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 !

Jimizul, is it racial or racist?

On 2nd September,  one of our regular readers posted  the following comment which I thought I will publish it here and respond since it raised what I consider a "typical mind set" symptomatic of a few in Malaysia. I had just returned to the country and hence, this delayed response.

"Salam bro,

Why don't you open up your eyes and see that in Malaysia everything is based on race no matter how hard people like you are trying to deny- politics, education, social and the list goes on...don't try to be so naive or rather ignorant. And please don't play with your religion card (emm..makes me wonder if you belong to a particular race or you'd rather be known as Muslim/Islam under your race column)..Please enlighten me bro if you really want to project your deep sense of piousness to the deny the important of race, then why the Chinese Muslims are requesting for their own mosques (which everything in it including the sermons will be in Chinese?)I'm waiting bro...Jimizul

Jimizul

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

Salam bro,

Firstly, I want to thank you for being the conduit to inspire me to write something of significance in these trying and evolving times of our country. At least writing this article may allow me to “cleanse” my heart further.

Let me tackle the easier items in your comments first.

1. I have never, at any time in my life, denied that generally, the socio-economic and political framework in Malaysia is race-based. Having said that, however, I disagree with you that everything in Malaysia is race-based. If you open your eyes, you will see that there are many relationships, be it friendship, marriages or pure neighbourliness are not race-based.

2. Obviously all of us  on earth are classified into a social construct which we term as "race" or "ethnicity". There are usefulness and weaknesses in such a classification.  I will explain this below.

3. You accuse me of "playing the religious card". Obviously you have not read my articles. I believe you may have mistaken my considered respect and passion for the Quran as being religious. It is the politicians and religious bigots and their unthinking hand-clappers that shamelessly use the religious card. In our country, we had seen some "religious" people mysteriously "protest" in support of the ISA under the cry that it protects Islam! There are even some who use religion as a cover to promote racist interests. You should be targeting your accusation and opposition to them, not me.

4. As to your statement that I want to project my deep sense of piousness, this is my response: I did not know that I came across as such to you. I have never seen myself as pious and it has never really been important to me to determine so. What is more important to me is to live this temporary life causing as little damage as possible. In any event, the concept of "piousness" itself is something that have to be dealt with in another article.

5. Chinese seeking Chinese mosque complete with sermons in Chinese. It is just amazing that you should raise this because  the exact thought came to mind while I was in Beijing. I will cover it below.

Jimizul, I hope the following article which expresses my thoughts on the matters that you have raised will be useful.

Racial versus Racism and Religious versus religious bigotry

Actually Jimizul, your  comment requires firstly a discussion between what is "racial or "ethnic" considerations against what is "racism". The two are completely different. Many unfortunately are confused between the two. Secondly, it also requires an understanding of the Quran's position on "race" and "racism". Thirdly, we have to understand the difference between being religious and being a religious bigot.

Racial versus Racism

Few ideas have been so fraught with controversy, or have provided as much occasion for discussion and debate, as that of race. Race is a highly contradictory notion.  I am of the view that “race” is nothing more than a social construct to describe groups of people with certain similarities.

Article 160 of the Malaysian Constitution supports the idea that “race” is nothing more than a social construct. According to Article 160, a Malaysian citizen is defined as a “Malay” if he speaks the Malay language habitually, follows the Malay custom and is a Muslim. By this definition therefore, the “ethnic Chinese” is a “Malay” if he fulfills this criteria. Likewise, a Malaysian Javanese is a “Malay” in Malaysia while an Indonesian Javanese is not a “Malay” in Malaysia. This is what racial classification is all about – a social construct. If we take the definition of “Malay” in the Constitution technically, possibly many elite Malays may not qualify as constitutional Malays!

Anyway, as I mentioned earlier, "race" or ethnicity are social constructs. They are terms created by human beings to refer to a group of people sharing similar characteristics which other groups do not have. Ethnicity or race therefore is a term used to describe people in terms of their common culture, language, social and dietary habits and such.

In this sense, therefore if you look at China or India, it is indeed multi-religious multi-racial and mutli-cultural. In China, while the Han Chinese is the largest ethnic group, it has 55 other minority ethnic groups. China has over 290 languages and for this reason, the Chinese government try to unite them by introducing Putonghua or Standard Mandarin as the common or national language. 

Similarly, India has displayed varied hues of culture, religion, race, language, and so on. The Constitution of India has recognised 22 different languages that are prevalent in the country, out of which, Hindi is the official language and is spoken in most of the urban cities of India. Other than these 22 languages, there are hundreds of dialects that add to the multilingual nature of the country.  

Malaysia too is multi-religious multi-racial and mutli-cultural society. However China and India are huge countries with much much bigger and more diverse population than ours. They have greater challenges than us at national integration and unity.   I doubt if any of our politicians have the calibre to govern those countries seeing how they have governed our much smaller country with much lesser challenges. But that’s a different point!

Jimizul, I am sure the above examples should suffice to demonstrate that one cannot deny the existence of these “racial classifications”.

Surely one cannot deny that knowledge and identification of ethnic origins does have its relevance. For example, if you identify someone as an orang asli, you will try to study his ethnic background to understand him. If you are a responsible government, you will try to understand the orang asli's culture, ethnicity and religion when you want to plan any development programmes for his community. You cannot for example, remove the orang asli from their "racial or ethnic environment" and suddenly throw them into towns. This has happened in our country and it is cruel. With our knowledge of the racial makeup of the orang asli, we should prepare them for the different kind of challenges that living in developed towns will entail.

Another example is that of the Indians in the estates. When we removed the estates, we never prepared these Indians for living outside the estate. Again we have been cruel. The point is this: we use the knowledge of a particular social construct or ethnic origin or race for the purposes of improving that particular ethnic group or solving problems that appear to be peculiar to that particular ethnic or racial group. Such an approach may require a “racial approach” in which there is nothing wrong. There is nothing racist when we say that the orang asli community is still generally backward after 52 years of merdeka. It is racist if we accuse them of being inherently backward.

A study of ethnic characteristics may also be relevant to understand the community in the effort to formulate policies or action plans to improve that particular community. For example, in our country, we have so much superficial talk about the creation of “human capital” but I have yet to see any indepth study on “ethnic obstacles” to progressive thinking. If the thinking or the ability to think of the population is not addressed, how do you improve them? There could very well be parts of the culture of some ethnic communities that hinder their progress. These things ought to be addressed.

Another example where the classification of race becomes relevant. For example, we may conduct the study on the occurrence of diabetes among the different racial communities and may arrive at a conclusion that diabetes is high among certain communities. Such a study may reveal that lifestyles of certain ethnic groups actually increases the chances of getting diabetes. The data may be useful as a basis to formulate behavior alteration programs to arrest the diabetic problem.

We can go on giving examples where information about the ethnic origin of person is relevant and sometimes necessary. Such “racial approaches” may be legitimate.

However, if a social construct such as race or ethnic origin is used as the sole basis to sustain only itself to the exclusion of the rest of the world, then it becomes racism. The notion of “racial supremacy” is racist and an affront not only to the intelligence but to humanity. The apartheid policy for example which extols the supremacy of the “white Africans” and discriminates the “black” Africans and non-whites is racist and shameful to humanity. Merely because it was in existence for years did not stop Ghandi from opposing similar racist discriminations.

If a certain race claims that it is the only chosen race of God to the exclusion of the rest of the world, then that is racism. The zionists are racists.

If a certain race claims that all other races except its own race are lazy and stupid, then that is racism.

If your choice of expressing compassion, kindness, justice, opportunities and such turns solely on the basis of someone’s ethnic origin, you are not only a racist but in my view a manifestation of Iblis. I believe the Creator will deal with you in His merciful way.

The Ku Klux clan in America which "fights" for "America is only for whites" and the others can go back to their country of origin are racists. They do not want the presence of other non-white Americans whose forefathers have migrated to America. They have conveniently forgotten that their forefathers too were immigrants unlike the Red Indians. They are angry that the Americans of immigrant parents have worked hard and are economically well off. To me, these shameful right wing small group of Americans are mentally deranged people who use other people’s success and hard work as a scapegoat for their failures and laziness.

One of the worst manifestations of racist ideas took place in Germany under the command of Hitler where he promoted the idea of the “German race”.  Hitler believed that in the world, only one race was fit to survive; the Aryan race. Aryans were tall, with beautiful facial features, white skinned, and blond hair, so the myth goes!

Without doubt, racists are mentally sick people who have a warped perspective of human nature. The larger majority of normal people are not racists. Racists seem to have, among others, the following traits:

a) They always look for scapegoats for their deficiencies or failures in life.

b) They have a deep sense of inferiority complex and they try to overcome this with aggressive behaviour or a false sense of superiority complex;

c) If these racists have larger numbers, they will deride or make fun of others from different ethnic origins with the objective of bolstering thier own lack of self confidence or to attempt to attack the others sense of self confidence.

d) Even anyone from their own racial grouping who disagrees with their racist outlook will be immediately accused as being a traitor to their race;

e) They have very little respect for the sanctity of life;

I find it completely difficult to comprehend that people who truly believe in God or consider themselves religious can be racists.

If you say you are a buddhist, you must know that Siddhartha Gautama was an Indian Prince. If you are a Chinese Buddhist and you are prepared to receive enlightenment from a Prince of another ethnic/racial origin than yours, why would you find it difficult to share dharma with the rest?

If you say you are a Christian, you must know that all are the children of the Lord.

If you say that you are a Muslim, you must know that all the Prophets that are mentioned by name in the Quran are neither Malay, Chinese, Kadazan or Indian. The Muslim must know the following verse from the Quran which is supposed to be their daily guide:

“O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of God is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And God has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things)". [Quran: 49:13]

The Quran does not say that a particular race or nation is the most honoured. It is the one that is most righteous that is most honoured.

If you are a Hindu, you must believe in karma or rebirth and know that good begets good and evil begets evil irrespective of racial or ethnic construct.

If you are an atheist, then surely you must know that values are either good or bad, that either you are a good person or a bad person irrespective of racial or ethnic origin.

Why are we letting social constructs like “race or ethnicity” demean our humanity?

Jimizul, even if you are the only one standing in a crowd of billion racists, you must not deny humanity. This is because, ultimately, you and you alone will be answerable to the creator – none of the billions will advocate on your behalf.

 Peace!

Next: Jimizul, Religious and Religious bigotry – surely there is a difference? - God willing.