Politics Should Never Be the Source of Our Moral Values

By Dr Jahaberdeen Mohamed Yunoos

 

Politics should never be the source of moral values, national unity, or genuine human compassion. If anything, politics is often the art of division disguised as governance. The sooner we realise this truth, the sooner we can begin the serious task of building a society rooted in empathy, justice, and human dignity—values that transcend race, religion, and the pursuit of power.

We must reject the naïve expectation that political actors will lead the moral or spiritual direction of a nation. Their primary motivation is not the cultivation of a just and humane society—it is the acquisition and retention of power. Power brings influence, wealth, and control. That is the core pursuit of politics, and moral integrity is rarely its compass.

Populism over Principles

Politicians, especially in democracies, do not govern by principle. They govern by numbers. This means they will always prioritise populist narratives that appeal to the majority, even if it marginalises the minority or undermines long-term societal well-being. Principles of justice, compassion, and equality are often sacrificed at the altar of electoral gain.

In Malaysia, political rhetoric continues to revolve around cmunal identity—race and religion are the favourite themes. “Defending race and religion” becomes a repeated slogan, not a deeply held conviction. It is used to invoke fear, provoke insecurity, and consolidate support among one’s perceived political base. Instead of challenging racial and religious bigotry, many politicians exploit it. They do not unite the people; they divide and conquer.

Disturbingly, we are now seeing younger politicians emulate and perpetuate these same divisive and opportunistic political behaviours. Many of them, rather than becoming reformers, are merely more eloquent versions of the past. They adopt the same playbook—emotionally charged slogans, racial pandering, manufactured outrage, and short-term symbolism over genuine substance. The same toxic cycle continues, just with younger faces.

Race and Religion as Political Tools

True leadership uplifts, educates, and unites. But political survival in Malaysia often depends on the opposite—on creating imagined enemies and defending imagined threats. Race and religion are weaponised to maintain political roles and secure voter loyalty. When Malaysians are divided, there is always room for a politician to present themselves as a “protector” of their group.

This strategy has devastating consequences for national unity. Our institutions, policies, and even educational content are often influenced more by racial arithmetic than by universal ethics. Policies are frequently crafted to appease communal insecurities rather than to promote justice across the board. The language of equality is rarely spoken in Parliament unless it is politically safe.

In schools, children are subtly segregated by language streams and cultural framing. Many grow up with limited exposure to other communities. By the time they are adults, this lack of socialisation becomes fertile ground for suspicion and prejudice—ready to be exploited by politicians.

Toxic Values Reinforced by Political Convenience

Politics in Malaysia not only fails to challenge regressive values—it reinforces them. The blind obedience to authority, the culture of silence in the face of wrongdoing, patriarchal structures, homophobia, and the fear of difference are often defended as “tradition” or “Asian values.” These are not values; they are chains.

Survivors of domestic abuse are often urged to stay silent “for the family.” Religious dissenters are demonised. Victims of racism are told not to “question the system.” And politicians, ever pragmatic, rarely challenge these oppressive norms. Why would they? These norms help preserve the status quo. These norms help win elections.

Instead of guiding citizens toward more ethical and compassionate thinking, politicians fuel the very toxicities that keep people divided, fearful, and emotionally reactive. The more divided and reactive the population, the easier it is to control.

The Illusion of Reform

We hear much about “national reform,” especially when new coalitions come to power. But reform is not merely changing faces or renaming institutions. True reform requires educating the citizenry, fostering critical thinking, and promoting a culture of compassion and civic responsibility. This is exactly what most politicians fear.

A thinking, compassionate, and morally upright population is difficult to manipulate. It demands answers. It sees through empty slogans. It refuses to be ruled by fear. This is why we rarely see political platforms that genuinely promote critical education, interfaith understanding, or deep institutional reform. Those who try are often sidelined.

Even judicial independence, media freedom, and anti-corruption efforts are often used selectively—highlighted when politically convenient and buried when they threaten vested interests. The lack of consistency itself is a form of moral decay.

Where Then Do We Learn Our Values?

If politics cannot teach us values, where do we learn them? The answer must be: from ourselves, from our families, our teachers, our communities, and our own personal reflection. We must reclaim the responsibility of nurturing our own moral compass.

Movements like Rapera—which stand for nurturing thinking and compassionate citizens—recognise this need. They aim to raise a generation that transcends the limits of race and religion, that sees humanity first before ethnicity, and that values justice over blind loyalty. The future of our nation depends on such citizens—not on career politicians.

We must begin asking ourselves the right questions: Are our leaders making us better human beings? Are they encouraging unity, or division? Are they fostering strength of character, or fear and dependency? Do they want us to think—or merely to follow?

Conclusion

The time has come for us to stop expecting politicians to be our moral guides. They were never meant to be. They were meant to govern within frameworks created by a society with moral clarity—not to define those morals for us.

We must build a moral foundation that is citizen-led, not politician-driven. National unity, human dignity, and compassion must not be the slogans of political campaigns—they must be the lived values of our daily lives.

Politics should never be the source of our values. Our humanity should be.

END.

Politics and Business should not mix !

 The fusion of political power with business interests is a lived reality that poses serious risks to our democracy, economy, and social fabric. This isn’t about pointing fingers but about understanding the dangers and reminding ourselves why we need to keep these spheres distinct.

In a healthy democracy, the government should first serve the people, not corporations or elites. When business interests influence politics, democracy is compromised, and policies benefit a few well-connected individuals rather than the rakyat.

This is particularly risky for Malaysia, where democratic institutions are still maturing and vulnerable to such influence.

A democracy influenced by business interests is a democracy weakened, and preserving its integrity means keeping these lines clear.

Governments are meant to be facilitators, creating conditions to allow businesses to flourish. This means ensuring a fair and transparent regulatory framework, investing in infrastructure, and fostering innovation. However, when governments start working for specific business interests, they stray from their primary duty of serving the rakyat.

After 65 years of independence haven’t we heard all the stories. 

High-profile corruption cases that make headlines, for instance, revealing the ugly nexus between politics and business. It’s a pattern that repeats itself, and unless we remain vigilant, it will continue.

Corruption doesn’t just rob us of money – it robs us of trust in our leaders and institutions.

When public funds are siphoned off due to corrupt practices, who suffers? It’s the everyday Malaysian. Resources that should go to schools, hospitals, and infrastructure instead line the pockets of the powerful. This isn’t just a cautionary tale; it’s our reality, and we need to demand better.

The market is distorted. We must remind ourselves of the damage done to our economy when politics meddles in business. In a fair market, competition should drive innovation and growth. But when businesses secure government favouritism through political connections, it stifles competition. This is something we see far too often in Malaysia, with politically linked companies getting the lion’s share of contracts and benefits.

What happens then? Smaller businesses – especially the small and medium-sized enterprises that are the backbone of our economy – are left to struggle. Innovation stalls, prices rise, and ultimately, we, the consumers, bear the brunt. If we want a thriving economy, we need markets that are free from political interference.

Trust is the cornerstone of any functioning society. Yet, the mixing of politics and business erodes this trust. When Malaysians see leaders prioritising corporate interests over public welfare, it breeds cynicism and apathy.

We’ve all felt it – the frustration of seeing decisions being made that seem to be more about lining someone’s pockets than serving the people. This erosion of trust can lead to something even more dangerous: social unrest.

In Malaysia, where economic and social divides already exist, the perception of a corrupt elite can spark discontent. We’ve seen movements and protests arise from this very frustration. To avoid further disillusionment and unrest, we need transparency and accountability in both politics and business.

We also need to talk about the growing gap between the rich and the poor – a gap that’s often widened when politics and business get too cosy.

We can’t ignore the fact that political favouritism has contributed to this inequality. When policies favour a select few, the majority are left behind, struggling to make ends meet.

It is about real lives – about families who can’t afford proper education for their children or adequate healthcare. When business elites and politicians collaborate to serve their own interests, they perpetuate cycles of poverty and limit

opportunities for many Malaysians. We must remember that true progress is inclusive – it leaves no one behind.

So let’s talk about ethics. When politics and business mix, ethical standards often erode – politicians may seek personal gain, and businesses may ignore regulations for profit. This decline in ethics affects every-one.

In Malaysia, we’ve seen how environmental and labour rights can take a back seat when profits are on the line, which isn’t sustainable. Whether it’s in politics or business, our leaders must act with integrity and prioritise the rakyat’s best interests. The entrenched blend of politics and business makes it hard for new governments to implement reforms. Even with leadership changes, the old guard often holds sway through longstanding business networks, acting as a “shadow government” that resists economic, bureaucratic, and political reforms.

Efforts to dismantle monopolies, ensure transparent procurement, or reform public institutions often face pushback from these interests. True reform requires not only political will but also breaking down these deep-rooted power networks.

What can we do about this then?

It starts with us – the people. We need to stay informed, hold our leaders accountable, and demand transparency.

Campaign finance reform, stronger regulations, and independent oversight are all critical. But perhaps most importantly, we must keep reminding ourselves and others of the importance of separating politics from business.

Malaysia’s future depends on it. Let’s not wait for the next scandal or crisis to wake us up. Instead, let’s stay vigilant and proactive, ensuring that our democracy and economy serve the people, not the powerful few.

This is our country, our future, and it’s up to us to protect it.

Senior lawyer Datuk Seri Dr Jahaberdeen Mohamed Yunoos is the founder of Rapera, a movement which encourages thinking and compassion among Malaysians. The views expressed here are entirely his own.

The illusion of power: Why we must remain humane no matter our role

 IN life, many of us take on roles that carry influence and authority – whether as judges, lawyers, ministers, CEOs, police officers, or public servants.

These positions command respect, sometimes fear, and often come with perks that give the illusion of personal greatness. But therein lies the danger: it is easy to be carried away by the outward respect and forget that it is the position, not the person, that is being honoured.

Since my teenage years, I have had a keen interest in observing people and the unfolding of their lives. I noticed how some were gentle and humble in power, while others became arrogant, cruel, or dismissive of those beneath them.

Over time, I also began to see how life has a way of humbling even the most powerful – especially those who allowed the intoxication of authority to get the better of them.

I find it sad to have observed that many individuals fall into the trap of losing touch with who they really are. They become so usurped by their roles or positions that they mistake their titles for their identity.

It is a dangerous illusion. Because if they live a long life, they may eventually be subjected to the silent torture of being alone with someone they do not know – themselves.

The outer world fades, and what remains is the question: Who am I without the power? And for some, that question becomes unbearable.

History has shown us that not only have highly revered political leaders suffered unhappy and hollow final years, but many others with prestigious positions – senior judges, senior civil servants, corporate giants, popular leaders, celebrated academics – have met similar fates.

Their earlier years may have been filled with recognition, influence, and admiration. But when retirement comes and the applause fades, many are left restless, bitter, or even depressed – especially if they had never cultivated their inner lives or relationships beyond their titles.

Take, for example, the stories of once-feared leaders or senior government officials. Many of them, upon retirement, find themselves lonely or forgotten.

The late President Suharto of Indonesia, once one of the most powerful men in South-East Asia, spent his final years in near-isolation, facing public anger and legal scrutiny over corruption.

The reverence that once surrounded him turned into silent disapproval and, in many quarters, public disdain. It wasn’t just political backlash – it was the natural reaction to the way he exercised power.

In Malaysia, we too have seen powerful individuals – ministers, corporate figures, enforcement officers and so on – who once appeared untouchable, but ended up facing court charges, social rejection, or quiet retirement without the fanfare they once enjoyed.

The respect, the headlines, the invitations – all of it vanishes quickly once the position is gone. And for those who did not prepare inwardly – who mistook the prestige of the post for personal greatness – it becomes a very bitter realisation.

Compare this with individuals who remained grounded even at the peak of their careers. Former South African president Nelson Mandela, for instance, is remembered not just for his political role but for his humaneness, his humility, and his ability to forgive. Even after stepping down, he continued to be revered – not for his title, but for the character he embodied. Then there is Mahatma Gandhi. That is the kind of legacy worth leaving behind.

One can also think of those in simpler roles – teachers, nurses, smalltown mayors –who treat people with kindness, dignity, and fairness, despite not having national recognition or massive power.

Strangely enough, their legacy often lasts longer in the hearts of those they touched than the fame of those who climbed higher but treated others poorly.

Ultimately, it is not power that defines us, but how we behave when we have it. Life has a rhythm that cannot be avoided.

Old age comes. Retirement comes. Even memory fades. And the inner punishment for those who were cruel or self-absorbed in power often comes not in courts or newspapers, but in silence, regret, and the emptiness of a soul that spent too much time chasing applause and too little time nurturing humanity.

So let us remind ourselves: no matter our role in life – whether as a senior judge, minister or a street cleaner – treat others with basic human decency. Be kind even when you don’t have to. Be humble even when people praise you.

Use your influence to make others’ lives easier, not harder. Because when the world stops clapping, all that remains is the truth of who you are.

And that is what life eventually reveals.

Knowing this, for those who choose to take the seemingly difficult but righteous road, I say: continue. Walk it with quiet strength. You may not always be praised, and you may even be misunderstood. But at least you have avoided the delusion.

You are living in alignment with your conscience and with the laws of nature that favour balance, integrity, and inner peace.

That, in the end, is the real success.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Senior lawyer Dato Sri Dr Jahaberdeen Mohamed Yunoos is the founder of Rapera, a movement which encourages thinking and compassion among Malaysians. The views expressed here are entirely the writer’s own.

How Our Society Is Shaped by the Framing of Collective Thinking

by Dr Jahaberdeen Mohamed Yunoos

Promoting, understanding and analyzing “thinking” is an important endeavor of the Rapera movement.  This is because the power of collective thinking is often underestimated and overlooked in its influence on shaping societies. I believe society in general is unaware of its pervasive influence. Our thoughts, beliefs, and values as a society are not merely individual constructs but are deeply influenced by the way they are framed collectively. The framing of collective thinking embodies the narratives, ideologies, and perspectives that shape our understanding of the world. In this article, I will explore how our society is profoundly affected by the way our collective thinking is framed and the implications this has for our social, political, and cultural landscape.

One of the most important conduits through which collective thinking is framed is the media. Mass media, including television, radio, newspapers, and digital platforms, have an unparalleled impact on shaping public opinion. The way issues are presented, the narratives that are emphasized, and the voices that are amplified all play a pivotal role in shaping our collective understanding of the world. This is an important fact for policy makers, reformists and organizations involved in change dynamics to keep in mind.

Media outlets can frame issues in various ways, emphasizing different aspects of a story, and thereby influencing public perception. For instance, the framing of a behavior done in the name of religion as either a dangerous extreme behaviour or a normal religious behaviour can lead to starkly different public reactions. The way media frames these events has a direct impact on how society perceives them, often influencing support or opposition to the causes at hand.

Furthermore, the media's selection of news stories and their placement within the news can prioritize certain issues over others. This can lead to a lopsided focus on certain topics, while ignoring others that may be equally or more important. Such framing choices can have far-reaching consequences on societal priorities, influencing public discourse and policy decisions.

Politics is another area where the framing of collective thinking is particularly potent. Politicians and political parties use framing techniques to influence public opinion and garner support for their agendas. This often involves framing issues in ways that resonate with their base or appeal to a broader audience. Politicians may try to create the kind of thinking they want to achieve their agenda by using the framing technique. For example, a party that is race based or religious based may frame diversity of race and religion as a threat to their own race or religion.

One common framing strategy is the use of emotionally charged language and rhetoric. By framing issues in a way that elicits strong emotional responses, politicians can mobilize their supporters and galvanize public opinion. This can sometimes lead to a polarization of society, as different political factions use opposing frames to advance their own interests. The Nation of course may be split asunder merely to accommodate the political quest for power.

In addition to emotional framing, the selective presentation of facts and statistics is another powerful tool in political framing. Politicians and interest groups may cherry-pick data that supports their positions while ignoring or discrediting data that contradicts their narratives. This selective framing can make it difficult for the public to make informed decisions and contributes to the spread of misinformation.

Collective thinking is also framed by cultural and social influences. Our cultural norms, values, and traditions shape our worldview and influence our beliefs and behaviors. These cultural frameworks are often deeply ingrained and can be difficult to challenge or change. Social institutions, such as family, schools, religious organizations, and community groups, also play a role in framing collective thinking. These institutions transmit values and beliefs from one generation to the next, reinforcing societal norms and expectations. For example, the way history is taught in schools can frame the collective understanding of a nation's past and its impact on the present. It is not exaggerative to say that the nature of the collective thinking will determine whether the society will progress or regress in the future. 

In the digital age, technology and social media platforms have become significant players in framing collective thinking. Social media algorithms often prioritize content that aligns with a user's existing beliefs, creating echo chambers where people are exposed to information that confirms their preconceptions. This reinforcement of existing beliefs can contribute to polarization and limit exposure to diverse perspectives.

Furthermore, the rapid spread of information on social media platforms can lead to the viral dissemination of both accurate and false information. The way a piece of information is framed can determine whether it goes viral or is debunked. This phenomenon has significant consequences for public opinion, as false or misleading information can spread rapidly and shape collective thinking.

Undeniably, our society is influenced by the way our collective thinking is framed. From media and communication to politics, culture, and technology, various factors contribute to the framing of our collective consciousness. Recognizing the power of framing is essential for understanding how societal norms, beliefs, and values are shaped and perpetuated. 

As individuals, it is important to critically evaluate the framing of information and be mindful of the influences that shape our thinking. By engaging with diverse perspectives, questioning dominant narratives, and seeking out reliable sources of information, we can contribute to a more informed and balanced collective consciousness. Additionally, holding media outlets, politicians, and institutions accountable for the way they frame issues can help ensure a more transparent and equitable shaping of our society's collective thinking. Let’s not forget that as a Nation, we become what we think we are.

END.

Collaborative Empowerment: How Citizens Can Safeguard Against Exploitation by Political and Economic Elites for Collective Well-being

by Dr Jahaberdeen Mohamed Yunoos. 

In a world where political and economic elites often wield significant power and influence, citizens must recognize the importance of working together to protect their interests and enhance their collective well-being. This article explores the idea that collaboration among citizens is fundamental to prevent exploitation and ensure that the benefits of society are shared equitably.

Political and economic elites typically possess substantial resources and control over key institutions. This concentration of power can lead to policies and practices that favor their interests, potentially leaving the rest of society at a disadvantage.  Economic elites include wealthy individuals, major corporations, and influential financiers who often shape economic policies, taxation, and resource allocation in their favor. Political elites include elected officials, bureaucrats, and lobbyists who can exert significant influence over government decisions and regulations, sometimes prioritizing elite interests over those of the broader citizenry.

Power and wealth are like inseparable twins who help each other to grow. Due to the fact that power and wealth brings forth extraordinary privileges and status in life, it becomes addictive to the wealthy and the powerful.  The concern arises when the political and economic elites exclude the broader citizenry from opportunities in life and indulge in greedy acquisition of wealth to the detriment of the Nation.

To counterbalance the influence of elites, citizens must come together and take collective action to safeguard their well-being and ensure a fair distribution of resources and opportunities. Here are several key reasons why such collaboration is necessary.

Firstly, collective action enables citizens to hold political leaders accountable for their actions and decisions. Through voting, advocacy, and grassroots movements, citizens can demand transparency and fairness in government policies.  Secondly, by working together, citizens can advocate for economic policies that promote income equality, workers' rights, and access to essential services for all, reducing the disparities created by economic elites. It also enable citizens to scrutinize the annual budget and to ensure that the correct priorities are set instead of budgetary policies that only benefit the elities.

Thirdly, collaborative efforts among citizens can lead to the development and protection of social safety nets, healthcare, education, and other vital services that benefit the entire community. It is very important to ensure that ordinary citizens and their families are able to live dignified lives without being compromised by poverty or deprivation of essentials. 

Fourthly, collective bargaining, labor unions, and advocacy groups help ensure that workers' rights are protected, preventing exploitation by powerful economic interests. At the same time, various non-governmental organisations can demand for compassionate workplace ethics to be implemented.

Fifthly, collaborative efforts foster a sense of community and solidarity, strengthening bonds among citizens and promoting a shared vision for collective well-being. This is particularly critical in a multi-cultural, multi religious, multi ethnic society like Malaysia where the diveristy can either be projected as a boon or a bane. Political and economic elites often practice the politics of division as a distraction to amass power and wealth. They also exploit religion and ethnicity for political and economic reasons. 

Lastly, collaborative efforts in the form of specialized groupings to ensure and demand the just practice and implementation of the rule of law is fundamental. This is a major matter that would require a separate discussion. Briefly, we need to ensure the existence of just and fair laws and not draconian and oppressive laws. The law ought to be exercised wisely and compassionately without fear or favour.

Throughout history, collective action by citizens has yielded remarkable results in the fight against the influence of political and economic elites.  It is a fact of human history that the elites would want to maintain the status quo that benefits them. Hence, it is up to the citizens to cooperate with each other. 

The civil rights movement in the United States, led by figures like Martin Luther King Jr., showcased the power of collective action in challenging racial discrimination and achieving legal and social reforms.  Grassroots advocacy, cooperative enterprises, growth of small and medium industries, and political mobilization are some of the ways in which the power of the political and economic elites can be balanced.  

In an age marked by increasing influence from political and economic elites, collaboration among citizens is not just a valuable tool but an essential one. By working together, citizens can hold leaders accountable, advocate for policies that promote equity, protect essential services, and prevent exploitation.

Education and awareness are the foundations of effective collaboration, enabling citizens to make informed decisions and engage in purposeful collective action. Ultimately, the power to improve collective well-being and safeguard against exploitation lies within the hands of citizens who recognize the strength of their collective efforts in shaping a fair and just society. It becomes even more urgent in Malaysia because it appears that many of us are still stuck in a feudal mindset such that we seem to welcome shades of oppression and indignity willingly. 

END.

Compassion in politics: Bridging divides and fostering humanity

 ONE of the fundamental traits to look for in a leader is his sense of compassion. Does his normal behaviour, ideas, vision and speeches exhibit compassion?

Stop selecting leaders who talk the loudest or those who spread fear, hatred and toxicity among the citizens, or those who rely on elitism.

These are political vultures whose desire for power, glory and wealth is so dominant that they do not understand the sufferings and hopes of the ordinary people of the nation. They will hurt others to fulfill their political desires without any loss of sleep.

According to the Rapera movement, which encourages compassion among Malaysians, the concept of compassion that a leader should have is an understanding of other people’s suffering accompanied by the desire to remove that suffering. In other words, genuine empathy followed by effective action.

In the often turbulent world of politics, compassion may seem like an elusive and naive ideal. However, with the complex challenges that we face now, it is becoming increasingly clear that compassion is not only desirable but also essential for effective governance and societal well- being.

We need to understand that compassion in politics encompasses understanding, empathy, and the willingness to alleviate the suffering of others.

Compassion in the political sphere can bridge divides, foster humanity, and pave the way for a more inclusive and just society.

Firstly, compassion in politics begins with embracing empathy and understanding. Political leaders and policymakers must strive to comprehend the diverse experiences and perspectives of constituents and citizens.

By placing themselves in the shoes of those they represent, politicians can gain a deeper understanding of the challenges faced by various communities. This understanding enables leaders to develop policies that address the root causes of societal issues and prioritise the needs of vulnerable populations.

Empathy fosters a culture of respect and inclusivity, diminishing the animosity often associated with political divisions. Leaders who are compassionate are able to transcend the borders of prejudice, racism, religious bigotry and extremism. They will see their constituents as human beings with human problems, not just as numbers of votes.

A compassionate political strategy places the welfare of citizens above personal gain, above ideological objectives, and above purely partisan interests.

Leaders are more likely to implement policies that uplift the marginalised, advance social justice, and create opportunities for all if they place human dignity and well-being at the core of their decision-making process.

Secondly, a compassionate political agenda seeks to reduce poverty, provide access to quality education and healthcare, and protect the rights of minorities and vulnerable groups.

Leaders are more likely to implement policies that uplift the marginalised, advance social justice, and create opportunities for all if they place human dignity and well-being at the core of their decision-making process.

A compassionate political agenda seeks to reduce poverty, provide access to quality education and healthcare, and protect the rights of minorities and vulnerable groups.

Compassionate politics builds trust and strengthens the bond between government and citizens by putting the needs of the people first.

Thirdly, ideological, cultural, and socioeconomic differences are frequently seen in politics. These gaps can be bridged by compassion, which fosters productive communication and promotes cooperation.

Leaders who are compassionate look for common ground and create coalitions that cut across party lines rather than sustaining divisive rhetoric. The divisive narratives that politicians generate are clear evidence of their lack of compassion.

Politicians can develop a more unified and peaceful political environment by identifying shared principles and working toward similar objectives. Such a compassionate approach becomes even more relevant when leading a diverse nation like Malaysia.

Fourthly, even when there are disagreements, compassionate politics promotes courteous dialogue and constructive debate.

Compassionate leaders like to concentrate on the core of problems rather than using aggressive words or personal attacks. This strategy promotes civil discourse among citizens and sets a good example for them, increasing public involvement and democratic decision-making.

An environment where different viewpoints are welcomed and celebrated, rather than ignored or derided, is fostered by a political culture that places a high emphasis on compassion.

Fifthly, global challenges such as climate change, humanitarian crises, and pandemics demand coordinated efforts and collective action. Compassionate politics goes beyond national boundaries and encourages leaders to collaborate with other nations to tackle these challenges with cooperation.

By offering a helping hand to those in need, encouraging diplomacy over hostility, and embracing international solidarity, compassionate politics can lead to more effective global solutions.

Finally, history has shown that political decisions and actions can create wounds that last for generations. Compassionate politics acknowledges historical injustices, seeks reconciliation, and works towards healing societal trauma.

I am truly concerned – as are many others – that our country is slowly being torn apart by personal politics between individuals or political and economic “clans”. Selective perception and interpretations of the nation’s history is being used to fragment the nation. By addressing past wrongs and acknowledging the pain experienced by different communities, leaders can build a foundation for a more united and harmonious future.

Compassionate policies focus on restorative justice and aim to right historical wrongs, fostering a sense of closure and healing. This is what Malaysia truly needs.

Politicians who show compassion are not weak or naive; rather, they demonstrate the strength of the human spirit and a capacity for positive change.

Basically, compassionate politics emphasises the need to embrace empathy, focusing on the welfare of citizens, bridging divides, fostering civil dialogue, tackling global crises with humanity, and mending rifts.

We can create a Malaysia that is more just, equal, and inclusive by incorporating compassion into politics. Political leaders who practice compassion have the ability to improve humankind for future generations, inspire hope, and heal divisions.

Demanding and fostering compassionate politics is in our collective best interest because it is essential to creating a world that is better and more compassionate for all. I believe that if we are unable to create collective happiness in our country, we will be collectively miserable.

This article first appeared in The Sunday Star

END.