15 March, 2008

Party loyalty or Leader loyalty?

Mukhriz Mahathir wrote a letter to the PM.Which is naturally over publicized again by the media. What was suggested in the letter was for Pak Lah to resign after BN's performance for the 12th General Elections.

Putting aside that he is the son of the country's ex-premier his opinion is not at all out of line. All he did was wrote a letter and not announce to the whole world publicly that Pak Lah should step down.

Dumb and relics the seniors of UMNO are they called Mukhriz's action as disloyalty to the leader. Which happens all the time in any political party in the world. The old farts are probably shit scared that all that they get now will no longer be provided if Pak Lah steps down. So naturally everyone has to protect their rice bowls.

But honestly there is no such thing as being loyal to a leader when the leader indeed has fucked up. But what stays is loyalty to the party. A party can never never fuck up but a leader is always able to screw people dependent on him. SO what is the clear message here?

It is very clear that those who denies a fuck up that is pretty obvious are cronies. Party members should first be loyal to the party because the party stays even when the leaders change all the time.

SO, I don't see what was wrong what Mukhriz did. Nor it was something that could weaken the party. What he did simply is scary to cronies of the leader. Who are worried that their contracts will be pulled off and what ever they have invested will be left to just dust.


No comments: