Today, two politicians suffering from sexual scandals are launching a new political game respectively. Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim is going to contest in the Permatang Pauh by-election as a major step taken for his 916 power seizing plan. Meanwhile, Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek declared that he will be contesting in MCA's party elections in October, marking his comeback to politics.
Compared to Anwar, Chua is undoubtedly “lucky”. Anwar was imprisoned before, got punched in the eyes and he is now facing another charge. As for Chua, he can still unashamedly face the media, talking about his “courage to admit mistakes”.
Datuk Ong Tee Keat said that “tainted” political leaders should face up to society's values and norms instead of blaming others for exposing their misconduct. We know who he was referring to.
Needless to say, this has triggered new controversies.
Firstly, should personal moral behaviours be a consideration for the selection of a party's leader?
| "I'm wrong, but the others are more despicable." |
Secondly, is Chua sincere to admit his misconduct or is it just a political struggle result?
We will leave the first controversy to MCA members. As for the second controversy, I believe different people will have different views.
We can actually survey Chua from two points of view. From the political point of view, he has great political performances. This is in fact very controversial and complicated as people from different camps may make a totally different conclusion.
On the other hand, morality has a universal standard. Right means right and wrong means wrong. You cannot simply rationalise your own behaviours because others have exposed your misconduct by a dirty means. Of course, morality should not be counted in political performance. But once a person is found morally guilty, even he has owned up, he will still have to accept the criticism from the society and pay the price. This is what we call politics.
Moreover, there are differences between introspection and admission of misconduct. Introspection is humble as a person will review his fault on the basis of admission. He will further prove that he will redeem himself by a thorough change.
A person needs courage to admit his fault but it does not mean that he will have introspection. Just like a murder suspect has courage to admit his murder in court but it is not necessarily means that he has reviewed his fault, understands that he has done something very wrong and make up his mind not to do it again.
The controversy about Chua is whether he really made the confession with remorse?
To Chua, he is a person who has committed a wrongdoing, as well as a victim who was secretly videotaped. Such a “confusing” status may lead him falls into the confusion of “I'm wrong, but the others are more despicable”. At this moment, the confusion between right and wrong seems to be unable to be clarified.
No comments:
Post a Comment