A tale of two budgets

COMMENT | We can learn a number of things by comparing the BN budget with Pakatan Harapan’s shadow budget.

Before jumping into that, let’s examine briefly our attitude towards federal budgets in general.

Some use “election budget” as a derisive term (which might be mildly odd, considering the term is undoubtedly correct this time, technically speaking), while “populist budget” has been thrown by both sides at each other.

I suppose by this point we should no longer be expecting people to take umbrage at the fact that the federal budget is treated like a huge gift basket.

I suppose some of the middle class and elites believe - not incorrectly - that a federal budget should be more of a measured, responsible financial roadmap for the nation, rather than a huge Santa Claus sack.

That said, for our present time and context, perhaps it is best that we acknowledge current political realities and recognise the essentially feudal nature of our budget.

A core essence of feudalism is the “social contract” between the ruler and the ruled - where the ruler depends on the ruled to keep him or her in power, while the ruled expect their ruler to dish out resources and provide for their welfare.

In many ways, the budget is an embodiment of this system. It says to the people, you have elected me (and should continue to do so), and in return, you shall have all these goodies.

Again, however well-founded our concerns, we are unlikely to score many productive political points (electorally at least) bemoaning this practice of feudalism, and decrying poor uneducated peasants for perpetuating what is in essence their own servitude.

Rather, perhaps it is best that we acknowledge for the near future - as a transitionary period, if nothing else - that a larger portion of Malaysians will indeed continue to look to the federal budgets as an indicator of the generosity of their feudal lord...