LETTER | A few days ago when DAP’s Tony Pua and Ong Kian Ming suggested that Pakatan Harapan should explore and discuss Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin’s olive branch offer, they were snubbed by their supporters and social media followers.6

In my opinion, the offer made by the Perikatan Nasional (PN) government was golden, if not once in a lifetime, an opportunity to enact reforms and the real winner from this deal is the rakyat.

I am very certain people like Pua, a strategist, and Ong, a political scientist, have put lots of thought into it before revealing their intention to the public. 

Unfortunately, their intention was not properly presented from a strategic communication perspective, and a lack of unity from their colleagues in Pakatan Harapan.

In politics, it’s not what you say but rather how you say it. It’s more about understanding the factors that actually engage people or open them up to your idea and perhaps get them to see something a little bit differently.

Most Malaysians can easily misinterpret and misunderstand their intention, which I have always attributed to our lack of political science and economics knowledge. 

I bet there are some voters in Pua’s and Ong’s constituencies who have no idea what is “two-thirds majority” or what were the benefits of the reforms from the olive branch.

Harapan missed out on the chance to take advantage of a weak government to get what is best for the country and the rakyat. Ultimately, the goal is to ensure we are supporting the lesser of two evils. 

Electoral and political reforms are needed to solve many of the root causes of Malaysia’s economic and social issues. The proposed anti-hopping law, if enacted, could be a game-changer for our political landscape.

If you have strong political science knowledge, or in fact common sense, you would know that no government of the day under a democratic system would pass the anti-hopping law.

This is because the priority of any government of the day is to remain in power, everything else is secondary. They have no carrot at all because as the government, you would always want the opposition to jump over to your ship so you can continue sailing.

So when PN offered the deal, it was literally a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to grab and enact that reform, and the rakyat would be the clear winner from the bipartisan reforms. Not to mention the two-term prime minister position.

Not many Malaysians would understand the opportunity cost that was presented in the olive branch that was so quickly shot down by the other component parties of the opposition and their supporters.

Pua and Ong must understand that most ordinary Malaysians lack strong economics and political science knowledge to make sense of the olive branch deal. 

Plus, during times like these, most want instant gratification rather than delayed gratification. When their intention was misinterpreted, it’s easy to quickly accuse both DAP members as being ignorant, selfish or blinded by power.

When people are struggling to put food on the table now, most would also immediately assume that the DAP members were more interested in playing the chess of politics instead of going to the ground to help the people.

Pua and Ong had valid reasons to explore the PN deal but they made a mistake in their communication style to influence their supporters. 

The biggest loser from this deal is not Harapan but the rakyat. Pua and Ong were right with their intention but they were cursed by knowledge: once you know something, you tend to assume everyone else knows it too.

Malaysians must be taught to analyse everything without bias. It is when they look at everything from their “woke, politically correct” perspective, their judgment is clouded. 

Many just don’t seem to think with an open mind. This is also a reminder to politicians: Make your complex ideas accessible.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.