After the humiliating change of guard in MCA o­n May 23, 2003, party members should seriously reconsider whether they still deserve to call themselves the Malaysian Chinese Association.

Wouldn't it be more honest to let MCA stand for 'Mahathir Chinese Association', considering the heavy hand played by its real big boss (Prime Minister) Dr Mahathir Mohamad in the entire episode?

Any fool who has been reading newspapers could have seen that party president Dr Ling Liong Sik was forced to make the final jump against his will. Equally obvious was the hand of the big boss in the appointment of the new leader o­ng Ka Ting and his deputy Chan Kong Choy.

Sure, the central committee of MCA ostentatiously went through all the "correct" motions of initial rejection, lengthy persuasion and final acceptance of the resignations, capping the day with its resolution o­n the new leaders.

But this was mere sandiwara (play-acting) that had been carefully choreographed to convey the impression that resignations were made with the players' own volition, and the new leaders decided upon by the central committee itself. Through this charade, MCA hopes to convince the Chinese community that it is still the master of its own fate.

Evidence is galore of the puppet master pulling the final strings. The latest such drama was provided by contender Chua Jui Meng who urgently dashed from the airport to meet the grand master in the early hours of May 23, in an apparent last ditch move for the top MCA job.

The degradation of MCA as the supreme political body representing Chinese Malaysians started a long time ago.

Its subjugation to Mahathir's authority came to a head in April 2002 when he ordered a ceasefire between warring factions Team A and Team B. Included was a gag order against public utterances of grievances and a ban o­n contests for party posts until the year 2005.

In the ensuing implementation of Mahathir's order, controversies shifted to interpreting what Mahathir actually said or intended. Both Teams competed to quote Mahathir to legitimise their positions.

With this, the degradation of MCA was complete, to give the unmistakable impression that the party was working more interested to meet the ideals of Mahathir than the aspirations of the Chinese community. The present change of guard merely added another jewel to his crown.

Veteran political observers who recollect the founding of this country must have felt the pang of sadness when they view the MCA today. In those glory days of independence, MCA founder Tan Cheng Lock stood o­n equal footing with Umno president and first Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman to co-found modern Malaya.

In those early days of camaraderie and mutual respect, the foundation of an egalitarian society was laid through the embracing of the Federal Constitution; and MCA ministers then helmed the important portfolios of finance, and trade and industry.

Though the letter of the Constitution remains largely intact today, the spirit of egalitarianism is gone. The May 13, 1969 racial riots drastically altered the balance of power between the races, giving rise to the hegemony of Umno.

This transformation of Malaysia, mainly during the reign of Mahathir, into a racist and autocratic state clearly contradicts the letter and spirit of the Constitution.

While the slide of political status of the Chinese cannot be attributed to a single party or leader, Ling is clearly responsible for a bulk of the blame - for degrading the party to the servile posture of fulfilling Mahathir's political design.

To emphasise his absolute subjugation, he o­nce drew an analogy of his relationship with Mahathir as o­ne between a soldier and his general unquestioned obedience and loyalty.

When faced with petitions from Chinese compatriots against racial discrimination, he reminded them that they must not forget that they were a minority race and that they must therefore learn to behave like o­ne.

Does MCA possess any political principle? Though racial political parties have outlived their original purpose and should have been phased out long ago, so long as they continue to exist, MCA's primary political objective should be to ensure that the Chinese enjoy their constitutional rights, in accordance with the Constitution.

Partnership among these racial parties must be o­ne of equality or else it would be ultra vires the Constitution.

While common sense tells us that parties hold different status in accordance with the size of their constituency, there is absolutely no justification for o­ne component party to behave in slavish fashion to another. In this respect, Ling's contemptuous behaviour must be held as treason to his community.

Like elder brother Umno, MCA hierarchy is filled with self-seeking fortune hunters, devoid of political idealism. As an example, the present life-or-death feud between Team A and B that ravaged the party since the last general election in 1999 was not over policy differences or even personality clashes.

In Ling's own words, the conflict was attributable to leaders fighting over the distribution of ministerial posts.

Since MCA has not o­nly failed its primary function in safeguarding Chinese interests, but has also abetted Umno in perpetuating racism and autocratic rule, MCA supporters should seriously consider abandoning this decadent ship.

They should now switch their electoral support to parties with non-racial but rights-based platform such as the DAP, Keadilan or PRM, to create a powerful third force in the political arena - a space currently dominated by the twin extremities of race and religion.

Through genuine realisation of democracy and human rights, the interests of minorities can be safeguarded.