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
Wednesday, 21 November 2007
Tuesday, 20 November 2007
Discussion on MT - PAS factor
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 following was the discussion on the above matter, in the comments section on Malaysia today.
I have focussed on my responses to points raised by some other commenters and my doubts about PAS. Not that I'm anti-Islam or anything .....
It is just that it is my opinion that many are taken up by PAS member's charisma and nothing more. Most of the PAS supporters actually know little or nothing about PAS's motives, manifesto or modus operandi. I could be wrong, and I certainly wish I were. If only one of them could come forward and give me enough proof of the "lies" disseminated by the PAS detractors about the much publicized cliche of "Islamofascism" and bigotry, I would be the first to actually vote for them.
So here goes the discussion that took place on MT - comments were taken from two different pages discussing the same issue.
(To read the relevant articles and comments click here and here.)
zanie wrote:
What is it that you are so afraid of the islamic state? The law of Islam applies to muslim only! you may choose the British law if you like because in Islam , we punished muslim to safe them from the god's wrath hereafter.and if you study hard the law that we inherit came from lord reid, which comes from british and goes further back to the bible.
Open your eyes wide folks! If you are not a criminal then nobody will punish you blatantly according to islamic law. not like BN's law that even Tun muhamad Suffian was afraid if he was innocent!
cruzeiro wrote:
So the bickerings begin, and it beats the Muslims mind why their laws are abhorred by the Kufr ......
LOL!
Islamic State, Syaria, - Wow! Malaysia has come up with the perfect Islamic state formula!
I wonder why the citizens of the world aren't clamouring to become citizens of Islamic states of the world, zanie .....
Indeed - Open your eyes wide folks!
If you are not a criminal then nobody will punish you blatantly according to islamic law.
BTW, The perceptions of a crime would depend on who sits to judge you using outdated tribal laws. And you women may take comfort that you'll be stoned to death should you seduce men who rape you! LOL!
Bukit Chandan wrote:
To effect the proper changes, the Opposition must be united. Put aside differences and work on common grounds for a better Malaysia in the future.
Do not let the betrayers of Truth & Justice capitalize on this issue.
Best Regards.........
bukit.chandan@gmail.com
cruzeiro wrote:
Do not let the betrayers of Truth & Justice capitalize on this issue.
========================
Islamists worldwide are known to betray secular constitutions, once they achieve power.
In fact, it is the recommended modus operandi ...
So are we to risk the betrayal of the constitution by the newcomer, should they win?
Or are we just supposed to just support them to increase the Islamist opposition, so as to bolster the Islamisation policy?
Once these laws are enacted, there usually will be no turning back, and the electorate would be driven to conflict and polarisation, due to the parallel systems of justice - not to mention enhanced "moral policing".
Doesn't sound very appealing to me!
Quite a Catch-22 .....
Meanwhile we can rest assured of UMNO - dulu, kini dan selamanya.
As long as the thorn of the Islamist's agenda remains, - Hidup UMNO, Hidup MCA, Hidup MIC, Gerakan, PPP, BN!
So let's all have fun while the going is good - just stop debating about some hard-headed moronic policy, and stop dreaming of a strong credible opposition. You could even forget voting!
Cheers!
cruzeiro wrote:
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?
cruzeiro wrote:
PAS, DAP and PKR should draw up a "social contract" - then they stand a chance.
The question would be if PAS can be trusted to relax on their Islamization policies, should they win more than the others.
Without a "social contract in writing", there is no way in hell that an opposition front can even dream up one third of the seats on Dewan Rakyat.
Salmah wrote:
I think UMNO has succeeded in frightening the non Muslim to accept PAS. What are you afraid of guys, should PAS behave badly once they are in power with the others, just vote them out after 5 years. By fighting with each other you guys are allowing UMNO and BA to continue being in power. Is that what we want?
HIDUP BERSEH!!!
cruzeiro wrote:
Salmah,
That is where you are wrong - all it takes is bad enough behaviour once, for laws to be enacted.
Once religious laws are passed, they are almost impossible to be ammended - hey, after all, they are "God's" laws - and there'll be no turning back from the slippery slope ....
bat8 wrote:
Look jumlah kerusi parlimen yang akan ditandingi kebanyakannya di kelantan, kedah, terengganu. Itupun bukan keseluruhan kerana berkongsi dengan PKR, jika DAP mahu bertanding di kelantan dan yakin boleh menang, PAS akan beri juga. Minoriti seats di lain-lain negeri.
Sebahagian besar kerusi parlimen akan ditandingi oleh PKR,DAP dan lain-lain parti pembangkang yang menyertai pakatan.
Jika pakatan pembangkang menang, PAS hanya akan menjadi minoriti dalam kerajaan. Jadi macamana PAS mahu menjadikan negara ini negara islam. Terok sangatkah negara islam? Tidakkah kita sekarang ini berada dalam negara islam hadhari?
Jika PAS berkeras juga mahu mendirikan negara islam, tendang sahaja mereka keluar dari kerajaan. Apalah yang mereka boleh buat jika sekadar hanya memerintah kelantan dan terengganu?
Keupayaan PAS untuk menubuhkan negara Islam dalam senario sekarang adalah sesuatu yang amat sukar kalau tidak pun mustahil melainkan mereka menubuhkan kerajaan secara mutlak dengan majoriti 2/3 atau lebih. Now can PAS achive that?
Jika katakan PAS berjaya menubuhkan kerajaan federal secara sendiri, mereka perlu terlebih dahulu meminda perlembagaan malaysia bagi menjadikan negara Islam. Mereka hanya boleh berbuat demikian jika mereka menang dengan majoriti 2/3 atau lebih. Kerusi yang mereka tandingi pun tak sampai separuh! bagaimana nak dapat majoriti 2/3?
Jadi alasan cruzeiro samalah alasan karpal singh. Cruzeiro bolehlah kita maafkan tapi karpal singh mustahil tidak tahu hakikat keupayaan PAS menubuhkan negara Islam berdasarkan keupayaan PAS dalam pilihanraya2 sebelum ini.
Cruzeiro, usahlah buang masa dengan membangkitkan isu yang almost impossible akan terjadi. tenaga dan usaha kita terlalu mahal untuk dibazirkan membahas isu yang tak mungkin terjadi.
Gembelingkan usaha kita untuk mengajak rakyat dari semua kaum menyokong usaha untuk menewaskan BN dalam pilihanraya yang akan datang.
cruzeiro wrote:
Cruzeiro, usahlah buang masa dengan membangkitkan isu yang almost impossible akan terjadi. tenaga dan usaha kita terlalu mahal untuk dibazirkan membahas isu yang tak mungkin terjadi.
===============
bat8,
bukan niat saya utk membawa isu yang "tak mungkin jadi" - niat saya adalah utk membincangkan niat PAS!
Niat PAS agak sukar dipercayai, sebab mereka ni berfungsi sebagai "trojan horse" buat "perikatan". Dengan sentimen Islamist mereka, sudah tentu pihak Kufr yg mereka kutuk tak habis2 itu tidak akan menerima mereka. Oleh itu, agak sukar utk satu gabungan politik dgn yg lain. Gabungan sebegitu akan menjadi terlalu rumit.
Kalau ya pun, tidak mungkin stabil, kerana mereka hanya membohongi diri mereka dgn agenda mereka yg tersendiri.
Membantu PAS dlm pilihanraya semata2 kerana nak usir UmnoBaru, tidak akan memberi apa2 manafaat - cuma akan menambahkan "sentimen Islamist" org Melayu, dan mengubah haluan UmnoBaru kearah Islamist agenda, kerana ingin bertanding keIslaman dgn PAS!
Usah gunakan beberapa tokong atau kuil yg dibina buat publisiti, sebagai contoh - ini akan berubah jika mereka terpaksa menilai org Kufr dlm situasi lain.
Cuba jawab soalan2 yg saya tanya sebelum jawaban pada Salmah tadi, dan suruh PAS buat pendirian tetap mengenai "nilai2 murni" mereka ..... lepas tu, sama2 kita "turun padang", ya!
Jika parti lain nak bertanding, sepatutnya mereka bertanding utk menjadi kerajaan dan bukan pembangkang. Dan utk menang, seharusnya mereka semua tidak menerima langsung lagu "sectarian politics" yg sedang dimainkan oleh BN.
This Islamist agenda was started by the ulama who took over PAS in the 80s during TDM's time. And it was a very good ploy to strengthen his grip on power, with the support of the Chinese.
Apa lah yg PAS takut sgt dgn sistem sekular ..... adake org halang mereka pakai serban, jadi alim, sembahyang atau menjadi seorang yg mukmin? Salahke kalau mereka menyokong sistem sekular?
Hang pikiaq sendiri .....
=====================================
Note: It appears that bat8, is lost in his defense of the PAS agenda, and is starting to get abusive.
=====================================
Nice discussing with you.
Let's hope something good works out for the good of the nation.
Cheers.
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 following was the discussion on the above matter, in the comments section on Malaysia today.
I have focussed on my responses to points raised by some other commenters and my doubts about PAS. Not that I'm anti-Islam or anything .....
It is just that it is my opinion that many are taken up by PAS member's charisma and nothing more. Most of the PAS supporters actually know little or nothing about PAS's motives, manifesto or modus operandi. I could be wrong, and I certainly wish I were. If only one of them could come forward and give me enough proof of the "lies" disseminated by the PAS detractors about the much publicized cliche of "Islamofascism" and bigotry, I would be the first to actually vote for them.
So here goes the discussion that took place on MT - comments were taken from two different pages discussing the same issue.
(To read the relevant articles and comments click here and here.)
zanie wrote:
What is it that you are so afraid of the islamic state? The law of Islam applies to muslim only! you may choose the British law if you like because in Islam , we punished muslim to safe them from the god's wrath hereafter.and if you study hard the law that we inherit came from lord reid, which comes from british and goes further back to the bible.
Open your eyes wide folks! If you are not a criminal then nobody will punish you blatantly according to islamic law. not like BN's law that even Tun muhamad Suffian was afraid if he was innocent!
cruzeiro wrote:
So the bickerings begin, and it beats the Muslims mind why their laws are abhorred by the Kufr ......
LOL!
Islamic State, Syaria, - Wow! Malaysia has come up with the perfect Islamic state formula!
I wonder why the citizens of the world aren't clamouring to become citizens of Islamic states of the world, zanie .....
Indeed - Open your eyes wide folks!
If you are not a criminal then nobody will punish you blatantly according to islamic law.
BTW, The perceptions of a crime would depend on who sits to judge you using outdated tribal laws. And you women may take comfort that you'll be stoned to death should you seduce men who rape you! LOL!
Bukit Chandan wrote:
To effect the proper changes, the Opposition must be united. Put aside differences and work on common grounds for a better Malaysia in the future.
Do not let the betrayers of Truth & Justice capitalize on this issue.
Best Regards.........
bukit.chandan@gmail.com
cruzeiro wrote:
Do not let the betrayers of Truth & Justice capitalize on this issue.
========================
Islamists worldwide are known to betray secular constitutions, once they achieve power.
In fact, it is the recommended modus operandi ...
So are we to risk the betrayal of the constitution by the newcomer, should they win?
Or are we just supposed to just support them to increase the Islamist opposition, so as to bolster the Islamisation policy?
Once these laws are enacted, there usually will be no turning back, and the electorate would be driven to conflict and polarisation, due to the parallel systems of justice - not to mention enhanced "moral policing".
Doesn't sound very appealing to me!
Quite a Catch-22 .....
Meanwhile we can rest assured of UMNO - dulu, kini dan selamanya.
As long as the thorn of the Islamist's agenda remains, - Hidup UMNO, Hidup MCA, Hidup MIC, Gerakan, PPP, BN!
So let's all have fun while the going is good - just stop debating about some hard-headed moronic policy, and stop dreaming of a strong credible opposition. You could even forget voting!
Cheers!
cruzeiro wrote:
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?
cruzeiro wrote:
PAS, DAP and PKR should draw up a "social contract" - then they stand a chance.
The question would be if PAS can be trusted to relax on their Islamization policies, should they win more than the others.
Without a "social contract in writing", there is no way in hell that an opposition front can even dream up one third of the seats on Dewan Rakyat.
Salmah wrote:
I think UMNO has succeeded in frightening the non Muslim to accept PAS. What are you afraid of guys, should PAS behave badly once they are in power with the others, just vote them out after 5 years. By fighting with each other you guys are allowing UMNO and BA to continue being in power. Is that what we want?
HIDUP BERSEH!!!
cruzeiro wrote:
Salmah,
That is where you are wrong - all it takes is bad enough behaviour once, for laws to be enacted.
Once religious laws are passed, they are almost impossible to be ammended - hey, after all, they are "God's" laws - and there'll be no turning back from the slippery slope ....
bat8 wrote:
Look jumlah kerusi parlimen yang akan ditandingi kebanyakannya di kelantan, kedah, terengganu. Itupun bukan keseluruhan kerana berkongsi dengan PKR, jika DAP mahu bertanding di kelantan dan yakin boleh menang, PAS akan beri juga. Minoriti seats di lain-lain negeri.
Sebahagian besar kerusi parlimen akan ditandingi oleh PKR,DAP dan lain-lain parti pembangkang yang menyertai pakatan.
Jika pakatan pembangkang menang, PAS hanya akan menjadi minoriti dalam kerajaan. Jadi macamana PAS mahu menjadikan negara ini negara islam. Terok sangatkah negara islam? Tidakkah kita sekarang ini berada dalam negara islam hadhari?
Jika PAS berkeras juga mahu mendirikan negara islam, tendang sahaja mereka keluar dari kerajaan. Apalah yang mereka boleh buat jika sekadar hanya memerintah kelantan dan terengganu?
Keupayaan PAS untuk menubuhkan negara Islam dalam senario sekarang adalah sesuatu yang amat sukar kalau tidak pun mustahil melainkan mereka menubuhkan kerajaan secara mutlak dengan majoriti 2/3 atau lebih. Now can PAS achive that?
Jika katakan PAS berjaya menubuhkan kerajaan federal secara sendiri, mereka perlu terlebih dahulu meminda perlembagaan malaysia bagi menjadikan negara Islam. Mereka hanya boleh berbuat demikian jika mereka menang dengan majoriti 2/3 atau lebih. Kerusi yang mereka tandingi pun tak sampai separuh! bagaimana nak dapat majoriti 2/3?
Jadi alasan cruzeiro samalah alasan karpal singh. Cruzeiro bolehlah kita maafkan tapi karpal singh mustahil tidak tahu hakikat keupayaan PAS menubuhkan negara Islam berdasarkan keupayaan PAS dalam pilihanraya2 sebelum ini.
Cruzeiro, usahlah buang masa dengan membangkitkan isu yang almost impossible akan terjadi. tenaga dan usaha kita terlalu mahal untuk dibazirkan membahas isu yang tak mungkin terjadi.
Gembelingkan usaha kita untuk mengajak rakyat dari semua kaum menyokong usaha untuk menewaskan BN dalam pilihanraya yang akan datang.
cruzeiro wrote:
Cruzeiro, usahlah buang masa dengan membangkitkan isu yang almost impossible akan terjadi. tenaga dan usaha kita terlalu mahal untuk dibazirkan membahas isu yang tak mungkin terjadi.
===============
bat8,
bukan niat saya utk membawa isu yang "tak mungkin jadi" - niat saya adalah utk membincangkan niat PAS!
Niat PAS agak sukar dipercayai, sebab mereka ni berfungsi sebagai "trojan horse" buat "perikatan". Dengan sentimen Islamist mereka, sudah tentu pihak Kufr yg mereka kutuk tak habis2 itu tidak akan menerima mereka. Oleh itu, agak sukar utk satu gabungan politik dgn yg lain. Gabungan sebegitu akan menjadi terlalu rumit.
Kalau ya pun, tidak mungkin stabil, kerana mereka hanya membohongi diri mereka dgn agenda mereka yg tersendiri.
Membantu PAS dlm pilihanraya semata2 kerana nak usir UmnoBaru, tidak akan memberi apa2 manafaat - cuma akan menambahkan "sentimen Islamist" org Melayu, dan mengubah haluan UmnoBaru kearah Islamist agenda, kerana ingin bertanding keIslaman dgn PAS!
Usah gunakan beberapa tokong atau kuil yg dibina buat publisiti, sebagai contoh - ini akan berubah jika mereka terpaksa menilai org Kufr dlm situasi lain.
Cuba jawab soalan2 yg saya tanya sebelum jawaban pada Salmah tadi, dan suruh PAS buat pendirian tetap mengenai "nilai2 murni" mereka ..... lepas tu, sama2 kita "turun padang", ya!
Jika parti lain nak bertanding, sepatutnya mereka bertanding utk menjadi kerajaan dan bukan pembangkang. Dan utk menang, seharusnya mereka semua tidak menerima langsung lagu "sectarian politics" yg sedang dimainkan oleh BN.
This Islamist agenda was started by the ulama who took over PAS in the 80s during TDM's time. And it was a very good ploy to strengthen his grip on power, with the support of the Chinese.
Apa lah yg PAS takut sgt dgn sistem sekular ..... adake org halang mereka pakai serban, jadi alim, sembahyang atau menjadi seorang yg mukmin? Salahke kalau mereka menyokong sistem sekular?
Hang pikiaq sendiri .....
bat8 wrote:
cruzeiro wrote:
Bat8,
You masih belum menjawab soalan2 yang saya kemukan mengenai pendirian PAS.
Usahlah nak bawak cerita patung buddha lagi .....
Niat PAS dan modus operandi mereka amat penting - bukan sekadar nak tendang org skg aje, beb ....
Takkanlah nak menggelabah bila dia org dah "power" - kalau I undi dia org, I nak paham niat mereka - in black & white!
Kalu nak buat gabungan politik dgn mereka tanpa menerima hakikat yg sebenarnya, umpama menegakkan benang basah!
You masih belum menjawab soalan2 yang saya kemukan mengenai pendirian PAS.
Usahlah nak bawak cerita patung buddha lagi .....
Niat PAS dan modus operandi mereka amat penting - bukan sekadar nak tendang org skg aje, beb ....
Takkanlah nak menggelabah bila dia org dah "power" - kalau I undi dia org, I nak paham niat mereka - in black & white!
Kalu nak buat gabungan politik dgn mereka tanpa menerima hakikat yg sebenarnya, umpama menegakkan benang basah!
20/11 20:37:24
bat8 wrote:
cruziero...yang membohongi diri sendiri adalah anda.
Pada masa rakyat malaysia yang selama ini dipisahkan atas dasar perkauman dan ugama, dilaga-lagakan antara satu kaum dengan kaum yang lain selama 50 tahun, mendapat satu suntikan semangat untuk bersatu menentang kezaliman dan membina masa depan yang lebih saksama- anda muncul membawa roterik basi yang kita dicanang oleh UMNO sejak 50 tahun lalu.
Hujah-hujah umum yang berlapiskan ugutan yang dah basi anda bawa nampak sangat senada dan seirama dengan hujah dan propaganda UMNO sejak 50 tahun lalu.
Kami rakyat malaysia: melayu, cina,indian, kadazan dll telah mendapat semangat baru untuk bersama-sama menentang kezaliman selama ini.
so juallah hujah basi yang general anda kat zimbabwe ke kerana robert mugabe sedang dalam keadaan tertekan sekarang. Rakyat malaysia dah tak termakan dengan tipu helah murahan begini.
Pada masa rakyat malaysia yang selama ini dipisahkan atas dasar perkauman dan ugama, dilaga-lagakan antara satu kaum dengan kaum yang lain selama 50 tahun, mendapat satu suntikan semangat untuk bersatu menentang kezaliman dan membina masa depan yang lebih saksama- anda muncul membawa roterik basi yang kita dicanang oleh UMNO sejak 50 tahun lalu.
Hujah-hujah umum yang berlapiskan ugutan yang dah basi anda bawa nampak sangat senada dan seirama dengan hujah dan propaganda UMNO sejak 50 tahun lalu.
Kami rakyat malaysia: melayu, cina,indian, kadazan dll telah mendapat semangat baru untuk bersama-sama menentang kezaliman selama ini.
so juallah hujah basi yang general anda kat zimbabwe ke kerana robert mugabe sedang dalam keadaan tertekan sekarang. Rakyat malaysia dah tak termakan dengan tipu helah murahan begini.
cruzeiro wrote:
bat8,
Mana tipunya? Mana helahnya?
Siapa yang membawa isu keagamaan - saya ke PAS?
Maksud you, you anggap isu keagamaan dan bangsa tidak patut dibawa ke medan politik?
Kalau begitu, bagus - saya pun sehaluan jugak!
BTW, kenapa hang belum jawab lagi soalan soalan yg saya kemukakan tadi?
Mana tipunya? Mana helahnya?
Siapa yang membawa isu keagamaan - saya ke PAS?
Maksud you, you anggap isu keagamaan dan bangsa tidak patut dibawa ke medan politik?
Kalau begitu, bagus - saya pun sehaluan jugak!
BTW, kenapa hang belum jawab lagi soalan soalan yg saya kemukakan tadi?
20/11 20:48:16
=====================================
Note: It appears that bat8, is lost in his defense of the PAS agenda, and is starting to get abusive.
=====================================
cruzeiro wrote:
Okay bat8 - I'm outta here!Nice discussing with you.
Let's hope something good works out for the good of the nation.
Cheers.
bat8 wrote:
cruziero... I tak represent PAS dan tidak mempunyai autoriti untuk menjawab bagi pihak PAS. I hanyalah rakyat biasa yang ingin bersama-sama rakyat lain membina masa depan negara ini yang lebih baik.
Nak dapat jawapan per****h ke ibupejabat PAS di jalan raja laut kl. Kat situ timbalan presiden PAS ada, setiausaha agung PAS ada, mereka-mereka yang boleh menjawab soalan hangpa dengan jelas dan yang mewakili pandangan PAS. Sebab tu depa bukak pejabat tengah-tengah KL supaya senang oarang seperti hang pergi berjumpa untuk mendapat penjelasan.
Kat sana hang boleh bawa hujah-hujah basi yang dibawa oleh UMNo untuk menakutkan rakyat rakyat selama ini untuk mendapat penjelasan.
======================================
So ends the discussion I had with bat8 and a couple of others .....
Nak dapat jawapan per****h ke ibupejabat PAS di jalan raja laut kl. Kat situ timbalan presiden PAS ada, setiausaha agung PAS ada, mereka-mereka yang boleh menjawab soalan hangpa dengan jelas dan yang mewakili pandangan PAS. Sebab tu depa bukak pejabat tengah-tengah KL supaya senang oarang seperti hang pergi berjumpa untuk mendapat penjelasan.
Kat sana hang boleh bawa hujah-hujah basi yang dibawa oleh UMNo untuk menakutkan rakyat rakyat selama ini untuk mendapat penjelasan.
======================================
So ends the discussion I had with bat8 and a couple of others .....
Sunday, 18 November 2007
Progress of a Nation - the flip-side.
We are a great people who have built the tallest towers, biggest, longest, flashiest this & that, sent a man to everest, the north pole, space and what not (never mind that it was all by proxy), but cannot seem to live without making asses of ourselves in the eyes of the world. We seem to be obsessed with keeping up appearances of affluence, while wallowing in muck.
We are a unique kind of people - yes I include myself in this special category of mankind ..... mea culpa.
The economy is in tatters, crime at epidemic proportions, health in the pits, security forces apparently feuding, judiciary - disgraced, criminals - awarded, politicians incapable of debate, media - the powerful politician's footstool, education - substandard, and a leadership that wouldn't welcome challenges. All these, while we have catchy phrased campaigns of a Glokal, cemerlang, gemilang, terbilang and "spaced-out" (angkasakan bangsa) race - all C4-ed into oblivion, when one looks beneath the shiny surface. And yet we promote personality cults, for politicians.
As if to illustrate this state of denial, some, have made bold statements in the international media that amounted to - “we need to improve, but don't need to change the system” - that was indeed quite amusing, to say the least. Will Durant once said, "Education is the progressive discovery of our ignorance" - no, not for these guys - they are our elite!
Gone are the days when we embraced values deemed "western" – free debate, free media, free enterprise, competition, accountability, economic sustainability and succession planning- that would've actually made this nation an economic powerhouse that it should have been; if nothing else, simply by virtue of its strategic location on the world map.
People tend to seek simplistic solutions to complex problems when they are devoid of ideas , intellect and reason. It is through the suppression of critical thought that dictators perpetuate their rule. The lack of intellectual philosophical insight into social maladies that plague our nation, render us vulnerable to exploitation and would lead to our fall.
It happens when a people indulge themselves in the delusion of grandeur, that all is well. It happens when a leadership is so consumed by its own "greatness", that it boasts and gloats even of its shortcomings. Any attempt towards reason is perceived as anti-establishment. Faults and ills are “glossed over” in the interest of "maintaining social order".
Such is the extent of philosophical and intellectual bankruptcy that we are faced with. Most, if not all leaders that we have, would sell-out their convictions with the blink of an eye, should it justify the desire to "make a living". As TDM once quoted - “Every man has his price”. Gone are the ideals of the nation's forefathers, that shaped the nation. Greed has become the sin that most of us indulge in today - a sin that is actually perpetuated by the leaders of today. This is "our way", today.
Greed and selfishness have always been used by the powerful, as a weapon to control others. Today, it is used on the ignorant rakyat and those entrusted by the people to preserve our independence and freedom. We as a people have sacrificed our freedom at the altar of economic gains, which doesn't necessarily translate into progress. We often readily sell our souls for material gain due to greed, which is today part of our culture. We have become sitting ducks to the political elite, who strive to increase their control over our daily lives.
These sins of greed and covetousness have become part of all of us - some have embraced it more than others. Malaysians would sell their souls for freebies and "favours". It is a deadly disease that has been inflicted upon certain "leaders" and people alike, via policies that actually cater to the powerful elite in society. The masses swallow the political spins in a drunken stupor, oblivious to their enslavement in the hustle and bustle of “modern lifestyle”.
So easily appeased is the average Malaysian, that they prefer to be blind to the truth, for the sake of “saving face”, comforts, pride, allegiance to authority, social order, "making a living" and maybe for a plate of "nasi goreng" or KFC. Incidently, all these things are apparently essential components to the much touted "Asian Values" ....
That is how cheap we have become.
We are a nation full of people who are sick to the bone, due to the addiction to instant gratification and symptomatic solutions. We are therefore a nation of appeasers, and not fighters. We are a nation enslaved by delusions of grandeur and persecution.
We are not just socio-politically ill, morally decadent, spiritually lost and philosophically bankrupt - we even have among the highest rates of physical illnesses, as a result of lifestyles encouraged by the "leaders".
We are today, a people so disillusioned by our lives, that we just seek short cuts to escape from it. We scramble for anything that provides that elusive "peace of mind", so that we get those moments of refuge- to escape from the problems that plague us. Religion, vice, luxury, drugs or any of the seven deadly sins become “fair game”. We are a people clamoring for hope and direction, in a nation with a new culture devoid of reason. Having lost control of our lives we beg to be controlled, by the luxuries and pleasures we deem necessary. We gawk in fascination at the shine of the cage built around us, unaware of our emasculation and imprisonment.
It remains to be seen if our leadership has the will to snap out of this “syndrome of denial”. Or else, in due time, by 2057, as a result of the NEP, sooner or later, natural selection will play its role. A sick nation cannot preserve its independence, and identity.
Friday, 16 November 2007
"Asian Values" 101
At the time the term "Asian values" began to appear in the mass media, the scholar de Bary, who has spent more than 50 years studying Asian civilizations (including China, Japan, Korea, and India) was asked "What are Asian values?", he did not know how to answer. He has never heard of this term. It was not in the literature. Asians were not conscious that they have such common values in the past. It is highly likely that such Asian values are political constructions. (de Bary 1998: p. 1)
-The Alleged Asian Values and Their Implications for Bioethics
- Kam-por Yu, Ph.D.
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University
With the above, allow me to begin by saying that the idea of "Asian Values" is nothing but Hogwash - a political spin articulated by authoritarian regimes of the third-world nations, to legitimize and strengthen their grip on power. They use this excuse also disguised as Confucianism, Family values, Islamic Laws, Morality and many more.
At the heart of this argument lies one undeniable "asian value" - hypocrisy! It is this undoubtedly Asian value that is used every so often to perpetuate a make believe orderly society, where-in the problems of the day is often swept under the carpet to "save face" (which by the way, is an Asian value).
Corruption, rape incest, cronyism, theft, murder, apostasy, honor and in fact almost anything and everything that is evil is tolerated to "save face" on the part of the one in a position of power - not the victim who is supposed to be protected.
It was an excuse for despots to thumb their noses at the "west", with their economic gains in the last 30yrs or so, despite the absence of real freedom in these countries, that "boasted" an apparently hard working, disciplined, politically docile and subservient "social order".
When there is opposition or expression of discontent in public, the people are frowned upon by authorities that claim that "It is not our way of doing things .... we prefer 'polite negotiated settlements' .... " which in actuality means "arbitration/ bribery behind closed doors". By doing so, leaders of dissent are often "bought out" or "blackmailed" into submission to authorities who ultimately seek to perpetuate the rule.
Leaders who espouse "Asian Values" often say, "we have laws by which the people have to abide" - sure, we should!
Provided the laws are just and not manipulated to the advantage of oppressors.
To say that concerns of society takes precedence over the individual in all cases, is very much a "misguided" statement or policy, for it is individuals that have brought out these ideas of "Asian Values" and have convinced society as a whole.
It should be brought to light that these very proponents of "asian values", often quickly abandon these principles when they are faced with economic gain via competition, but backtrack when it comes to politics and freedom.
Free and healthy debate of opinions and ideas is as much a value that should be preserved as are filial piety and respect for authority. So are freedom of speech and media.
I was quite perplexed to say the least, on hearing the differences in opinion between En. Nazri and En. Khairy on 101 East (Al-Jazeera) last night- While En. Nazri says that the system has worked for fifty years and doesn't need an "overhaul", En. Khairy (despite being the apologist) says that it works but has room for improvement!
It appeared that En. Khairy at least isn't as blind to the truths and has chosen to play both sides of the fence.
By saying that the media should be able to "regulate itself", instead of being regulated by the government in due time, while En. Nazri comes out boldly to say that the press is free to write what they wish, could En Khairy have unwittingly exposed the "lie of a free press in Malaysia"?
Or was it done on purpose to illustrate the difference of opinion within the hierarchy? Could there be a shift in the policies, given the western influences in En Khairy? Could he have been "restrained" on the international stage by his alma mater?
And I wonder if he thought of postal votes while bragging about the "teasing-off" of ghosts on the electoral rolls and indelible ink ...........
While En. Nazri was gloating about the "democratic rule of the Majority", was he aware that the true test of a democracy lies in taking care of minority rights? Did he think that the system that he represents is perfection manifested, that he believes that it couldn't be changed or improved on? Hasn't he heard that the only thing that he cannot change is "change" itself and that is the only way to progress?
Come what may, it would be prudent for all Asians to bear in mind that there has been no social system or order that is infallible in the face of human evolution.
It is very much an "Asian Value", Islamic value, Confucian Value and a democratic too to seek justice.
To that end, individuality and an expression of dissent is very much an "Asian Value".
I follow up the above with quotes from a few essays. I have decided against publishing my work on this topic, as it would be tiresome to most. The links I promised, have all got mixed-up - so I apologize for not providing them (Just google "asian values" and you'll find them).
Thank you.
"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 Alleged Asian Values and Their Implications for Bioethics
- Kam-por Yu, Ph.D.
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University
With the above, allow me to begin by saying that the idea of "Asian Values" is nothing but Hogwash - a political spin articulated by authoritarian regimes of the third-world nations, to legitimize and strengthen their grip on power. They use this excuse also disguised as Confucianism, Family values, Islamic Laws, Morality and many more.
At the heart of this argument lies one undeniable "asian value" - hypocrisy! It is this undoubtedly Asian value that is used every so often to perpetuate a make believe orderly society, where-in the problems of the day is often swept under the carpet to "save face" (which by the way, is an Asian value).
Corruption, rape incest, cronyism, theft, murder, apostasy, honor and in fact almost anything and everything that is evil is tolerated to "save face" on the part of the one in a position of power - not the victim who is supposed to be protected.
It was an excuse for despots to thumb their noses at the "west", with their economic gains in the last 30yrs or so, despite the absence of real freedom in these countries, that "boasted" an apparently hard working, disciplined, politically docile and subservient "social order".
When there is opposition or expression of discontent in public, the people are frowned upon by authorities that claim that "It is not our way of doing things .... we prefer 'polite negotiated settlements' .... " which in actuality means "arbitration/ bribery behind closed doors". By doing so, leaders of dissent are often "bought out" or "blackmailed" into submission to authorities who ultimately seek to perpetuate the rule.
Leaders who espouse "Asian Values" often say, "we have laws by which the people have to abide" - sure, we should!
Provided the laws are just and not manipulated to the advantage of oppressors.
To say that concerns of society takes precedence over the individual in all cases, is very much a "misguided" statement or policy, for it is individuals that have brought out these ideas of "Asian Values" and have convinced society as a whole.
It should be brought to light that these very proponents of "asian values", often quickly abandon these principles when they are faced with economic gain via competition, but backtrack when it comes to politics and freedom.
Free and healthy debate of opinions and ideas is as much a value that should be preserved as are filial piety and respect for authority. So are freedom of speech and media.
I was quite perplexed to say the least, on hearing the differences in opinion between En. Nazri and En. Khairy on 101 East (Al-Jazeera) last night- While En. Nazri says that the system has worked for fifty years and doesn't need an "overhaul", En. Khairy (despite being the apologist) says that it works but has room for improvement!
It appeared that En. Khairy at least isn't as blind to the truths and has chosen to play both sides of the fence.
By saying that the media should be able to "regulate itself", instead of being regulated by the government in due time, while En. Nazri comes out boldly to say that the press is free to write what they wish, could En Khairy have unwittingly exposed the "lie of a free press in Malaysia"?
Or was it done on purpose to illustrate the difference of opinion within the hierarchy? Could there be a shift in the policies, given the western influences in En Khairy? Could he have been "restrained" on the international stage by his alma mater?
And I wonder if he thought of postal votes while bragging about the "teasing-off" of ghosts on the electoral rolls and indelible ink ...........
While En. Nazri was gloating about the "democratic rule of the Majority", was he aware that the true test of a democracy lies in taking care of minority rights? Did he think that the system that he represents is perfection manifested, that he believes that it couldn't be changed or improved on? Hasn't he heard that the only thing that he cannot change is "change" itself and that is the only way to progress?
Come what may, it would be prudent for all Asians to bear in mind that there has been no social system or order that is infallible in the face of human evolution.
It is very much an "Asian Value", Islamic value, Confucian Value and a democratic too to seek justice.
To that end, individuality and an expression of dissent is very much an "Asian Value".
I follow up the above with quotes from a few essays. I have decided against publishing my work on this topic, as it would be tiresome to most. The links I promised, have all got mixed-up - so I apologize for not providing them (Just google "asian values" and you'll find them).
Thank you.
"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
"However, as an Asian observer noted: ''When I first came across Lee's list of supposed Asian values, I saw values that were not so much specific to Asian culture but good British upper class Tory values dear to threatened elites everywhere." It was not without good reason that one British cabinet minister once referred to Lee, when he still was known as Harry Lee, as the ''best bloody Englishman east of Suez".
Not to be outdone by Lee is Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, who combined an attractive Third World critique of Western economic domination with a strident equation of liberal democracy with anarchy and Western imperialism. The classic is Mahathir's statement in this regard with his speech at the United Nations in 1991, in which he asserted:
''If democracy means to carry guns, to flaunt homosexuality, to disregard the institutions of marriage, to disrupt and damage the well-being of the community in the name of individual rights, to destroy a particular faith, to have privileged institutions [ie the Western press] which are sacrosanct even if they indulge in lies and instigations which undermine society, the economy, and international relations; to permit foreigners to break national laws; if they are the essential details, can't the news converts opt to reject them? Hegemony by democratic powers is no less oppressive than hegemony by totalitarian states.""
- THI LAM (Pacific News Service), THE NOTION OF "ASIAN VALUES" IS A MYTH
"In light of the severe recession that has gripped Asia in 1997-98, the collapse of the paternalistic Asian authoritarian government in Indonesia, and political instability in Malaysia itself, these arguments now ring hollow, and it is safe to say that "Asian values" have not figured prominently in the analysis and interpretation of the crisis. Lee Kwan Yew has publicly backed away from some of his earlier assertions, and many observers now claim that that Asian values, far from explaining Asia's economic success, lie at the root of the cronyism and corruption afflicting countries there." - Francis Fukuyama, ICAS Fall Symposium, Asia'sChallenges Ahead, University of Pennsylvania, September 29, 1998
Wednesday, 14 November 2007
Thinking About Human Rights and Asian Values
(Note: I'm currently at work trying to verify my opinions that Asian Values is nothing but a political spin for "Asian Despotism" also called "Oriental Despotism" - the chief proponents of which were Tun Dr. Mahathir and Mr. Lee Kuan Yew. There is another essay, wherein Mr. Sen specifically points out LKY's (and Li Peng's) ignorance of facts.
This is the first in the series that I publish as an introduction to the topic. Further readings will be given as links, when I write my piece in a couple of days. Thank You)
Human Rights Dialogue 1.4 (Spring 1996): "Three Years After The Bangkok Declaration"
While it might not be clear what "Asian values" are, they seem to have gained a place in the standard analysis of contemporary events. In a provocative essay, entitled "Japan's Nice New Nationalism," published in 1995, the Economist poses a question in a rather stark form—a query that has often been stated, albeit less clearly: "Is the combination of nationalist confidence and a growing economic interest in Asia likely to pose a threat?"*2* The threat referred to relates to the concerns of the Western countries. The reference here is not only to—not even primarily to—Japan's dominance in trade and world markets, but to Japan's possible role in tolerating and supporting some policies and practices in Asia that may be quite unacceptable in the West. The Economist identifies "human rights and press freedoms" as "the most frequent battlegrounds."
*2* "Japan's Nice New Nationalism," Economist, January 14, 1995, p. 13.
*3* Isaiah Berlin, Four Essays on Liberty (Oxford: Oxford university Press, 1969), p. xl. Even as far as the idea of democracy itself is concerned,as Benjamin Schwartz notes, "in China, the model of the natural and sacred hierarchy of the patrilear family may have lenbt its own coloration to the concepts of hierarchy and authority, but we must again remember that even in the history of the West, with its memories of Athenian democracy, the notion that democracy cannot be implemented in large territorial states requiring highly centralized power remained accepted wisdom as late as Montesquieu and Rousseau." ( The World of Thought in Ancient China [Cambridge: Harvard university Press, 1985], 69).
This is the first in the series that I publish as an introduction to the topic. Further readings will be given as links, when I write my piece in a couple of days. Thank You)
Human Rights Dialogue 1.4 (Spring 1996): "Three Years After The Bangkok Declaration"
Amartya Sen
While it might not be clear what "Asian values" are, they seem to have gained a place in the standard analysis of contemporary events. In a provocative essay, entitled "Japan's Nice New Nationalism," published in 1995, the Economist poses a question in a rather stark form—a query that has often been stated, albeit less clearly: "Is the combination of nationalist confidence and a growing economic interest in Asia likely to pose a threat?"*2* The threat referred to relates to the concerns of the Western countries. The reference here is not only to—not even primarily to—Japan's dominance in trade and world markets, but to Japan's possible role in tolerating and supporting some policies and practices in Asia that may be quite unacceptable in the West. The Economist identifies "human rights and press freedoms" as "the most frequent battlegrounds."
This way of seeing the "clash of cultures" is increasingly prevalent now. But to see the conflict over human rights as a battle between Western liberalism on one side and Asian reluctance on the other is to cast the debate in a form that distracts attention from the central issues, which concern Asia itself. In the battle over the role of human rights and such matters as press freedom (a battle that is certainly forceful in contemporary Asia), the primary parties are Asians of different interests and convictions, even if occasionally a visiting American might get caned in an Asian country. This is not to deny that America or Europe has legitimate reasons to worry about the outcome of this and related contentions about ideas and politics in Asia (I have nothing against the Economist posing this "Western" question—one of some interest to its readers), but this dispute over principles and practice is really about the lives of Asians—their beliefs and traditions, their rules and regulations, their achievements and failures, and ultimately their lives and freedoms. The Western concern—legitimate on its own—may even contribute to misspecifying the central features of the debate.
There is a further reason for removing this debate from the perspective of Western anxiety about Asian practice. That often-invoked perspective gives the immediate impression that the primacy of human rights is a fundamental and ancient feature of Western culture, and one not to be found in Asia. It is, as it were, a contrast between the authoritarianism allegedly implicit in, say, Confucianism vis-Ã -vis the respect for individual liberty allegedly deeply rooted in Western culture. There are good historical reasons to doubt each of the two claims implicit in the contrast. As to when the notion of individual liberty first became explicit in the West, Isaiah Berlin has noted: "I have found no convincing evidence of any clear formulation of it in the ancient world."*3* And insofar as we do find arguments championing freedoms in some generic sense in ancient Greek treatises (as we clearly do, for example, in Aristotle's Politics and also in Nicomachean Ethics), it is not hard to discover comparable championing of generically described freedoms and tolerance in the writings of many Asian theorists, such as Ashoka, whose inscriptions from the third century b.c. emphasize tolerance and liberty as central values of a good society. Indeed, the rhetoric of freedom is abundantly invoked in many of the Asian literatures. Buddha even explains nirvana in the language of "freedom," to wit, the freedom from the miseries of life. If there is a real gap today in the acceptance of freedom and liberty in the West vis-Ã -vis those in Asia, the roots of a hard division lie much closer to our times.
Nor is it helpful to see the contrast in terms of the practical traditions of "Oriental despotism" that had once so fascinated European scholars in the heyday of the historial emergence of democratic commitments of the West. If the despots of the Orient were more despotic than those in the West (it is not obvious that this was the case), the political limits of today's Asia are not clearly bound by those traditions—not any more than the political possibilities in Europe are confined by the heritage of the Spanish Inquisition or the history of Nazi genocide.
Many Western commentators find it deeply unacceptable that some people who argue against human rights in Asia try to gain inspiration from specific interpretations of "Asian values." This is an understandable concern, but that search for inspiration is a close cousin of the tendency in the West to see ideas of democracy and liberty specifically in terms of "Western" traditions. Even the language used in recommending to Asia what is called "Western democracy" imposes a geographical mode of divisiveness that springs not only from Asian intransigence but also from Western "priority complex." If the grabbing of "Asian values" by the champions of authoritarianism has to be effectively and fairly questioned, what is needed is not the claim—often implicit—of the superiority of what are taken as Western values, but a broader historical study of Sanskrit, Pali, Chinese, Arabic, and other Asian literatures (in relation to corresponding writings in the Western classics). And nearer our times, acknowledgment would have to be made to the contributions of national leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi or Dr. Sun Yat-sen, who were, already a hundred years ago, cogently vocal in defense of the widest forms of democracy and political and civil rights.
I am not, of course, disputing that at a truly deep level, cultural comparisons based on real history could be extremely interesting in diagnosing the balance of focal concerns in different regional traditions in the world and in dealing with the principles and reasonings that have a bearing on the contemporary formulations of human rights. But neither the rapid invoking of "Asian values" in defense of suppressing human rights, nor the expression of Western anxiety and consternation about "Asian" ways, helps to advance critical scrutiny of the role of human rights and their consequences in Asian societies. The subject has a contingently regional dimension, but it is not a foundationally regional issue.
*1* This is an excerpt of a paper entitled "Human Rights and Economic Achievements," presented at the Hakone Workshop of the Human Rights Initiative, June 23-26, 1995.*2* "Japan's Nice New Nationalism," Economist, January 14, 1995, p. 13.
*3* Isaiah Berlin, Four Essays on Liberty (Oxford: Oxford university Press, 1969), p. xl. Even as far as the idea of democracy itself is concerned,as Benjamin Schwartz notes, "in China, the model of the natural and sacred hierarchy of the patrilear family may have lenbt its own coloration to the concepts of hierarchy and authority, but we must again remember that even in the history of the West, with its memories of Athenian democracy, the notion that democracy cannot be implemented in large territorial states requiring highly centralized power remained accepted wisdom as late as Montesquieu and Rousseau." ( The World of Thought in Ancient China [Cambridge: Harvard university Press, 1985], 69).
Monday, 12 November 2007
A Social Contract of "Asian Values".
We've all heard of many things related to the much cherished and lauded "Asian Values".
But just what is it really?
Is our "social contract" also part of this value system?
Is there any system at all to these cherished values in the first place?
As I listened to Pak Lah make his winding up address, I wondered if this much touted phrase "Pantang dicabar" is very much part of this social contract or Asian Values ....
What does "pantang dicabar" actually mean?
Does it meant to "stifle & suppress the challenge", or is it supposed to mean "rising to the challenge"?
From my knowledge of Bahasa Melayu (Bahasa Malaysia, Nusantara, Pilihanraya or whatever you call it), it is supposed to be the latter.
Judging from the way our "Asian Values" and "Social Contract" (whatever they mean) are put to practice, it appears that the former is preferred by the ruling elite in most Asian and third world nations.
In fact, it is this very same political spin that every repressive regime in the world uses, to justify their actions, albeit, for peace, security and prosperity of the nation.
These values become manifest in various forms - it may be Islamic/ Syariah law, Confucianism, Communism, Socialism, ISA, Military rule etc, etc.
Whatever the "philosophy" that is apparently held dear by these authoritarian regimes, they all subscibe to the idea of "pantang dicabar" which means "do not question the order of the day"!
Most, if not all, practice a democracy that is "guided" by those "in the know" for the good of the ignorant masses/ proletariat.
They have got it all figured out, and it should never change - period!
The people are generally held in an ideological stranglehold, and to deviate is to be anti-social, unpatriotic and a danger to society, if not "treasonous".
However all is fine and dandy, should there be fraud, corruption, wholesale money laundering, immorality and cultural decadence on the part of the political elite.
Hey - it was their plan after all, and you are supposed to thank God (and them) that you have crumbs to chew on ........
This is what Asian Values stand for today.
The much lauded and dearly held "Asian Values", is nothing but an excuse for the political elite of these "philosophically primitive" despots to tighten their grip on power, and to rule over the masses.
It is almost the same reasonings used by many an authoritarian parent, to impose their will upon children.
Such is the disdain that the political elite with "Asian values" hold, for freedom of opinion, speech, information and public opinion.
The public do not deserve to hear or see the truth - they should be told at all times that all is well, and that the "wise ones" never make mistakes.
The stifling of the media, show of power and a diet of lies, in their opinion is the only thing that can pacify a restive people.
It is best that they are kept ignorant, pampered and lazy, so as to perpetuate their mental slavery, for the benefit of the ruling class.
The public who pay their taxes are not worthy enough to ask questions - to question authority is a "Pantang" in Asian Values.
To indulge in an intellectual discourse is "Pantang".
To demand accountability is "Pantang".
To demand free and fair elections is "Pantang".
To engage in an open discussion and debate with the people having opposing ideas, is a "pantang".
Free debate/ discussion of philosophical/ socio-political ideas is but the greatest "pantang" of them all. To do so would incur the wrath of the "thought police" of the wise ones, who are ordained by God to rule.
"Asian Values", thrive on "Pantangs" imposed upon the citizens in the guise of democracy.
"Pantang" is the name of the game!
It is therefore no surprise that most Asian, African, South American and Eastern European regimes who espouse these "Asian Values" form the bulk of the third-world and poor of the world.
How I wish "Pantang DiCabar" meant "Rising To the Challenge" rather than the "Suppression and Repression of Challenges".
The world could probably be a much better place without these apparently great "Asian Values" ......
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Btw, pembinaan tokong budhaa dibachok yang baru bukan publisiti. Ia menjadi publisiti apabila PAS sendiri mendirikan patung tersebut dan menhadiahkan masyarakat yang berugama budhaa. Btw, sleeping budhaa, patung budhaa yang terbesar di asia tenggara bukan dibina oleh kerajaan PAS sekarang. Patung itu telah lama wujud sejak pemerintahan PAS dari tahun 1959 - 1978. How come ia menjadi publisiti sedangkan ia telah lama dibina?
Now, boleh explain mengapa pembinaan patung dewa Ma Tzu di sabah menjadi masalah?