PMX Caught Without His Pants: The Death of Fixed Deposits & The Rise of Thinkers

Sabah killed the “fixed deposit” myth, exposed greed and complacency, and reminded Malaysia that the future belongs to thinkers – not fanatics, not yes-men, not lazy doers.

By Amarjeet Singh @ AJ

When Malaysians watched the formation of the unity government after GE15, many finally exhaled. The gates of Putrajaya had new guards. The old empire had fallen. For a brief moment, people felt fresh air. Maybe this time, reform would be real. Maybe this time, it wouldn’t be about race cards, contracts and cronies.

Today, that air feels heavy again. Not because Malaysians changed, but because the system refused to change with them. The clearest slap came not from Kuala Lumpur, but from Sabah – where voters quietly did the unthinkable: they ended the myth of “fixed deposits”. They caught PMX politically without his pants on.

1. The Night Fixed Deposits Died

For years, political strategists spoke in the language of “fixed deposits”:

Chinese urban voters assumed to be loyal to DAP and PH,
Sabah and Sarawak expected to back the federal government of the day,
some seats treated as untouchable, guaranteed wins.

Then Sabah voted.

Eight out of eight DAP seats – gone.
Nineteen out of twenty PKR seats – gone.
PH machinery – confused, disconnected, and out of date.

Two days before that, PMX stood before Sabah Chinese leaders and said:

“Don’t scold me, call me ‘lu siau eh’, and then come ask for things.”

They did not argue. They did not riot. They did not burn tyres. They simply went home, waited for polling day, and pushed back using the most powerful tool in a democracy: the ballot.

That was the moment PMX got caught without his political pants – not because of one sentence, but because that sentence exposed a deeper mindset:

arrogance,
entitlement,
the belief that allocations are gifts from his pocket,
the assumption that minorities owe him eternal gratitude.

Sabah replied very clearly: “We don’t owe you. You owe us good governance.”

2. When Greed Overruled Reform

Let’s be brutally honest: when the gates changed after GE15, many expected a new culture in Putrajaya.

People hoped for:

cleaner governance,
professionals in key roles,
real institutional reform,
transparent appointments in GLCs and agencies,
a clear break from “business as usual”.

Instead, what they often saw felt uncomfortably familiar:

political appointees parachuted into strategic positions,
selective prosecution and selective mercy,
old faces re-emerging with new titles,
alliances built more on survival than on principle,
silence when scandals involved “our side”,
speed and fury only when it involved “their side”.

Slowly, a new perception hardened: that many government agencies were being infiltrated – not by public-spirited technocrats – but by greed, power hunters and fanatic fools.

Not everyone inside the system is corrupt. Far from it. There are many honest officers giving their best. But when top layers are captured by those who treat public office as a personal ATM, or as a platform to push narrow racial or religious agendas, the rot spreads downward.

That is how trust dies: not in one scandal, but in a series of decisions where greed quietly overrules Reformasi.

3. Rafizi: The Whistleblower They Pushed Out

Long before he sat in any Cabinet room, Rafizi Ramli did something most politicians avoid: he went after greed head-on, from the outside, with documents in hand.

He exposed:

the NFC scandal,
misuse of public funds,
financial irregularities many preferred to whisper about rather than confront.

He didn’t just shout “rasuah”. He unpacked the mechanics:

who approved what,
how money flowed,
how rakyat’s funds turned into private benefit.

For that, he was charged and convicted under secrecy laws. He was blocked from contesting GE14 just as Pakatan Harapan finally toppled Barisan Nasional.

Most people discover courage after they get power. He showed courage before he had any. That alone makes him different from many of his peers.

4. Strategist, Brand and Builder: Rafizi’s Second Act

After NFC and the whistleblower years, Rafizi moved into a different role: architect.

He:

won Pandan with a large majority,
became Strategic Director, Secretary-General, then Vice-President of PKR,
built INVOKE, a data-driven campaign and analytics machinery,
helped normalise polling, segmentation, and strategy inside the opposition,
returned with Ayuh Malaysia when PH was flat and exhausted.

He forecast around 80 seats for PH in GE15. Many sneered. The coalition ended up with 82.

In a landscape dominated by personality cults and racial rhetoric, Rafizi’s “brand” rested on four pillars:

sincerity proven by past whistleblowing,
transparency through data and open breakdowns,
competence in reading the ground via INVOKE,
relevance to youth and urban voters who were tired of 80s-style politics.

If UMNO once had Khairy Jamaluddin as its modern brand, PKR’s closest equivalent in brand value and impact has always been Rafizi Ramli.

5. From War Room to Cabinet – and Back Out Again

GE15 created a hung Parliament. Out of that mess, a unity government was born and Anwar Ibrahim finally became Prime Minister. For the first time, Rafizi was both:

election general, and
Cabinet minister – as Minister of Economy.

He pushed for:

targeted subsidies,
structural reforms,
long-term industrial strategies,
data-based decisions instead of guesswork.

He showed up to press conferences with charts instead of slogans. Some appreciated it. Some rolled their eyes. But you could not accuse him of winging it.

Then came the PKR party elections. He contested for deputy president and lost to the old forts and familiar networks. Soon after, he resigned as minister. His closest ally in Cabinet resigned too. Two of the clearest reform voices walked out – voluntarily.

In a political culture where many cling to posts no matter what, resigning after losing internal mandate looked strange. But it was consistent with his core message: position is not the goal; integrity is.

6. Sabah: Rafizi’s “I Told You So” Moment

Six months later, Sabah voted. PH’s result?

PKR – 1 out of 20 seats.
DAP – 0 out of 8.

The wipeout wasn’t just a defeat. It was an extinction event. Sabah’s Chinese and urban voters used to be seen as PH’s natural allies. This time, they simply walked away.

Rafizi had warned, with data, that:

Chinese support had dropped significantly,
Indian frustration was rising,
youth were drifting and disillusioned,
the arrogance of power was pushing core supporters away.

He cautioned that relying on “fixed deposits” was dangerous. He highlighted scandals, tone-deaf decisions and bad optics. He advised PMX privately.

But the inner circle listened more to comfort than to data. Sabah became proof that the comfort was fake.

Rafizi does not need to stand up and shout “I told you so”. The ballot boxes have already said it for him.

7. The End of Easy Money & Race-First Politics

For a long time, politics in Malaysia was seen as a fast track to:

contracts,
positions in GLCs,
influence,
side income,
and a comfortable career without real performance.

That era is being slowly, painfully interrupted. Sabah’s result is one more sign.

Voters are pushing back against:

race-baiting and moral policing,
leaders who talk big but deliver little,
old names who keep appearing in new roles,
warlords who think loyalty is a permanent guarantee.

The politics of fear, “ketuanan” and manufactured outrage may still work in some pockets, but it is no longer the only script. In many places – especially Sabah, Sarawak and urban Malaysia – it is being rejected.

The road to easy money is narrowing. The road to lazy leadership is shrinking. The ground is demanding: thinkers, builders, and problem-solvers.

8. Thinkers vs Fanatics: Why Malaysia Needs a Different Kind of Leader

You summed it up well:
Malaysia needs thinkers like Rafizi, Syed Saddiq – not lazy and incompetent doers.

Thinkers bring:

long-term planning,
policy literacy,
data and evidence,
global context,
the courage to challenge broken systems.

Fanatics and opportunists bring:

noise,
division,
emotional blackmail,
short-term survival tactics,
zero intention to fix root causes.

Rafizi’s model is clear:

whistleblower before power,
data strategist during elections,
RM5 kedai experiments after leaving government,
a consistent effort to ground big ideas in real-life impact.

Syed Saddiq, in his own way, represents a youth-focused, reform-minded alternative: willing to pay personal cost, speak uncomfortable truths, and push institutional change.

Are they perfect? No. But they are trying to build something new – instead of defending everything old. That alone matters.

9. DAP Has Talent – But Talent Without Strategy Is Wasted

Sabah’s result does not mean DAP is empty. In fact, DAP has some of the strongest reform-era leaders in Malaysia:

Gobind Singh Deo – fearless, competent, respected beyond race.
Ramkarpal Singh – principled, sharp on justice and rights.
Hannah Yeoh – proven administrator with real delivery.
Anthony Loke – technocrat-style minister who fixes, not just talks.
Steven Sim – hardworking, rakyat-focused, modern in outlook.
Nga Kor Ming – experienced organiser and grassroots builder.
Young Syefura Othman (Rara) – youth magnet, progressive voice.
Syahredzan Johan – articulate, consistent on governance and rights.
Tengku Zulpuri Shah – respected Malay leader bridging communities inside DAP.

DAP’s core problem is not shortage of quality. Its problem is that **its talented leaders are trapped inside an ecosystem that refuses to evolve**.

They are:

policy-driven,
non-racial in governance,
respected by professionals,
capable of carrying the party into a new era.

Yet they are held back by:

old assumptions about Chinese “fixed deposits”,
old ways of communicating,
coalition dynamics that demand silence on key issues,
a culture that reacts after a crisis rather than anticipating it.

Sabah voters did not reject Gobind, Hannah, Steven Sim, Rara or Syahredzan as individuals. They rejected:

complacency,
arrogance,
and the feeling that they were taken for granted.

Talent without strategy is wasted. Brand without humility is fragile.

The question DAP must now face is: who is the bigger brand – the old comfort zone, or the new generation of leaders who can rebuild trust?

10. PMX’s Real Enemy Is Not PN – It’s His Own Echo Chamber

Many think PMX’s main enemy is the opposition. Sabah suggests otherwise.

His greatest risk is:

a circle of rich yes-men,
career politicians who filter reality,
strategists who think yesterday’s map still applies,
advisers who confuse loyalty with competence.

If you are surrounded by people who say:

“Boss, the ground is good,”
“Boss, Chinese still with us,”
“Boss, Sabah okay one,”
“Boss, Rafizi overrated,”

…then Sabah becomes the reality check that no one can spin away.

If PMX does not widen his circle to include genuine thinkers, honest critics and data-driven voices, the next humiliation will not be limited to one state.

11. The End of Allegiance Voting & the New Young Voter

Once upon a time, parties could speak in certainties:

“Chinese will always support us.”
“Urban seats are guaranteed.”
“Sabah and Sarawak will stay loyal to federal.”

Those days are over.

Today:

Chinese voters back whoever respects them and delivers – and walk away when taken for granted.
Indian voters are tired of being remembered only during festivals.
Sabah and Sarawak voters think as Sabahans and Sarawakians first – not as background extras for Semenanjung drama.
Youth voters are issue-based, not party-locked. They scroll, they read, they compare, they decide.

Young Malaysians especially are shaped by:

the cost of living crisis,
job insecurity,
social media transparency,
global exposure,
a deep dislike of hypocrisy.

They respond less to:

party songs,
race rhetoric,
blind loyalty.

They pay attention to:

who is sincere,
who explains clearly,
who shows their working,
who actually solves things.

In that landscape, the “bigger brand” is no longer just a party logo. It is:

the leader who carries credibility,
the track record that feels real,
the approach that respects young minds.

If any coalition wants to connect with young voters, it has to stop treating them as numbers and start treating them as partners – as co-authors of the country’s future, not as tools.

12. Where Do We Go From Here?

We can pretend nothing happened in Sabah. We can recycle the same excuses, blame the same enemies, repeat the same script. Or we can accept that something fundamental has shifted.

Malaysia needs:

cleaner, braver governance,
independent institutions that cannot be bent by timing games,
merit-based appointments instead of party parking,
policies grounded in data, not guesses,
youth included in real decision-making, not just in campaign pictures,
leaders who can admit mistakes and correct course.

Above all, we need leaders who remember a simple truth:

You were not elected to protect your party. You were elected to protect your people.

Not UMNO first. Not PKR first. Not DAP first. Not GRS, GPS or PN first. Rakyat first.

13. The Final Reality Check

Sabah has spoken. Fixed deposits are dead. Allegiance voting is dying. The age of automatic loyalty is over.

The question now is not:

“Will voters stay with us?”

The real question is:

“Are we, as leaders and parties, still worth staying with?”

Greed tried to overrule reform. Fanatics tried to hijack institutions. Yes-men tried to manufacture comfort.

But in the end, the rakyat still holds the final card. They can, at any time:

remove any leader,
erase any “safe seat”,
punish any arrogance.

The future belongs to:

thinkers who can plan,
builders who can deliver,
leaders who can evolve,
and brands that earn trust, not demand it.

The rest – the greedy, the fanatics, the lazy, the incompetent – will slowly be written into the footnotes of history.

Whether Malaysia moves forward or stays stuck will depend on one thing: how seriously we take this moment, and how honestly we demand more from those who lead us.

— Amarjeet Singh @ AJ

Search This Blog

SELF IMPROVEMENT AND MOTIVATION