Democracy（民主） or democrazy（疯狂示威）?

nillwong

在是一篇很好的分析。我没办法译为中文，希望英文不好的网友慢慢阅读。

翻译能力好的网友，请帮忙！


来源：http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/members_opinions_and_comments/democracy_or_democrazy_.html

Democracy or democrazy?

Monday, 13 May 2013 09:43am

©The Star (Used by permission) Comment By Roger Tan Democracy is about accepting finality through the ballot box and due process of law. IN the 2000 United States presidential election, despite Al Gore having won the popular vote, he did not get to become President. He received 266 votes and George W. Bush obtained 271 at the Electoral College due mainly to the vote recount fiasco in the state of Florida. The matter went all the way up to the US Supreme Court, which ruled 5-4 in favour of Bush. This was by far one of the most divisive and controversial US presidential elections, so much so that Bush was described as the President elected by the US Supreme Court. Even though Gore strongly disagreed with the apex court’s decision, he was nevertheless gracious in defeat. Indeed, it took a big man like him to admit defeat. I remembered his concession speech almost moved me to tears. Gore said: “Almost a century and a half ago, senator Stephen Douglas told Abraham Lincoln, who had just defeated him for the presidency, ‘Partisan feeling must yield to patriotism. I’m with you, Mr President, and God bless you.’ Well, in that same spirit, I say to president-elect Bush that what remains of partisan rancour must now be put aside, and may God bless his stewardship of this country. Now the US supreme court has spoken. Let there be no doubt, while I strongly disagree with the court’s decision, I accept it. I accept the finality of this outcome ... And tonight, for the sake of our unity as a people and the strength of our democracy, I offer my concession. I know that many of my supporters are disappointed. I am too. But our disappointment must be overcome by our love of country.” This is what democracy is all about – accepting finality through the ballot box and due process of law. Alas, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim refused to do so. He has vowed to move on with a “fierce movement” by holding protest rallies throughout Malaysia to challenge the 13th general election results. This is not democracy. If I may coin a new word for the Oxford’s English dictionary, it is democrazy! If we want to indulge in an orgy of rhetorics that Barisan Nasional won by massive fraud, then I say Pakatan must have won by massive lies spread over the social media such as that: > 40,000 foreigners were flown in from east Malaysia to vote in the peninsula; > a bomb planted by Barisan supporters had exploded at the Johor Baru immigration terminal in order to frighten Malaysians working in Singapore from coming home to vote; > new ballot boxes were added or exchanged when there was a blackout in Bentong in order to enable Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai to win. In fact, all sorts of unfounded allegations and rumours were mendaciously spewed with impunity by anonymous Facebook pages like “We Fully Support PKR” to cause anger and hatred among the electorate. It is really shocking to see how so many Malaysians actually believed in unverified rumours by even sharing them on social media. Many were also thinking irrationally in their arguments over the social media. A small number of them were sadly converted to vigilantes by taking the law into their hands. No wonder one recent study claimed that Facebook could actual ly send you mad by causing “psychotic episodes and delusions”! This explains why China has banned social media like Facebook and Twitter; otherwise it would have disintegrated long ago! One case that requires special mention is that of Chua Lai Fatt who was harassed by cyberbullies. He is of Indian descent but many people did not know that as an orphan he was adopted by a Chinese family. He actually speaks fluent Hokkien. A copy of his MyKad with his picture and Chinese name was posted and circulated on Facebook. It was really distressful to read all those abuses thrown at him until his family and friends came forward to explain. But nothing can be as distasteful as the picture of a mock altar with candles and joss sticks placed before Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak’s photograph. Also, no error could have been bigger than Anwar’s when he tweeted as early as 6.57pm on May 5 that Pakatan had won when votes in a majority of areas were still being counted! Is this what we call clean and fair elections? Bersih and its leaders should also take the blame by fuelling unverified rumours of tens of thousands of foreign voters. While I cherish my friendship with Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan, I must still say, personal friendship aside, that this time round Bersih has lost its credibility as a neutral and independent election watchdog. There is no doubt that it has done a marvellous job in raising public awareness about the importance of fair and clean elections. In fact, the high turnout during the election could be attributed to this greater public awareness. But during the campaigning period, it looked as if Bersih’s cause was no longer about fair and clean elections but rather in ensuring victory for Pakatan. It follows that if many still believe Barisan had won due to massive fraud, then it can also be argued in the reverse that Barisan could not have lost so badly if there had been tens of thousands of phantom voters and massive fraud. We must move on. The country needs to move on. We have had enough of all the politicking from the 12th to the 13th general elections. If we want to continue in this way until the 14th general election, it is only the rakyat who will suffer. If there is any evidence of wrongdoing, then they should produce it in the election court. A fortiori, the accusers owe it to Malaysians to provide such evidence in a court of law so that election results can be overturned or fresh elections can be called. But not through street protests any more. In fact, a total of 26 election petitions were filed after the 2008 elections, but none was overturned. It is sad to see that in this most divisive election in our nation’s history, many so-called independent and apolitical NGOs and religious bodies openly took sides. Some were even prepared to burn all the bridges with the Barisan government which they had taken pains to build over the years. But this is the time for national reconciliation. Each one of us plays a part in bringing healing to our divided land. Najib has said he is the Prime Minister for all Malaysians. So, there should be no witch-hunting. Neither should any voter or community be punished for making their decision through the democratic process. The new government must immediately address the issues which matter most to Malaysians, which are corruption and social injustice. At the same time, victors and losers must move on for the sake of national unity and reconciliation. Let us uphold democracy and not embrace democrazy. God bless our beloved Malaysia. > The writer is a senior lawyer.

sprig

如果美国的选举也和我们这样做票做到全民皆知，举世闻名
你看那个Al Gore 会不会这样了事？可能更激烈的都来

LZ你看问题不看本质哦

nillwong

sprig 发表于 13-5-2013 03:50 PM
如果美国的选举也和我们这样做票做到全民皆知，举世闻名
你看那个Al Gore 会不会这样了事？可能更激烈的都 ...

如果你具备“做票”的证据，请入禀选举法庭，而不是疯狂示威。

sprig

nillwong 发表于 13-5-2013 03:56 PM
如果你具备“做票”的证据，请入禀选举法庭，而不是疯狂示威。

入禀选举法庭? 请问法官谁委任？
最高元首委任，但需要首相提名。。
你认为你会提名一个公正的法官还是一个u help me, i help u 的法官？
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Court_of_Malaysia

请问民联有上届示威？他们不过是在stadium...只是人太多了。。。没办法，
谁叫大家都不认同那个“非法”政党的胜利。 大家认同的是华哥为首相。

三权分立是我国独立初期的模式，也是我们的立国之本
但现在搞到三权统一，警察/军队和政党和法律都是同样的abang adik

如果你能解释如何从小存钱买个百万cincin。可能我会相信你。。。
报纸登的，是真实故事。。。如果不真实utusan就被ROOOSMAH告了。。

nillwong

林冠英起诉Utusan三次，三次皆赢。你怎么说？

如果你是在法律界工作，大家的共识是，马来西亚的司法体系整体上依然具备相当程度的自主权、公正。

难道一宗诉讼案，民联赢的话叫做公正，民联输得话叫做国阵操纵？

sprig

nillwong 发表于 13-5-2013 04:18 PM
林冠英起诉Utusan三次，三次皆赢。你怎么说？

如果你是在法律界工作，大家的共识是，马来西亚的司法体系 ...

前上诉庭法官诺阿都拉（Mohd Noor Abdullah）今日警告，随着华裔在大选中背叛马来人，华裔必须准备好面对马来社会的“报仇”。
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/229912

这就是你说的共识？
还是你要说他在位的时候不是，他卸任后才是？


怕你忘记。。。提醒你下
Mohd Nor was the judge who had found then Kota Melaka MP Lim Guan Eng and present Penang chief minister guilty
under the PPPA over a leaflet linking then Malacca chief minister Rahim Thamby Chik with an underaged girl in 1999.

professiorKing

完全是一个用词不当的典型示范，过去的几场活动里，没有一个马拉西亚人民在疯狂的示威，人民只是和平的聚会，聆听他们心目中的最佳领袖发表演说。

你要谈民主？那好，我们就来谈民主，民主社会里，人民有权利去表达对执政者，当权者的不满，当然也有权利有选票去拒绝他们认为最差的人选。
好，一部分人民最终也那样做了，但是，胜选者怎么说？胜选者和他的支持者们怎么说？他们把失利归咎于一方，发表种族主义论，这些又是民主的表现？人民必须无时无刻感恩，并让他们永远执政？那么大可以去去修改宪法，不用大选，让马拉西亚每一个人民永远的感恩好了。
或者，当初就干脆选择共产主义好啦。

sprig

人民公正党实权领袖安华是在9月19日公布“林甘影片”的首8分钟片段，内容显示著名律师VK林甘正在通过电话洽谈幕后操纵高级法官的擢升以及内定司法案件的裁决。尽管电话另一端的人士身份不明，但是谈话脉络却显示对方极可能就是现任首席大法官阿末法鲁斯，他当时出任马来亚大法官兼代掌上诉庭主席。

林甘经典名句“it looks like me and sounds like me，but not me"

哈哈哈你能提供一些例子证明我国的司法公正？
这些是被暴出来的冰山一角， 我们不懂，毕竟媒体被管制。
我可不想像明福那样从开始的失足，然后改口自杀，最后“悬案”

疯狂的牛奶

我觉得那些国阵的破坏狂
才crazy
好端端的 跑来放铁钉？

来富

一看到你的标题，就知道你是枪手！
省省力气吧！你的主人快要灭亡了～
快点去出粮方为上策！

malaysian2012

美国人讲成熟民主的绩效制， 马来西亚讲不理性的两线恶斗制， 当民联引进台湾招数时， 马来西亚未来的政治只会越来越不成熟。

sprig

malaysian2012 发表于 13-5-2013 08:56 PM
美国人讲成熟民主的绩效制， 马来西亚讲不理性的两线恶斗制， 当民联引进台湾招数时， 马来西亚未来的政治只 ...

原来做票是成熟民主的绩效制

国阵的绩效制是什么？ 为什么在大选时不好好和人民说。。。
那些派钱的，条件式的u help me, i help u就不要说了。。。
那些威胁式的也不用说，美国人选举没有这些。。。你来说说国阵的绩效制是什么？

拜托，要做枪手不是不可以，因为这个是你的奴性。。我们不怪。
可是。。。说些有POINT的。。。不要说白话。。

malaysian2012

nillwong 发表于 13-5-2013 03:56 PM
如果你具备“做票”的证据，请入禀选举法庭，而不是疯狂示威。

对于民联红卫兵， 安华讲的话， 就是证据， 这些红卫兵是没有理性的， 你跟他们讲证据， 他们跟你讲他们“相信”。

malaysian2012

sprig 发表于 13-5-2013 09:01 PM
原来做票是成熟民主的绩效制

国阵的绩效制是什么？ 为什么在大选时不好好和人民说。。。

安华讲做票， 你就信咩， 你那么单纯的， 如果做票， 一早就嬴回雪州与槟州啦， 用脑思考一下。

NBK1965

山芭老当然不懂翻译啦，看都不懂，敢帖出来，回你的山芭去。

dupont378

malaysian2012 发表于 14-5-2013 12:32 AM
对于民联红卫兵， 安华讲的话， 就是证据， 这些红卫兵是没有理性的， 你跟他们讲证据， 他们跟你讲他们“ ...

民主的前提是不能够有特权阶级，
大马的特权阶级太庞大。。。

NBK1965

malaysian2012 发表于 14-5-2013 12:34 AM
安华讲做票， 你就信咩， 你那么单纯的， 如果做票， 一早就嬴回雪州与槟州啦， 用脑思考一下。

当然要去像你这样山芭老比较多的地方做票比较容易成功，是不是，山芭老。

cheeleng

malaysian2012 发表于 14-5-2013 12:34 AM
安华讲做票， 你就信咩， 你那么单纯的， 如果做票， 一早就嬴回雪州与槟州啦， 用脑思考一下。

如果不是我国的SPR失去了公信力！你以为安华讲什么，人家就相信？
如果墨汁真的不会褪色，选举层序透明，会出现那么多谣言？
有没有做票我不知道，我知道的是SPR在我国人民心目中已经没有公信力了！
其实不止SPR，还有很多政府机构都让人失去信心才会这样！
你可以选择不信，但是人家可以选择信！我就选择合理怀疑！

candy

看到是馬華黨報完全沒mood读了

candy

malaysian2012 发表于 14-5-2013 12:34 AM
安华讲做票， 你就信咩， 你那么单纯的， 如果做票， 一早就嬴回雪州与槟州啦， 用脑思考一下。

用脑思考一下啦! 沒有做票,民聯執政了