The power paradigm

Most of us know and understand the power paradigm in the applied form. It is often made visible by the application of authority through power in our daily lives.

Whether at home, in the office, or in the community or at the service counter, ordinary people can see and recognise raw application of power.

Its counterpart is force. The forced opening and closure of Jalan Cheras Lama in Selangor are two sides of one example. Daily, the newspapers appear to be full of such power models, role-players and actors. Why?

A paradigm is a world view that defines what one thinks and believes about life, and also espouses as a model for living. It expounds one’s espoused theory for life and presumably helps explain one’s lived theory of life. If there is a gap between the two ‘theories’ as defined, then there is a gap of integrity in one’s life. The most accurate root word for ‘world view’ is the German word weltanschauung , which implies both thinking and action.

Since Thomas Kuhn popularised the word ‘paradigm’ in ‘The Structure of Scientific Revolutions’, there has been no better equivalent word for a thinking-acting system for human beings.

I prefer the word ‘world views’ over ‘paradigm’ as this encompasses two composite sets of ideas: of both a view about the world and also a view about living one’s lived life.” It is normative and positive; includes both faith and action.

In his original argument, even Kuhn did mean exactly such ‘actions’ and defined it “a paradigm shift;” an almost religious-like shift in the understanding and assumptions one has made about life and living.

To me, the only way to understand what happened on March 8 in Malaysia is vide the paradigm shift of a newer world view. All the players and actors need a paradigm shift from their traditional perspective.

Unfortunately, the Umno leadership and membership is at a loss as to how to define and understand this paradigm shift. To reduce all that happened to a mere “Internet phenomenon” is simplistic at best as I have argued previously .

Worse are the reactions (through actions) by the Umno-led government; as evidenced by the many little power-plays, as reported in the media, against ordinary people. I hope they do not forget that 49 percent of the people consciously voted against the older governance model, especially during the last four years of unfulfilled promises.

If we think deeply, this was the same reason the same people gave Pak Lah a 92 percent mandate in 2004. He had promised to clean up the government after about 22 years of abuse of power and authority. But, unfortunately he could not, but the people held him accountable because he did not. That is the nature of leadership and accountability.

Irrelevant paradigm

Beginning with this column I will reflect on 10 paradigm parameters which define the ‘power paradigm’ and will argue why this older paradigm of power and authority is not relevant any more in the newer ‘Internetworked world’. This word is a compound of three sets of applied concepts; one is the Internet, second the network, and third work itself, which creates value. This word defines, to my mind, the newer paradigm almost exactly.

There are 10 challenges and thus opportunities which redefine the power paradigm which should force an imperative for a mindset change or a paradigm shift among ‘power players’. The greatest need is for Malaysians to change our hearts and mind and move from the power paradigm model towards a ‘stewardship and responsibility paradigm’ model within our world views.

The first and most effective parameter of the power paradigm is the belief that ‘power, manipulation and control’ are absolute and the final form of accountability for any manager or power operator. We see evidence of this every day.

Two examples illustrate my point. First is the accusation that DAP national chairperson Karpal Singh insulted the Perak royalty when he declared that Sultan’s instruction to the menteri besar to rescind the transfer of the religious department head was “unconstitutional”.

The stewardship and responsibility paradigm model would argue that ‘truth of the matter’ is the most important criterion in determining what is right. Karpal has clarified that he was only giving a legal opinion on the matter.

The Perak royals are learned and can fully understand this point. But the very nature of their role and responsibilities requires them to stay out of this political skirmish. And they should. What amuses me is that it is the Umno leadership that has taken umbrage with this comment, not the Perak royalty. I wonder why. Is it because the incumbent is an Umno member? Is this not selective prosecution?

Second is the sedition charge against blogger par excellence, Raja Petra Kamurudin (RPK). The Sedition Act defines sedition as an action against the public or national interest.

But the reaction to RPK’s blog-post shows evidence of the ‘power, manipulation and control’ mindset – or how this ordinary citizen, who is innocent until proven guilty, is being mishandled by the power system. It is raw power because the whole thing smells of selective persecution.

Alternative approach

The alternative paradigm would reject the parameters of power, manipulation and control and recognise the parameters of influence, networks and partnerships. To understand this, we must first understand the difference between power and influence.

Power is an authority-centred approach to resolve contentious issues. Power uses authority to enforce decisions, often unilaterally. Authority-based decisions are a poor alternative. Ketuanan Melayu is an authority-based paradigm of thinking and being. The BN is still not an alliance of equals. There is Umno and the ‘others’ – who are now trying to identify and define their real identity.

Influence is an information and knowledge-based approach requiring reason to resolve issues. Influence uses relationships to communicate reasonably. The Internetworked world is based on influence communicated via networks and partnerships.

Unlike the power paradigm, the responsibility paradigm uses and allows equal partnerships, and only allows reason as the mediator in the process of convincing someone. Pakatan Rakyat is circumstantially forced to operate as a partnership of different equals; it will and can become a true partnership of equals.

March 8 shifted the goal-posts of the paradigm of politics in Malaysia. It would do all political parties good to understand this shift. There is no longer a singular ‘titanic way’ of viewing reality; today there are many constructions of reality depending on who you to talk to.

The sooner that Umno realises this, the better for all concerned; otherwise, we will witness the next tsunami wiping out even the very originators of this nation.

As is said, real change is only possible when one breaks down the old and rearranges the new.

Only then can you unfreeze, and refreeze the changed paradigm. May God Bless Malaysia through this journey of change and changing.