Cacoethes Scribendi (An insatiable urge to write)

Good bye Cacoethes Scribendi, Hello new Cacoethes Scribendi

2010-05-01T23:03:00.001+08:00

Folks, the end have come for Cacoethes Scribendi. I have decided to end this blog for a variety of reasons. Nonetheless, it does not mean the end of the road of my blogging. Rather, I have migrated to WordPress with a blog of the same name.

However, please note that I've decided to make some changes in the new blog. You can read the first entry there about those changes and why I decided to make those changes.

Hope to see you there. The new blog address is http://cacoescrib.wordpress.com/ or just click here.

Some thoughts on the future of this blog

2010-04-29T17:11:00.001+08:00

It has been half a year since I started this blog. When I first started, I really had no idea how it would turn out as it was my first time writing in the blogosphere. Admittedly, as with any other novice, I stumbled here and there in the course of writing this blog … trying to find a voice and direction which Cacoethes Scribendi (C.S.) should take.

I thank you for taking the time to read this blog. Anyway, half a year flies so quickly. I’m pausing here to contemplate on the future of this blog. When I first started it, C.S. was meant to be an experiment to see whether I can write to a more general public rather than just for a small group in the academia.

I really enjoyed writing here although I’ve to admit that sometimes I cheated by just copying other pieces which I find interesting, why re-invent the wheel when it is in front of you. I find that writing here with a more general public in mind, I cannot fall back on academic speak and am forced to write in a manner that is plain and intelligent to all thoughtful readers.

I hope I succeeded in this but I must apologise to my earliest readers who have to painfully endure my somewhat stilted writing in the beginning.

So what does the future have in store for C.S.? I really don’t know. For those who know me, I ‘m in the midst of finishing off my thesis which I hope to submit in a month’s time down the road. With things winding down, I have been giving some thought to C.S. and asking myself do I have anything interesting to say … I mean there are many blogs out there which is doing what I’m doing and doing it better. So should C.S. continue on? What purpose can C.S. serve? Is it even effective in trying to communicate to you dear readers?

Well, I have been giving some thought to just shut down C.S. as I feel that I’m replicating what others can do (and do it better) … anyway, the future of C.S. is not that clear. I’m still giving it some thought.

Something different for a change ...

2010-04-29T10:06:00.000+08:00

After so many serious and depressing news about the recent developments in our nation's politics, I thought this video might be a good change of pace. It sure brightens my day.

The good, the bad and the ugly in the Hulu Selangor by-election

2010-04-28T09:34:00.004+08:00

Here is a piece I written in theThe Micah Mandate:

The good, the bad and the ugly in the Hulu Selangor by-election
Posted on 28 April 2010 by Christopher Chong | TinyUrl ^TM
The Micah Mandate needs your support.
I’m writing this piece just hours after the results of the Hulu Selangor by-election had just been announced. In the coming days, we will be seeing more commentaries in the blogosphere and the mainstream media on why BN won and its implications on Malaysian politics. I’ll leave this part to more knowledgeable heads than mine to sort it out. What I want to do here is to offer some observations on the run-up to and on the day of the by-election in terms of the trends which I believe is a precursor to the next general elections.

Let’s start with the good first. The high voter turnout in the Hulu Selangor by-election indicates that Malaysians are conscientious of their civic duty as citizens of a democratic country. More importantly, the participation of younger people in the run up to the by-election canvassing for votes is an encouraging sign. Also, the access to news on the Hulu Selangor by-election was not restricted to mainstream media where one can go to the web to find alternative sources of news demonstrated that the ruling party’s stranglehold on access to news have been broken. All these developments point toward the gains made in the last General Elections towards a more democratic political system are here to stay.

As for the bad, we are still mired within a communal political outlook. For example, race features prominently in the choice of the candidate that will contest in the by-elections. This was clearly seen on the BN side with the MIC-UMNO squabble on whose candidate should be the one contesting for the Hulu Selangor Parliamentary seat and there were the usual racial rhetoric in the run up to the by-election. We still observed the usual pork-barrel politics in action (and this time by both coalitions, i.e. BN and PR). And then, there were stories of irregularities during the voting process … all familiar stories in any election in the country.

Finally, the ugly. The amount of venom spewed by both sides on the perceived failings of both candidates could have poisoned the entire population of Hulu Selangor. What I find disturbing is the move away (and again by both parties) during the campaign from principles and issues to attack the candidates personally in all (mainstream and otherwise) the media. I fear that this will become the norm in the next General Elections.
In looking at the bad and the ugly, there is no denying that our electoral system requires urgent reforms in order to make the system work for us rather than for the benefit of a select few. In the next coming General Elections, we – the voters – must send out a strong message that we will only support the coalition that will overhaul the electoral system to make it more accountable to the people together with a level playing field for all parties involved.

We need to reject racial cat calling and personal attacks in favour of principles and issues as the pre-condition for giving even the time of day for party workers and candidates canvassing for votes. Let alone for giving them our votes.

I want to end here by saying that we should not be disheartened by the negative developments that have taken place in this by-election. The last General Elections have proven that citizens can make a difference and the old rules of politics can no longer be taken for granted. The emergence of the alternative media, the growing political awareness and participation of the previously apolitical younger generation, to name but a few, are surely signs that the nation is heading towards a working democracy that we can all be proud of. However, for that to happen, we need to play our part in supporting the call for electoral reforms and insisting that parties staked out their political principles and issues rather than just dishing our more electoral goodies and personal attacks as the means to capture electoral support.

Another interesting analysis of the Hulu Selangor by-election

2010-04-27T09:17:00.002+08:00

Winning Hulu Selangor
26 Apr 10 : 1.17AM
By Deborah Loh and Ding Jo-Ann
deborahloh@thenutgraph.com, dingjoann@thenutgraph.com

A victorious Kamalanathan with Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin (left)
and Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak

THE Barisan Nasional (BN) has wrested back Hulu Selangor from Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR), but who is the real winner — MIC candidate P Kamalanathan, or Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak?

Kamalanathan polled 24,997 votes against Datuk Zaid Ibrahim's 23,272 in a closely fought race. There were 731 spoilt ballots. Voter turnout was 75.87%, compared with 75.24% in the 2008 general election. In the 2008 polls, PKR won the federal seat by a slim 198-vote margin. This time round, it lost by 1,725 votes.

Kamalanathan's campaign was run not on what his principles would be as a parliamentarian, but on what the Najib administration wanted to sell. Hence, the MIC information chief was labelled a "1Malaysia candidate". Indeed, even his name was adapted to suit his audience — Kamal to Malay Malaysians, Nathan to Indian Malaysians, and Alan to Chinese Malaysians.
For certain, the results reflect some degree of support for Najib's initiatives. Beyond that, however, what do the results mean for both the BN and the Pakatan Rakyat (PR)?

Read more here.

Hulu Selangor by-election

2010-04-27T08:15:00.007+08:00

With the Hulu Selangor by-election over ... we are now seeing a slew of articles from the blogosphere dissecting the whys and hows of PR defeat. I selected three articles here because I find them to be the most thoughtful ...

So why did PKR lose in Hulu Selangor?
By Syed Jaymal Zahiid | The Malaysian Insider
APRIL 26 — It was rather anticipated that Barisan Nasional would snatch the Hulu Selangor seat yesterday from right under Pakatan Rakyat’s (PR) nose and without giving too much credit to the former, two factors contributed to this somewhat predestined outcome.

First, the notoriously poor and inefficient machinery. The second is the candidate factor itself. PKR’s Datuk Zaid Ibrahim lost to MIC information chief P. Kamalananthan by a 1,725-vote majority. The former law minister garnered 23,272 votes while his opponent, a public relations practitioner whose qualifications were subject to tactical scrutiny by Zaid and Co, bagged 24,997 votes.

Read more here.

Monday, April 26, 2010

What I learned from the HS buy-election
Okay guys. The by-erection is over.

As many of you might notice, I am a history freak. I just love history. I don't know why. But one thing for sure, I like to look at how people behaved or acted before so that I could learn a lesson or two from them in order to enable me to predict how people will behave in the future. I think that's part of the reason why I love history.

What can I learn from the Hulu Selangor buy-election?

Read more here.

Hulu Selangor by-election afterthoughts

For the BN, nothing to be proud about winning in this way. The means are just as important as the ends.

It was always going to be close, either way. In the end, it was 52:48 in the BN’s favour. A political economist friend of mine was right when he told me to listen to the Pas campaigner I referred to a number of times in this blog (even though I did get a bit swayed by the large turnout at the PKR ceramah on the eve of polling).

This Pas campaigner was accurate in his prediction of a 54:46 outcome (plus/minus 2 per cent margin of error) in favour of the BN, which he consistently stuck to throughout the campaign and polling day itself. He had campaigned for Pakatan across Hulu Selangor and developed a gut feel for the area, especially the kampungs and Felda settlements. He felt Pakatan could have received around 35 per cent support (“not more than 40 per cent”) in these areas. This seems consistent with a Pas MP who predicted 36 per cent support in these areas.

Read more here.

March 8th, 2008 ... two years onwards

2010-04-17T12:02:00.010+08:00

Here is an interesting piece by Clive Kessler. He is a professor in the University of New South Wales where Malaysia happens to be one of his area of interest. Great analysis of Malaysian politics. I will add my own thoughts latter on the same issue. But for now, please read him ...

Malaysia over the last two years has entered into a deep and inexorable “systemic crisis”
By Clive Kessler, Professor of Sociology at the University of New South Wales

A second major post-independence regime crisis.

The first post-independence political dispensation lasted from 1957 to 1969, when it collapsed in the wake of national elections that demonstrated rapidly diminishing support for the inter-ethnic governing coalition among both the nation’s Malay and non-Malay citizens.

A second dispensation was accordingly created, designed to last for twenty years until 1990. Grounded in the view that the 1969 crisis had stemmed from a profound sense of Malay exclusion from the benefits of independence and national development, its core political imperative was a far-reaching national project of pro-Malay affirmative action. Implementation of these bold programmes required the development of an ever-stronger state that came increasingly to dominate Malaysian society.

But even after 1990 the same policies continued to be pursued, in fact even from strongly than before. These expanded measures were now justified not as necessary for the overcoming of Malay relative social deprivation and exclusion but in the name of assuring “ketuanan melayu” or comprehensive Malay political dominance, ascendancy, or “hegemony”.

At the same time, the period from 1970 saw the pronounced rise of new forms of militant political Islam in Malaysia, which the government, especially under Dr. Mahathir Mohamad’s long prime ministership, sought [with a major contribution from his protege Anwar Ibrahim from 1982 to 1997] to co-opt and outflank with its own Islamic “modernist” project of counter-Islamisation.

Ultimately, competition between Dr. Mahathir’s government and the Malaysian Islamic Party [PAS] served to promote only the interests of PAS and the new Islamic political activists, not those of Dr. Mahathir, his government and party.

As a result, during Dr. Mahathir’s long prime ministership, the Malay political agenda became increasingly demanding, insistent and central; the Islamist political agenda and its promoters became increasingly adamant and ambitious; and, to the extent that they remained distinct, the Malay political agenda itself increasingly became an Islamic, or Islamist, agenda. A convergence occurred, one that became increasingly central to and powerful within national political life.

The Islamic agenda had its own autonomous sources and impetus. But the Islamist agenda also fed upon and was fuelled by Malay ethnic sentiments and ambitions. Conversely, the Islamist imperative with its powerful political “idioms” and rhetoric were now increasingly employed to drive, and also served to promote–and even politically to “sacralise” and so place beyond question–the new imperative of “Ketuanan Melayu”/Malay ascendancy, a nationally defining project that the ever more powerful Malaysian state now saw as its main task to promote.

The cost of this growth in the power and centrality, even irresistibility, of the new Islamist and Malay “ethno-supremacist” agenda was threefold. These developments made it increasingly difficult for the state’s non-Malay citizens to support, or even respect, the government, its purposes and assurances; similarly, it offended the sensibilities of many younger, more inclusive and “democratically-inclined” Malays who gave high importance to social justice and the equality of all of the state’s citizens, irrespective of gender, religion and ethnicity; and it involved a largely covert reinterpretation of the Malaysian constitution, which had been promulgated in 1957 as the foundational charter for an emerging modern, social democratic, multiethnic, religiously pluralist and secular nation.

So long as Dr. Mahathir held power, he was able to hold together this ever more explosive mix, or bundle of policy contradictions. But under his milder successor Abdullah Ahmad Badawi this was no longer possible.

As a result, the government, led by Abdullah Badawi to the polls in 2008, suffered a massive political reversal–again, as in 1969, among both Malay and non-Malay voters. In effect, Malaysia’s second post-independence political dispensation, which under Dr. Mahathir was made to maintain an unduly protracted afterlife far beyond its 1990 “sunset-date”, was simply “blasted away” by the massive expression of anti-governments sentiment at the 2008 elections. Malaysia’s long serviceable governing formula and its underlying logic, that had been placed under growing strain by Islamist and Malay ethnosupremacist pressures [working both independent and ever more in concert] from 1970 to 2008, simply collapsed. It no longer enjoyed adequate public credibility or confidence.

In response, the Malaysian government since 2008 has sought to restore its position not by moving to the centre and restoring political and religious moderation and inter-ethnic conciliation. Instead it has decided that the major, and immediately urgent, imperative is to “shore up” and consolidate its position among the nation’s “core” political community, the Malays–who not only are the demographic and electoral majority but the group from whom in overwhelming part the nation’s police and armed forces are drawn. To do this it has abandoned any pretence of commitment to a modernist Islamic “counter-mobilization”. Instead, it has sought to recapture, corral and “harvest” Malay ethnic and committed Islamist support in its radical Malay and Islamist opponents’ own preferred terms.

After half a century and more of an ”Islamist policy auction” between the government and the opposition Islamic party, the government has bowed out, ceased to make counter-bids. In a different metaphor, it now sings the same song as the Islamic opposition, the opposition’s chosen tune: perhaps in a whisper rather than in loud voice but none the less with full conviction [and out of perceived pragmatic necessity!]. Long-term developments over the preceding decades reached their culmination after the 2008 elections. Except among a few brave and principled opponents outside of “official circles”, Malaysia has seen and assented to the retreat of the Islamic modernist and the secularist alternatives to the new assertive Islamism. Those who had long been the main opponents of militant political Islam from within the government and political establishment have now capitulated to Islamist pressures and demands.

As early as 1969 the Islamic party had made clear its determination to use the political system of electoral democracy tactically and strategically: to deprive the Islamically more moderate and secular government of popular Malay support and so make the government ultimately dependent on the votes that the islamic party could mobilize. By denying the government popular malay support and religious legitimacy, it sought to acquire the leverage enabling it to make the government do its bidding, to become its hostage in policy terms. That strategy has now succeeded and come to fruition. The next stage of malaysian politics now begins.

As Malaysia now seeks, after the collapse of the second, to construct its third post-independence political “dispensation”, it is doing so under conditions where the ideas and goals, as well as the continuing political dynamism and impetus, of the ethnically-minded Malay Islamists now set the ideological terms of the national agenda and, as both government and Malay Islamist opposition alike now view things, its unfolding “narrative”.

Anwar Ibrahim's Lecture at University of Westminster 19/3/2010

2010-03-30T10:59:00.001+08:00

Listen to him and judge for yourself about the state of Malaysian politics and economics.

March is the cruellest month

2010-03-29T10:43:00.001+08:00

March, to rephrase Elliot’s opening line in “The Waste Land”, is the cruellest month. Just when I decided to go off the web for a break to focus on completing my thesis, so many things happen. I was not really able to give my attention to all that happened during the month.

My attention was fully absorbed by my thesis although I did try to follow on what is happening in a cursory way. Anyway, I have started to blog again although I doubt I be doing it as often I as I did because I’m still in the midst of trying to complete my thesis while trying to negotiate with that little thing called life, e.g. looking for a job now as my days as a unemployed student is nearly numbered.

Anyway, the main events in the horizon are, of course, the unveiling of the New Economic Policy in a couple of days time and the upcoming by-election in Hulu Selangor (hey, it is just in my backyard). I look forward to those events.

As for MCA … is the party still around? I thought it was dead and buried. With the way things are going, I seriously doubt MCA will be able to regain the support of the Chinese community which have swung over to PR any time soon. Seriously, there has been too much attention given to the moribund MCA in the mainstream media and the web.

As for me, I think the phrase “you can’t flog a dead horse” can be applied to the said party. Of course, I could be wrong and the new leadership can revive the moribund party … don’t think it will happen any time soon. I may give some thought to the fate of MCA in some future blog but as for now, they are a non-entity, living in a twilight between the living and the dead.

Well, that it for today.

The times they are a-changing

2010-03-28T13:38:00.004+08:00

This song is dedicated to those who are disappointed over what is happening in our current political landscape since March 8.

Times are a-changing

Bob Dylan

Come gather 'round people

Wherever you roam

And admit that the waters

Around you have grown

And accept it that soon

You'll be drenched to the bone

If your time to you

Is worth savin'

Then you better start swimmin'

Or you'll sink like a stone

For the times they are a-changin'.

Come writers and critics

Who prophesize with your pen

And keep your eyes wide

The chance won't come again

And don't speak too soon

For the wheel's still in spin

And there's no tellin' who

That it's namin'

For the loser now

Will be later to win

For the times they are a-changin'.

Come senators, congressmen

Please heed the call

Don't stand in the doorway

Don't block up the hall

For he that gets hurt

Will be he who has stalled

There's a battle outside

And it is ragin'

It'll soon shake your windows

And rattle your walls

For the times they are a-changin'.

Come mothers and fathers

Throughout the land

And don't criticize

What you can't understand

Your sons and your daughters

Are beyond your command

Your old road is

Rapidly agin'

Please get out of the new one

If you can't lend your hand

For the times they are a-changin'.

The line it is drawn

The curse it is cast

The slow one now

Will later be fast

As the present now

Will later be past

The order is

Rapidly fadin'

And the first one now

Will later be last

For the times they are a-changin'.

Malaysian politics have changed but the politicians are still slow in grasping it. They are still playing the old game. We need to tell them that we no longer will tolerate such a political game! If you want to be part of the change then register yourself as a voter. If you've registered then good for you. Make sure you vote in the next GE. We, the people, need to tell politicians that the times are a-changing!

Howard Zinn on social change

2010-03-24T19:03:00.000+08:00

John Dear (a Jesuit Priest, writer and activist) reflects on Howard Zinn. Here is a part of the article which I like and think is relevant for us Malaysians:

Over lunch in Santa Fe a few years ago, Howard told a group of us that after a lifetime of studying the history of U.S. social movements, he had come to a conclusion. He said every major movement for social change in our history was hopeless. Here, I thought, was a discouraging word.

Hopeless from the beginning, hopeless through the middle, hopeless up to the very end -- people laboring toward a hopless goal. But then, like a bolt out of a blue sky, a breakthrough. The key, he said, was that ordinary people kept at it despite all evidence. Ordinary people doing their small acts for justice every day -- here was the key. Over time peaceful acts add up to something big. What the powerful fear most, he said, are the grass-roots movements that won’t go away.

So our job is not to give up, give in, or go away. Take action, speak clearly as you can, and trust the lesson of history -- a kind of holy principle in the nature of things. Truthful, nonviolent movements are destined to win.

“Small acts, when multiplied by millions of people, can quietly become a power no government can suppress, a power than can transform the world.”

Read the whole article here.

What is human rights? ,,, and why it matters!

2010-03-24T11:50:00.008+08:00

For those who want to know what is human rights and why it matters. Watch these short and educational videos. It will give you a better understanding of the state of human rights in the country.

Taking a break from blogging

2010-03-01T20:42:00.001+08:00

March will be the month where I’m taking time off from blogging. This is because I’m in the midst of writing the final draft of my thesis and I don’t have time to do anything else.

Anyway, I need some time off to reflect on Malaysian politics as well. I should start blogging again in April … until then.

Message from Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia

2010-02-27T19:13:00.001+08:00

The SABM message goes to ground

February 27, 2010

This is how it works.

You attend one of the SABM forums, and the message delivered at the forum resonates with all that you feel.

Or if you haven’t attended any of the forums, but you’ve seen video clips of messages delivered or heard of the same from friends and you think “Why our politicians don’t think and talk like that, ah?”.

Whichever, you now want to share that message with your family, friends and colleagues.

Get in touch with SABM. e-mail us at events(at)sayaanakbangsamalaysia.net or call us at 03-2095 0435 from Wednesday to Sunday between 12noon-7pm.

Or you can send me an e-mail at thepeoplesparliament@gmail.com.

Organise some teh tarik at your home, your office, or at some stall. Get your family, friends and colleagues to come round.

We’ll come and partake of your fellowship and share our message.

________________________________________________

What Aristotle can teach our politicians

2010-02-21T15:02:00.006+08:00

When we think of Aristotle and politics, we probably think of his book “Politics.” Interestingly, Aristotle commented that the reader read “The Ethics” before proceeding to “Politics.”

“The Ethics” deals with the formation of a virtuous character with the ability to make sound judgment. Only those with a virtuous character and a sound judgment have the maturity to handle what was written in the "Politics."

Reading the news about our politicians recently – be it in their actions or public statements – from BN and PR makes me wonder about the soundness of their character and judgment, particularly when they opened their mouth.

There are, of course, honourable exceptions but they are in the minority. I suggest that in the future, all our politicians be given a copy of “The Ethics” to read before they take office to save us the embarrassment of acknowledging them as our elected representatives ... that is if they read at all.

How outsiders view us

2010-02-13T00:15:00.001+08:00

From Malaysia Today:

What’s wrong with Malaysia

The institutions, as inherited from the British, generally worked. The judiciary was independent, it was fairly conservative but it worked and the police force was okay. And other elements in the bureaucracy worked. But after 50 years of the party being in power for 50 years, a half a century, the bureaucracy and the heads of those bureaucratic institutions have become extensions of the ruling party.

Mark Colvin, ABC News

MARK COLVIN: More than 50 Australian federal MPs have signed a letter to the Malaysian Government protesting against the trial of the former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim.
It's the second time Anwar has been brought to court charged with sodomy, a fact that the letter describes as hard to believe for many friendly observers of Malaysia.
The man who organised the letter, Melbourne Labor MP Michael Danby, says supporters of the incumbent government are manipulating the legal system to drive Malaysia's best known leader out of national politics.
Barry Wain is writer-in-residence at Singapore's Institute of Southeast Asian Studies and he says the Anwar trial and much else that's wrong with Malaysia, can be traced back to Dr Mahathir Mohamad's long rule as prime minister.
He's just published a book called Malaysian Maverick: Mahathir Mohamad in Turbulent Times.
I asked him to explain the Anwar case.

Read more here …

The benefits of a two party system

2010-02-11T23:31:00.001+08:00

A great piece on why a two party system is better than a dominant party system that has characterized our political system since independence.

Two-party system – and a ‘third force’?
Thursday, 11 February 2010 18:41

The two-party system is a step towards the further maturity of the democratic status of a country. But it will not automatically solve the problems facing the nation, says Jeyakumar Devaraj.

Malaysia has only known one ruling coalition in the past 52 years since Independence. But the result of the March 2008 elections has led to rising hope among many Malaysians that an enormous change might be around the corner – a two-party system under which the people are free to choose between two coalitions which are both capable of governing the country.
The purpose of this paper is to locate the institution of a two-coalition system against a wider historical perspective.

Read more here.

A great tool to judge political parties

2010-02-11T22:52:00.003+08:00

The Nut Graph published an interesting article giving us, ordinary folks, tools to gauge whether a political party is committed to democracy or not.

How democratic are political parties?

11 Feb 10 : 8.00AM
By Shanon Shah
shanonshah@thenutgraph.comshanonshah at thenutgraph dot com
SINCE the watershed March 2008 elections, intra-party spats and power struggles have become the norm in Malaysia. These problems seem to be an equal opportunity malaise, affecting both the Barisan Nasional (BN) and Pakatan Rakyat (PR).
It could just be that these internal tensions are part of the process of greater democratisation. However, it must be stressed that political parties provide the institutional means for citizens to take ownership of the political process in a democracy. Whether in government or opposition, political parties aspire to a certain kind of organised power in society. The question is, how can citizens gauge whether or not these parties will take and share this power democratically?
Read more here.

Revisiting history: A historian’s take on the race relationship during British colonial rule

2010-02-11T10:24:00.002+08:00

Here is a piece of history which your teacher didn’t teach you when you were at school. Cheah Boon Kheng is a respected historian who have published books on Malaysian history.
As Shakespeare said: The past is but a prologue for the present (or something like that).
‘Race and Ethnic relations in Colonial Malaya during the 1920s and 1930s’
By Cheah Boon Kheng
From the end of the First World War to the beginning of the 1929-1932 Depression, British Malaya experienced an “era of internal peace and unbounded prosperity” and “racial relationships were a model of harmony and good feeling for all the world,” observed American political scientist Rupert Emerson, in his book Malaysia, published in 1937.
Read more here …

Against discouragement

2010-02-10T14:33:00.014+08:00

I recently received an email asking me whether I feel discouraged with what is going on. I don’t plan to write a long piece on whether we should be discouraged with what is happening in the national political scene lately.

Here is a speech Howard Zinn delivered on May 15, 2005 to students of Spelman College in Atlanta, the very college that once expelled him in June 1963 for siding with the students in agitating for a change to the college’s traditional emphasis on producing ‘young ladies’ rather than fighters for black freedom.

Although meant for the graduating college students, this speech (below, which is reproduced in full) is equally applicable to ordinary folks who are concerned with political situation of our nation.

AGAINST DISCOURAGEMENT
Howard Zinn’s address to Spelman College, 2005

I am deeply honored to be invited back to Spelman after forty-two years. I would like to thank the faculty and trustees who voted to invite me, and especially your president, Dr. Beverly Tatum. And it is a special privilege to be here with Diahann Carroll and Virginia Davis Floyd.
But this is your day — the students graduating today. It’s a happy day for you and your families. I know you have your own hopes for the future, so it may be a little presumptuous for me to tell you what hopes I have for you, but they are exactly the same ones that I have for my grandchildren.

My first hope is that you will not be too discouraged by the way the world looks at this moment. It is easy to be discouraged, because our nation is at war — still another war, war after war — and our government seems determined to expand its empire even if it costs the lives of tens of thousands of human beings. There is poverty in this country, and homelessness, and people without health care, and crowded classrooms, but our government, which has trillions of dollars to spend, is spending its wealth on war. There are a billion people in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East who need clean water and medicine to deal with malaria and tuberculosis and AIDS, but our government, which has thousands of nuclear weapons, is experimenting with even more deadly nuclear weapons. Yes, it is easy to be discouraged by all that.

But let me tell you why, in spite of what I have just described, you must not be discouraged.

I want to remind you that, fifty years ago, racial segregation here in the South was entrenched as tightly as was apartheid in South Africa. The national government, even with liberal presidents like Kennedy and Johnson in office, was looking the other way while Black people were beaten and killed and denied the opportunity to vote. So Black people in the South decided they had to do something by themselves. They boycotted and sat in and picketed and demonstrated, and were beaten and jailed, and some were killed, but their cries for freedom were soon heard all over the nation and around the world, and the President and Congress finally did what they had previously failed to do — enforce the 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution. Many people had said: The South will never change. But it did change. It changed because ordinary people organized and took risks and challenged the system and would not give up. That’s when democracy came alive.

I want to remind you also that when the war in Vietnam was going on, and young Americans were dying and coming home paralyzed, and our government was bombing the villages of Vietnam — bombing schools and hospitals and killing ordinary people in huge numbers — it looked hopeless to try to stop the war. But just as in the Southern movement, people began to protest and soon it caught on. It was a national movement. Soldiers were coming back and denouncing the war, and young people were refusing to join the military, and the war had to end.
The lesson of that history is that you must not despair, that if you are right, and you persist, things will change. The government may try to deceive the people, and the newspapers and television may do the same, but the truth has a way of coming out. The truth has a power greater than a hundred lies. I know you have practical things to do — to get jobs and get married and have children. You may become prosperous and be considered a success in the way our society defines success, by wealth and standing and prestige. But that is not enough for a good life.

Remember Tolstoy’s story, “The Death of Ivan Illych.” A man on his deathbed reflects on his life, how he has done everything right, obeyed the rules, become a judge, married, had children, and is looked upon as a success. Yet, in his last hours, he wonders why he feels a failure. After becoming a famous novelist, Tolstoy himself had decided that this was not enough, that he must speak out against the treatment of the Russian peasants, that he must write against war and militarism.

My hope is that whatever you do to make a good life for yourself — whether you become a teacher, or social worker, or business person, or lawyer, or poet, or scientist — you will devote part of your life to making this a better world for your children, for all children. My hope is that your generation will demand an end to war, that your generation will do something that has not yet been done in history and wipe out the national boundaries that separate us from other human beings on this earth.

Recently I saw a photo on the front page of the New York Times which I cannot get out of my mind. It showed ordinary Americans sitting on chairs on the southern border of Arizona, facing Mexico. They were holding guns and they were looking for Mexicans who might be trying to cross the border into the United States. This was horrifying to me — the realization that, in this twenty-first century of what we call “civilization,” we have carved up what we claim is one world into two hundred artificially created entities we call “nations” and are ready to kill anyone who crosses a boundary.

Is not nationalism — that devotion to a flag, an anthem, a boundary, so fierce it leads to murder — one of the great evils of our time, along with racism, along with religious hatred? These ways of thinking, cultivated, nurtured, indoctrinated from childhood on, have been useful to those in power, deadly for those out of power.

Here in the United States, we are brought up to believe that our nation is different from others, an exception in the world, uniquely moral; that we expand into other lands in order to bring civilization, liberty, democracy. But if you know some history you know that’s not true. If you know some history, you know we massacred Indians on this continent, invaded Mexico, sent armies into Cuba, and the Philippines. We killed huge numbers of people, and we did not bring them democracy or liberty. We did not go into Vietnam to bring democracy; we did not invade Panama to stop the drug trade; we did not invade Afghanistan and Iraq to stop terrorism. Our aims were the aims of all the other empires of world history — more profit for corporations, more power for politicians.

The poets and artists among us seem to have a clearer understanding of the disease of nationalism. Perhaps the Black poets especially are less enthralled with the virtues of American “liberty” and “democracy,” their people having enjoyed so little of it. The great African-American poet Langston Hughes addressed his country as follows:
You really haven’t been a virgin for so long.
It’s ludicrous to keep up the pretext.
You’ve slept with all the big powers
In military uniforms,
And you’ve taken the sweet life
Of all the little brown fellows.
Being one of the world’s big vampires,
Why don’t you come on out and say so
Like Japan, and England, and France,
And all the other nymphomaniacs of power.
I am a veteran of the Second World War. That was considered a “good war,” but I have come to the conclusion that war solves no fundamental problems and only leads to more wars. War poisons the minds of soldiers, leads them to kill and torture, and poisons the soul of the nation.

My hope is that your generation will demand that your children be brought up in a world without war. It we want a world in which the people of all countries are brothers and sisters, if the children all over the world are considered as our children, then war — in which children are always the greatest casualties — cannot be accepted as a way of solving problems.

I was on the faculty of Spelman College for seven years, from 1956 to 1963. It was a heartwarming time, because the friends we made in those years have remained our friends all these years. My wife Roslyn and I and our two children lived on campus. Sometimes when we went into town, white people would ask: How is it to be living in the Black community? It was hard to explain. But we knew this — that in downtown Atlanta, we felt as if we were in alien territory, and when we came back to the Spelman campus, we felt that we were at home.
Those years at Spelman were the most exciting of my life, the most educational certainly. I learned more from my students than they learned from me. Those were the years of the great movement in the South against racial segregation, and I became involved in that in Atlanta, in Albany, Georgia, in Selma, Alabama, in Hattiesburg, Mississippi, and Greenwood and Itta Bena and Jackson.

I learned something about democracy: that it does not come from the government, from on high, it comes from people getting together and struggling for justice. I learned about race. I learned something that any intelligent person realizes at a certain point — that race is a manufactured thing, an artificial thing, and while race does matter (as Cornel West has written), it only matters because certain people want it to matter, just as nationalism is something artificial. I learned that what really matters is that all of us — of whatever so-called race and so-called nationality — are human beings and should cherish one another.

I was lucky to be at Spelman at a time when I could watch a marvelous transformation in my students, who were so polite, so quiet, and then suddenly they were leaving the campus and going into town, and sitting in, and being arrested, and then coming out of jail full of fire and rebellion. You can read all about that in Harry Lefever’s book Undaunted By The Fight: Spelman College and the Civil Rights Movement, 1957-1967.

One day Marian Wright (now Marian Wright Edelman), who was my student at Spelman, and was one of the first arrested in the Atlanta sit-ins, came to our house on campus to show us a petition she was about to put on the bulletin board of her dormitory. The heading on the petition epitomized the transformation taking place at Spelman College. Marian had written on top of the petition: “Young Ladies Who Can Picket, Please Sign Below.”

My hope is that you will not be content just to be successful in the way that our society measures success; that you will not obey the rules, when the rules are unjust; that you will act out the courage that I know is in you. There are wonderful people, Black and white, who are models. I don’t mean African-Americans like Condoleezza Rice, or Colin Powell, or Clarence Thomas, who have become servants of the rich and powerful. I mean W.E.B. DuBois and Martin Luther King and Malcolm X and Marian Wright Edelman, and James Baldwin and Josephine Baker and good white folk, too, who defied the Establishment to work for peace and justice.

Another of my students at Spelman, Alice Walker, who, like Marian, has remained our friend all these years, came from a tenant farmer’s family in Eatonton, Georgia, and became a famous writer. In one of her first published poems, she wrote:
It is true –
I’ve always loved
the daring
ones
Like the Black young
man
Who tried
to crash
All barriers
at once,
wanted to swim
At a white
beach (in Alabama)
Nude.
I am not suggesting you go that far, but you can help to break down barriers, of race certainly, but also of nationalism; that you do what you can — you don’t have to do something heroic, just something, to join with millions of others who will just do something, because all of those somethings, at certain points in history, come together, and make the world better.

That marvelous African-American writer Zora Neale Hurston, who wouldn’t do what white people wanted her to do, who wouldn’t do what Black people wanted her to do, who insisted on being herself, said that her mother advised her: Leap for the sun — you may not reach it, but at least you will get off the ground.

By being here today, you are already standing on your toes, ready to leap. My hope for you is a good life.

Bringing peace in the midst of religious strife: What we can learn from two men from Nigeria

2010-02-10T14:17:00.004+08:00

Yesterday night, I watched a documentary entitled "The Imam and the Pastor" at Rumah Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia, K.L. If you have a chance, you must watch this documentary
Briefly, the documentary tells of a journey between an imam and a pastor in Nigeria which was experiencing violent conflict between the Christians and the Muslims. The conflict had led to many deaths in both communities. Both the imam and the pastor experienced the conflict first hand where friends and familiy members fell victim to the tragedy. Both were involved in propagating the violence and hatred that wrecked their community. They hated each other and plotted each other's death.

However, both found within their religious tradition the teaching of the need to forgive and embrace peace as a way forward to their violent past. In the end, they were reconciled to one another and started to work together to bring peace among Muslims and Christians by acting as mediators for both communities in their country.

In Malaysia, we tend to bemoan the fact that we're heading towards ethno-religious strife and that there is nothing we can do about it. Here two Nigerians from different faiths decided to put away their hatred and worked towards a common goal of bringing peace between their communities. Change takes place when individuals and communities decide to take the first step.

Government and political parties have their role to play as well but it is individuals who galvanize their communities in taking the first step. Perhaps, it is time that we, ordinary citizens, start taking the first step in understanding our neighbors who are different from us and asking ourselves in what way can we come together not as two different communities but neighbors living together in the same neighborhood.

Idealistic? Perhaps ... what will the future holds for us if we choose to ignore one another and keep separating ourselves. Is this the nation which Tunku Abdul Rahman envisioned when he brought merdeka to our country?

An open letter to PR MPs

2010-02-08T01:47:00.001+08:00

Got this from Lik Kit Siang’s blog. Perhaps, it will do some good if it’s forwarded to PR MPs and state assembly(wo)men with a note saying that this letter represents your feeling, i.e. if you are as fed up as I’m with the antics of certain PR MPs.

I reproduce it in full:

Open letter by Emmanuel Joseph

Dear Few Pakatan Rakyat Elected Representative (You Know Who You Are)
Yang Berhormats,

I am writing this to vent my frustration, irritation, disgust, disbelief and anger on how many of you are acting recently. Its with sincerest and most honest intention that I am writing this, as a Pakatan grassroots ’small fry’ member, who like the millions of Malaysians came out in full force to support you all when you were practically nobodies and put you where you are today, sitting in the highest decision making bodies in your own states and country respectively. Some of you were luckier than others, and been appointed to important government posts, some even head entire state governments. Congratulations, your long wait and tireless effort paid off. But please do kindly remember, it was not only your effort alone, but the effort and will of more than half the Malaysian electorate that put you where you are. You did not win entirely on your own charm, your education level, your profile in your respective fields of expertise or struggle. Frankly, most Malaysians who supported you did not even care who you were or what you did, as long as you were not donning a dark blue cap with a BN logo on it. That is the reason we had aircraft mechanics voted into power in the last General Election.

The next time any of you decide to foam in the mouth about lack of funding, lack of resources and other similar grumbles, please bear in mind these few facts. Firstly, you stood for the election on your own free will. Nobody put a gun on your foreheads asking you to run for elections, nobody begged you to contest. Out of your own reasons, rightly or wrongly you stood, representing the people, and because of that, the people rallied behind you and riding on this, you were catapulted into where you now are. Secondly, others have had far less than you, suffered much more than you and been doing it for far longer. Take a look at the likes of YB Dr Tan Seng Giaw, YB Fong Kui Loon, YB Dr Wan Azizah, YB Mustafa Ali, YB Nasharuddin Mat Isa and many more. What more YBs Karpal, Kit Siang and Nik Aziz? Who was there to fund them? Who supported their families when some of them were thrown into ISA? Most of you are only first term Yang Berhormats, so why can’t you not sacrifice less than 5 years of your life if you are sincere in your cause? Thirdly, regardless of your previous political alignment, you are with Pakatan now. Its a people’s alliance, not a cronies’ alliance. If money, resources and a luxurious allowances is what you craved, you have the wrong party, maybe even the wrong country. And if you were in it for those express reasons, please do the honorable thing and resign.

Dear Yang Berhormats,

The next time you decide to shoot from the hip about party policy, please bear in mind these few facts.Firstly, you are not Pakatan Rakyat, you are a part of Pakatan Rakyat. The policy of Pakatan Rakyat is not your sole prerogative, nor is it yours, your father’s or your grandfather’s to decide. There’s a hierarchy in place, and its there for a reason. You are a single member of Pakatan Rakyat, and as an elected rep, have the trust of the nameless, faceless, positionless Pakatan grassroots to speak on its behalf in explaining the policy to the people, not deciding on the policy for the people. Secondly, your opinions, however valid you perceive them to be, and your points, however salient you believe them to be, remains just that, yours. Not the party’s, not the alliances’ and hell, no, not the peoples’! If its your own opinion by all means say so, lease don’t confuse everyone by muddling and befuddling everything and everyone and turning what is clearly black and white into a giant grey mess. Thirdly, please remember that the media loves to give you attention even more than you love the attention it gives you. Especially when you shoot yourself in the foot. While you’re busy shooting your own feet, the media is amputating the very feet Pakatan stands on, no thanks to the likes of you. If you don’t like what Pakatan stands for, then by all means, do resign.

The next time you decide to bring out your personal vendetta against any Pakatan colleague, due to a long standing feud, a dissatisfaction over your appointments or that of your political followers,or just because you just don’t like the guy’s face, please try doing this steps instead. First, try talking to the person. Nothing clears the air like a good honest conversation. Second muhasabahlah diri. You are nothing near perfect, yet we still voted you in. Isn’t that nice? Shouldn’t you then be nice to your comrades? Third, remember that every action has a reaction. Call it a law of physics, or political karma, it will come back to haunt you one day! If you feel you are still right and Pakatan is wrong, then don’t demand that Pakatan withdraw! Your own withdrawal from office will more than suffice.

Dear Yang Berhormats,

Please remember, the people who voted you in can as easily vote you out. The people who worked hard to ensure your victory can work as hard with a vengeance to ensure your loss. You carry the aspirations of an entire generation on your shoulders, please do not snuff out our dreams for a better Malaysia. There are enough elements out there that want Pakatan destroyed, so internal self-destruction is the last thing needed right now. And if you believe you don’t need the Malaysian electorate, then, rest assured, the Malaysian electorate needs you even less. Thank you, and have a pleasant (remaining ) time in political office.

Sincerely,
Emmanuel Joseph,
(A Nearly Nameless, Faceless, Positionless Pakatan Member)
DAP Socialist Youth,
Klang.

Is PKR Imploding?

2010-02-07T19:56:00.002+08:00

The recent news that came out from the PR front have not been encouraging. This is particularly true for PKR. News of its members criticizing the Chief Minister of the DAP-led state government of Penang and rumours of impending defection of its MPs paints a picture of a political party that is imploding within.
The problem that plagues PKR have always been the dominance of a single personality, i.e. Anwar. PKR is made up of a diverse range of members that ranges from people such as Zulkifli Noordin (who comes across as more an UMNO politician in championing issues such as race and religion) to Tan Tee Beng (who is currently embroiled in the criticizing Lim Guan Eng controversy).
And in between these two names, you now have rumours of certain PKR MPs about to defect because of fears of being dropped in the next GE because of the failure to perform and dissatisfaction with the leadership, i.e. real politik. Added to this mix, you have younger members who truly wants to move forward in reforming the Malaysian political system.
What unites these people is Anwar. Take away Anwar and the party lacks a cohesive centre where its members can gravitate to. The party seems to lack a cohesive political agenda to unite its members and a strong organizational structure to impose party discipline on errant members.
So, is PKR imploding? No … for the moment. However, the current signs shows a party that is facing leadership crisis which Anwar must give immediate attention to resolve.
Bogged down as he is with the Sodomy II trial, he must give the leadership rein to some one who is well respected enough to rebuild the party away from a single personality to one where it can function as a true political party with a political agenda and party discipline that ensure PKR remains a viable ally in PR.
If this problem is left to fester, the long term prognostication of PKR is bleak in the near future where implosion or the party fragmenting into smaller political parties are likely scenarios.
This bring us to an interesting question, can DAP and PAS do it alone with out the problematic PKR? This is a question that I will leave in a future blog.

There are days …

2010-02-03T18:59:00.001+08:00

There are days ….

I feel disgusted with our politicians whose statements were designed to disunite the people with its rhetoric of race and religion;

I feel frustrated with the political indifference of those around me;

I feel tired because I have been saying the same thing over and over about the need to be politically responsible;

I feel powerless to affect change that can better our society;

But then …

To give up is to be resigned to the status quo and to see the situation gets worse.

All actions are but part of the larger whole.

By playing my part, I am adding to the efforts of others who combined will bring the much needed changed that we need.

Remembering Howard Zinn

2010-02-02T16:44:00.006+08:00

Howard Zinn (August 24, 1922 – January 27, 2010) was an American historian and social activist. One of his key ideas was that ordinary people – through countless small acts of organizing, struggling and clamoring for reforms – are the ones who can turn the tide and push elected reps to make meaningful change.

I believe that March 8th was a significant event in Malaysian politics. Perhaps, it is time we should push our elected representatives to be more accountable to the people rather than playing petty politics and blame game.

A Lawyer's take on Article 3 of the Federal Constitution

2010-01-29T14:51:00.001+08:00

When words fail ...

2010-01-28T15:07:00.005+08:00

When words fail, maybe a song would do just as well as a response to the recent controversies that have divided our society...

Musings on Malaysian Christians and Politics

2010-01-28T11:52:00.002+08:00

Just posted something of interest to the Christian community in my other blog (read here). I didn’t post it here because it would probably be of interest to Christians. I intend to keep postings in this blog that meditate on concerns to all Malaysians while Nocturnal Musings (my other blog) is my meditation directed towards Christians.

Mea culpa: Is the Malaysian Church complicit to the political status-quo

2010-01-24T17:27:00.003+08:00

Here is a piece I read in the Nut Graph by Debra Loh entitled “Church survival and complicity.” The author argued that the Malaysian Church has been complicit to the nation's political status-quo by being apolitical.

The article can be read here. Do you agree with what she have said? I will probably respond to her article in a few days time in my other blog.

Farish Noor and the Politics of Concession

2010-01-24T00:24:00.001+08:00

Another great piece by Farish Noor on the current “A” controversy. Here he touches on the horns of dilemma which the government faces in handling the controversy.

Ultimately, we are facing the cul-de-sac of communal politics which has been played for as long as the nation gained its independent. The question is … what politics should replace communal politics?

You can read the piece here.

One man’s reason for not migrating

2010-01-22T10:16:00.003+08:00

I just read this interesting piece and thought it is timely. Recently, it was reported that not only is the country facing capital flight but also migration of its citizens to better pastures. The reasons are well known and there is no need to rehash them here.
Here is a piece by Dr. Kua Kia Soong in Malaysiakini on why he decided against migrating. I reproduce here in full:

The patriot game

Kua Kia Soong | Jan 14, 10 1:53pm

'Come all you young rebels
MCPX

And list while I sing

For love of one’s country is a terrible thing

It banishes fear with the speed of a flame

And makes us all part of the patriot game…' These plaintive yet stirring lines from an old Irish republican song also inspired Bob Dylan's "With God on our side". As we hear of more Malaysians emigrating (300,000 in the last 18 months?) and their reasons for doing so, allow me to write about my own part in the patriot game… When I was a young rebel in the seventies, I received the news that my brother-in-law and eldest sister were emigrating to Australia with pious indignation. I felt that despite the injustices, Malaysians should stay and fight for our rights while helping to build the country.

It was easy for me to say as a propertyless and angry young man. But could I honestly feel how my brother-in-law felt as a professor of medicine in University of Malaya, watching the compromises to academic excellence in the name of bumiputeraism and suffering the indignity of being systematically bypassed in his career advancement?
His warning of the possible de-recognition of UM's MBBS degree by the British Medical Council was not heeded and this became a reality in the Eighties. The rest is history…

Today, I am not as sanguine as I was in my youth except to feel a sadness that talented Malaysians are forced to leave the land where they were born in order to pursue their careers in other countries.

Has the government cared to record how many Malaysian talents have been lost to other countries since 1969 and how much this translates into economic terms?

In my family alone, our country has lost not only a professor of radiology (my brother-in-law) but also a professor of psychological medicine (my brother at NUS).

His daughter is an A&E specialist in Singapore and we have three other psychiatrists abroad (a cousin in Ottawa, my nephew in Newcastle and another cousin in Singapore).
Two other young cousins are doctors in Singapore, while two more nieces have just graduated as doctors from Imperial College. I doubt they will be coming to practice in Malaysia. Our own daughter will be graduating as a doctor next year and we have to keep our fingers crossed whether she will return to practice here.

A colleague of mine in the eighties had four children who were all accomplished academics at MIT, UCLA, Oxford and Cambridge. In the housing estate we live in, practically every household has children studying or working abroad and some of them have truly illustrious careers, all lost to other countries.
Apart from our medical professionals, many talented professionals in LLN, JKR, KTM, RRI have been forced to seek employment overseas ever since the "bumiputera policy" came into being.

Barry Wain has counted the glaring costs of Mahathir's rule. He puts it at RM100 billion. Maybe someone should count the collateral damage of the bumiputera policy since 1969.

Has any Umno leader expressed regret or remorse over this brain drain? No! These "drained brains" have been greeted with "good riddance!" at Umno general assemblies through the years since all the Umnoputras are more concerned about the dubious figures proclaiming a higher proportion of bumiputera representation in the professions.

No doubt the recent torching of churches has sickened many Malaysians and will prompt more to emigrate.

Our so-called "nation builders" and "outside-the-box" thinkers seem incapable of producing a "win-win" situation that can prevent this brain drain while building national unity. Wasn't it Robert Frost who said, "Originality and initiative are what I ask for my country?"

My first stirrings of patriotism

Patriotism is indeed a "terrible" thing – when the Irish use the adjective "terrible" they mean something equivalent to “awesome” rather than "contemptible".

The pogrom of May 13, 1969 had left me and many other Malaysians with a nasty taste. I had just completed my higher school certificate (A levels). Soon after, I saved up enough to buy a ticket to London and borrowed a month’s living expenses from my sister.

During those early years of sojourn in London, my first instinctive "patriotic" feelings were kindled whenever I met British people who would ask me where I was from. After I had told them I was from Malaysia, they would invariably add:

"I suppose you won't be going back there no more then…"
Without a moment's hesitation and recognizing the pre-supposition behind that statement, I always replied: "Yes, I am. I'm certainly going back to my country when I've finished my studies!"
I’ve kept true to that undertaking I made to myself even though these British people I met were just strangers in the pub or in the street. That’s not just patriotism, that’s integrity to myself.

A choice in the seventies

Then when I was at university in 1975, I suddenly got a letter from the British Home Office asking me to send them my passport since they suspected that my leave of stay in the UK had expired. Weeks later, I got my passport back with a letter saying:

"I am writing to say that the time limit and conditions attached to your leave to enter the United Kingdom have been removed…You are now free to remain permanently in the United Kingdom. You do not require permission from a Government Department to take or change employment in England, Wales or Scotland and you may engage in business or a profession …" (The Under Secretary of State, 6 March 1975)

Until today, some people I meet still ask if I’ll be emigrating to the UK since my kids are studying in the UK and I have a British wife. My answer is always:

"If I had wanted to emigrate, I would have done so in the seventies!"
When I finally finished my PhD, I returned to "build my homeland" in the early eighties. I could have stayed and enjoyed a good bourgeois existence in Britain enjoying the English countryside, good ale and the arts but my social conscience would have got the better of me ere too long…

Back in Malaysia at the end of 1982, apart from working I wrote profusely in response to many issues confronting our society during that time. It was a period when the press was relatively freer and while it was "owned by the MCA", it was "edited by the MIC for the DAP", as we used to say.
It turned out to be a false spring. The eighties were the heyday of activism in the country which culminated in the "Operation Lalang" crackdown. The BN government showed its appreciation of my nation building efforts by arresting and detaining me without trial during Operation Lalang in October 1987.

ISA 'rehabilitation'
Detention without trial under the ISA is a good test of one's patriotism. During the first sixty days of solitary confinement when the special branch was trying to 'rehabilitate' me, I remember they had a three-pronged approach to my rehabilitation programme (sic), viz.:

(i) Why don't you emigrate since you have a British wife rather than "cause trouble" here?

(ii) Why don’t you join the Barisan Nasional instead of always siding with the opposition?

(iii) Why can't you be like Khoo Khay Kim instead of speaking for those Chinese educationists?

To the first question, I told them I was a Malaysian who had come home to serve the country. To the second, I said it was against my principles to join racist political parties.

To the third, I said, "You've already got one Khoo Khay Kim, why do you want another?"

During those weeks of harrowing interrogation, they also wanted to know about my activities when I was in the UK. At one stage, they asked me if I had ever written to the British press.

When I couldn't recall what they were getting at, they produced a news cutting of an article I had written to The Guardian in the seventies. It was a critique of an article in the paper by the famous writer Anthony Burgess in which he had written patronisingly about the old colonial stereotypes of Malaysian society.

"There," I pointed out, "there you have perfect evidence of my multiethnic perspective and my defence of our country, the opposite of what you are making me out to be!"

Of course they knew what I was made of but still, they sent me to the Kamunting Rehabilitation Camp on a two-year detention order for being "a threat to national security".

At Kamunting, the so-called "rehabilitation" programme included a weekly "assembly" during which we were supposed to sing the national anthem as if we were back at school and to make a pledge (Ikrar) of allegiance to the king, country and the Rukunegara.

Many of us "hardcore" did not participate in this vacuous token of "patriotism". It brought home the scathing quote by Samuel Johnson that, "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel."

The American humorist Kin Hubbard adds: "The less a politician amounts to, the more he loves the flag."

While in detention, my wife and I made the decision to change our six-year-old son's British passport to a Malaysian one since otherwise, he would have to leave the country with his mother every two months to have it stamped.
When some of my camp inmates heard about this they exclaimed: "What! You mad ah? As soon as we're released, we'lll be leaving this country! You crazy lah, giving up his British passport for a Malaysian one!"
Several of these Operation Lalang jailbirds have flown and good luck to them. Patriotism is not something that you can foist on people. People make choices according to what they have experienced, especially in today's globalised world. They certainly love the country where they were born and grew up but alas, the country does not seem to love them in return but instead robbed them of their precious freedom.

Would you defend your country with your life?

In recent years, there has been plenty of breast beating among the Umnoputras, with flag waving, keris kissing and singing of patriotic songs. But how many of these Umnoputras can proudly stand up and say that they patriotically took part in the liberation war against the British colonialists and the Japanese fascists?

Hardly any!

Yet, how many Malayan patriots have given their lives in these two campaigns? Have they ever been honoured by the country they defended?

They were honoured by the Allies for their valour during the anti-Japanese resistance after the Second World War in London. Have our historians exposed those who collaborated with the Japanese fascists during the Second World War - the "quislings who sold out the patriot game?"

At least one man, Chin Peng can claim that he achieved this and today he merely wants the opportunity to visit his homeland that he defended against British colonialism and Japanese fascism but he is unable to do this! If he were an Irish republican, Chin Peng might be inspired to sing this other republican song I have adapted:

Show me the man

Where is the man who does not love

The land where he was born

Who does not speak of it with pride

No matter how forlorn

I only know that I love mine

And long again to see

Oppression banished from our land

And (Malaysia) truly free…

Let friends all turn against me

Let foes say what they will

For my heart is in my country

And I love our people still

There is not a (Malaysian) today

Who’d ever wish to roam

Into a foreign land to toil

If he could stay at home

So give to us our liberty

Let our banners be unfurled

Then (Malaysians) will prove to be

A credit to the world!

DR KUA KIA SOONG, a former MP, was principal of the New Era College, Kajang. He is also a director of human rights group Suaram.

Perhaps for those of us who chooses to stay, we must ask ourselves why are we staying and will we stand up and be counted (even if it is only to vote).

Re-imagining the Nation

2010-01-16T10:28:00.006+08:00

Here is a piece I wrote on The Micah Mandate:

The spate of recent attacks on churches in the country reveals, once more, the fault lines that have plagued our nation since its founding. The deep cleavages of ethnicity and religion still haunt us today.[1] Although the government has made efforts towards nation-building, particularly after the May 13 incident, nonetheless the efforts have been largely wasted as we are still as divided along the racial and religious lines.
The reasons for this failure are legion and it is not my intention here to delve into them. Suffice to say that when the foundation of our nation was being laid, it was based on a communal vision of society. The various ethnic groups that collectively make up this nation was seen as engaging in a zero-sum game over political and economic resources that was mitigated by the social contract. And upon this foundation, our current political system was built upon.
Looking back in hindsight, the events of recent years, e.g. the UMNO Penang protest over the new PR Chief Minister’s statement on the abolishment of the NEP in the state, the cow head protest and the recent protests on the court’s judgement on the use of “Allah” by non-Muslims, have demonstrated that the whole political and social structure is collapsing. Hindsight, as they say, is perfect vision. It is not my intention to criticize what our founding fathers might or could have done.
The urgent question that needs to be answered in our time is simply this: What alternative vision of society can we articulate and build upon to create a nation that will simply see past the barriers of ethnicity and religion that divides us? The answer is not simple but one that requires everyone (and not just the politicians) who have a stake in this country to come together to share each other’s fears and hope for the nation and to understand one another away from the biases and prejudice that have kept us divided.
Christians, as part of the larger community, have an obligation to participate in this great project of re-imagining an alternative and better vision of who we are as a nation and how we could achieve this vision, if not for ourselves then at least for our children and grandchildren. For a long time, Christians tend to congregate among themselves in the church minding their own business rather than participating in the public life of the nation. In so doing, have we then contributed to the status quo?
Again, I’m not interested to find faults but rather to make a plea that Christians must collectively begin to take steps in participating in this project and not hide behind the comfort zone behind the walls of the church. In so doing, the royal law of loving your neighbour would have been fulfilled (Mk. 12:31; Rom. 13:8).
P.S. J’accuse – I accuse the author, who as a Christian, have been too comfortable in hiding behind the walls of the church. Mea culpa (I am guilty).

[1] More muted is regionalism where the political and socio-economic divide between peninsula with Sabah and Sarawak.

More on the "A" issue in Al Jazeera

2010-01-15T07:34:00.004+08:00

A message for Malaysians

2010-01-14T23:14:00.002+08:00

For those who have become jaded and cynical about Malaysian politics. Watch this political advertisement from Argentina. Substitute the word Argentina with Malaysia.

Understanding the "A" issue

2010-01-13T15:17:00.001+08:00

Economic fall out from the church attacks

2010-01-13T08:35:00.001+08:00

The recent attacks on the church does not only have political consequences but also economic ones. You can read it in this article in Malaysian Insider here.

Farish Noor on the State of Malaysian Politics

2010-01-12T08:28:00.002+08:00

A piece by Farish Noor on the recent attacks on the church. It is a pretty pessimistic piece but hopefully it will become a wake up call for all Malaysians. You can read it here.

Man in the Mirror

2010-01-12T01:25:00.006+08:00

On Violence, Reconciliation and Religion

2010-01-11T18:47:00.003+08:00

I embedded two videos in my other blog (Nocturnal Musings) which talks about violence and reconciliation in religion. The talks were given by the evangelical theologian Miroslav Volf. The videos are linked here.

Malaysia will not bow to acts of violence

2010-01-11T18:05:00.002+08:00

Statement by a coalition of NGOs and political parties on the recent attacks on the churches in the country. You can read it in Aliran.

Zaid Ibrahim's response to Black Friday

2010-01-11T12:56:00.000+08:00

The unprecedented attacks on churches has sparked a lot of responses from different quarters. Here is one from a respected public figure, Zaid Ibrahim,on how the nation should response to what has (and is still happening, last count 8 churches has been attacked) last week.

You can read it here.

Why history matters

2010-01-10T01:55:00.006+08:00

Farish Noor needs no introduction. He is our most prolific public intellectual. I have just started to read his latest book entitled What Your Teacher Didn’t Tell You. Anyway, here are some interesting quotes by him on why history matters:

"The recounting of the past and the act of re-membering our manifold histories are as much a psycho-social endeavour as they are political and politicised ones, and in so many instances we see how history has been put to work at the beck and call of the ruling elites, politicians and governments in order to deliver some form of rationalisation, justifications and dterminism for the way things are" (p. 9)

He goes on to say:

"This is particularly true in the case of so many postcolonial societies where the first generation of elites, still reeling from the traumatic encounter with the colonial era, sought to erase and deny so many things about the past that infringed on their ever-so-fragile comfort zones: their collusion with, and in the workings of the Empire; their own internalisation of the logic and epistemology of colonial capitalism; the lingering traces of the colonial encounter that persist till today - be it in the form of colonialism's mode of divisive race politics or the repressive laws that were left behind by the masters who had packed and left on the last boat out" (p. 9-10).

If we choose to ignore history then:

"Left in the hands of right-wing communitarian and sectarian bigots, these totems, emblems and markers that make up the discursive and semiotic repertoire of our collective history will end up becoming the toys of facists" (p. 13).

On why history matters:

"For that reason alone, the struggle to remind ourselves of the complex past which we all share, and which enriches all of us, is part and parcel of the struggle to save this nation from sliding further down the slippery slope of authoritarianism and repression" (p. 13).

"History isn't just about getting your facts right: it is as political as the next demo you will attend" (original bolding; p. 14)

I encouraged everyone to get this book and read it to learn history the way your teacher never taught you.

Between protest and violence

2010-01-08T11:53:00.004+08:00

I woke up this morning expecting only some protest by Muslims who were not happy with the court’s ruling on the “A” issue. Later, I received a couple of smses from friends who told me of churches being fire-bombed. Refusing to believe in rumours, I went online to confirm it with some online news portal.
And then there were some news about some church and the judiciary websites being hacked to protest the ruling. I am asking myself what has happened to the country?
It seems that in the past few years, our nation has taken on the culture of violence as a means of public protest, something unheard just a generation ago. The culture of peaceful public protest is normal in the democratic political process. As citizens, we have the right to protest over decisions taken by the government but we do not have the right to resort to violence.
The problem with violence is that it tends to escalate until it is out of control. What is needed right now is that we, as Malaysians, must reject violence from becoming embedded in our politics!
Malaysians regardless of race and religion must come forward to condemn what has happened. Let us show those who want to inculcate violence the true meaning of 1Malaysia.
P.S. I just blogged about politics and violence in my other blog yesterday. You might want to have a look. You can read it here.
P.S.S. An excerpt reported in Malaysiakini:

In a show of solidarity, Muslim and Christian students in Universiti Malaya (yesterday) came out with a consensus over the ‘Allah’ row.
In a statement, PMIUM (UM Association of Muslim Students) and PKVUM (UM Varsity Christian’s Association), the umbrella organisations that represent students of the respective religions, said the two groups had reached an understanding over the matter.
PMIUM president Shazni Munir Mohd Ithnin and PKVUM president Benjamin Ong both signed the statement listing down the guidelines that they have agreed upon:
That dialogue and discourse is the best and respectable way to handle the issue.
That proper education to the adherents of the different faiths must be given in order to ensure the proper understanding of tenets of each religion.
The legal system is not the only proper way to solve the issue, especially when it is open to manipulation by certain parties.
Religious institutions and leaders must take the proactive step of meeting and engaging in discourse in order to promote greater understanding among the different faiths.
They reminded all parties not to manipulate the issue and condemned those who use it to provoke public sentiments.
The public must use discretion and proper education to avoid prejudice towards the followers of other religion.

There is yet hope for Malaysia if our younger generation (of two different religions) can show such maturity.

My Other Blog

2010-01-07T10:44:00.002+08:00

I started a new blog. It is called Nocturnal Musings. It is a completely different blog from Cacoethes Scribendi in that it starts from an evangelical Christian point of view.
I called it my grab bag blog as it does not focus on anything specific except relating it to my theological point of view. Some of the topics which I plan to touch in Nocturnal Musings are theology, political theology, ethics, faith (the non-academic, everyday live in kind) and whatever else comes to my mind.
Anyway, for those who are interested you can find it here or http://nocturnalmusings.wordpress.com/.
In case you are wondering why I use Word Press rather than open another blog in Blogger … I have a confession to make. I have been itching to try out Word Press. So this is my excuse for starting the new blog.

Staying or Leaving

2010-01-07T09:30:00.003+08:00

If you have been reading some of the articles and comments posted in Lim Kit Siang’s blog etc, you would have notice a lot of these articles/comments talk about people thinking of leaving or have left the country in search of better pastures elsewhere. Here is an example of such a letter in Lim Kit Siang’s blog. You can read it here.
I just came across this interesting article by Debra Loh in The Nut Graph where she is asking why should stay. She gave her own personal answer …. perhaps we should ask ourselves in the midst of so many people leaving, is there a reason or reasons to stay?
Perhaps you would like to respond to her article. You can read it here.

Bible translation and the name of God in BM

2010-01-06T12:04:00.002+08:00

Here is a piece on translation of God’s name in BM by an Indonesian bible scholar (I think). Found it on Dr. Ng Kam Weng’s blog. It is the missing companion piece to his article in Malaysian Insider on the “A” issue. You can read it here. Be forewarned that it is a bit scholarly (dealing with hermeneutics and translations as such) but it is worth reading.

Some thoughts on the “A” issue in the web

2010-01-06T11:41:00.002+08:00

Here is a piece by Dr. Ng Kam Weng of Kairos on why the term Allah cannot be substituted in the Malay bible. Very thoughtful piece with scholarly arguments. You can read it here.
Also Bob Teoh’s view on the court’s judgement of the same issue. I find it thoughtful and insightful on how the judiciary should work, i.e. how judges must judge. You can read it here.
And here is a piece by Bernard Dompok, who happens to be a Christian and member of the cabinet, on why the word “A” should be used by Christians who use the national language for worship. You can read it here.
Also, a take by Nik Aziz (the MB of Kelantan). You can read it here (it is in BM).

The fuss over the “A” word: A mediation on language and unity

2010-01-05T21:32:00.003+08:00

Well the new year started with a firestorm when the High Court ruled in favour the Catholic Herald over the use of the “A” word in the national language. Already, the blogosphere is lighted up with those against and supporting the court’s decision. And there is news that some groups are planning for a march in protest of the court’s decision (reported in Malaysian Insider – read here).
In the beginning I was reluctant to start off my first entry for the new year by joining in the debate. However with the recent developments, I suppose no blogger can avoid this issue. So this is my take on the “A” issue.
Is Bahasa Malaysia the national language of the country? If it is, should there be words that are exclusive for a certain religion (or whatever categories that you can dream of)?
It is ironic that the very language that is meant to unite Malaysians regardless of race become the very thing that divides us. For how can we treasure (and use) our national language when one is told that certain words are the exclusive preserve of some and off limits to others?
My fear is … today we are told certain words are forbidden for religious use. Perhaps tomorrow we may be told other words cannot be use for other purposes because it belongs exclusively to one group in the country. Where will this exclusive ownership of national language stop?
The current controversy is but a symptom that has plagued us since the founding of this nation, i.e. how can we achieve unity in the midst of our diversity. Will we forever be locked in our insular worldview of society as one of zero sum game where a group wins meant the other have to lose?
We see ourselves as strangers whom we have noting in common except living together in this blessed land called Malaysia. Each of us locked up in our own comfortable world of sameness and exclusivity. In so doing, we are only impoverishing ourselves as a nation.

On the direction of our nation

2010-01-01T19:09:00.002+08:00

Some times I wonder why I blog when there are some many good blogs that comment on the state of the country. Here is a good one to start the new year of the second decade of the second millennium. It is a sober piece … one which requires deep contemplation and, perhaps, action.
As usual, you can read the piece here.

The year that was 2009

2009-12-24T18:27:00.002+08:00

Well the year is coming to a close. Here are the highlights of the year courtesy of the Nut Graph. You can read it here.
Until next year. Have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

Politics, economics and Mahathirism

2009-12-18T13:15:00.002+08:00

Here is an interesting piece by Malaysian Insider on Najib’s decision to sell down stakes in government linked companies and the return of Mahathir’s privatization policy.
Read it here.

What I’m looking forward to this Sunday

2009-12-16T16:35:00.003+08:00

This Sunday is an interesting date. It is the PR convention and I look forward to what the end result of the convention will bring. Will PR coalesce towards a formal platform? Or will PR remain a marriage of convenience between the partners?

Razaleigh on the Curse of Oil Wealth

2009-12-12T11:23:00.003+08:00

Proverbs 13: 11 tells us that: “Wealth from get-rich-quick schemes quickly disappears; wealth from hard work grows over time.” I was just reading an interesting write-up by the elder statesman Tengku Razaleigh who was reflecting the “curse of oil wealth.”
Briefly, he said that black gold has made us complacent . And now we are paying the political and economic price for this complacency.
I agree with him but you need to read him to make up your mind. You can find the piece here.
Also you might want to check out the “resource curse” thesis at wikipedia. It is linked here. Also there is this essay on the curse of oil wealth found here.

Migration as political protest

2009-12-02T07:49:00.005+08:00

Malaysian Insider published an interesting piece where Deputy Foreign Minister Senator A. Kohilan Pillay, revealed the number of Malaysians who surrendered their citizenship has almost doubled in this year. About 3,800 Malaysians have given up their citizenships to date compared to 2,000 last year (read article here).

There is a raging debate going on the blogosphere about the morality of leaving one’s country for another. Farish Noor provided another angle on this debate.

He suggested that migration should be seen as an act of political protest. Using the history of pre-modern Southeast Asia, he argued that people here often go on a one way trip out of a kingdom if the ruler was a tyrant. The wise and benevolent ruler, on the other hand, would encourage people to settle in their kingdom.

As word spread, migrants would come to settle in the land of the wise and benevolent ruler.In the end, depopulation and passive resistance from those who remained behind would befall the kingdom of the tyrant.

Interesting vignette from history with contemporary application, no? You can read Farish Noor’s article here.

Is PR losing momentum? Part II

2009-12-01T17:18:00.002+08:00

As I said in my last post on this topic, PR’s major problem is public perception of its creditability as an effective alternative to BN. This was admitted by Anwar in an article by Malaysian Insider (see here).
Politics is more than just about principles, it is about gaining support from voters by persuading them that the party in question has what it takes to govern effectively. In short, it is about perception as well.
Right now, PR is not effective in projecting an image that it can govern with all the conflicts that is going on within each component party and between the parties within PR.
In order to gain momentum, PR must get its act together. Firstly, they must quickly formalize the current loose alliance into a formal coalition with a leadership structure that can resolve the inter-party conflicts. More importantly, such leadership can begin to direct the coalition’s strategy in wresting power from BN as opposed to the current ad-hoc reaction to BN’s moves in cutting PR down to size.
Secondly, they must now come up with a common platform, what the advertisement industry called as unique selling proposition, to convince voters that their alliance is not just a marriage of convenience. That they do have a concrete plan to govern the country rather than just shouting slogans.
Thirdly, the formation of a shadow cabinet. Like it or not, PR has absolutely no experience in governing. The best way to learn is to appoint an MP or two who will be responsible in passing criticism on the current government and its respective legislation, as well as offering alternative policies. Such a move will help PR learn the art of governing and project an image that it has what it takes to govern if it comes to power.
Fourthly, party discipline. Politics is a team sport and not a game of individuals. Any coach will tell you that discipline is important in any team sport. Each party must tighten party discipline and crack the whip on those who do not follow the party’s line. Again, conflicts between and within opposition party members that gets highlighted in the media simply reinforces the public’s view that PR will not be effectual as a governing party.
What is the point that I am trying to drive in here? In politics, perception matters and right now PR is slowly losing the battle in this front.
This is the second part of the series. Part one of the series can be found here.

Can Malaysia ever achieved advanced economic status?

2009-11-30T10:43:00.002+08:00

Interesting article in The Nut Graph on what it takes for the country to achieve advanced economy status, a.k.a. high income per capita.
You can read it here.

Is PR losing momentum

2009-11-30T01:53:00.002+08:00

I was reading this on the net and found it interesting. Anyway it is a forum that was recently held in Penang (you can read it here). The forum seeks to answer the question: “Will BN or PR win if the general election were to be held today?”
The speaker Ibrahim Suffian (from Merdeka Research Centre) was of the opinion, that BN will win back its 2/3 majority based on the surveys done by Merdeka Research Centre (if you are interested in the surveys, check out their website here).
Now I am not going to rehash Suffian’s argument and the surveys which his outfit did on this topic. Neither am I interested in nitpicking the methodology which the survey used.
What I am interested in is trying to answer this question “Is PR losing momentum?” By now the answer should be obvious … yes they are.
Looking at it objectively, I’ll say that PR faces a couple of problems. Firstly, the key players – PKR, DAP and PAS – have yet to work out a common political platform – much less formalize the loose alliance into an official coalition - that can convince voters of their ability to offer an alternative to BN.
Secondly, there doesn’t seem to be a leader to lead the current loose alliance. No doubt, Anwar is the de facto leader but so far he does not seem to be able to influence the direction of each party. Consider for example, the current leadership tussle within PKR and the blow up within the Selangor state government with PAS pulling one direction and the others another. All which lead to public perception that all is not well within the leadership of PR. Anwar’s hiatus from the public glare only added to this perception.
Now after saying this, I want to add that BN is not doing all that well. The current crisis within UMNO’s coalition partners is not helping its cause but the strength of BN has always been a single party, i.e. UMNO who exercises overall leadership within the coalition, which ensures BN marches to the tune the piper played. This leadership advantage together with the natural advantages of the incumbency gives BN the edge in any election.
But of course, there is no such thing as a determined outcome, much less after March 8. So does it mean that BN will win back support to regain its traditional 2/3 majority in the Parliament?
I will answer this question in my next posting. For those who are interested in an opinion that is different from Suffian (see this blog posting).

New book on Mahathir

2009-11-26T10:41:00.003+08:00

Came across this piece while I was surfing the next:

Mahathir squandered RM100 bil, says new book
From Malaysiakini

Malaysia has squandered an estimated RM100 billion on financial scandals under the 22-year rule of Dr Mahathir Mohamad, according to a new book about the former prime minister.
According to Barry Wain, author of the soon-to-be launched ‘Malaysian Maverick: Mahathir Mohamad in Turbulent Times’, direct financial losses amounted to about RM50 billion.

You can read it here.

New developments in Hindraf

2009-11-26T08:53:00.001+08:00

Speaking of Hindraf, here is some new developments. You can read the article here.

On BTN

2009-11-25T16:49:00.001+08:00

By now, you probably have heard about Biro Tata Negara (BTN) from the alternative media. I don’t want to comment about it. Here are some links.

On why there is public outcry with BTN … read here, here and here. If you google it, you find more on what people are saying about it.

On what the Selangor state government (the first among the PR state government) is doing about it. Read here.

Lessons from the collapse of Hindraf

2009-11-25T12:16:00.002+08:00

Two years ago, a social movement emerged suddenly to take centre stage in Malaysian politics. The movement in question was Hindraf which organized a series of street protest among working class Indians to highlight the plight of marginalized Indians. The clashes that took place between Indian protestors and the police resembles the street protests that took place during the reformasi movement of the late 1990s albeit with a different group of actors.
Today, Hindraf seems to be a spent force with the movement where leaders squabble among themselves and the movement splintering into different groups with different agenda (see this article on the collapse of HIndraf).
The question which must be asked is what lesson does the collapse of Hindraf hold for political parties and social movements in the country.
The first lesson to be learned here is that playing the race card would only sustain a political party or movement for so long. Consider the case of Hindraf, which openly state that its struggle is for the betterment of Indians who represent 8% of the total population. Translated into political terms, the political pressure which they can pile on the government is limited.
By trumpeting its cause as an Indian only affair, it failed to gather wider public sympathy to sustain its political pressure on the government.
Secondly, the use of street protests as a political mean only invites government crackdown as in the case of the reformasi movement back in the 1990s. Its inability to communicate the grievances of the marginalized Indians and the trouble it caused to the public during their protests only served to alienate wider public support to their cause.
Thirdly, the movement’s initial success have caused internal rift within its leadership which over time became irreparable. All which led the movement to stagnate.
To recapitulate, I think the lessons any political party or social movement must learn from the collapse of Hindraf are:
(i) they must gain a broad base support rather than playing the racial card that had been used since independence. Political attitudes are changing in the country. This is particularly true among the urban folks who are more supportive of the “justness” of a cause.
(ii) the ability to communicate one’s cause in a way that not only reach the public but also persuading people of the “justness” of their cause. The internet is great for this purpose but we must remember of the limited connection in the country. Other means must be explored.
(iii) street protests/demonstrations, even if peaceful, will not work if it is not complemented by other strategies.

Losing our economic competitiveness?

2009-11-24T14:18:00.002+08:00

I was reading this article which was no surprise to me. Anyways, read the article and tell me what you think about it.

More on MCA

2009-11-24T10:01:00.002+08:00

Interesting article here on MCA. Also have a look on this article as well. Both articles simply just reinforce what I said about MCA and its future.
Quo Vadis MCA …

Is the end nigh for MCA?

2009-11-23T22:09:00.004+08:00

The recent controversy within MCA, which saw a power tussle between three factions in the party was truly a political drama of epic proportion. Now, I am not interested in describing the why and where-offs of each factions. What I am interested is to locate the current crisis within the broader politics in the country.

First, let me say that the internal struggle within MCA is really not new as almost all the past presidents of the party had to face off their challengers but the current struggle reminds me during the early 1980s, which saw UMNO stepping in to resolve the leadership crisis. The party recovered and made some progress in gaining loss grounds among Chinese voters, that is until the last General Election which saw the party again losing support among the Chinese because of the perception that it could not defend Chinese interests.

Since then, the party had bee wrecked by scandals and power struggles. Some observers had argued that the party is imploding and can no longer command even a modicum of support from the Chinese community. Such observation is undeniable but the question that should be asked is: "Can UMNO allow its senior member to disintegrate?"

I think the answer is an emphatic no ... at least for now. Although the Chinese population is shrinking nonetheless given the split within the Malay community between UMNO and Malay opposition political parties, the Chinese community still plays a vital role as swing voters who cannot be ignored. Obviously, given the racial set-up within BN, MCA still have a role to play in the scheme of things (at least in the near future).

So, I do not expect the disintegration of MCA anytime soon as UMNO will pressure the factions involved in the current power tussle to accept a compromise plan, which in turn, enables UMNO's grip on power. However, the long-term prognosis is bleak for the party.

Related to this topic, read this article from M'sian Insider.

Education and democracy

2009-11-20T11:18:00.002+08:00

I was just reading this article this morning. The Ministry of Education has introduced an aptitude test as part of the Primary School Achievement Test (UPSR). The article can be found here.
The results are shown in the table below.

Band 1 represents the lowest skilled while Band 4 represents the highest skilled. Students are tested for (i) thinking skills and (ii) problem solving and decision making skills.
Now I am not sure how the Ministry defines the skills component. I will assume that thinking skills involve the ability to recall facts and comprehend the facts they recalled.
Problem solving and decision-making skills, again I assume, involve the ability to apply and analyze facts to resolve problems presented as well as the ability to take connect various facts to make them into something new (synthesis). It also involve the ability to make judgement as to the truthfulness/usefulness of the facts synthesised.
Looking at the results, it would seem that our students have the ability to recall and understand the facts. Band 3 and 4 represents some 70% of the total students. The problem, it would seem, is their problem solving and decision-making skills which account for slightly more than 30% (Band 3 and 4).
What does these results tell us of our students? Simply put, they are good at giving facts or absorbing knowledge without knowing what they are learning. In other words, they know the “what” without knowing the “why”.
This does not abode well in a knowledge-driven economy which requires people to have the ability to create new knowledge or creatively apply existing knowledge to new problems.
Does this result surprised me? No. After spending slightly more than a decade in the field of private higher education, I can personally attest to the fact that our students lack the ability to think critically, i.e. the ability to come up with independent answers and justify their answers. Relying heavily on textbooks, their thinking is based on the recalling of facts.
Now for those who are interested, the definition which I presented are based on Bloom’s taxonomy (a classic criteria in constructing educational objectives). It would seem our students are good at the lower end of Bloom’s taxonomy but weak at the higher end (for those who are interested in this taxonomy, you can find it here).
This trend is worrying not only because of its economic implications but also it has political implications. Consider this … once they become adults, would they be able to think critically about politics and policies? Democracy requires its citizens to become participants in the democratic process. It requires thinking citizens who can evaluate government policies and claims made by political parties. Ultimately, it is through such evaluation that decide the way we vote.
The results are disturbing because our future generation shows no aptitude toward independent and critical thinking (as I defined it). Without the ability to think critically what would happen to the future of our democracy?

Why federal government is more powerful than state government in Malaysia?

2009-11-19T10:06:00.002+08:00

Continuing on my blog on federalism. I have written that federal government is more powerful than state government. Why? It has to do with who holds the purse string. In Malaysia, it is the federal government that holds the purse string.
Anyway, you can read why this is so here and here. As they say, he who holds money holds power (or something like that).

What should we expect from our politicians

2009-11-17T21:31:00.002+08:00

I was just reading a piece by Farish Noor on the recent behaviour of Malaysian politicians (you can read it here). I just want to add that the antics of our politicians and political party show the level of maturity of the people whom we entrust with the affairs of the nation.
Honestly, I think it is high time we get quality debate in the august Dewan Rakyat rather than name calling. What we need are politicians who seek the higher good for society rather than immediate gain such as support from one group or the other. Perhaps, what we need are the likes of politicians of yesteryear such as Tan Chee Koon and Tun Dr. Ismail for example. Politicians with principles and willing to act on their principles.
What we have today … sigh. Like many people, there are days when I am totally turn off by the antics of some of our Yang Berhormat MPs. They seem to think it is okay to act in boorish ways and expect people to respect them because of their position.
Me think we need to remind them who is their paymaster. In the next election, we should attend the ceramahs of candidates in our constituency and ask some hard questions rather than just giving our votes because of the party they represent. Hey, I want my taxpayer money’s worth in my MP and state assembly(wo)man!

Another by-election on the way?

2009-11-16T22:23:00.002+08:00

I just read the news. Apparently, the High Court has ordered the Election Commission to call for a by-election for the Kedah state seat of Kota Seputeh. Apparently, the assembly man for the seat went AWOL twice in the state assembly meetings. Of course, the by-election is not certain as the decision could be challenged in the court of appeals. We’ll just have to see.
Now, this contest (should it happen) will be interesting to watch as it will take place in the Malay heartland. The contest (again, if it happen) could gauge Malay support for UMNO and PAS. It is definitely a must watch by-election for anyone interested in what is happening in Malaysian politics.

The next General Election

2009-11-10T07:55:00.002+08:00

The 12th G.E. was one of the most unexpected in the history of the country. The next G.E. is expected to be a hotly contested one between BN and PR.
By law it is slated to take place in 2013, three years hence. Will Najib calls for an earlier poll? Or would he wait until the the term expires? Who would benefit from an early poll? Who would benefit from a late poll?
These are questions wish I had been thinking about. However, I just stumbled on this article which had answered these questions. I agree with the analysis. So, I don’t have to blog about it.
Anyway, you find the piece here.

Zaid Ibrahim on PR

2009-11-09T08:25:00.003+08:00

Continuing my thoughts on the viability of PR as a coalition, here is a an interview by the Nutgraph with Zaid Ibrahim on his views of PR. Very thoughtful. I will reserve my comments until I seen the manifesto.
I have deep respect from Zaid as a politician and a Malaysian. The interview can be found here. My five-cents worth piece is found here.

The imbalance between Federal and state governments

2009-11-07T09:53:00.002+08:00

Here is a piece on why the Federal government has the advantage when dealing with opposition state governments. This has always been the advantage of the center.

Will the opposition parties ever become a workable coalition?

2009-11-05T16:40:00.004+08:00

It was reported a few days back that the opposition parties are now in the midst of making their loose alliance into a formal coalition of opposition parties, i.e. Pakatan Rakyat (PR). The question that is now in the minds of many is could they pull it off given the different directions each party seems to be taking. Perhaps the best way to answer this question is to look at the way Barisan Nasional (BN) works.

i) A brief description of how BN works:

BN is the enlargement of the Alliance Party in the aftermath of the May 13 tragedy. It is a coalition of 14 political parties led by UMNO. Next in line is MCA which serves as the senior partner of the coalition followed by MIC (all parties mentioned formed the original Alliance Party).

The coalition is made up of political parties that represents different ethnic communities in the country where decisions affecting different ethnic communities are made behind close-door negotiations between the political parties involved. In reality, all decisions that are made is balanced against the interests of UMNO and its constituent.

As can be observed from the way BN works, UMNO is the anchor of the coalition providing the much needed leadership and stability to ensure the political crisis experienced by it's key partners, i.e. MCA, MIC and Gerakan, does not destroy BN. Let's now look at some of the problems faced by the opposition parties as they attempt to form a coalition.

ii) PR and the problems of creating a workable coalition:

PR in its current form is, at best, a loose alliance of opposition parties that banded together to contest in the last election. The results of the election was unanticipated by these parties. As such, they were caught by surprise with the results as the ordinary Malaysians.

A year on, we can observe that these parties seem to work at cross-purpose with one another. For example, the spate between PAS and DAP in the Selangor state government over the sale of beer. At the national level, PAS seems to be keeping it's option opened with its top leadership engaging in dialogue with UMNO.

The problem that comes to my mind is simply this ... Can the proposed coalition work together? Put in another way, how would decisions that affect the proposed coalition as a whole be worked out? Would it be like BN with UMNO as the de facto decider? Would PKR play the same role here? Can PAS and DAP accept such a structure?

If PR choose to be different, that is decision-making would be based on negotiation among equals, can PAS and DAP see eye-to-eye? PAS's political platform is based on Islam while DAP's is secular. How would PKR balance both parties here?

Also, how would PR differentiate themselves from BN? BN is based on a communal politics approach. So would PR position themselves in the political market in order to gain support from the various ethnic groups in the country?

And then there is the question of Sabah and Sarawak. How would the proposed coalition address the issue of representation from Sabah and Sarawak, given the fact with electoral support from both states, grabbing political power from BN is impossible.

iii) More questions than answer:

So what are the answers to the questions that I posed here? It is impossible at this juncture to answer any of these questions until the plans for the proposed coalition is offered for public scrutiny. Nonetheless, it will be interesting to observe how the opposition parties will work towards these common goal. I await with bated breath on the plans about formalizing the coalition, which could change Malaysian political landscape.

Another commentary on the recent budget

2009-11-05T10:31:00.002+08:00

Speaking of budget, here is another piece which I like. It is by Dr. Dzulkefly Ahmad (MP Kuala Selangor – PAS). I think he raises some very important points for consideration. A budget should not be about just giving goodies but what benefit does it bring to the rakyat.
Now this is an MP who talks sense to me.

A Christian point of view on the budget

2009-11-05T00:25:00.003+08:00

Here is a piece that gives a Christian reflection on the recent budget. I generally don’t like to comment on budgets as I am not an economist. So hope this will help to give points to ponder on the budget just presented.

Federalism and politics

2009-11-04T19:47:00.005+08:00

Last Thursday (29/10) I was at Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, attending a one-day roundtable entitled “Political parties and civil society in Federal Countries: The Case of Malaysia.” The discussion focused on federalism, i.e. federal-state government relationship, in the country with participants from the academia, social activists and politicians.

I found the roundtable interesting as it gave me some insights into the current political situation. Here is my five cents worth of insights ...

Firstly, political parties still matter in our political stage. Simply put, they are the main actors that initiate (or resist) changes in the nation’s political landscape. Other political actors need political parties to achieve their agenda.

Secondly, whoever helms the federal government holds more power than state governments. This is unsurprising as the federal government holds the purse string and with a stronger administrative machinery. For example, all state governments are guaranteed by Federal Constitution a certain amount of financial allocation from the federal government. However, opposition state governments have found it difficult to get the funds because of “administrative” problems. In some cases, the federal government has by-passed by the state government by channelling the funds to federal agencies in these states for development purposes.
Thirdly, at the federal level, the executive has more power than the legislative. For obvious reason, lets look at finance and manpower.

The annual budget for the Parliament is around RM 65 million. MPs are expected to hire their own research assistants to help them table bills and debates. Parliament, if I’m not mistaken, have two or three research assistants to help two hundred plus MPs compared to the British where each MP would have a few research assistants to assist them. The pay of the research assistant is around RM 1,000 plus. So MPs, if they want, would have to hire their own research assistants. With all their expenses, the monthly funds allocated to each MP is not enough to get high quality research assistant.

The PM’s department alone has an annual budget that runs into billions and with a few thousand personnel. It also have departments that do research and implementation of government policies. And this is just one department. Multiply it with other ministries and you get the picture.

So, what do I conclude from these insights. Like it or not, we can’t run away from political parties if we want to bring changes in society and winning state government will not be enough as it does not have the political muscle to govern effectively without support from the federal government. Therefore, winning over the right to control the federal government is very important.

A proposal to stop the “frog” jumping phenomena

2009-11-04T10:24:00.002+08:00

Do MPs have the luxury of jumping from one party to another? Given the spate of frog jumping that has taken place in the country, Wong Chin Huat’s proposal must be taken with serious consideration.
You can read the article here.

Economics and politics

2009-11-02T17:05:00.002+08:00

Great piece about how government policies can affect the economy which, in turn, affect our well-being. Notice how the price of everything keep rising and there seem to be no end to it.
The article is by a key opposition politician on the recent budget. Read the article here.

Unemployment and Government Policies

2009-10-28T14:19:00.006+08:00

Here is an interesting piece by the respected economist Dr. Lim Teck Ghee on the failure of government policies to deal with unemployment problem. Looking at the figures (the number unemployed and the amount spent on making them employable) shocked me.

What is your opinion on this problem? More importantly, what are some prescription that you would offer to resolve this problem? We all have a stake in the economic well-being of the nation.

Christians and Democracy

2009-10-26T16:30:00.003+08:00

What is the role of Christians in the democratic political process? Why are Christians so indifferent to politics? I published a piece meditating on these questions with Micah Mandate. Have a look at the piece and tell me what you think.
The piece is linked here.

The business of government

2009-10-25T17:46:00.004+08:00

What do government do? The short answer is, of course, to govern. Basically it means government makes and implement policies that ensure the well-being of its people. Now we come to the question of how do we know whether the policies introduced has effectively brought about this well-being?
Now, I don’t want to bother you with the whole gamut of the literature found in political science on this issue (it is abstract and boring). The best way is looking at how real government go about measuring the effectiveness of its policy in securing “the well-being of the people.” Our current PM, for example, has pledged that his administration will adopt the “business” model to ensure the effectiveness of the government machinery. For this reason, he has announced earlier on the use of Key Performance Index (KPI) and National Key Results Areas (NKRAs) for this purpose. In theory, this will not only show whether the government is achieving its purpose or not but also as an accountability measure where people can observe whether the government is doing their job or not.
I do not propose to argue the pros or cons of this approach but rather I want to look at it from another angle. The people side of the equation. How many of us, if we honest about it, take time to reflect whether the government is doing their job or not? To use the analogy from business, if I am a shareholder in a company, I will be looking at things such as whether the company is making money or not, the price of the share in the stock market, etc.
So do we take time to see whether the government is doing their job in ensuring our well-being? If they are not doing a good job, do we take action? Face it, if the company which I hold stocks in is not making a profit, I would make noise in the AGM and let management knows about it.
It seems, the same does not happen in government. Oh, we complain … in mamak stalls or the blogosphere. But we don’t let the government knows about it except in election time through our votes. The problem here is .. it’s every three to five years.
Perhaps, we should let the government know much earlier. The question is how. Well, we have elected representatives, don’t we? Shouldn’t we let our representatives know how we feel about issues that we are not happy about … and in a nice way … tell them if they don’t raise it up in Parliament or the state assembly … they might lose our votes. Now that will really wake them up.
More often than not, we only go to see these people when we have problems (hhmm … sounds like going to a dentist). Their job is more than just to solve problems. As member of the legislative branch of the government, their job is to tell the executive branch how we feel as well. But they will only do it, if people voice their concerns to them and not otherwise because their political future is at stake, i.e our votes. Of course, we do have a small group who raises our concerns in parliament (you know who they are). But suppose now a larger group now raises the same concern … Parliament will never again become so predictable. Then the executive will have to sit up and pay attention.
KPI and NKRA is fine and good but if the people can’t be bothered to ensure government is accountable to them then it will just end up as another PR stunt with nothing change.
What do you think?

Politics and Christians

2009-10-22T16:19:00.003+08:00

I was just reading this interesting article arguing that Christians cannot avoid politics even as Christ did not avoid it. Now I am just wondering … why do Christians ignore politics?
I notice that Christians tend to wall off Christ and Caesar as if the latter does not matter in their live.
So why is this so? Care to share your thoughts?

More analysis on the Bagan Pinang be-election

2009-10-15T10:43:00.003+08:00

More analysis on why BN won the by-election. Wow, its seems like I don't have to keep my promise of writing the follow-up posts on this topic. Anyway, if you are intersted ... please read this article.

Right, I will move on to other topics as with more comments and analysis coming out..

Should we be surprised with the results of the Bagan Pinang by-election?

2009-10-12T21:59:00.004+08:00

On the day when the good people of Bagan Pinang went to vote, a friend of mine asked me during breakfast as to who will win the state’s seat. I replied that BN/UMNO will win and that the odds were stacked against PR/PAS. I continued on saying that I was really paying close attention to this contest and that if PR/PAS won then things would be very interesting for our national politics. With that I resumed my breakfast. Later in the evening, when the results of the by-election came in, I felt smugly justified by my answer to my friend and thought no more about it.
The next day, I received an email from an ex-student of mine asking my analysis of the by-election. Feeling that I owe both of them an answer as to why BN/UMNO would win, I thought that I would post my thoughts on the Bagan Pinang by-election.
Let’s begin with the results. BN/UMNO won by a landslide with its candidate Mohd Isa who polled 8,013 votes compared with its rival PR/PAS’s candidate Zulkefly Mohamad Omar who polled 2,578 votes where Isa’s majority was 5, 435. When compared with the 2,333-vote majority garnered by former BN assemblyman Azman Mohammad, whose death necessitated the by-election, it would seem that BN/UMNO’s victory must have been a morale booster which the ruling coalition was looking for in the light of trouncing handed by the opposition coalition in previous by-elections and the political implosion of UMNO’s political partners and the scandals that have followed BN.
So what changed in this by-election? The factors that played a hand in the ruling coalition’s victory were the dominance of local politics and personality, postal votes and the growing doubt among non-Malay voters on the viability of opposition parties to work together as a coalition.
i) The dominance of local politics and personality
Unlike previous by-elections where national issues played a crucial role, the recent by-election was essentially based on local politics and personality.
Consider the BN/UMNO’s candidate, Mohd. Isa, who is considered a local boy made good. Although tainted with corruption, he has strong ties to the local community which is ready to overlook this misdeed, as can be observed with the votes which he garnered.
And then, there is the advantage of having the resources of the federal and state governments in this by-elections. In the run-up to the by-election, the Prime Minister has declared Port Dickson as “Army Town” that promises to bring economic benefits to the area. In addition, the Deputy Prime Minister promises to ensure that the Ladang Silliau public housing project (which had been proposed in 2003) takes off. The project will benefit the Indian community who are in the estate in the area be completed. He also promises that the federal government will look at issues that affect the welfare of the estate workers. The Indian community forms 20% of the voters in Bagan Pinang.
In short, the ruling coalition promised to bring development to Bagan Pinang which resonate with the voters. In short, the issue of bread and butter was foremost in the mind of the voters.
ii) Postal votes
Political analysts have pointed out that postal votes would play an important role in the upcoming by-election. These votes made up 1/3 of the total votes in this state constituency.
For example, Prof. James Chin (from Monash University) had predicted that BN/UMNO will pick up most of the postal votes in the by-election. The results proved him right. Mohd Isa polled 3,521 of the 4,611 votes cast.
The Nutgraph has done a piece on postal votes which clearly provide the answer to why the ruling party has an advantage on this form of voting. I do not purpose to reinvent the wheel by talking about it. It is suffice for me to point you to that article.
iii) Non-Malay voters perception of PR
Since the last General Election, PR has been beset by internal conflict among its member political parties. In the one and a half years since its formation, PR still acts as if it is a coalition of individual political parties, each with it's own interests and agenda rather than sharing a common interests and agenda. To quote a phrase from the bible "each did what was right in their own eyes".
Take, for example, the case of the state government of Selangor. In recent months, the PR state government has been embroiled in controversy with the PAS state chief Hassan Ali’s spat with his colleagues in the state assembly over the way the Select Committee for Competency, Accountability and Transparency (Selcat) works and with his colleagues at the state government over the issue of banning the sale of alcohol in Muslim-majority residential areas which culminated with the threat of pulling PAS out of the PR state government coalition.
Such conflicts within PR have created some doubts among non-Malays as whether the opposition coalition can be a viable alternative to the ruling coalition, BN. Some have become disillusioned with PAS over its stand on Islam which they feel restrict their rights.
In addition, certain quarters in the Indian community are becoming impatient with PR, which they perceived as dragging their feet in helping to resolve the plight of the community. Indeed, there had been calls that Indian voters boycott the by-election all together to show their displeasure. Others, however, have taken the route of transferring back their support to BN albeit without supporting MIC. For example, the recently formed Makkal Sakti Party had declared that they will throw their effort in garnering Indian support for BN in the by-election even though they are not part of the BN coalition.
Such perception have eroded some votes from the non-Malay quarters for PR.
iv) Implications for Malaysian politics in the coming days
The results of the Bagan Pinang opened up new questions about the Malaysian political scence in the coming days. For example, does Bagan Pinang mark the resurgence of BN? Would non-Malay voters now swing back to BN? Would PAS soften its stand on Islam in order to attract non-Malay voters or would it harden its position in order to consolidate Malay voters?
These are some of the questions which I would be posting in the coming days.