MUSLIMS should welcome the announcement by Datuk Dr Mujahid Yusof Rawa, the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department in charge of religious affairs, that it will be the government’s policy to promote compassionate Islam. Actually, I believe there is only an “Islam” whose teachings are primarily compassionate, a blessing and merciful. Anyone who reads the Quran will know that it describes itself as a “healing and a mercy to those who believe” (Al Isra (17) verse 82). In fact, the Holy Prophet Muhammad himself is described in the Quran as rahmatan lil Alamiin for the whole world and the creations (Al Anbiya (21): verse 107). Essentially, rahmah means love or affection and is often understood to mean the love of God for mankind and His creations where He has provided everything they need to develop and live on this earth. In other words, the Quran guides mankind to understand and appreciate this rahmah through its guidance. Dr Mujahid also pointed out the use of state resources to confront “public sins” and “private sins” to show, I believe, that any use of religious enforcement powers must be tampered with common sense and compassion. I believe real scholars of Islam know that there is an abundance of literature that discourages the deliberate attempt to expose private sins. For reasons which I cannot understand, Dr Mujahid has been exposed to irrelevant criticisms by some Muslim religious experts implicit within which is the assumption that he is ignorant of the discourse in these matters. Read more at https://www.thestar.com.my/opinion/columnists/through-many-windows/2018/10/14/the-compassionate-face-of-islam-it-should-never-be-the-states-role-to-merely-punish-the-offender-or#yJmObO1TVuz0wQfl.99
I have spoken and written many articles over the years where I tried to provoke the Rakyat into taking responsibility for the well being of the Nation. I was deeply concerned that the general rakyat who are generally good and decent people were illusioned that they are helpless in shaping the destiny of the Nation.
Whatever the impetus was, I am glad that the Rakyat now know that they can change the government if they are determined to. I hope that this makes the politicians realize that the Rakyat’s mindset has changed. They no longer fear the powers that the politicians wield.
I would like to remind the Rakyat that while the Rakyat’s mindset and imagination with regards to politics may have changed, they must remember one thing - power still has a druggish effect on the politicians and their servants. Hence, they must not assume that just because the baton has been passed to the member of parliaments and state assemblymen on the other side of the fence, all must necessarily be well - they are still politicians.
Hence, our focus should still remain the same - we want a stable, peaceful country where each of us and our children have the opportunity to prosper based on the efforts that we put into life. Every Malaysian has a right to feel safe, useful, appreciated as a citizen with a sense of belonging and respected as a human being.
While the some or most of the Rakyat may still be caught up with the elections that have ended, the Raperas must put on their thinking caps while being balanced by their compassionate hearts.
While some or most of the Rakyat may think that their responsibility has ended by casting their votes, Raperas must know that duties and responsibilities to ensure that this Nation progresses comprehensively continues. Raperas must be ever vigilant.
Believe me when I say this: most people are unable to free themselves from vested interests that may actually run counter to national interests. Do not for a second think that a change of government automatically means that human nature itself has changed.
While we must give the trust, the benefit of doubt and support the government of the day, the Rapera must be vigilant of the human nature which may only want to act in its own interests.
Let us together unite, as Malaysians, to ensure that the key institutions in our country are strengthened not to act against ordinary citizens but to empower them so that they are protected and assisted in their quest to contribute in making this nation greater.
I am sure quite a number of
thinkers, real reformers, prophets and ordinary people must have said this
before. But we forget easily. Life and
its demands make us forget it. Our sense of helplessness, and the threats,
bullying by the powerful and the institutions make us think we are weak and
make us adapt.
Only the People can bring about true
reform – if we are united and help each other.
We are not united in our sense of
helplessness and our hopes because we have been forced by the system to become
slaves of the masters that have been created. Due to our disunity of purpose
and hope, we continue to be misled by the politicians and the institutions that
continue to take our away our dignity as human beings.
We continue to be oppressed by those
who abuse democracy for their selfish ends. We fail or simply think we have to accept a system
that does not throw us the best choice of candidates as leaders.
Hence we do not have leaders who
really understand the aspirations, needs and hopes of the common man. These
leaders do not understand that we want a safe home for our kids, that we want affordable
homes, food decent employment to live, and basic necessities like free
education,, free medical services, child and old age care and so on. All these can be done but they do not and
will not do it as efficiently as can be done.
The reason is simple: they do not and
will not face these challenges because they, their children and their cronies live a luxurious
life of aplenty. They cannot emphatise
with the needs that they themselves do not have. They themselves are stuck in the position to
sustain their status and lifestyles.
Do you not recognize them and see their
game?
Do you not see the conspiracy
between the politicians, the capitalist and their religious elites to keep the
People politically, economically and spiritually enslaved? So they can
perpetuate their position of influence and give the people an illusion of
reforms, and illusion of service?
They have managed to divide us, not
only along racial and religious lines but occupationally as well. We have been tricked into thinking we are
just civil servants, workers in the government sector, private sector and so on
letting us forget that we are at the end of the day – common, ordinary folks
who need each other.
It is sad that occupationally be
have been divided until we often become enemies of each other instead of cooperating
to enhance our quality of life. Thus, we become even weaker to confront the oppression
by the politicians, capitalists and the religious elites. We continue to be humiliated
slaves on God’s earth – struggling only to survive.
The People have to be united – doesn't
matter who we are occupationally, we have to help each other, help each other
to make our lives a little easier.
Our only defence against the oppression
of the politicians, capitalists and the religious elites is our unity and cooperation. Only we can bring about real reforms. We are
our only hope.
We have to make the 21st
century the era of the common People.
We and our children have a God given-right
to live in dignity.
Values are very important. Values will affect the vision and the decision of our leaders. We must be careful to know what values the leaders we want to lead us have.
In our country, under the generally out-dated and archaic political culture that the majority of our politicians still cling onto, public expression of personal values are not allowed. For this reason, the voters and the public cannot know for sure what values each of them have. For this reason also, the kind of values that are being presented by political parties seem very superficial and artificial, some of which sound like they have been created by some political strategists or image consultants.
We have heard many times, some of our political leaders utter the term"Asian values" and then only to forget about it completely until another political occasion requires it. There had also been situations where "Asian values" had been manipulated by shameful politicians to sneakily justify oppression, especially denial of basic human rights.
Likewise, the term "Islam" and "Islamic values" have been subjected to tremendous abuse, manipulation and trickery by politicians purely for political purposes with total disregard to the sanctity and right to personal faith. In this regard, quite a number of paid clerics and religious "gurus" shamefully abet their political masters in the manipulation and abuse. This manipulation and abuse of the term "Islam" and "Islamic values" becomes easy for the politicians because they are either backed by mass supporters or by the very culture in our country that has allowed the politicisation of Islam.
Terms like "Islam" and "Islamic values" have often been abused to condone denial of basic human rights, oppression and denial of women's rights. The voice that pleads that Islam upholds human rights, women's rights and abhors oppression of any sort is drowned by the smooth operation of the politicians and the shouts of their abettors - the paid clerics and the paid mobs.
Islam has become so politicised in the country such that the right and duty of the individual Muslim to practice his faith as he understands it has been taken away by the politicians in this country. Any cleric or scholar or thinker that denounces this control of faith is either pushed into oblivion or equally oppressed in ways that are possible. Alternative views are not only not allowed but often shout down by supporters organised and approved by hidden hands from above.
So, in the scenario of artificiality, superficiality and hypocrisy that has become part of our political culture, what are the values that these politicians hold? Don't you or the voters want to know or has the time not come yet in Malaysia to understand the impact of this question?
I look at both the Pakatan and the BN political parties and when I critically assess them, I am unable to determine with certainty what positive and encouraging values they represent. Often times, they all seem to say one thing today and another the next. Often times, their general behaviour is not consistent with the rare fine speeches they make. More often, their speeches frighten me to think that those are the values they represent.
DO they respect basic human rights?
Do they even respect the dignity of a human being? Do they understand what "dignity" is?
I do not know because I do not really know what values they actually hold.
No citizen in their right sense of mind will object to the campaign for free and fair elections. Bersih had its aim in the 8 points that it wanted to hand over to the Yang Di Pertuan Agung through the memorandum. This memorandum could very well have been delivered to the palace by just four or five Bersih representatives. But of course Bersih wanted to create as much awareness as possible among the citizens and hence the peaceful walk thorugh the streets of Kuala Lumpur. This is understandable. They wanted to exercise the democratic right of peaceful assembly and freedom of expression. All noble aims.
The situation however has changed. The events of past weeks have shown that Bersih's 8 points have received almost maximum publicity around the country. Blogs, newspapers and even the national television have publicised Bersih's objectives and much discussion have been aroused. People are aware. bersih's aim of creating awarenss have been achieved. Bersih has even succeded in getting all sorts of reactions from the public - political and apolitical.
Bersih's constant aim was to have a peaceful march through the city of Kuala Lumpur. The emphasis being on PEACEFUL.
In reaction to Bersih, both UMNO Youth and Perkasa have announced that they too will walk through the streets to show their strength. Both of these entities have numbers too. The Bar Council's entry into the "foray" has not helped to ease the tension but lead to further misunderstandings and "aggressive" reactions.
Somehow or other, the situation in and around Kuala Lumpur has been unnecessrily tense and worrisome these past few days and promises to become worse.
I have met and talked to almost all sides involved and to many ordinary, apolitical citizens. I have had discussions with some of those responsible for the security of the Nation. I am convinced that the situation currently does not permit a street march. It is now too dangerous.
This is not the time to point fingers to apportion blame.
This is not the time to state who is responsible for the current security threat that we are faced with.
This is the time to understand that a street march planned for July 9 is indeed a security threat.
This is the time to act responsibly and to recognise the citizen's right to security and peace. The right to peaceful assembly and freedom of expression has to temporarily take a back seat because the security situation does not permit it.
If Bersih organisers truly believe that they had noble aims, which many quarters think so, then this is the time to be consistent and do the noble act - call off the July 9 street march in the interest of peace and security.
UMNO Youth being part of the very Barisan Nasional Government which should be responsible for the security of the Nation should immediately announce that they will NOT be walking through the streets on July 9.
I make the same appeal to my brothers and sisters in Perkasa - demi keamanan Negara dan cinta kepada rakyat, batalkan sahaja rancangan untuk berdemo pada July 9. Biarlah menjadi NGO yang menunjukkan contoh yang baik yang mampu mengutamakan keamanan negara dan kesejahteraan Rakyat jelata.
I also appeal to all the other NGOs, including Pekida to do the right thing - do not walk the streets on July 9 in groups. I make the same appeal to all Raperas.
We should NOT be ashamed to do the right thing even if it means changing our plans, swallowing our pride or egos or even temporarily suspending one of our democratic rights.
May Peace be with you all and may God guide you all to do the wise thing.
I went to a function today and had a chat with a few Malaysian businessmen who are doing businesses abroad. We were also joined by a Malaysian who has been with the World Bank for years and is now posted to the United Nations. We discussed global economic trends and where Malaysia stands in the larger scheme of things.
The Vatican, the Jewish groups and the China are said to be global economic firepowers. Each of these groups are influential globally in their own areas.
Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC) is said to be the largest bank in the world. in terms of lending and deposits. China Construction Bank Corporation, Agricultural Bank of China and the Bank of China also rank within the top 30 banks in the world.
China's car industry is also said to be the next major player in the world. Apparently, Japan no longer considers Malaysia's car market of any significance and this may lead to more cars coming from China to Malaysia - that too if the market volume is considered as commerically viable for China. The businessman who has business dealings with China, UK and other parts of the world predicts that the world economy will be completely different in five years from now with China being the major economic player in the world.
As to Malaysia, the consensus reached was that there will continue to be a major brain drain from the country. Malaysia is said to be regressing behind neighbouring countries like Indonesia, Singapore, Thailand and even relatively Vietnam. The recurring theme was the lack of competitive spirit and competence among the Malaysian businessmen and industry players. If this is true, then we have failed all these years to cultivate a competent industrial and business culture.
I have been hearing too many negative things being said about Malayisan business competency and this needs to be addressed. However, our country's politics seems to be too engrossed with sensational, trivial and nonsensical issues and news which have no bearing on the general welfare of the Nation.
I hope Malaysians have not become too full of themselves or "syok sendiri" until we do not realise that globally, we may be considered as totally insignificant.
We had an interesting discussion with some university students last weekend. It was about governance and leadership of the country.
It was agreed that political leadership is relevant because the people in general require direction for the Nation. There must be a captain who is steering the ship and a capable crew to help the ship move safely and efficiently. The safety of the passengers is paramount. There also must not be pilferage on the ship either by the captain or the crew. More importantly, economic considerations should not override the safety and welfare of the passengers like what happened to the Titanic.
Having agreed that political leadership is necessary, next on the discussion was various matters such as – the function and quality of the leadership. It must be borne in mind that while politicians provide general leadership, the actual work of governance of the Nation is being carried out daily by the civil servants. The civil servants carry out their duties in accordance with the laws, rules and regulations that are passed by politicians in Parliament. Hence, it is the politicians that set the legal framework within which the government functions. Without the slightest of doubt, these laws, rules and regulations affect the daily lives of the ordinary citizen. For example, due to several “unfriendly” regulations concerning setting up businesses, many ordinary citizens are unable to readily feed their family by doing legitimate businesses.
Since the laws that are passed by Parliament (Politicians) affect our everyday lives, it becomes critical that we have not only clever and intelligent politicians but those that can emphatise with the needs of the ordinary Rakyat. It is really pointless having a politician from Oxford or Standford or Harvard if he is unable to emphatise with the needs of the Rakyat, particularly so when his entire family background and growing up environment is detached from the lives of the ordinary Rakyat. Can a person who studied at exclusive schools, mixing around with children of elites, and living a life with an extra ordinary budget ever understand the social and economic challenges of the average citizen? Such a politician will only be manipulative of the Rakyat for his own political ends while serving elitist economic interests.
We agreed that in Malaysia, politics has become a family “property” to be passed on from generation to generation. This need not necessarily be a bad thing but it does behove us to ask several questions. If the Rapera does not ask the relevant question, then we will be guilty of creating an aristocracy and some sort of political feudalism with its attendant problems. If this happens, then there will be a master-slave relationship between the political leader and the ordinary citizen which is an antithesis of true democracy. In a democracy, the government is of the people by the people for the people. In other words, the People are the masters of the destiny of the Nation.
Our discussion identified the important link between the quality of leadership, the laws passed and the welfare of the people. If there are “bad laws” in the sense that it impinges on natural rights of human beings, it reflects badly on the quality of political leadership in the country. If the wealth of the Nation is largely concentrated in the hands of the very few elites and families, then, it also reflects upon the quality (or possibly greed) of the political leadership.
This is particularly so when the opportunities for such a wealth was gained largely by political interference. Responsible politicians should not create policies or do acts that deliberately create income inequalities. In our country, an examination of the control of wealth and essential businesses may reveal that it belongs to a very select few. This is an exercise that should be undertaken by a Rapera for the benefit of the general public. This exercise may even reveal the “political and money trail” that binds together the economic and political power in the country in the hands of some who can perpetuate power forever, ceteris paribus. If this is the case, then the ordinary Rakyat is doomed forever – it is just a matter of time.
We also agreed that the search for a “People leader” should continue and it need not be confined to the leaders that have been offered by the respective political parties. In fact, as I have argued before, political parties in our country are unable to allow the best “talents” to rise as leaders. The current political system and culture is so embedded in itself that it cannot evolve into something better without fundamental reforms within the political system, thought and culture. It is also equally challenging for Raperas to evolve because the political environment has engulfed the national environment where only politicians are given prominence in public space, and that too, the mainstream politicians. Alternative views and thoughts that contest the mainstream are either systematically suppressed or ridiculed through control of the mainstream media.
We have yet to develop a culture that each citizen cares for the Nation and has a responsibility and duty towards ensuring its general well being. Over the years, our politics has descended to the level of championing rights to the exclusion of collective responsibility and general empathy to the needs of the other fellow citizens. Our politics have yet to detach itself from the tribal, primitive or jahiliah basis of exclusivity based on ethnicity or religion (yes, religious discrimination included if it is intended to discriminate against fellow human beings). When we are unable to identify humane leaders, how can we have quality political leadership? When we have feeble mortals behaving like God on earth, can we truly believe they serve God? It is all politics at its worse.
We admitted that bringing about a responsible thinking political culture among the citizens is a momentous task and requires long term awakening among the citizens of this Nation. Like Egypt and in all human history, the general citizens only act when they brought to the level of utmost humiliation.
We also recognized that the elitists with their vested interests will try very hard to arrest the Rakyat’s awakening and political maturing. Raperas must take this lead as the ordinary citizens are too busy with their daily lives.
SO, the search for the People’s Leader continues. And we continued to enjoy our teh tarik and roti canai.
Peace !
(Note: To the Raperas who made time to have teh tarik with me – thanks for educating me further. You all were wonderful and I have hope for the future with the presence of young people like you all)
I told this to my friends many times over the years: real and fundamental reforms cannot happen in this country because Malaysians in general do not have the will to make it happen. There has never been a real people’s movement in this country since independence. If the citizens of this country do not have the will to WANT to make fundamental reforms, how can it ever happen?
We like to make the mistake of thinking that a mere mass assembly of people is a people’s movement. One example is the “Semarak Rakyat” during the Mahathir era which swept the country during the so called constitutional crisis. True, that was the first of such ‘movement’ since independence where we have the Prime Minister addressing crowds of people at open assemblies.This was however completely politically orchestrated by strong political parties. Much of the attendance at these assemblies was orchestrated too. It was also meant to address only one issue – political power versus royal power. So in this sense, it cannot be considered as a “people’s movement” though it was politically very clever of the political masters of that time.
The second often quoted so-called movement was the “reformasi movement” since the sacking of Anwar Ibrahim from UMNO. True again, it was also the first time since independence that many Malays took to the streets to protest against the Government. I will say that it did have an impact on Malay political activity in the sense that for the first time, Malays were willing to go against their Malay political leaders. I consider those “street demonstrations” a new phenomenon in Malay political activity post independence. It has also left an indelible shock wave through the UMNO party which I believe UMNO has yet to fully recover to date. The impact of the “Anwar sacking” and his subsequent charge on the first sodomy case appeared to have affected UMNO’s balance in a way that Semangat 46 could not. Even PAS and UMNO as two independent Malay political parties did not bring about such a drastic impact on the Malay’s perspective of political activity and perception.
Maybe, these events lead to Malay political maturity about race-based politics and its effectiveness because these events, rightly or wrongly, brought about the perception that there is no guarantee that your own race will not suppress you if politically necessary. Obviously, those on the side of Anwar Ibrahim, being former UMNO members felt betrayed by their own UMNO members.PKR, which was born directly out of Anwar’s episode had to be pragmatically multi-racial because it did not receive or was not able to garner the overt support many of the UMNO and PAS members. I think politics would have been totally different today for PKR had PKR been largely Malay or had succeeded in wooing members from PAS and UMNO in large droves. However, the main objective of PKR, as perceived, in the early days was to secure the release of Anwar Ibrahim. A new political party, like the bus, will have many passengers with their own directions and destination points. But I have digressed and this point may be discussed at another date.
I was going to talk about the people’s movement and why we may never have fundamental reforms in our society. I have to conclude on the above discussion by saying that neither events like the “semarak” or “Anwar’s reformasi via the PKR” can be considered as a people’s movement.
There were however semblances of “people’s movements” in this country like the “Bersih campaign” and the “Lawyer’s walk”. These were two unprecedented events where the ordinary citizen took part without any cajoling, force or payment. Once again, the objective of these two events was very limited to specific objectives and it did not really succeed in firing up the imagination of the general citizen to pursue the issues canvassed.
For a people’s movement to arise, the people themselves must have the will to want to have fundamental reforms. For them to want reforms, they must know the following:
1. 1. The fundamental flaws of our existing system – for this to happen, there must be an environment of knowledge and discussion;
2. 2. There must know that alternative ways of doing things are available and possible;
3.3. They must feel the injustice or the inefficiency of the system and be less tolerant of the same;
4. 4. They must understand or be made to understand that often they are being made use of as pawns on the political chessboard by the existing crop of politicians;
5.5. They must see beyond their own selfish, narrow interests and learn that their indifference to larger things in society will hurt them or their future generations one day.
6.6. That no fundamental reforms in human history has ever been achieved without sacrifices of energy, time and wealth.
7. 7. That what they do or do not do today will affect the well being of tomorrow.
Generally, I believe that we, as a society, are far away from possessing the above 7 characteristics. We are a Third world country that has developed but has still retained the third world mentality of non interference in National affairs. However, we fail to see that national affairs have a direct bearing on our daily lives, especially so in the long run. It is such “national indifference”, apathy’ ignorance and “fear” that will prevent us, the People, from bring about fundamental reforms in our country.
Lacking the will to bring about fundamental reforms, we develop a culture of “fire-fighting” and ad hoc measures. I find it extremely sad that we waste huge resources in developing fire-fighting measures only to spend more resources to put out more fires resulting from the expiry of the shelf life of the earlier fire-fighting measure! We are content to be a Nation of ad-hoc solutions without any concern for long term National goals and vision. Hence, we also end up having “cosmetic” reforms and reforms that cannot work because the system as a whole is not ready or capable of absorbing or sustaining such a reform. For example, the best of reforms in bringing about a “corruption free system” will fail if the factor of the corrupt human being who is tasked with implementing the system is not addressed. It will be like asking the cat to guard the fish. The cat must either be asked to go and replaced or be rehabilitated, if possible.
In the absence of the general will of the People to seek fundamental reforms, there are pockets of individuals or groups of Raperas who relentlessly try to seek fundamental reforms through their modest means. Sadly, however, even the efforts of these groups and individuals do not receive the kind of support from the people that they deserve. There many public interest non-governmental organizations, and individuals who are selflessly trying to make life better for all of us. We need to seek them out and provide our energy to strengthen their struggles.
For fundamental reforms to happen, I believe we must first of all get out of our current political understanding and perspectives (for those who find understanding very difficult). This, in itself is a major challenge because most people do not like to revisit their understanding of anything in their lives. It is this trait of Malaysians that is fully understood and capitalized upon by our current crop of politicians so that each of them can simply keep rewinding their own slogans and vision statements. We do not seem to realize that they are actually determining our values for us without even us having to evaluate them. The self-oppressive values become as normal as breathing.
It should be clear that if we are unwilling to re-evaluate our current political understanding, then we can never bring about any reforms. This is because our current political understanding is confined to the activities and thoughts of the currently existing political parties and we all know what they stand for and what they have achieved.
Are we happy with any of them? If not, do we expect them to radically reform or change? This answer cannot be accurately answered without first realizing that there is a big difference between the political government and the administrative government (civil service). The political government is the political party that forms the “government of the day”. For example, politically, Malacca is BN government while Penang is PR government. Administratively, is there any change in the state civil service of the two? The civil service is largely on auto pilot where it matters most to the people’s daily lives.
A creative, reform minded and energetic political government will give people benefitting direction and vision to the administrative government. That’s the critical difference. The manner in which the administrative government functions will also be influenced by the culture and values of the political government. Hence, though the civil service is almost on auto pilot, its integrity and level of efficiency will, to a large extent, be influenced by their political masters.
Therefore, it is extremely crucial that you evaluate the political masters that you want to put in the seat of political power. You can only do this wisely if you are prepared to think outside or alternative to your current understanding of politics.
[Mereka yang tidak boleh bergurau diberi amaran untuk tidak terus membaca]
Kawan aku mengeluh. “Pelik betul lah dia ni..dah lah lahir di Malaysia, keturunan berabad-abad di Malaysia, masih tak tahu Bahasa Kebangsaan”.
“Marah je kamu?”
“Mesti lah bang….nama rakyat Malaysia, Bahasa Malaysia tidak dikuasai. Hormati sikit lah Bahasa Kebangsaan. Kan itu bahasa kita?
“Siapa yang kau maksudkan tu? Ah Chong dengan Manikam?”
“Bukan lah. Dia orang memang mahir dalam Bahasa Kebangsaan.Pelat pun tak ada. Aku maksudkan Mydin dengan Nik tu. Tak erti cakap Bahasa Kebangsaan langung! Loghat tebal pulak tu”
“Mydin dengan Nik? Esh! Apa yang kau merepek tu? Ni kawan-kawan Melayu kita lah”.
“Ya lah..tu yang aku berasa malu ni. Tak tau menghormati Bahasa Kebangsaan. Tak usaha nak kuasai Bahasa kebangsaan”
“Tak percaya lah aku!”
“Tak percaya? Kau dengar sendiri”
PERBUALAN DENGAN MYDIN:
“Mydin! Mydin! Datang sini sekejap”
“Awat sughuh aku mai? Hang dok pikiak apa?”
“Kamu tak kerja kah hari ini?”
“hang dok meghapu tei minyak! Tak keja soru miss lah sheh. Aku dah pi keje, la baghu nak pi nishan sat”.
“Tak nak minum bersama kami dulu ke?”
“Piiirah pulau kendi! Aku dah pekena baguih punya cendoi tadi. Hariah mai sat pen hang”
[Mana-mana rakyat Malaysia yang tidak faham jangan betulkan screen komputer anda]
PERBUALAN DENGAN NIK:
“Nik…kamu nak ikut kami esok ke seminar?”
“Semina? Semina gapo ni?”
“Kamu dah lupa ke?”
“Esh mu kechek gapo ni? Mu tak ghoya pon..bilo tu?
“Esok. Ada yuran untuk berdaftar”
“Naatang betul! Ambo nak keno cari piti pulok! Berapo riyal?”
[Mana-mana rakyat Malaysia yang tidak faham jangan goyangkan tetikus anda]
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm…………………………tak kan nak batalkan warga Negara kot?..
Though I was very happy when Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak announced the 1Malaysia policy, I did expect diverse reactions to it, particularly from within UMNO. In fact, I believe I was probably the earliest blogger to “expand” and try to give meaning to the policy with the first posting on April 8, 2009 (I believe too that even then, Najib did not yet outline his concept!). Since then, there has been more than 10 postings on the subject.
I truly believe that 1Malaysia concept is relevant, and the way forward. It is a good start and a bold one by an UMNO President considering that it could easily turn out to be a major political risk for him. I knew then that it will be misunderstood by some people in UMNO as abandoning the main objective of UMNO – ie protecting Malay rights. While UMNO’s stated objective of “protecting Malay rights” is exclusive, 1Malaysia policy promotes inclusiveness – every citizen’s rights. Such a shift will certainly require time for UMNO leaders in general to understand and to subsequently embrace it.
1Malaysia calls for a paradigm shift - away from the used way of doing things to looking at the same things with fresh eyes and new approaches. Changing habits is never easy but 1Malaysia motivates the need to change for the better – for the general good. The Nation itself is still on the learning curve and we are learning that the way we are used to is not necessarily the best way to achieve positive results. Admission of past failures and our collective weaknesses is the first step towards realigning the Nation towards greater things. 1Malaysia, I believe provides us the channel to do this. In this regard, the Quran itself challenges us to reevaluate ourselves:
“Fighting is prescribed for you, and you dislike it. But it is possible that you dislike a thing which is good for you, and that you love a thing which is bad for you. But God knows, and you know not” (Quran: 2.216)
Confused apprehension of 1Malaysia coupled with engineered ignorance
As I expected, there were sections of the Malay community that were anxious that 1Malaysia will erode their special position that are enshrined in the Constitution. Not surprisingly, NGOs like Perkasa came into being to act as some sort of a pressure group to “remind” the Government not to “sideline the Malays”. While I respect the democratic rights of these NGOs to freely express their concerns, I must state that their “fears” are actually unfounded. I presume that their unfounded fears arose because of several factors, including confusion, ignorance of the Constitution and ignorance of the demographic facts. I shall explain below:
It is a fact that many UMNO members are also part of Perkasa. There has been an unhappy feeling among UMNO members since Tun Abdullah Badawi was UMNO President. There seems to be a perception that he has weakened UMNO and the unprecedented loss by BN in the 2008 general elections seems to have lent credence to that perception. Further, the unhappiness of UMNO with Abdullah Badawi resulted in him relinquishing both the offices of the Prime Minster and UMNO President. To be fair to Abdullah, he did introduce several liberal reforms or at least did give space for various “sensitive issues” to be publicly discussed. However, this liberalism was seen as his weakness rather than a result of his policy. This public discussion of “sensitive issues” were also seen by many UMNO leaders as UMNO becoming weak. This is a scenario which they have never seen before especially since some of the participants airing the issues were educated and young Malays! It was becoming a Malay-Malay dialogue on the reality of the multi-religious, multi-cultural and multi-ethnic Malaysia. You now have Malays championing not only Malay rights but also non-Malay rights – very Malaysian in perspective.
Further, the loss of 5 states to the opposition also seemed to have ‘embarrassed’ UMNO leaders/members. Malays, who are not UMNO members but UMNO sympathizers, also seemed to lose confidence in UMNO’s ability to look after Malay interest. Barisan Nasional’s (seen as UMNO’s) erosion of political power is confused with “erosion of Malay rights”.
All the above factors I believe caused confusion in the mind of some Malays. The confusion being between rapid phase of political changes, weak leadership, a bigger than usual opposition, and legitimate Malay interests. It is this confusion that led some people to wrongly saying that Malay political power has eroded when in actual fact, we have the biggest Malay representation in Parliament since merdeka!
It is also this confusion that led to some people wrongly saying that “Malay rights” in the Constitution are being challenged when in actual fact (a) the Constitution has always spoken about “Malay and natives special positions” and (b) there has never been any legal or Parliamentary challenge to Article 153. I have written about this in three parts here. http://jahaberdeen.blogspot.com/2010/02/hak-melayu-terhakis-bhg-satu.html)
It is noteworthy that these self-styled “champions of the Malays” have conveniently never taken the initiative to educate their Malay audience on the entrenched provisions in the Constitution. It is as if they want to perpetuate the ignorance of their audience on the said provisions so that they can “pump up the emotions” without putting the “brain in gear”.
Of course, as in any political community, there will always be vested interests who will take advantage of the existing confusion to promote their selfish interests at the expense of the majority. These are people who will pretend to care for the community but in actual fact, they do not care beyond the perpetuation of their own wealth, power and influence. Such a hypocritical behaviour has been pointed out in principle in the Quran:
“Ah! you are those who love them, but they love you not,- though you believe in the whole of the Book. When they meet you, they say, "We believe": But when they are alone, they bite off the very tips of their fingers at you in their rage. Say: "Perish in you rage; God knows well all the secrets of the heart." (Quran 3:119)
Inclusive or exclusive vision for the Nation?
Race based politics may have been relevant pre-Merdeka when possibly the diverse ethnic groups were unable to communicate with each other and lived in their own respective villages with very little inter-mingling. Race-based politics is certainly exclusive. It only promotes the well-being of one race to the exclusion of others. Such a political approach is bound to create conflicts and tension in the long run.
Today, the situation in Malaysia is completely different. People from diverse ethnic backgrounds inter-mingle freely on a daily basis – schools, places of work, neighbourhood, festivals, businesses, etc. Inter marriages are common. Bahasa Malaysia and English has enabled them to communicate with each other and allowed them to understand that they have common fears and hopes. Malaysia is the only home that most common Malaysians have though the elitists may have alternative homes in other countries.
There is a real bond between common Malaysians with the “soil of Malaysia”. In this sense, all Malaysians are “sons of the soil” or “bumiputra”. The term actually is unimportant compared to what it entails to be a Malaysian in reality. In the final analysis, it is they who have to collectively defend Malaysia if it is under attack from external or internal enemies of the Nation. It is they who have to collectively develop this Nation. Malaysians know and realize that if any Malaysian in suffering it will subsequently affect the well being of the others.
You cannot have what you want for yourselves and yet deny the very same for others. Such an approach is primitive, unjust and is a recipe for long term social conflict, strife and disaster. Denying others the equal and legitimate right to available resources is oppressive. I believe the right to God’s resources cannot legitimately be denied by man made laws.
“We have honored (karamna) the children of Adam; provided them with transport on land and sea; given them for sustenance things good and pure; and conferred on them special favors, above a great part of Our creation.” (Quran: Al-Israa 17:70)
We are all children of Adam and as siblings we are required to share the resources that God has given us. We are required to care for each other regardless of ethnic, cultural or religious differences. By now, we should have evolved into thinking beings who know that one of the biggest myth is that tribalism is security for the members of the tribe. Good and bad people are sprinkled into every tribe.Our diversity is not a weakness but a strength that we should collectively draw upon. The Quran lucidly refers to the strength of diversity as such:
“O humanity! We have created you from a single male and female and have made you into nations and tribes that you may know one another (not that you have pride over one another). Verily, the most honorable (أَكْرَمَكُمْ ) of you in the God’s Sight is the one most righteous. And God has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).” (Quran: Al-Hujraat”, 49:13)
The mark of a civilized society is that which takes an inclusive attitude towards each other. I believe 1Malaysia contains this very important ingredient of inclusiveness. As Najib himself has frequently pointed out, 1Malaysia is not a new phenomenon in Malaysia. We have been living peacefully developing this Nation together. 1Malaysia policy however puts into motion a vision for us to focus and to work out tangible reforms that will entrench this idea into the system.
Incidentally, last week I met Bassam Abu Ali, a Palestinian who is residing in Athens. He is here on a short trip and we exchanged notes. He strongly expressed his view that he is proud of the 1Malaysia concept being put forward by a Muslim majority country. He felt that Malaysia is an outstanding example of a Muslim majority country that lives peacefully with others. He also felt that this concept should be brought to other Muslim countries so that they can learn.
Anyway, back to us, I believe each of us should give meaning to this 1Malaysia concept and make it the foundation of our Nation. Any attempts by vested groups to thwart this vision should be opposed.
Twenty three years ago, Dr Chandra Muzaffar, the well respected social scientist and Muslim thinker, wrote in his book “Islamic resurgence in Malaysia” (Fajar Bakti Sdn Bhd, 1987) that the signs of “Islamic resurgence are everywhere”. In this excellent book, he analysed objectively and clearly the primary and secondary causes of the resurgence, the reaction of the political players (primarily PAS and UMNO) and the general reactions of the Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
It is interesting that he decided to explain in his book why he chose the term “Islamic resurgence”. I will like to quote one of the reasons he cited at page 2:
“…resurgence as a term embodies the notion of challenge, even a threat to those who adhere to other world-views. Many Muslims themselves would regard the espousal of an Islamic alternative as a challenge to the dominant social systems. Groups outside Islam, including those who are being challenged, would similarly perceive the rise of Islam as a threat to the position they hold.”
I recall as a young student in UKM in 1984, I was part of the “Islamic resurgence wave” with the determination that before I graduated I must organize at least one “Islamic programme”. I did manage to organize the first international seminar of its kind organized by a student body in the country then – “Seminar Sistem Kewangan Islam”. A seminar to discuss various “Islamic financial institutions”. That time, “Bank Islam” was still in its infancy and there were hardly any other “Islamic financial institutions”. The event was a success if measured by the attendance of international speakers and it was officiated by YM Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah who was then the Finance Minister. ( Of course I never realized then the metamorphosis of such institutions today labeled “Islam”)
I recall too that the main challenge in making the seminar a success was the management of my project committee. In UKM then, the student body was divided into two – one pro-PAS and the other pro-UMNO. The Economics Society was controlled by the pro-UMNO group. Normally, whenever any project is carried out by pro-UMNO, they will only select their own kind. Likewise with pro-PAS, they will also select their own kind. When my proposal for the project was accepted, I had insisted that I had the sole discretion to select my committee without any interference from the Economics Society exco which they agreed.
My committee was made up equally of pro-UMNO, pro-PAS and non-Muslims! Though I am considered to be part of the pro-UMNO group, but I was among the rare ones who could mingle easily with the pro-PAS group. However, in the eyes of the pro-PAS group, I was considered “dangerous” because while my dressing is western (shirt tucked in, belt, long pants and black shoes!) I could debate and argue with them. Those were the days when even UMNO leaders (with the exception of Dr Mahathir) would not dare to argue about Islam with PAS or pro-PAS groups.
Hence, some of the pro-PAS members of my committee were actually trying to scuttle the project. Student leaders like me should not be allowed to succeed because that would give me an “Islamic credential” when in some of their eyes, I do not deserve that. That was my first lesson of “religion being a tool of politics”. Some groups feel that Islam is their sole property and only they can dictate what is and who should talk about it. As a young student of course I was shocked that a “noble intention” and the willingness to work towards the success of the project was insufficient. I had to look and talk like them.
I had to make a decision because there were real sabotages done that could actually derail the seminar. That’s when I decided a few things in my life:
1) I will forever refuse to look like an Islamist (not “Islamic”). I do not live this life for fools/hypocrites who conjecture and treat God’s religion as a club membership. My life is Allah’s.
2) I will maintain the members and will not sack them unless they themselves do not want to be part of the seminar. They will be my test of fairness.
3) The non-Muslim members will remain unless they too do not want to (there was opposition to their inclusion too.) I am a Muslim and no one will convert me into a racist.
Finally, I called a meeting and spoke at length about the importance of the seminar, asked everyone to cooperate, those who want to leave can leave but I prefer them to stay and help. They who want to stay and try to scuttle the project too are also welcome to remain behind because I too want to know what was God’s ultimate plan for the seminar. I told them that I hold no grudges against any of the scuttlers and that they are a test to us and to themselves. I told them each of them are answerable to God, not to me. By the end of the meeting, some of the committee members cried and from that day on, generally, we were “smooth sailing”. Generally.
I read Dr Chandra’s book in 1988 because I was amazed how accurately he analysed the events that I saw then in UKM. He was talking about Malaysia and I was thinking that UKM in 1982 is the future Malaysia. Today, I think I am correct.
While I too was very happy with the rise in “Islamic consciousness”, I cannot help worrying about mass hypnosis and indoctrination, preoccupation with form rather than substance and the political “hijacking” of faith which to me is personal. It worried me that we may become a society where there is “religious oppression” and in the process, we are left with the “Law” but the death of “the spirit of Islam” in our society.
In 1984, the wave of “Islamisation” was strong for both the “right and wrong reasons”. The reactions to this wave were both “right and wrong”. My own impression was that the “embracing” of the resurgence was not altogether due to the love of God but other factors too, including the need for identity. However, while everyone was espousing the “Islamic” nature of UKM, I was seeing something else.
I saw that there was a rise of racism under the guise of “Islam”. For instance, until 1985, if I recall correctly, there were no non-Malay students who stood as candidates in the University elections. The logic then (and am sure still now among the conservative quarters) was that non-Muslims cannot be leaders for Muslims. Hence a Muslim should not vote for non-Muslims. You may recall that at one time, PAS was criticizing the Barisan Nasional for working with MCA and MIC. Heavens! This is not the mercy to humankind called “Islam” that I understand.
As a senior student in UKM, when I was put in charge of the campus election machinery, I argued along Quranic principles why we must field non-Muslim candidates too. For the first time, one Chinese and one Indian student stood for elections in UKM. This is Islam as I understand from the Quran. There also I learnt that I will have to prepare myself for the conflict between those conservative groups who want to impose their views on me and my own understanding from the Quran. I am, at the end of the day, accountable to Allah for my deeds. No one will be my advocate.
From UKM in 1984 to this day, “the conservative outlook of Islam” is the dominant outlook in our society. This is largely due to the political positioning and competition between PAS and UMNO as both try very hard to get into the hearts of the Malay voters. This I call the “politico-Islamisation process’ – where political considerations determine the “type of Islam” in the country. Political considerations usually consider what is pragmatic, popular and expedient – not necessarily what is “right and correct”.
The politico-Islamisation process in this country took on a serious evolutionary process because both PAS and UMNO seem to want out to each other with who is more “Islamic”. In the process, the UMNO led government is the one that gave momentum and force to this process, albeit unsuspectingly, by its Islamisation programme in 1982 with the subsequent sprouting of many institutions “Islamic”.
I think somewhere along the way, everything got out of hand. The man or the group of men who started the “Islamisation programme” were not there forever to control or manage it. It began to have a life of its own and began to mutate into something else altogether. Politics and the fight for prominence in matters “Islamic” took precedence over the education, discussion and understanding of Islam by Muslims themselves. The very political structure of our society seem to make the State and its apparatus the sole decider of what is “Islamic and what is not”. For example, there are set syllabuses in primary schools which are compulsory for all Muslim students to attend. All these which involves matters of faith and personal accountability to God are decided by a group of paid civil servants and politicians for the rest of the Muslim populace.
The rest of us will simply have to submit to them. This is a point which I have to return to later.
image thanks to