I, as the first-time voter come Sunday, hereby declare myself as a person-centric voter.
No doubt about it.
May the best (wo)man wins.

me again.

The reason why American politics is candidate-centric while ours remains party-centric is simply because of the way our electoral systems differ.

In US, the presidential candidate is chosen by a majority of party delegate votes. The nominations for a presidential candidate are chosen during party primaries (usually). Only once his/her nomination has been accepted by the party can s/he be considered a pres. candidate. The campaign for the election is not a party-planned political machine, but is designed and executed by a hand-picked team of people close to the candidate.

In contrast, the Malaysian system requires the party leader with the majority vote in the election to be Prime Minister. It is very much a team effort. In some ways our system is somewhat more democratic than the American (where by the electoral college system, even a candidate with the majority vote may lose the election).

The fact of whether we are party-centric or not is not a reflection of our maturity but rather of the administrative system we inherited from the British.

"but have we explored the possibility that they're just singing to the tune of the market"

You're right. Touche. It's a catch 22 situation. The candidates test the waters to see what they can get away with in their constituency and then pander to exactly what we want to hear. If the people do not demand ethical and reasonable action, we can't expect to get it. And we don't, because M'sian voters are more concerned with what we can get today, here, now. We are concerned about immediate policies, and not the future plans. We are indirectly planning to vote for a party that will last for four years, we are not thinking of voting in visionaries. I think that is a major problem - because change in any country has to be done slowly for it to be peaceful (humans and animals generally react violently to upheavals).

I have lots more to say but I think I've said it all in the context of the Spanish elections in my LJ. So yeah. that's all :)

Prema,
I've to concur wif you. However in the US they don't have "opposition" unlike we in M'sia. Having such term will make one to think of opposing everything what the government does?

Nevertheless I wish M'sia could have a single body that creates and uphold national policies no matter which party control the government.

IMHO this is to ensure we the rakyat equally benefits (no matter who we elect) what we have worked for and the country strive economically and in peace.

I like a comment T-Boy made in Aiz's blog:

Maybe we deserve what we get.

Who we choose to vote for reflects what our current priorities are. Of course for those of us high up in the Maslow chain, we think of social development, the arts etc etc.

As always, it's a matter of figuring out what kind of change is good while at the same time everyone's scrambling to "jaga periuk nasi". It's inevitable, and it's amusing.

However it turns out, there'll always be someone dissapointed. Oh well..

The thing is like Najah says we bloggers in particular while ranting, and banging our heads against a wall, myself included, because we were brought up in a more liberal context and have developed different ideas about democracy tend to forget that there is a whole nation behind us to worry about. Contrary to popular belief, there is life outside KL and it's part of the bigger picture, and until we realise this nothing will change.

Instead of taking into account what they're saying whenever elections are near, why don't we judge the candidates by their track record.

When campaigning for elections, they will look at the demographics of the constituency and focus on the issues affecting the majority of the constituency. So, issues like potholes and tarred roads will be highlighted where the roads have a lot of potholes and are not tarred. Similarly, in the more urban areas, they will talk about different issues.

Najah, I think some of your worries are already taken care of. There are people thinking about those issues, it's just that you won't win elections if that's the basis of your campaign.

I agree with Meesh. Don't be surprised to find that the majority of Malaysians (even many in KL) falls into the trying-to-make-ends-meet category.

I have also met countless of others who live the simple, quiet and laid-back life by choice. They avoid KL like a plague, even if many are highly capable of doing something great with their knowledge and skills.

The sad facts is that most those who are high up in the Maslow chain and who are worth their salt to change the country finds their chances and horizon restricted. So they end up somewhere else, contributing to other countries instead.

As long as this goes on, Malaysia as a whole will probably not be very different in the years to come.

I still believe that individuals and small groups that makes the different not the politicians. When was the last time they did anything good - worth 2 minutes of your time ? Keep writing Cik Najah, you're doing wonders to lots of people.

"Contrary to popular belief, there is life outside KL and it's part of the bigger picture, and until we realise this nothing will change."

Well said, meesh.

As far as the comments, it is all fair game. We should be brave to rock the boat, and ask the politicians to be responsible and accountable. Then, maybe things will change ...

You have to accept that Malaysia still places the community above the individual. Wherever its source, it's largely a true fact. Maybe not in your personal life, or mine, but certainly in the larger community out there. And if ever there was a need for an example of a "socialistic" country, Malaysia would be it - look at our distributive policies, the paternalitistic Government, etc.