We Were All Young Once Govt Should Tolerate Offensive Protests

---

 


Last week, a small group of students under the banner Rakyat Benci Rasuah (The People Hate Corruption) staged a rally in Kota Kinabalu, Sabah.
One of their more controversial acts was the burning of the prime minister’s image. For that, several organisers were arrested and are now being investigated under the Sedition Act.
Many were quick to dismiss the protesters as disrespectful and overtly offensive. I, too, have issues with this particular action.
This is not because I disapprove of burning effigies or any kind of symbols in public assembly. Neither do I believe that the state should criminalise burning effigies.
My main concern is with the effectiveness of the tactics used by the students, rather than moral or legal considerations.
No doubt, setting ablaze the image of the PM would get you on the front page and boost hits on social media.
The flames in the demonstration always represent very powerful symbolism. But can this symbolic performance alone eliminate corruption or change the political system?
Too often, young activists mistake dramatic acts as an expression of radicalism. I fully understand this, as I have been there myself. For some, radicalism is all about expression.
Quite obviously, any radical transformation of society requires the support of the masses.
Sometimes we are too obsessed with radical gestures and believe they could stir the public into action.
We thought militant confrontation was the best way to articulate the people’s rage. We assumed the louder the shout, the larger the following.
As a movement that intends to represent the voice of students, the protest leadership must consider how these media stunts fit into their bigger strategic plans.
In practice, media headlines without public backing are hollow. They may even alienate the very people the movement is trying to reach.
If student activists truly want to build a credible, effective movement that has the power to influence change, they must build the strength of resilience. There is no shortcut.
Activists have to return to basics: organising on campus, engaging their peers, and building awareness steadily.
Even a cause as uncontroversial as anti-corruption needs more than slogans to win lasting support.
Movements are not built overnight. They require patience, stamina, and public trust. And that trust is not won through rhetoric alone.
Rights not applied selectively
While I may critique their methods, I absolutely stand by the students’ right to protest. I will defend their freedom of expression even when their actions are offensive or provocative.
A democratic society is inherently noisy. It thrives on debate, contention, and contradiction.
Young people are not always polite or measured in their behaviour. The youth sometimes feel alienated and disenfranchised by society.
Their protests may be reckless or amateurish, but a healthy democracy must give them space to voice their anger and frustration.
A confident society should not fear dissent.
Freedom of assembly is a cornerstone of reformasi. The Peaceful Assembly Act guarantees the right to protest, as long as public order is not threatened.
In the student protest in Kota Kinabalu, no one was harmed, no riot broke out, and no public property was damaged.
Yes, setting things on fire may carry some risk, but risk is not the same as threat. Symbolic acts, no matter how crude, are not seditious.
Let’s consider a different scenario in which demonstrators at the US embassy burned an effigy of US President Donald Trump.
Would the backlash be equally severe? Perhaps it’s a stretch -Malaysians are, after all, often too polite for such gestures toward a foreign leader.
Yet many of us felt solidarity, even joy, watching mass protests in New York, London, or Paris, where people hurled insults at their own leaders.
To protect democracy, the law must defend citizens’ right to stand up against their leaders.
If the state always overzealously protects leaders from criticism or disrespect, our political system risks descending into tyranny.
Ultimately, freedom of expression is not reserved for the polite commentary. Human rights are not selective; they must be upheld even when inconvenient.
Rebels of yesterday, leaders of tomorrow
History offers us plenty of examples. Transformative changes were made by leaders who were agitators and dissenters. Some were jailed, humiliated, or vilified for their dissent.
Social movements are full of images of burning flags or effigies, and certainly no shortage of insults against those in power.
In recent months, we have witnessed a huge surge of youthful rebellion globally.
In the United States and Europe, there have been massive upheavals against leaders who are complicit in genocide and unjust wars.
Amidst the humanitarian crisis in Palestine, few Malaysians would see such strong actions as inappropriate.
In Malaysia, many of our political leaders were once rebels themselves.
Former long-serving prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad was once sacked by Umno for being disrespectful to the Father of Independence, Tunku Abdul Rahman, a national icon.
The current prime minister was no less rebellious in his youth. He was seen as a recalcitrant troublemaker in the eyes of the political establishment at the time.
Anwar Ibrahim during his reformasi eraWithout a doubt, political change was often championed by these loud, naive, idealistic daredevils.
The gatherings of reformasi, too, were characterised by rowdy crowds flinging fists and mocking the leaders of the ruling parties.
In retrospect, some of these were bravado displays meant to show courage and inspire the people to reject political norms.
Also, on some occasions, they were plainly silly and thoughtless outbursts of frustration.
Protest is rarely neat. Nor is it always wise. Having been part of the reformasi movement myself for over two decades, I must admit my share of folly and naïveté.
A young Tian Chua being arrested during a reformasi protest in 1999Still, the right to err is essential in the process of building a democratic political system. Leaders learn from making foolish mistakes and improve along the way.
We could lose a generation of future leaders if this brave spirit is crushed.
It would be a bitter irony if that happened under a government established by those who once suffered under unjust laws.
In the entire history of Malaysia, this should be the first government that celebrates youthful dissent.
The reformasi stories of defiance and struggle against oppression should not only be glorified in memoirs, but must live on through policy.
Tolerance is strength, not weakness
Some have called for dialogue with the young protesters (to guide them to the “right” path?). I’m not sure that’s the right response either.
We don’t need a roundtable to agree that corruption is bad. The students shouted, “Rakyat benci rasuah.” (“Siapa tidak?”)
The real answer will not come out of debate, but through real action. In order to respond meaningfully, the government must do the hard work of cleaning up the system and delivering justice.
Trying to convince your critics that their tone is wrong is a waste of time.
The public isn’t moved by rhetorical flourishes. They will judge based on results, not persuasion.
However, to be honest, no matter what efforts are made, young people will never be satisfied with the status quo.
By virtue of being young, they will always ask for more. That’s not a flaw, but it’s the nature of youth. Their energy, even when messy, challenges complacency and propels society forward.
A truly reformist government should not fear the youth. It should embrace their rebellious spirit, even when it appears rash, immature, or offensive.
In the end, let’s remember: We were all young once. - Mkini
TIAN CHUA is former Batu MP.
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.

---