The People never wanted any fundamental reforms !!!

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.

Peace !

Screw them young???

Get them young. 

Plug them into the system but make sure they do not know how the system works. 

Give them choices that you have already decided for them. They will readily believe that they are making the choices. 

Get them into automotive mode so that their behavior is predictable to you.  However, make them believe that their peer behavior is erratic and unpredictable. They like that sense of being unique. 

Getting them into automotive mode is good for you. They will get used to all that is wrong and negative. They will loathe knowledge and love being lazy (call it “chilling out”). They will surrender their lives to you by only making them believe they have complete control.

Distract them from your main game. Give them music, girls, boys, gossip, or if you run out of ideas, rehash what has worked with the young 50 years ago and repackage it. They will not know the difference. They just want to think they are different from their adults. 

Make sure they do not understand your game or better that they are fed-up with your game. That way they will leave you alone to do what you want. Do all you can to make sure they are not interested in what you do.

Give them hope. Give them fear. Confuse them and mange the hope and the fear to make them subservient to you. Oscillate the fear and hope often. This way, you will make them surrender their self esteem to you.

Get them young and they will be the slaves of the system for life.  And they will then teach their children what the system has imbibed in them.

And you will be the master forever - to do as you please.

Peace !

Disruptive Leadership- Lead, follow or get out of my way!

by Amir Faisal Manan

As I sit here at my hotel room desk in Jakarta, glimpsing out of the window occasionally, I could not help but compare and contrast the capital of Indonesia with our very own pride and joy, KL. And I must admit that we have gone a long way to come to where we are now today, not just in terms of the physical socio-economic transformation, but also the in the quality level of the physical infrastructures. This is not insinuating that Indonesia is much more inferior than Malaysia, but if you feel offended, then sorry- get over it and get on with life.

Some may argue that I have not lived long enough to appreciate the evolutionary transformation that has taken place from way before my generation. But I will of course beg to differ for my very own reasons. I recalled a book I read several years back written by Kim Quek titled “Where to Malaysia? Back to Mahathirism or Anwar’s Reformasi”, where the author has very strong negative views against Dr Mahathir and in particular his mega projects. It made me realize that no matter what you do, you will always have people going against what you believe, telling you that you have done wrong and criticizing your every decision. The art of effective leadership is to not ignore criticism, but also to not take it personally.

I sometimes think that people confuse between leaders and politicians. To my mind, not all politicians are leaders inasmuch as not all leaders are popular. Most politicians would only change their ways when they receive cues from the citizens reminding them that it is time to change and the fear of losing the popularity battle is the impetus for change. A true leader, on the other hand, has sufficient foresight to think what is strategically best for the nation or the people of the country. To put it simply, a leader leads and not waits to be led by the citizens. But of course, that would mean that his actions would not necessarily be a popular one thus making him a failed politician. There are many instances where leaders were/are also popular, but there is no point in naming names since obviously my perception of a successful leader will differ from others. It is subjective in nature.

In thinking about leadership styles, there are also cases of disruptive leadership that is often against the majority thinking flows that are entrenched with complacency. These are the kinds of leaders who believe in a cause that differs from the majority, but seeks to revolutionize the present system for a potentially better future. Worst still, often they are dismissed as a “mad-man” and their ideals go unnoticed. This is a deterrent for many to go down the route of being different from the majority as they fear that they would inevitably invite trouble. The mere fact that there is a saying of “never trouble trouble till trouble troubles you” signifies that this is the mindset that is prevalent in the current society globally –i.e. just go with the flow.

We need more disruptive leaders to bring about the change that is required. Relying on the naturally slow Darwinian momentum may prove to be too late for us as a nation. A disruptive leader, by definition, would disrupt the natural cycle by turbocharging change and overcoming whatever inertia thats holding us back against progress and betterment. Martin Luther King was a disruptive leader. He saw injustice and inequality in his society and decided to change it. He disrupted the existing system which initially drew resistance from his very own people, the oppressed. But as with all charismatic leaders in history, although he had a difficult start, he managed to gain sufficient supporters to fight for the dream that he had. And yes, it all starts with a dream of a future that we want… 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amir Faisal Manan is a fuel scientist in an international Oil &Gas Company. This article originally appeared here.

Of Breasts, Buttocks and Thighs.

What has this topic got to with Raperas?  Well, it has a lot to do with Raperas because it has to do with living issues.

I have often cautioned that “women are women’s greatest enemies” and “men are women’s greatest oppressors”. I always qualify this statement by saying that it is a general statement and therefore not true of ALL women or ALL men. There are many men and women who are content being the human being that they are, calmly accepting the biological and psychological differences between them. The fact is: irrespective of gender differences, not all human beings are the same. They differ in many aspect – psychologically, intellectually, culturally, financially, etc, etc, etc.  Hence, we cannot factually be correct when we say that “All men like…..” or “All women like to….” in all cases. 

Having said that, generalizations do assist as a discussion tool sometimes. For example, I can safely assume that ALL women like their dignity to be protected and upheld. However, we can get into sticky waters when we try to examine what “dignity” means to each person. Worse even when we want to inject concepts like “modesty”, “honour” and such. 

Now let me ask how will you reasonably respond if I say: “ I want girls to walk around flaunting their sexuality”.  Now that word “sexuality”. It is straightforward is it not? It has to do with sex and I can safely assume that most people will agree “sexual” is a private matter unless it a matter for education or intellectual discussion.  So, If I want and encourage girls to flaunt their sexuality to the maximum permissible in society, would that make me a “sick” person or a “normal” person? Would that make me a “respecter” of women or one who degrades women? 

I read in the Star today that “Some GT-grid girls are willing to don skimpy outfits for the opportunity to earn good money”. They start as early as 16 and 17 which in Malaysia is considered a minor for the purposes of having sexual relationship. Skimpy clothes means skimpy clothes ie let as little clothes as possible cover your body.  Go to the link of Staronline and view them to ascertain your reasonable response. 

It is interesting that the girls admit that their boyfriends do not like it but they do it nevertheless for money. However, some of the girls interviewed said that being a grid GT girl gave them confidence. I wonder if they have paused to think whether they are confusing confidence for familiarity. Once you get familiar enough with anything, you can do it “confidently” .

Some guy told me that it is nice to be a girl especially a pretty one with curves in the right place to become rich. He explained that being a women, you can “sell parts of your body” for money. You can show off your legs, or your breasts or your buttocks. It sells.  I was quite upset when I heard that because I thought it sounded demeaning of women.  After all, legs, buttocks and breasts are meat, skin and fat wrapped around bones same as mens’.  Biologically, it is factually what is. However, psychologically and culturally, it means something else – it reminds you of sex.  Or more correctly, it is meant to tease you or excite you. Is this wrong or right? 

Would you allow your daughter or wife to display parts of her sexuality for money? 

This kind of questions and the answers will determine what kind of society we are. 

Of course we are living in a society of cultural extremes. I know some who believe that women should be completely covered from head to toe to safeguard their honour. On the other, there are others who believe that each women has an absolute right to her body. Extreme positions like this do not excite me. 

I recall I had a debate with some girls when I was a student in UKM on the “proper and acceptable” swim wear for women. Of course, the girls held the position that bikinis and swimsuits are acceptable in the swimming pool or the beach. I asked if they would stand in front me clad only in their bra and panties. They shook their heads in disbelief and called me sick.

I asked: “What in the world is the difference between bra and panties and a bikini?”

They kept quiet.

I asked further: “You do no mind being in public clad in bikinis but you are hesitant to stand in front of me alone with bra and panties? Why?”

They replied; “We are shy la!”

I asked; “ Will you mind being in bra and panties if I leave the lecture room?”

They said “Of course la…we are all girls”.

I said: “ See? The fact is because I am a guy. But you fail to understand or refuse to understand that even at the swimming pool or beach, there are guys. You have conditioned your mind to expose yourself in public because you have been conditioned to believe it is ok!”

I can never understand that logic of being able to be almost nude in public but not in private!

I hope I am not being misunderstood in my post here. I am not moralizing and personally, I really have no strong views whether a person wants to be nude or wants to be completely wrapped up. However, I get irked when I see hypocritical stances in our society either due to acquired pretence or a result of a weak brain. 

Even issues like women’s attire has never been discussed rationally in our society. We only hear religious exhortations which bores me to death because I am more interested in evaluating reasons, effects and general consequences. Have you ever heard of a seminar or a forum held on “The purpose of clothing”. At this seminar it will be interesting to have a women panelist say “One purpose of clothing for a women is to show the whole world that she has thighs, breasts and buttocks”. 

What do you think?

Peace!

Parti Keadilan Rakyat's Party Elections marred with lack of electoral security?

People are now referring to PKR as Parti Kian Runtuh. Quite a number I have met who once had hopes for PKR as a reform party are now thoroughly disappointed and have raised many credible questions.

One such question is being raised by Haris Ibrahim, a well known social activist who had actively campaigned for Pakatan Rakyat during the last General Elections. This question involves the legitimacy of the Party elections in the light of ballot papers floating around in the thousands! Haris asks:

"And if so, how then did I, who have no role to play in this electoral process, and the informant who had in his possession at least 100 of the same and  claimed to have access to more than 1,000, come to be in possession of these if the central election committee have the ballot papers intended for use in all 4 weekend elections secured under lock and key?"

He legitimately asks the question of electoral security. If past ballot papers ( as allegedly described by Saifudin Nasution) can float around, what guarantee is there that future ballot papers are not floating around too?

Does this not tamper with "free and fair elections" that the PKR brader is so fond of flaunting around?

To add further credence to the doubt that the public is forming about the "freeness and fairness" of PKR party elections, it is reported that Datuk Zaid Ibrahim has pulled out of the Deputy President race! According to Malaysian Insider, Zaid Ibrahim pulled out of the race citing the party election's as "not transparent and fair".

With such a move, can the public be faulted in thinking that PKR has finally shown its true colours and for whom it really stands for? To date, not a sound from the unchallenged PKR President on these marred elections!!!

Peace !

America - Democrat or Authoritarian Terrorist???

THE US-SAUDI MILITARY DEAL ---- AND GLOBAL MILITARY EXPENDITURE

by Dr. Chandra Muzaffar

The US plan to sell US 60 billion dollars worth of military equipment to Saudi Arabia will not contribute to peace and security in the Middle East.

The biggest arms deal ever in history, it provides for the sale of jetfighters and helicopters to oil-rich Saudi Arabia over a period of 15 to 20 years. US officials have stated that it will enhance the security of its key allies in the region, especially in the context of the alleged threat from Iran. The Saudis, according to Pentagon sources, are worried about Iran’s missile arsenal.

Independent political analysts, however, do not regard Iran as a threat to its Arab neighbours. While the rhetoric of some of its leaders may be belligerent, Iran’s diplomatic moves since the late nineties have been aimed at strengthening its ties with states in the Persian Gulf region, including Saudi Arabia.

There are perhaps other motives behind the US-Saudi deal which have not been highlighted in the mainstream media. The sale reinforces US military hegemony in a region that it perceives as vital for its triple interests---- Israel, oil and geopolitical control. Since the sale is huge, it will help to fill the coffers of corporate weapons manufacturers at a time when the US economy is in deep trouble

But the consequences for the Middle East could be dire. It could encourage both friends and foes of the US to increase their military expenditure. This could ignite an arms race in the region. An arms race in turn could intensify tensions in the Middle East which is already a cockpit of conflict. An arms race could also skew national priorities and lead to the subordination of other goals such as the eradication of poverty or the elimination of illiteracy, or the minimization of corruption.

This is why countries in Asia should be careful about expanding their military budget. They should not allow weapons manufacturers and arms merchants--- supported by political leaders--- to dupe them into making unnecessary military purchases. This danger is all the more real today than in the past since some of the countries in the region are rich and maybe the targets of those who are hell-bent on pursuing their business-cum-political agenda.

Indeed, escalating military expenditure is a global challenge.  Global military expenditure in December 2009 stood at 1.5 trillion US dollars. This represents a six percent increase in real terms over 2008. Compared to 2000, it is a 49 percent increase!

Worse, the entire UN budget--- the budget of the body charged with maintaining global peace--- in 2009 was only 1.8 percent of global military expenditure in that year.    

It is significant that the US alone accounted for 46.5% of global military expenditure in 2009. The respected Swedish peace institute, SIPRI, observes that massive US military expenditure is one of the contributory factors to the decline of the US economy since 2001.

For a few years after the end of the cold war in 1989 and the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, global military expenditure decreased but it has now increased to 2.7 percent of the global gross domestic product (GDP) which translates into US 225 dollars per person in the world.

There is no doubt at all that global military expenditure has to be curbed and controlled for the good of humankind.  It will be no easy task. For the vested interests that sustain military budgets in most countries are powerful. Nonetheless, we have to persevere. Perhaps for a start, governments with low military budgets and anti-war, pro-peace civil society groups should come together to plan the mass mobilization of public opinion against mammoth military spending.

Peace !

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Chandra Muzaffar is President of the International Movement for a Just World  (JUST) and Professor of Global Studies at Universiti Sains Malaysia

        

                      

Bukit Bintang step aside... Beijing taking over !!!

No wonder they say China is taking over the world economy!

But that's okay..we are happy with our comfort zones and our self serving issues at home!

Peace!

Democracy in Parti Keadilan Rakyat’s Party Elections?

Undoubtedly, the move to allow 400,000 over PKR members to vote directly is indeed a very democratic move.  Does this translate to mean that the PKR members now will have the opportunity to make an informed choice of the most suitable candidate? What will the criteria be – loyalty to party or loyalty to party personalities? Capability or pure popularity? Once the results are out, the people will evaluate the quality of PKR.

One may ask: why even have democratic elections in a political party anyway? Arguably, political parties do not have to exercise democracy within the party if they so choose to.  They can just stage manage the whole process of electing leaders. Obviously, democracy is exercised in political parties for the following main reasons:

1)      1) To give an opportunity for ordinary members to determine the leadership of the party by exercising their vote. They get to choose who to lead.

2)      2) Secondly, the elected leaders can be held accountable by the party machinery. If you hold no official position, then you cannot be held accountable by the party.

3)      3) The President of the main leader of the political party can give a direction and set its policies which can then be debated by the party members.

The manner in which a party allocates political power to its leaders reflects their true attitude towards the principle of democracy and accountability.

PKR is a peculiar political party when it comes to the allocation of decision making of the party’s direction. Every other political party, be it UMNO, DAP, MCA, MIC or Pas, the main power vests in the President of the party. In PKR, the perception is: the power does not vest in its President, Datin Seri Wan Azizah. She is perceived as a puppet for her husband or a stakeholder until her husband clears his trial.  Someone please correct me if I am wrong on this.

Wan Azizah’s husband is perceived to be the main power behind the throne. Her husband has also been nominated to go for the President’s post but I understand he had declined. By default, Wan Azizah wins uncontested. In democratic language, he has refused to allow his acceptance within the party to be tested. In democratic language too, this means that he has missed the opportunity to get the mandate from PKR members to lead them. Hence, he is without mandate, in the democratic sense. Why choose this path when PKR appears to extol democracy?

Long, long time ago (despite my reservations), I used to see PKR as a potentially 1Malaysia kind of party that may bring reforms to the Nation. However, the manner in which the party elections are unfolding especially in the election of the top leaders becomes worrisome for a discerning Rakyat who is evaluating alternatives.

If a political party continues to innovate something called “defacto leader” with vast powers, imagine the same political party taking over the government. You may end up having a democratically elected Prime Ministress with powers held by a defacto leader!  This would be a logical conclusion the people are entitled to make based on current behavior of the political party.  Am I wrong here?

The other thing that people are watching keenly is the expected results of the race for the Deputy President’s post. I am made to understand the contestants are – the sure winner Azmin Ali the loyalist, the idealistic reformer but not so politically astute Zaid Ibrahim and lastly the Abim Mustapa Ayub. Many say this will be the end of Abim influence in the politics of this country.  Times have changed.

It will be a shocker for the Nation and I bet, many people will have a second look at PKR should zaid Ibrahim win.

Peace !

Cakap lah Bahasa Malaysia! Tak erti ke?

[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?..

Jangan marah..nanti kena jual!

Salam.

Kenapa kau ni gatal sangat?

[Perbualan ini hanya lah rekaan semata-mata dan tidak kaitan dengan sesiapa yang hidup, yang akan meninggal atau pun yang sudah meninggal. Sebarang persamaan adalah kebetulan semata-mata. Artikel ini juga tidak bertujuan anti atau pro poligami.]

Samad: Aku minat sangat seorang budak la…

Aku:  Minat macam mana?

Samad: nak ..kenalan dengan dia la..kalau boleh..nak nikah dengan dial ah.

Aku: Kau kenal dia?

(diam)

Aku: Mad, kau kenal dia ke? Dia suka tak kamu?

Samad: Er….dia student dalam kelas aku. Kan aku mengajar part time?

Aku: Ya rabbi! Student kamu pun nak sapu??? Tak sedar kah kamu ni dah 40 lebih? 

Samad: Kamu ni…cakap macam aku nak buat benda maksiat je..ni aku jujur la..aku nak kahwin dengan dia la kalau boleh.

Aku renung muka Samad dengan perasaan penuh tidak percaya adanya kawan macam ini.

Samad: Kau renung apa tu? Aku belum pun cakap dengan dia hasrat aku. Cuma kongsi perasaan dengan kamu sebagai kawan.

Aku: Mad..kau lupa saje lah hasrat kau tu. Isteri kau kan baik. Kau kan dah ada tiga orang anak. Aku rasa anak sulung kau tu pun dah umur 15 tahun…budak ni umur berapa? 20?

Samad: Kau tak faham lah. Ni..bukan kehendak aku. Dah rasa sayang nak buat apa? Bini aku memang lah baik…tapi…alah..kita kan boleh kahwin empat? Kan sunnah rasul? Dirikan masjid lah katakan...

Aku: Mula lah…nak cari alasan agama untuk penuhi kehendak kau.  Tak pernah pun aku tengok kau perjuangkan anti rasuah ke,  membela orang yang tertindas ke…ni bukan sunnah rasul juga?

Samad:  Cinta bang, cinta....aku tunggu kursus dia habis, aku nak approach dia.

Aku: Mad, bukan cinta…kau ni tak erti nak guna kemewahan yang tiba-tiba kau ada. Kau ni betul-betul perangai Melayu baru..lebih kaya dan mewah daripada ibu-bapa nya, ada pangkat pula…jadi macam budak2 yang tak erti kawal kuasa dan kedudukan..mesti ada banyak mainan.  Dulu belum kaya, hidup dengan isteri, tiba-tiba ada keupayaan, nak cari girlfriend muda. Chei! 

Samad: Kau ni tak faham la..kan aku berhasrat nak nikah dengan dia? Tujuan aku mulia..
.

Aku: Kau tak pernah fikir dari segi kemampuan kewangan ke? Kau tak risau ke pembiayaan pendidikan 3 orang anak kau nanti?

Samad: Rezeki masing-masing kan Allah yang tentukan?

Aku: memang lah Ustad! Menyampah betul bila dalam hal2 ni kau nak alatkan hujah2 agama. Hakikat sebenarnya orang macam kau lah yang aku takrif sebagai Melayu baru yang bila dah kaya, bila berpangkat mula lah tongkat Ali kau tak terkawal.

Samad: Cakap tu elok2 sikit. Tepuk air dalam dulang, percik muka sendiri! Macam hina Melayu je…

Aku:  Aku tak hina Melayu la…aku cuma cerminkan Melayu baru macam kamu dihadapan kamu.  So, isteri kau tu..perasaan dia tak penting la…oh ya..hujah kamu akan berpaut pada ..isteri yang patuh pada suami suruhan agama. Menyampah aku dengan engkau orang. Kalau nak mengatal, mengaku saje lah..aku akan cakap suka hati kau. Ni nak guna alasan agama pula!

Salam.

"Are we ready for 1 Malaysia: Does Race Still Play a Part?"- Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad

1. I would like to apologise to the students and others for failing to turn up to give the talk I had agreed to.

2. I would also like to thank those who sent get well messages, fruits and flowers while I was in hospital in Melbourne.

3. Honestly I feel I have lost an opportunity to meet and talk to what may be the future leaders of Malaysia. For this reason I am writing down here what would have been the contents of my talk.

4. The suggested topic for my talk was, "Are we ready for 1 Malaysia: Does Race Still Play a Part?"

5. I will be frank but factual. My only interest is the country we all love. I am past self-interest.

You can continue reading the rest here. 


Peace!

Grand Mufti of Syria : There is Only A Culture of Humankind. Let's embrace it.

I was pleased that I attended the talk organized by the Institute of Advanced Islamic Studies headed by Prof Dr Hashim Kamali today. The talk was moderated by Dr Chandra Muzaffar. It was a rare occasion where I was very happy to hear a religious cleric give his talk. The Grand Mufti of Syria, Dr Ahmad Badr Al-Deen Hassoun was invited to talk on the topic of “Challenges facing the Muslim World”.  

The following is what I understood him to say:

On Malaysia

He said that Malaysia is a good model for other nations to follow. It has achieved many things. He was very impressed with the cosmopolitan nature of Malaysian society and the diversity of its religions and races.  This, he said, demonstrated God’s creativity very clearly. God did not just create the Muslims but all the non-Muslims and atheists as well. If we examine every human being, we will find the stamp “made by God” on them! He further says that if we understand and accept God’s creativity in creating diverse religions and races, we will understand the true value of human nature.  

On Religion, politics and religious people

He opines that religious leaders should stay away from political office. This is because religion is for all humanity and politics will limit the religious leader to a small segment of the population or make him partisan. This does not mean that religious leaders should shy away from political issues as politics is very much a part of life. The role of the religious leaders should be to advise and guide the political leaders and invite everyone to peace. 

He explains that Syria has diverse religions and sects – Muslims of various sects, Christians of various sects, Aramenians (the language that Jesus spoke), Jews, Atheists, Zorasters. He was entrusted to be the Grand Mufti for all of them, and not just one group. 

He says “When I read the Quran, it pointed to one faith but many religious path. Each prophet have different paths but faith is one - different legal paths”.

We are all creations of God
 

He explains that religion was created to serve humankind and not the other way round. That religion came after Adam. He rhetorically asked the question: is there a Hindu world, a Muslim world, a Christian world, etc? Why don’t we just say a “human world”? Does ‘musibah’ (calamity) just befall one group and not the others? The Palestinian and Iraqi issues are human issues not a particular group's issue.

He recalls in school that he was taught only the Muslims prayed properly. Later when he read the Quran, he realized that it spoke of believers and people of faith.  All prophets from the different cultures – Noah, Shuaib, Moses, Jesus – also prayed. These are Prophets from diverse cultures. Our children were never taught about other cultures.  It was as if we ourselves are just one universe to the exclusion of the rest. When our children live in narrow circles, they get confused when they meet diversity. However, the fact is God created all of us through His creativity. Isn’t a non-Muslim a living breath that God created? He says we need to cultivate the courage and fortitude to engage others who are born in different cultures and build bridges of peace. 

Inter cultural experiences

He gave the example of how Prophet Jesus left the environment of his Armenian culture to mix with others and how Prophet Muhammad left his Arabian cultural environment to mix with others. It is through such cultural mingling that we learn because different cultures have different things to offer.  There is no harm but benefit in learning from one another. We are all of one faith but may be of different legal religious paths.

He said that the Prophet Muhammad was an example of transcending cultural barriers where he married a Coptic Christian and a Jewish woman.  However, today we are building walls and barriers between different cultures and hence in this regard, we have become more primitive.

He regards it unfortunate if human beings want to be trapped into narrow circles while the true value of humankind is its diversity. 

Muslim Unity

He said that there is too much emphasis on division between the Muslims. He rhetorically asked: ‘Was the Prophet Muhammad a Sunni or Syiah or Wahabi or anything else? He was a man of faith” . He says Muslims should learn to embrace each other and discard the divisions. He citied Europe as an example where people of differing cultures have discarded their differences and embraced unity. We should learn from their ability to do so. He prays and hopes that Asia will cooperate and unite as one.

What came across clearly was the Grand Mufti’s message that we are all the “living breath” created by God and we should embrace God’s creativity in making us diverse. The nature of humankind is simply diversity and that is God’s ‘handiwork’ which any person of faith will rejoice and celebrate. 

I wish him all the strength, peace of mind and heart to continue conveying this message of humanity to all.

Peace!

[NOTE: This is my understanding of the Grand Mufti’s talk.]

Nothing personal..it's just a job

We all live a life.

Many of us give excuses for the life we live especially when we know that the way we live our lives causes untold miseries for other people's lives. The fact is quite a number of us take care of ourselves and our families at the expense of other people's happiness and welfare.

Obvious examples will be the tobacco industry and the gaming industry. Shamelessly, these two industries thrive on the weakness of human nature. Tobacco industry's main objective is to make smokers systematically addicted to smoking. This is the target of all the millions they spend in marketing - to convince smokers that systematic suicide is cool. Governments support this industry in the name of revenue while at the same time, the Government proclaims that it wants a healthy citizenry.

Nothing personal, they will say. It is just a job.

Likewise, it does not matter to the relevant government agencies and the "businessmen" in the industry of gambling that they are milking away someone's wealth by thriving on the addiction to gambling. They are merely concerned that they can make all the money they can at the expense of other families being wrecked and destroyed. In this country, we have no shame in declaring that we are an "Islamic State" and yet licence many family wrecking gaming outlets. At the same time, we have slogans saying that we are a moralistic society and that all religions prohibit money-making schemes that take advantage of human weaknesses - yet we never walk the talk. We create excuses because the smell of money is over-riding than the smell of death of families. Once again, it is nothing personal. It is just a job. No one forced you to gamble. We conveniently forget that we never use this excuse for drug trafficking!

Political corruption is yet another example of where thousands of families welfare and standard of living is sacrificed at the altar of vested interests. We have witnessed mega projects and mind-boggling projects that bring forth "millionaire businessmen" that "society" proudly proclaims as the "successful businessmen" - never minding the fact that millions more Malaysians are left to struggle for an average income every month. Amazingly and shockingly we witness politicians and their families living lives beyond the reach of the ordinary citizen.

It never crosses anyone's mind that the amassing of such wealth denies these resources from being utilised for the general good of all citizens. To keep up the extraordinary lifestyles and wealth of these politicians, the general citizen's standard of living has to be sacrificed.

Even the more fortunate citizen like a professional who works 16 hours a day is unable to reach the wealth level of these politicians and their families. It is mind boggling as to how they are able to amass such wealth while they are supposedly busy serving the people! Nothing personal...just a job.

Lastly, but not the least, of course are the civil servants who wreck havoc on the citizen's lives by abuse and, sometimes, refusal to use their proper discretion in the interest of the citizen. They get their monthly salaries to bring back to their respective families and their strongest excuse for incompetency and irresponsibility is :" saya yang menurut perintah". It is nothing personal. It is just a job.

I have been seeing this same attitude pervade even into the other sectors, including the enforcement agencies, private sector, judiciary and so on...nothing personal. Just a job.

They all forget. To the victim, it is very personal.

It is the way these people in power CHOOSE  to make other peoples' lives and thier families lives miserable and poor so that they can be wealthy and powerful.

In life, almost every thing is personal. Raperas, Let's not forget that.  How you choose to live your life says alot about you - if you are the angel or the devil on earth.

Peace !

Democracy in PKR elections absent???

This was supposed to be the most democratic party elections with 400,000 odd members having a direct voting right. The country will be impressed had this election proceeded smoothly and civilly. It will have been a show case for democracy and will present PKR as a credible democratic political party that is worthy of walking the road to Putrajaya. However, events seem to prove otherwise.

There seems to be reports of ugly incidences and undemocratic practices.

Candidates with NGO backgrounds seem to be losing while those with political backgrounds get elected. The results seem to validate that politics is only for politicians. This gives rise to questions as whether the elections are marred with political manipulations.

Even some of the PKR members I have met give me the impression that all is not well in PKR because of over-riding concerns for personal political interests rather than party aspirations.

Democracy dictates that leaders must be properly elected according to democratic processes.

What is the democratic equivalent of a "de facto leader" who is all powerful in a political party. Why does the defacto leader not legitimise his position though the democratic process?

Let's us see if Zaid Ibrahim, whom many in PKR consider as a reformer will win or politics will fall back to the politicians based on loyalty to political personalities.

The final outcome of the PKR elections will determine whether PKR is indeed a reform party or a party riding on the sensationalisation of personalities.

Peace !

Book Review: Who amongst us is a Rapera?

The Malay Mail did a review of the book "Rapera -urgently wanted".

"For him, there is a strong need for citizens to have their own thoughts and ideas regarding national is­sues where at times, these issues are strictly determined by the rules of various political groups in power today.

He hopes that through the intro­duction of the Rapera concept, citi­zens will no longer sit back and watch the country's changes pass them by. Instead they should evolve and be better citizens who can help encour­age a better nation in general.

Reading his book, one would probably be stirred emotionally and mentally as Jay questions many hard-hitting issues happening within Malaysian politics and lifestyle.

Some may say that his book may seem a little controversial for their taste buds as he writes honestly and transparently regarding subject mat­ters that he feels could be better ex­ecuted or evaluated by authorities".

You may read the whole review and interview here - TheMalayMailonline

Peace !

Do you know the difference between the “conscious” and “conscientious” acts by politicians?

Image thanks to here

If the ordinary Rakyat does not know the difference, it is imperative that Raperas do.  There is a big difference between the “conscious acts” of politicians as opposed to their “conscientious acts”.  If you get confused between the two, you do so at your own peril.

Let me say this at the very outset: - MOST acts of the politicians are “conscious” acts and not “conscientious”.  These acts are calculated purely for political expediency. Nothing else matters.

One meaning of conscientious is “Guided by or in accordance with the dictates of conscience; principled: a conscientious decision to speak out about injustice.”  You may want to check out the rest here.  

One meaning of “conscious” is “Possessing the faculty of knowing one's own thoughts or mental operations”.

Conscious acts means the politicians is aware why he is doing what he is doing. It is a calculated move to serve his vested political interest.

Conscientious acts, on the other hand are acts that arise out of principles or conscience or having considered “right and wrong”.

Politicians do something because it gives them political benefit. A politician does not do something because it is the right or moral or ethical thing to do. He is not guided by principles  or conscience but by what is politically necessary. 

In politics, the politician believes, there is nothing right or wrong. The only objective is to do something to achieve the desired result – whatever that may be at different times.

Understanding the difference will determine whether the politician is the servant of the Rakyat or the Rakyat is the puppet of the politician. 

The politician, of course, will endeavour to be the master. Hence, he will consciously tell the Rakyat that he is the servant of the people just so that he can be the master. He does not conscientiously believe that politicians should be the servants of the Rakyat. So, do not be duped by their acts.

An act of seeming goodness by a politician is nothing more than a conscious political act. An act of seeming evil by the politician is the same too. He dances according to the political music of the time. So, the Rakyat should be careful what tunes they want to play.

You want examples? Haven’t you seen the politician who used to sing “racist” songs now singing unity? Haven’t you heard those singing “detention without trial” now singing fair justice through open trial”? And the list goes on. These are not sudden birth of consciences. These are political expediencies. 

If you know that only political acts motivate the politicians, every Rapera must create the situation where the politician will act in accordance with what is conscientious. In other words, the Rakyat must create the political situation which will benefit the general population, so that politicians will adjust their behavior and acts accordingly.  

Make the politicians dance to the Rakyat’s tune. Not the other way round. Since most of the Rakyat is either apathetic or pandering to “norms” to serve narrow vested interest or blissfully in the dark, the role falls on the shoulders of the Raperas.

Politicians excel in a culture of ignorance and suppression of information to the general public. They love apathy among the Rakyat and blind support. What should be done in these regards is obvious. 

Put on your thinking cap. Be alert. You have been warned.

“There is the type of man whose speech about this world's life May dazzle you, and he calls God to witness about what is in his heart; yet is he the most contentious of enemies.  When he turns his back, His aim everywhere is to spread mischief through the earth and destroy crops and cattle. But God loves not mischief”. (Quran: 2:204)

Peace !

Can Our Tourism Ministry Develop Arts???

I saw a stage show in Beijing. It was a story about Queen who was liked very much by the people and later when she dies, how they missed her. It was amazing how the stage settings changes smoothly and quickly without any interruption at all.

All audience were shocked with amazement when the entire stage and the sides of the stage turned into an instant waterfall...real water!!...and once the scene was over, the stage was dry like as if the waterfall was never there. I understood that this is one of the many tourist attractions in Beijing.

Obviously, the Tourism Board in Beijing takes tourism seriously. Do we?

Watch the video to believe!!!




Peace !

IN the Name of Peace

It’s an important Peace keeping Operation

It is important that we have to keep the peace. For this reason

We need to increase our defence budget by 60%.

Military equipment is not cheap and money should not matter where peace is concerned.

Without peace, there is no healthcare, no education, no housing, no democracy.

So it does not matter if we increase our military budget now by reducing the budget from the other areas.

WE need more tanks. More firepower , more fighter planes, more soldiers and more missiles.

All these because we take peace seriously.

Such is the logic of the human mind.

Peace !