10 of November shall forever be remembered. In helplessness and desperation tens of thousands of citizens march to exert their right and express their grievances. It gave me hope for Malaysia -that the will and assertion of good men will prevail and overcome evil.
The event shows the best and worst of humans. Police showed restraint, probably to avert international outcry over anything else, particularly after Malaysia's overtones on the relatively recent events in Myanmar. Internal Security Act, a tool often used in the past, was not taken out from the drawer, again to avert international condemnation. UMNO and its apparatus was however quick to condemn and criminalize the event and its participants. They fear for their power, they fear for their egos. How can a man with a clear conscience condemn another into slavery? How can one stomach the subjugate others to submission for one's selfish gains? How can we deprive another's right with indifference? Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and his UMNO supporters can. When I first heard the story about a man who sold his soul to the devil, I thought it is incomprehensible for a man to relinquish himself to the ultimate epitome of evil. The thought of surrendering oneself to the devil and eternal damnation for a moments' pleasure was impossible a bargain. After witnessing the events and people surrounding Malaysia, it is only fair to disabuse myself. The devil is beyond an entity. It symbolizes greed, selfishness, oppression and evil. Abdullah Badawi and his supporters, through their actions, has sold his soul the the devil.
From the stories we have been told; in history books the downfall of Hitler; in popular fiction the chronicles of Batman; in Holy books the triumph of Moses on the Pharaoh, that good will succumb evil. That justice will prevail. The 40,000 people on that day lead to 40,000 small triumph against evil. 40,000 closer small minutes closer to the day our oppression will end. 40,000 way forward for Malaysia.
Thursday 15 November 2007
Monday 22 October 2007
Blog seorang warganegara
Kita sering membaca blog bertema politik yang mungkin jarang mengaitkan kehidupan biasa ramai rakyat Malaysia. Jeff Ooi, Rocky's Bru, A Kadir Jasin mengungkitkan isu yang relevan dan mengkaji dengan mendalam, tetapi apakah pendapat dan kesan isu-isu tersebut dari sudut rakyat Malaysia yang biasa?
Seorang pensyarah Universiti awan telah memberikan pendapatnya tentang 'penyalahgunaan' istilah 'rakyat' dan 'warganegara'. Rakyat, dalam istilah bahasa inggeris ialah 'subject' dan bermaksud seorang individu yang bertanggungjawab terhadap seseorang pemerintah (terutamanya seorang raja atau maharaja). Warganegara, atau dalam istilah bahasa Inggeris 'citizen', bermaksud seseorang yang berhak menduduki sesuatu negara yang secara langsung diberikan hak-hak tertentu seperti memilih pemimpin dalam pilihanraya, memberi pendapat secara terbuka dan tanpa halangan, hak untuk memiliki harta bebas tanpa campurtangan pemerintah, serta hak untuk mendapat pengadilan yang adil. Pensyarah tersebut kemudian telah diberi amaran oleh pihak Universiti.
Niamah!! adalah blog milik Patrick Teoh yang memberi pendapat yang telus dan ikhlas tentang perihal negara kita dari sudut seorang rakyat biasa. Beliau memberikan gambar yang baik tentang kesan dasar kerajaan terhadap kehidupan dirinya sebagai seorang rakyat biasa. Baca blognya disini. Blog ini dalam Bahasa Inggeris.
Seorang pensyarah Universiti awan telah memberikan pendapatnya tentang 'penyalahgunaan' istilah 'rakyat' dan 'warganegara'. Rakyat, dalam istilah bahasa inggeris ialah 'subject' dan bermaksud seorang individu yang bertanggungjawab terhadap seseorang pemerintah (terutamanya seorang raja atau maharaja). Warganegara, atau dalam istilah bahasa Inggeris 'citizen', bermaksud seseorang yang berhak menduduki sesuatu negara yang secara langsung diberikan hak-hak tertentu seperti memilih pemimpin dalam pilihanraya, memberi pendapat secara terbuka dan tanpa halangan, hak untuk memiliki harta bebas tanpa campurtangan pemerintah, serta hak untuk mendapat pengadilan yang adil. Pensyarah tersebut kemudian telah diberi amaran oleh pihak Universiti.
Niamah!! adalah blog milik Patrick Teoh yang memberi pendapat yang telus dan ikhlas tentang perihal negara kita dari sudut seorang rakyat biasa. Beliau memberikan gambar yang baik tentang kesan dasar kerajaan terhadap kehidupan dirinya sebagai seorang rakyat biasa. Baca blognya disini. Blog ini dalam Bahasa Inggeris.
Sunday 21 October 2007
A blog of a Malaysian academic
With the rigged and dubious selection and promotion system, Malaysians have elevated several characters with dubious qualifications and personality to lead and teach institutions entrusted in educating and preparing our youth for the challenge of globalisation. It is a well known fact, ensuring a bright academic careers requires nothing less but total reverence and loyalty to institutional superiors which in turn answer to their political masters. Do not get me wrong, we do have excellent academics like Prof Azmi Sharom (UM) and Prof Wazir (UM). They are but a minority and helpless in a rigged and corrupt system.
Prof. Muhd Kamil Ibrahim is the head of UiTM-ACCA Financial Research Centre. Read his blog here. Gauge and judge for yourself intelligence and articulation.
Prof. Muhd Kamil Ibrahim is the head of UiTM-ACCA Financial Research Centre. Read his blog here. Gauge and judge for yourself intelligence and articulation.
Saturday 20 October 2007
Thursday 18 October 2007
Would you invite Hitler to Malaysia?
Prescript: Thanks for visiting this humble blog. There is a substantial increase in visitors for the past week despite being just in its infancy, and despite the absence of comments. But its fine, I feel appreciated and heard.
Wonder why Malaysia's universities are on decline? True academicians distinct themselves from the lies and chaos of politics in search of the higher truth of knowledge.
"... If Hitler were in the United States.. if you (Hitler) were willing to engage in debate and a discussion to be challenged by Columbia and faculty, we will certainly invite him" John Coatsworth, Dean Columbia University.
While Columbia University invites America's current public enemy No.1 to argue his side of the story, the likes of Anwar Ibrahim could not even step into University of Malaya. In fact, students are even kicked out of their colleges for supporting the wrong party in campus elections.
Politicians, if you have the advantage of truth on your side, set us free. But then again, you have much to hide from- even from your own shadow.
Wonder why Malaysia's universities are on decline? True academicians distinct themselves from the lies and chaos of politics in search of the higher truth of knowledge.
"... If Hitler were in the United States.. if you (Hitler) were willing to engage in debate and a discussion to be challenged by Columbia and faculty, we will certainly invite him" John Coatsworth, Dean Columbia University.
While Columbia University invites America's current public enemy No.1 to argue his side of the story, the likes of Anwar Ibrahim could not even step into University of Malaya. In fact, students are even kicked out of their colleges for supporting the wrong party in campus elections.
Politicians, if you have the advantage of truth on your side, set us free. But then again, you have much to hide from- even from your own shadow.
Where is the people’s outcry?
Pondering the state of affairs in
Highest judge entrusted in preserving justice in the land is implicated in a scandal. Where is the people’s outcry? Corruption scandals from ministers to state assemblymen. Where is the people’s outcry? Silencing of alternative voices. Where is the people’s outcry? Electoral abuses from general elections to campus elections. Where is the people’s outcry? Separate laws for the weak and the powerful. Where is the people’s outcry? Reckless inflammatory and hypocritical racial politics. Where is the people’s outcry? Detention without a fair trial. Where is the people’s outcry? Media monopoly and restriction. Where is the people’s outcry? Dubious and shady dealings under the veil of Official Secrets Act siphoning hard-earned tax-payer’s money. Where is the people’s outcry? Money politics and vote buying. Where is the people’s outcry? Continuous harassment and intimidation of the opposition. Where is the people’s outcry? Continuous abuses by corrupt and unaccountable policemen entrusted for our safety. Where is the people’s outcry? Billions of hard-earned taxpayer’s money siphoned to government supporters and cronies. Where is the people’s outcry? Overpriced cars and rising cost of living. Where is the people’s outcry? An increasingly uncompetitive and underperforming economy. Where is the people’s outcry? A corrupt government who minds more of the fate of themselves and their supporters rather than their people. Where is the people’s outcry?
It alright if we lose all we own. It is fine if we are ignorant. It is tragic if we lose our loved ones. It is unacceptable if we lose our conscious. We deserve nothing and should expect nothing if we lose our conscious. Even animals have the conviction to love and care for one another. Yet here I am, dumbfounded and pondering. Where is the people’s outcry?
Sunday 14 October 2007
Seruan Menggantikan DEB Bukan Pengkhianatan
Baca artikel oleh Hizami Iskandar disini
Tiba masanya kita sebagai orang Melayu menimbang dan mengimbas semula Dasar Ekonomi Baru yang diperjuangkan di atas nama suci kita. Adakah DEB landasan kepada penstrukuran sosial yang adil atau alasan rasuah untuk memberikan ganjaran kepada Melayu tertentu?
Tiba masanya kita sebagai orang Melayu menimbang dan mengimbas semula Dasar Ekonomi Baru yang diperjuangkan di atas nama suci kita. Adakah DEB landasan kepada penstrukuran sosial yang adil atau alasan rasuah untuk memberikan ganjaran kepada Melayu tertentu?
Exonerating Mahathir?
Reading Malaysian blogosphere, I noticed a chilling trend. They have uplifted, almost glorifying Mahathir Mohamad, arguably as the source of many of the nation's ills, as their hero.
Don't you agree my fellow bloggers, that we are fighting for the people? In doing so, we take people to task for their actions and inactions? Don't you think that we should take Dr. Mahathir into task for his past actions which are the source of many of today's problems? After all the final legacy of a leader is his successor. Don't you think our credibility is compromised when certain people are allowed to get away while certain others are not? Should'nt he at least admit some errs? Is the enemy of our enemy truly our friend selling our principles along with it?
I too pray to God for the speedy recovery of Dr Mahathir. But he still needs to answer for his actions.
Attachment:
Gunasegaram's 22 questions for DrM
The Edge
DATUK Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is only in his third year as Prime Minister but his predecessor Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad already has four questions for his administration to answer. They relate to Proton's sale of MV Agusta; the exit of the former Proton chief executive officer; approved permits for cars; and scrapping of the bridge project.While we would like to hear a better explanation from the government than what has been given so far, Abdullah should not be the only one answering questions. I am sure we all have questions for Mahathir too - on how he ran the country for 22 years. Here's a list of 22 questions or rather 22 groups of questions we would like to ask Mahathir, one for each of his 22 years in power:
1. On clean government. You came to power in 1981 and introduced the slogan "bersih, cekap dan amanah" (clean, efficient and trustworthy). What did you do to further that? Did you make the Anti-Corruption Agency more independent and effective? Did you ensure that the police and judiciary did their job properly and reduce corruption in their ranks? Did you ensure that ministers and chief ministers not have income beyond their legal means? How many big guns were prosecuted for corruption offences during your long tenure? What happened to "bersih, cekap dan amanah"?
2. Press freedom. Your criticism of the government got plenty of coverage in the local media whereas during your time, criticisms against you by two former prime ministers were muted in the mainstream newspapers. Editors in Umno-linked newspapers too were removed during your time for not toeing the line. What did you do to advance the cause of responsible press freedom?
3. Proton. You went ahead with the national car project in 1983 despite a number of experts disagreeing with you, especially with respect to lack of economies of scale. Isn't it true that Proton's profits over the last 20 years came out of vastly higher prices that the Malaysian public has to pay to subsidise Proton, resulting in considerable hardship for Malaysians who need cars because of the poor public transport system? More lately, why was it necessary for Proton to buy a stake in a failed Italian motorcycle manufacturer when it could not even produce cars competitively?
4. Heavy industries. Why did you push into heavy industries such as steel and cement in the 1980s, ignoring studies which suggested developing natural resource-based industries instead? They caused major problems and billions of ringgit in losses.
5. Population. Why did you encourage a population of 70 million for Malaysia and change the name of the National Family Planning Board to the National Population Development Board? How do you expect poor people to take care of five, six or more children? What kind of quality of life can they provide to their children?
6. Immigration. Why did you allow hordes of people to immigrate, mainly from Indonesia, in such an unregulated way that there are as many or more illegal immigrants than legal ones now, accounting for some two million or more people? Did you not realise that this would cause serious social problems?
7. On his first deputy. Some five years after you came to power, there were serious rifts between you and your deputy Datuk (now Tun) Musa Hitam. What was the cause of these problems and was it because you were heavy-handed and did not consult your ministers?
8. On the first serious Umno split. When Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah and Musa took on you and Tun Ghafar Baba at the Umno general assembly of 1987, it caused a serious split in Umno, with you winning by a very narrow margin (761 to 718). Why did you not seek to heal the rift in Umno post the elections? Instead, you purged Umno and its successor Umno Baru of those who opposed you, causing an unprecedented split in Malay unity.
9. Operasi Lalang. Why did you have to resort to this move in October 1987, when you used wide powers of detention under the Internal Security Act to detain over 100 people, close down four newspapers and cause a wave of fear throughout the country? Was it to consolidate your tenuous hold on power then by using an oppressive law?
10. Judiciary. What was your motive to take action in 1988 to remove the then Lord President and several Supreme Court judges from their positions under allegations of judicial misconduct, a move which was heavily criticised by the Bar Council and other bodies? Was it because you needed more compliant judges whose rulings would not threaten your position of power in a number of cases in court? Was this the first step in dismantling the judiciary's role as a system of checks and balances against the legislature and the executive? What have you to say to repeated assertions by many, including prominent ex-chief justices, who maintain that this led to the erosion of judicial independence?
11. Education. You presided over the education system at an important part of its transformation first as Education Minister in the 1970s, then as Prime Minister. Would it be correct to surmise therefore that you were also responsible for its decline during those years? Why did you not spend more money and resources to ensure that our education system was excellent and continued to improve but instead spent billions on other showpiece projects? Why did you allow our national school system, which is the ideal place to develop ties among young Malaysians, to become so divisive that today, 90% of those who attend national schools come from only one race while the rest have opted out?
12. Former finance minister Tun Daim Zainuddin. Why did you give this one man so much power? And you have not given a satisfactory explanation why he left government the second time around. Did it have anything to do with the forced consolidation of banks? Why did the government buy back Malaysian Airline System (MAS) shares at RM8 apiece in 2000 from Tan Sri Tajudin Ramli when the market price was less than half that?
13. Cronyism and patronage. Did you not encourage cronyism and patronage by dishing out major projects to a few within the inner circle? People such as Tan Sri Halim Saad (the Renong group Ñ toll roads, telecommunications and so on), Tajudin (mobile telephone group TRI and MAS), Tan Sri Amin Shah Omar (the failed PSC Industries Ñ multi-billion ringgit naval dockyard contracts) and Tan Sri Ting Pek Khiing (Ekran Ñ the Bakun Dam), to mention just a few?
14. Privatisation. Why did you allow privatisation to take place in such a manner that the most profitable parts of government operations were given away? Toll roads had guaranteed toll increases and compensation in the event traffic projections were not met. Independent power producers had contracts that guaranteed them profits at the expense of Tenaga Nasional.
15. Tun Ghafar Baba. Although Ghafar had the highest number of votes among Umno vice-presidents when Tun Hussein Onn became Prime Minister in 1976, you, who got the lowest number of votes, were chosen as Hussein's deputy. Yet, when you called upon Ghafar to be your deputy in 1986 when you fell out with Musa, he obliged, helping you to win the Umno presidency. Yet, you and your supporters did little to back him up when he was challenged for the deputy presidency in 1993 by Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. Can we say that you stabbed him in the back? And what about Hussein, the man who picked you as his successor? He died not as a member of Umno as he had refused to join your Umno Baru.
16. Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. Did you move against him because he was a threat to your position in 1998? Did you use the entire government machinery at your disposal to get him sentenced? Do you think he got a fair trial? Don't you think the country suffered terribly because of nothing more than a power struggle involving the two of you?17. Kuala Lumpur International Airport. Was it really necessary to spend RM10 billion on a showpiece airport at Sepang when Subang airport could have been so easily expanded?
18. Putrajaya. What is the justification for spending RM20 billion on a grandiose government city at a time when office space was available in Kuala Lumpur? Could the money not have been put to better use, such as improving educational resources?
19. Government-linked companies. Why did you not make efforts to improve the performance of GLCs? Why did you allow funds such as the Employees Provident Fund and Kumpulan Wang Amanah Pencen to take up dubious investments? These have led to hundreds, if not billions, of ringgit in losses to these funds.
20. Islamisation. At the end of your tenure after your falling out with Anwar, you criticised the extreme elements in Islam of taking control of government institutions and doing things that divided Muslims from non-Muslims. But isn't it true you started it all with your "Menyerap Nilai-Nilai Islam Dalam Pentadbiran Negara" policy of 1981 when you lured Anwar into Umno to help you promote it? And why did you declare that Malaysia was an Islamic state when it is clearly enshrined in our Federal Constitution as the wishes of our founding fathers that Malaysia should be a secular country given our multi-racial and multi-religious composition? Were you trying to reverse the policy of the nation's founding leaders?
21. Approved permits. You blamed International Trade and Industry Minister Datuk Seri Rafidah Aziz for the AP fiasco. As we recall, you appointed her and kept her at the ministry since 1986 until you stepped down in 2003 and never once complained or took action over the issuance of APs by the ministry. Indeed, she was embroiled in some controversy over bumiputera share allotment but you stood by her. So why make it an issue now? If you say you were not aware back then, what does that tell us?
22. Money politics. Why did money politics (vote buying) in Umno become such a big issue during your tenure as Umno president? Why were you so powerless to do anything about it when the solutions were so simple?There are other questions, of course, but that makes our list of 22. In the same way that Mahathir hopes the government will answer his questions, we hope that Mahathir will answer ours.
Don't you agree my fellow bloggers, that we are fighting for the people? In doing so, we take people to task for their actions and inactions? Don't you think that we should take Dr. Mahathir into task for his past actions which are the source of many of today's problems? After all the final legacy of a leader is his successor. Don't you think our credibility is compromised when certain people are allowed to get away while certain others are not? Should'nt he at least admit some errs? Is the enemy of our enemy truly our friend selling our principles along with it?
I too pray to God for the speedy recovery of Dr Mahathir. But he still needs to answer for his actions.
Attachment:
Gunasegaram's 22 questions for DrM
The Edge
DATUK Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is only in his third year as Prime Minister but his predecessor Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad already has four questions for his administration to answer. They relate to Proton's sale of MV Agusta; the exit of the former Proton chief executive officer; approved permits for cars; and scrapping of the bridge project.While we would like to hear a better explanation from the government than what has been given so far, Abdullah should not be the only one answering questions. I am sure we all have questions for Mahathir too - on how he ran the country for 22 years. Here's a list of 22 questions or rather 22 groups of questions we would like to ask Mahathir, one for each of his 22 years in power:
1. On clean government. You came to power in 1981 and introduced the slogan "bersih, cekap dan amanah" (clean, efficient and trustworthy). What did you do to further that? Did you make the Anti-Corruption Agency more independent and effective? Did you ensure that the police and judiciary did their job properly and reduce corruption in their ranks? Did you ensure that ministers and chief ministers not have income beyond their legal means? How many big guns were prosecuted for corruption offences during your long tenure? What happened to "bersih, cekap dan amanah"?
2. Press freedom. Your criticism of the government got plenty of coverage in the local media whereas during your time, criticisms against you by two former prime ministers were muted in the mainstream newspapers. Editors in Umno-linked newspapers too were removed during your time for not toeing the line. What did you do to advance the cause of responsible press freedom?
3. Proton. You went ahead with the national car project in 1983 despite a number of experts disagreeing with you, especially with respect to lack of economies of scale. Isn't it true that Proton's profits over the last 20 years came out of vastly higher prices that the Malaysian public has to pay to subsidise Proton, resulting in considerable hardship for Malaysians who need cars because of the poor public transport system? More lately, why was it necessary for Proton to buy a stake in a failed Italian motorcycle manufacturer when it could not even produce cars competitively?
4. Heavy industries. Why did you push into heavy industries such as steel and cement in the 1980s, ignoring studies which suggested developing natural resource-based industries instead? They caused major problems and billions of ringgit in losses.
5. Population. Why did you encourage a population of 70 million for Malaysia and change the name of the National Family Planning Board to the National Population Development Board? How do you expect poor people to take care of five, six or more children? What kind of quality of life can they provide to their children?
6. Immigration. Why did you allow hordes of people to immigrate, mainly from Indonesia, in such an unregulated way that there are as many or more illegal immigrants than legal ones now, accounting for some two million or more people? Did you not realise that this would cause serious social problems?
7. On his first deputy. Some five years after you came to power, there were serious rifts between you and your deputy Datuk (now Tun) Musa Hitam. What was the cause of these problems and was it because you were heavy-handed and did not consult your ministers?
8. On the first serious Umno split. When Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah and Musa took on you and Tun Ghafar Baba at the Umno general assembly of 1987, it caused a serious split in Umno, with you winning by a very narrow margin (761 to 718). Why did you not seek to heal the rift in Umno post the elections? Instead, you purged Umno and its successor Umno Baru of those who opposed you, causing an unprecedented split in Malay unity.
9. Operasi Lalang. Why did you have to resort to this move in October 1987, when you used wide powers of detention under the Internal Security Act to detain over 100 people, close down four newspapers and cause a wave of fear throughout the country? Was it to consolidate your tenuous hold on power then by using an oppressive law?
10. Judiciary. What was your motive to take action in 1988 to remove the then Lord President and several Supreme Court judges from their positions under allegations of judicial misconduct, a move which was heavily criticised by the Bar Council and other bodies? Was it because you needed more compliant judges whose rulings would not threaten your position of power in a number of cases in court? Was this the first step in dismantling the judiciary's role as a system of checks and balances against the legislature and the executive? What have you to say to repeated assertions by many, including prominent ex-chief justices, who maintain that this led to the erosion of judicial independence?
11. Education. You presided over the education system at an important part of its transformation first as Education Minister in the 1970s, then as Prime Minister. Would it be correct to surmise therefore that you were also responsible for its decline during those years? Why did you not spend more money and resources to ensure that our education system was excellent and continued to improve but instead spent billions on other showpiece projects? Why did you allow our national school system, which is the ideal place to develop ties among young Malaysians, to become so divisive that today, 90% of those who attend national schools come from only one race while the rest have opted out?
12. Former finance minister Tun Daim Zainuddin. Why did you give this one man so much power? And you have not given a satisfactory explanation why he left government the second time around. Did it have anything to do with the forced consolidation of banks? Why did the government buy back Malaysian Airline System (MAS) shares at RM8 apiece in 2000 from Tan Sri Tajudin Ramli when the market price was less than half that?
13. Cronyism and patronage. Did you not encourage cronyism and patronage by dishing out major projects to a few within the inner circle? People such as Tan Sri Halim Saad (the Renong group Ñ toll roads, telecommunications and so on), Tajudin (mobile telephone group TRI and MAS), Tan Sri Amin Shah Omar (the failed PSC Industries Ñ multi-billion ringgit naval dockyard contracts) and Tan Sri Ting Pek Khiing (Ekran Ñ the Bakun Dam), to mention just a few?
14. Privatisation. Why did you allow privatisation to take place in such a manner that the most profitable parts of government operations were given away? Toll roads had guaranteed toll increases and compensation in the event traffic projections were not met. Independent power producers had contracts that guaranteed them profits at the expense of Tenaga Nasional.
15. Tun Ghafar Baba. Although Ghafar had the highest number of votes among Umno vice-presidents when Tun Hussein Onn became Prime Minister in 1976, you, who got the lowest number of votes, were chosen as Hussein's deputy. Yet, when you called upon Ghafar to be your deputy in 1986 when you fell out with Musa, he obliged, helping you to win the Umno presidency. Yet, you and your supporters did little to back him up when he was challenged for the deputy presidency in 1993 by Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. Can we say that you stabbed him in the back? And what about Hussein, the man who picked you as his successor? He died not as a member of Umno as he had refused to join your Umno Baru.
16. Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. Did you move against him because he was a threat to your position in 1998? Did you use the entire government machinery at your disposal to get him sentenced? Do you think he got a fair trial? Don't you think the country suffered terribly because of nothing more than a power struggle involving the two of you?17. Kuala Lumpur International Airport. Was it really necessary to spend RM10 billion on a showpiece airport at Sepang when Subang airport could have been so easily expanded?
18. Putrajaya. What is the justification for spending RM20 billion on a grandiose government city at a time when office space was available in Kuala Lumpur? Could the money not have been put to better use, such as improving educational resources?
19. Government-linked companies. Why did you not make efforts to improve the performance of GLCs? Why did you allow funds such as the Employees Provident Fund and Kumpulan Wang Amanah Pencen to take up dubious investments? These have led to hundreds, if not billions, of ringgit in losses to these funds.
20. Islamisation. At the end of your tenure after your falling out with Anwar, you criticised the extreme elements in Islam of taking control of government institutions and doing things that divided Muslims from non-Muslims. But isn't it true you started it all with your "Menyerap Nilai-Nilai Islam Dalam Pentadbiran Negara" policy of 1981 when you lured Anwar into Umno to help you promote it? And why did you declare that Malaysia was an Islamic state when it is clearly enshrined in our Federal Constitution as the wishes of our founding fathers that Malaysia should be a secular country given our multi-racial and multi-religious composition? Were you trying to reverse the policy of the nation's founding leaders?
21. Approved permits. You blamed International Trade and Industry Minister Datuk Seri Rafidah Aziz for the AP fiasco. As we recall, you appointed her and kept her at the ministry since 1986 until you stepped down in 2003 and never once complained or took action over the issuance of APs by the ministry. Indeed, she was embroiled in some controversy over bumiputera share allotment but you stood by her. So why make it an issue now? If you say you were not aware back then, what does that tell us?
22. Money politics. Why did money politics (vote buying) in Umno become such a big issue during your tenure as Umno president? Why were you so powerless to do anything about it when the solutions were so simple?There are other questions, of course, but that makes our list of 22. In the same way that Mahathir hopes the government will answer his questions, we hope that Mahathir will answer ours.
Saturday 13 October 2007
Internet : Malaysia's only hope
Regimes have various ways to remain in power. But no other means can rival the importance of information control. Without information, governments are less accountable, and with less accountability, there is less dissatisfaction. Myanmar and North Korea their populace are subjugated at gunpoint. Here in Malaysia, the key modus operandi is information.
Mental control demands more creativity than physical subjugation. Instead of forcing populations to support the government, populations are made to want to support the government. In the advertising industry, it is called 'manufacturing demand.' Consumers are made to demand a product they do not need. TV and dailies of the mainstream media sets and directs the population towards the governments' agenda. Official Secrets Act ensures shabby deals are kept from the voters. Printing Presses and Multimedia Act 1984 ensures no other voices and views are heard. Internal Security Act ensures limitations of physical exchanges and discussions. Effectively, people are not making an informed choice.
The Berlin Wall fell after computers and modern communications bridged the gap between both sides of the Iron Curtain. Now, with the advent of the internet, barriers to information are destroyed overnight and is bound to instigate a greater change. People are able to exchange ideas and comments without meeting physically. One way flow of information are becoming a thing of the past. Bulletin Utama reports can be retorted and rebutted by an average citizen on a click of the button for all to read or listen to -all for next to nothing. Malpractices and abuses are made known worldwide almost instantly. Mentalities, and subsequently expectations, change with increased exposure.
Adapt or lose - a tagline of evolution. UMNO so far has been losing the internet battle but have instead intensified their media offensive. Legal actions have backfired an have instead further popularize their opponents. Their main supporter's website KPMU, seems more of a ranting club and blind cheer leading than having semblance to articulative debate. On the other side, Malaysia-Today.net claims to have a wider readership base than New Straits Times. A Kadir Jasin blog recently hit its millionth visitor. Jeff Ooi is a household name for his outspoken views on current issues. The results are impressive - people are as critical as ever. Every other person you meet are well informed of the latest controversies and issues. With the number of people on the reform agenda increasing every single day, it is only a matter of time before change sets in.
However there are two issues for us to consider in uncovering the full impact of reform internet. According to the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission, as of 2007, 48.7% of the population has access to the internet. Even less are with decent broadband access and computer facilities. Most blogs (including this one) are written in English, a language still foreign to many Malaysians. We need more well written argumentative blogs in Malay where the majority of the population (and voters) can connect and interact with. Jeff Ooi and Lim Kit Siang should perhaps employ a translator for postings in a parallel Malay blog (I am sure many students are willing to do the job).
We hope our lives can be transformed beyond ordering merchandises on ebay and downloading entertainment. We will try hard and we will continue to hope.
Mental control demands more creativity than physical subjugation. Instead of forcing populations to support the government, populations are made to want to support the government. In the advertising industry, it is called 'manufacturing demand.' Consumers are made to demand a product they do not need. TV and dailies of the mainstream media sets and directs the population towards the governments' agenda. Official Secrets Act ensures shabby deals are kept from the voters. Printing Presses and Multimedia Act 1984 ensures no other voices and views are heard. Internal Security Act ensures limitations of physical exchanges and discussions. Effectively, people are not making an informed choice.
The Berlin Wall fell after computers and modern communications bridged the gap between both sides of the Iron Curtain. Now, with the advent of the internet, barriers to information are destroyed overnight and is bound to instigate a greater change. People are able to exchange ideas and comments without meeting physically. One way flow of information are becoming a thing of the past. Bulletin Utama reports can be retorted and rebutted by an average citizen on a click of the button for all to read or listen to -all for next to nothing. Malpractices and abuses are made known worldwide almost instantly. Mentalities, and subsequently expectations, change with increased exposure.
Adapt or lose - a tagline of evolution. UMNO so far has been losing the internet battle but have instead intensified their media offensive. Legal actions have backfired an have instead further popularize their opponents. Their main supporter's website KPMU, seems more of a ranting club and blind cheer leading than having semblance to articulative debate. On the other side, Malaysia-Today.net claims to have a wider readership base than New Straits Times. A Kadir Jasin blog recently hit its millionth visitor. Jeff Ooi is a household name for his outspoken views on current issues. The results are impressive - people are as critical as ever. Every other person you meet are well informed of the latest controversies and issues. With the number of people on the reform agenda increasing every single day, it is only a matter of time before change sets in.
However there are two issues for us to consider in uncovering the full impact of reform internet. According to the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission, as of 2007, 48.7% of the population has access to the internet. Even less are with decent broadband access and computer facilities. Most blogs (including this one) are written in English, a language still foreign to many Malaysians. We need more well written argumentative blogs in Malay where the majority of the population (and voters) can connect and interact with. Jeff Ooi and Lim Kit Siang should perhaps employ a translator for postings in a parallel Malay blog (I am sure many students are willing to do the job).
We hope our lives can be transformed beyond ordering merchandises on ebay and downloading entertainment. We will try hard and we will continue to hope.
Racial Paradigm in Malaysia
The issue of race and religion has always plagued the scene of Malaysian politics – from the independence of
Oddly enough, on the ground, grievances are expressed among members of the same ethnic group (and in some cases to foreigners) and are rarely discussed openly. Perhaps human nature prompts us to evade or avoid unnecessary conflicts. Perhaps, more plausibly, it simply is not worth discussing. Even when it arises, discussing racial relations with your peers could hardly change the wider picture. If we were to conduct a study on inter-racial relationships and cross-examined their topics of discussion, racial issues would constitute a negligible or absent amount of issues addressed. It is also not reflective of our actions. How many of us when buying goods take into consideration the skin color of the person behind the counter? The point is, if ethnic questions are ignored in our day to day life due to its irrelevance, why does it deserve the merit of our whole nation? No doubt it is an issue nonetheless, but as a people we have priorities and we need to get them straight.
There needs to be a clear cut distinction between racism and preference. People are comforted with familiarity and fear differences. A group of Chinese peers may not mix around with Malays because they hate Malays, but because Malays are unfamiliar and different (This unfamiliarity highlights the failure of our education system more than anything else and shall be discussed as a separate issue). Malays have different beliefs, customs, language, values and even jokes. The Chinese peers are neither racist nor discriminatory, but they are following their intrinsic human nature. The Japanese are xenophobic for this reason. Leaders of nations tend to originate from ethnic majorities mainly because majority of voters demand someone that shares their values and identity. Very often it is not about racism and the fear and discrimination of others. Ideally, merits transcend petty differences. Unfortunately, imperfections of human paranoia cloud our judgment and compel us to choose familiarity.
We have concluded racial issues deserve little merits of attention compared to the wider picture and subsequently discussed that not all distinctions are driven by discriminatory urges but more of compatibility. Why is it worth our unduly attention? It simply does not. It has been thrust upon us. As testament, Malaysians have longed ignored words of ‘muhibbah’, ‘bersatu-padu’, ‘berkerja-sama’ and what have you churning from the mouths of politicians. Malaysians know, once they return to their respective racial party conferences, tones and stands will change. Hypocrisy at its best. Unfortunately, many of us have been seduced in this unholy charade. Malaysians already know, without realizing it, they work along fine with their fellow countrymen. Malaysians know that we are a people for better or for worst.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)