Of late, PH+ politicians have carelessly thrown around words like 'betrayer' and 'traitor'.
What I cannot understand is that these words are only used on certain leaders who do not support Anwar as the 9th PM. On the other hand, potential leaders who have been identified as friendly MPs and are being courted to join Anwar are shielded from such lables. These two scenarios are in fact two sides of the same coin.
Why can Anwar openly meet and entice MPs from other parties to join PH+ while PH leaders who have being identified to be sacked or suspended cannot meet up with other leaders?
Where is the logic behind this double standard?
Even DAP and Amanah have not been spared from being labled as such. Is supporting Tun M for six months an act of betrayal? If having dignity is such a priority, then Anwar should have had better sense than to work with Tun M during GE14.
DAP and Amanah are between a rock and a hard place. Of course, nobody wants to be on a losing team, and everyone thinks they make the best government. But the government of the day, any day, is a mandate given by the people to a certain group to govern the country. It is definitely not for any politicians to negotiate or promise to handover power to anyone, especially the wishful PM. That prerogative belongs to the rakyat.
Politicians have no right to call others as betrayers and traitors, because the very next minute, they themselves will do the same and portray themselves as heroes.
There is no telling whom you need to work with in the future. So, when does one become a betrayer or a traitor, if everyone has reasons to justify their actions?