Malaysian Journal of Democracy and Election Studies ... - UM e-Journal

Malaysian Journal of Democracy and Election Studies Vol. 1 Issue 1, 86-95, 2013

Virtual civil society: resurgence of social capital and the 2008 General Election in Malaysia Makmor Tumin1 Ibrahim Ndoma2

Abstract This article portrays how internet usage was a last resort for opposition groups in a political arena that is semi authoritarian in nature. In this political system, the mainstream media has been distorted by the government, with opposition rallies and group meetings always treated with suspicion and dispersed with force by the incumbent government, thus inhibiting convergence of social capital. Elections are streamlined to favor the ruling coalition, the Barisan Nasional. Control of government since 1969 until 2008 has always been hegemonic, with UMNO, the dominant party of the coalition, firmly holding unto power and dictating policies. The literatures examined concurred that internet usage especially during elections is accrued to the liberal nature of the mainstream media which lacks the power to be critically blatant; however, others see the authoritarian nature of states to be the push factor. By examining political events prior and after the 2008 general elections through opposition accounts and publications, academic literatures and personal accounts, this article depicts the internet and social capital as unrivalled synergies that effect change in a strict socio-political setting. Keywords: Social capital, internet, Barisan Nasional, elections, Malaysia Introduction The 12th Malaysia general elections in March 2008 marked a significant milestone in the history of Malaysian politics. From the propaganda surrounding the allegation of misdeeds of the former government to the renewed perception of Malaysians about politicians through social capital and also, the remarkable change in electoral results was unprecedented. For the first time in the history of this country, except for the year 1969, the ruling multi-party coalition, the Barisan Nasional that has consistently maintained a two-thirds majority in parliament, saw its unpopularity following the rise of a unified and more purposeful opposition that gained popularity and support from the populace. Most importantly, the internet was very well utilized as an alternative medium to propagate the repugnance of the malignant scourge that has held the Malaysian politics to ransom. This change in business as usual in the Malaysian body politic did not occur by chance but through an invigorated reconstruction of social capital amongst Malaysians. One such indispensable mechanism which has been considerably underrated by several influential groups, especially political parties, is the internet. In the 2008 elections, the internet exposed its importance by surpassing all other sources of disseminating information. The internet blatantly exposed all the contradictions inherent in the political system, thus redefining the prospects of the 12th general elections. State policy on the media is a fundamental factor that determines the performance of the mainstream media. The state media is being controlled by the government and ownership of the private media companies are mostly controlled by pro-government elites. Besides, the strict principles of media practice associated with ownership and control, automatically makes it a 86


government affair and property. This provides sufficient justification as to why the mainstream media lost its credibility and apolitical status. So it is discernible that internet where individual’s anonymity is guaranteed and an arena where views can be expressed without fear and engagement played a crucial role in knitting the social fabric amongst groups that constitute the vanguard for political change like the opposition parties, minority groups (e.g. Hindu Rights Action Force or HINDRAF), Human rights groups and several independent bodies that have witnessed tremendous flaws inherent in the UMNO led government. This article seeks to showcase the relevance of the internet as it empowers civil society in the 2008 general elections, thus changing the electoral status quo that has remained fairly constant since 1969. This article starts with a depiction of the political and electoral atmosphere of Malaysia; the next section gives an insight to the main themes of the article, internet and social capital. Review of arguments on the growing influence of the internet on civic engagements followed suit, after which an outline of political events prior and after 2008 elections threw light to the possible factors that added considerable leverage to the outcome of the elections and a brief reflection on the remarkable political change, concludes the discourse. The Political and Electoral Outlook of Malaysia The political system in Malaysia since 1957 has been tagged differently by researchers; Crouch (1996) sees it as a ‘semi-authoritarian state’, that is a state that inculcates authoritarian rule with democratic ideals. Following this pattern, but tagged differently, a ‘semi-democracy’ (Case, 2002) and a ‘syncretic state’ (Jesudason, 1996), that is a doctrinaire and responsive state that justifies economic development at the expense of the rights and freedom of the people. Coupled with the different political affiliations, is the existence of a multi-racial society with deep cleavages along ethnic lines (Noreha, 2008). Authoritarianism was perceived as the only option for administering and stabilizing the diverse and precarious race relations for the country’s development and continuity. This followed the use of draconian preventive laws, although sparingly applied, have succeeded in instilling a culture of fear among Malaysians (Loh, 2005). Following these descriptions, it is discernible that the Malaysian polity is one of diverse interests and pressures that cannot be easily harmonized by government. As such, it is definitely not surprising to observe an interface of elements of authoritarianism and democracy. The semi-authoritarian nature of the political system, coupled with the pattern of political mobilization on ethnic lines, promoted by political parties, is an irrefutable reason why elections has been characterized by the following: a single coalition party the Barisan Nasional (BN) which monopolizes and has persistently controlled a majority of contested seats in the parliament; agents of social capital like the electronic and print media were completely streamlined only to propagate government’s policies and as such, dissenting voices, citizens views and opposition’s stance on electoral processes were not well represented. Also detention of the opposition members and dissidents without trial is a routine phenomenon in this kind of political setting. The Internal Security Act (ISA) (Article 5, Section 3 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia) is a justification to this end, which authorizes detention without any legal recourse, renewable indefinitely at the command of the Minister of Internal Security. Electoral processes and outcomes in Malaysia, except in 1969 have always had a steady pattern as the ruling coalition the Barisan Nasional has consistently maintained election victories which puts it in the hegemonic position of running the government; the independent electoral commission as designed by the constitution is to remain apolitical, but due to excessive influence of the incumbent government, it has become an agent of Barisan Nasional; the unfair political division 87


of constituencies has also given the Barisan Nasional a considerable unfair leverage during elections over other opposition parties; and the control of massive public funds to set up tight patronage (Gomez and Jomo, 1999) enterprise to influence elections (Ufen, 2008) tends to have degenerated the fairly weak electoral competition from the opposition. Most importantly is the marginalization of the opposition and the public through the control and politicization of the mainstream media. It is pertinent that the subjugation of social capital is the main reason why the electoral status quo has remained fairly constant until 2008. Internet and Social Capital The 1990’s saw the versatility of the internet in constructive and unprecedented dimensions. The internet is a collection of networks connected to other networks to form a huge network (McLaughlin et al, 1995) and since it connects people, makes it a social network which is the base for social capital (Ferlander, 2003). As a result, it has offered new hope to deliberative groups, to proponents of democratic ideals and humanitarian groups as it provides an improved forum for political debate, one that involves geographically disparate citizens, where issue relevance matters, status is less important, and arguments are evaluated based on their strength (Downey and Fenton, 2003). Social capital and counter hegemony are two distinct dimensions in the concept of civil society (Bieler and Morton, 2001). Social capital is a capability that arises from the prevalence of trust in a society or in parts of it. It can be embodied in the smallest and most basic social group, the family, as well as the largest of all groups, the nation, and in all the other groups in between (Fukuyama, 1995). It is basically the unison of individuals and groups on the basis of trust, mutual agreement and cooperation, all in the quest to enshrine democratic ideals against values and ideologies that inhibits social freedom and interests. It is strategically the ability of citizens to articulate and organize requests for good government. After Tocqueville, Robert Putnam is one notable architect of social capital (O’ Connel, 1999). Putnam (1996, 2000) delineates social capital as encompassing two forms namely; network capital - relations with friends, neighbors, relatives, and workmates that significantly provide companionship, emotional aid, goods and services, information, and a sense of belonging. Secondly, participatory capital - involvement in politics and voluntary organizations that affords opportunities for people to bond, create joint accomplishments, and aggregate and articulate their demands and desires. From the foregoing, it is evident that the political and electoral state of Malaysia since 1969 has been the bane behind the collapse of the participatory capital, thus preventing community to become embedded in social networks. This has resulted in movement of community relationships from easily observed public spaces to less accessible private homes (Lin, 2001). According to Kraut et al. (1998) and Wellman (2001), when people are tucked away in their homes rather than conversing in cafes, then perhaps they are going online; chatting online one-to-one; exchanging e-mail in duets or small groups; ranting, and organizing in discussion groups such as newsgroups and political groups. This is simply an explanation for the reformation of social capital which is made feasible via the internet. This new form of social capital is accrued to the alienation of individuals from avenues of free expression and communion in the state of public affairs. The internet is a medium through which social capital extends its influence not just during the electoral process but enlightenment towards relief aid, social welfare, community development, capacity building - the list is endless. Governments nowadays see the internet as a very close ally when propagating ideas and lobbying for support. However, it is more utilized and more effective when opposition groups, neutral bodies and citizens use it to propagate an 88


idea or course, particularly against government policies. It is pertinent that people these days prefer to deliberate online rather than in open physical groups. As such, they join online groups of different types and they tend to get very committed to such groups possibly because it costs them nothing to join such groups, they find such groups as the only avenue through which they can express themselves critically and perhaps because of the convenience of using the internet where ever they feel deems fit. Most studies view the increasing use of the internet as a justification of the increasing distrust and dislike of the mainstream media which is consistently tolerant, sympathetic and impotent when it comes to information dissemination that requires blatant and critical analysis (see Weiss, 2005; Mertzger et al., 2003). Johnson and Kaye (2004) see blogs as a new and better journalism that is opinionated, independent and personal as against the mainstream media and their readers who are liberal and conservative in nature, thus lacking the audacity to be critical of political events. Following similar trend, Greer (2003) sees the credibility of information derived from the internet to be the force driving more people to go online. Both views simply delineate the decreasing value of the mainstream media in contrast to the growing, pragmatic and influential values of the internet to enforce social capital. It is apparent that the performance and success of the mainstream media lends credence to the information derived from the internet. To this end, Johnson and Kaye (2004) contend that journalists may perceive bloggers as wannabe amateurs badly in need of some skills and editors; however, they increasingly rely on blogs for story tips, information, and access to stories from news sources throughout the world. The growing popularity and influence of the internet has presently escalated beyond proportions especially with regards to information dissemination. Other studies view the authoritarian nature of some states, characterized by repression and subjugation of all sects that oppose the state and the continuous battle for and perhaps total control of the mainstream media by such autocratic state, to be the rationale behind the growing popularity and usage of the internet to propagate ideas and principles. Healy (2001) placed emphasis on the importance, benefits and contribution of the internet to modern societies especially those restrained in one form or the other from social inclusion. He argued that the internet provides powerful opportunities for people to enhance their lives and change them for good. He went on to suggest that improved access to the Internet helps people to develop new skills, improve their employability and confidence, thus regenerates their communities. Ideally, all sources of media ought to be agents of social capital, but due to the immense influence social capital has on the political system and especially the electoral process, governments especially less democratic ones engage in full time war either to gain control of the media sources or to get them completely non-reactive, so that control of the status quo will specifically be at their dictates. Unfortunately, complete overhaul of the internet has remained a mirage for governments and as such, its credibility and popularity amongst people continue to expand in great magnitude. To this end, Rahimi (2003) argues that the internet is a powerful medium of interaction that defies any form of strict supervision and any form of distortion, simply makes it proliferate its hostilities with bewildering impacts. Presently, the World Wide Web and e-mail have consistently remained powerful means of opposing autocratic rule (Larmer, 1995). Viewing it from the Iranian context, Rahimi (2003) also argued that the threat posed by the internet to conservative and authoritarian regimes is beyond compromise, thus assuming a constructive stance for citizens. In Iran, the internet has been the greatest threat to incumbent governments as it functions as the political tool through which the reformists amass support amongst the Iranian populace against hard-line policies of the conservatives. The government 89


responded by devising systematic strategies to block internet websites or filter its contents (INQUIRER, 24th May 2009). This tactic has always been used during elections simply to subdue the inevitable impacts of the internet, thus prevents it from sabotaging and probably incapacitating the regime. Social capital is an integral part of human livelihood, as such denying a group of this essential means of communion could lead to some devastating consequences. It is our conviction that this article will enhance understanding of social capital as a key used by groups of people especially the opposition to unlock any form of socio-political order that does not permit a free and just socio-political engagement of people. Social Capital and Election in Malaysia Social capital that has been subjugated for decades, only unleashed itself even more forcefully in 2008, well equipped to be the determinant for the electoral future of Malaysia. Its victory rested on the divergent contradictions that resulted in continuous pressures, allegations and unstable government of Abdullah Ahmed Badawi. Several repugnant developments in the political system conveniently consolidated social capital with so much intensity; coupled with the fact that main stream media has remained an instrument of the government, gave internet the impetus to conveniently weaken the hegemony. The convergence point for social capital in Malaysia can be traced to the formation of the Reformasi movement in 1998. A resistance movement against the government of Mahathir following the discontent aroused by the economic woes, specific repressive laws and policies promoted by the regime such as the ISA and dismissal of Anwar Ibrahim as the Deputy Prime Minister, Deputy President of UMNO and Finance Minister for alleged corruption and sexual misconduct. Reformasi is a conglomeration of the Barisan Alternatif (opposition parties), nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and the non-governmentlinked media especially the Internet (Weiss, 1999). The movement was aware that their grievances would not be well portrayed by the mainstream media which is an instrument of the government. As such, they resorted to the sporadic use of the internet to propagate their resentments against the government. Immediately after the Reformasi movement in 1998, there was a rapid proliferation of several blog sites, a minimum of 30 sites inclined to Reformasi emerged while Laman Reformasi reached heights beyond 5 million in 1999 (Saravanamuttu, 2001a; 2001b). After assuming office in October 2003, the future looked bright for Datuk Abdullah Ahmed Badawi who introduced new reforms and took a totally different leadership style which was much relaxed and cordial as compared to his predecessor, Tun Mahathir Mohammed. However, Abdulla encountered chains of problems which started in 2004, barely a year after he assumed office. It started with his failure to meet up his election promises such as checking and putting an end to corrupt practices and improving racial and religious relations amongst races and groups. Instead, poverty aggravated as inequalities continued to widen, price of basic essentials like petrol, food stuffs, housing and healthcare increased beyond proportions, raising the cost of living without any improvement in income. Corruption, which was one of his major agenda during campaign, degenerated into various despicable dimensions. The gigantic, luxurious and expensive project plans inherited from Mahathir continued and favoritism reigned as his friends and relatives got most of the contracts. Several alleged accusations on his former deputy, Najib Razak, now Prime Minister, being involved in the murder of a Mongolian woman and profiteering from the government’s purchase of Rusian fighter jets and French submarines were never investigated. Also the affirmative action policy (McGarry and O’ Leary, 1993) which has from the early 1970’s been one of unfair advantage enjoyed by the Malays was given 90


additional boost as delegates from the UMNO party congress voted in favor of the extension of the policy. This augmented frustration and resentment amongst other ethnic groups who viewed the act as unjustified, partial and a strategy to further marginalize other racial groups. All these, coupled with intense and perpetual criticisms of Badawi as being incompetent, wishy- washy and ineffectual by his predecessor, Tun Mahathir, further exposed the weaknesses of Abdulla’s government. Coupled with his inability and acknowledging that he is yet to deliver his electoral pledges, bred distrust and loss of confidence amongst the populace, hence rendered it unpopular and vulnerable to the well informed and organized forces of social capital through the internet.With unfolding of political events, so is the proliferation of internet sites that informed the public with latest information and are open to group discussion where views are exchanged and unanimous agreement of a particular political course of action are reached. There are thousands of blog sites which disseminate salient and controversial information on corruption and interethnic and religious tensions that the mainstream media would never dare to disseminate. This proliferation can be accrued to the development of several new applications of web establishment by international web companies like Yahoo groups, Google groups, LISTSERVE and Microsoft SharePoint. These developments have made it a lot easier for individuals, especially bloggers, to design and operate their own websites. The resultant effect is the escalation in the number of internet users. Table 1 shows the estimated number of internet users in Malaysia which is slightly above 10 million. This number is huge in view of the country’s overall total population of about 26 million in comparison with Indonesia which has just a little above 15 million internet users with an overall total population of about 240 million. Table 1: Number of Internet Users in Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore (2007) Country Brunei Indonesia Malaysia Singapore

Number of Internet Users 35,000 15,300,000 10,040,000 2,135,000

Source: Ahmad Rizal Mohd Yusof. 2008 “Internet Democracy: Influence of Electronic Community in the 12th Malaysian Election” Pp 6. The opposition perceived the internet to be a convenient apparatus through which people’s support can be galvanized. The websites comprised of those of the opposition politicians like Anwar Ibrahim, Lim Kit Siang, Hassan Ali Husam Musa; human rights activists like Susan Loone, Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, Ronnie Liu and those critical of state of politics like that of Raja Petra Kamaruddin. Mahathir’s website was very popular and notable for its critique of Abdullah’s policies. It is as well not surprising that members of the ruling coalition own disguised blog sites which might be used as sabotage to settle scores with the ruling party and this could serve as a very formidable avenue through which sensitive and salient information is disseminated to other bloggers. One astonishing feature of some of these web sites especially that of Anwar Ibrahim, is the search engine optimization it is designed with which gives it a first hit status (Ahmad Rizal, 2008). The first hit status makes it possible for Anwar Ibrahim’s web site to remain dominant whenever an individual makes a search with key words “blog politics Malaysia” with any of the main search engines. This attracts visitors, thus contributes to the 91


overcrowding of blog sites, particularly Anwar Ibrahim’s web site is perceived to record the busiest traffic with over 15,000 visitors (Ahmad Rizal, 2008). Aftermath of the 2008 General Elections Following the loss of the Barisan Nasional in the 2008 general election, Datuk Abdullah Ahmed Badawi attested that his long-ruling coalition underestimated the power of the Internet and agreed that his coalition certainly lost the Internet war. He saw the sole reliance on the government controlled media as a serious misjudgment when disseminating campaign messages (Ramirez, 2008). From Table 2, it is pertinent that 2008 elections marked the worst electoral outcome for the ruling coalition, Barisan Nasional after 1969. In 2008 that the opposition was able to substantially close the huge difference in parliamentary seats difference between the ruling coalition and the opposition. The ruling party closed its score with 140 seats as against 198 seats obtained in the 2004 elections. The United Malay National Organization (UMNO), the Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA) and the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC), which are the major parties of the coalition, Barisan Nasional could not maintain the astounding victory of 198 seats won in the 2004 general elections. The decline in election results are as follows: 109 to 79 (UMNO), 31 to 15 (MCA) and 9 to 3 (MIC) respectively. Whereas the opposition, Barisan Alternatif that comprised of major parties like Parti Keadilan (PKR), the Democratic Action Party (DAP) and the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS) secured 28, 31 and 23 respectively in 2008 as against 1, 12 and 7 respectively in the 2004 elections. Closing with a total of 82 seats in 2008 as against 20 seats won in 2004. Several factors most embraced by social capital contributed to the outstanding victory of the Barisan Nasional in 2004. It is very important to note that social capital and authoritarianism are incompatible. Malaysians have had enough of Mahathir’s regime which was autocratic and high-handed and as such, Badawi’s liberal nature and gentility was hurriedly welcomed as it was perceived as an avenue for liberation and a respite for long years of authoritarian rule. Also the moderate religious image of Barisan Nasional as compared to PAS which advocated for a theocratic state added tremendous leverage to BN’s success. In a multi religious nation like Malaysia, religion is a very delicate issue that cannot be compromised. Couple with this point, the propagation the idea of Bangsa Malaysia (United Malaysia irrespective of race and religion) by Barisan Nasional during the 2004 campaign simply gave majority of Malaysians irrespective of race and religion the conviction that their long expected desires has finally come to manifest. Unfortunately, BN and the government of Badawi did not live up these expectations and instead contradicted all the promises that engendered its victory in 2004 and in fact carried on with most of Mahathir’s programmes which has always been a pain for the citizens. The elements of social capital that contributed to BN’s victory in 2004 elections were still the same forces that haunted it in the 2008 elections. This time around, the internet played significant roles in conjuring social capital against the ruling coalition.

92


Table 2: Number of Seats won in the National Parliament between the Ruling Coalition and the Opposition from 1959-2008 Year

1959* 1964* 1969 1974 1978 1982 1986 1990 1995 1999 2004 2008

Ruling Coalition

Opposition

Seats

Seats

74 89 95 135 130 132 148 127 162 148 198 140

30 15 49 19 24 22 29 53 30 45 20 82

Total

104 104 144 154 154 154 177 180 192 193 219 222

Source: Election Commission of Malaysia. *With the exception of Sabah and Sarawak

Conclusion This article has undoubtedly portrayed the internal dynamics that led to the unprecedented price the Barisan Nasional had to pay in the 2008 elections by losing its two-thirds majority which has remained fairly constant since 1969 to the opposition, who made astonishing use of the elusive instrument of social capital to change the course of events. Since the mainstream media has remained under the confines of the incumbent government and owing to the fact that the semi authoritarian nature of the country which holds everything and everyone to ransom delineates the synergy that energized the internet to be an unforgiving driver of change in the Malaysian electoral and political history. The elusiveness of the internet makes it very unique and difficult to counter. As such, there has been a wedlock between the opposition and the internet, a possible union that is credited to the credibility and unrivalled effectiveness of the internet to critic and expose all forms of anomalies inherent in the policies of the incumbent. The opposition can now have a stake in policy formulation, implementation and calling the Barisan Nasional to order when ever it deviates from its tracks, a true characteristic of democracy which has been in oblivion since 1969.

Acknowledgements Many thanks go to the staffs of University of Malaya library. We say thank you for your support by making sure we get all the necessary data for this article. 93


References Ahmad Rizal Mohd Yusof (2008). “Internet Democracy: Influence of Electronic Community in the 12th Malaysian Election.” 6th International Malaysian Studies Conference, pp. 8. Bieler, A. and Morton, A.D. (eds.) (2001). Social Forces in the Making of the New Europe. London: Palgrave, pp. 112-138. Case, W. (2002). Politics in Southeast Asia, Democracy or Less. Richmond, Surrey, England: Curzon Press. Crouch, H. (1996). Government and Society in Malaysia. St. Leonards, England: Allen and Unwin. Downey, J. and Fenton, N. (2003). “New Media, Counter Publicity and the Public Sphere.” New Media & Society, 5(2): 185-202. Ferlander, S. (2003). “The Internet, Social Capital and Local Community.” Phd Thesis Department of Psychology, University of Stirling, pp.138-139. Gomez, E.T. and Jomo, K.S. (1999). Malaysia’s Political Economy: Politics, Patronage and Profits. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 72-91. Greer, J.D. (2003). “Evaluating the Credibility of Online Information: A Test of Source and Advertising Influence.” Mass Communication and Society, 6:11-28. Healy, T. (2001). Social Capital and Lifelong Learning: Some Practical Issues for Public Policy. Working Paper at ESRC Research Seminar, Glasgow University. INQUIRER Newsdesk Sunday, 24th May 2009. Jesudason, V.J. (1996). “The Syncretic State and the Structuring of Oppositional Politics in Malaysia.” In Garry Rodan (ed.). Political Opposition in Industrializing Asia. London: Routledge. Johnson, T.J. and Kaye, B.K. (2004). “Wag the Blog: How Reliance on Traditional Media and the Internet Influence Credibility Perceptions of Weblogs among Blog Users.” Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(3): 622-642. Kraut, R.E., Scherlis, W., Patterson, M., Kiesler, S. and Mukhopadhyay, T. (1998). Social Impact of the Internet: What does it Mean? Communications of the ACM, 41(12): 21-22. Larmer, B. (1995). “Revolutions without Guns: Nonviolent Resistance in the ‘Global Village.” Progress Presentation, United States Institute of Peace, April 27, pp. 13-14. Lin, N. (2001). Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Loh, F.K.W. (2005). Malaysia: National Security, the Police and the Rule by Law: Militarization by other Means in Malaysia. London: Zed. McGarry, J. and O’Leary, B. (1993). The Politics of Ethnic Conflict Regulation: Case Studies of Protracted Ethnic Conflicts. U.K: Routledge, pp.138-156. McLaughlin, M.L., Osborne, K.K. and Smith, C.B. (1995). “Standards of Conduct on Usenet”, in Steven G. Jones., Cyber Society: Computer Mediated Communication and Community, Thousand Oaks, C.A : Sage, pp. 90-111. Metzger, M.J., Flanagin, A.J., Eyal, K., Lemus, D., McCann, R.M. (2003). “Bringing the Concept of Credibility for the 21st Century: Integrating Perspectives on Source, Message, and Media Credibility in the Contemporary Media Environment.” In Kalbfleish, P. (eds), Communication Yearbook, 27: 293-335. Noreha binti Hashim (2008). “Modernization and the Politics of Power-Sharing in Malaysia: An Analysis of the 2008 Twelfth General Election and its Implications.” In The 6th International Malaysian Studies Conference MSC6, pp. 168-212. 94


O'Connell, B. (1999). Civil Society: The Underpinnings of American Democracy. Medford, Mass: Tufts University Press, pp. 180-204. Putnam, R. D. (1996). “The Strange Disappearance of Civic America.” American Prospect, 24: 34-48. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon and Schuster. Rahimi, B. (2003). “Cyberdissent: The Internet in Revolutionary Iran.” Journal of Middle East Review of International Affairs, 7(3): 142-158. Ramirez. Luis (2008). “Malaysian Prime Minister says He Underestimated Power of Blogs before Suffering Big Election Losses.” Voice of America, 25th March. Obtained from: http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2008-03/2008-03-25-voa17.cfm?CFID. Saravanamuttu, J. (2001a). “Is there Politics of the Malaysian Middle Class?” In Embong, A.R (ed.), Southeast Asian Middle Classes: Prospects for Social Change and Democratisation, Bangi: Penerbit UKM. Saravanamuttu, J. (2001b). “Malaysian Civil Society-Awakenings?” In Maznah Mohamad and Wong, Soak Koon (eds.), Risking Malaysia: Culture, Politics and Identity, Bangi: Penerbit UKM. Ufen, A. (2008). “The 2008 Elections in Malaysia, Uncertainties of Electoral Authoritarianism.” Taiwan Journal of Democracy, 4(1): 155-169. Weiss, A. (2005). “The Power of Collective Intelligence.” NetWorker, 9(3), pp.16-23. Weiss, M.L. (1999). “What Will Become of Reformasi? Ethnicity and Changing Political Norms in Malaysia.” Contemporary Southeast Asia, 21(3) 1999, 424-450. Wellman, B. (2001). “Physical Place and Cyber Place: The Rise of Personalized Networking.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 25: 227-252.

1

Dr. Makmor Tumin is a Senior Lecturer in the Faculty of Economics and Administration, Universiti of Malaya. 2 Ibrahim Ndoma is a Master candidate at the Department of Administrative Studies and Politics, Faculty of Economics and Administration, Universiti of Malaya.

95