The writer of the letter, [#1]Let's argue constructively[/#] (March 31), is largely right for saying that I was arguing a lot for the sake of arguing in my letter, [#2]No half-measures, please[/#] (March 29). I have no love for Umno and found it quite malicious fun tearing the pretensions of A Serving Umno Youth Bureau Member's letter to pieces.

However the writer seems also to have missed the point I was trying to make so I will repeat it a little less convolutedly.

I see no point in someone with intelligence and connections stating sterile academic points of argument if the rest of the person's makeup (in this case condescension and pride in being affiliated in Umno) would seem to argue he does not have the moral courage to follow his intellect with heart-felt action.

I understand that this harshly gives the ASUYBM no benefit of doubt whatsoever in terms of his personal motivations for making these points, never mind the moral high horse I am precariously getting on.

But I believe at a really basic level that if you believe in certain principles and you have the information to back your stand to the point where you can confidently say your viewpoint is right and in good faith, then you should act on it - in good faith - in so far as you are able.

This is why I respect some of the opposition politicians like Dr Syed Husin Ali and Lim Kit Siang: they have not wavered from dearly held principles despite knowing that they may not get to see the fruits of a lifetime's effort or enjoy them.

Maybe it is an excess of cynicism, but I do not want to give ASUYBM any benefit of doubt, because of what his party stands for, what it has done and what it does not do. Again, I agree it is a harsh and unfair stand to take, but I take Umno Youth membership seriously. Nothing I have seen or heard of this section of our population gives me any hope that a new generation of leaders may successfully emerge to lead us a different and better way.

I do think arguing for principled action, despite however little we are able to live up to it, is worth it. I did not further the academic arguments ASUBYM brought up because I largely agree with them and because I believe many writers on this site have gone over the same ground and reached the same conclusions already. It's just that at the end of the letter I came to the conclusion: So what? More annoyingly, it was So Umno what?

Hence my letter, hence this reply.