Journalism which democracy depends on...

A prejudice (and a prayer) for the power of the newsroom

Off the news ticker this week:

McClatchy and a number of other newspaper companies recently surprised and pleased Wall Street with first quarter earnings reports far better than predicted. One analyst (who's invested in newspaper stocks) predicts that cost-cutting at the papers has taken hold just as the economy bottoms out, meaning that even modest improvement could mean "spectacular earnings growth" for several quarters.

By no coincidence at all, newspaper stocks – languishing in the cellar – rose dramatically. Their levels are still at or near historic lows, but after a long, steady plunge many are climbing again.

All of this relies on the economy getting better – people selling cars and houses, placing help-wanted ads, advertising clothing sales – and news on that front also brings tentative signs of improvement. Numbers involving home sales, earnings, declining unemploymentclaims and news from other sectors all gave hints that the bottom of the recession may be near.

On top of all that, beleaguered newspaper people must have taken some comfort from an article in Advertising Age that show public use of the internet is flattening, while traditional media have generally slowed or reversed their declines.

So it's all good, right? Won't be long 'till everything is back to normal.

Well, no. There is no "normal" nowadays, and there's no going back. But it is equally true that predictions of apocalytical change are overstated.

This is unquestionably a run of good news for those of us who don't believe total, immediate digital transformation is the best scenario for journalism in America. Some do, and they argue their case tirelessly. No doubt they'll find many reasons to dismiss my analysis of those development.

At least I'm consistent. I've argued for years that the shift from analog to digital is inevitable; on my first web page, in 1995, I wrote, "I've always been a storyteller, and I'm convinced the stories of the new millenium will be told digitally."

But I also argue, against a gale of internet triumphalism to the contrary, that the shift won't (and shouldn't) be immediate or total. Many of the people predicting the imminent death of printed news or counseling companies to shutter newspapers and spend all their money on the web are drinking their own bathwater. They have a vision – many times a clear and compelling vision – of what the shift to a digital, networked world will look like, but they're in danger of leaping to conclusions that aren't there.

I don't believe untrained or unpaid volunteers alone can produce the kind of journalism on which democracy depends. I believe most people want and value good filters to separate signal from noise – and the best way we've ever found to do that is with professional journalists.

Of course I am deeply prejudiced on this subject. I love newsrooms and newsroom culture; for 40 years they've been my church, my job and my playground. You have to view my analysis with that in mind.

But those 40 years have also given me experience and insight I think come to play here. I know what a good newsroom can do, because I've been lucky enough to work in some. I have seen principle stand up against pressure, courage hold sway against expedience, ideals triumph over self-interest. I know what it takes to produce work like "A People In Peril," the Anchorage Daily News' 1989 Pulitzer for Public Service, when more than 30 talented professionals applied decades of skill and training and all their energy in the service of a singular public-spirited vision. I don't think that will come from a volunteer collective.

But I neither am I terminally nostalgic about the past. A lot of things need to change, and others will change no matter what we think about it. Hierarchy has evaporated, the gatekeeper role has vanished and what was once inclined to become a sermon must now be a genuine conversation. "Objectivity" and distance – the "news voice" of our heritage – are dead. Transparency and fairness remain achievable goals; combined with the new plethora of views and opinions, that may be enough to support a consensus reality and common vocabulary for public affairs.

None of these things are the exclusive provence of professional journalism, certainly not exclusive to legacy newsrooms built to meet different needs. There are a handful of creditable "hyperlocal" news operations, there are examples of non-professional journalists making important contributions, and a few beacons that show us outlines of how newsrooms may evolve. All of these will grow stronger with experience.

But none of them now come close to the capacity of a good newspaper newsroom, which encompasses so much talent and experience and knowledge that it can produce a fountain of vital, important and compelling journalism where others are still producing trickles.

Talking Points Memo – a clear example of how journalism can evolve into new forms without forsaking heritage – did a fine job (along with McClatchy's DC bureau) of exposing the politicization of the Department of Justice. And while it was doing that, traditional newsrooms opened our eyes to things like unauthorized wiretapping by the NSA, the CIA's secret "black site" prisons in Europe, illegal back-dated stock options at public companies, scandalous conditions at Walter Reed Army Hospital, abuses at Guantanamo Bay, and much more.

Thus I come to my continuing prayer: that the potency and capacity of our best newsrooms will be preserved and once again nurtured, and that they will continue to rise to the challenge of embracing a new news paradigm and a new relationship with audiences. I am encouraged to believe this is happening.

Article source: http://editor.blogspot.com/2009/07/prejudice-and-prayer-for-power-of.html

"Melayu" Boleh...

The Doctrine of the Freed Malay

The government has announced the removal of the 30% rule on equity allocation. Earlier, it has also done away with the FICC and the rules associated with foreigners setting up businesses in Malaysia. This administration has started dismantling certain edifices of the NEP. Clearly, this new approach indicates a changing perception on managing this country's economy.

There is a term for this stand that refuses to accept things as they are. It is directly opposite to that of conservative thinking. Conservatism in the original sense means a stand taken to insist things to remain as they are. It stands for the business as usual approach. In political terms it means reliance on the state or government to perform the functions which are better accomplished by the free individual.

The opposite of this stand, which is being adopted by this current administration, is libertarianism. It represents an unwillingness to see things as they believe that things can be done and get better through the free individual. It relies on the voluntary cooperation of individuals each pursuing their own interest.

Let me be more direct. The NEP is a legislative instrument designed to achieve a number of economic objectives which should be carried out by free men. We accepted it as necessary because of certain debilitating factors in society especially so in Malay society, which occurred as a result of a number of reasons. The NEP therefore became a means to concentrate economic and political powers at one place. Such concentration was fraught with dangers but we accepted the arrangement as necessary as it was only meant to be temporary.

This is the political arrangement favoured by the Malay conservatives who regard themselves as loyal to the Malay cause. The term Malay conservatism is associated with an unquestioning readiness to rely primarily on the state rather than on private voluntary arrangements to achieve a set of objectives. In the name of welfare and equality for instance, these people favour policies of state intervention and paternalism against the pursuit of the idea of freedom. Those who oppose their views are easily castigated as traitors.

I have written in support of the removal of the rule on 30% equity participation. I have said it is the most undemocratic aspect of the NEP and the most abused. The rule has benefited only the elite, the selected few excluding the ordinary Malay. The common folks don't know anything about this rule. Because of that, I welcome its removal. As to the other aspects which were designed for capacity building turning the Malays into wealth generating agents, I am in full support.

I have expressed my opinion about this matter and have given my reasons for believing so. I expect disagreement over this opinion to be refuted by reasoned argument. There was one particular comment by an anonignoramus (a combination between an anonymous and ignoramus) who stated that by arguing the line which I have taken, I am a traitor and a liberal.

A liberal traitor? That's a new one.

The principal person initiating the removals of these unfair vestiges of the NEP is the PM himself. The outbursts from the Malay anarchist such as the anonignoramus would therefore place the PM squarely in the category of traitor and liberal. That would be an interesting classification.

Obviously this anonignoramus hasn't read my articles on this issue. I have said cleanly that this particular aspect I cannot apply myself to believe- but as to the other aspects of the NEP which build capacity and empower the majority Malays, I am in full agreement.

Let us be clear about this so as not to debate endlessly on a position not taken.

 

A failed Welfare state.

I am sure many of you have heard the phrase- we want a fair society not a welfair society. I am not attributing the quote to anybody because, that in itself can be a contentious starting point. Welfare is for the infirmed, the old, the sick and the debilitated. These people deserved to be on permanent welfare schemes. It is the right thing to do.

Temporary assistance is for those who suffer temporary misfortunes. The wife whose husband who is also the breadwinner has died, wives left by husbands, young and able widows, those who are laid off. These people also deserve temporary assistance. Even orphans received temporary welfare. When they grow older, go to school and become adults, they fend for themselves.

I come back again to the ascriptive or status centric and achieved societies classification. As a reminder, a progressive society is associated with achieved norms. Such a society is characterised by a values system that place prominence on what a person can do, social and function mobility and specific role of individuals. A status cantered or acriptive normed society places a high premium on who you are, social exclusivity and undefined role of the individual.

Let's apply the status centric classification on the 30%equity rule. Who were the ones lucky enough to get the privilege of being allocated shares in listed companies? They would be those who the titled elite, senior civil servants, well connected people, the puteras of the left behind bumis, and so on. In other words you got to be given the allocation because of who you are, to which section of society you belonged and so forth. This would be a perfect example of the practice of ascriptive norms.

I have one term of the Malay who cherishes this arrangement- the Feudal overlord.

Malay political conservatism is therefore is state absolutism in disguise. It holds the state as the absolute arbitrator in the affairs of free Malay people. Accordingly, any questioning and challenges to the state are regarded as a direct challenge to the Malays. This mindset provides the perfect excuse for the political operators to leverage on crass racism.

Hence, when the issue of the death on an aide to a DAP exco became an issue of public interest, this was quickly seized by the Malay feudal overlords as a challenge to the Malay people. When the ISA is being challenged it was met with an aggressive reaction by a group of Malays designating themselves as presumably, the only custodian of Malay heritage.

As a responsible political party,UMNO should distance itself from these brownshirts with black gloves.

Article source: http://sakmongkol.blogspot.com/2009/07/doctrine-of-freed-malay.html

Perspective from 'our' East

To Those Degenerate Malays Who Have Made UMNO Their God

You claim to be Muslims, yet persist in upholding and perpetuating the disgusting racist agenda of UMNO. How does this conform to Islam and what does that make you? The position of Islam is very clear on this subject.

As the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said in his last sermon: "All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor has a non-Arab any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over a black nor has a black any superiority over a white except by piety and good action. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that the Muslims constitute one brotherhood. Nothing shall be legitimate to a Muslim which belongs to a fellow Muslim unless it was given freely and willingly. Do not, therefore, do injustice to yourselves.

Remember, one day you will appear before ALLAH and answer for your deeds. So beware, do not stray from the path of righteousness after I am gone".

Yet you as Muslims have broken the Muslim brotherhood and strayed from the path of righteousness by supporting, encouraging and helping UMNO to implement its insidious subversive racist agenda of purportedly upholding "Malay rights" not only against other Malays but all other Malaysians as well.

You know very well what UMNO in pursuit of this subversive agenda has done to the country, yet you persist in forcing such an agenda down the throats of other right-thinking Malaysians, Malays and non-Malays alike, in the perversely mistaken belief that whatever UMNO does is right.

In doing so, you have made UMNO your God and the Devil your Guide. This is syirik. And it is wrong. And you are doing injustice to yourselves.

The sad fact is that since independence, UMNO's agenda has resulted in many lost opportunities for the vast majority of the people and vicious exploitation by a few opportunistic and greedy UMNO Malays and their BN cronies.

Untold hundreds of billions of ringgit have been siphoned out of the economic system in the implementation of UMNO's subversive agenda.

UMNO has not even paid for its own building, the PWTC Complex, and the amounts owing by it have had to be surreptitiously absorbed and written off by Bank Bumiputra and Malayan Banking. Whose money was it? Are you not ashamed of this, or perhaps it is something that you degenerate UMNO Malays are proud of?

Has UMNO really given back anything much to the people in return, other than some crumbs and even that grudgingly? The poor Malays in the mean time do not know any better and continue to support a corrupt, inept, exploitative and divisive UMNO government whose programmes do nothing more than regard the country's resources as their own to do with as they please.

The whole political, legislative, judicial, administrative and economic process of the nation has been hijacked by all means, mostly foul, to maintain this corrupt UMNO regime in power at the total expense of the people, who are fed lies and all kinds of misinformation in the name of governance and government.

You disingenuously maintain that all institutions of government, which should be run for the benefit of all Malaysians, are "Malay" institutions, even if most other right-thinking Malays themselves would not agree with you. Why not just be truthful and call them "UMNO" institutions since their only function is to ensure the continued survival, empowerment and enrichment of UMNO and degenerate Malays like you?

Just because you degenerate Malays, and those non-Malays whom you have been able to convince, hoodwink or otherwise compel, uphold corruption, misgovernance, theft, injustice and all kinds of other wrongs, including murder, does not make any of it right.

But that is the UMNO whom you have made your God.

You will only regret it when you have to answer before the One True God on Judgment Day.

Don't think that you can hide behind your race, as you know very well that this has absolutely nothing to do with race. It has everything to do with right and wrong, truth and justice.

Then it will be too late to realize that UMNO was the Devil, not God. And it was degenerate Malays like you who made it your God.

You are a disgrace to the Malays and worst of all to all other Muslims.

Repent before it is too late, change your evil ways, be pious and do good deeds so that the One True God may forgive you.

UMNO will never change.

ABANDON UMNO.

Article source: http://sarawakheadhunter.blogspot.com/2009/07/to-those-degenerate-malays-who-have.html

Reliving the myth of the lazy native: the PPSMI issue and the denying of success to the poor

Azly Rahman http://azlyrahman-illuminations.blogspot.com/2009/07/reliving-myth-of-lazy-natives-on-ppsm.html The refusal to teach Mathematics and Science in English is not just an ideological position but an idiotic one as well. It is an attempt to self-fulfill a prophecy that the rural children especially the Malays, cannot be challenged and must continue to be given easy passes through social promotion. The refusal to acknowledge that English is currently a language of scientific progress, more than Bahasa Melayu, is an example of the policymakers' and Malay language nationalist's hypocrisy in dealing with success. Based on spurious research findings headed by a teacher training university, sanctioned by other public universities, the government has erred in its decision that will not only impact the future of Malaysian children in a continually globalised world where English is the lingua franca. And this will open up avenues for the establishment of classes of schools, increasing the demand for the setting up of private schools that will emphasise the English language as a language of instruction and a rigorous curriculum that will prepare students for a competitive world. The premise that Malay children cannot follow instructions in English and therefore not only standards should be lowered and subject matter made easier, but the teaching of Mathematics and Science itself must be reverted to the Malay Language points to this: that Malay children especially are presumed to be losers even before all avenues of success are provided. Because in one study they voiced their concern over their inability to understand instructions, the future of a generation is sacrificed. It is like saying that the more a child says that he/she does not like school, the less the teachers need to work to challenge them. While children of the privileged in urban areas get first class education through private and international schools or even in high schools abroad and master the English Language (so that they can be given places and sponsorship in English-speaking universities abroad), children of the rural poor are left to become victims of policies dictated by research findings that hardy make sense in the realm of educational futurism. Retired professors, poet laureates, die-hard Malay nationalists who themselves are well-educated in the English language having tasted the successes and given national accolades become incoherent and hypocritical spokespersons to a government policy that will make the myth of the last native a reality. 'Strategically denying success to the poor' These individuals do not understand changing times; that English is no longer a language of the colonials. The colonies revolted against the colonials through the natives' mastery of the English language. These individuals who are against the teaching of Science and Mathematics in English are giving wrong advice to the nation; mastering English does not mean challenging whatever status Bahasa Melayu has been accorded to. The government is strategically denying success to the poor of all races, with this language policy reversal. We are creating a nation at risk; incompetent in the language that will give them the chance to pursue their studies in good universities in the English-speaking world. There is a specific process one needs to follow in order to gain access to Western education; especially in the fields of Science and Mathematics. Many of the critical subjects are taught in English. The multitude of English proficiency tests is evidence that one must understand English for specific purposes (especially in the Mathematics and Sciences) right up to being able to write a Bachelors, Masters, or even Doctoral and Post-doctoral dissertations in the English language - all these are stages one has to go through. Especially for entry into American colleges where English proficiencyis given through tests ranging from the TOEFL (Test of English as a Foreign Language) to the challenging GRE (Graduate Record Examination), which require consistent polishing of skills not only in English as a language but English taught in the content areas. The government has blundered big time, succumbing to irrational voices disguised as those who care about the rural poor who are slow to master Mathematics and Science concepts in English. Who said kampong kids can't learn? There are enough success stories of children of the poor of all races coming from the rural areas slogging and struggling hard to master any language and to any subject matter and triumph to become world-class surgeons, engineers, lawyers, academicians, diplomats, musicians, and even culinary experts. Who said kampong kids cannot be challenged academically? There is enough evidence that if you provide them with dedicated teachers, a nurturing learning environment, a supporting home, and a challenging curriculum, and constant reminder of "yes you can" and "when the going gets tough, the tough get going" - kids will excel. Down with those who are out to underestimate the ability of our children to succeed. We must ignore bad advice and demand for success for all - urban and rural, Bumiputra or non-Bumiputra. We must demand a radical restructuring of our schools so that the same standard and support is given to all schools and the commitment to a philosophy that however we want our own children to succeed, we want the children of others to achieve similarly as well. Start early in teaching English. Put an end to any effort to make the myth of the lazy native a reality. We must remove our glass coconut shell. Repost: http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/24883/84/

Look in the mirror...

It is not the fault of Mahathir, it is our own making

By R. Shan  (Human Being) Sure, condemn me with, "What can I do? I am just one person and everything is controlled by the government" although it is the public that put them in power.  Imagine, I just counted the number of "agree' on the comments on Mahathir's article in MT's website and it was on or about 3,700. It is fascinating how much hatred and deep rooted frustration lies within the so called educated commentors. Well, I am sure many more would have read the article and not leave a comment. Anything on Mahathir tops even RPK's article sometimes. I found this to be the most intriguing comment written by Admiral Tojo, July 21, 2009 10:59:46 Mahathir's rambling could be due to excessive heart medication. Malaysia is NOT suffering from a race issue but a CLASS issue. The poor and downtrodden against the corrupt and those who abuse their powers to steal and cheat the common people. THe state of the majority of the Malays are due to the failure of UMNO. The Chinese due to the failure of the MCA and Indians the failure of MIC. The class of people whom I call thieves cut across the race divide. They however will use the race issue to continue to divide the people so that they can assert control and continue to assert control. As the people wake up and becomes more aware of issues and information is available, the ranting of these thieves sound more and more shallow and irrelevant. The people will have to decide what is best for them and not the politicians (those whom the people select and entrust). Treat them as who they really are, the people's servants rather than the people's bosses. It was the freedom fighters, the common people, who led the drive for Independence from the Brits and NOT UMNO. Mahathirs twisted history is full of lies. UMNO was not even created yet when the first cry for independence from the Brits was heard. Mahathir, go die peacefully and soon, so that I can piss on your grave. Bollocks Shalom Don't you think it is so true? Actually there is no race issue between Malaysians but more a class issue. Admiral Tojo can be an ordinary man, but wise in his perception. Whether he is an elite, middle class or poor does not matter, his heart is in place to fight a Malaysian cause for all, I presume. You see, a poor man can't afford to rant because he has no time except for his survival. The middle class person is always caught up with material issues but rants in the little time he/she finds - in frustration with the system and way of life in Malaysia. But someone like Admiral Tojo has been through the gravy route and realizes that commoners have been short changed by the elites due to our own inaction. Mahathir's innuendo on the Chinese is completely choreographed and stereotyped for we are so predictable in our nature, bogged down in our own quagmire. Mahathir speaks the truth now, not then because it served his own purpose to divide and rule based on race and in the process created a class of the elite, middle class and poor. That has been his modus operandi. He fails to understand this, but seeing the commentary on his article on MT, I understand why he is still a dark force to be reckoned with for those who have no outlet to voice their frustration except through MT. The disparity is so obvious these days similar to America where 300 million people live but 1% owns 40% of the wealth.         Now, how do we change this? Yes it can be only be if we are humane enough to forego some aspects of our ego and selfishness to enhance the society with direct and open discussion of the class reality of the Malaysian society. We all know Mahathir created this, why cry over spilt milk, let's move on and do what is necessary to create a truly Malaysian state if every individual can do what it takes.     It does not matter whether BN is in power or the opposition is in power, but we need to feel humane enough to do the right thing and put it to action, rather than polticking. A simple example that just strung into my mind, you have 3,700 agree commentors in Malaysia Today for Mahathir's article. Such ranting, such frustration!!!! Is it possible for these people to actually talk to 10 other people individually and convince them that we should register to vote if they could influence these 10 people to change the government in the GE13. Imagine, if these 10 good friends of yours are convinced, don't you think that it can multiple, similar to a MLM scheme only that it serves for the betterment of our society rather than making money. Do we have the time, is it fruitful, or would it be a futile attempt? If you have to ask all these questions, then better to stick with Mahathir. I can't answer that as it is one's own truthful effort to make the change. I guess the less political you become for a human cause, the more you will realize how desperately the political system responds - in the pretext of concern for the public. Its responses are superficial and don't address the needs of the needy and aspirations of the working people.            People may think I sound cynical and critical, but I speak the truth for humanity in Malaysia. Only when we chose to act without any expectation, will Malaysia be what it should be. We, the people, are a force to be reckoned with. With the right thoughts and momentum, we should not let it slip by, not for our own needs but the need of the community. If the community is well, we will all be well.     Our efforts, irrespective of our race, religion, color or class, to find truth will pave the way for us - only if we chose to act with a tinge of socialism. Do find some time to enhance this. I am not asking to sacrifice your life, but be truthful and make the effort by action if we want to see the change. You have been shown the path through RPK, HINDRAF, and it is up to us to act and educate those around us. It is a class war, not one that concerns race, in Malaysia.   Dear commentors, what is your take on this. Be constructive and contribute, not the typical me, me and me. We all face the same problem of "me" as a community. That was the past, now let's evolve for the revolution of the people, for the community on the basis of humanity that we live in rather than being such egoist pricks. Couldn't help it with "egoist pricks" because we fail to see humanity for own needs and not of the humanity for the community as a whole.         People Power is Powerless, Power to the People! Just imagine and act upon it and you will see the change that you seek for the community that you live in.

Article source: http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/24761/84/

You think?

Is this article still relevant today?

Posted by admin

Friday, 24 July 2009 06:23

Five years ago, one day after the 11th General Election of 21 March 2004, I wrote this article which was published in the freeanwar.com website. That was five months before Malaysia Today was launched. Is what I wrote five years ago still relevant today? I will allow you to be the judge to that. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin The aftermath of Malaysia's 11th General Elections: Where to now BA? The opposition coalition, the Alterative Front (Barisan Alternatif or BA), will need a couple of days to recover from the shellshock before it regains its composure and decides where it goes from hereon. Yesterday, BA, in particular the National Justice Party (Parti Keadilan Nasional or keADILan) was wiped out in Malaysia's 11th General Elections. I am not about to go into a lengthy 'I told you so' piece. Nobody likes a 'hindsight expert'. If you are so clever then why not talk with foresight, most would say. To offer your analysis after the event is easy. It is forecasting before the event that makes one an expert. The fight has not ended First of all, a defeat in an election is part and parcel of the game. Maybe keADILan has not seen itself massacred yet as, understandably, it is a new party and this is only its second election. It will need many more elections under its belt before it can learn how to handle both defeat and victory. The Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS), though, is better at this as once before, in 1986, it was wiped out leaving it a solitary seat in Parliament. Since then, however, PAS revamped itself and went through a leadership change after which it bounced back stronger than ever -- until yesterday. Now, PAS will have to do what it did in 1986. It will have to do some serious soul-searching and ask itself what went wrong. And what it discovers it is not going to like. But PAS will still need to address the matter. It will need to ask itself whether it is a missionary movement or a political party. It will need to ask itself whether it is in the business of propagating Islam or in the business of winning elections. PAS is trying to be both. But it cannot, as it should by now have learnt. PAS wants to serve God and it conducts its business with this in mind -- the Islamic State Document (ISD) is but one proof of this. PAS must now understand that, to win elections, it must serve the voters' interest. And if serving God is not what the voters want, is this then the political strategy to adopt? I am not saying that serving God is wrong. What I am saying is PAS should ask the voters what it would like to see and structure itself, its policies and its strategies taking into account the voters' sentiment. As it is now, PAS does things in isolation, detached from the voters, and this is not how a political party should be run. And all those who would like to serve God should leave the party and become fulltime preachers, leaving the 'hardcore' politicians the task of 'mending' the party. KeADILan too will have to do its own soul-searching. Will it too need a leadership revamp? This will be for the party leadership to ponder upon. But keADILan will need to understand what it needs to do and change accordingly. If yesterday's fiasco is the result of a bad leadership, then those responsible should gracefully stand aside and allow the party to be run by those who better understand politics. If the party feels I have seriously erred and my role as the editor of the party newspaper, Seruan Keadilan, is a liability to the party, then I will be the first to tender my resignation and leave the scene without a whimper. I leave it to the party to decide my fate and I will accept whatever decision the party makes in the spirit of the betterment of the party. I hope those others will do the same. PAS's 14-year cycle PAS seems to suffer from a 14-year cycle, probably similar to what people call the '7-year itch'. In 1990 it won Kelantan State, which thereafter saw its performance going uphill the two elections following it in 1995 and 1999. Today, 14 years down the road, and it is back where it used to be prior to 1990. Roughly 12 years prior to its success in the 1990 elections, Kelantan was under UMNO rule where in 1978 UMNO, with Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah leading the charge, knocked PAS out. 19 years before that, PAS was in control of Kelantan. In short, every three elections or so, Kelantan changes hands from PAS to UMNO, back to PAS, then back to UMNO again. And now Kelantan may be back to UMNO again or, even if PAS can still retain Kelantan after the recount of about five or six seats today, it will only be able to rule the state with a simple majority. Whatever the outcome, no one is going to have a two-thirds majority in the Kelantan State Assembly. The question now would be, will PAS require another 14 years or three general elections before it takes back the state from UMNO? This will mean it would be close to 2020 before PAS will see its fortunes change in Kelantan. I remember way back in 1978 when UMNO managed to kick PAS out, one Kelantanese told me that every few elections they will give the state to UMNO so that they can get development. Then, when they feel they have been sufficiently developed, they will kick UMNO out and give the state back to PAS. This sounds over-simplified, but if this is really the mentality of the Kelantanese, then expect Umno to be in power in Kelantan for the next three elections, or at least until the Kelantanese feel they have had enough development. Maybe UMNO would then now not over-develop the state to ensure that the people keep on feeling they still need more, which means Kelantan can perpetually remain under UMNO control. The clock has been turned back 30 years All Malaysians must understand the impact of yesterday's general election. I am not talking with the advantage of hindsight here as I have said this even as early as last year during the launch of Party Keadilan Rakyat and what I said then drew a lot of flak from the non-Malays, in particular the Chinese supporters of the Democratic Action Party (DAP). What happened yesterday is we have turned the clock back 30 years, back to the days leading to the 13 May 1969 racial riots infamously known as 'May 13'. Then, when we utter the word "opposition" it is meant "Chinese" and when we say "government" we mean "Malay". Today, we are back where we were in the days of the 1960s. In this scenario who loses? What we managed to achieve in 1999, 42 years after independence or Merdeka, has just been demolished. In 1999, after 42 years of sweat and toil, both the ruling party and opposition were transformed into a multi-racial mix. No longer could you say that Chinese oppose while Malays support. Today that is again what it is. This situation is bad for the Chinese as it is now so easy to play the racial card. When the Chinese go against the government it can easy be manipulated as they are against the Malays. Every policy the Chinese opposition oppose can be bandied as they are trying to undermine the Malays. UMNO, which in 1999 lost the right to claim it was a party representing Malay interests, has regained that right. The opposition, in particular keADILan, which claims to represent all races and fights for equality for all races can no longer claim so. In short, the line has been redrawn to Chinese opposing Malay interests. And with keADILan out of the picture this claim would have credibility. I have said this before, and that is the opposition must not be reduced to Chinese only and the ruling party as all Malay. My saying so drew accusations that I am a racist. But what I feared most has happened. I also said if this happens then the Chinese have only themselves to blame as kicking out keADILan would mean Malaysian politics would be again reduced to Malays on one side and Chinese on another. And is this not what happened yesterday? And does this not now put the Chinese at a great disadvantage? Every time the Chinese opposition opens its mouth the ruling party will scream that it is anti-Malay. And since the opposition is all-Chinese, and there is no real Malay opposition to speak off, will this not sound true? It's all about worldly desires Before this, one could only speculate that the Malays are religious and that the 'Islamic values' tagline would work with them. PAS' success in the Malay heartland of Kelantan, Terengganu and Kedah was touted as proof of this. Opinion polls done over the last two years, however, revealed the stark reality that money was the motivating factor for the Malays and not rewards in the afterlife. 1999 was a unique situation and should not be used as an indication that the Malays have finally 'seen the light' and have rediscovered Islam. The Malays are still basically the same. They have not changed much and money and development is still what the Malays seek What was most puzzling is the Malays' sense of 'values'. The Malays seem to be torn between two opposing values. For example, more than 80% of the respondents in the poll feel that the Internal Security Act (ISA) is undemocratic as detention without trial go against the very grain of democracy. These same respondents, however, though they pray, fast, perform their Hajj (pilgrimage) and so on -- in short display signs of being pious Muslims -- are not able to equate the ISA to Islam teachings. In other words, those 80% Malays who feel the ISA is wrong feel so with the spirit of 'western' democracy and not because detention without trial goes against Islamic teachings. In short, Islam is farthest from their minds in their opposition to the ISA. Then, when the issue of security is discussed, these same people feel that the ISA is necessary to protect the security of this nation. How can they feel that the ISA is undemocratic yet feel it is required to guarantee the peace and stability of Malaysia? They agree that the ISA is evil but is a necessary evil. This is where the Malays demonstrate an extremely confused state of mind and I have said this before in a piece where I said the Malays are a difficult race to understand whom even the Malays themselves do not understand, let alone a non-Malay. What, therefore, do the Malays really want? A good afterlife is certainly not one of them! What they want is a good life right here on earth. And the Malays will chose secure jobs, a home, a couple of cars in their driveway, and money in the pocket, over guarantees of heaven after death. And if the ISA is required to guarantee them all this then the ISA shall remain, though in the same breath they may agree it is an undemocratic law. In short, forget about "give me liberty or give me death". To the Malays it is, "to hell with democracy but give me property". And to hell with Islam as well if I have to sacrifice my comfort here on earth. The Putrajaya experience Which brings me to what happened in Putrajaya where the keADILan candidate, Abdul Rahman Othman, not only lost but lost his deposit as well. This, in fact, had been predicted, by no less than the Umno candidate, Adnan Mansor, who repeated time and time again that this would happen. But how did Adnan know? How could be so boldly predict this without fear that he would embarrassingly be proven wrong? Because he knew he would be proven right and he knew why. The Putrajaya constituency is 100% civil servants and 95% Malay. And they all live in government quarters, homes they do not own, at the grace of the government. Abdul Rahman knew this and he knew this would be the trump card Adnan could use against the Putrajaya voters. And he did. Adnan met the civil servants face-to-face in their offices, though this was not allowed, and told them in very clear terms that they risk being kicked out of their government quarters if they voted for the opposition. The voters were also told that their votes could be detected. All the ballot papers are numbered. The voters too have serial numbers. Once the ballot paper is torn from the book, the voter's serial number is recorded on the counterfoil that has corresponding numbers to the ballot papers. All they have to do is to check the ballot papers of the opposition votes and match its serial number against that on the counterfoil to know who voted for the opposition. When the voter goes into the polling station, his serial number is shouted out for all to hear and everyone in the room records it. Many civil servants personally told Abdul Rahman that they strongly believe their votes are not a secret and that the government can detect whom they voted for. Abdul Rahman tried his best to assure the voters that this is not so and that their votes are definitely confidential but the fear factor was just to high, and in the short space of seven days it was impossible to change their minds on this. Abdul Rahman, in fact, brought this matter to the attention of the Election Commission (EC) and requested them to make an official statement to clear the air. But it was not done and the Putrajaya voters who went to the polls on 21 March 2004 believed that their votes are not a secret and that it is not worth the risk of voting for the opposition and getting kicked out of their government quarters. Two days before Polling Day, I discussed this fear factor with Abdul Rahman. We both believed that even if we cannot win we can still garner about 2,000 votes, an impressive enough performance against 5,000 voters, and not lose our deposit. But the fear factor was still very high and we had not been able to overcome it yet. If we could not do it the following 48 hours then we may yet prove Adnan's prediction right. We also discussed the 'Scud missile' that Adnan would probably use against us. We believed that a 'Scud missile' was waiting to be fired, and this should be in the wee hours of the eve of Polling Day. But we just did not know what. There was no question of not getting hit with something 'big'. We even knew the timing. But we were groping in the dark wondering as to what it was going to be. We decided to embark on a last round 'polishing' exercise of our own to counter whatever Adnan had waiting for us. Abdul Rahman himself prepared the ammunition. But on the last night we were stuck in our operations centre, unable to move. Every time we sent a team out the UMNO army surrounded it and locked it in. We phoned the police but got no help from them and this is not surprising considering this has been the scenario the entire week. I phoned the head of the Putrajaya Special Branch, ASP Ibrahim, and shouted at him. I accused him of being an UMNO tool. I went berserk. I also sent him a nasty SMS message, which he saved on his hand phone, probably to use against me the next time they (again) detain me under the ISA. While we were under siege on that last night, the UMNO army did their rounds popping VCDs into every letterbox of the 5,000 Putrajaya voters. The VCDs was a documentary of Lokman Noor Adam, the onetime Executive Secretary of the keADILan Youth Movement, 'revealing' amongst others that keADILan was being funded by the Jewish currency trader, George Soros, "the man instrumental in wrecking Malaysia's economy", that the keADILan leaders misappropriate the money received from supporters and donors for personal use to build lavish homes and buy luxury cars, and so on and so forth. In short, keADILan was portrayed as a party backed by an enemy of Islam and Malaysia and its leaders but a bunch of corrupt, immoral and dishonest crooks. And this expose was made by non other than its Youth Secretary. And the VCDs showed the so-called 'documentary evidence' such as bank statements, etc. Whatever little support Abdul Rahman had was totally demolished. What is frustrating about this whole thing is we knew it was coming and even knew when. We even planned our own counter-operation. But we were stuck at base and had to just helplessly watch the UMNO boys tear us down piece by piece. We knew we had lost even before the race started. We were outnumbered, outgunned and outmanoeuvred. And the UMNO boys laughed at us while they destroyed us in our very face. We saw it coming Putrajaya is not the only place we saw it coming but were forced to stand by helplessly and watch everything crumble before our very eyes. I frequently joke that PAS was built on love while keADILan was built on hate. PAS was built on love for Islam while keADILan was built on hate for Dr Mahathir. This may have been said in jest but, as they say, many a true word is said in jest. On the second day of Ramadan, a two-day conference was held in Melaka to discuss our political strategy for the 11th General Election. The number one issue that was agreed by all is that, now that Dr Mahathir has left the scene and Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has taken over, keADILan has lost the concept of enemy. It would, in fact, have been better if Dr Mahathir had stayed on. We could have held our ground or maybe even perform better if Dr Mahathir was still the Prime Minister. Now that Pak Lah is in charge, the concept of enemy has disappeared and this spells bad news for keADILan. It was further agreed that keADILan would need to quickly reinvent the enemy or else face irrelevancy. If it fails to do so, then the need for keADILan will disappear. KeADILan is only required so far as to kick Dr Mahathir out of office. Once this has been achieved, then who needs keADILan anymore? Our political strategists, however, were not able to come up with this new 'enemy', or maybe they did not see the need for one. Whatever it may be, the prediction resulting from the Melaka conference was fulfilled. Pak Lah walks down the same road as Dr Mahathir Over the last couple of months I was asked by the foreign media, on more than one occasion, what I felt about the 11th General Elections and what was my prediction of the outcome. I replied that one must look back to the 1982 General Election soon after Dr Mahathir took over as Prime Minister. Then, Dr Mahathir was in his 'honeymoon' period and he performed well, as he did in the election after that in 1986. But, by the third election in 1990, his fortunes started to change and he lost Kelantan. But Dr Mahathir lost Kelantan not because PAS, who at that time had teamed up with Tengku Razaleigh's Semangat 46, was strong, but because the Kelantanese just hated Dr Mahathir's guts. If Dr Mahathir had stayed for just two terms, he would have retired at the top. But he stayed beyond that and, thereafter, Dr Mahathir was never able to recapture his 'honeymoon' period performance of 1982 and 1986 when PAS was practically wiped out. Pak Lah, I replied, just like Dr Mahathir in 1982, is now also in his 'honeymoon' period. He, just like Dr Mahathir in 1982, is going to perform well this election. And he will continue to do so in the following election as well in 2009, just like Dr Mahathir did in 1986. It will have to be in the third election in 2014 (Malaysia's 13 General Election) before Pak Lah can be brought to his knees. If Pak Lah is smart, I added, he should retire around 2013 or 2014, just before the 13th General Election. Then he will retire at the top, something Dr Mahathir did not do. This will make Pak Lah the best performing prime minister in Malaysia history. If, however, just like Dr Mahathir, he tries to take Malaysia into his third election as Prime Minister, then he would face the same humiliation Dr Mahathir suffered. In short, the opposition can expect humiliation in the 11th General Election, plus in the 12th as well. The opposition will then have to hope that Pak Lah becomes 'greedy' and clings to power, which means its fortunes will change in the 13th General Election. If, however, Pak Lah very cleverly bails out and hands the country to his deputy just before that, this would be bad news for the opposition as then it may never recover. 'Show me the money' I know this prediction does not augur well for the opposition. But when the Malaysian opposition parties can only win by default, win when the ruling party makes mistakes, then what can it expect? You just need to listen to the opposition speeches. The opposition leaders speak about the mistakes made by the government. It talks about the excesses and abuses. It talks about the corruption and mismanagement. In spite of all this, the country's economy grows and Malaysians see development. The opposition fails, or refuses, to understand what the voters want. They want the security and comfort of a good life and the ruling party has shown it can guarantee this. They want peace and stability and the freedom to get rich and the ruling party offers this. They want education and good jobs and the ruling party provides this. Agreed, to get all this Malaysians must sacrifice a little freedom and democracy. Granted, while the voters are free to get rich, the ministers too help themselves to some of the money. Maybe, there is no real equality but the Chinese still prosper in spite of the Ketuanan Melayu (Malay supremacy) policy. Malaysia offers the voters a win-win solution. Get rich, prosper, get a good education, get good jobs, live in beautiful homes, drive nice cars, but just do not question what the government does or criticise it. This is acceptable to two-thirds of the voting population. The balance one-third disgruntled voting population can support the opposition if it so wishes. But in the 'first past the post' election system that Malaysia practices, the one-third is of no consequence. And yesterday's 11th General Election has proven this point. The voters have not heard how the opposition can better develop Malaysia. The voters have not been told how they would get even richer than now if the opposition were to come to power. In fact, Kelantan and Terengganu have proven the reverse; the people get poorer with the opposition running these two states. And this is all that counts. And this is something the opposition does not seem to understand. Do I hear someone say this is a most unIslamic stand to take? Do I hear someone say that principles cannot be compromised and exchanged for worldly desires? Don't tell me, tell the voters, they don't seem to think so as yesterday's message from them has very loudly and clearly shown. And the message from the voters is, "Show me the money!"

Article source: http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/24792/84/

A view...

The Alternative Theory

Friday, 24 July 2009 07:13

By Hakim Joe  Dr. Azmi Sharom has espoused his intellectual rhetoric in pertinent to the state of affairs in Malaysia and the spate of broken promises that have broken down the multiracial society into ranks and files in accordance to race and religion. His deep understanding of how politics were ultimately utilized to manipulate the interpretation of the Federal Constitution is but one undeniable theoretical attempt at the explanation of the truth as existing in this nation. Though far less learned as the honorable doctor, I herewith attempt to explain my side of views with reference to the same subject but as a layman. There is no doubt whatsoever that religion plays a big part on how Malaysia is governed and it is with this tool that was used, and is still being utilized, to control the majority of the masses. I do agree entirely with the good doctor that our Constitution is "littered with references to race and religion that can only be described as racially based preferential treatment". However, I do not agree with Dr. Azmi's statement that "the nature of the constitution can be accepted as an understandable compromise."  First of all, how can religion be used as a compromise to solicit cooperation and to foster harmony between the different races? Should Bangsa Malaysia be split into which religion one ascribes to? No, I believe that religion should never be the element that is embraced to segregate a multiracial society or any society for that matter. Religion transcends Politics (for those who believe there is a God) and Law transcends Politics (for those that chose not to believe there is a God).   The matter of fact is that Malaysia possesses a population that is majority Malay and it is this that has compelled all Malaysian leaders (after Tunku) to exploit this verity in order to remain in power. Malays, just like all human beings, have different dogmas and ideologies, and to facilitate a mass consciousness amongst them means finding a common denominator. Religion is that denominator and it was, and still is, being used as the "means to justify a favorable outcome".  Secondly, Article 3 of the Constitution may state that "Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practiced in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation", but it was written in another era by leaders who aspired to form a united country. However, why is religion being used as a defining factor? By supplanting the statement that Islam will be the religion of the Federation, it creates an opportunity for future Malay leaders to use it as a leverage to divide and rule. Again, religion might be the "means" and the retention of power is the "outcome".  That is the reason why the Reid Commission remained neutral with this decision to specify Article 3 with regards to religion in society. Should religion be the defining criterion for a Malaysian seeking high office in a democratic nation? Isn't religion a personal contract between God and his disciple and what has it got to do with a politician governing the nation? Religion can only play an important part in politics if the country adopts a theocratic type of governance. Fortunately and unfortunately, Malaysia is not a theocracy. Fortunately because there will be Ayatollahs and Mullahs in charge of the Islamic Government in a multiracial, multi-religion society, and unfortunately because these Ayatollahs and Mullahs (crazy as it sounds) might be less hypocritical when exploiting their religious beliefs on the population of a multiracial, multi-religion society.  Thirdly, to accept racism as "an understandable compromise" is duplicitous. Just as black is black and white is white, one either accepts racism or one does not.   Article 153 is another quandary by itself and owes its enduring existence by the mere detail that Malays are in the majority in this country. RPK rightfully stated that the Malaysian Constitution is just about the only constitution in the entire world that not only permits and encourages racism to exist in a democratic society, it is legally enshrined within the constitution itself. In another democratic country, one could very well be prosecuted for being a racist as there are enacted legislations that forbid discrimination against race and religion. Over here, it is clearly and carefully spelt out in the Constitution.  By being exactly what it is, Article 153 rationalizes the introduction and implementation of UMNO's version of the NEP, and from a program that was presented as a way to give assistance to the hardcore poor (regardless of race and religion) and to elevate the plight of these people, it has somehow been transformed to the provision of aid and the allocation of special privileges to Bumiputeras only. If that was not transparent enough, these special privileges have somehow attained the status of unalienable rights that is seemingly justifiable by the so called Social Contract that nobody seems to be able to show proof of its existence. Using this loose mandate as a form of enticement, UMNO has been able to retain its position as the government by merely attracting the Bumiputera vote.  Article 153 is inviolable as well. What was initially conceptualized as a stop gap proposition to "level the playing field" has now been turned into a way of life. Protected by the royalty, sanctioned by UMNO and supported by zealots who deemed themselves "deserving" of such handouts, the Malay Rights is unquestionable and herein the perception of Ketuanan Melayu is born. What it really is, is but yet another racist government-sponsored structure that is constantly nurtured to take advantage of the Malay vote owing to the composition of the political parties here in Malaysia where parties are race-defined. The inception of Pakatan Rakyat, a multiracial political component will be the bane of Article 153.  Yet another aspect of Dr. Azmi's article that I do not subscribe to is the "forgetfulness" of the many Malaysian PMs starting from Tun Razak onwards. These Malay leaders did not forget Tunku's legacy, in fact they remembered it very well and it was with this acute remembrance that they seek to exploit the constitution to further their personal political ambitions and in a few cases, to establish a dynasty. Except for Tun Ismail, almost every leader within the BN coalition (after Tunku's administration) has manipulated, or attempted to manipulate, the system for their personal gain, and this includes the BN-Chinese political parties, the BN-Indian political parties and even DSAI himself when he was the Education Minister and later on the DPM.  Religion was therefore never the weapon that was employed to alienate the Malays from the rest of the people but was utilized as an adhesive to unite the Malays for political mileage. Justice was never served when the jurist responsible for upholding the virtues of the Constitution was themselves perverted by interpretation (or misinterpretation) of the very Constitution they have pledged to protect.  I do however entirely agree with the gist of what Dr. Azmi is alluding to and the fact that a Malay is denouncing his UMNO-given "rights and privileges" shows a small step towards morality and common sense that is indeed a breath of fresh air.   Thank you, sir for understanding and for standing up when the rest of the people are sitting down. Article source: http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/24796/84/

Heil... er... er...

Mein Kampf - Malaysian Style

On reading the recent emotional ranting of the architect of modern Malaysia (a person whom I admire for his tenacity, determination and foresight in managing issues), I could not help but detect certain strands and themes that seem to parallel the infamous Fuehrer. Mein Kampf (My Struggle) by Adolf Hitler was spoken by Hitler and written by Rudolf Hess while Hitler was in prison in 1925. This book crystallized Hitler's thoughts and became the blueprint which the National Socialist Party (Nazi) would use to gain power. Although Austrian by birth, he championed German Supremacy, i.e., the idea that Germans are a superior race, and was accepted by the Germans as one of them (as Austria is a Germanic nation). Hitler kicked out a corrupt government, brought Germany out of recession and reignited the pride of the German people of that time, the 1930s. We should remember that Volkswagen and the Autobahn are his legacies, among others. He carried out his plans per his writings in Mein Kampf, mesmerizing the people with simplistic rhetoric and inspirational tones on grand stage sets. The Malay Dilemma was written by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad in 1970, after he lost his seat in parliament and after the May 13, 1969 riots. This book crystallized his thoughts and became his blueprint in running the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) and the country. The book's basic message was that the Malay race was a gentle and a laid-back race, taken advantage of by foreign arrivals. To overcome that, the Malays had to aspire to develop themselves and be the dominant force in the country through state support. Although of Indian Muslim heritage, he is classified as Malay, and the Malaysian constitution recognizes him as a Malay, as being a Muslim and practicing Malay customs are defined as being Malay. The other native races are not defined as Malays but instead are labeled as Aborigines (Orang Asli/Pribumi), even though they could be Muslim and practicing Malay customs. Mahathir became Prime Minister in 1981 (resigned in 2003), and he went on to eliminate the power of the Royals in parliament. He fanned the flames of Malay supremacy (Ketuanan Melayu) and continues to do so right up to this very day. His legacies are Proton (Malaysian national car maker), the North South Expressways and the Petronas Twin Towers among others. His greatest success was overcoming the Asian Financial Crisis of 1997 by implementing radical measures such as capital and exchange controls. However, the greatest criticism of his tenure as PM was the nullification of the separation of powers on which a democratic state is based on, making the Judiciary report into the Government. During his tenure, the perception grew that the Royal Malaysian Police and the Anti Corruption Agency were his personal tools, and this perception gained mass acceptance after the arrest and brutal beating of the then Deputy Prime Minister, Anwar Ibrahim, while in the custody of the police. Mahathir could influence an audience with his simple down to earth banter. Unlike Hitler however, he could not do it wholesale to the entire nation as the nation was fragmented into camps that had little common ground. So it was divide and rule. One message for the Malays was that the Chinese would grab all the wealth and the Malays becoming a subjugated race, pointing to Singapore as an example of lost Malay territory. For the Chinese and Indians, it was to fear conservative Islam in the form of PAS, painted by the mass media as a Taliban like Islamic party. And so he ruled merrily until he stepped down in 2003. It should be noted that his successor won more than 70% of the popular vote in the general election that followed his departure, indicating the euphoria the nation had of finally getting him out after 22 years in office and the expectation of reforms post-Mahathir. Back to Hitler. Hitler said in Mein Kampf that the masses find it difficult to understand politics, their intelligence being small. Therefore all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points. The masses will only remember only the simplest ideas repeated a thousand times over. "If I approach the masses with reasoned arguments, they will not understand me. In the mass meeting, their reasoning power is paralyzed. What I say is like an order given under hypnosis." In Mein Kampf, the whole state organization of education and training is to instill into the hearts and brains of the youth entrusted to it the racial instinct and understanding of the racial idea. Hitler needed a fall guy and so he pointed to the Jews as being responsible for all the evils befalling the Germans. Hitler alleged that the Jews had been responsible for losing the First World War. Hitler believed that the Jews were involved with Communists in a joint conspiracy to take over the world. Hitler claimed that 75% of all Communists were Jews. Hitler ranted that Jews, who were a minority in Germany, were slowly taking over the country. They were doing this by controlling political parties, many of the leading companies and several of the country's newspapers. The fact that Jews had achieved prominent positions in a democratic society was, according to Hitler, an argument against democracy and the need for state control. This warped thinking of Hitler won over many adherents through his rhetoric and stagecraft especially from the dispossessed and fearful. A similar warped logic runs through Mahathir's articulation that the Chinese were becoming the masters of Malaysia. This tune was sung a long time ago, penned into the Malay Dilemma. And like Hitler postulated, this message is kept simple and it is repeated a thousand times and drummed into the heads of the populace. Doing thus, Mahathir's original intentions in the Malay Dilemma have now spun out of control into state sanctioned racial discrimination and further develop into utter corruption of the institutions of the state. An affirmative action program called the National Economic Policy (NEP) was created in the early 70s (and was to end in 1990) to facilitate Malay participation in the economy where licenses and funding were provided by taxpayers. However this was hijacked by opportunists and cronies and this NEP is now institutionalized as a right and a privilege for the Malays. Thus a two tiered citizenry has emerged with the privileged citizens and normal citizens. The privileged citizens are guaranteed special rights over non-Malays in access to various facilities such as scholarships, education and licenses. Education and the mass media are hijacked to the extant that the population learns only what the political masters want them to know. As Hitler desired in Germany, so in Malaysia race predominates all activity; from eating, shopping for food, education, work, filling forms and access to opportunities. The population is tuned to think along racial lines, to better support the racial parties that form the ruling alliance. Mother tongue education is bandied about as the key to retaining a person's culture, heritage, intelligence and religion and is the most often used sword, slashing away at the people, separating them into nice little pockets of Malay, Chinese and Indian voters. Today, even most opposition politicians fall into this trap, with politicians from the affected race championing pig abattoirs and saving Indian villages. Kristallnacht and Operation Lalang were used in Nazi Germany and today's Malaysia respectively to capture dissidents. The Gestapo, Brownshirts (Nazi Youth) and the Police were used to coerce, intimidate and control the population in Nazi Germany. In today's Malaysia, the Police, the MACC (Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission), the FRU (Federal Reserve Unit, a riot squad) and the ISA (Internal Security Act) are used to intimidate and detain citizens (rabid, rabble, reporters, aides etc.) for the better good of the nation. In short, racial dominance and apartheid, fear of another race dominating, formatting the citizens mindsets through education and the mass media, and bringing in the goodies through a successful economy are the common themes of Nazi Germany and today's Malaysia. The concept of the individual is utterly lacking in this country, save for a handful of thinking citizens. http://www.thoughts.com/rottenegg/blog/mein-kampf-malaysian-style--342746/

Integrity at satke - continued...

Arresting the Slide in Our Public Institutions - Part II

---

By Farish A. Noor ~ July 22nd, 2009. Filed under: TOM_Main.

The scholar of comparative politics is often struck by how so many postcolonial nation-states have managed to degenerate into neo-feudal societies where power and politics have become so personalised that state power and the use of force/violence is monopolised in the hands of a few, who nonetheless claim mandate to govern over their respective populations. This was certainly the case in many of the Communist postcolonial states (such as Vietnam) where the one-party system effectively put an end to any semblance of representative democracy and negated the presence of an active public domain where alternative political opinions or voices could be heard.

But more worrying is the fact that the same has come to pass in so many former colonial states that at the outset inherited the tools and instruments for representative democracy under the rule of law as well. One simply has to look at countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh, the Philippines (under the rule of Marcos) and Indonesia (during the leadership of Suharto) for examples of how even the most vibrant democracies with in-built constitutional guarantees managed to devolve to become oligarchal assemblies of entrenched elites who no longer felt accountable to the citizenry.

The reasons for this slide in our public institutions lies in part in the culture of politics and power in so many countries, including countries like Malaysia that claim to be developed nations. Yet despite the rhetoric of development Malaysia is a country that has more than 1,500 deaths in custody as part of its developmental record: Proof, if any was needed, that building gigantic shopping malls and skyscrapers does not guarantee that one will live in a developed country where public institutions and officials respect the value of human life.

Yet it is our political culture that valorises 'strong leadership' and 'powerful leaders' that has to be held into account here, and the tendency to think of power in terms of state violence (both legitimate and illegitimate) that has to be expressed in the public domain. We still live in societies where people believe that being a powerful leader equals being a good leader; and underlying this assumption is the related assumption that the acquisition of power is an end in itself, by whatever means.

The political elite of countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, Phillipines, Thailand, Pakistan and Bangladesh (among others) behave as if considerations of fundamental human rights of their citizens are rhetorical flourishes that occasionally justifies the election process, but seldom gets anywhere beyond that. The foundational idea that in a democracy the fundamental rights of the citizen counts above all is still, sadly, an alien concept to so many of them. Hence the tendency that we see time and again in so many developing countries for political elites to rely on the tools of the state - such as the police, army, judiciary and other related governmental institutions - to serve their own party-political interests.

In the wake of the MACC scandal involving the tragic death of a young political assistant to the DAP party, it is imperative that Malaysian society re-asserts its presence in the public domain by demanding an enquiry into what really happened at the premises of the MACC office. But more than the details of the interrogation process itself, the protests over the death of the young PA at the MACC office has to start from the simple premise of who runs MACC and whose agenda was it serving?

Lest it be forgotten, MACC stands for the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission. The very name itself spells its purpose and mandate and should remind all of us - MACC officers included - that they are public servants who are meant to serve the interests of the Malaysian public, of whatever political background or affiliation. It beggars belief that among those accused is a State Assemblywoman who is said to have given money to a health centre in her own constituency, while other more notable cases that includes a former senior politician who has built for himself a Bali-styled mansion fit for a King (or perhaps even surpassing the palaces of the Kings) are not called in for questioning.

It is this blatant and shameless selectivity of the MACC investigation procedure that adds to the growing cynicism of the Malaysian public, and raises questions about the objectivity and credibility of the institution. We have seen many other cases of selective persecution in so many other failed and failing states all over Asia and Africa, and in all of these cases the rot begins when the institutions of governance fail in their stated goal of serving the public and end up serving the interests of those in power. MACC's reputation in the long run will depend on how the enquiry into the death on its premises will be carried out, and whether the body can persuade the Malaysian public that its enquiries into the alleged wrongdoings of lawmakers in Selangor are not motivated by other political agendas that may serve other party-political interests as well.

In the meantime, as the Malaysian public clamors for reforms in key institutions of state such as the police and the educational system, it is imperative that we - the Malaysian public - play our role as the real power-holders and stakeholders in the system by demanding that these institutions perform their basic task, which is to serve the Malaysian public in the first place. Anything less than that would be to concede to a neo-feudal political culture where the citizenry have no role to play (save voting once every few years) and where politicians and public servants behave like rulers immune to the law. That is not development, the word for it is degeneration.

http://www.othermalaysia.org/2009/07/22/arresting-the-slide-in-our-public-institutions-part-ii/

Integrity at stake...

Arresting the Slide in Our Public Institutions

---

By Farish A. Noor ~ July 22nd, 2009. Filed under: TOM_Main.

The term 'Asubhabhavana' is familiar with many historians of Buddhist theology by now, for it refers to a meditative mode of introspection that has become ritual practice over the centuries. In layman's terms, Asubhabhavana refers to the simple process of self-reflection and mental back-tracking where one contemplates the manifold paths, steps and mis-steps that were taken to get us to where we are today; prompting the simple yet direct question: "Why have I become what I am today, and what were the mistakes that I made that continue to hurt me now?"

As it is with individual subjectivities, so is it with states, governments and institutions. For when we look at the process of historical development and decline of so many post-colonial societies we also need to ask what were the steps and mis-steps that were taken to get them to their present state of degeneration and decline?

A case in point is the recent one in Malaysia, where a young political assistant to the DAP opposition party was found dead under the most suspicious of circumstances. The young man had been summoned by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) to its offices in order to answer some questions related to allegations of corrupt political practice. The next time anyone sees him, he is found lying dead on the rooftop of the building next door. Needless to say the fact that the young man may have died while under MACC custody begs the immediate and obvious questions: How did he die, and why? This is the burning question that has brought Malaysians of all walks of life, across the political divide, together. Already the same question is being asked even by the component parties of the BN ruling coalition, and prominent BN leaders have likewise called for an enquiry into what happened that day at the MACC office.

Sadly Malaysia's convoluted politics has begun to twist the facts of the case. The death of the young man has been turned into a racial-ethnic issue, with the vernacular Malay press in particular arguing that those who question the official version of the story are actually working to undermine the Malaysian government and its related public institutions that are dominated by Malaysian Malays. But no amount of spin can alter the fact that the death of the young man was mysterious to say the least; and no amount of spin can alter the fact that Malaysians want to know the truth.

Firstly it has to be noted that Malaysians have every right to complaint about and to question the conduct of state institutions that are, after all, being paid for by the Malaysian tax payers themselves. To suggest otherwise would be to miss the point that state institutions are there to serve the needs of the citizenry, and that it is the citizenry who have the right as stakeholders to ensure that the institutions of governance are run well. For if the citizens of Malaysia are not allowed to ask how institutions like MACC are run, then who does?

Which brings us to the second question: namely, who does run these institutions? In so many developing postcolonial societies we have seen how the institutions of the state such as the police, army and judiciary used and abused by entrenched political elites who continue to act and behave as if these institutions are part of their party-political apparatus. In the worst case scenario as we have seen in countries like Indonesia (under Suharto) and the Philippines (under Marcos), the army and police were no more than extensions of the political apparatus of the dictators in power. In other countries across Africa and Asia we have seen how anti-corruption agencies were used in the most biased and selective manner, to bring about the selective persecution of opposition politicians, activists and members of the public.

In the long run, these casual and routine instances where the distinction between political elites and the institutions of state are blurred will do more damage to the latter than the former. One should not wish for a situation as was the case when Zulfikar Ali Bhutto of Pakistan even had his own pseudo-state paramilitary apparatus, the Federal Security force, at his beck and call. In such instances, the state has all but dissolved itself and things can only degenerate further.

Which brings us to the theme of Asubhabhavana and the need for states to be self-reflective and for societies to ask how and why did the institutions of governance slide so far? The controversy surrounding the death of the young political assistant at the office of MACC will now force Malaysians to look seriously into the decline in standing and credibility of our state institutions, and to ask how they can arrest the slide in performance and credibility of bodies such as the Anti-Corruption Commission. To be sure, Malaysia - like all countries - needs an Anti-Corruption Commission, but it has to be one that is credible, transparent and accountable to the people themselves, and not merely political elites in power. Anything less will make a mockery of the process of governance, and reduce us to the level of the proverbial banana republic, where state violence has been normalised and the rule of law rendered irrelevant.

Malaysia is a country that now has 1,535 cases of death in custody as part of its developmental record. If that figure alone does not give us cause to pause and reflect on how far we have veered from the ideal set by the nation's founding fathers, then nothing will.

http://www.othermalaysia.org/2009/07/22/arresting-the-slide-in-our-public-institutions/

Think about this...

Who Says That Tun Is Wrong?

I see this massive furore over Tun M's article Kaki Dalam Kasut. The very blunt Khoo Kay Peng responded almost instantaneously and held no punches back. I can see where the both of them are coming from. Tun being a realist; while the very intelligent KKP, in my opinion, is too much of an idealist.

Hey, no offence to KKP. He is one of the better guys around.

I know I am gonna be getting a whole lot of stick for being on the side of dear old Tun. And 2 days in a row at it. But, truth be told, Tun had just spoken the truth.

The Malays are in power but the Chinese are in control of this country. Why? Because the elitist Malays who are in power are whores to wealth. How many among the 'elite' Malays in the corridors of power truly have their heart for the people or even the Malays? And how many of these Malays in the corridors of power aren't at where they are for money, money and money?

The Chinese knows this. And they also know that they do not have the numbers to create among them a Prime Minister. The Chinese are realists. They are survivors. Realising that it is not possible for them to form the government, they instead find ways to control the government. People say that the Jews and the Chinese are the smartest - and if you asked me, I say they probably think alike too. The Chinese in Malaysia controls the Malaysian government the way the Jews control the US government. Something new? Think about it.

To the Chinese, and this must be the worst kept secret, the Malays in power are lazy and greedy. Easy money. Easy money. And with this knowledge, the Chinese gets their way by providing financial support for Mr. Malay. Patronage. I help put you up there, you take care of me. Then we plunder together. Since Mr. Malay is too lazy to do the actual dirty work to earn the money, he will always need the Chinese to earn him his dough. Some of you call this cronyism. But this is not cronyism. This is call playing it smart.

Count me the number of Chinese in Malaysia's top 10 riches. Extend that to the top 100. Do you think it's easy to get that many projects with that many zeros in value? The Gohs, the Tans, and the Yeohs are the ones who truly decide where the country is heading. They come up with a master plan and their toy boy Menteri finds ways to implement them. This is how it is done, not the other way. Malaysia is not planned based on Kementerian wanting to this and then implement. Those with interests come up with the plan. The Menteri simply gets paid.

And that's at the upper level. What about implementation?

The Malays have been enriched in the past couple of decades but only a select few truly benefits from it. That's because the Chinese have created a 'structure' where the ultimate wealth will flow to the Chinese. Let's take an example of a construction project. The government allocates RM100 million to build a road. The Menteri and his cronies award the project to a Bumi company. The Menteri and his thieves take a 15% cut. The Bumi company keeps 5% of the project value. The project is then ali-baba-ed to some Chinese sub-contractors. The Chinese sub-contractors on the other hand no longer sub it down. They share the balance of RM80 million among Chinese businessmen via provision of labour, materials, freight, and what is and what not. This 'sharing' is made possible because the Chinese have extended their interests in all forms of businesses in this country. And we all know how much the Cina Ah Peks don't trust the Malays in doing jobs for them. Heck, they don't even trust the Malays to deliver ordered raw materials. You can't really blame them when the Malays have such poor track records. So where did the wealth ultimately end up with. You heard me right, the circles of Chinese. And you question why the Chinese do not fight the 'structure'? They don't lose a single sen. The portion 'retained' by the Malays is not even their profit. It's the public's money, stupid - the project has been awarded at a price much higher than that in a free market.

Of course there are some smart alec Malays who tried to break this 'structure'. But without the expertise and work ethics, they ended up shitting themselves in the pants with the likes of MRR2.

So, the Chinese have no social ethics. Too bad that they are too smart!

You just have to give it to them. The Chinese are street smart, hard working, entrepreneurial and most important of all, they are realists.

So yes, the Chinese controls the nation and wealth of the country like what Tun said. He is not senile la. And to proof that even further, lets compare the wealth of Malays and Chinese based on categories; apple to apple.

At the top category of super rich with massive businesses, the Chinese on the average are richer than the Malays.

At the lower category of rich with businesses the size of SMEs to large PLCs, you cannot deny that there is definitely way more Chinese than Malays.

At the medium category of well to do income earners and small businesses, lets be honest and again give it to the Chinese. They head this corporation and that MNC. You see small Chinese businesses everywhere.

At the below medium category of good income earners, look around your office and peek into your managers' rooms, and I shall not say much more.

At categories below that, things might start to get even. Or it might not.

So, was Tun wrong in what he said?


Side note. Khoo Kay Peng, you mentioned Tun's super rich sons. What do you expect? Which man do not first enrich himself and his family first? This is human's nature. In which country does this not exist? Look at the US. The elites are always wealthy. Just that they don't to it that obviously. So, maybe Tun was not very subtle with his boys' wealth. But that's how it is. This is the real world. To me, it's a foregone conclusion that the leader(s) will take. But I only hope that they make sure that they do their job in leading the nation. The country must benefit from his leadership. And this I think Tun M did. He built Malaysia. No questions about that. Badawi on the other hand, took way much more in a much shorter time and gave nothing back in return.

Original article: http://saltpepperandalittlekicap.blogspot.com/2009/07/who-says-that-tun-is-wrong.html