long as BN can “sponsor” the elections in rural areas, it will be a real uphill task for PKR in the rural heartland of Sarawak.
No comments:
Post a Comment