Playing a risky waiting game

Free Malaysia Today

September 17, 2012

The prime minister is holding back on the election date to shore up flagging support and give his reforms more time to work.

KUALA LUMPUR: Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak could call national elections anytime between now and April 2013, but he may wait to announce a generous budget on Sept 28 as he plays a risky waiting game.

The ruling Barisan Nasional coalition is widely expected to win the election but further gains by the opposition after its strong performance in 2008 could undermine Najib’s standing.

Holding back until after September would give Najib more time to shore up flagging support among ethnic Chinese voters, and to convince Malaysians that his reform efforts are working as he tries to reverse the ruling coalition’s worst election showing in 2008.

It would also make him vulnerable to any worsening of the global economy or the emergence of fresh corruption scandals that could push swing voters over to the three-party opposition.

The political atmosphere is becoming more tense as the election looms. Key opposition figures have complained of hate speech and acts of intimidation directed at them.

Its economy grew at a surprisingly strong annual pace of 5.4% in the second quarter, Bank Negara said, as a jump in private and government investment helped offset weakness in exports. The central bank expects growth this year to be at the top end of its 4%-5% forecast.

Following is a summary of key Malaysia risks to watch:

Election approaching

The polls will be a test of Najib’s efforts to reform the state-heavy economy and roll back repressive security laws without upsetting the status quo that has seen his dominant Umno party rule since independence in 1957.

The election promises to be the most fiercely fought in Malaysia’s history, and already tensions are high after Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim was charged over his role in a major street protest for electoral reform in April.

In addition, senior opposition politician Rafizi Ramli, who made a series of revelations about alleged government wrongdoing, was arrested in early August for disclosing bank details related to a high-profile corruption case involving the family of a former minister.

Meanwhile, the government is planning a fresh round of cash handouts to poorer families, Deputy Prime Minister Muhiyuddin Yassin said in June, a move aimed at shoring up support among undecided voters.

In July, Najib – facing growing public demand for greater political and social freedoms – said he would scrap the colonial-era Sedition Act, which has been used over the years to silence dissent.

Firm domestic demand helped cushion Malaysia’s economy from the worst of the slowdown in global activity in the first half of 2012 and the trend is expected to continue as government and government-linked companies spend on big projects.

At the same time, heavy government spending and an overly generous budget would sharpen concerns over Malaysia’s chronic budget deficit. Ratings agencies have raised concerns about Malaysia’s public finances and its reliance on oil revenue.

Najib’s personal approval rating remains high but support for his ruling coalition is sliding. According to a June survey, Najib’s rating eased one point to 64% while the coalition’s popularity fell 6 points to 42%.

Two July defections from coalition in what has traditionally been a safe bank of seats in the east Malaysian state of Sabah have added to Najib’s worries.

What to watch:

 •Clues about the timing of the election. Signs that the global economy is deteriorating more rapidly could prompt Najib to rush to the polls before Malaysians feel the pain from a slowdown.

 •Large anti-government protests, and the government’s response to them, as well as racial and religious relations. Najib is trying to reach out to non-Muslim minorities who make up about 40% of the population. Last year, he set up diplomatic ties with the Vatican in a bid to win Christian support.

Economic reform

Najib pledged to reform a decades-old affirmative action policy favouring ethnic Malays and replace it with a “New Economic Model” to promote greater competition and boost domestic investment that has lagged in recent years.

But the prime minister has since softened his stance on reforming the policy for fear of alienating conservatives among the majority ethnic Malays who make up about 60% of the electorate.

Investors and the opposition complain that the race-based policy has been widely abused, fostering cronyism.

The government is implementing a US$444 billion initiative, called the Economic Transformation Programme (ETP), that is aimed at propelling the country to developed nation status by 2020.

The government says the ETP has helped it turn the corner on years of sub-par investment, pointing to a 19% jump in private investment last year. Critics say the ETP is overly reliant on government funding, which could end up putting further strains on a budget deficit that hit 5.4% in 2011.

The central bank has kept its benchmark interest rate on hold at 3% since May 2011, a position it maintained in September, saying domestic demand was helping shore up the economy amid a weakening external sector. Malaysia’s trade surplus slumped to RM3.6 billion (US$1.16 billion) in July, its lowest in more than a decade, as the Southeast Asian nation’s exports to the European Union and China fell sharply.

Many analysts believe Najib is waiting until after the election to announce politically sensitive cuts to fuel subsidies that he has described as economic “opium”. That move, as well the implementation of a new goods and services tax, is seen as crucial to tackling the chronic budget deficit and reducing the government’s heavy dependence on the oil sector.

What to watch:

 •How the global slowdown affects the Malaysian economy, and how this affects development spending.

 •A possible rise in Malaysia’s budget deficit if the economy slows and the government ramps up spending in an election year.

– Reuters

                This entry was posted on Monday, 17 September 2012, 5:13 pm and is filed under
Economics
,
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
NEM
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The Havoc Education Reform Inflicts:  Education Blueprint 2013-2025

by Bakri Musa

17th September 2012

First of Five Parts: Education Blueprint – Transparent, But Not Bold Or Comprehensive

Education reform is inflicted upon Malaysians with the regularity of the monsoon. Like the storm, the havoc these “reforms” create lingers long after they have passed through.

            In this five-part commentary I will critique the latest reform effort contained in Preliminary Report: Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025 released on September 11, 2012. The first three essays will address the Blueprint’s findings and recommendations; the fourth, its omissions, and the last, the flaws in the process with this particular reform effort.

            The Blueprint clearly identifies the main problems and challenges at both the system and individual levels, but fails to analyze why or how they came about and why they have been let to fester. Consequently the recommendations are based more on conjecture rather than solid data; more towards generalities and the stating of goals rather than on specifics and how to achieve those goals. On the positive side, the goals and milestones (at least some of them) are clearly stated in quantifiable terms, so we would know whether they have been achieved going forward.

            Despite extensive public participation and the inclusion of many luminaries (including foreign ones) on the panel, the report has many glaring omissions. It fails to address the particular challenges facing Islamic and rural national schools. This is surprising considering that the constituents in both streams are Malays, a politically powerful group. Even more pertinent, those schools regularly perform at the bottom quartile; they drag down the whole system. Improving them would go a long way in enhancing the entire system. Yet another omission is the failure to analyze and thus learn from earlier reform efforts.

            This Blueprint does not live up to Najib Razak’s assertion of being “bold, comprehensive and transparent.” Transparent perhaps, but not bold or comprehensive! That is not surprising as the panel is dominated by civil servants. They have been part of the problem for so long that it would be too much to expect them now to magically be part of the solution.

Predictability of Education Reform

It is a particularly Malaysian obsession to reform its educational policy with the political season. Every new minister feels compelled to do it, as if to demonstrate his political manhood. Now it is Muhyiddin’s turn.

            Five years ago under Hishamuddin there was Langkah Langkah Ke Arah Cemerlangan (Steps Towards Excellence). Five years before that under Musa Mohamad was Pembangunan Pendidikan 2001-2010: Rancangan Bersepadu Penjana Cemerlangan Pendidikan (Education Development 2010-2011. Plan for Unity Through Educational Excellence). Notice the long pretentious titles and frequent use of the word “excellence.”

            In the meantime generations of young Malaysians, especially Malays, continue to pay the price for the follies of previous reforms, in particular the one in the 1970s that did away with English schools. Someone finally wizened up and brought back the teaching of English, albeit only in science and mathematics. Then just as we were adjusting to and recovering from that reversal, a new leader who thought himself smarter changed back the system!

            This latest reform released on September 11, 2012, will prove to be the 9-11 of Malaysian education. The destruction may not be as dramatic visually and physically as the other 9-11, but the wreckage will be real and massive, with the havoc remaining long after to haunt current and future generations. The damage will be extensive, cumulative, and compounding.

            As in the past, this time we are again being promised that this storm of a reform will wash away the thick polluted haze that has been hovering over our schools. Yes, the air will be clearer and fresher after a storm, and the birds will sing. Meanwhile however, we have to deal with ripped roofs, flood debris, and destructive landslides.

            In compiling this Blueprint the government has commendably sought wide public participation and at great expense. The public in turn responded massively and enthusiastically, reflecting the angst over our education system. The panel however, did not sufficiently discern the difference between quantity and quality, and duly gave equal time to the bombasts as well as the wise.

The Challenge of Quality

This Blueprint, like earlier ones, is already getting rave reviews from the usual quarters. Just as predictably, a year or two from now even before any of the recommendations have been fully implemented, “scholars” from our public universities will declare through their “research” that the reforms have already produced the anticipated improvements!

            We saw this when the policy of teaching science and mathematics in English was rescinded. Barely a year into the program and “scholars” from our public universities were already trumpeting the “remarkable” improvement in the science and mathematics scores especially among rural Malay students. With all those great improvements one wonders why we need another reform!

            This new Blueprint was barely released when Muhyyiddin announced a new history curriculum, meaning, one written by UMNO hired hands. So much for the weight given to this reform and its objective of creating students capable of critical and independent thinking!

            No one would argue with the Blueprint’s objectives of improving access, quality, equity, unity, and efficiency. Consider quality; it is uppermost in everyone’s mind. The government proudly parades the success rates at its national examinations, as with the accelerating number of A’s scored. Yet when assessed by such external yardsticks as TIMSS and PISA, our students scored poorly. As the report acknowledges, they are at least two to three grades behind their counterparts in South Korea, and declining.

            The panel glosses over this glaring anomaly and thus fails to draw the only and important conclusion: Obviously what we teach and how we test are substandard; worse, we are doing both wrong!

            If your home thermometer says you do not have a temperature but at the hospital you register a high fever, then you should get rid of your thermometer lest you would be dangerously misled in the future. If we wish our students to be in the top third in PISA and TIMSS, then we should first dispense with the current curriculum and testing as they do not correlate (in fact inversely correlated) with those international measurements.

            Consider another objective, to have our students be bilingual in Malay and English. I agree with that; the problem is how to achieve it. The panel addresses the issue generally, but the kampong boy in Ulu Kelantan faces a vastly different problem in learning English vis-a-vis the diplomat’s son in Bukit Tunku; likewise a Tamil girl on an estate school in Ulu Tiram learning Malay to a penghulu’s daughter at a national school in Ulu Trengganu.

            It would be wiser to focus first on the problem areas, as with improving the Malay proficiency of students in vernacular schools and the English skills of Malays in national schools. Correct both and you would go a long way in improving the system’s overall performance, and in the process satisfy many.

            As the challenges are very different; the solutions too must necessarily be different. For vernacular schools especially in areas where Malay is not widely spoken, devoting more hours to Malay and having bilingual (Malay and the vernacular language) teachers would be the more appropriate solution.

            In the kampongs however, not only is English not widely used, there is also active antagonism to using and learning it. Again this is not a problem unique to the kampongs. In Western Canada there is similar resentment towards learning French despite it being Canada’s second official language. To overcome this and compensate for the low level of French usage in the community, some schools have total immersion classes where pupils would spend their first three or more years in classes conducted entirely in French. As the program is entirely voluntary, it is politically and socially palatable. As parents discover the many advantages, the enrollment soars.

            A similar solution could be employed in the kampongs. Have English immersion classes for the first few or better yet, throughout the entire primary school years. Introduce Malay only at Form One. Go beyond that and have secondary schools that would teach half the subjects in Malay and the other half in English. Science and mathematics would be the ideal subjects to teach in English. Such a school would produce fluently bilingual graduates.

            Aware of the political sensitivities Malays have towards learning English, I would make the program entirely voluntary, like those French immersion classes in Western Canada. Kampong Malays are as rational as those Anglophone Western Canadians. Once those Malays see the advantages of being proficient in English, they will flock to enroll their children in those immersion classes.

            Such schools could be the innovation worthy of emulation by other nations who similarly aspire to have their students be bilingual. Such Malay-English bilingual schools are much easier to set up than Arabic-English or Mandarin-English ones as Malay and English share the same roman script. I would restrict such schools to only those who already have (or can demonstrate) near-native fluency in Malay so that those students would not “forget” how to speak Malay.

            In practical terms, this was how my contemporaries and I learned English back in the 1950s. English usage was even much lower then, in fact nonexistent, at my home and community. I advocate bringing back those English schools, but site them only in areas with low level of English and high Malay usage, as in the kampongs.

            If we were to bring back the old English schools (as the parent-group PAGE is advocating) and locate them in the cities where the usage of Malay is low, then we would only resurrect the old problem where students would ignore Malay.

            Similarly, such Malay immersion classes could be used to enhance the proficiency of non-Malay students, especially in communities where the usage of Malay is low.

            The panel highlights the many islands of excellence in our school system. Yes there certainly are, as with the missionary and independent Chinese schools. As they are already doing a superb job there is little need to reform them. Instead the government should support them so they could enhance and replicate their successes. Others (including and especially the government) would then be inspired to emulate them. I would impose only one condition for that generous public support and that is the enrollment must reflect the general Malaysian society. Such a policy would also further one of the stated goals of the Blueprint: to enhance unity among our young.

Next:  Part Two: Quality Schools Begin with Quality Teachers

                This entry was posted on Monday, 17 September 2012, 3:27 pm and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
Education
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The Kuching Declaration

THE KUCHING DECLARATION

(adopted by Pakatan Rakyat in Kuching at Pakatan Rakyat Malaysia Day Celebrations at Chonglin Park, Kuching on September 16, 2012)

LEST WE FORGET, AND LEST ALL THE PEOPLES OF OUR GREAT NATION OF MALAYSIA FORGET, WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, DO ONCE AGAIN FIRMLY, RESOLUTELY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY PLEDGE AND PROMISE BEFORE THE WHOLE NATION OF MALAYSIA AS OUR WITNESSES, ON THIS HISTORIC DAY THE 16TH OF SEPTEMBER, 2012, IN THE CITY OF KUCHING, AND ON BEHALF OF OUR RESPECTIVE PARTIES AND PAKATAN RAKYAT AS A WHOLE, THAT WHEN WE FORM THE NEXT GOVERNMENT OF MALAYSIA, PAKATAN RAKYAT WILL HONOUR ALL ITS PLEDGES AND PROMISES TO THE PEOPLES OF MALAYSIA.

WE WILL HONOURABLY EXECUTE ALL THE POLICIES SET FORTH IN THE BUKU JINGGA SO THAT MALAYSIA WILL ONCE AGAIN BE A GREAT NATION, HER PEOPLES PROSPEROUS, HER FUTURE SECURE AND PEACEFUL, AND HER NAME CELEBRATED BY ALL THE NATIONS OF THE WORLD.

WE WILL HONOUR THE SPIRIT OF THE MALAYSIA AGREEMENT OF 1963 WHICH OUR FOUNDING FATHERS PUT THEIR HANDS TO, AND AS A SIGN OF OUR DEEP COMMITMENT TO THE PEOPLES OF SARAWAK AND SABAH, CONSISTENT WITH DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES AND JUSTICE FOR ALL MALAYSIANS, IN PARTICULAR:

ARTICLE ONE: EQUAL PARTNERS

We will restore the spirit of the Malaysia Agreement and the position of Sarawak and Sabah as equal partners within Malaysia by restoring autonomy to Sarawak and Sabah within the framework of the Federal Constitution.

ARTICLE TWO: FAIR REPRESENTATION

We will increase national integration between Sarawak, Sabah and Peninsular Malaysia through a fair power-sharing arrangement that fully upholds the spirit of the Malaysia Agreement.

ARTICLE THREE: CITIZENSHIP

We will set up a Royal Commission to solve the perennial national problem of illegal immigration and citizenship, particularly in Sarawak and Sabah.

ARTICLE FOUR: RESTORATION OF NATIVE CUSTOMARY RIGHTS OVER LAND

We will endorse the authority already vested in the State Laws of Sarawak and Sabah to set up Land Commissions to investigate, resolve disputes, redress, survey and restore Native Customary Rights over Native Customary Lands.

ARTICLE FIVE: COMPETENT SARAWAK AND SABAH

We will endorse the appointment of Sarawak and Sabah citizens to head Government Departments in their own respective States and by the powers vested in the State Secretaries of both States as well as give first priority to the appointment of Sarawak and Sabah citizens at Federal Government level functioning within Sarawak and Sabah.

ARTICLE SIX: OIL JUSTICE

We will raise the royalties paid on petroleum and hydrocarbon resources to Sarawak and Sabah to 20% from the present 5%.

ARTICLE SEVEN: EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT

We will bring the level of infrastructure development in Sarawak and Sabah up to par with Peninsular Malaysia.

WE, the undersigned, MAKE THIS DECLARATION AS AN INCONTROVERTIBLE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE PAKATAN RAKYAT AND THE PEOPLES OF MALAYSIA, THIS HISTORIC DAY OF 16TH SEPTEMBER, 2012, ON MALAYSIA DAY, SO THAT IT MAY RING OUT RESOUNDINGLY From MALAYSIA’S high forest hills Down to the open sea; SO THAT freedom MAY ever reign; AND OUR PEOPLES Live in Unity!

In witness whereof the undersigned, being duly authorised thereto, have signed this Declaration, and all the peoples of Malaysia being witnesses thereof.

Done at Kuching, this 16th day of September, 2012, in six copies of which one shall be deposited with each of the signatories.

For People’s Justice Party (KEADILAN)

Y.B. Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Ketua Umum

For Democratic Action Party (DAP)

Y.B. Lim Kit Siang, Parliamentary Leader

For Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS)

Y.B. Dato’ Seri Hj. Abdul Hadi Awang, President

For People’s Justice Party (KEADILAN)

Y.B. Baru Bian, Chairman, PKR Sarawak

For Democratic Action Party (DAP)

Y.B. WONG HO LENG, Chairman, DAP Sarawak

For Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS)

TUAN HAJI ADAM BIN AHID, State Commissioner, PAS Sarawak

                This entry was posted on Monday, 17 September 2012, 4:37 pm and is filed under
nation building
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Sabah
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


10 Reasons Why You Should Bother To Protest

By Thomas Fann

It was soon after the Bersih 3.0 protest on 28th April, 2012 that I chanced upon a posting on a social media network by someone I knew. Commenting on the huge protest and violence that followed, he said that it is not that he doesn’t support the demands of the protesters but he doesn’t believe protesting is the way to go as it doesn’t solve anything.

It is very likely that many a Malaysian echoes the same sentiments and asks the question – Why bother to protest? Can anything good come out of a protest? Some may even agree with the Prime Minister who said this is not our culture.

I want to suggest ten reasons why we should bother to protest:

Reason 1 – It’s our constitutional right

Did you know that the supreme law of our land, the Federal Constitution in Article 10(1)(b), states that all citizens have the right to assemble peaceably and without arms (weapons)? Unfortunately, subsequent laws passed like the Police Act (Section 27) and its new incarnation, the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA) 2012, restricts that right.

It can be argued that such restrictions are not in keeping with the intent and spirit of the Constitution which allows us to assemble peaceably. In such cases of inconsistency, we revert back to our supreme law, the Federal Constitution. As law-abiding citizens, our courage and confidence come from knowing this fact.

Reason 2 – It’s democracy in action

We are still a democracy and every citizen has a right to express their views in a peaceful manner. As you glance through the news today, you’d find people from all over the world protesting on a variety of issues ranging from unemployment to the latest government austerity measures, to the way banks are run and to an offensive film. It is not just happening in so-called “less” democratic countries but more so in countries that cherish democracy.

Democracy is not just about casting our votes at the ballot box. It is about us engaging the political process on an ongoing basis through dialogue with lawmakers and government servants, lobbying or petitioning for change in a certain policy, and even protests. Some issues need multi-pronged approach when the authorities are unresponsive.

Reason 3 – It is healthy and needful

People need a space where they could express their unhappiness and it is imperative that they be given that space. Constant suppression of people’s need to release pent-up frustrations could only lead to an explosion of anger as seen in the Arab Spring.

Protests are healthy in the way they show up the feelings of the people and are symptoms of some under-pinning problems, not the problem itself. Using the analogy of our body, protests are like fever or cough. A good physician does not only alleviate the symptoms but also treat the root cause, be it a virus or bacteria that is causing the fever or cough. Good governance means allowing room for protests and paying attention to the root cause for it.

Reason 4 – It highlights issues

Issues that affect communities are many and they are all important to those affected by them. Often times issues would not be made known to the rest of the country or the world without a protest.

This would especially be true in a country where the press and media are not free. How else would we know about problems in our electoral roll and process, about Lynas, Bukit Koman and Pengerang, if not for the series of Bersih and Himpunan Hijau protests? How many more injustices and abuses have gone unnoticed because it was not highlighted by the press and no protest was organised?

Protests draw our attention to issues that may or may not directly affect us but at least we know about them and can decide what to do about it.

Reason 5 – It can bring about changes

It would not be wrong to say that much of the course of world history is shaped by direct actions of the people. Rulers who failed to serve the interest of their subjects are ALWAYS removed, eventually. Martin Luther King Jr. said, “Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.”

Protests led by Martin Luther King Jr, Mahatma Gandhi, anti-apartheid protests worldwide, democracy movements in South Korea, Taiwan, Philippines, Myanmar and Middle East have brought about seismic changes in their countries.

On the local front, the Bersih protests has forced the EC to implement some changes like the use of indelible ink and promises of reforms to the other demands. While it is true that it still falls short of the true reforms we are asking for, it has forced the authority to consider the demands. If any of

the demands are not fulfilled, they would have served to educate the voters of the problems and for them to question why they are unfulfilled.

Reason 6 – It unites people around issues

Issues like injustices, freedom, corruption, abuses of power, crime, land grab and the environment affect all regardless of race and religion.

As a participant in a number of protests over the past couple of years, I can tell you one of the most exhilarating experiences was the joy and privilege of marching side by side with Malaysians of all races, faith, age, and social backgrounds. It was a cleansing experience, being washed clean of years of state sponsored prejudices against our fellow citizens.

When we protest against our shared common concerns, we realize that we share a common desire for a better future. Underneath all the things that make us different, we realize that we are just fellow humans.

Reason 7 – It exposes the authority

The role of the governing authority is to facilitate peaceful protests and to maintain law and order.What all of us, the protesters and the government, should want is a peaceful assembly. Only a very small minority would want a violent and chaotic assembly.

If the stated intent and planning of the protest organiser is towards a peaceful assembly, there is no reason why the authority and the police cannot facilitate it. They just need to provide a public space large enough for the protesters, divert the traffic, deal reasonably with anyone who wants to

break the peace, and allow the protest to proceed.

We have to ask ourselves why they would want to hinder, politicize, demonize and outright attack innocent protesters unless they feel that their shortcomings are being exposed?

Reason 8 – It’s a check and balance

For too long we have had a one-party political system, given that the opposition has always been weak until 2008. Now that we are moving towards a two-party system, we can take heart our democracy is maturing.

Another key component of a matured democracy is the active involvement of the citizens. Some would call this the Third Force. It is needed to hold the politicians in check, to ensure that the promises made during elections are kept. The awakening that our country experienced in 2008 was the awakening of the Rakyat and it is here to stay.

Reason 9 – It’s standing in solidarity with others

Don’t let others struggle for us but stand in solidarity with those who share our belief and are overcoming their fears to make a stand for what is right. It is all too easy to click “Like” on Facebook or even to give money but at the end of the day it is about numbers. Authorities only take notice when there are big numbers of protesters.

I joined in my first protest at Bersih 2.0 because I didn’t want to let others do the fighting (struggle) for me. I want to be there for my own family and for my country.

Reason 10 – It’s doing something

Rather than doing nothing and complaining about things, you are doing something when you protest with others who feel the same way as you do. Admittedly, protest is not the only way to go but sometimes it is the only option left when all other attempts are met with indifference or disdain.

Perhaps there are many who feel the same way as my friend that protests are a waste of time and that it is too messy. To him and others like him, I’d want to ask, “What are you doing then?” Turning up at a protest is the least we can do.

Conclusion

As a nation, we are going through the throes of growing pains and it does look messy – dirty politics, corruption, vote-buying, gangster tactics, hate speeches, expose of scandals after scandals and of course, mega protests. These are normal and will soon pass if we do not give up struggling for justice and for the preservation of our democracy.

We can gain courage from countries like South Korea and Taiwan whose people have to struggle to set their country free from military juntas not too long ago. But once freedom was achieved and democracy established, their countries flourish and today are shining examples of prosperity and peace. Yes, it was messy during transition but it was well worth it.

To the argument that it is not our culture, one only has to look at the history of our nation. UMNO who held mass protests against the Malayan Union and the road to independence was one of protest right up to 1957 and there has always been protests in the subsequent years.

Perhaps there are few men who had to struggle with this matter of protestation in the modern context of a democratic society as much as Martin Luther King, Jr. He has this to say.

“The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy. The true neighbor will risk his position, his prestige and even his life for the welfare of others.”

Protesting is not a matter of our culture or not. It is a human need to be heard and for our views to be respected. No more excuses, pack your salt and bottle of water, our voices must be heard.

THOMAS FANN blogs at
www.newmalaysia.org

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 18 September 2012, 7:22 pm and is filed under
Bersih
,
Constitution
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Are these promises still being respected and honoured?

By Martin Jalleh

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 18 September 2012, 10:14 am and is filed under
Martin Jalleh
,
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Charges against Bersih supporters thrown out

By
Hafiz Yatim
 | 11:45AM Sep 18, 2012

Malaysiakini

Twenty-one people, including federal and state lawmakers, were acquitted and discharged by a sessions court today for illegal assembly and not abiding by a police officer’s order.

The prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case against the accused and police failed to show the roles played by the participants in the candlelight vigil in support of Bersih in 2008, the court in Petaling Jaya ruled.

“There is a gap in the prosecution’s case following the inconsistent testimony of the witnesses  (from the police).

“The witnesses were inconsistent in stating the time for the crowd to disperse as some were saying 9.45pm and others 10pm and 11pm. This affects to their credibility and also the credibility of the order isued by the police to disperse.

“Following this, there is no need to call the accused to enter their defence. They are acquitted and discharged on all charges,” sessions judge Hayatul Akmal ruled.

She also said the initial gathering in front of the Petaling Jaya Municipal Council building lawn was considered a spontaneous assembly as there was no proper organisation.

Hayatul also noted the participants were wearing various coloured T-shirts with various messages, including anti-ISA messages and hence she could not rule who the organisers were.

“As such, the participants need not have a permit within the definition of the Police Act and hence it cannot be considered an illegal gathering,” Hayatul added in her judgment.

Those charged included Petaling Jaya Utara MP Tony Pua, Selangor exco member Ronnie Liu, Kampong Tunku assemblyperson Lau Weng San and MBPJ councillor Tiew Way Keng, Catholic priest Paulino Francesco Miranda and lawyer S Ashok Kandiah.

The others were K Raman, G Ramish, Augustine Gan Liam Tee, Andrew Ng Yew Han, Lim Cheng Inn, Ooi Suan Huah, Ambrose Poh Teik Huat, Johny Andu @ Abu Bakar Adnan, K Thengaran, Ong Boon Keong, Mohd Fasya Mohd Tajudin, Goh Jin Kiat, Henry Hor @ Henry James Hor, Mohd Khairul Anuar Mohd Jamil and Goh Chien Yee.

All of them are between 29 and 66 years, with the majority hailing from the Klang Valley and the others from Alor Setar, George Town and Tampin.

They were charged under dubious circumstances in 2009, two days before Chinese New Year and two months after the November 2008 candlelight vigil on the occasion of the first anniversary of electoral reform movement Bersih.

Hayatul also ruled that despite Liu being arrested as he was speaking at the assembly, there was no evidence before the court to corroborate testimony from prosecution witnesses that Liu was part of the assembly.

Fine and/or jail if convicted

They were charged with illegal assembly and failing to adhere to orders to disperse from the Petaling Jaya City Council field off Jalan Yong Shook Lin, given by police officer Supt Mohammad Shukor Sulong.

The 21 were accused of committing the offences during an anti-ISA vigil at the field from 9pm to 10.10pm on Nov 9, 2008.

They were charged under Section 27 of the Police Act for both the offences, for which each of them would be fined between RM2,000 and RM10,000 and/or a jail term of not more than a year on each charge if convicted.

Section 27 of the Police Act has been repealed and has since been replaced with the Peaceful Assembly Act.

Commenting on the decision, lawyer Gobind Singh Deo who represented some of the accused, said it had taken close to four years to arrive at the verdict.

“A lot has changed since Section 27 of the Police Act was repealed. The sessions judge has given sound reasoning to acquit all the accused and the attorney-general should study the reasons.

“We also hope that the prosecution will not appeal the decision,” Gobind said.

DAP parliamentary leader Lim Kit Siang said the decision showed that the 21 citizens should not have been charged in the first place.

“I reiterate that the AG should not appeal this decision,” Lim said.

Pua described the court’s decision as a victory for freedom of assembly as it showed how repressive the laws were prior to the Peaceful Assembly Act.

Liu thanked the lawyers and the judge for the decision.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 18 September 2012, 2:25 pm and is filed under
Bersih
,
Court
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Education The Sacred Torch

A Poem

by Allan CF Goh

Education starts from birth’s yell

To teach the young survival skill

Stories that all parents will tell

Enhance the infants’ growing trill

It is found in the lilting song

Or the constant loves that surround

Or the voices heard all day long

As well as all the things around.

School and ‘formal education’

To many are one and the same

That’s a narrow definition

That strives to bring the child to fame

School should be a knowledge centre

To fund children’s curiosity

Allow good values to enter

With proper generosity

School is the national cradle

To produce upright citizens

If the wrong knowledge is peddled

The Nation fails with denizens

With all the useless attributes

Unable to discern wrong from right

Disadvantaged to contribute

To bless the State with brightest light

Education the sacred torch

Must light up the mental darkness

With all righteous principles taught

To produce students of rightness

With useful knowledge and wisdom

And unquestioned ability

So as to build the best kingdom

Within the world’s community

All our schooling generation

Must not be manipulated

By contrived misinformation

Or ‘facts’ politically polluted

They must freely develop

To the best of their potential

In solid worth enveloped

Not crippled by politics racial

A good sensible government

Will give all our students the best

Ensure their destined fulfillment

To overcome all future test

A responsible government

Ensnare them not in politics’ whirl

But provide sound encouragement

And value them for the future world

Students should not be subjected

To wishy-wasy vagaries

With their best interests rejected

For political expediencies

The State must provide best features

In planning our education

For our youth to touch the future

Confidently for the Nation

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 18 September 2012, 6:37 pm and is filed under
Education
,
Poem
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib-Taib “love fest” in Bintulu for Malaysia Day celebrations camouflaged the fact that  Taib has won hands-down his political tug-of-war with Najib

The 49th Malaysia Day Celebrations in Bintulu on Sunday witnessed a “love fest” between the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak and the Sarawak Chief Minister, Tan Sri Taib Mahmud, with each crooning the greatness of the other.

Najib praised the co-operation and support for the  Federal Government from Taib and the Sarawak state government,  and even alleged that “certain states” are not as developed as Sarawak because other state governments “prefer to politicise issues instead of working with the Federal Government”.

On his part, Taib gave his blessings to Najib as the Prime Minister when he said that it would be a loss to the nation and people “if we lose the continuity of the good government in the form of the Barisan Nasional government”.

Taib added that “there is no political newcomer that can produce miracle to say they can do better than Barisan Nasional government which has run the country so well for more than 50 years”.

But what the Najib-Taib “love fest” in Bintulu camouflaged was the clear victory “hands-down” by Taib in the political tug-of-war with Najib.

Before the Sarawak state general election in April 2011, Najib had tried to pressure  Taib to step down as Chief Minister but in vain.

There were reports that Taib, who had been Sarawak Chief Minister for over 30 years since 26th March 1981, succeeded in getting a “reprieve”, on the basis that he would call the  state general elections and to leave office once a “transition period” had established a suitable successor.

This was what
Sarawak Tribune
 reported on Sunday, 20th March 2011:

Taib to step down after polls

SERIAN: Chief Minister Pehin Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud says he will step down but before that he wants to lead the Barisan Nasional (BN) in the upcoming state election to ensure smooth leadership transition.

He made the announcement at the Samarahan-level launching of ‘Sejiwa Senada’ programme here yesterday.

The programme, launched by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, is aimed at fostering closer contacts between the people and civil servants through the promotion of government services in a one-stop service centre.

Taib said: “I had the intent ion to step down even way back in 2006 but due to many factors and unavoidable ci rcumstances then, i t was not possible for me to do so.”

Najib, meanwhile, said he respected Taib’s decision (to step down) and gave his assurance to the people that he would give his full support to the Chief Minister in leading the state government.

“I respect Pehin Sri because he has been in politics for a long time…even during the time of my father as the Prime Minister.

“I support Pehin Sri’s decision to gradually step down as the Chief Minister but this will be done at the right time and I can assure the people that when Pehin Sri is ready, the transition will be a smooth one,” he said.

The Prime Minister said that Taib would continue to serve the people in other capacities even after relinquishing the Chief Minister’s post, and assured that the federal government would continue to defend the rights and interests of Sarawakians for a long time to come, regardless of their races and beliefs.

The matter (decision to step down) was again mentioned at a press conference by the Prime Minister at Kuching International Airport here before leaving for Kuala Lumpur yesterday evening.

Najib told the press that Taib would proceed to contest in the upcoming state election and to continue leading the Sarawak Barisan Nasional party in the election.

When pressed further, Najib did not discount the possibility that Taib would step down midway into his term of office after winning the state election.

There was however widespread cynicism and scepticism that Taib had agreed to any exit timetable, which prompted Najib to return to the subject three weeks later when starting his six-day whirlwind election  tour of Sarawak on April 11, 2011 declaring at a rally at the Kuching South City Council (MBKS) indoor stadium in Bintawa, Kuching:

 “I have discussed with the Sarawak CM and he has agreed to have a leadership change in Sarawak. Believe me, in me, at the right timing, this will be done.”

When pressed at the time, Taib equivocated although he finally mentioned “two years” as the timeframe of his stepping down as Sarawak Chief Minister after the Sarawak state general elections on April 16, 2011.

As I said at the DAP ceramah in Bau on Sept. 8, Taib’s two-year timeframe to step down as Sarawak Chief Minister will be up in seven months’ time but there are absolutely no signs that he is prepared and ready to honour his understanding and undertaking with Najib to effect a transition of power in Sarawak.

In fact, all the signs point to the opposite, as Taib seems to be ensconced to complete his full term as Chief Minister. This explained his speech earlier on Sept. 8 that there was no need to speed up leadership change as the people of Sarawak were able to “enjoy peace, political stability and organised development”.

I had pointed out that it would appear that Taib’s speech was  specially meant for Najib’s ears, with the unmistakable message that he was  not going to honour his understanding with the Prime Minister on stepping down as Chief Minister.

I said there was “a test of will” between Taib and Najib, and that Taib was “thumbing his nose at the Prime Minister, defying Najib to see who could last longer politically”  as Taib was confident that Najib was too weak politically to try to enforce their understanding before the 416 Sarawak state general elections to be Sarawak Chief Minister for only two years.

I said in Bau that the most appropriate occasion for Najib to clarify whether his understanding with Taib on the latter’s stepping down as Sarawak Chief Minister two years after the Sarawak state general elections still stands would be during the Prime Minister’s visit to Bintulu during the Malaysia Day national celebrations.

The answer is furnished by the Najib-Taib “love fest” in Bintulu during the  Malaysia Day celebrations, which  camouflaged Taib’s  wins hands-down in the political tug-of-war with Najib.

The reason is also very simple and straightforward – the table has turned with Taib now having more political leverage vis-à-vis Najib instead of the other way round 18 months ago before the April 16, 2011 Sarawak state general elections.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 18 September 2012, 4:55 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Topless photos save Najib

Mariam Mokhtar

Malaysiakini

Sep 17, 2012

Since the day Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak got embroiled in the Scorpene scandal, the stench of corruption has clung to him like a cheap, musky perfume.

Last week, on the first day of the Jubilee trip for Prince William and Kate Middleton, Najib was basking in the expectant pleasure of playing host to the royal couple. In an article in the Huffington Post, Najib was effusive about Malaysian-British ties.

By the second day, the world reverberated with news about a magazine which intended to publish topless photos of Kate. Instead of reporters writing positive things about Malaysia, all focus was on the the couple’s next move.

Najib’s chance to improve his reputation, both locally and abroad, were scuppered. In the run-up to GE13, political interference, religious strife and institutional violence were playing havoc with Najib’s image. How ironic that the publishers responsible for the attack on the Duchess of Cambridge were French. The pictures were of Kate on holiday, in France.

It must have been galling for the PM that the French magazine is called ‘Closer’. Najib might have felt the French are getting too close for comfort, for he has already been unsettled by the French investigators into Scorpene.

Attempts by six government agencies to intimidate Suaram and ‘punish’ it, have proven unsuccesfull. Its annual reports and funding have been scrutinised. The Companies Commission of Malaysia (CCM) denies being heavy-handed but the average Malaysian wonders if the same amount of zeal would have been put into companies that have previously been accused of unacceptable practices, corrupt activities or money-laundering.

Defence Minister Zahid Hamidi told Utusan Malaysia of his anxiety that foreigners were manipulating Suaram: “I am worried if Suaram becomes a tool for foreigners. This is because Suaram’s action of accepting foreign funding and being an irresponsible social critic against any government policies indirectly fuels this concern.”

Months, earlier, Zahid did not exhibit the same concerns concerning allegations that a subsidiary of the French defence company DCNS had paid RM142 million for highly classified government documents.

Nor did Zahid show any concern that defence purchases were inflated. Even the sultan of Johore expressed outrage at the price of the Rapid Intervention Vehicles (RIVs).

Zahid does not care that these purchases are excessive or dogged with problems. The exorbitant prices of the Scorpene submarines were high enough to buy a brand new nuclear submarine and still have some loose change. Even the drug cartels of South America were able to build a submarine, from scrap metal, to transport tonnes of cocaine, under the noses of the authorities, along rivers.

Some pundits argue that Najib’s downfall is being orchestrated by those in Umno who eye his premiership and that the vendetta against Suaram is being engineered by his rivals. The truth is that extra help is unnecessary. Recent comments by cabinet ministers will quicken Najib’s and their own fall from grace.

Information, Communications and Culture Ministers Rais Yatim told the Malays to stand united but moments later, as an afterthought or admission of guilt, said that the government “championed all races, including the non-Malays”.

The Education Ministry backpedalled when their guidelines for recognising gays and lesbians in schools caused a public outcry, as the ministry was seen to endorse bullying and bigotry.

Najib said that our culture did not include mooning but he was silent about veteran Malay soldiers performing butt exercises in front of Ambiga Sreenevasan’s house, in May. Nor did he criticise those who had urinated on photos of opposition leaders. Perhaps the behaviour is part of the culture of the Umno elite.

On the receiving end

Why should Umno feel wounded? The opposition is used to the deplorable acts of Umno, but after 55 years of dominance, Umno finally knows what it is like to be on the receiving end.

The judiciary appears to champion only males with bright futures but ignores the plight of rape victims. Najib, who is the de facto Women’s Minister, did not empathise with the public. He failed to consult the women in his cabinet, or even the self-styled First Lady Rosmah Mansor. Despite a 30 percent quota for women in positions of leadership and power, Najib’s cabinet has only one woman, the Tourism Minister, Dr Ng Yen Yen.

To be fair, Najib may have tried to consult Ng (left) but found she was unavailable. Ng has been criticised for allegedly abusing her ministerial status which has earned her the ignominious title of ‘The Tourist Minister’.

Najib’s heart may have skipped a beat, with the French connection in the furore surrounding the Duchess of Cambridge. He must have held his breath, just in case the foreign media also focused on his own French scandals, but he needn’t have worried. Fickle minded people who are concerned by what Kate wears or doesn’t wear, are a bit like Umno and their fixation with sex. Normal people have better things to preoccupy their time.

With the news being dominated by topless pictures of Kate, the foreign media did not write anything about Sabah, under its Chief Minister Musa Aman. What follow-up stories might they have unearthed about the stripping of virgin jungle, allegations of Musa’s corruption, the Swiss investigation into his finances and the alleged backhanders from timber merchants?

Similarly, the abuses under Najib’s rule, like the violence against opposition party members, police beatings, deaths in custody and the falsification of immigration records to boost electoral numbers, went unnoticed all because some French editor wanted to grab the headlines.

What Zahid said is true. Malaysians need to sort out their own internal problems. Umno cannot be entrusted to resolve these, and so the rakyat has its work cut out. Najib has admitted that he is averse to change. Perhaps, Najib’s French dalliance will be known as the French curse.

——————————————————————————–

MARIAM MOKHTAR is a non-conformist traditionalist from Perak, a bucket chemist and an armchair eco-warrior. In ‘real-speak’, this translates into that she comes from Ipoh, values change but respects culture, is a petroleum chemist and also an environmental pollution-control scientist.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 18 September 2012, 8:34 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Two popular request ignored in the Education Blueprint 2013-2025

– Toh Boo Huat

The Malaysian Insider

Sep 17, 2012

SEPT 17 – The just released Education Blueprint was touted to be very comprehensive as it took into account the views and desires of Malaysians who were given opportunities to provide input during dialogues held in major towns across the country.

However, if the responses and loud cheers from large section of the crowd during the dialogues are any indication of popular support and demands by the people, then two such requests are missing in the blueprint i.e. calls for Science and Mathematics be taught in English and, for a non-politician Education Minister.

In my humble opinion, the blueprint ought to address the desire of many ordinary folks who would like their children to learn Science and Mathematics in its lingua franca i.e. English while fully supporting maintaining MBMMBI policy for those who want it. Interestingly, the rich who can afford to attend International schools and those Mara sponsored students are enjoying this privilege that is gradually being denied to those attending national schools.

It is an accepted fact that the English language proficiency among our students and workforce is low. The government has rightly, in this blueprint, seek to tackle this issue by improve the teaching methods, getting better qualified teacher and allocating more teaching hours to it.

These are good starting base to work from but let us be also frank and accept that learning any language in isolation is tough. Learning English will be very much easier and picked up faster when used frequently and applied appropriately. Realistically, studying both Science and Mathematics in English will provide our pupil, especially from rural areas with a great platform to do so, much like a twin turbo-charger needed to help elevate our standard of English.

I am also of the opinion that the plan to introduce English literature is premature and contradict the reasons why PPSMI was left out. The authorities have constantly highlighted that some of our pupil struggled with PPSMI and that we do not have enough capable English teachers for PPSMI, what more English literature which is a much more difficult subject by itself.

In fact, days before the launch, the DPM said: “We have done studies repeatedly and we have found that there is a lack of English teachers” and that “when students did not understand, the teachers reverted to using Bahasa Malaysia to teach the subjects”. (NST 9-Sep-2012 – Improving quality in all areas of education)

Walk before attempting to run. Our immediate and urgent target is students and a mass workforce with a higher proficiency in English, not flooding the country with Shakespeareans! We should only consider introducing English literature in future when the standard of English amongst our pupil is elevated, thus reducing any likelihood of failing, leading to abandoning yet another overly ambitious policy.

The other loud call was for a professional and highly experienced academician to be the Education Minister and this popular request received among the loudest applause during those dialogues. It is obvious that the rakyat do not want any more politicians in that post. Many (including our former DPM, Tun Musa Hitam) are alarmed and have enough of seeing our education standard deteriorate continuously over the years with no end in sight, not to mention numerous “politically inclined” policy decisions made.

The people have spoken and the message was indeed conveyed up. An attendee of two Round Table discussions on education revealed in his blog that “there was an almost unanimous agreement that English should be made the medium of instruction for at least Mathematics and Science”.

How then and why were these two well-supported request left out of the blueprint? Whoever made this decision to do so have betrayed the people!

As parents and primary stakeholders, we demand that the final blueprint include these two issues to truly reflect and honor the desires of the people.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 18 September 2012, 2:25 am and is filed under
Education
,
English
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


We are all gay…

By
Azrul Mohd Khalib
 | September 18, 2012

The Malaysian Insider

SEPT 18 — Let’s see.

I often wear fitted, V-necked T-shirts. I can’t lay claim to having a muscular body but I am working out at the gym and lifting weights so that’s a work in progress. I did have to fight it out with a girl over a really nice bag this one time.

Ergo according to the Ministry of Education-endorsed (yes, despite their denials) guidelines/awareness material, I must be gay.

This latest move by the Yayasan Guru Malaysia Bhd (Teachers’ Foundation of Malaysia) and the Putrajaya Consultative Council of Parents and Teachers Associations is quite simply steeped in ignorance, bigotry and clearly homophobic.

Lest we forget, back in April this year, the Jaringan Melayu Malaysia (JMM) had announced a nationwide campaign to 30 schools to campaign against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender minorities utilising an awareness module targetting students. They misused their positions as parent-teacher association members to gain access to schools for this purpose.

Could this recent programme be an insidious reincarnation of that same movement, now clothed in the skin of the Yayasan Guru Malaysia Bhd and the Putrajaya Consultative Council of Parents and Teachers Associations? It seems like it. Quite successfully too as according to the foundation, they have managed to organise 10 seminars thus far which have reached 1,500 people.

I continue to be disturbed by this misuse of our education system to channel and cultivate fear, hate, prejudice and discrimination towards others who do not conform to stereotypical norms and social expectations. Without a doubt, that will basically be the net effect of these simplistic and ignorant guidelines which have been established to create awareness, identify and single out people or, in this case, children.

To what end, I wonder? What is the purpose of such a move to classify and label people? So that they can be dealt with, or in this case, to prevent them from becoming gays and lesbians? Without a doubt the so-called “symptoms” are superficial and reflect a mind-set dependent on pseudo-science, fear and ignorance to get the message across. Painting the programme as multi-religious and multi-cultural doesn’t make it right either.

So what happens when a group of students determine that a classmate fits these “symptoms”? When they have determined that this student is a lesbian or gay? Are they going to take matters into their hands and make him or her “straight”? In similar situations which have occurred here in Malaysia and around the world, this has resulted in mental and physical abuse, bullying, torture and even rape.

What happens when that child, depressed and facing abuse, decides to commit suicide or dies because of the physical abuse by self-anointed moral vigilantes?

This is why the Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development has deemed such actions which single out children for discrimination to be in violation of the 2001 Child Act. This is why we need to put a stop to such programmes which target our students, our children because they bring harm and cultivate prejudice and bigotry. These programmes are also illegal under Malaysian laws which protect children.

Who is going to be responsible if a child dies or is abused as a direct result of this awareness raising/prevention programme? Make no mistake, it will happen. Will the Yayasan Guru Malaysia, Putrajaya Consultative Council of Parents and Teachers Associations and Ministry of Education be there to take responsibility? Or will they wash their hands like Pontius Pilate?

This denial of responsibility is already happening.

The Ministry of Education is already wiggling around like a worm on a stick trying to escape the maelstrom. Is this campaign being endorsed and supported by the Ministry of Education? You would be justified in thinking so.

The lame denial by the ministry is precisely that, lame and unconvincing. The deputy minister of education officiated the seminar on “Parenting in addressing the issue of LGBTs (lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders)”. He was quoted, in defending the “guidelines”, as saying that the exposure of “symptoms” of gays and lesbians was the best approach to address the “unhealthy phenomenon” among students. Why is the Ministry of Education allowing for these people to place our teachers in a position to cultivate fear, hatred and prejudice among our children towards others?

Take the time to understand and be compassionate. Do not allow our teachers to be the vehicle and medium for our children to begin their young lives by learning to marginalise, hate, discriminate and harm those who are different and do not conform.

If it is true that the Ministry of Education had nothing to do with these guidelines, does not endorse or support them in any way, I call for the ministry to ban and reject such programmes from our schools. Let our schools be what they are supposed to be — places of learning and not places of discrimination and intolerance.

____

Azrul Mohd Khalib works on HIV/AIDS, sex and human rights issues. He is becoming cynical and is in danger of losing his sense of humour and mind. He also runs and is battling an addiction to the “A Song of Ice and Fire” book series. Azrul can be contacted at
[email protected]
.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 18 September 2012, 2:33 pm and is filed under
Education
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


A discourse on a true educative blueprint

 ― Jose Mario Dolor De Vega

The Malaysian Insider

Sep 19, 2012

SEPT 19 ― Once again we return to the perennial question of the kind of educational system that we have.

Indeed, it is not an exaggeration to state that our present academic set-up, instead of encouraging critical thinking, acquiring soft skills and other relevant intellectual weapons, sad but true, is precisely the very one that kills creativity, stifles innovation and impinges on independent dynamism.

Indeed, our prevailing exam-oriented, score-based, points-mindset educational system undeniably distorts motivation and learning by our zealot overemphasis on the importance of scores as outcomes and measures of students’ abilities.

Such distorted academic myopia is one of the root causes why our students lack personal confidence and intellectual creativity. Sadly, they are not even qualified enough to fulfil future tasks that requires beyond memorizing.

I am specifically referring to those employments that demands conversation, writing and oral/verbal communication. I doubt that receiving instructions, writing memoranda, engaging in a discourse, presenting one’s idea in a meeting, etc. can be memorised. I doubt if there is a book that will teach our kids to learn those methods, skills and craft?!

It is my ardent and firm contention that those skills can only be harness and cultivated by the very act of practicing them in everyday actuality inside the class room and even beyond the four corners of the university.

This is the irrefutable fact and they are indisputable! There seems to be a grave confusion with regard to what we want for our students as against the interest of the general system.

Extrinsically, we are encouraging them to memorise and aspire to get big marks, even perfect scores; yet intrinsically we are also demanding they must possess critical thinking, creativity and persuasive discourse.

This is a blatant contradiction and self-defeating to the utmost. How could we expect our lads to possess critical thinking when we are not encouraging them to speak their minds?

How could we expect our pupils to become creative if we consigned them to the borders of the lecture-notes and syllabus of the subjects? And most importantly, how could we expect our students to express and talk in a brilliant persuasive discourse if they lack the personality, the basic foundation and the necessary training (both the written and the oral form)?

I believe that it is unjust for the system and for the teachers to expect too much for the students, given the confusion and contradiction of the system. It follows that it is also unfair for the student to be expected to deliver when they are not even trained and nurtured in the first place.

How could one expect the horse to run fast if the trainer of the horse did not fully practise and exercise the maximum speed of the said horse? If we did not allow the horse to run freely in the plains to explore the vastness of the wild, but rather subjected the same to the four corners of enclosure, do we expect the said horse to perform well the day we release it for the race of life?

Lastly, if we did not give the “finest grasses” and the “best vitamins” to the said beast, do we have the right to expect the said beast to launch and unleash its full prowess and potentials? I do not think so!

At this juncture, I would like to talk about the paramount duty of the trainers, the mentors, the lecturers, yes indeed, the teachers. The base obligation of the teacher is to inspire and guide his pupils to think unlimitedly, to wonder unceasingly, to dare to ask question beyond imagination, to question without fear nor hesitation, to ask unafraid, to speak their minds courageously, to express themselves boldly and with fortitude, to be confident about themselves and so as their character, to open up both their hearts, so as their souls!

The teacher must pass this characteristic of wonder, a questioning mind and sense of awe to his pupils. It is my fervent belief that the ultimate duty of the teacher is to teach his lads not what to think, but how to think.

Not all students understand the rigorous process and the slow and laborious construction or the patient cultivation of the different thoughts and ideas that will lead them to a much higher plane of diverse views and more superior discourses.

If the pupils grasp the inner workings of this complicated, yet truly liberating and beautiful process by virtue of their meticulous efforts and painstaking endeavour to render justice to the whole enterprise and craft, to lay down the material basis of the whole process and consequently draw the comprehensive paradigm of the whole matrix of the interconnection and the interdependence of the different ideas and varied thoughts, as discuss in the class in a given session and correspondingly see to it the ultimate similarity and the profound interrelationship of these various and multifaceted elements; the whole class shall be happy, the teacher has won in his academic passion and this is indeed a victory for both the teacher and the rest of the students.

Theory without practice is dead, in the same vein that a good mark, without the confidence and the courage to justify an argument in an open discussion in a class room is not only detestable but also disgusting.

The dialectical relationship between the teacher and the student must always be present, from the beginning of the class up to its completion. A true teacher is the one who could gear his student to think for themselves independently of the teaching and the rearing and the training of the teacher himself.

He/she must teach them to craft their own paradigm, to discover and consequently construct their own truths, to nurture and create their own structures and foundations, to posit and to simultaneously to answer their own queries and questions.

Having explicated my thoughts let me dwell now on the other perennial problem of the whole matter and that is the issue of the view and focus of the system. Though, I already discussed this issue in passing, let me state that the ultimate problem of the whole academic system is our extreme emphasis and overzealous addiction to the extrinsic aspect of education as against the intrinsic element of it.

The extrinsic aspect refers to the memorization and rote learning of our children so that they will get big scores and good marks in the examination.

At the outset, there seems to be no problem here; however look at it again and analyze the whole spectrum. Getting good scores and full marks in the test is not bad in itself; it becomes bad and even evil the moment an educational system devoted its entire focus and energy to it at the expense of the intrinsic part of the whole general education!

In the critical words of Chris Hedges: We’ve bought into the idea that education is about training and “success”, defined monetarily rather than learning to think critically and to challenge. We should not forget that the true purpose of education is to make minds, not careers.

A culture that does not grasp the vital interplay between morality and power, which mistakes management techniques for wisdom, which fails to understand that the measure of a civilization is its compassion, not its speed or ability to consume, condemns itself to death.

The intrinsic part of education refers to those acts of the students such as speaking freely, engaging in a scholarly debate in class, presenting their ideas, appearing in the stage play, reciting a poem, singing a song, doing some extra-curricular activities, participating in sports competition, and other intellectual, cultural, artistic and aesthetic pursuits.

The intrinsic part of the education is precisely the key, in order for our lads to develop confidence and nurture creativity. These are necessary ingredients in order for them to develop soft skills and other inter-personal skills. The intrinsic aspect is the practice, the practical part or the practicum.

What we need is the rational and reasonable merging of these two elements for the benefit of our children! Henceforth, it is my humble suggestion to all the stakeholders concern to take a break and pause and think about what we truly wanted for our children.

Having said so, it is my firm belief and so hold that the Government, principally and the Education Ministry in particular must rethink, reevaluate and refocus their focus and views and correctively review the whole process of the educational system!

The stakes are high! Why? Because what we are talking here is not only the future of our children, but also the future of the whole country!

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 19 September 2012, 12:05 pm and is filed under
Education
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Barisan Nasional election slogan-turned Merdeka/Malaysia Day theme “Janji Ditepati” never more violated in the 17 days between 55th Merdeka Day and 49th Malaysia Day

The Barisan Nasional election slogan-turned Merdeka/Malaysia Day theme “Janji Ditepati” has never been more violated in the 17 days between the 55th Merdeka Day on 31st August and the 49th Malaysia Day on September 16.

Let me just refer to three  BN violations of “Janji Ditepati” in these 17 days:

1.	Royal Commission of Inquiry into Illegal Immigrants (RCIII) in Sabah

I confess my deep disappointment that the Prime Minister,   Datuk Seri Najib Razak did not at least take the opportunity of the 49th Malaysia Day on September 16 to announce that the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Illegal Immigrants (RCIII) in Sabah has started work.

Najib had said on August 11 that the RCIII would be given six months to complete its investigation and report, and that the six-month period would take effect beginning from the date the  instrument of appointments were issued to the RCIII chairman and members.

More than five weeks have passed since Najib’s announcement on August 11 but there has only been stunning silence and void about the RCIII, as there are no signs that the RCIII chairman and members have been officially appointed to enable the RCIII to start its six-month work to address the decades-old problem in Sabah and Malaysia.

There can be no devastating violation of “Janji Ditepati” and Najib’s own Prime Ministerial slogan of “People First, Performance Now” than the ridiculous and scandalous situation where the RCIII is not yet operational more than seven months after the Cabinet decision on Feb. 8 to set it up and more than five weeks after Najib’s announcement of its terms of reference and membership on August 11.

2.	Najib’s signature slogan of 1Malaysia

Twice during this 17-day period, Najib violated his own signature policy of 1Malaysia which is “to make Malaysia ….a greater nation: a nation where, it is hoped, every Malaysian perceives himself or herself as Malaysian first, and by race, religion, geographical region or socio-economic background second and where the principles of 1Malaysia are woven into the economic, political and social fabric of society”.

The first time Najib violated the 1Malaysia “Janji Ditepati” was when he failed to conduct himself as Prime Minister for all Malaysians and instead made the divisive call to Malaysians to “defend independence” against Pakatan Rakyat in his closing speech at the “Merdeka 55: Janji Ditepati” gathering at the Bukit Jalil National Stadium on 31st August.

The second time Najib violated “Janji Ditepati”  was on Malaysia Day eve, where Najib made an inflammatory and divisive speech on Malay survival and UMNO’s position as backbone of the BN, totally contradictory to his 1Malaysia policy of wanting Malaysians to be “Malaysian first and race, religion or region second”.

3.	Malaysia as world’s best democracy

Najib wants Malaysia to become the world’s best democracy – but the BN government is the source of the most instances of violation of “Janji Ditepati”, as illustrated by the double standards applied by the BN government, which took tough action against  “mooning” by a youth on August 30 and stomping on pictures of the Prime Minister but saw nothing wrong in similar deplorable conduct against Pakatan Rakyat leaders like Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng, and PAS Mentri Besar Datuk Nik Mat Nik Aziz and civil society leaders like Bersih Co-Chairman Datuk S. Ambiga whether perpetrated by UMNO or UMNO-sponsored activists.

Aggravating such double-standards is the shocking statement by the Home Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein just two days before Malaysia Day that there will be no guarantee of security for PKR’s nationwide Merdeka Rakyat tour in the face of rising political gangsterism, crime and violence perpetrated by UMNO elements.

Is Najib prepared to conduct a public review of the many violations of the BN election slogan-turned Merdeka/Malaysia Day “Janji Ditepati” theme?

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 19 September 2012, 2:26 pm and is filed under
Hishammuddin
,
Najib Razak
,
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


An Appeal to the Contemporary Muslim Conscience

Tariq Ramadan |
18 Septembre 2012 / Tariq Ramadan

www.tariqramadan.com

One controversy subsides ; another worse one begins. After the Danish cartoons, the Dutch video “Fitna” and several low-grade irritants, a short, crudely executed—and scrupulously insulting—film has inflamed deep-seated resentments. Several hundred furious demonstrators gathered in front of the American Embassy in Cairo and the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. In the confusion and violence, a U.S. Ambassador and three diplomats were killed ; elsewhere embassies came under violent attack, with many wounded and serious material damage. Literalist Salafis succeeded in mobilizing a relatively small number of demonstrators ; over-excited young people and ordinary citizens who, firm in their intention to protect the Prophet’s reputation, joined in to express their rejection of the American government and its policies. The demonstrations were the work of a tiny minority, but media coverage and the rapid spread of the protest movement has destabilized the region, and may well have substantial consequences for the future of the Middle East, and for the process of democratization and normalization. The violence must be condemned unconditionally. To attack innocents, diplomats and to kill indiscriminately is anti-Islamic by its very nature ; Muslims cannot respond to insults to their religion in this way. On this principle there can be no compromise.

Still, there is every reason to ask what lies behind such vulgar provocations (whose intent is clearly to set off a reaction by mocking Muslims’ unanimous respect for the Prophet of Islam). Here we have individuals, or interest groups (and not the American government) that make cynical use of the noblest values—freedom of speech—to attain the most poisonous objectives, promoting hatred, racism and contempt.
Well-established and protected in their rich and comfortable societies, they pretend to celebrate critical intelligence and wit at the expense of a religion practiced by much less fortunate people, many of who are struggling with numerous social frustrations and are barely surviving. But behind the celebration of freedom of speech hides the arrogance of ideologists and well-fed racists who feed off the multiform humiliation of Muslim peoples, the better to mock their “crazed” and “backward” reactions, thus to demonstrate the clear “superiority” of their civilization or the validity of their resistance to the “cancer” of retrograde Islam. In criticizing this ideological stance there can be no compromise either.

In the light of the contemporary Muslim conscience, while deploring and regretting the emotive reactions of the populations of the Muslim-majority societies of the Global South we must take into account their social and historical reality. Economically and culturally disadvantaged, their political and cultural sensitivities are sorely tried by deliberate insults to the sacred symbols that give meaning to their perseverance and their lives—the very symbols invoked by leaders or Islamist tendencies to nurture resentment and to give voice to anger. This reality in no way justifies violence, but helps us to understand its source and seek out possible solutions. It is the task of the elites, the leaders, of Muslim religious scholars and intellectuals to play a leading role in order to head off explosions of anger and mob violence. They bear three kinds of responsibility.

1. First, they must turn their attention to education, and work toward a deeper understanding of Islam, one that focuses on meaning and ultimate goals, and not simply on rituals and prohibitions. The task at hand is enormous, and requires the full participation of all schools of thought.

2. Second, Islam’s extraordinary diversity must be accepted and celebrated. Islam is one, but its interpretations are many. The existence of literalist, traditionalist, reformist, mystic, rationalist and other currents is a fact, a reality that must be treated positively and qualitatively, for each of them has its own legitimacy and should (must !) contribute a multifaceted debate among Muslims. Unfortunately, today today’s Muslim religious scholars, and the leaders of various trends, are caught up in ideological confrontation—and often a clash of egos—that create division and transform them into dangerous populists who claim for themselves the title of sole and authentic representatives of Islam. Within Sunni Islam, as within Shi’ism, between Sunnis and Shi’ites, scholars and schools of thought lash out at one another, forgetting the fundamental teachings and the principles that unite them and instead splitting along doctrinal or political lines that remain secondary at best. The consequences of these divisions are serious. Populism pushes people to vent their emotions blindly in the guise of legitimacy. The attitude—or the absence of attitude—of such scholars perpetuates among the Muslims nationalist, sectarian, and often racist postures based on their particular school of thought, their nationality or their culture. Instead of calling upon individual egos to control themselves, and upon minds to understand and celebrate diversity, leaders and scholars play, in their rhetoric or in their silence, upon people’s emotions and sense of belonging with catastrophic consequences. The Great Powers, West and East, not forgetting Israel, easily exploit these divisions and internal conflicts such as the danger-fraught fracture between Sunni and Shi’a. Instead, it is imperative that voices from the two traditions collaborate on the fundamental principles that unite all Muslims. Whenever considerations of belonging threaten to replace principles, religious scholars, intellectuals and leaders must to return to shared principles, must find common ground between these considerations, in full respect of legitimate diversity.

3. Third, scholars and intellectuals must have the courage to expose themselves further. Instead of encouraging popular feelings, or to use those feelings to further their own religious identity (Sunni, Shi’a, Salafi, reformist, Sufi, etc.) or their political ideology they must face the issue squarely, dare to be self-critical, commit themselves to dialogue and—more often than not—tell Muslims what they may not like to hear about their own failings, their lack of coherence, their propensity to play the victim, failure to understand and to accept responsibility. Far from the feverish rhetoric of the populists, they must put their credibility on the line to awaken consciences in an attempt to counter emotionalism and mass blindness. The educated elites, students, intellectuals and professionals also have a major responsibility. The way they follow their leaders, as does their status as intermediaries makes their active and critical presence imperative : holding the scholars and the leaders accountable, simplifying and participating in grassroots dynamics is an absolute imperative. The passivity of the educated elites, looking down upon inflamed and uncontrolled populations far below them, is a grievous fault.

Ultimately we end up with the leaders—and the peoples—we deserve. Without committed and determined religious scholars, intellectuals and business people aware of the critical nature of the issues, there can be little doubt that we will be heading for an upsurge of religious populism among the leadership, and the emotional blindness of the masses. The words and the commitment of the leaders must set the highest standards : beginning with knowledge, understanding, coherence and self-criticism. They must abandon the notion of victimization by appealing to responsibility, by freeing themselves from the illusion that opposition to the “other” can lead to reconciliation with one’s self. Make no mistake : the violent reactions to the insults uttered against the Prophet have driven many Muslims to behaviors far removed from the principles of Islam. We become ourselves not in opposition to someone else, but in accord and at peace with our conscience, our principles and our aspirations. In the serene mastery of ourselves, and not in the aggressive rejection of the Other. Such is the message the world’s Muslims need to hear, and most of all, put into practice.

Source : http://gulfnews.com/opinions/column…

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 20 September 2012, 4:19 am and is filed under
Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


In Solidarity with Suaram

By Martin Jalleh

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 20 September 2012, 10:45 am and is filed under
Martin Jalleh
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


MCA President Chua Soi Lek playing destructive role of Utusan Malaysia  seeking to frighten Chinese voters with lies and falsehoods in the same manner Utusan trying to scare Malay voters

The MCA President Datuk Seri Dr. Chua Soi Lek is playing the destructive role of Utusan Malaysia seeking to frighten Chinese voters with lies and falsehoods in the same manner Utusan has been trying in the past three years to scare Malay voters with its daily staple of lies and falsehoods.

The role of Utusan Malaysia, the official organ of UMNO, is to violate all ethics of journalism to systematically and unconscionably concoct and dispense lies and falsehoods about the DAP and the Pakatan Rakyat to stampede the Malay voters to vote solidly for UMNO.

For instance, Utusan Malaysia had been publishing downright lies and falsehoods about the DAP, spreading the completely baseless allegation that the DAP is anti-Malay, anti-Islam and anti-Malay Rulers, that the DAP wants to create a Christian Malaysia to replace Islam as the official religion, appoint a Christian Prime Minister, establish a Republic and abolish the system of Malay monarchy.

In the past months, it has become obvious that the MCA President is playing the irresponsible and divisive role of Utusan Malaysia by seeking to frighten the Chinese voters to stampede them to vote for MCA through what MCA strategists believe is the MCA trump card – the issue of Islamic state and hudud implementation.

DAP’s stand on Malaysia as a secular state has always been constant and consistent.

We hold firm to our fundamental principle that an Islamic state and hudud laws are inappropriate and unsuitable for Malaysia as a plural society.

We do not hide our fundamental principle and beliefs, whether from PAS or any other political party or the Malaysian people. We know PAS’ stand on Islamic State and hukum hudud, just as PAS knows our different stand on these two issues.

Although DAP, PAS and PKR have our differences,  the Pakatan Rakyat leadership has repeatedly reaffirmed our unswerving commitment to common policy agreements reached by the three component parties, whether before or after the 13th General Election, in the PR Common Policy Framework of December 19, 2009, Buku Jingga of 20th December 2010 or other Joint PR Leadership statements and documents.

The PR Leadership has  also repeatedly reaffirmed the principle that there must be consensus among the three PR component parties before there could be any change in any agreed PR policy.

The PR Leadership has also repeatedly emphasized that the implementation of hudud is not part of the PR Common Policy Framework.

This means that if Pakatan Rakyat wins the 13th General Election and forms the Federal Government in Putrajaya, for the next five years from 2012/2013 to 2017/8, the implementation of hudud will not be part of the Pakatan Rakyat Federal Government policy or programme unless all the three PR parties can reach a consensus on it.

This position is very clear, simple and straightforward  but the MCA President is doing his utmost in his politics of desperation, fear and irresponsibility to try to cause panic and fear so as to stampede the Chinese voters to vote for MCA in the 13th General Election.

One of Chua’s favourite gambits is to cite the PAS Deputy President Mohamad Sabu claiming that Mohamad  Sabu had announced that PAS will amend the Federal Constitution to implement hudud if Pakatan Rakyat comes into power – totally ignoring Mohamad Sabu’s denial of ever having made such a statement and the Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council’s policy pronouncement that the implementation of hudud is not part of Pakatan Rakyat policies, a policy position which binds  all Pakatan Rakyat parties for the next four to five years until the 14th General Elections.

Another favourite Chua gambit is to shout from the rooftops that hudud implementation is a certainty if Pakatan Rakyat wins in the 13th general election, claiming that “judging from the 222 MPs, of whom most were Muslims, PAS could easily obtain the two-thirds majority to implement its version of hudud”.

Chua had gone on public record in saying: “So, this is a political reality that all non-Muslims must face. This is not a threat. It is something that all of us most think about carefully.”

This is a downright lie and utter rubbish.  It shows that in his politics of desperation, Chua Soi Lek has utter contempt for figures, facts and the truth.

Firstly, the number of Muslim MPs, as it stands, still falls short of the two-thirds majority required to amend the constitution.

After the 2008 GE, for Peninsular Malaysia,  there were 107 Muslim MPs, i.e. 65 MPs  from BN and 42 MPs – a far cry from the two-thirds majority of 148 MPs required to amend the constitution.

Even when Sabah and Sarawak are included (and Sabah and Sarawak must be considered separately, as Malaysia’s position  as a secular state is specifically underlined in Sabah’s 20-Point Agreement and Sarawak’s 18-Point Agreement in the formation of Malaysia in 1963), the total number of Muslim MPs still fall short of two-thirds majority.

Including Sabah and Sarawak,  the 2008 GE elected  130 Muslim MPs out of 222 or 59%, 18 MPs short of a two-thirds majority  –  with 88 Muslim MPs from BN and 42 Muslim MPs are from PR. (Table 1 below)

Table 1: Muslim and Non-Muslim MPs by BN / PR and by Region / State post GE2008

Region / State

BN

PR

Muslim

Non-Muslim

Muslim

Non-Muslim

P.Malaysia

65

20

42

38

Sabah

14

11

–

1

Sarawak

9

21

–

1

Total

88

52

42

40

It would be simplistic to assume that the Muslim MPs from BN in East Malaysia would blindly support a motion to declare Malaysia as an Islamic state especially since some of these MPs, such as those from PBB in Sarawak, are from parties with non-Muslim members and representatives among their midst.

If we consider only the Muslim MPs in Peninsular Malaysia, they only constitute 107 MPs, less than 50% of the total number of MPs in Malaysia, far short of the two-thirds of 66.7% required for any constitutional amendment.

Table 2: Muslim and Non-Muslim Majority seats by Region / State

Region / State

Muslim Majority

Non-Muslim Majority

Total

P.Malaysia

113

52

165

Sabah

15

11

26

Sarawak

8

23

31

Total

136

86

222

Even if we take the number of Muslim majority versus Non-Muslim majority seats, there are only 136 Muslim majority seats in the whole country (61%), still 12 short of a two thirds majority of 148.

Again, the rationale of Sabah and Sarawak Muslim MPs not necessarily supporting such a motion still holds.

From Table 1 and 2, even in the most extreme circumstances where ALL of the MPs in Muslim majority seats vote to support an Islamic state motion, it would still not be sufficient to reach a two-thirds  majority.

These two tables debunk the lie that the MCA President is spreading all over the country, that it is virtually a certainty that there would be two-thirds parliamentary majority of Muslim MPs to support a constitutional amendment to implement hudud when Pakatan Rakyat comes into power in Putrajaya in the 13th General Election.

I would advise the MCA President to cease and desist and halt all his politics of fear, desperation and irresponsibility.  Let him act responsibly for a change and  show greater respect for figures, facts and the truth.

(Speech at the DAP Pasir Pinji 919 UBAH nite in Ipoh on Wednesday, 19th September 2012 at 9pm)

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 20 September 2012, 3:55 am and is filed under
Elections
,
Islamic state
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Understanding rage, and its antidote

By
Mohamed Imran Mohamed Taib
 | September 20, 2012

The Malaysian Insider

SEPT 20 — Just days ago, I was asked over a dinner conversation with several interfaith practitioners: “Why are Muslims such an angry people?” The riots over the film “Innocence of Muslims” was certainly on their minds. It took me a while to respond.

First, there is an unstated presumption that most, if not all, Muslims are prone to anger.

Second, a string of incidents from recent decades seems to suggest that any form of provocation to the Muslim faith is sure to lead to riots and vengeful killings across the Muslim world.

Who could forget the death fatwa issued on British novelist Salman Rushdie for “The Satanic Verses”, which denigrates the founder of Islam, Mohammed; and a similar response to the Danish Jyllands-Posten’s cartoon in 2005?

It seems as if provocations directed at Muslims have heightened in the last few years. In 2008, Dutch film-maker Geert Wilders released his movie “Fitna”, which depicted the Quran as evil and promoting hatred and violence.

Two years later, Terry Jones, pastor of a small church in America called for a Quran-burning day that sparked worldwide protests and violence.

Yes, perhaps Muslims have a legitimate basis to feel angry. There is a sense of injustice felt when hate-speech is disguised in the garb of free speech. More so, when there is rising Islamophobia perpetuated by extremists in Europe and America. The shocking massacre by Norwegian Anders Behring Breivik who held anti-Islam views is a case in point.

REINFORCING A STEREOTYPE

Yet, I also feel unease over the way some Muslims have responded to these provocations.

The worldwide violence that occurred in cities ranging from Islamabad to Jakarta to Sydney ironically reinforces the very stereotype that the low-budget film “Innocence of Muslims” seeks to perpetuate: That Islam is a religion of violence. Never mind that the film is crude and aesthetically hopeless; no serious viewer would find it convincing, only an already warped and prejudiced mind.

When American Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three others were killed in Benghazi, Libya, during protests over the film, it raised the whole issue of what some have been calling the “Muslim rage”.

This face of Islam — that of vengeance and violence in the face of provocation — is alien to me. How can a person proclaiming daily the invocation “In the name of God, Most Merciful, Most Compassionate” spout so much hate and violence in a single breath?

How does one call oneself a follower of “Islam” — a derivative of the Arabic root word “salam”, meaning “peace” — yet be so willing to commit acts of violence at the first instance of provocation? There is a disjuncture between the acts of these Muslims and the tradition of Islam that more than a billion Muslims around the world have been brought up in.

If one claims to protect the dignity of the beloved Prophet Mohammed, why not take a leaf or two from the manner in which Mohammed treated those who hurled insults at him? Never had the Prophet acted in ways other than compassion.

In one instance out of the many, he tended to a Jewish woman when she was too ill to continue hurling garbage at him. Even in the capture of Mecca, he provided amnesty and granted forgiveness to his enemies among the Quraysh tribe bent on destroying him. “Keep to forgiveness,” God commanded Mohammed, “and enjoin kindness, and turn away from the ignorant.”

If such was the ethical quality and mission of Mohammed, why do those who claim to be his most ardent believers not display the same mercy and compassion in the face of adversity?

BAGGAGE OF HISTORY

The answer, I believe, lies in the tumultuous relationship that the Muslim world has had with some of the forces that shape modern global society.

First, there is the baggage of colonialism that continues to haunt the Muslim psyche. A people once dominated and relegated to an “inferior status” in the ladder of civilisation will eventually subvert that very narrative and adopt a diametrically opposite set of categories — that of its own “superiority” and the “bankruptcy of the West”.

Anti-West sentiments are part of the burning coal for Muslim reactionary movements. The occasional insults to Islam are mere triggers to a deeper trauma resulting from centuries of domination and humiliation.

Second, post-colonial developments in the Muslim world have not brought reprieve but further injury. The failure of democratic ideas and social justice to take root across many Muslim-majority countries was a further blow to the psyche.

This would eventually take the form of erratic displays of rage and anger — a way, as social psychologists would impute, of not dealing with one’s own inadequacy, frustration and exclusion from being part of a creative process for positive social change.

Third, the ascendancy of extremists within the political institution of democratic governments in Europe and America, as well as within the Religious Right dominated by Christian conservatives, exacerbate the situation through their drumming of Islam as the antithesis of Western civilisation, an enemy of modernity and an evil religion out to dominate the world.

Such views unfortunately inform or eventually seep into many of the policies that determine how Western governments deal with the Arab Muslim world.

The result can only be a pitting of two contrasting ideologies — the “clash of civilisation” thesis promulgated by American political theorist and consultant to the US State Department, Samuel Huntington.

RAGE ISN’T EXCLUSIVE

The question posed at the dinner table led me to re-examine what has gone wrong within the Muslim world today. I do not see the vengeful and violent act of several thousand Muslims across the globe as representative of the Islamic faith.

To me, there is no such thing as an exclusively “Muslim rage”. There is only rage, which is a type of violent anger that all humans are capable of. And to understand this rage is to delve into the nexus of history, politics and even psychology. Theology cannot answer why some Muslims respond with anger and violence.

One cannot solve the problem of extremism through mere appeal to “right Islam” as opposed to “wrong Islam”. One must dig deeper for the solution, and it is not just about having the “moderates” speak up. It is about ensuring that peace-loving people of all persuasions find each other and provide mutual support in an increasingly volatile and polarised world.

Extremists tend to feed off each other. The last thing we want is for them to dictate the terms of engagement for the rest of us. We must reach out to the progressive elements within each faith community, and build bridges to strengthen the common good for all of us.

In this, there is hope and joy that might quell the hate and anger within all of us. — Today

____

*
Mohamed Imran Mohamed Taib is an interfaith activist and a programme consultant with the Muis Academy, an institution of the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore that provides niche programmes in Islamic learning and contemporary issues in Islam.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 20 September 2012, 10:38 am and is filed under
Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.