Slightly better than chimpanzee...

There was a popular joke that made the rounds in the late 1990's about the different levels of efficiency of the election commissions in various Asian countries. At the time, many countries in the region were experiencing a surge of interest in elections and politics. The joke goes something like this:

A journalist wants to know which country in Asia is fastest in announcing the results of their national elections. First, he went to Indonesia and met with the Election Commission (EC) there. The Indonesian EC said, "we are a big country and our system isn't really good, so we can only announce the official results three months after the election." The journalist next went to India and asked the EC there the same question. The Indian EC said, "we have a huge population but our system is good, we can announce the results three days after the election". Next, to Singapore, and the journalist was told, "we are very efficient, we announce the results in three hours". The journalist finally went to Malaysia and told the Malaysian EC how efficient Singapore was, to which the Malaysian EC chief retorted, "we can do even better, we can announce the results three months before the election!"   

This was of course during the time when elections in Malaysia were more predictable and if someone did really want to fix the election, he could have done so quite easily. Civil society was not strong, election monitoring bodies almost non-existent and opposition parties most often did not have enough counting and polling agents. Elections can still be fixed today, of course, but to do so without anyone noticing it would be extremely difficult.  

Fixed or not, to predict (correctly) election results is not easy. We often rely on experts and pundits for their views but how valid really are their views? Well, according to Professor Philip Tetlock, in his book Expert Political Judgment: How Good Is It? How Can We Know? (2005), an 'expert' is only slightly more accurate than a dart-throwing chimpanzee! A rather sad statement, isn't it? But the evidence is overwhelming.

Here, in Malaysia, we only need to go back to the 2008 General Election to find examples of how inaccurate many expert predictions were. If you browse through all mainstream newspapers the editions just prior to the election, you will find one of the most talked about issues was 'who from Gerakan will replace Koh Tsu Koon as Penang Chief Minister?'; a question totally oblivious of even the possibility of Gerakan losing in Penang. And among pro-Barisan Nasional experts, a view often drummed-up was the 'death' of Parti Keadilan Rakyat after the election and the end of PAS' rule in Kelantan.

What happened then was really quite amusing. I can still recall watching at around 7 pm on election day how excited an RTM presenter was about wanting to know the latest tally in Permatang Pauh. She was so excited because she was expecting a result that signals the end of PKR. PKR, of course not only retained Permatang Pauh but won 30 other parliamentary seats in 2008.      

Local political experts and politicians are very much more cautious this time around. Pro-government experts have lately become more philosophical. Those with statistics and numbers are gaining more prominence.

A few days ago, Professor Redzuan Othman from the University of Malaya presented 'selected findings' from his survey on the election. He reported that 43 percent of his respondents preferred Anwar Ibrahim as Prime Minister, and 37 percent preferred the incumbent Najib Abdul Razak. That is indeed good news for the opposition. Pakatan Rakyat supporters are ecstatic and many are now predicting a resounding victory.

I am not a member of any political party but for this election, I have openly expressed my wish to see PR win. I honestly believe a PR win would be good for the country, and good for Umno and BN too;) But a PR victory, with one week to go, is far from certain. Seven days is a long time in politics. Many things can still happen, many 'videos' can still be produced, and many mistakes can still be made. If everything falls into place, PR may not even need Sabah and Sarawak to win federal. But make just one mistake and PR may end up with only Penang and Kelantan to govern.        

Professor Redzuan's findings would be more meaningful if this was a direct presidential election. But that's not the case here. We have a really unfair system where even if a coalition garners more than 50 percent of the popular votes, it may only get 25 percent seats in parliament. The magic number is 112. Whoever gets at least 112 parliamentary seats will form the next federal government. And at this point, nobody really knows who will that be.

The only way any pundit or expert can validly predict the outcome is to do what Nate Silver did for the US Presidential Election last year. He correctly predicted the outcome in all 50 states. More remarkably, in 48 of those, the actual votes received by each candidate fell within his margin of error.

Nate Silver did not collect any data on his own. He uses data from various polling and media agencies, averages them and run a series of regression analyses to cater for various adjustments. The method isn't really that complicated. But you need a diverse range of present and historical data to get it right, and we just don't have that here in Malaysia.

That, however should not stop us from making our own predictions. Unlike 2008, I haven't been able to observe how things are on the ground but I still would like to offer my own humble slightly-better-than-chimpanzee's prediction. Later...

Farewell Tribute to a 'Friend'

I went to Subang Jaya last week and went to Subang Parade, a place I frequented a lot during my teenage years. Back in those days, this was the biggest and coolest shopping mall in the Klang Valley. That remained for about a decade or so before other more gigantic malls like Sunway Pyramid and Megamall were opened. My last visit to Subang Parade was a couple of years back and at the time, the place looked run down. But now, after some extensive interior renovation work, the place is glowing and packed again with visitors.

I certainly have some fondness for Subang Parade but the place that I am more attached to is the building next to it. It is splashed in orange these days (the corporate colour of its new owners) but as recently as two months ago, it was all-white except for the iconic double arrow symbol of red, white and blue. This was Carrefour Subang Jaya, the first Carrefour store and hypermarket in Malaysia.

I have always enjoyed shopping for groceries. As a young boy, I often accompanied my mother to the local pasar malam and pasar tani. Then, when the first Giant Supermarket opened in Kelana Jaya, we went for our groceries quite often there too.

But shopping at Carrefour Subang Jaya was something else. The store in Subang Jaya was just a single-storey building when it opened in 1994 but it was bright and looked so spacious. The items on display were of such great variety, and the way they organised and arranged them was just splendid and that really matters for an OCD borderline case like me.

All these years, even after other and bigger hypermarkets has sprung all over, Carrefour remained the place I would go to if time permits. My late wife was fond of Carrefour too. So fond of it she was, it was the first place she wanted to go to immediately after her confinement when our twins were born nine years ago. When we moved to Taman Melati, the Carrefour store in Wangsa Maju became our favourite shopping place even though the Giant Hypermarket in Batu Caves is perhaps nearer to where we live.

Our fondness for Carrefour is not entirely sentimental. It is also due to a few of its practical qualities, which for me, other hypermarkets; try as they might, they simply do not have.

The first is the systematic and practical arrangement of items. In some Giant stores, the bread section is located next to the poultry and fish section, which I personally find rather disconcerting because when I'm buying bread, especially fresh bread, I want to smell the aroma of freshly baked bread. At Carrefour, the bread section is normally at one end. Next to it are the cakes and cookies section, then the cooked/packed food, and then the fruits and vegetables, and finally the poultry and fish section at the other end.

And speaking of bread, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that Carrefour had the best bread in town. Just take the potato bread as an example. Other hypermarkets make them too but potato bread from Carrefour was just a class above. Others tend to overcook it or make it too soft and too fluffy. Carrefour however had it all just nice. It had the perfect tender.

Another aspect I believe Carrefour triumphed over all its rivals is its spacious aisles. Others tend to crowd the aisles with promotional and discounted items. As a result, customers face great difficulty to move their shopping carts especially during busy shopping hours. Carrefour stores however, had most of the time kept the main aisles empty. Hence, it's easier and more convenient for customers to move around with their baskets and carts.

I do concede though when it comes to pricing, Carrefour is not the best especially when compared to Tesco. You can certainly buy many things cheaper at Tesco, perhaps even at Giant. But both my late wife and I agreed that although many things are cheaper in Tesco, we still prefer to shop at Carrefour because every time we shop at Tesco, we end up buying more and at times unnecessary things. The cheap pricing is very seductive but potentially detrimental especially when you end up buying things too large in quantity and things that you don't actually need.  

So, as far as my shopping experience is concern, the time I've spent at Carrefour will forever have a special place in my heart. It pains me to witness the current 'orange invasion' in all its previous premises. But I do understand that sometimes in life, we have to make tough and painful decisions. Farewell my 'friend' and thank you for the services you had rendered us throughout the years. Au revoir!  

Satu hari di taman permainan...

(Berikut adalah artikel saya yang diterbitkan di laman web Centre for Policy Initiatives pada 19 January 2013 di bawah tajuk 'Budak diherdik dengan panggilan 'keling bodoh')

Beberapa minggu yang lalu, saya telah membawa anak-anak ke taman permainan berhampiran tempat tinggal kami. Taman permainan itu agak luas. Di satu sudut, terdapat alatan permainan kanak-kanak – gelungsur, buaian, jongkang-jongket dan sebagainya – manakala di satu sudut lain terdapat tanah lapang yang walaupun tidak begitu luas, cukup untuk kanak-kanak lelaki bermain bolasepak.

Saya memang minat bolasepak dan suka melihat telatah kanak-kanak cuba mempamerkan skil masing-masing. Tatkala asyik memerhatikan mereka, saya baru sedar dalam kumpulan budak-budak lelaki sekitar 20 orang itu, terdapat seorang budak lelaki berbangsa India. Yang lain semuanya budak-budak Melayu.

Situasi sebegitu bukanlah ganjil sebenarnya. Memang kawasan perumahan itu majoriti penduduknya orang-orang Melayu. Yang ganjil dan amat memeranjatkan saya adalah sikap budak-budak Melayu terhadap budak India tunggal itu. Hampir kesemua mereka memanggilnya “budak keling”. Bila dia tersilap tendang, diherdik pula dengan panggilan “keling bodoh”. Budak India itu walau bagaimanapun, tetap bersemangat mahu terus bermain. Malangnya dia dipinggirkan. Tidak ada yang mahu menghantar bola kepadanya. Dia cuba juga mengejar sedaya-upaya namun terus dibuli budak-budak yang lain. Tidak cukup dengan itu, tidak putus-putus dia diherdik dengan kata-kata kesat dan menghina.

Budak-budak lelaki yang saya perhatikan hari itu semuanya masih kecil. Pada amatan saya, semuanya berumur bawah 15 tahun. Kerana itulah saya terperanjat dengan sikap mereka terutamanya kata-kata kesat yang keluar daripada mulut mereka. Persoalannya, bagaimana mereka mampu bersikap sedemikian?

Dalam bidang sosiologi, setiap kelakuan manusia dikaji berdasarkan rangkaian interaksi antara agensi-agensi masyarakat daripada yang paling kecil hingga yang paling besar. Individu itu sendiri adalah agensi yang paling kecil, diikuti dengan ibubapanya, adik-beradik, sanak-saudara, jiran-jiran, guru-guru, tokoh-tokoh dan idola masyarakat, dan akhirnya sesebuah masyarakat itu sendiri secara am.

Sukar untuk kita tentukan adakah budak-budak Melayu yang saya ceritakan di atas, sikap dan kelakuan menghina yang mereka tunjukkan itu adalah hasil pengaruh ibubapa atau ahli-ahli keluarga terdekat. Itu hanya boleh ditentukan melalui kajian mikro psikologi personaliti dan psikologi sosial. Namun kita boleh melihat kepada beberapa contoh kelakuan dan sikap di kalangan tokoh-tokoh masyarakat yang jikapun tidak banyak, pasti ada memberi pengaruh dan kesan.

Pada tahun 2007, ketika menghadiri sebuah program bersama pelajar-pelajar Malaysia di California, Amerika Syarikat, seorang menteri kabinet berbangsa Melayu telah dilaporkan mengeluarkan beberapa ungkapan yang dianggap menghina seorang pelajar berbangsa India. Dalam ucapannya, beliau menerangkan bagaimana pihak penjajah British membawa buruh India ke Tanah Melayu. Seraya berkata demikian, beliau memandang tepat ke arah seorang pelajar India di dalam dewan tersebut lalu berkata “that’s how we got Indians in Malaysia” (“kerana itulah di Malaysia ada orang-orang India”).

Kemudian, pada tahun 2010, timbul pula laporan bagaimana seorang pengetua sekolah menengah kebangsaan di Johor, ketika berucap dalam perhimpunan khas sempena perayaan Hari Kemerdekaan, dengan lantang berkata pelajar-pelajar Cina tidak diperlukan di sekolah itu. Dicanang beliau agar pelajar-pelajar Cina berpindah ke sekolah Cina atau pulang sahaja ke negara Cina. Kepada pelajar-pelajar India beragama Hindu pula beliau berkata, tali sembahyang yang dipakai di lengan dan di leher mereka umpama tali yang dipakai seekor anjing!

Dua contoh di atas adalah contoh kelakuan dan manifesti sikap yang ditonjolkan secara terbuka di khalayak ramai. Bayangkan apakah kata-kata yang mereka hemburkan dalam percakapan harian bersama ahli-ahli keluarga dan rakan-rakan? Pengetua sekolah menengah itu misalnya, kalau begitulah sikap beliau ketika berucap dalam perhimpunan, bayangkan sikap beliau ketika berbual bersama guru-guru (yang majoritinya berbangsa Melayu) atau ketika memarahi pelajar-pelajar berbangsa Cina dan India di pejabatnya? Bayangkan juga bagaimana sikap beliau ini boleh mempengaruhi guru-guru lain yang masih muda dan pelajar-pelajar Melayu di sekolah berkenaan?

Merujuk kembali kepada kerangka sosiologi yang diterangkan tadi, tidak adil sebenarnya untuk kita menyalahkan individu-individu seperti pengetua sekolah ini semata-mata. Sikap dan kelakuan mereka juga dipengaruhi suasana atau individu-individu yang lebih besar kedudukannya dalam masyarakat. Dalam konteks negara kita, mereka yang paling berpengaruh dan yang paling besar hebahan kata-kata mereka adalah pemimpin-pemimpin politik kerajaan.

Polemik bangsa dan agama memang sudah sebati dengan politik di Malaysia. Agak menyedihkan namun tidak dapat dielakkan. Setiap parti dan pertubuhan-pertubuhan yang mewakili bangsa-bangsa tertentu semuanya mahu tampil garang mempertahankan hak masing-masing. UMNO dan PERKASA misalnya, tidak putus-putus berteriak memberi amaran agar jangan ada yang berani mempertikaikan hak-hak orang Melayu. Diiringi pula dengan liputan meluas media arus perdana dan akhbar-akhbar tempatan.

Selalunya pihak yang diberi amaran itu memang tidak disebut dengan jelas. Namun, siapa lagi ianya ditujukan jika tidak kepada orang-orang bukan Melayu di negara kita. Teringat saya bagaimana beberapa kenalan berbangsa Cina mengeluh apabila anak-anak mereka yang bersekolah di sekolah kebangsaan takut untuk ke sekolah setelah terdengar ucapan-ucapan yang disampaikan dalam Perhimpunan Agung UMNO yang disiarkan secara langsung di televisyen.

Mungkin pemimpin-pemimpin politik ini tidak sedar kesan perbuatan dan kata-kata mereka. Mereka menakut-nakutkan orang-orang bukan Melayu, dan kesannya lahirlah perasaan marah yang menyebabkan mereka tidak mahu lagi mengundi mana-mana parti dan individu yang bersama dengan UMNO dan Barisan Nasional.

Dari sudut yang lain pula, kesan kata-kata keras ini menyebabkan ramai orang-orang Melayu daripada segenap lapisan masyarakat menjadi sombong dan hilang rasa hormat terhadap bangsa-bangsa yang lain. Apa sahaja yang dilakukan pemimpin-pemimpin akan dijadikan teladan. Maka, ramai tidak lagi berasa segan menghina dan melemparkan kata-kata keras terhadap bangsa-bangsa lain kerana rasionalnya, “kalau pemimpin politik boleh, mengapa kita tidak boleh?”

Budak-budak lelaki Melayu yang saya perhatikan di taman permainan beberapa minggu yang lalu itu adalah salah satu hasil daripada rantaian interaksi pemimpin dan masyarakat ini. Adakah ini sikap bangsa Melayu yang ingin dipupuk pemimpin-pemimpin UMNO, PERKASA dan pertubuhan-pertubuhan Melayu yang lain?

Bukanlah tujuan artikel ini untuk menghentam orang-orang Melayu semata-mata. Sifat prejudis ada pada semua bangsa. Sebagai seorang yang berkemahiran sedikit berbahasa Cina, saya tahu bagaimana sebahagian orang-orang Cina menghina dan mempersendakan orang-orang Melayu. Namun, dalam konteks negara kita, orang-orang Melayu sebagai kumpulan majoriti lebih bertanggungjawab menunjukkan teladan yang baik. Tambahan pula, kita orang-orang Melayu beragama Islam dan ajaran Islam itu mengajar kita saling hormat-menghormati, bukan menabur dan menyemai perasaan benci.