“The individual cannot bargain with the State. The State recognises no coinage but power: and it issues the coins itself.”

- Ursula K Le Guin, ‘The Dispossessed’

There is this rather disingenuous meme amongst a certain section of the punditry class that likes to go on about how Bersih has strayed from its original goal hence they are not in support of the upcoming rally. Add to this, statements from the Umno state that Bersih has become the tool of the opposition.

When people talk of clean and fair elections, what they are really talking about is a system of governance. Elections do not exist in a vacuum. While people may vote in corrupt governments (as many Malaysians did and still do), corrupt governments in order to maintain their hegemony seek to ensure that elections are rigged in their favour.

This rigging is part of a system of governance that does violence to the democratic processes. In other words, it is not in the interest of corrupt governments to have free and fair elections, even though citizens may vote in corrupt governments in compromised electoral processes. It goes without saying that democracy is messy and electoral systems are plagued with inconsistencies.

Now we either believe in democracy or we go the so-called Asian values way, as Singapore’s Harry Lee articulated back in the day - “It is necessary to try and put some safeguards into the way in which people use their votes to bargain, to coerce, to push, to jostle and get what they want without running the risk of losing the services of the government, because one day, by mistake, they will lose the services of the government... You unscramble Singapore, well, you'll never put Humpty Dumpty together again.” - On tweaking the one-man one-vote system after losing two seats to non-PAP candidates, The Straits Times, Dec 24, 1984.

Understand now, I am not arguing against independent institutions. I am not arguing against organisations being independent of political parties. I am not arguing against so-called watchdog organisations. I am not arguing against non-partisanship. I am making the argument that partisanship does not necessarily carry the implications that critics of Bersih say it does.

Of course, when people speak of non-partisanship what they really mean is “independence”. Independence is normally defined as being separate from whatever forces that are shaping the system. Independence implies credibility, which is fine and something that democratic societies require. However, partisanship does not necessarily mean devoid of credibility.

The idea that Bersih has strayed from its original intent is symptomatic of the myopic vision of our political elites and the intelligentsia which services a cottage industry of non-governmental lobbies, each concerned with protecting its own turf. As I said, free and fair election and governmental corruption are not mutually exclusive.

Would it have been better if Bersih remained an electoral watchdog and remained silent as to why we need free and fair elections or why we need to voice our discontent?

I made this argument during the last Bersih rally - “They should continue advocating the idea that peaceful demonstrations of public discontent are the foundation of liberty and that everyone has the right - even those people whose views we disagree with - to use our public spaces to voice their discontent. Now you could argue that this is not the stated goal of Bersih but anyone familiar with their literature and public statements would realise that this has been the backbone of their rhetoric which so far has translated into action.”

Would it have been more credible to remain silent in the face of the systemic breakdown and merely be content with advocating electoral reform? Would it have been credible to not align the organisation with like-minded organisations, individuals and political parties and using the resources of those groups and individuals to mobilise not only their bases but also non-aligned citizens? Would it have been more credible to not ask for systemic reforms that are integral to electoral reform?...