http://www.hudson.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=publication_details&id=5326
From the December 3, 2007 National Review Online
December 4, 2007
by Paul Marshall
Editor's note: There is rioting in Sudanese streets calling for the death of a woman over a teddy bear named Mohammed. What can we in the West possibly do with this — nationally, individually? How do we help? What must we learn from it? National Review Online asked a group of experts and commentators.
Paul Marshall
British teacher Gillian Gibbons's sentence for blasphemy, and the subsequent demonstrations calling for her death, is one of a series of such incidents that, by their very absurdity, have shone media attention on the perils of accusations of blasphemy, apostasy, and insulting Islam. We need this attention to lead the West to become aware of and address the far wider and more serious political repercussions of such accusations in the Muslim world and beyond.
Examples could be taken from Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and elsewhere, but Sudan provides enough of its own. In 2005, Mohammed Taha, who edited the al-Wifaq newspaper in Sudan's capital, reprinted an article that debated the background of Mohammed. He was charged with blasphemy, though the charges were later dropped. However, in 2006 his body was found in a Khartoum street. He had been beheaded.
In the early 1990s, Gaspar Biro, the courageous United Nations Special Rapporteur on Sudan, produced a series of reports documenting the National Islamic Front government's massacres, slavery, draconian penal code, and other depredations. In 1994, the NIF (an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood) called his work "a vicious attack on the religion of Islam." In 1995, Sudanese officials said "we don't want to speculate about his fate if he is to continue offending the feelings of Muslims worldwide." These accusations of blasphemy were deemed dire enough that the U.N. General Assembly described it as "an unacceptable threat against his person."
Perhaps the most striking instance was Mahmoud Mohamed Taha. He was one of the country's leading Islamic scholars, and a co-founder of the Republican Brotherhood, which pushed, on Islamic grounds, for an open and democratic society. A major opponent of the regime, in January 1985 he was tried and executed on charges that amounted to apostasy because of his views on Islamic teaching.
As these examples show, a major function of blasphemy laws is silencing those who want to debate and discuss the meaning of Islam, particularly those who favor open and democratic societies.
How do we respond? Well, first, with diplomatic pressure to have Ms. Gibbons released, which appears to be progressing. But it is vital not to treat blasphemy accusations and convictions as merely idiosyncratic vagaries of Muslim regimes that simply require a humanitarian response on behalf of the unfortunates involved. Blasphemy charges are the front line of the war of ideas within Islam. If there is to be debate within Islam, we need to work to remove such laws.
A good place to start is for the U.S. to seriously campaign against the ongoing, partly successful, multi-year effort by the Organization of the Islamic Conference to have the United Nations condemn "blasphemy" in the international sphere (an effort couched in the language of combating 'Islamophobia'). A good occasion for this campaign is the preparatory meetings for the 2009 U.N. conference on "Racism," which, under the leadership of Iran, Libya, and Pakistan, is set to condemn all "insults to Islam," whether those purportedly by Ms. Gibbons, or those of political targets such as Gaspar Biro or the Tahas.
— Paul Marshall is senior fellow at Hudson Institute's Center for Religious Freedom and is writing a book on blasphemy. The new edition of his World survey of Religious Freedom will be published by Rowman and Littlefield in January.
Wednesday, 5 December 2007
Tuesday, 4 December 2007
Saturday, 1 December 2007
The PAS "Cooperation" and Vote.
"So this is how liberty dies. With thunderous applause."
-George Lucas , Senator Amidala in Star Wars: Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (2005)
Recently, on Malaysia Today, there was an article entitled An Open Letter to PAS, Keadilan and DAP. Although it sounded like a "balanced" letter, I do have some serious misgivings over his stand and logic, where PAS is concerned (so much so, I seriously doubt that his name is RAJAN).
Allow me to quote a few words from Rajan in the letter:
"Their pure existence as a political party was from this platform. Asking them to forgo this call, however bitter it may be for many of us, is similar to asking them to close shop."
Now I have a few questions ....
Has the "Islamic State" been on the agenda of PAS from the very beginning?
If so, how was it defined just 40yrs ago, and how is it defined now?
I'm a little confused .... when Raja Petra writes that it is about "values" and not about laws/ fatwas, and an "Ulama" says that it is all about laws and edicts - "Islamic" this & that, or "unIslamic" this & that.
Bear in mind that the definition of "Islamic State" is what matters here. To my knowledge, the current definition of Islamic State varies significantly from that, prior to the Islamic rhetoric of the post 1967 Yom Kippur war and the Iranian revolution of the 70s. Those were the days of Dato Asri in PAS. The days when the Islamic extremist of the day, would be an "unIslamic" dove by todays standards.
Those were the days when when Mak Yong, Wayang Kulit and other forms of art (performing and non-performing) were very much part of the rich local (Kelantan) culture.
We now fast forward to the 80s, with the rise of Dr. Mahathir (aka Che Det) to power in UMNO, along with the Ulamaks in PAS, with much fanfare in both parties - both promising great things, with cliches for their mottos.
Strangely, both sides took away civil liberties as a price for imposing their agendas while pulling wool over the eyes of the public. On one side, was the death of the independent press/ judiciary/ democracy which were considered "pesky"; and on the other, death of commerce, industry, lifestyles and arts which were considered "unIslamic".
Let us move on to the legacy of the current PAS leadership - a write-up about Kelantan on the BBC website in 2005, would be a timely reminder for those who wish to extol the virtues of "cooperation" with PAS for the sole intent of voting out the current Government.
Lest the proponents of this "cooperation" forget, may I remind you - that the reason we oppose actions of a government isn't necessarily to vote it out, but to demand better governance.
Moreover, I still don't understand why PAS has to "close shop" should it give up the idea of an Islamic state - it is a party that takes part in democratic elections - and that isn't a very "Islamic" virtue by some standards!
And who ever said that they cannot be Islamic in a modern democracy?
Based on "Islamic values" (as opposed to Arabic tribal values), a democracy is in spirit, a very Islamic thing to propose.
In fact, in terms of fundamental liberties and rights, some Muslim Ulamas do agree that the "great Satan", the US of A, is in fact more Islamic than the so called Islamic nations with Syariah laws!
Having said that, does the current PAS leadership approve of the fundamental liberties of a person, Muslim or otherwise? Do they believe in equal rights and freedom of choice for all?
These are questions that one should ask oneself before suggesting that PAS shouldn't be asked to give up their stand on the "Islamic State", for these are questions which are fundamental to any democracy.
The next issue is that of the meaning of the vote, that one may give PAS - is it a signal of approval of the PAS manifesto, or is it just a rebellion against the current system?
I believe it is the latter.
However, with the increasing political manifestation of the Islamist agenda in the parliament and on the street, would it not whip up the competition among Malay dominated parties to "out-Islamize" the other?
Would it increase the "Islamisation" fervour among the powers that be, akin to Mahathirs introduction of the Syariah courts to "neutralize" PAS?
In fact, a vote for PAS with its "values", may signal to the BN govt of the day, that the non-muslims have no problems with the PAS brand of Islamic politics- and this can have undesirable and disastrous effects.
This brings me to the next point - Rajan said,
"Thus all of us especially the DAP icons should remain silent on this matter and work towards the main objective – secure the parliament. If DAP and the non–Muslims fears that once the election is won, PAS and KeADILAN will join together to press for an Islamic state then Barisan is still here. Barisan by itself is not bad."
What Rajan says here is this,- "Hey DAP! I think you should bet your @$$ on PAS - but if you get buggered, that's your friggin' problem man - I'll then vote BN!"
Come on - what a juvenile logic to be used on DAP.
That was definitely a low-down, cheap shot!
Which party in their right mind would do such a thing? Let's get real here - If at all they wish to work with an "enemy", the least they would wanna do is make sure their credibility doesn't get shot.
It would've been more logical for him to appeal to PAS to give up on the Islamic state agenda (at least temporarily), to work with a logical DAP+PKR +PSM alliance, based on social democratic principles!
In fact, PAS could pull out of the alliance, if it decides to impose an agenda which isn't acceptable to other parties. It may even rejoin BN if it wishes do so - after all, it was a breakaway from UMNO, and a one time BN member party.
As far as the NEP is concerned, it is what it is - so no point in saying that you want it, but not the way it is. What Rajan tries to say (presumably) is, we need fair distribution of wealth and opportunities for all, in all sectors, with affirmative action for the poor regardless of race. For a start, I suggest that we get rid of this evil of racial and religious profiling, except in warranted medical or criminal cases.
Let's move on to the issue of "gerrymandering"........
After the Bersih march, what is the ultimatum that Bersih has given? Would they still participate in the elections? If so why? After all, you've agreed that you're all being taken for a ride.
I presume, should reform not be instituted, Bersih would call for a boycott!
Logically speaking, they should - after all, who would wanna "turun padang" and play a game where the home team gets to sell tickets to only its own supporters, with its own players acting as linesmen and referee (plus having the ability to shift the goalpost at its whim and fancy)!
Without reform, any participation of any opposition party in the elections, would definitely lend Nazri's much publicized phrase of "wayar putus" much credibility. It would strip all opposition parties of what little credibility left in them, for being hypocrites.
Nothing short of a total boycott from them (the opposition) would be acceptable, should the reasons for the Bersih rally be ignored - not even the lame excuse of putting up independents by proxy, "to deny BN an uncontested victory".
What has the opposition got to fear should their victory ring hollow? It would only open the floodgates for more agitation from the electorate .....
The opposition has to stop playing politics for the sake of selfish, financial or sectarian interests, and make national interests their priority, based on logical and viable principles.
Malaysia in in a very precarious state of affairs, and badly needs proper governance, as mentioned by DSAI on Al-Jazeera. With good governance, Malaysia would definitely realize its true potential as an economic powerhouse and paradise, simply by virtue of its strategic location, if not for anything else.
The alternative we have as a nation, is nothing but a failed state.
Allow me to sign off with a beautiful quote :
-George Lucas , Senator Amidala in Star Wars: Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (2005)
Recently, on Malaysia Today, there was an article entitled An Open Letter to PAS, Keadilan and DAP. Although it sounded like a "balanced" letter, I do have some serious misgivings over his stand and logic, where PAS is concerned (so much so, I seriously doubt that his name is RAJAN).
Allow me to quote a few words from Rajan in the letter:
"Their pure existence as a political party was from this platform. Asking them to forgo this call, however bitter it may be for many of us, is similar to asking them to close shop."
Now I have a few questions ....
Has the "Islamic State" been on the agenda of PAS from the very beginning?
If so, how was it defined just 40yrs ago, and how is it defined now?
I'm a little confused .... when Raja Petra writes that it is about "values" and not about laws/ fatwas, and an "Ulama" says that it is all about laws and edicts - "Islamic" this & that, or "unIslamic" this & that.
Bear in mind that the definition of "Islamic State" is what matters here. To my knowledge, the current definition of Islamic State varies significantly from that, prior to the Islamic rhetoric of the post 1967 Yom Kippur war and the Iranian revolution of the 70s. Those were the days of Dato Asri in PAS. The days when the Islamic extremist of the day, would be an "unIslamic" dove by todays standards.
Those were the days when when Mak Yong, Wayang Kulit and other forms of art (performing and non-performing) were very much part of the rich local (Kelantan) culture.
We now fast forward to the 80s, with the rise of Dr. Mahathir (aka Che Det) to power in UMNO, along with the Ulamaks in PAS, with much fanfare in both parties - both promising great things, with cliches for their mottos.
Strangely, both sides took away civil liberties as a price for imposing their agendas while pulling wool over the eyes of the public. On one side, was the death of the independent press/ judiciary/ democracy which were considered "pesky"; and on the other, death of commerce, industry, lifestyles and arts which were considered "unIslamic".
Let us move on to the legacy of the current PAS leadership - a write-up about Kelantan on the BBC website in 2005, would be a timely reminder for those who wish to extol the virtues of "cooperation" with PAS for the sole intent of voting out the current Government.
Lest the proponents of this "cooperation" forget, may I remind you - that the reason we oppose actions of a government isn't necessarily to vote it out, but to demand better governance.
Moreover, I still don't understand why PAS has to "close shop" should it give up the idea of an Islamic state - it is a party that takes part in democratic elections - and that isn't a very "Islamic" virtue by some standards!
And who ever said that they cannot be Islamic in a modern democracy?
Based on "Islamic values" (as opposed to Arabic tribal values), a democracy is in spirit, a very Islamic thing to propose.
In fact, in terms of fundamental liberties and rights, some Muslim Ulamas do agree that the "great Satan", the US of A, is in fact more Islamic than the so called Islamic nations with Syariah laws!
Having said that, does the current PAS leadership approve of the fundamental liberties of a person, Muslim or otherwise? Do they believe in equal rights and freedom of choice for all?
These are questions that one should ask oneself before suggesting that PAS shouldn't be asked to give up their stand on the "Islamic State", for these are questions which are fundamental to any democracy.
The next issue is that of the meaning of the vote, that one may give PAS - is it a signal of approval of the PAS manifesto, or is it just a rebellion against the current system?
I believe it is the latter.
However, with the increasing political manifestation of the Islamist agenda in the parliament and on the street, would it not whip up the competition among Malay dominated parties to "out-Islamize" the other?
Would it increase the "Islamisation" fervour among the powers that be, akin to Mahathirs introduction of the Syariah courts to "neutralize" PAS?
In fact, a vote for PAS with its "values", may signal to the BN govt of the day, that the non-muslims have no problems with the PAS brand of Islamic politics- and this can have undesirable and disastrous effects.
This brings me to the next point - Rajan said,
"Thus all of us especially the DAP icons should remain silent on this matter and work towards the main objective – secure the parliament. If DAP and the non–Muslims fears that once the election is won, PAS and KeADILAN will join together to press for an Islamic state then Barisan is still here. Barisan by itself is not bad."
What Rajan says here is this,- "Hey DAP! I think you should bet your @$$ on PAS - but if you get buggered, that's your friggin' problem man - I'll then vote BN!"
Come on - what a juvenile logic to be used on DAP.
That was definitely a low-down, cheap shot!
Which party in their right mind would do such a thing? Let's get real here - If at all they wish to work with an "enemy", the least they would wanna do is make sure their credibility doesn't get shot.
It would've been more logical for him to appeal to PAS to give up on the Islamic state agenda (at least temporarily), to work with a logical DAP+PKR +PSM alliance, based on social democratic principles!
In fact, PAS could pull out of the alliance, if it decides to impose an agenda which isn't acceptable to other parties. It may even rejoin BN if it wishes do so - after all, it was a breakaway from UMNO, and a one time BN member party.
As far as the NEP is concerned, it is what it is - so no point in saying that you want it, but not the way it is. What Rajan tries to say (presumably) is, we need fair distribution of wealth and opportunities for all, in all sectors, with affirmative action for the poor regardless of race. For a start, I suggest that we get rid of this evil of racial and religious profiling, except in warranted medical or criminal cases.
Let's move on to the issue of "gerrymandering"........
After the Bersih march, what is the ultimatum that Bersih has given? Would they still participate in the elections? If so why? After all, you've agreed that you're all being taken for a ride.
I presume, should reform not be instituted, Bersih would call for a boycott!
Logically speaking, they should - after all, who would wanna "turun padang" and play a game where the home team gets to sell tickets to only its own supporters, with its own players acting as linesmen and referee (plus having the ability to shift the goalpost at its whim and fancy)!
Without reform, any participation of any opposition party in the elections, would definitely lend Nazri's much publicized phrase of "wayar putus" much credibility. It would strip all opposition parties of what little credibility left in them, for being hypocrites.
Nothing short of a total boycott from them (the opposition) would be acceptable, should the reasons for the Bersih rally be ignored - not even the lame excuse of putting up independents by proxy, "to deny BN an uncontested victory".
What has the opposition got to fear should their victory ring hollow? It would only open the floodgates for more agitation from the electorate .....
The opposition has to stop playing politics for the sake of selfish, financial or sectarian interests, and make national interests their priority, based on logical and viable principles.
Malaysia in in a very precarious state of affairs, and badly needs proper governance, as mentioned by DSAI on Al-Jazeera. With good governance, Malaysia would definitely realize its true potential as an economic powerhouse and paradise, simply by virtue of its strategic location, if not for anything else.
The alternative we have as a nation, is nothing but a failed state.
Allow me to sign off with a beautiful quote :
- "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Wednesday, 28 November 2007
Class Politics - the Other Option?
"The HINDRAF movement is symptomatic of the fundamental problems that remain entrenched in our country and to stoke the flames of racism would only exacerbate racial tensions and animosity among Malaysians.
Malaysians of conscience who are committed to reforming this nation must recognise that a viable opposition is essential and now is the time to support it.
For the pro-reform parties in society to work together effectively, they must find common ground, be open to communication and collaboration, and resist the temptation to scapegoat other races for their problems and frustrations."
-ANWAR IBRAHIM http://anwaribrahim.com/site/
“Only a class based movement not based on ethnicity and religion can truly built a nation without discrimination, race based corruption and race based politics. The ruling party would be able to rule and would continue to rule as long as the people are divided. The ruling party is not going to build a united Malaysian Nation, as it is not going to work to its advantage. The Opposition too have at many occasions being sucked into the same mode to win support of the people.
The future of Malaysia can go two ways – Race and Religious Politics which is the rule of the day versus Class based politics – cutting across race and religion lines. It is a serious question as race and religious politics with its history and conditioning remain the most effective way to mobilise the racially divided people. It is a question every person has to ask and ponder. It is a question which is going to continue to haunt us.”
-Setiausaha Agung, Parti Sosialis Malaysia
The above were the statements of DSAI & PSM of late, in response to the recent recent ethno-religious demonstration in Kuala Lumpur.
These statements got me thinking (not that I never thot of it in the past) - if at all we as Malaysians, have the mental capacity to break away from the ethno-religious politics that has become so firmly entrenched in "our" minds. So much so, any proposed option for anything along other ideological lines (than that prevalent) are declared "not feasible".
While what DSAI and Mr. Arutchelvan of PSM say may be true, how is it that educated individuals (ulamaks and umaraks, as one blogger would put it), choose to ignore this fact?
Isn't it obvious that the people are being taken for a ride? Is it really worth voting in a system that thrives on the ignorance of the masses?
How can they get their message across, into the hearts of the people to have national interests above selfish sectarian interests? How can the trust, that has been so efficiently subverted by "certain quarters", be cultivated for a truly united and unique Malaysia?
Despite the failures of race/religion politics, the masses seem to take to it like ducks to water. They subscribe to this idea, thinking that their "race, religion and heritage" is protected in this manner.
This phenomenon/ problem has been compounded by the "perceived rise of Islam" as a political force, and "exclusive socio-economic policies" by certain quarters.
Despite all the propaganda that has been dished out, it is time we acknowledged that "working together for larger interests" has never been the Malaysian way.
Instead, we have a system of "separate development" wherein, the selfishness of "to each, his own" is the philosophy. In other words, it is no different from the apartheid of Pietr Botha in the pre-Mandela South Africa.
In their intellectual bankruptcy, many a pseudo-intellectual try to play on emotions of a clueless people, who seek refuge and solace in the artificial constructs of race and religion based politics. It is a plague that feeds on the fears and insecurities of the innocents.
EQ- Zero in Action
Pardon me if I'm wrong - to me, the answer is plain and simple;
-First and foremost, we need educated politicians - (as opposed to the current IQ & EQ zero crop)
-transparent socio-political & business practices.
-We need to have a free media and a liberal education system that subscribes to excellence and affirmative policy.
-We need to arrest the unnecessary political meddling in all sectors of society.
-We should increase impartial and fair educational and business opportunities for the poor, without stifling competition.
- We need to abolish "sectarian" party politics thru liberalized education.
-Education has to be streamlined into three viable languages (Malay, English and Mandarin).
-Tamil as a medium of instruction has to be abolished, as it has no real economic value. It should be preserved by encouraging it with incentives of some sort- eg scholarships.
-Faculties in Universities have to be developed for ethnic studies.
-Unrestrained philosophical/ ideological debates need to be encouraged.
In order to assist in the evolution of the nation in a progressive manner, all parties need to refrain from using religion and ethnicity as a platform.
History has proven that theologically and ethnically based politics has polarizing, repressive and disastrous economic consequences, which are often incomprehensible to the masses who are desperate for a revolution. It would be wise of Malaysians not to descend to that level of desperation - wherein they have to turn to theology for statecraft.
Theology and racism in statecraft are for the ideologically ignorant and bankrupt- It would indeed be a sad day for Malaysia, when the masses have to turn to religious zealots or opportunists for political salvation. These are the two major factors that have polarised the nation today. To deny this would be foolhardy.
In order for the nation to evolve politically, we also need an enlightened electorate and student fraternity, who understand basic concepts of statecraft, democracy, socialism and elementary economics. Without real debate and discussion at the grassroots, nothing will come of this fight for justice that our fractured opposition parties grapple for.
Why is is so hard for the opposition to unite under one platform of social interests?
It is only becos they too have succumbed to the propaganda machinery of the neo-colonialists - be they chauvinistic nationalists, racists, religious ideologues, opportunists or simply ruthless capitalist pirates.
After the first 12 yrs of independence, then next 12 yrs of NEP ripened for 22yrs of repressive "Mahathirism", Malaysia has come to a stage of transition and transformation - when people have begun questioning the values that have been promoted by the authorities for 50 yrs. Malaysians are beginning to realize that all is not as rosy as depicted by the media - partly with the help of the Internet and communication revolution.
In all periods of history worldwide, when communication underwent a revolution - it heralded some form of socio-political upheaval and/or industrial revolution. Malaysia is no exception. To deny it, would only lead to turmoil.
Without this factor, all fights on the political front be it in the parliament, elections or demonstrations/marches/petitions, are doomed to fail.
Those who control communication, will be the elite - who will rule- who will define, make, interpret and break the law at their whim and fancy.
The message of a class based struggle need to reach the hearts of the heartlanders. They need to understand that their heritage,culture, religion and right can only be protected with a class based political scenario - as opposed to the elitist ethnic politics that is prevalent today.
The people need to realize that democracy is the only way forward - as opposed to the tried and tested authoritarian "asian values" - and speed of liberalization of the media is the key factor that would determine the progress of this phenomenon.
For social democrats to get their message to transcend the ethnic and religious divide, they would have to start educating the public on its ideals, economics and socio-political significance.
For this to be realized, we need a free media and liberal educational system. With these two factors, the peaceful transition and evolution of the Malaysian political landscape would be inevitable.
Monday, 26 November 2007
Bravo HindRAF-ians!
Hindraf marched last Sunday with little, if any, trouble to the security of Kuala Lumpur - except for one officer sustaining a few stitches from a missile (most probably the canister of the tear gas?).
It was nice to see that many Indians were quite passionate about issues that were central to the events that transpired. In order to get the feel of the sentiments, I thot that the best place to meet my fellowmen would be, none other than the watering holes with predominantly Indian patronage - and so I headed into town, after making an appointment with a friend of mine for some "appetizers" ........
On the way, I landed up stuck in a traffic jam (slow traffic, really) as a result of police checkpoints - of course I managed to get a "second look" from these policemen who waved me by.
So I met up with my old friend and we got talking about "Hindraf" and the issues.
I must say that most if not all, were totally in support of the rally, although not many were too aware of the reasons, for the predicament that they were in.
It was very "heart-warming" to see these underprivileged and marginalized brothers being able to drown their sorrows, without any financial woes at that moment in time. It is like you're in another time zone - what matters is that, their problems (regardless of Hindraf) are drowned out amidst the "cheers", laughter, pool, and curses for the "oppressors".
Of course Al-Jazeera was showing, and the cheers were for the rally and Uthayakumar, while the jeers were reserved strictly for Uncle Sam.
With all the noise, I could almost hear Sammy echo Khairy & Nazri -
it was illegal,
use proper channels (or tunnels -bocor or not),
it is not "our way",
they should voice thru elections,
the assembly was illegal,
no permit was issued,
organized by opposition,
we are the true voice of the people,
we don't need change but only "improvement",
and so on and so forth.
Uncle Sam - why not try to be more original?
As I spoke to this guy who worked in the British High-Com, I really had nothing to tell him when he asked, "If the High-Com is closed, and they don't work as Uncle Sam alleges, why doesn't he let them go peacefully, and make a fool of themselves? What have they got to lose?"
Just a minute here .... I thot Star reported today that the IGP said, " ...police had wanted to allow the rally leaders to hand over the memorandum but they arrived only at 1.30pm, gave a speech and left".
How sweet - and I suppose, he even had prepared mineral water, laddoos and beers too, in the Diwali spirit of muhibah .....
That's a truly mind-boggling statement - considering the fact that tear gas and chemical laced water-cannons were used on the gathering as a gesture of goodwill .....
As for Batu Caves, I have my doubts with regard to the reasons for the police pelting, and for the guys to start throwing Molotov cocktails at buses, when there was no such incident at Jln Ampang- and for these guys to defile the sanctity of the very premise that they are fighting to protect and preserve?
I beg your pardon - but I find that a little hard to swallow (even with beer). Although I'm not a Hindu myself, I do know that it isn't something that they would do for fun, or to spite the police.
(Unless of course they were all intoxicated en-mass at lunchtime - then it would be possible ....)
Maybe these guys have a some pyromaniac tendencies, are fans of Indian movies where chaos and anarchy unleashed by "the hero" is applauded ...... I really wouldn't know- but I believe that Hindus are generally more God fearing than depicted in the report by Star.
What if those anarchists were planted there as "trojans" to create unrest, and unleash some sort of mass psychosis and rioting? Once again, I wouldn't know - but hypothetically speaking, it is indeed quite a possibility.
Anyway, whatever happened, only those who were there would know the real story and I wouldn't want to speculate any further.
One thing is for sure - there were Hindraf-ians, and there were Hind-ruffians ...... I wonder which ones were implicated in the vandalism.
Whatever the case may be, it was evident from sentiments on the ground that all those whom I met were unanimous in their opinion that they have been marginalized and economically suppressed - that they only received "when others have had their fill". That whatever little they had, was being slowly and systematically being taken away.
The question remains however, if their votes will will be acquired for a song, coming from the melodic voice of "you know who", or maybe even a drama of tears/ humble apologies with prostration - you can't rule out and underestimate the compassion & love of the "permanently colonialized Indians" for the "thalaivar".
One thing is for sure, Hindraf did achieve with 20,000, what the 60,000 of Bersih marchers couldn't ....... they made it to the STAR Frontpage news headlines!!
Let's "sheers" (sic) to that, brother .......
Friday, 23 November 2007
Sothi, LKS, and HINDRAF
I was quite tickled to see the so-called "debate" which was side-tracked so easily with "psychological harassment" - the "tormentor" being none other than Mr LKS. Not to be left out, there were other hecklers in the opposition adding fuel to the fire, some bringing out "rocket stories" in defense of racial concerns .......
Firstly, it has to be said that Mr.LKS's conduct was definitely improper - screaming his guts out when there was no need for it. Secondly, he diverted attention from the issue of quit rent that was to be debated. To say the least, I believe his conduct was also unbecoming of a parliamentarian whom we address as "YB". His conduct was juvenile, indelicate and uncultured, at best.
I wouldn't have been surprised, had Mr. LKS and gang stuck out their tongues or middle fingers at Mr. Sothi and Co., during their sparring session!
Why is it so difficult to debate in a civil manner? Was it the way it is now, just a generation ago?
Although I do not condone his manner of torment, (by bringing up the issue of humiliation MIC and PPP were subjected to), I couldn't help laughing at the conduct and reaction of Mr. Sothi ...... he was obviously quite flustered by the needling, and was trying hard to maintain composure. He apparently, even whacked Jasin by telling him to "tutup satu mata"!
Being an "Indian" in the race-politics landscape, I guess his Emotional Intelligence Quotient could probably be quite low, after watching the "Indian" movies (and of course training from the "big guy" himself), with so much of extreme emotional expressions and decadence.
Let me indulge in some speculative, hypothetical thots ......
At that moment in time, with the adrenaline pumping his brains, I wouldn't have bet on what might've happened should Mr. LKS had handed him a rod for whatever purpose! Mr. Sothi, in his sweaty emotional turmoil, might've whacked (or shoved) himself if he was into Masochism, or could've whacked LKS if he was in line with the sacred "pantang dicabar" principle of "asian values".
If there were similar challenges at the Hindraf assembly to submit the memo to the Queen, could a similar response be evoked from participants?
I believe, that the likelihood is quite high, that these guys could be quite easily provoked - and indulge themselves in "heroics".
As much as I would support their right to peaceful assembly, I don't really subscribe their agenda of sectarian interests.
Of course there are convenient "Malaysian interests" dished out as political spins to the event - but it is ultimately, nothing but a fight for sectarian interests. From that perspective, I believe their methods of fighting for their rights are very much misguided.
One thing is for sure - even though I empathize with their sentiments, I wouldn't say that I fully sympathize with their predicament.
It was these isolationist attitudes that actually got these unfortunate marginalized Malaysians into the predicament that they cry foul about - that too, at the British crown!
Where were these guys during the Bersih March? Little chest thumping bravado did I hear from these Hindraf guys who now scream "justice" for "colonialized Indians" .......
I was quite shocked to hear that some of these guys have taken the words, "Jai Hind" to be their rallying call!
Allow me to ask a few simple questions -
What prevented them from rallying their followers in a similar manner for the Bersih March?
How many of these guys, claiming to be proud Malaysians, can actually speak Malay flawlessly, despite having lived all their lives in Malaysia?
What have they actually done personally to actually "integrate" into Malaysian society?
Do they really want to integrate or do they wish to isolate themselves, by clinging to ethnic chauvinism inclinations that has been infused into their minds?
The way I look at it, these guys from Hindraf are just playing the "race card" as a means to achieve their ends - no different from MIC, MCA, UMNO or other parties and groups that masquerade under non-ethnic constitutions. In fact, I'm certain of the fact that there are some "bloggers" who are obviously MIC supporters, who are campaigning for this rally - all fired-up and issuing warnings to others along the lines of "pantang dicabar", and "krisman" himself.
But of course, this assembly is "a fight for the rights of all Malaysians" - so, they say!
Yeah, right - And I'm Abraham Lincoln .........
Allow me to post DSAI's statement on this matter ...
HINDRAF Rally
I support HINDRAF’s right to peaceful demonstration and therefore reiterate my appeal to the Royal Malaysian Police to approve a permit for their rally to take place on 25 November 2007. The right to peaceful assembly is guaranteed by the Malaysian Constitution and the November 10 BERSIH rally has demonstrated conclusively that the Malaysian people can act responsibly and in accordance with the best traditions of civil society.
However I must appeal to HINDRAF to consider a more balanced and responsible approach to addressing its grievances, which have been incorrectly attributed to the Constitution, and in particular Article 153. HINDRAF’s complaints should be directed towards the corrupt UMNO-led BN coalition government that is guilty of serious abuses of power and which continues to marginalise and neglect the plight of poor Indians, and has also failed to take into account the problems of all Malaysians, irrespective of race, colour or religion.
The HINDRAF movement is symptomatic of the fundamental problems that remain entrenched in our country and to stoke the flames of racism would only exacerbate racial tensions and animosity among Malaysians.
Malaysians of conscience who are committed to reforming this nation must recognise that a viable opposition is essential and now is the time to support it. For the pro-reform parties in society to work together effectively, they must find common ground, be open to communication and collaboration, and resist the temptation to scapegoat other races for their problems and frustrations.
Divided our voice is weak. But united and enlightened, we can together build a nation that we all can be truly be proud of, and one in which we can live in peace and harmony.
ANWAR IBRAHIM http://anwaribrahim.com/site/
Wednesday, 21 November 2007
The PAS factor - A Viable Alternative?
DAP to go it alone if PKR works with PAS The Star: Monday, November 19, 2007 PENANG: The DAP will work with Parti Keadilan Rakyat at the next general election only if the PKR disassociates itself from PAS. DAP national chairman Karpal Singh said the party wants PKR de factor leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to publicly declare that he will not work with PAS. “The DAP is for a secular state, not an Islamic state. If Anwar chooses to be silent on the matter, the DAP is ready to fight without the PKR,” he said at a dinner organised by the DAP Bukit Bendera division on Saturday.
=================================
The matters that I wish to write are simply personal opinions. None of them are uncontested "truths", and are subject to debate and correction/ alteration. I do not mean to "accuse" any relevant party/parties of the things mentioned here - these are perceptions and personal opinions, based on "current events". Allow me to digress a little ....
At present, the most powerful opposition party in the parliament is actually PAS, considering the fact that they hold sway among the conservative Malay- Muslim populace, even though it is Mr. Lim Kit Siang who frequently voices for the opposition. He is for all practical purposes, at present, just a "showpiece" for Democracy (Malaysian Style).
He is often subjected to derogatory and humiliating remarks from MPs from the ruling coalition. It beats me as to why he puts up with such infantile behaviour from such chauvinistic ignoramuses we call "YB"s. If at all politics were my line, and I were an MP in sitting I would stage a walk-out the moment these "lovers of monkeys" misbehave in the "august house".
(Politics is definitely not my line - never was, and never will be - considering the fact that I will never ever subscribe to sectarian/ racial/ religious politics of this country, which is the legacy of colonial divide-and-rule policies! Malaysia is a country divided along sectarian lines as a result despite all the political spins about being "peaceful, tolerant, united and progressive".)
Anyway, getting back to the subject of discussion - The PAS Factor. Is it really an alternative which the Malay electorate offer the "Kufr"? If they believe it to be so, so be it - and I wish to discuss it.
Let me start by saying, there is no doubt in my mind whatsoever, that Tok Guru Mursyidul Am Nik Aziz and Tok Guru Hadi are truly gems - they would put to shame a lot of us out here through their sincerity in wanting a truly civil society. However, that is far from what concerns the nation as a whole.
Having been in parliament for such a long time, and being "veterans" at being the opposition, I do not recall much of any issues of financial, social, national or international interest which PAS has fought for - please pardon my ignorance, if this this isn't the case, and I wish to be enlightened.
Discussions of universal human rights would be lost on the wise ulamas of PAS, simply becos they prefer to perceive the world from the perspective of one from age, long gone.
They do not believe in universal human rights, simply because, from their perspective the Muslim individual should be accorded special privileges under Islamic laws.
They do not believe in freedom of thought.
Neither do they subscribe to freedom of worship.
They do not believe, that it is my right as an individual Human Being under "God-given rights" to be a Hindu, Christian, Zoroastrian or Muslim, as and when I please, even if I'm confused! They do not believe that it is my right to be an "apostate", as and when I choose - and it isn't their right to persecute me for it!
They of course say that "God" says otherwise!
Debates on these issues with the ulamas would have them refer to scriptures, instead of common sense, to argue their point on "righteousness" -
they'd obviously say, "...... because, the good book says so and it is God's law!"
It is quite obvious from the earlier discussion (go to archives), that most of PAS supporters are mesmerized by their charisma and religious fervour, and are thus taken up by them. Little do they understand the implications of PAS policy - the socio-economic implications of their Islamist agenda.
Allow me to post a few questions I had posted in the discussion mentioned, again -
PAS,
-Don't you realize that your policies are exclusivistic?
-Don't you realize that you are the ones keeping BN in power?
-That you are instrumental to their existence?
-That you complement their intentions?
-How many of you actually understand and are tolerant of the sentiments, culture, religions and lifestyle of the Kufr?
(By this I do not mean the negligible Kelantan, Terengganu, Kedah, Perlis and Pahang populace).
-Do you intend to start policies of Islamic this and Islamic that?
-Do you plan to impose nationwide dress code and gender segregation should you gain power?
-Would you endeavour to abolish "immoral" entertainment outlets?
-What about education? Wanna promote madrasahs?
-Take a good look at your policies and ask yourselves - Are you the Trojan Horse party?
I didn't receive any replies to these simple concerns, and so I didn't pursue the issue, or ask questions on more complex matters. Maybe these questions were too "insignificant" or simplistic for them ... I wouldn't know.
Sadly, after a year discussing about this issue, the only flimsy arguments I get from them are the standard - "Oh so you'd rather have UMNO corruption ....", "What is there to fear?", "Islamic law aka Syariah is righteous and just", "Look PAS has built (or allowed the building of) some Buddha statues", "Ask the Chinese of Kelantan ....." and so on and so forth.
To think that the supporters of the Islamic State platform, should not understand the sentiments and insecurity that they fear under such a system, is mind boggling, to say the least. All of them point to Kelantan - as to how peaceful and harmonious it is! However, just seeing the "prosperity" of the common man on the streets of Kota Baru,( at least, based on the cars in the capital Township), sends shivers down my spine ...... Most Malay-Muslim PAS/ opposition supporters are willing to trade-off principles of justice, becos they wish to weaken UMNO Baru - not becos they believe in their cause. Their reasonings for working with PAS are too simplistic, and absolutely makes no sense. To that end, I believe Mr. Karpal's stand on PAS's Islamic state issue is justified.
Malaysians are basically politically illiterate - they know very little about socio-political issues and are easily manipulated due to their ignorance. It has been the intention of those in power to keep it that way by being the only ones who would be able to relay "the truth" via the media under their thumb.
The general public in Malaysia are so easily manipulated via "financial incentives" or religious fervor, that they have become complacent and behave like the illiterate masses coming from rural India. I'm sorry, I believe the rural masses in India are more politically aware despite their illiteracy - maybe Africa would be a better choice .....
This in itself sets a very dangerous precedent, as the electorate wouldn't be able to exercise their constitutional right to an "informed choice".
This elementary issue is (from my perspective) the main issue, which lies at the heart of all the democratic institutions of the world - making an "informed choice". Not casting the ballot, or indelible ink! This was in fact at the heart of the BERSIH march on 10/11/07. Without freedom of speech, information and media, there can be no democracy, no matter how many Lim Kit Siangs, Karpal Singhs, Hadi or Nazis scream their guts out at monkeys in parliament - for God , King and Country (or maybe Bangsa, Agama dan Negara)!
Once the electorate is able to make an "informed choice", everything else would fall into place - and the key to it all is a free media, and free discussions on socio-political or philosophical matters. This in itself would set the ball rolling for a social and political awakening, and would bring about a "renaissance" among the electorate. It beats me, how a PAS government would allow this, when they speak for an Islamic state.
Having said that, I would stress here that, should PAS be able to work out a solution, and guarantee all of us these universal human rights, I wouldn't deny them my vote, should the situation warrant it.
As things are, I'm not so sure if I'd like to have a candidate with whom I cannot discuss "certain issues" of concern to me, because "God says so ...".
I guess I'll just have to wait and see what the Malay-Muslim Malaysians (aka the "real Malaysians" whose god-given "rights" are unquestionable under an unsigned "social contract" in the current system) decide for the future - peaceful evolution or revolution!
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
"While we accord high priority to social and economic rights, we must at the same time guard ourselves from stretching the argument too far. Development cannot be used as an apology for authoritarianism. The fact of the matter is that more nations have been impoverished by authoritarianism than enriched by it. By not giving vent to the vices of dissent, wrongs cannot be made right and remedies for failures cannot be made available," said Anwar.
"Thus the notion that freedom must be sacrificed on the altar of development must be rejected. It is our conviction that only through the ability of every individual, however weak or disadvantaged, to freely articulate his fears and grievances can we hope to bring about a just and caring society. Only by guaranteeing the individual's right to participate fully in society's decision-making processes can we confer legitimacy to political leadership and governance, for government derives their just powers from the consent of the governed."
- Anwar Ibrahim,University of the Philippines Law Centre's Institute of Human Rights,1994
=================================
The matters that I wish to write are simply personal opinions. None of them are uncontested "truths", and are subject to debate and correction/ alteration. I do not mean to "accuse" any relevant party/parties of the things mentioned here - these are perceptions and personal opinions, based on "current events". Allow me to digress a little ....
At present, the most powerful opposition party in the parliament is actually PAS, considering the fact that they hold sway among the conservative Malay- Muslim populace, even though it is Mr. Lim Kit Siang who frequently voices for the opposition. He is for all practical purposes, at present, just a "showpiece" for Democracy (Malaysian Style).
He is often subjected to derogatory and humiliating remarks from MPs from the ruling coalition. It beats me as to why he puts up with such infantile behaviour from such chauvinistic ignoramuses we call "YB"s. If at all politics were my line, and I were an MP in sitting I would stage a walk-out the moment these "lovers of monkeys" misbehave in the "august house".
(Politics is definitely not my line - never was, and never will be - considering the fact that I will never ever subscribe to sectarian/ racial/ religious politics of this country, which is the legacy of colonial divide-and-rule policies! Malaysia is a country divided along sectarian lines as a result despite all the political spins about being "peaceful, tolerant, united and progressive".)
Anyway, getting back to the subject of discussion - The PAS Factor. Is it really an alternative which the Malay electorate offer the "Kufr"? If they believe it to be so, so be it - and I wish to discuss it.
Let me start by saying, there is no doubt in my mind whatsoever, that Tok Guru Mursyidul Am Nik Aziz and Tok Guru Hadi are truly gems - they would put to shame a lot of us out here through their sincerity in wanting a truly civil society. However, that is far from what concerns the nation as a whole.
Having been in parliament for such a long time, and being "veterans" at being the opposition, I do not recall much of any issues of financial, social, national or international interest which PAS has fought for - please pardon my ignorance, if this this isn't the case, and I wish to be enlightened.
Discussions of universal human rights would be lost on the wise ulamas of PAS, simply becos they prefer to perceive the world from the perspective of one from age, long gone.
They do not believe in universal human rights, simply because, from their perspective the Muslim individual should be accorded special privileges under Islamic laws.
They do not believe in freedom of thought.
Neither do they subscribe to freedom of worship.
They do not believe, that it is my right as an individual Human Being under "God-given rights" to be a Hindu, Christian, Zoroastrian or Muslim, as and when I please, even if I'm confused! They do not believe that it is my right to be an "apostate", as and when I choose - and it isn't their right to persecute me for it!
They of course say that "God" says otherwise!
Debates on these issues with the ulamas would have them refer to scriptures, instead of common sense, to argue their point on "righteousness" -
they'd obviously say, "...... because, the good book says so and it is God's law!"
It is quite obvious from the earlier discussion (go to archives), that most of PAS supporters are mesmerized by their charisma and religious fervour, and are thus taken up by them. Little do they understand the implications of PAS policy - the socio-economic implications of their Islamist agenda.
Allow me to post a few questions I had posted in the discussion mentioned, again -
PAS,
-Don't you realize that your policies are exclusivistic?
-Don't you realize that you are the ones keeping BN in power?
-That you are instrumental to their existence?
-That you complement their intentions?
-How many of you actually understand and are tolerant of the sentiments, culture, religions and lifestyle of the Kufr?
(By this I do not mean the negligible Kelantan, Terengganu, Kedah, Perlis and Pahang populace).
-Do you intend to start policies of Islamic this and Islamic that?
-Do you plan to impose nationwide dress code and gender segregation should you gain power?
-Would you endeavour to abolish "immoral" entertainment outlets?
-What about education? Wanna promote madrasahs?
-Take a good look at your policies and ask yourselves - Are you the Trojan Horse party?
I didn't receive any replies to these simple concerns, and so I didn't pursue the issue, or ask questions on more complex matters. Maybe these questions were too "insignificant" or simplistic for them ... I wouldn't know.
Sadly, after a year discussing about this issue, the only flimsy arguments I get from them are the standard - "Oh so you'd rather have UMNO corruption ....", "What is there to fear?", "Islamic law aka Syariah is righteous and just", "Look PAS has built (or allowed the building of) some Buddha statues", "Ask the Chinese of Kelantan ....." and so on and so forth.
To think that the supporters of the Islamic State platform, should not understand the sentiments and insecurity that they fear under such a system, is mind boggling, to say the least. All of them point to Kelantan - as to how peaceful and harmonious it is! However, just seeing the "prosperity" of the common man on the streets of Kota Baru,( at least, based on the cars in the capital Township), sends shivers down my spine ...... Most Malay-Muslim PAS/ opposition supporters are willing to trade-off principles of justice, becos they wish to weaken UMNO Baru - not becos they believe in their cause. Their reasonings for working with PAS are too simplistic, and absolutely makes no sense. To that end, I believe Mr. Karpal's stand on PAS's Islamic state issue is justified.
Malaysians are basically politically illiterate - they know very little about socio-political issues and are easily manipulated due to their ignorance. It has been the intention of those in power to keep it that way by being the only ones who would be able to relay "the truth" via the media under their thumb.
The general public in Malaysia are so easily manipulated via "financial incentives" or religious fervor, that they have become complacent and behave like the illiterate masses coming from rural India. I'm sorry, I believe the rural masses in India are more politically aware despite their illiteracy - maybe Africa would be a better choice .....
This in itself sets a very dangerous precedent, as the electorate wouldn't be able to exercise their constitutional right to an "informed choice".
This elementary issue is (from my perspective) the main issue, which lies at the heart of all the democratic institutions of the world - making an "informed choice". Not casting the ballot, or indelible ink! This was in fact at the heart of the BERSIH march on 10/11/07. Without freedom of speech, information and media, there can be no democracy, no matter how many Lim Kit Siangs, Karpal Singhs, Hadi or Nazis scream their guts out at monkeys in parliament - for God , King and Country (or maybe Bangsa, Agama dan Negara)!
Once the electorate is able to make an "informed choice", everything else would fall into place - and the key to it all is a free media, and free discussions on socio-political or philosophical matters. This in itself would set the ball rolling for a social and political awakening, and would bring about a "renaissance" among the electorate. It beats me, how a PAS government would allow this, when they speak for an Islamic state.
Having said that, I would stress here that, should PAS be able to work out a solution, and guarantee all of us these universal human rights, I wouldn't deny them my vote, should the situation warrant it.
As things are, I'm not so sure if I'd like to have a candidate with whom I cannot discuss "certain issues" of concern to me, because "God says so ...".
I guess I'll just have to wait and see what the Malay-Muslim Malaysians (aka the "real Malaysians" whose god-given "rights" are unquestionable under an unsigned "social contract" in the current system) decide for the future - peaceful evolution or revolution!
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
"While we accord high priority to social and economic rights, we must at the same time guard ourselves from stretching the argument too far. Development cannot be used as an apology for authoritarianism. The fact of the matter is that more nations have been impoverished by authoritarianism than enriched by it. By not giving vent to the vices of dissent, wrongs cannot be made right and remedies for failures cannot be made available," said Anwar.
"Thus the notion that freedom must be sacrificed on the altar of development must be rejected. It is our conviction that only through the ability of every individual, however weak or disadvantaged, to freely articulate his fears and grievances can we hope to bring about a just and caring society. Only by guaranteeing the individual's right to participate fully in society's decision-making processes can we confer legitimacy to political leadership and governance, for government derives their just powers from the consent of the governed."
- Anwar Ibrahim,University of the Philippines Law Centre's Institute of Human Rights,1994
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)