Karpal and the 'principle of damage'






He would agree with the ‘principle of damage’ devised by a 19th century philosopher, who argued that no person should suffer as a result of someone else’s exercise of freedom.

Cast your mind two decades ago when he responded to a Member of Parliament who willed Malaysia an Islamic state. He applied the ‘principle of damage’ then as he does now.

The issue is not 'consistency' but rather a ‘formality’ in his thought process, the way a lawyer is trained to think. It is clear that as much as he is a politician for the man on the street, he does not discern the concept of power. He does not condone the horizontal power-spread of his partners lest it jeopardizes the vertical relationship between the individual and government.

He relates party hopping to usurpation of an individual’s freedom in favour of the usurper.

A straight line connects a party hopper to a serial polygamist - where desire trumps fidelity - where a vile practice trumps a sound principle.

The 'principled politician' is rare. This combination is the gem in him.

Words, Tommy Peters

Re-posted in The Star (Citizen's Blog) (Note: The Star's Citizen Blog is closed as of August 26th 2011)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Exchange Stabilization Fund, explained • Eric deCarbonnel

MING: 1999-2009

The Sabah - Sulu timeline: 1405 to 2022