One of the (many) joys of living in a hotel in a foreign country - for a Brit, at least - is that you get to watch CNN.

Granted, I’m watching a fair amount of CNN because it’s the only English language channel apart from Star Movies (and I just never seem to be in my room at the right time to catch The Horse Whisperer) - but I’m watching it also because I’m enjoying indulging myself in a slightly geeky love.

Election coverage.

I’m not sure why, but there’s something about television coverage of elections that stirs something in my, well, not quite my loins, but some sort of region like it. My mental loins, perhaps.

I think it’s partly the ‘comfort blanket’ effect - childhood memories of election-night coverage, these strange one-off events in which adults stayed up in a TV studio all night, in some sort of grown-up sleepover; which I could never match, given that I was, erm, a child, and not an adult, and therefore had to go to bed early. And like all ‘comfort blanket’ events, it’s regular, and inevitable. Like the Queen’s speech. Or Wimbledon. You may not like it; you may not follow it; you may not even agree with it. But its mere presence, every year (or four or five years), is comforting in some way.

Also, of course, it’s simply an interest in politics - and more specifically, political analysis. This combined with the fact that it’s the American election - an event whose interest in which I wouldn’t be able to indulge in such depth back home - makes watching CNN’s coverage a delight. To the extent that I get rather annoyed when I switch it on and it’s Business News, or World News, or a special report on polar bears.

The American election coverage is gripping due to the current contest between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, of course; and the emergence of John McCain as the Republican front-runner, and the possible consequences of that. (Is it only me who finds McCain’s public-speaking frighteningly like Linus’s at the end of A Charlie Brown Christmas?).

But on CNN you also have John King, America’s answer to Peter Snow:

- who bears an uncanny resemblance to another CNN political correspondent, Anderson Cooper:

Anderson Cooper

John King

Fortunately, I have quickly learned to tell them apart a) by their hair (John King’s is more bouffant); and b) any time they’re on the same show together. That normally makes it quite easy.

There’s a general election taking place in Malaysia right now; and the votes have already started coming in (over here, it seems as if this process happens over a matter of days, if not weeks, as opposed to on one night).

The ruling party - or strictly speaking: coalition party - Barisan Nasional has so far won all of them, I think. And in some cases: unopposed.

Barisan Nasional has governed Malaysia for the past fifty years. Fifty years. Or to put it another way: every year that it’s been independent from us Brits.

Given that Malaysia is a Muslim country (Islam is the official religion - although others are practiced openly here, too), Barisan Nasional is, unsurprisingly, a right-wing coalition. Its dominance of Malaysian politics is such that when the date of the election was announced, the front page of the New Straits Times (which is linked to the BN) carried a graphic of the current make-up of parliament in which virtually every ‘little man’ was coloured blue. Underneath, it had the number of seats held by each party. Which is as follows:

Barisan Nasional - 198

DAP (the main opposition: a secular, multi-race, social democratic party) - 12

Barisan Alternatif (a coalition of opposition parties) - 8

Others - 1

198 out of 218 seats. It doesn’t take a genius to work out that there isn’t much of a political opposition in Malaysia.

And this lack of opposition, and lack of dissent, is part of the make-up of Malaysia, I’m finding. There’s an awful lot of talk in the papers and from politicians about ‘wanting peace’ and people not letting their ‘emotions’ affect their decision at the ballot box - undoubtedly a response to political rallies and demonstrations in recent months - and it strikes me that the government here is keen to keep its people quiet, and under-the-thumb.

On the one hand, you could argue that they don’t have much to dissent about. Malaysia is, by South East Asian standards, a very prosperous and safe country. But as an outsider stepping in, talking to people and reading the national papers every day, it seems that dissent and criticism of the status quo, of the government, is not encouraged - and you see this both in what Malaysians are willing to accept; and by the level of analysis by political writers. Which is, to put it kindly, limited - even though acres of press are devoted to national politics - although not unsurprising, seeing as the two main English language papers (which are the two available at the hotel, incidentally) are linked to the ruling coalition.

These papers read like newsletters you receive through your door from local parties during election time, telling you what good work the government has been doing, how much money they have given to this project and that group, reporting verbatim what ministers announce without much, if any, criticism, and so on. Every day is a good news day here in Malaysia.

But back to the lack of dissent, and the two conversations/news stories that have hit me most thus far (apart from learning that the BN was completely unopposed in some of its winning seats in this election).

One: S, the bass player, told me that they were “lucky” in Malaysia, because the internet isn’t censored here.

Two: This story in the New Straits Times, subtitled: “Undergraduates found to be actively involved in politics risk losing their government scholarships.” Read the report in full, but this is a choice quote from the Higher Education Minister:

“The number of university students involved in active politics is just a handful, but I believe the majority of them is with the government. These are rational students who appreciate and understand what the government has done for them and the people all these years.”

So: if the government gave you your scholarship, woe betide you if you criticise them. No, wait: woe betide you if you indulge in any sort of “active politics” whatsoever while you’re a student! (And the same goes for lecturers).

I showed this story to the guys that work at the bar here, my jaw on the floor in disbelief, and it provoked a fascinating discussion about politics and the law (both state and Muslim), and what is and isn’t allowed here. And yes, students are not allowed to be politically active, nor do they have the vote here until they’re 21 (I was also told that no students of any age - including mature ones - are allowed to vote, either **Update: see comment from Suraya below**).

I certainly don’t mean to criticise Malaysia or its wonderful people (only its ruling party ;-0), and I’m certainly no patriot. But sometimes - as I have also found travelling to America - I feel very lucky to live in liberal Britain, where we can vote at 18; where same-sex unions are recognised; where there is no death penalty; and where political debate and analysis is open and virulent and sometimes, yes, bloody.

That said, the New Straits Times‘ arts coverage is impeccable.