或許，國陣並沒有預料，112大集會能夠掀起熱潮。
過去的紀錄顯示，不包括淨選盟大集會，如果是民聯號召的集會，一般上，出席者在萬人以內；即使是大規模動員，也很難突破2、3萬人。1萬到3萬人上街，可以理解是民聯的中堅分子，也是積極的反對者；不管民聯是否有表現，也不管國陣有否改變，他們都是吃了秤砣鐵了心，跟定了民聯。這樣的一個數目，是國陣能夠消化的數目；只要能夠控制在這個數目以內，對國陣的衝擊就有限。
國陣的期望，在於沉默的多數，如果更多人民保持觀望態度，就還有爭取他們的機會。國陣手上有各種的資源，民聯也會犯下錯誤；等待和爭取，這也是納吉遲遲不解散國會的原因。但是，112的人群，遠遠超過了國陣的預估，也翻轉了國陣的棋盤。不管是警方估計的5萬人，民聯稱的10萬人，甚至外界機構評估的15萬人，都比國陣預估的人數，翻了倍。多了好幾萬人，這些人是哪兒來的？他們為何會響應民聯的號召？是否政府和警方採取溫和姿態，鼓勵了更多人走上街？
這是國陣急著要找出的答案。
如果以10萬人作為一個參照數，代表著過去許多消極的民聯支持者，以及政治中立者，如今改變了態度；他們放棄了沉默的立場，投向民聯，成為積極的民聯支持者。這些人當中，過去沒有固定或堅定的政黨傾向；然而，他們是政治醒覺的一代，關心社會課題，重視國家的發展。他們被許多課題所牽引，從政府的施政、經濟發展的差距、環保的爭議，政界和公共服務界的貪腐，乃至選舉的公正透明等等，在在激發他們的關注。他們要一個有前途的國家，希望擁有一個更美好的社會；這也是公民社會的期盼。
當他們認為政府不能滿足這些期盼，或是政府的改革速度太慢，他們就站了出來，以行動表達意願。一旦民聯的訴求和他們契合，他們就走出沉默，放棄被動姿態，認同民聯的立場。
他們成為積極的反對者之後，會造成滾雪球的效應，影響更多的人群。當更多原來的沉默者放棄國陣，就是國陣要擔心的事。
至於問說，如果當局採取高壓方式，是否會阻止人們上街抗議？
我的答案是否定的。人們依然會走出來，如果遭到打壓，他們會更加憤怒；這股情緒，會發酵得更快，更遠。
國陣做對的事，就是以和平姿態回應，贏回了一些聲譽；否則結果會更糟。擔心之外，國陣能做的，就是加速改革，挽回其他沉默者的信心；至於民聯，要維持這種聲勢和動力，就應該避免犯錯。
伊斯蘭黨吉打州政府的措施，對民聯是一種傷害；“阿拉＂字眼的挑起和內鬨，也使民聯受挫；兩者處理不好，會是它滑下坡的開始。
Tay Tian Yan, Sin Chew Daily (English translation)
Barisan Nasional (BN) probably had not anticipated that the January 12 rally could cause a stir at all. Past records show that rallies initiated by Pakatan Rakyat, other than the Bersih rallies, could only manage under-10,000 attendance, at best 20,000 to 30,000 on full mobilisation.
The 10,000 to 30,000 that took to the streets could be easily seen as diehard supporters of the opposition pact that would remain loyal whether Pakatan had performed up to the mark or BN had put in any effort to change. Such a figure could be easily digested by BN and so long as the attendance was placed within this bracket, the impact it would leave on the ruling coalition would be minimal. BN laid its hopes on the silent majority. So long as these people adopted a wait-and-watch attitude, BN should be able to bring them into its fold.
BN has vast resources at its disposal and Pakatan can make mistakes at times. That explains why Najib prefers to wait instead of rushing to dissolve the Parliament.
The attendance of last weekend’s rally far exceeded the estimates of the BN government. Whether it was the 50,000 estimated by the police, the 100,000 claimed by BN, or even the 150,000 some others have estimated, the figure was way higher than what the BN had anticipated. Where did these additional participants come from? Why had so many answered Pakatan’s call? Could the moderate stance adopted by the police and government embolden the masses to take to the streets?
This is what BN was eager to find out.
If we take 100,000 as a reference, it shows that many erstwhile passive Pakatan supporters and political neutrals have indeed changed their minds. They refused to stay silent and chose to throw their arms around Pakatan. Some of them did not have a firm or solid political inclination in the past but have now begun to care about social issues and national development.
They were led there by a plethora of factors ranging from dismal government policies, discrepancies in economic development, environmental concerns, widespread public sector corruption and lack of transparency in electoral procedures, among others. They want a country with a bright future, a more promising society. When they felt the government had failed them, or the government had slackened in implementing its reform agenda, they rose up to demonstrate their feelings.
The moment Pakatan’s appeals met with their aspirations, they would walk out of their passivity and silent past to embrace Pakatan.
When they have become active opponents to the government, a snowballing effect would ensue, enticing more people to their camp. BN should become truly worried when more and more people have chosen to drop their silence, and the ruling coalition.
As for whether a tough crackdown could stop the people from going to the street, I would say no. People would still pour out onto the streets and if subjected to oppressive operations from the government, will be more enraged, bringing the anti-government sentiment way further and broader than anyone could cope with.
What BN did right was to respond with a peaceful gesture which has spared it from much more horrible eventualities. Something that BN can do now is to expedite reforms to win over the rest of the silent majority.
As for Pakatan, it has to make sure not to commit even the slightest mistakes to sustain the momentum. The policies of PAS-led Kedah state government have dealt a blow to the integrity of Pakatan Rakyat; so have the controversies over the use of the word “Allah.” Improper handling of either could signal the start of its downfall.
Tay Tian Yan, Sin Chew Daily (English translation)
Barisan Nasional (BN) probably had not anticipated that the January 12 rally could cause a stir at all. Past records show that rallies initiated by Pakatan Rakyat, other than the Bersih rallies, could only manage under-10,000 attendance, at best 20,000 to 30,000 on full mobilisation.
The 10,000 to 30,000 that took to the streets could be easily seen as diehard supporters of the opposition pact that would remain loyal whether Pakatan had performed up to the mark or BN had put in any effort to change. Such a figure could be easily digested by BN and so long as the attendance was placed within this bracket, the impact it would leave on the ruling coalition would be minimal. BN laid its hopes on the silent majority. So long as these people adopted a wait-and-watch attitude, BN should be able to bring them into its fold.
BN has vast resources at its disposal and Pakatan can make mistakes at times. That explains why Najib prefers to wait instead of rushing to dissolve the Parliament.
The attendance of last weekend’s rally far exceeded the estimates of the BN government. Whether it was the 50,000 estimated by the police, the 100,000 claimed by BN, or even the 150,000 some others have estimated, the figure was way higher than what the BN had anticipated. Where did these additional participants come from? Why had so many answered Pakatan’s call? Could the moderate stance adopted by the police and government embolden the masses to take to the streets?
This is what BN was eager to find out.
If we take 100,000 as a reference, it shows that many erstwhile passive Pakatan supporters and political neutrals have indeed changed their minds. They refused to stay silent and chose to throw their arms around Pakatan. Some of them did not have a firm or solid political inclination in the past but have now begun to care about social issues and national development.
They were led there by a plethora of factors ranging from dismal government policies, discrepancies in economic development, environmental concerns, widespread public sector corruption and lack of transparency in electoral procedures, among others. They want a country with a bright future, a more promising society. When they felt the government had failed them, or the government had slackened in implementing its reform agenda, they rose up to demonstrate their feelings.
The moment Pakatan’s appeals met with their aspirations, they would walk out of their passivity and silent past to embrace Pakatan.
When they have become active opponents to the government, a snowballing effect would ensue, enticing more people to their camp. BN should become truly worried when more and more people have chosen to drop their silence, and the ruling coalition.
As for whether a tough crackdown could stop the people from going to the street, I would say no. People would still pour out onto the streets and if subjected to oppressive operations from the government, will be more enraged, bringing the anti-government sentiment way further and broader than anyone could cope with.
What BN did right was to respond with a peaceful gesture which has spared it from much more horrible eventualities. Something that BN can do now is to expedite reforms to win over the rest of the silent majority.
As for Pakatan, it has to make sure not to commit even the slightest mistakes to sustain the momentum. The policies of PAS-led Kedah state government have dealt a blow to the integrity of Pakatan Rakyat; so have the controversies over the use of the word “Allah.” Improper handling of either could signal the start of its downfall.
No comments:
Post a Comment