In his twilight years, Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the 99-year-old former Prime Minister of Malaysia, seems content with spending his last days being an internet troll obsessed with his former protege, current Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim.
It's become like clockwork, as when Anwar says A, Mahathir must come out to say no, it's not A, it's B. This has become so routine that even Mahathir, the neoliberal champion of Malaysia in the 1980s and 1990s, has sought to position himself as a champion of people with low incomes as if he were a socialist icon, just because equitable share of wealth has become a key pillar for Anwar's administration.
However, this self-portrayal is steeped in hypocrisy, given his long history of cultivating the conditions he now claims to criticize. The irony of his self-proclaimed role as a champion for the underprivileged is stark, inviting a critical view of his actions.
As the architect of Malaysia's economic policies for over two decades, he is often credited with modernizing the country. Still, this modernization came at a significant cost. His administration facilitated the rise of crony capitalism and a widening wealth gap. The very neoliberal policies he championed birthed a class of billionaires, many of whom are his former associates and family members. The term "privatization" has often been used to describe the dubious deals that characterized Mahathir's initiatives, which benefitted a select few while leaving the majority in the lurch.
Mahathir has expressed concern about the growing disparity between the rich and the poor, warning that unchecked capitalism could lead to social unrest. This is a classic case of the pot calling the kettle black. His administration was pivotal in entrenching the capitalist structures that have exacerbated wealth inequality. While it is true that the rich consume and waste more, Mahathir's policies were instrumental in facilitating their ascent while the poor struggled in poverty. By lamenting the current situation, he conveniently overlooks his role in fostering the environment that has contributed to these disparities.
Moreover, Mahathir's claims of concern for the welfare of average Malaysians clash with the reality of his governance. During his time in office, he prioritized projects that benefited his allies over the populace's needs. Privatizing essential services such as education and healthcare has made these services increasingly inaccessible to many. His policies created a system in which access to education and healthcare depended on wealth rather than need, leaving countless Malaysians struggling to navigate a burdensome system designed for profit rather than people.
Take a look at the long-running "open secret" of his cronyism, where even the average pak cik on the street can tell you of wild bailouts of his friends and family, of the RM1.79 billion bailout of Tajudin Ramli for his MAS disaster or even, hitting closer to home, his own family?
A notable case is Mirzan Mahathir, who established Konsortium Perkapalan in the 1990s. This company eventually required a bailout from Petronas through MISC during the 1998 economic crisis. At that time, MISC and Petronas reported directly to Mahathir as Prime Minister. How can one reconcile Mahathir's position as a moral arbiter of economic practices while his son benefitted from such a situation?
Further compounding these concerns is the transaction involving Mirzan Mahathir and Diperdana Corp. In 1996, Vincent Tan's brother, Danny Tan, sold Diperdana Corp to Mirzan just two years after acquiring it himself. This deal raises red flags about potential nepotism and favouritism, particularly given Mahathir's high office at the time. The nepotism and favouritism in these business dealings are evident, inviting suspicion from the audience. Was it merely a coincidence that Mirzan was involved in significant business dealings while Mahathir served as Prime Minister?
Additionally, Mohzani Mahathir's ascent in the business world further exemplifies the intertwining of politics and family interests. In 1997, while Mahathir held the reins of power, Mohzani became the largest shareholder of Hospital Pantai after acquiring it from the Vincent Tan-controlled Berjaya Group. Following this, the FOMEMA concessions and government hospital supply contracts were awarded to his group while Mahathir remained in office. Such actions cast a long shadow over Mahathir's claims to prioritize the welfare of the Malaysian populace.
Reflecting on Mahathir's legacy, one could argue that he succeeded in uplifting some segments of society; after all, he rose from humble beginnings to become a pivotal figure in Malaysia's economic landscape. His journey from rural Kedah to the helm of power, where he became a patron to one of the wealthiest families in the nation, is indeed a remarkable narrative. However, the reality is that this success story is not the experience shared by the majority of Malaysians.
The rest of the country can only grappled with the legacy of his choices, for better or for worse. The rest of the country can only grit through the culture of patronage and communal distrust he built after feeling threatened by his peers. The rest of the country can't simply hide away in their stately mansions whenever the chickens come to roost.
What the rest of the country truly desires is not to limit Mahathir's freedom to live as he pleases but instead for him to find peace in accepting the current state of affairs. Instead of relentlessly criticising present leadership, it would be refreshing for Mahathir to acknowledge the complexities of the nation he helped shape and step back from the public fray.
It's become like clockwork, as when Anwar says A, Mahathir must come out to say no, it's not A, it's B. This has become so routine that even Mahathir, the neoliberal champion of Malaysia in the 1980s and 1990s, has sought to position himself as a champion of people with low incomes as if he were a socialist icon, just because equitable share of wealth has become a key pillar for Anwar's administration.
As the architect of Malaysia's economic policies for over two decades, he is often credited with modernizing the country. Still, this modernization came at a significant cost. His administration facilitated the rise of crony capitalism and a widening wealth gap. The very neoliberal policies he championed birthed a class of billionaires, many of whom are his former associates and family members. The term "privatization" has often been used to describe the dubious deals that characterized Mahathir's initiatives, which benefitted a select few while leaving the majority in the lurch.
Mahathir has expressed concern about the growing disparity between the rich and the poor, warning that unchecked capitalism could lead to social unrest. This is a classic case of the pot calling the kettle black. His administration was pivotal in entrenching the capitalist structures that have exacerbated wealth inequality. While it is true that the rich consume and waste more, Mahathir's policies were instrumental in facilitating their ascent while the poor struggled in poverty. By lamenting the current situation, he conveniently overlooks his role in fostering the environment that has contributed to these disparities.
Moreover, Mahathir's claims of concern for the welfare of average Malaysians clash with the reality of his governance. During his time in office, he prioritized projects that benefited his allies over the populace's needs. Privatizing essential services such as education and healthcare has made these services increasingly inaccessible to many. His policies created a system in which access to education and healthcare depended on wealth rather than need, leaving countless Malaysians struggling to navigate a burdensome system designed for profit rather than people.
Take a look at the long-running "open secret" of his cronyism, where even the average pak cik on the street can tell you of wild bailouts of his friends and family, of the RM1.79 billion bailout of Tajudin Ramli for his MAS disaster or even, hitting closer to home, his own family?
A notable case is Mirzan Mahathir, who established Konsortium Perkapalan in the 1990s. This company eventually required a bailout from Petronas through MISC during the 1998 economic crisis. At that time, MISC and Petronas reported directly to Mahathir as Prime Minister. How can one reconcile Mahathir's position as a moral arbiter of economic practices while his son benefitted from such a situation?
Further compounding these concerns is the transaction involving Mirzan Mahathir and Diperdana Corp. In 1996, Vincent Tan's brother, Danny Tan, sold Diperdana Corp to Mirzan just two years after acquiring it himself. This deal raises red flags about potential nepotism and favouritism, particularly given Mahathir's high office at the time. The nepotism and favouritism in these business dealings are evident, inviting suspicion from the audience. Was it merely a coincidence that Mirzan was involved in significant business dealings while Mahathir served as Prime Minister?
Additionally, Mohzani Mahathir's ascent in the business world further exemplifies the intertwining of politics and family interests. In 1997, while Mahathir held the reins of power, Mohzani became the largest shareholder of Hospital Pantai after acquiring it from the Vincent Tan-controlled Berjaya Group. Following this, the FOMEMA concessions and government hospital supply contracts were awarded to his group while Mahathir remained in office. Such actions cast a long shadow over Mahathir's claims to prioritize the welfare of the Malaysian populace.
The rest of the country can only grappled with the legacy of his choices, for better or for worse. The rest of the country can only grit through the culture of patronage and communal distrust he built after feeling threatened by his peers. The rest of the country can't simply hide away in their stately mansions whenever the chickens come to roost.
What the rest of the country truly desires is not to limit Mahathir's freedom to live as he pleases but instead for him to find peace in accepting the current state of affairs. Instead of relentlessly criticising present leadership, it would be refreshing for Mahathir to acknowledge the complexities of the nation he helped shape and step back from the public fray.
Comments
Post a Comment