Time to make it a Malaysian problem

Time to make it a Malaysian problem

MARCH 19 — Every time some politician makes an ill-advised remark about race or religion, there will be the inevitable deluge of comments reminding him where his true allegiance belongs. If the politician speaks out for the Malays or Islam, the chorus will be: “Remember, you are beholden to Malaysians, not the Malays/Muslims,” and if the politician speaks out for the non-Malays or non-Muslims, it will be, “Remember, you are beholden to the Malays, not the non-Malays.”

What infuriates me is that I agree with both sides — and yet they are both so insufferably smug in excluding other Malaysians and Malaysian concerns from their vision of what Malaysia should be.

It should be abundantly clear to all that when you serve the Malays, you are serving Malaysians, and when you serve the non-Malays, you are serving Malaysians. Yet this basic fact eludes so many of us.

When a Malay youth cannot find employment or education, that is not a Malay problem — that is a Malaysian problem. When a Hindu temple is torn down, that is not the desecration of a Hindu place of worship — that is the desecration of a Malaysian place of worship. We, as Malaysians, need to champion the solutions to these problems together, because who else will do it? Surely not the Singaporeans or the British!

But who among the non-Malays talks about the plight of the Malays or the Bumiputeras? If ever we talk about their problems, it is to make an insulting joke about their supposed ignorance, or to dismiss them as know-nothing bumpkins. Do we ever take seriously the problems Malay youth have in their schooling, or ponder how to help them into the mainstream of the modern Malaysian economy?

And how often do the Malays talk about the problems of the non-Malays? Is there ever recognition of the difficulties non-Malays encounter in obtaining public scholarships or government work? Is there ever a discussion of the non-Malays’ fear of Malay culture encroaching on their own traditions and way of life?

Some politicians, both from Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat, are valiantly trying to change our culture of ignoring other communities’ interests. 1 Malaysia, as much of an empty slogan as it is, is all about this idea, if nothing else.

Admirably, Pakatan politicians have made clear that they practise what they preach. Teresa Kok gives money to mosques; Lim Guan Eng attends Muslim festivities which his predecessors in the Penang government shunned. Meanwhile, Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat defends Bumiputera Christians’ usage of the word “Allah,” and Malay leaders from all Pakatan parties denounce the unfair treatment of the non-Malay communities.

But all this will be for naught unless we, the Malaysian rakyat, change. Why aren’t we taking responsibility for the Malaysian problems in our country? Why do we still not bother trying to find out why other Malaysians differ with us so strongly on an issue? Why are we content with dismissing them as arrogant ignoramuses, instead of recognising and working out our valid differences?

When a church is bombed, that is my problem. When a mosque is vandalised, that is my problem. When a Malay youth becomes a Mat Rempit, that is my problem. When a Chinese youth joins a triad, that is my problem. When a Penan girl is raped, that is my problem. When an Indian father becomes an alcoholic, that is my problem. Until we can all say and truly believe these things, where is our Bangsa Malaysia?

* The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the columnist.

Anwar: Racism, not Christians, is the threat

Anwar: Racism, not Christians, is the threat

By Shannon Teoh

LONDON, March 19 — Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has slammed as “ridiculous” the idea that Muslims in Malaysia were under threat from Christians, and instead accused Umno of sanctioning racism.

“In this Allah issue, the idea that Muslims are under threat from Christians is ridiculous to say the least,” he said at a press conference, after his talk at the London School of Economics here yesterday.

“They are playing with fire,” he said and added that the prime minister’s 1 Malaysia slogan, based on a united Malaysia, was not consistent with what was happening on the ground.

“Malaysia is not a Muslim state, or... well, I’m not sure now,” he joked. “But it is not secular either because there is not a total separation of religion and state.”

He explained that while countries like the United States are seen as secular, they were in fact built on religious principles.

Earlier in his talk, which saw hundreds being turned away, he accused Umno of simply feigning interest in Islamic values.

“What Umno has done is not about Islamic issues at all. If you find a committed Muslim, you can argue with him, but in Umno, they don’t even want to understand what Islam is about.

“It is just political expediency and a crude blend of politics. It is distasteful, the way they abuse the Chinese,” he added, in seeming reference to a recent racist statement by Datuk Nasir Safar, made when he was still an aide to the prime minister.

“There should be freedom not just for an ex-deputy prime minister,” he said in reference to the overturning of his sodomy conviction in 2004, “but all Malaysians.”

Anwar went on to explain that the basic issue was one of governance, and added that the strength of Islam in South East Asia was in its inclusivity and moderate position, which took into consideration the interests of other religions.

“The moment Syariah courts can compel non-Muslims, it transgresses fundamentals of the Constitution. It becomes contentious when you deny the rights of non-Muslims or use obscure Syariah interpretation to impose on non-Muslims.

“We need to educate Umno leaders,” said the former deputy president of the Malay party, drawing laughs from the 400-strong audience of mostly Malaysian students at the talk.

"ZORRO-UNMASKED" ASKS ....

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

The immovable 10pc

The immovable 10pc

MARCH 18 — The math does not work, does it? There is this obsolete, cruel and more importantly crude government, and despite its single-minded intention to self-destruct, it stays in power.

Malaysia is an anathema to all countries in our wealth, infrastructure and education group. We are close to being unexplainable. The government has tried to be more obsolete, crueller and cruder in the past two years, yet it is not met with any further rejection. Why?

The answer lies in the vote-base securing power for the Barisan Nasional (BN) — the immovable 10 per cent.

In the general, you have your traditional BN supporters, those who are immune to critique and sworn to the perpetuation of the present system, irrespective of its pending collapse. I have several family members and close friends in it, and they want to walk that path indefinitely.

At the other end, the non-BN guys. Those equally sworn to the end of BN rule and have stayed that course through all reincarnations of opposition — Independence of Malaysia Party, The Socialist Front, Gagasan Rakyat, Barisan Alternatif and now Pakatan Rakyat.

I’ve less family members and close friends in that side of the pitch. But in the last three years, the spike in support for them guarantees irrespective of how much longer BN stays in power it will always be confronted by a sizeable opponent, not a token one anymore. A true nemesis, not a kid with a wooden bat.

Which leads to the — equally divided between the ever-effervescent and extremely dull — undecided voters. The ones deciding whether BN wins by a landslide or if PAS or DAP rotate leadership of a bigger than small Opposition MP total in Parliament. In 2008 they turned their backs on BN.

However, that does not change the Federal government

You need the real king-makers, the immovable 10 per cent. Let me tell you about them.

The group has one characteristic, they vote BN even if they personally don’t have that much love for the ruling coalition. They vote BN because despite everything life in Malaysia is ok for them. That’s it. Life is ok. There are no sexy reasons, just an extremely cautious and cynical outlook to life. (Hey, blame it on our Asian genes.)

They keep BN in power, and help them stay there.

The number 10 is arbitrary, mostly guesswork — to show them being substantial, while being small enough to be an under-serviced group. The group is disparate and they don’t have an active effort to gather themselves under an umbrella. There is no “We really, really don’t care that much for the BN, but we vote for them all the time Club”.

It is important to know them, so that the arguments made to them apply to them, and have a chance to convince them.

What do they want? They want good. They want the good without having to endure any growing pains. This is where they falsely associate the BN government as the purveyor of reasonable good, because they have been in the power position infinitum.

They are willing to settle for good not coming through, as long as bad (for them) does not rise.

So much of what the BN decides, launches or offends does not irk them.

They’ll politely listen to you when you repeat your rehearsed lines about the mystery surrounding the death of a model or in a lock-up or at the bottom of a government building. They’ll nod away when you express your disdain with human rights openly abused and elections lacking the honesty one must surely wish for. They’ll buy you drinks when you admonish the nepotism, the xenophobia and the denigration of the human spirit. You’ll almost go blue exasperated about the brain drain, and they’ll comfort you with an arm over you while the other hand strokes the “green card” tucked inside their wallet.

Moral imperatives are not going to win their votes.

They are not interested in the process which the good prevails or develops from, they just want good.

Who are they? Some of the commentators in this website. The middle manager who needs his firm to be stable as he makes his career surge. The sub-contractor who hates the system, but has a life made from him compromising himself and the system. The school teacher who thinks all governments are inherently flawed which is a fair reason to back this one.

They are all around us. Your voting record (or lack thereof) will tell you if you are one of them.

My own personal favourite is my batch-mate — the good doctor in Putrajaya. He is cynical of everything, and builds his reputation on just being disagreeable and cocky about his intellect. You should see him justifying bad government, it is the closest as you will get to see a square peg being forcibly but successfully pressed into a round hole.

When you have made your mind, and possess a decent intellect you can always justify your world-view.

Ferdinand Marcos, Mobutu Sese Seko, Nicolae Ceausescu and Robert Mugabe are all frowned upon today, but in the heights of their power the very people who turned their backs on them were cheering them in stadiums and long parades.

The “immovable 10 per cent” will in a distant future disassociate their support for historically denounced characters. Which is why I try to commit to memory all my friends who are “Facebook fans” of a certain former prime minister.

So you see, now you can understand why the BN can and has made decisions that make your blood boil, but which do not ruffle them. They only care about appeasing their supporters, and keeping a portion of the undecided. The ‘immovable 10 per cent’ will find their own way to crossing the name of the BN candidate.

I’ll meet my quiz-mate in two hours, and he’ll run through for me all the nasty things the government is up to, mostly what was carried by The Malaysian Insider. As usual I’ll smile and tell him, the government does not care for him, since they can’t lose his vote twice in any given election.

I will tell him, as I tell my readers if you want the change you desire, identify those around you who are. If you bother to let listen and not moralise, they will share with you their misgivings about a life without BN. Listen and engage on their terms.

Don’t pour facts down their throats, you’ll only make them withdraw into their shells. Don’t force a responsibility they have never felt for others. Don’t insist they change, because it suits you.

You never win them in the conversation. You only have a chance if they consider the conversation long after it has ended.

That they realise as Edmund Burke put it: “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”

And maybe you can start by putting that as a bumper sticker on your car.

* The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the columnist.

Praba Ganesan is a Hulu Langat boy with a penchant for durians and debate. He is part of balairakyat, an NGO promoting ideas exchange. More of him at prabaganesan.wordpress.com

The Nut Graph | Debunking “politicking”

The Nut Graph | Debunking “politicking”

Cops halt Orang Asli advance on Putrajaya - Malaysiakini

Cops halt Orang Asli advance on Putrajaya - Malaysiakini

Orang Asli land policy: planned poverty? — Yogeswaran Subramaniam

Orang Asli land policy: planned poverty? — Yogeswaran Subramaniam

MARCH 17 — The obvious starting point for Orang Asli empowerment would be their exercise of control over their customary lands, says Yogeswaran Subramaniam.

The recent policy granting land titles to the Orang Asli has far-reaching consequences for the 150,000-strong Orang Asli community. It appears to be limited in economic utility and, more importantly, in flat contradiction of the 1Malaysia concept.

In short, the proposed policy involves the granting of two to six acres of plantation lands and up to a quarter of an acre for housing to each Orang Asli head of household. The policy is subject to two main qualifications that impact upon its economic utility.

First, land forming part of this policy is subject to availability. This means that the land is not available as of right and depends on state discretion. If past records are anything to go by, the states’ performance for gazetting Orang Asli reserves has been nothing short of dismal.

Second, Orang Asli households would have to reimburse the appointed developer for all costs in relation to the development of the land from proceeds gained from the plantation. Other than the obvious room for abuse in the development process itself, Orang Asli would additionally have to start their ‘new’ life in the market economy under the burden of debt.

Sources also indicate that the estimated 50,000 hectares allocated under the proposed policy is well short of the 140,000 hectares of customary land currently occupied by the Orang Asli. Have we not taken enough of their land?

The policy does not recognise Orang Asli customary lands. To compound matters, Orang Asli who accept the deal will not be able to bring any claims to the courts for customary lands or loss of such lands.

Subject to further elaboration of the amending law, Orang Asli are left to either accept the policy where they lose their customary lands or chance their arm in court for recognition of their customary lands. If the latter course of action is taken, Orang Asli can expect the governments (except maybe for Selangor state) to contest such claims to the hilt.

The Orang Asli community is unique compared to other ethnic groups in Malaysia. Unlike other communities, Orang Asli culture, identity and nationhood is inextricably linked to their customary lands. Land is central to the identity of an Orang Asli person, providing, physical, cultural, economic and spiritual nourishment.

Top-down policies that change the face of Orang Asli land into plantations are devastating and traumatic to Orang Asli culture and identity. Ironically, the 1Malaysia concept regards ethnic diversity as an asset and explicitly rejects the concept of assimilation where ethnic identity vanishes.

If we can accept perceived outlandishness of cultures and practices of the three main ethnic groups in Peninsular Malaysia, it should not to be too difficult to ‘tolerate’ the unique relationship between Orang Asli and their lands. 1Malaysia demands that we do so.

It is thus puzzling that the proposed land policy disregards Orang Asli customary lands. Whilst it is true that economic independence is vital to Orang Asli well-being, it should not be toyed with at the expense of their identity.

The answer lies in empowerment, where Orang Asli, with technical assistance from all parties concerned, are empowered to determine their own priorities in their cultural, social, political and development. Experiences in Australia, Canada and United States have shown that there is a direct link between enabling an Aboriginal community to exercise control over its own affairs and improved social and economic outcomes.

The obvious starting point for such empowerment would be the exercise of control over Orang Asli customary lands. Unfortunately, this is not at all apparent from the proposed land policy. If diversity of culture is to be celebrated as an asset, it is time for the government to rethink the land policy. — www.aliran.com

* Yogeswaran Subramaniam, an Aliran member, is pursing a doctoral thesis in the Reform of Orang Asli Land rights at the Faculty of Law, University of New South Wales, Sydney.

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or the newspaper. The Malaysian Insider does not endorse the view unless specified.