Farewell to the Homogenous Malay

(Note: This is the English version of the same article that will published soon as part of the compilation of articles by Dr. Farish A. Noor, entitled “Di Balik Malaysia: Dari Majapahit Ke Putrajaya”)

By
Farish A. Noor

‘Takkan Melayu Hilang di Dunia’
(Never Shall the Malays Cease to Be)
: Hang Tuah’s legendary call to arms rings a note of defiance laced with anxiety and speaks volumes about the perennial angst of a people whose place and standing in the world was never a thing to be taken for granted. Read in its proper context the full meaning of the statement becomes clear: here was the call for unity by a fabled hero that came at a time of flux and change, when the shifting fortunes of Malacca was tilting on the side of impending defeat at the hands of the Portuguese.

Yet sadly, as is always the case, the story of Tuah has been misread and mis-appropriated for other ends that have more to do with politics and less to do with history. Beloved by the right-wing conservatives among us, the dissected figure of Tuah has been robbed of his pacifist, mystical and philosophical leanings, leaving us with only the static figure of a cardboard two-dimensional ethno-nationalist who surprisingly resembles many of the
Mat Rempit
-wannabe types who make up the rank and file of UMNO Youth today. We forget that at the end of the
Hikayat Hang Tuah
 epic Tuah himself abandons his
keris
 and turns his back on his king, renouncing the world and turning his attention to the salvation of his soul instead. Yet this sorrowful figure has been cut-and-pasted today to suit the ethno-nationalist agenda of the race-warriors and demagogues.

Today that fear of permanent loss and historical erasure has gripped the hearts and minds of many a right-wing Malay communalist in the wake of the 12th General Elections and the dismal (and deserved) failure of UMNO in particular. That Kelantan could have fallen to PAS was a somewhat different matter, for the conventional wisdom that takes the place of reason in this country of ours assumes that even if Kelantan was to fall under the heels of the Mullahs, they would still be Malay Mullahs, and that the sacred soil of Tanah Melayu would still be in Malay hands.

Rather the fear we see today has been directed towards the loss of the more plural and cosmopolitan states of the West coast, where the DAP has made great (and deserved) strides in Penang, Perak and Selangor. Already the pathetic spectacle of ethno-communal fear and loathing has been played out in the public domain: Demonstrations in Penang were organised with the calculated intention of scaring the Malays into thinking that their land was up for grabs and that the vainglorious notion of
Ketuanan Melayu
 was being eclipsed. The vernacular Malay press in particular has gone into overdrive, harping on and on incessantly about every perceived slight and injury to Malay pride, their editorials littered with the recognised markers of discontent:
‘Biadab, kurang sopan’
are the accusations that have been levelled in no uncertain terms.

The latest attempt to shore up the fictional notion of Malay unity has come in the form of the creation of the
Barisan Bertindak Perpaduan Melayu
 (Malay Unity Action Front, BBPM), cobbled together by five-and-twenty Malay-Muslim NGOs and lobby groups to call for the unity of the Malay-Muslims and the defence of the status and place of Islam in the country. Already feelers have been sent out to court the doubtful hearts in PAS, on the basis that Malay-Muslim unity has to come first and foremost. All the buttons on the register have been pressed hard: Malay Unity, Islamic Unity, Communal interest, et al.

Communalism, still.

That such an organisation could have been formed so soon after the election results of March 2008 speaks volumes about the extent to which racial anxieties still prevail in the midst of our plural social landscape. But honestly, are we surprised by this, and should we be surprised at all?

After all, in the run-up to the 12th General Elections it was plain to see that ethnic and communal mobilisation was still a major factor in the campaign. The disastrous showing of the MIC in particular was a direct result of the actions of Hindraf, an organisation that rightfully pointed out the MIC’s failings to defend their community and to stand up to the right-wing ethno-supremacists of UMNO. The MCA and Gerakan’s poor performance was likewise a result of the widespread perception among Malaysians of Chinese background that neither party would ever be able to put a stop to the repugnant racist histrionics of the
keris
-waving hotheads in UMNO. The overwhelming shift in votes then was as much a vote for real, substantial (and we hope permanent) change as it was a vote of disgust against the emasculated and voiceless leaders of the MIC, MCA and Gerakan. But if this was the case, then we are also sadly back to where we started and have not really transcended the economy of race and ethnic-based politics.

And let us not forget that at the height of the election campaign another coalition of eighty-eight Malay-Muslim NGOs also put forth their demands to all the parties, calling upon them to recognise their own set of equally exclusive needs which happened to include the rejection of secularism and pluralism, an end to the process of inter-religious dialogue, persecution of those labelled as ‘liberal, secular’ Muslim intellectuals and the recognition of Malaysia as an Islamic state.

The Malay-Muslim Unitarians of the BBMP are likewise driven by the same exclusive, parochial and short-sighted interest to protect, promote and elevate their own communal interests solely. This is an organisation that foregrounds only the needs and aspirations of their own community, and by virtue of taking such an exclusive posture can only be labelled as being Malay, and not Malaysian. Indeed, one could argue that the BBMP in its form and intent is no different from any other right-wing racially exclusive group,  and that it cares more for its own community than it does for the wider community of Malaysia, which is made up by the rest of us.

The flawed premise upon which the BBMP rests, and which will ultimately lead to its own internal contradiction, however, is this: Like so many right-wing communitarian organisations its politics is one that is narrow, simplistic and historically inaccurate.

Not Malay, but rather Malays

The flaw of race-based politics in Malaysia goes all the way back to the era of the colonial census, where the fictional notion of homogenous racial groups was first concocted to serve the interests of a skewered, unjust and oppressive colonial plural economy. The segmentation and separation of Malaysia’s plural society along racialised lines was a direct consequence of racialised colonial capitalism at work, but this grand enterprise of divide-and-rule was aided and abetted by both the bayonet and the census.

It was the colonial census that began to narrow down the scope of the native communities of Asia to the point where ultimately all that remained of this multi-hued landscape of hundreds of colours was a tripartite division of Malays, Chinese and Indians. Gone were the lost tribes of Malaya: the myriad of cultural, ethnic, linguistic and religious sub-groupings that resisted such casual and arbitrary compartmentalisation. But when were these communities – the Malays, Chinese and Indians – ever homogenous and uniform? If the ‘loss of Malay-ness’ is the thing that spooks so many today, we need to ask: Was there ever such a thing as a unitary Malay?

Here we need to revisit our history and look at the etymological root-meanings of the words we use in politics today. Hang Tuah’s call
‘Takkan Melayu hilang di Dunia’
was made at a time when the very notion of what was
‘Melayu’
was problematic and constantly being problematised by the Malays themselves, who realised and accepted that there was not a singular Malay race but rather a plethora of diverse Malay communities. At that time even the notion of
‘Tanah Melayu’
was an alien concept for the kingdom of
Malayur
 (or
Malaiyur
) was not even on the Malay Peninsula but rather on the southern tip of Sumatra, next to Pelembang. Why, even the sentence
‘Takkan Melayu hilang di Dunia’
 reads as a curious amalgam of Malay, Sanskrit and Persian words that betrays the globally-connected and cosmopolitan character of the community that gave birth to this hybrid lingua franca we now call the Malay language. (Which by the way, should really be referred to as the Malaysian language.)

The calls for Malay unity today should therefore be deconstructed and critically analysed with this grand historical landscape in close view, and with us reminding ourselves again and again that the notion of a unitary Malay race (like the notion of a unitary Chinese or Indian race) were fundamentally colonial fictions that date back to the age of Empire and imperialism’s mode of race politics.

Some of the right-wing ethno-nationalists among us may not be too comfortable with the idea that the cherished comfort zones they have grown accustomed to are on the verge of shrinking; but it is crucial for us – Malaysians one and all – to remind ourselves that this is our common homeland and the home to all our cultures that have mixed and mingled for so long. Indeed it is precisely that long process of historical overlapping, inter-penetration and cultural osmosis that accounts for us being that ever-so-varied community that can make the boast “Malaysia, truly Asia”. Having witnessed the long-awaited rupture where ethnic and racial loyalties were finally by-passed on that fateful election night, let us at least keep the euphoria for a while longer. We owe this to ourselves as well as our hybrid ancestors who made the leap beyond racial loyalties, and we can do it again.

The Malays will never cease to be, as long as we understand that the Malays are in fact a community of communities, and that one can be both Malay and the Other, as long as we all remain – first and foremost – Malaysians to whom this country belongs.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 23 March 2008, 10:52 am and is filed under
Farish Noor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Penang housing development – comment

Letters

by Steven

I am a regular employee who works for an international company in Penang Bayan Lepas Free Trade Zone Industrial Area.

I have been working here close to seven years.

What I notice something seriously is the Penang landed housing property is going up tremendously.

I think that it is fair for the housing developers to buy the Penang lands and build whatever they like.

Realizing the Penang land price expensive, of course it is normal scenario to maximize the gain to build either luxury condominiums, three stories link houses or bungalows.

A quick check on the price is going to above RM600,000 and some could reach millions of dollars. As a result, only the upper income community or foreigners (who wants to utilize MMH2) can purchase these types of properties.

Of course one could say that why not we go and purchase the moderate costs of condominiums. Yes, we could do that but when times pass by, and if the person wants to change the quality of life,  the what-so-called luxury property will reach RM1,000,000 and above.

Nowadays, it has been a trend for Penang housing developers to build luxury houses only, why they never build medium costs houses?

I just would like to ask for the management to look into this case, and discuss that is there any plans to provide Penangites moderate prices of property so that it can benefit the whole community and not only  the minority. I know that the housing developers will not be happy but think of this for benefiting the society.

Below are few of my humble opinions:-

1) Lowering down the sales price

2) Build double or single stories houses instead of three stories houses

3) Come out a new township like Sunway Tunas

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 23 March 2008, 11:04 am and is filed under
Letters
,
Penang Government
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Plight of JPA medical scholars

Letters

by
Frustrated JPA scholar

I am a medical student sponsored by JPA to study in Ireland about to complete my studies.  I write to you after reading your article on the rot of the Malaysian healthcare system.  We JPA scholars here have been very frustrated with the JPA enforcing us to immediately return to the country upon graduation, barring us from continuing training as interns (equivalent of houseman) in the countries where we graduated from  This would mean we cannot obtain the sufficient exposure that would make our training complete, and would off course, mean a waste of taxpayers money as there would have been no difference with studying locally.

JPA had announced recently that none of its medical scholars overseas will be allowed the opportunity to do further train overseas even at their own expanses, and are to return ASAP upon graduation. No scholar would be allowed to stay on regardless of the training posts they obtain upon graduation. To add to the spice of JPA’s foolishness, it seems that JPA gives priority to romantic relationships over the academic achievements of its scholars by giving exception to remain overseas to those who are married to a fellow JPA/MARA sponsored student who are still commencing studies in the foreign country concerned.

Till today, I have yet to comprehend the narrow minded policies set by the JPA.  JPA seems to fail to understand that by allowing its scholars to stay on for postgraduate training, many will be offered positions in world-renowned healthcare institutions.  The exposure and experience gained through these positions would be an invaluable asset to the country and the rakyat in the future.  Unfortunately, JPA seems to be adamant in having fresh graduate doctors returning to receive Malaysian medical training, instead of allowing these fresh grads to further train themselves and  one day return as first world specialists who will reform and infuse new uptodate skills in Malaysian Healthcare a few years down the road.
 Also of importance is the availability of funding to do research work in these foreign teaching hospitals, which is significantly lacking in Malaysia.  Would it not make Malaysia proud if Malaysian Doctors were publishing their research work in heavy weight journals in the medical world.  Upon return, these foreign trained doctors will then be able to start up a trend of research-based medicine, to the benefit of the ranking of Malaysian universities who lose out because of lack in research.

This immediate return policy has also stunted the motivation of many JPA scholars.  Housemanship placements in Malaysia show disregard to academic achievements.  It is random where one is sent to at best, and at its worst influenced by racism and cronism.  This off course does not help in encouraging JPA scholars to strive to improve themselves.  Knowing the fact that additional experience, eg opitional research and academic grades do not count later on, there are some who have lost motivation, and many who have been apprehensive in taking further steps to improve themselves due to the fear that the JPAs immediate return policy might put all their effort into waste by abruptly discontinuing their work.

Starting year 2008, there will be at least 2000 Malaysian fresh medical graduates  from the various public and private universities sprouting throughout the country, not to forget graduates returning from Russia, Indonesia, India and Ukraine.  This number is likely to rise over the coming years.  Will MOH be able to cope with the demand for training posts?  Will the ministry of health be able to provide enough housemenship positions, and if yes, will these posts provide high quality training, as the saying goes ‘too many cooks spoil the soup’?  In the long term, will the ministry of health be able to provide enough specialist opportunities, considering its eagerness to do away with MRCP and only recognize the local masters program?  My fear is that there will be a bottleneck down the pipeline, and many competent doctors will be failed by JPA and the ministry of health’s poor planning.  Henceforth, to lessen the burden on the Malaysian Healthcare system, it would only be simple common sense to allow those graduating from foreign universities who are offered good opportunities to continue with their post graduate training overseas without having to return immediately, as it is the easiest way to gain access to train in these countries.

During one of the talks given by JPA officials who visited Ireland, a student raised a question on the rationale of JPAs ‘immediate return policies’.  The officer in charge went in a rage and accused the people who wanted to stay as ‘just wanting to earn money’.  I could not believe the narrow mindedness behind these words.  For one, what is wrong with earning money?  Also, many JPA scholars are top achievers, and view further career advancement as the driving force behind their intention to remain and continue training overseas.  The plight of these JPA scholars has fallen on deaf ears of the JPA authorities.  Many of JPA’s policy makers are not doctors themselves.  How are they to understand the need of good training even at a post graduate level.

Finally, I would like to stress that all JPA scholars love their country, and would love to return to serve.  However to my view, it would be better to return after adequate exposure to first world healthcare, as this would bring the most benefit to the rakyat.  I am also fully aware that a contract is a contract, (despite the fact JPA changed the contract one-sidedly half way through our training from a penalty of RM160,000 to approximately a million ringgit) without prior warning), and if JPA remains adamant to prevent its scholars to further develop their skills overseas, the only thing we can do is to return as housemen.  The authorities in JPA, however, should understand that to attract talent in the public service, the more effective methods would be by improving pay, ensuring fairness by meritocracy and adequate training opportunities,.  By using brute force, many may return, but only with the intention of leaving as soon as the bond imposed is over.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 23 March 2008, 4:55 pm and is filed under
Education
,
Health
,
Letters
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Siapa yang biadap sekarang

Letters

by Md Asmawi Md Nor

Saya bersetuju bahawa Saudara telah tersilap dalam isu majlis angkat sumpah MB Perak tetapi saya juga sangat hormat apabila Saudara dengan cepat menyedari kesilapan tersebut dan dengan segera memperbetulkannya dan melakukan tindakan yang tepat dengan memohon maaf kepada pihak istana secara peribadi. Tahniah atas tindakan anda tersebut.

Nah, sekarang Terengganu pula menghadapi isu yang sama dimana 23 Adun dengan segera mengumumkan untuk memboikot majlis angkat sumpah MB Terengganu yang dijangka akan diadakan esok sebaik sahaja ayam tambatan mereka Idris Jusoh tidak terpilih sebagai MB. Seperti biasa, media UMNO Utusan Malaysia akan bersikap ‘double-standard’ dalam menanggani isu ini. Maksud saya secara spesifik ialah bila mana Saudara mengeluarkan statement dalam isu MB Perak dulu, Utusan Malaysia dengan segera dan ‘bold’ terus dengan muka depan “DAP Biadap’, dan dikuti dengan pelbagai rentetan propaganda dan provokasi lagi. Saya sebagai rakyat Terengganu mahukan perkara yang sama kali ini dilakukan oleh Utusan Malaysia dalam menanggani isu 23 Adun yang biadap ini termasuk Idris Jusoh. Tajuk yang perlu keluar dimuka depan mereka sekurang-kurangnya ’23 Adun Biadap’. Mereka semua juga perlu memohon maaf seperti mana yang Saudara lakukan dahulu.

Saya amat berharap Saudara dapat memantau isu ini dengan diberi perhatian istimewa agar UMNO khasnya sedar jangan hanya pandai melihat orang lain biadap tetapi mereka sendiri boleh bersikap biadap dan bertindak sesuka hati mereka. Macamlah negara ini tiada undang-undang.

Sekian,

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 23 March 2008, 4:17 pm and is filed under
Letters
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


A Law To Prevent Defections

(Speech when moving a motion in Parliament  on March 21, 1978 to seek leave of the House to introduce a private member’s bill intituled Members of Parliament [Prevention of Defection] Act 1978 to ensure political integrity of Members of Parliament)

I rise under Standing Order 49(2) to move a motion to seek leave of the House to introduce a Private Member’s Bill intituled Members of Parliament (Prevention of Defection) Act, 1978, which would require a Member of Parliament to vacate his seat within 30 days and cause a by-election to be held on his resignation or expulsion from the Party on whose ticket he was originally elected.

In November last year, I was invited by a Tamil national daily, Tamil Nesan, to answer question submitted by Tamil Nesan readers. One question that was asked was about the defection of Opposition Members of Parliament and State Assemblymen after their election, in betrayal of the confidence and trust placed on them by the electorate.

I was asked what effective measure could be taken to prevent such opportunistic political betrayal of the people’s confidence. I replied that the most effective way would be for the enactment of a law requiring a Member of Parliament to vacate his seat and cause a by-election to be held on his resignation or expulsion from the Party on whose ticket he was originally elected. I promised to move a private member’s bill on his matter considering its importance.

Such a Bill is important so as to ensure the political integrity of elected MPs and to prevent political corruption.

Nothing disgusts the Malaysian public more than to see MPs or State Assemblymen elected on one party’s ticket and then betray the Party and the people’s trust by switching parties. This makes them very little different from con-men. Such practices debase politics, and strengthen the general impression that ‘politics is dirty’, when it is the dirty people who get into politics to make politics dirty.

The defection of MPs or State Assemblymen from parties on whose ticket they got elected is most undesirable and unethical, because they are elected not because of their personal qualities, but because of the Party they represent. Such practices also permit elected politicians to be bought and sold as if they are on the market place.

If an elected MP resigns or is expelled from the Party on whose ticket he was originally elected, then he should resign his seat and cause a by-election to be held. If the resignation and expulsion is over a matter of political principle which has the support of the people, then the MP or State Assemblymen concerned should have no qualms about getting re-elected.

We all know that Barisan Nasional parties require its candidates to sign undated letters of resignations to keep their elected MPs or State Assemblymen in line. Just before the Kelantan state general elections last month, the Kelantan UMNO State Liaison Chairman, Tengku Razaleigh, felt it necessary to declare publicly that UMNO Kelantan has taken steps to prevent UMNO candidates from betraying the party after they are elected. He said every UMNO candidate is required to sign undated letters of resignation to be kept in custody by UMNO, which it would use in the event of betrayal.

Of course, under normal circumstances, the Government party can keep its MPs in control through its wide paraphernalia of patronage, influence and largesse. This, however, tantamounts to another form of political corruption.

A law which I am proposing will uphold political integrity of MPs and be a serious deterrent to political corruption. Those who wish to see a cleaner political atmosphere should give it support.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 24 March 2008, 11:42 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
nation building
,
Politics
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Good Team, Bad Captain

by
M. Bakri Musa

Among other things, in this election Malaysians have asserted in no uncertain terms that they do not approve of Abdullah’s inept administration and his tolerance if not encouragement of corruption and shady practices among those closest to him.  With his new cabinet however, Abdullah once again demonstrated that he has learned nothing from the election debacle, his frequent declarations to the contrary notwithstanding.

            While the addition of fresh talent in the persons of Amirsham Aziz and Zaid Ibrahim makes this a good cabinet, the retention of the same old tired faces as Syed Hamid, together with the inclusion of tainted characters like the “double Muhammad” Taib, smudges what otherwise would be an excellent team.  It was, as the Economist noted, Abdullah’s shuffling deckchairs on a personal Titanic.

            This election did what Abdullah could not, that is, get rid of deadwoods like Samy Vellu and incompetents like Zainuddin Maidin.  Voters showed the way but Abdullah did not carry it further with his choice of a new cabinet.  This good new team is cursed with the same old bad captain.

            A team no matter how talented could not turn an incompetent captain into a good one.  Neither would a prolonged “warm up” time accomplish much; a bad captain will still remain so.  As one blogger cheekily noted, today even Abdullah’s “sign dah tak laku” (signature is worthless, as on a bounced check), in reference to the Raja of Perlis ignoring Abdullah’s choice for a Mentri Besar.  As of my writing, the Sultan of Trengganu too is set to do likewise.

            Abdullah’s cabinet remains bloated with 33 ministers, including five in his own department.  His “reform” consists of nothing more than changing faces.  He fails to address more fundamental issues like whether any of those ministries are needed at all.

            For example, what is glaringly obvious from this election is that the Ministry of Information has no credibility with Malaysians or foreign observers.  It is nothing more than the propaganda arm of the ruling party, and an inept one at that.  Replacing its minister would not alter that reality.  In the Age of the Internet, this is one ministry Malaysia can do without.  Abolishing it, together with other unneeded ministries like Sports, Tourism, and Federal Territory, among others, would shrink the cabinet and streamline the administration.

            This huge cabinet is unwieldy.  No meaningful or robust discussions could take place.  Even if each minister were to speak for only a few minutes, cabinet meetings would stretch for hours.

            Lee Kuan Yew, who knows something about forming an effective cabinet and selecting capable ministers, once said that he would appoint only those for whom a cabinet appointment would mean a reduction in their personal earnings.  This does not mean that Singapore pays its ministers miserly – on the contrary they are very well compensated – rather that those ministers have excelled elsewhere and thus are earning considerably more before they become ministers.

            Only two of Abdullah’s appointees, Amirsham and Zaid Ibrahim, meet Lee’s stringent criterion.  Long-serving former Trade Minister Rafidah Aziz would find few takers in the private sector for her talent.  The only reason she remains calm after being fired is not to jeopardize her chance of being given plump directorships in the many GLCs.  Further, if she were to complain too loudly, watch the ACA suddenly becoming diligent in scrutinizing her old AP files.

Blemishes and Kudos

Abdullah’s commitment to combat corruption is made hollow by his bringing Muhammad Taib into the cabinet.  He was the former Mentri Besar of Selangor who was caught at an Australian airport with literally millions in cash on his person.  He was acquitted from the criminal charge of not declaring the currency, but he has yet to explain how he secured the loot in the first place.

            If Abdullah has not asked Muhammad that pertinent question, then he (Abdullah) is derelict in his duties by not exercising due diligence in selecting his ministers.  If Abdullah did ask and was satisfied with Muhammad’s answer, then Abdullah owes the public to share that explanation.  Failure to do so would make Abdullah’s renewed call to combat corruption more than hollow; it would be hypocritical.

            Yes, that incident took place over a decade ago, old story Muhammad would claim.  However, there is no statute of limitation with criminal acts.  Time does not make a corrupt act less corrupt.

            I applaud Zaid Ibrahim’s appointment.  He is one of the few independent minded and unafraid to challenge the leader, a rare quality especially among Malays.  We are still feudalistic, blindly loyal to leaders regardless of circumstances.  I also applaud him for his commitment to the rule of law.  Also rare among Asian leaders and newly rich, Zaid is well known for his philanthropic works.  Forbes magazine recently listed him as one of Asia’s top philanthropists.

            Of interest here is that Zaid Ibrahim was only recently found guilty of “money politics” by UMNO’s Disciplinary Committee, whose esteemed members included Zaki Azmi, now Court of Appeal President, the second highest position.  Zaid strenuously appealed his “conviction” right up to the President of UMNO, Abdullah, but to no avail.  It reflects more on the credibility and prestige of that disciplinary committee (more correctly, the lack of both) that Abdullah would now appoint Zaid to the cabinet to be in charge of law and the judiciary!

            I have the highest regard for Zaid’s personal integrity and professional honor.  I bring this up merely to demonstrate Abdullah’s and also UMNO’s hypocrisy towards disciplining its members.  The fact that members of UMNO Disciplinary Committee would choose to remain silent on Zaid’s appointment attests to the “seriousness” with which they executed their duties.  Let us acknowledge openly what was previously simply alluded to, that disciplinary committee was nothing more than a kangaroo court, its deliberations not worth considering, not even by UMNO’s president.

            Zaid should consider his “conviction” a singular badge of honor.  When knaves and crooks rule and do the judging, the virtuous and honorable would be considered criminals.

Presidential Power versus Collective Cabinet

In the previous cabinet, Abdullah was also the Minister of Finance and of Internal Security.  That would be a tough assignment for even the most accomplished executive.  With Abdullah, well, the results were obvious; he was totally ineffective.  He held the Finance portfolio only to ensure that his family and cronies would get plump government contracts and privatization projects.  In the new cabinet, Abdullah still holds on to Finance but he has given up Internal Security.

            Abdullah continues to have the five full plus four deputy ministers in his department.  He is developing a presidential-type administration in tangent with our customary collective cabinet responsibility.  This could potentially give rise to unnecessary conflicts.  Eliminating those positions would reduce the size of the cabinet and enhance its efficiency.

            As a former civil servant Abdullah revels in the committee system.  His answer to every problem is to appoint a committee; it is a sly way to duck personal responsibility.

            I have an observation:  The executive talent of a leader is inversely related to his penchant for forming committees.  Abdullah is “Exhibit A” for my thesis; he has never seen a committee he does not like.

            Therein lies the problem; Malaysia is being “committeed” to death.  We cannot allow Abdullah to do that; we must force him step down for the good of the country.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 24 March 2008, 12:25 pm and is filed under
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi
,
Bakri Musa
,
Election
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


March 8 political tsunami – 8  matters for first Cabinet working meeting tomorrow

I have sent an urgent fax to the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi on the eight matters which the new Cabinet can do tomorrow to show that he is prepared to respond to the March 8 political tsunami and be on top of the changes demanded by Malaysians.

The March 8 general election results have wrought far-reaching political changes and it is beholden on all political players to heed the demand for change which the Malaysian voters have spoken loud and clear on polling day 17 days ago.

The first working Cabinet meeting tomorrow is being watched closely as to whether the new Government is prepared to respond and be on top of the changes demanded by the people.

The eight  matters which the Cabinet can do tomorrow  to signal that Abdullah and the new Government are  ready and willing to hear the voices and aspirations of the people and  begin the process of healing the divisions in the country are:

1.	Immediate and unconditional release of the five Hindraf leaders, P. Uthayakumar, newly-elected DAP Selangor State Assemblyman for Kota Alam Shah M. Manoharan, V. Ganabatirau,  R. Kenghadharan and T. Vasantha Kumar  from  Internal Security Act (ISA) detention as their only  “offence” is to voice out the legitimate grievances of the long-standing marginalization of the Malaysian Indians and which have been vindicated by the March 8 general election results.

2.	Restoration of national and international confidence in the independence, integrity and quality of the judiciary with the establishment of a Judicial Appointments Commission and  a   Royal Commission into the two decades of judicial crises starting with the arbitrary and unconstitutional sacking of Tun Salleh Abas as Lord President and Datuk George Seah and the late Tan Sri Wan Suleiman Pawanteh as Supreme Court judges in 1988.

3.	First-World Parliament – full commitment to  comprehensive parliamentary reform and modernization including live telecast of parliamentary proceedings, an Opposition Deputy Speaker, an Opposition MP to head the Public Accounts Committee, ministerial status for Parliamentary Opposition Leader and a full Select Committee system headed by Parliamentarians  where every Ministry is shadowed by a Select Committee.

4.	All-out drive to eradicate corruption with the elevation of the Anti-Corruption Agency as an autonomous agency answerable only to Parliament.

5.	Leadership by example on integrity by Ministers, Deputy Ministers, Chief Ministers, Mentris Besar, MPs and State Assembly members, including public declaration of assets,  end of discrimination in allocation of constituency development allocations to Opposition elected representatives, eradication of money politics as  its use to  induce defections and  electoral reforms for  free, fair and clean elections.

6.	Full  implementation of the 125 recommendations of the Royal Police Commission to create an efficient, incorruptible, professional world-class police service to reduce crime, eradicate corruption and uphold human rights, particularly the establishment of an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC).

7.	All-party inquiry to enhance Malaysia’s  international competitiveness to enable the country to successfully face the challenges of globalization.

8.	Public  inquiry into the RM4.6 billion Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) bailout scandal to demonstrate the new Government’s commitment to accountability, transparency, integrity and good governance.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 25 March 2008, 1:07 pm and is filed under
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi
,
Election
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


A Truly Defining & Defying Moment!

by
Martin Jalleh

The Umno-BN hegemony has come to a sudden halt. The 50-year old political juggernaut has been severely jolted. Its formidable force fragmented. A mean machine has been reduced to a mouse.

The coalition that had used its brute majority to bully and bulldoze its way and will in Parliament, blinked when the Opposition breached its two-thirds majority. It was something that they had not bargained for.

The regime of humbug, hype, hypocrisy, hysterics and histrionics, displayed especially in Parliament, has been humbled, even humiliated. People in high places came hurtling down without knowing what really hit them.

The government of unbridled arrogance of power and brazen high-handedness has been brought low. A haunting silence hovers over the once haughty as their political future hangs heavily against hope. The high and mighty are hushed.

The powers that have dominated, dictated and decided for “the good of the people” have been dented. The BN is left in a daze as to why and how they have been ditched and damned so decidedly.

Umno’s high-profile ‘heroes’ had failed to prepare the party to cope with the winds of change. Instead, they became experts in denial, diversion, damage control and in demanding that they be not deprived of their “crutches”.

They had tried to stamp their superiority by demonising others, demolishing critics, “desensitising” non-Malays by brandishing a keris annually, and dramatically displaying Umno as the staunchest defender of Islam.

Umno’s elite would even walk over each other to grab any and every opportunity to satisfy their insatiable and grotesque greed — and they would have the gall to do it under the guise of fighting for the poor Malay.

Incapable of reforming themselves, as former PM Mahathir had inspiringly  pointed out recently, it was only a matter of time when Umno would implode – self-destruct –  the inevitable happened on 8th March!

The rakyat were fed up, frustrated and furious at the unconscionable Umnoputra elite and their lapdog coalition partners for having bled this country dry and gambling the country away with the racial and religious card.

The people were tired of the government’s make-believe. Behind its portrait of a “successful nation” hung an increasingly strained and soiled social fabric – which they had to contend with everyday of their lives.

Pak Lah’s advisors failed to read the groundswell of disillusionment and discontentment. Detached and disconnected from the grassroots, they discussed day-to-day realities from the 4th Floor…as the PM dozed off!

For four years they had gone on a frolick, fumbling and flip-flopping all the way, while the people struggled to stay afloat against the rising cost of living…and as the leaders of the country grew fat and flaunted their fortune.

Khairy and his boys on the 4th Floor must have flogged themselves or went into a fit as four more states fell to the Opposition. Oxbridge must have wished they never had such an ox-brained graduate.

Dr Mahathir says Pak Lah is responsible for ‘destroying’ Umno and BN. He forgets that the ruins of today have their roots in his government of yesterday — one riddled with the most rotten of policies, practices and public personalities.

“Small” Smart Voter

Alas, it was the “small” and ordinary man and woman on the street without cash, clout or connection who succeeded in clipping, curtailing and even crushing executive supremacy.

In the run-up to the elections they were unafraid of being gassed or goaded on like animals into police trucks. They also refused to be gagged by the gamut of executive powers to contain, cripple and crush legitimate dissent.

Neither did they succumb to the government’s threats and taunts, or fall for its treacherous tricks, treats and theatrics or bow and bend in servile subservience, or allowed themselves to be bribed or ‘bought over’.

In the long ‘march’ to freedom, the rakyat matched the BN’s ‘Man, Media, Money and Machinery’ with their ‘Courage, Camadarie, Commitment and Cyberpower’. It was People’s Power that pushed this nation forward.

The populace were also not swayed by the four economic corridors (totaling RM1 trillion) – a cheap claptrap meant to keep the PM and his cronies in the corridors of power.

They did not flinch nor faint when met with another “formidable force” – the Elections Commission – which left indelible traces of farce, flaws and fraud behind.

Aided by the alternative media, the rakyat were able to make out and even mock at the spin and slant created by the mainstream media assisted by their band of “convertible” intellectuals.

General Elections 2008 saw the voter of Bolehland coming of age.  Crossing the age-old race and religious divides many boldly made their ‘one choice’ in the ballot box and told the PM the blunt truth.

The voter of today is discerning enough to decipher truth from falsehood, daring enough to cross mental borders, barriers and bias and to risk uncertainty that accompanies change, and determined enough to synergise with others to bring about genuine change.

The representatives of the Opposition must take note of this evolution of the matured and politically sophisticated voter – who will have no scruples over voting them out of office if they failed to keep their oath of office.

One can imagine Abdullah Badawi looking back on the day when the citizens of Bolehland gave him a massive mandate to seize the moment and to bring about much-needed change but the PM failed miserably.

The daggers are now drawn on poor Pak Lah. Perhaps Hishamuddin Hussien could tell us when they are going to use it? What a tragic and twisted irony! What an ‘unmitigated disaster’ for Umno, BN and the whole country!

(22 March 2008)

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 26 March 2008, 9:14 am and is filed under
Martin Jalleh
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Malaysia: Change is Long Overdue

By
Farish A. Noor

For as long as they can remember, Malaysians have been told time and again that there can only be political stability in the country as long as the status quo is defended. This rather uninspiring message was, of course, delivered by none other than those who were already in power and who had every reason to wish to remain in power for as long as humanly possible. Since it became independent in 1957 Malaysia has been ruled by the same coterie of right-of-centre Conservative-nationalist parties led by the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) and its allies in the former Alliance coalition and now the National Front. For more than half a century Malaysians were told that this was the natural order of things and that to even entertain the idea of there being a different government was tantamount to political heresy of sorts.

Yet a quick survey of the political landscape of many a post-colonial nation-state today would show clearly that almost every post-colonial country in the world has experienced a change of government, and in many cases this transition has come about without leading to chaos and tumult in the streets. The nationalists of Algeria were eventually kicked out of office after it became patently clear that their brand of conservative nationalism served only to disguise what was really a corrupt mode of patronage politics. In India the Congress party that had for so long rested on its laurels and prided itself with the claim that it was the party that won India’s independence has been soundly beaten at both the national and state level; again for the same reason. Why even Indonesia that suffered under three decades of military rule has made the slow but sure transition to a fledgling democracy of sorts, and the mainstream media in Indonesia today remains the most open and courageous in all of Southeast Asia. So why not Malaysia?

The election results of March 2008 have shown the world that in Malaysia at least race and communal-based voting may soon become a thing of the past. This may have been a protest vote against the lackadaisical performance of Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, but it did nonetheless send a very clear message to the government and all the parties in the country. It signalled that the Malaysian public was tired of empty promises and having sweet nothings whispered in their ears, while the government continues along its inebriated pace of mismanaging the country. It also reminded all politicians from all parties that the Malaysian voters will no longer vote along racial or religious-communitarian lines, and that henceforth they will vote for the best candidate who can do her or his job better than the other bloke.

If this is not a sign of political maturity and responsibility, then this analyst doesn’t know what is. The Malaysian voters were literally warned by the ruling parties to vote for them, yet they defied the might of the government and were prepared to take the costs. Yet soon after the election results were known there were still voices among the ruling elite who had not yet adjusted to the realities on the ground. During a rather tiresome debate live on TV with a prominent has-been from the ruling UMNO party, I was struck by how outdated, disconnected and irrelevant his views and discourse were: Rambling on about the need to protect his own ethnic and religious community while slandering the politicians of the opposite camp, he merely reiterated every single cliché on race politics we had been fed for the past fifty years. If people like these are still adamant that there should be no change in Malaysia, then we all know that the time for change has already come.

The fact is that the changes we have seen in Malaysia over the past two decades are not unique to Malaysia and are in fact simply the signs of the times we live in. All over the developing world we have witnessed the creation of better-connected, better-informed and better-educated urban constituencies that are more plural, cosmopolitan, diverse, hybrid and politically literate and informed. It has to be remembered that the Iranian revolution that brought to an end the decades-long regime of the Shah of Iran took place in the most urbanised Muslim country in the world then, where more than half of Iran’s population were urban-based.

Likewise it was no surprise that the uprisings against Ferdinand Marcos and President Suharto began in the urban centres of the Philippines and Indonesia, as did the Thai ‘democratic revolt’ of 1973-76.

Now that it is increasingly clear that Malaysia may have a change of government sooner than many Malaysians themselves had expected, it is imperative that Malaysians accept and understand the need for change: Political change is as natural as breathing and sleeping, and is nothing more than a mere normative aspect of modern democratic political life. As was the case with the fall of the Congress party in India, those political parties that stay on too long in power can only grow weak, corrupt and inefficient as a result of the exposure to the luxuries and temptations of power for too long. To its credit, when the time for change eventually came, the leaders of the Congress accepted their defeat and took their bow in time to preserve what little remained of their dignity and standing. In time the party was allowed to heal itself and come back to power – once again via democratic means.

Other post-colonial societies like Malaysia should heed this lesson well and learn to accept the fact that calling themselves ‘democracies’ means having to be democracies and behave like democracies as well. The failure of the ruling National Front coalition at the 2008 elections speaks volumes about the degree of disconnect that has set into the upper ranks of the ruling parties, and underscored their irrelevance in the eyes of the Malaysian public themselves. For the UMNO-led ruling coalition to remain in denial and to deny the fact that the Malaysian political landscape has already shifted from underneath its feet would be to compound the problem faced by themselves and the country. For this reason alone, the responsibility now lies with the leaders of this enfeebled government to admit to their mistakes and pave the way for change, even if it means sacrificing their long-held position of power and dominance over the country. For the question remains: If and when change is long overdue and can no longer be resisted, would not the preservation of the status quo be the cause of tumult and chaos we have dreaded all along?

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 26 March 2008, 8:54 am and is filed under
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi
,
Election
,
Farish Noor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


“Pace of reforms”? – Abdullah has yet to come to terms with March 8 political tsunami

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has yet to fully come to terms with the March 8 political tsunami which swept away the Barisan Nasional’s hitherto unbroken  two-thirds parliamentary majority and power in five states.

He said yesterday:

“The result of the elections was a strong message that I have not moved fast enough in pushing through with the reforms that I had promised to undertake.

“I thank the Malaysian people for this message. Point made and point taken,”

Abdullah’s admission is not assuring enough, as he seems to have missed the whole point of the March 8 electoral verdict – not that he had “not moved fast enough” in  reforms he pledged more than four years ago, but that he had hardly  moved at all apart from periodically paying lip-service to them.

This is why  there can be no political honeymoon for the second Abdullah Cabinet to implement what had been pledged four years ago as Malaysians are entitled to demand that these pledges going back to 2003 and 2004 are implemented without any further delay or hitches.

This is the reason why I had sent an urgent letter to the Prime Minister yesterday on the eight  reforms  which the new Cabinet should immediately embrace at its meeting today  to show that the second Abdullah Cabinet  is prepared to respond to the March 8 political tsunami and be on top of the changes demanded by Malaysians, in particular:

1.	Immediate and unconditional release of the five Hindraf leaders, P. Uthayakumar, newly-elected DAP Selangor State Assemblyman for Kota Alam Shah M. Manoharan, V. Ganabatirau,  R. Kenghadharan and T. Vasantha Kumar  from  Internal Security Act (ISA) detention.

2.	 Restoration of national and international confidence in the independence, integrity and quality of the judiciary.

3.	First-World Parliament – full commitment to  comprehensive parliamentary reform and modernization including live telecast of parliamentary proceedings, an Opposition Deputy Speaker, an Opposition MP to head the Public Accounts Committee, ministerial status for Parliamentary Opposition Leader and a full Select Committee system headed by Parliamentarians  where every Ministry is shadowed by a Select Committee.

4.	All-out drive to eradicate corruption with the elevation of the Anti-Corruption Agency as an autonomous agency answerable only to Parliament.

5.	Full  implementation of the 125 recommendations of the Royal Police Commission to create an efficient, incorruptible, professional world-class police service to reduce crime, eradicate corruption and uphold human rights, particularly the establishment of an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC).

6.	All-party inquiry to enhance Malaysia’s  international competitiveness including having a world-class education system  to enable the country to successfully face the challenges of globalization.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 26 March 2008, 12:15 pm and is filed under
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi
,
Election
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


What next after this ‘Asian implo-volution’?

by
Azly Rahman

(Early notes for a speech at an upcoming Malaysian forum at Harvard University, Massachusetts, USA, March 2008.)

“Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains”

(- Jean Jacques Rousseau)

“Man has no nature, what he has is history” (- Ortega y Gassett)

When I was invited to this gathering of young thinkers, movers and shakers, and public intellectuals, I was writing about hope. The Malaysian Revolution of 2008 was about hope materializing. It was about ‘freedom’ fought and won.

How Malaysian do we want to become? How free do we want to be? How much can we in turn be imprisoned by the newfound freedom?

These, I believe are strange philosophical questions that is peculiar-sounding at a time when the machinery of the previous regime is being de-constructed and dismantled piece by piece after being captured in a revolution that is aided by the force of cybernetic technology.

For those who believe in divine intervention, the revolution or the “Asian implo-volution” (a combination of “implosion” and “evolution”) as I would coin, the event was god’s will carried out by the general will of the people.

The enabling technology of this “Asian implo-volution” is the will of the Internet – of technological determinism.

Are we at a second phase of Merdeka/Independence? Who were we fighting against? If 50 years ago, it was against the British imperialists, who are the neo-colonialists amongst us now? If in the 1950s, we had a multicultural struggle in the form of the “hartal”, are we seeing a similar version of it now in the form of rallies such as of the Hindraf and Bersih?

Again, what is freedom and independence? How has it changed? Where does freedom lie? How do we feel and taste freedom? What are the manifestation so of the structure of freedom? What do we wish to be free from? Free of? Freed by?

These are the questions all of us must answer as a country of various nations evolving? Can one be free to shout “Fire… Fire…Fire” in a full packed theatre? Can one be free to pull his or her keris/dagger/Samurai sword out and shout “Tak Umno hilang di dunia? and not annoy the nation?

Can Abdullah Ahmad Badawi be free to allow the younger ones to run the nation, after the humiliating defeat? Can our Malaysian universities be free to do whatever they like to students, especially to intimidate those who wish to be set their minds free?

I have some thoughts on what freedom as it relates to what independence might be; thoughts that must be translated into practice.

Ten steps towards freedom

Independence and freedom are not a slogans but an existential state of mind and a condition of ‘lived democracy’, one in which citizens are aware of how oppressive systems are cultivated. We cannot be independent until we arrive at these historical junctures, and until we do the following:

1. Free the human mind from all forms of dogmas, superstitions, mental chains, hegemonic formations, and transitional levels of totalitarianism. Our educational system at all levels must strengthen the scientific and philosophical foundation of its curriculum and practices to effect changes in the higher-order thinking skills of the next generation. We should not tolerate any forms of bigotry, racial chauvinism, and retarded form of democracy in our educational system.

2. Understand the relationship between the ‘self and the system of social relations of production’ and how the self becomes alienated and reduced to labour and appendages and cogs in the wheels of industrial system of production, a system that hides under the name of the corporatist nation and any other term that masks the real exploitation of the human self.

3. Make ourselves aware that our social systems, through the rapid development of technology and its synthesis with local and international predatory culture, have helped create classes of human beings that transform their bodies into different classes of labour (manual, secretarial, managerial, military, intellectual, and capital-owning) that is now shaping the nature of class antagonism locally and globally.

4. Understand how our political, economic, cultural institutions have evolved and are created out of the vestiges of newer forms of colonialism, institutions that are built upon the ideology of race-based interpretations of human and material development that benefit the few who own the means of cultural, material, and intellectual production.

5. Understand how ideologies that oppress humanity works, how prevailing political, economic, cultural ideologies help craft false consciousness and create psychological barriers to the creation of a society that puts the principles of social contract into practice.

6. Be aware of how our physical landscape creates spaces of power and knowledge and alienates us and how huge structural transformations such as the Multimedia Super Corridor or those emerging corridors that create a new form of technological city-scape (technopoles) that benefits local and international real estate profiteers more that they provide more humane living spaces for the poor and the marginalised in an increasingly cybernated society.

7. Be fully aware of the relationship between science, culture, and society and how these interplay with contemporary global challenges and how we clearly or blindly adopt these rapid changes and transform them into our newer shibboleths of developmentalism – one such policy being the National BioTechnology Program.

8. Put a halt to the systematic stupefication of academicians and students in our public universities by first incorporating Academic Freedom Clauses in their mission statements and next enculturalising intellectualism in these learning environments. The public universities must be restructured based on a new paradigm of leadership. Leaders that enable the ability of our students and faculty to think must be removed and replaced with those that pay allegiance to truth. “Veritas!” or “Truth!” as Harvard University slogan decries.

9. Design an economic system founded upon socialistic principles that meet the needs of the many and curb our enthusiasm to consume conspicuously and consequently create a society divided by classes and a postmodern caste system. Rethink the progressive dimension of nationalization instead of pursuing the excesses of privatization. What good would Malaysia do if its leaders are siphoning the nation’s wealth by the billions, stashing them in places such as Switzerland and the Cayman Islands?

10. Restructure the entire education system that would not only create some variant of a classless society but also one that would evolve into a reflective one instead of being rushed to death along the path of Wall Street by those who owns the means of production.

First things first

Of course the first thing to do is to bring this “Asian implo-volution” to a conclusion and honor the people’s hope to bring the power abusers of the old regime to justice.

This is a daunting first step in the process of acquiring power, maintaining it, and next consolidating it. But power here means the power to transform the lives of others for the better.

We must educate Malaysians on the nature of “inter-locking directorates” or the link between business and politics that helped brought the end to the old regime.

Soon, this must become a lesson learned.

In the meantime, I am keen in exploring the possibilities of the social philosopher Rousseau’s ideas of ‘social contract’ and crafting a new definition of Malaysian multi-culturalism.

We wanted a revolution, we got an “implo-volution”. What then must we continue to do?

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 26 March 2008, 9:07 am and is filed under
Azly Rahman
,
Election
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


A New Malaysia

by
Dr. Chen Man Hin

MARCH 8TH 2008  was a defining day for Malaysia. The voting results clearly sent out messages by the voters.

The first message indicated that the people want

A NEW MALAYSIA WITH GOOD GOVERNANCE AND A NEW SOCIETY OF RACIAL EQUALITY, FREEDOM OF SPEECH, RELIGIOUS FREEDOM WITH EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES IN EDUCATION , EMPLOYMENT AND IMBUED WITH A VISION TO TURN MALAYSIA TO BE A LIBERAL MODERN GLOBAL NATION.

Since  March 8th there has been a  noticeable difference in society. The people are happier and more optimistic because they feel that change is in the air. They see the changes happening.

The political map has changed. There are now five new states under opposition rule,  This is the beginning of a two party system of government, as in advanced countries like Australia, Canada and USA.  it is accepted practice in these countries to have states controlled by opposition parties.

The new opposition states have immediately implemented new populist policies like stopping waste of public funds, simple lifestyle for chief minister and mentris besar, ban on application of land by elected DAP MPs and SAs, weeding out corruption.and an amnesty of fines for humble traders and hawkers.

THE SECOND MESSAGE message which is fundamental and show a radical change in the thinking of Malaysians on politics.

This change was voiced out aptly by Malaysia think-tank director-general Wan Saiful Wam Jian. He said

“The results indicated the voters had broken the ethnic and religious barriers. Voting no longer based on ethnicity or religion any more.

“Voting also shows we are heading more towards a Malaysia that is suitable for all Malaysians regardless of race and creed as in Perak where the Malays had voted for the DAP and Chinese for PAS…”

This is one message which PM Dato Abdullah and UMNO should take note.  Umno should reform and initiate party reforms and take a multiracial approach in future. instead of sticking to its Malay agenda,  reform and change to a policy of Malaysian agenda which would serve the interests of all Malaysians.

Wan Saiful Wam Jian also hinted that the challenge for political parties was to offer alternative policies which were no longer based on ‘defending Malay rights’ or ‘we’re an islamic country’. The debate should be on who can promote Malaysian rights best and on issues such as improving the school system and hospitals.

Political debates must revolve arouind policy issues rather than sentiments.

These are the messages of the people who want a change, and from the director general of Malaysia think tank, which UMNO should take heed.

UMNO must be aware that the popular votes of the opposition in peninsular Malaysia is 52% for the opposition whereas only 48% supported Barisan National

UMNO is no more the top dog in parliament, as it has only 79 MPs compared with the figure of 82 for the opposition coalition of DAP, PKR and PAS. Its old partners MCA and MIC are in tatters.  UMNO should eat humble pie and accept the new political reality.  It must be prepared to reform its old ‘Rip Van Winkle’ policies.

The people want a “Malaysian Agenda” not a Malay Agenda to lead the nation to peace, unity and prosperity.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 27 March 2008, 4:55 pm and is filed under
Dr. Chen Man Hin
,
Election
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Brave new M’sian identity emerging?

by
Dr. Azly Rahman

http://www.azlyrahman-illuminations.blogspot.com/

“Our government teaches the whole people by its example. If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.” -Louis D Brandeis (American Supreme Court Justice, 1856-1941).

I do not wish to remove from my present prison to a prison a little larger. I wish to break all prisons. -Ralph Waldo Emerson, American transcendentalist.

The second wave of Independence, achieved with the storming of the “Bastille that is Putrajaya” in March 2008, in a phenomena called “implo-volution” in which the old regime was crushed by its own weight of contradiction and one whose ruins were charted some fifty years ago, present an interesting possibility. It is that of the ethnogenesis (emerging new culture) of a new Malaysian identity. Political will is complementing this philosophical vision. The Internet is aiding in speeding up the process.

The wave is forcing the various ethnic groups to think of defining itself as a ” new nation” when power-sharing of a truly multicultural nature at the state level is becoming a reality. Not only the different ethnic groups are fairly represented in what I call the “yellow” states of “Perak and Selangor” but religious background of the state leaders are also playing a key role in the evolving nature of the leadership.

The yellow states are forging ahead with care – aware of the sensitivities of the different ethnic and religious groups, focusing on the pragmatics and ethics drawn from each cultural tradition. Thus, we saw Penang CM Lim Guan Eng refusing to use thousands of ringgit of state funds to move to a new office, we saw the Kedah chief minister and we saw the continuation of Kelantan chief minister’s commitment to the principles of Islam in governing the state with prudence and tolerance.

What is displayed is Confucianist-Taoist ideas and Islamic brand of ethical leadership – two seemingly radical philosophies that actually complement each other. When it comes to statecraft, both are useful in forming as basis for a philosophy of governance that appeals to the Malays and the Chinese. These ideals are no different that the ones taught in Christianity, Catholicism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, and the cultural philosophy of the natives of Sabah and Sarawak and of the Orang Asli.

The “ethics of authenticity” as philosopher Charles Taylor would put it, is universal enough to be a guiding light of this new nation. Ethics by any name is a system of check and balances of the Evil and the Good within. It is the Middle Path of Inner Statecraft.

Istana Zakaria and pondok Nik Aziz

In speaking of the manifestations of the excesses of greed and the imbalance of evil within, two installations of polar opposites are worth quoting as semiotics of conspicuous consumption, in a country such as Malaysia.

The old and dying regime, Barisan Nasional too consists of Chinese and Malays. But the evolution of racial-politics necessitated the development of a style of leadership that requires extra-ethical means to be employed in order for power to be sustained via the control of wealth and resources. Not only these are controlled but they are displayed conspicuously and of late, with arrogance. This brought about the shocking defeat of the 50-year-old seemingly indestructible machine. The excess of this image of conspicuous consumption is in the Istana Zakaria.

The alter image to Istana Zakaria would probably be the house that Tuan Guru Nik Aziz inhabits. But why do we have these contradictions? How have we come to this historical juncture in which the moral compass of the national leaders are misplaced or even lost and what we are seeing are the consequence of the capitalist system that is rearing its ugly immoral head. We have created monsters out of the freedom we give human beings to profit from the consumerist capitalist system we created out of the fear of socialism and Communism.

Billionaires and multi-millionaires in this nation are creations of a system. They are the products of the evolution of individuals that are installed by the institutions derived from the ideology of uncontrollable free enterprise constantly wanting to be freer and freer. Over a long period of time, the system creates a huge gap between the haves and the have-nots. It creates antagonism – of class and the hypermodern caste system. This is the Reaganomics of poverty – a mass deception of the “magic of the marketplace”.

As a nation, what do we want to be known as? How do we re-engineer another evolution? How do we maintain a sense of personal freedom in the process of crafting a synthesis of “national identity and freedom?” Will the Internet be the great deconstructor of such an identity, once we forget it?

There are multiple contradictions in these questions. They are worth exploring.

Themes of freedom

I suggest we explore these themes below, either out of your own interest or for your graduate work. I think these are fertile areas of research to help us contribute to the ongoing conversation on the politics of identity.

– Human nature and freedom

– National Front, freedom and its problems – based on political economy of identity formation

– People’s Front and freedom – even more problematic since we have multiple layers of identity, construction, deconstruction, and reconstruction of identity.

– New bumiputeraism.

– Archaeology of identity

– Philosophy of beingness

– Theology of existence

– Sociology of nationhood

– Technologies of the mind and body

– Education and cultural engineering.

– Culture critique and ethnogenesis

– Social reproduction and social relations of production

– Institutions and installations

– Self in society

These I believe are themes we will explore as Malaysia progresses into the age of postmodernity bringing forth the excesses of freedom in a world characterised by the rapidisation of technology and the heightening of chaos and complexity. The question of “freedom” will be more daunting as the politics of identity and the identity of politics become inter-twined.

What does “nation” mean? How must a nation be “free”? What kind of freedom must a nation enjoy and protect? In a consumerist society, how is freedom defined? How do bring the notion of freedom down to the grassroots level of the rakyat—how will we synthesise these notions?

Brazilian educator Paulo Freire would call this synthesis “praxis” in which the subjective and objective aspect of the phenomena under study become synthesised and transformed into action. The stage “cultural action for freedom” is an important aspect of this Malaysian revolution of 2008. How do we turn those at the grassroots level into active participants of the national development agenda? How do we teach them to reject all forms of state propaganda?

Freedom is an elusive concept and has its ambiguities. Mat Rempits think they are free and lead a life of total freedom, but who controls the production and reproduction of Mat Rempits. At another level, the power elites in the government think that they are guardians of Freedom/Merdeka but what is the meaning of freedom when those “corridors” built are institutions that will benefit the few and sell the country to foreign investors – in the name of progress.

Freedom is a prison-house of language

The new state governments in the yellow states (Kedah, Penang, Perak, Selangor and Kelantan) will need to showcase what freedom means and how the rakyat will benefit, in the most meaningful and tangible ways. What are the benchmarks of social justice and freedom that the rakyat will see in the agenda? How will “standards” of tolerance, justice, and peace be set and achieved – how will these be measured? How will the rakyat be the judge and the ones to decide if these standards are achieved?

We’re getting into a serious business of systemic and systematic change here, after the revolution.

Even fundamental is the question: who defines freedom? These themes below need to be explored in order to answer the question of the authorship of the definition of freedom:

– Needs versus wants

– Eco-philosophy

– Radical philosophy

– Poverty of culture and culture of poverty

Culture not merely and house we inhabit and the tools we use but both, evolvingly – technology shapes our consciousness.

Where do we go from here – in our exploration of two contradictory terms nationhood and freedom?

Let us discuss this question – as a new nation.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 27 March 2008, 1:20 am and is filed under
Azly Rahman
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Education – for Malaysians or Races

Letters

by
Chopin

My concern is always the above. With five children at schools and rising cost of living I find it rather difficult to cope with today’s Malaysia education systems. I find it rather messy, complicated, grade-oriented and so on. Not to mention the teachers’ grumbles and tight red-tapes in its ministry level. Therefor, I would like to line up the followings if Uncle Lim could somehow bring it up or perhaps to YB Dr. Halimah Ali of S’gor Exco in charge of education.

1. Primary and Secondary Education

I would like the education system could emphasise on Child’s Creativity and character build-up rather that grades oriented. It’s a shame that teachers in our Primary education is a Maktab Perguruan graduates with little knowledge on Early Child Education. Even, I found out recently our children as young as 5-6 years old in Kindergarden are having tuitions now! Are we becoming something like S’pore now? Teachers should be a graduate with specialization in early child education or related to that. A master degree and PhD would be better. (There is always a gap between  primary school teachers and secondary school teachers and the first is a bit low, so to say)

I strongly feel that with strong foundation in the early education our children would have better understanding of their future and their career path, in a crude word, they should know what they want to be. If a child says that he/she wants to be a lawyer, or a policeman, or an army personnel at least the path for that is always there for them to venture.

It is a common practice among the schools now to segregate the children based on their grades achievement. The bright one in the always  the best classes while the “stupid” ones are in the last classes. Are these our children are stupid enough? Recently I watched this Nationa Geopraphy channel how a girl nearly totally abandoned her musical gifted talent and career after she was told by the teacher for “wasting the time” based on her musical ability. So as I can see, teachers’ words are so powerful to change children mind in a split second. Please change this old mentality methods for once and for all.

I also find it rather strange although year after year brillliant outstanding students graduates but still technology inventions and significant achievement  always belong to these western countries? Why? Why today each and every children needs to buy Activity Books? Why not teachers give them excercise extracted from Text Books hence fully utilise the Excercise Books? And this why our children have to bring heavy bags to schools today? Why today our children are so lacking in excitement to go to schools? Why there is always no teacher attending the classes either going for meeting, or kursus or government functions etc? And yet we reach no better than Korea or Taiwan or Singapore and even China.

Early social intergration with all races would come as early as our children step into schools. This should continue when they go further to Secondary Education. By having too much Chinese Schools, Tamil Schools and Malay Schools plus Islamic Religeous Schools and so on, this racial intergration is very difficult to achieve when our children grow up. But at the same our ethical  values and cultures along with its valuable heritage should remain in each of our children. Our children should be given their chance with our guidance how this beloved country should look in future.

Having  boarding schools are good but poorly managed and mishandling with little or no understanding to youngsters problems would lead more complicated matters. Almost 50% of our SBP students are having either a boyfriend or girlfriend and they are having some kind of serious relationship!  This worries me. It seems that schooling is no longer considered to be enjoyful. Some SBP’s are meant for Malays only which is bad in a long period of time. It means although on surface we are Malaysians but deep in our heart we tend to hate each other.

Too many women teachers and little men for teaching. Please do not brand me as biased towards our women contribution to this country. By saying this I mean women are having three jobs at one time, a teacher, a mother and a housewife which all are great and difficult jobs. Therefore, at the end of the day these extra jobs would limit their ideas and exhaust their energy to move forwards and “janji hujung bulan ada gaji”. The rest I don’t care attitude. With male teacher around the scenario would be different a bit, so instance may be to come during the weekends would be less problems and involving more in extracurriculum and  fun. Therefore, teachers’ plights have to given attention too.

2. University

University fee in Malaysia offers almost same amount to foreign students while the latter has to pay a little bit higher (I might be wrong). I feel that education suppose to be minimal or affordable to our children not until they have to “loan” from any agencies and pay with interests. If our education is at world class level, which I doubt about it, then fee should be higher for foreign students. This is considered to be an industry by itself, like Australia or UK or US for that matter. Even Open University is not cheap let alone Monash University in M’sia or Nottingham Univ. in M’sia or whatever. Let us open a way for every one with a chance to study at higher level and affordably.

For matured students university should open more opportunity for them to enhance their educations. Provide more grants to potential students where more corporate involvement and semi-gorvenment agencies. Can we at least consider these mega projects which would benefits a handful of people and start giving back to rakyat especially education? What is the purpose of NEECR or so on but the rakyat there needs more talents and educations, can we just for once consider this?

I am sure I have no direct benefits while these mega projects are going on. If I were to go to KLCC now, again the food is expensive, the parking is expensive, the roads there are jammed I again have to pay if I were to go up there just to have a few “significant” views. It only benefits only already rich people who are trying to be extra richer.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 27 March 2008, 4:05 pm and is filed under
Education
,
Letters
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Second Abdullah Cabinet – no signs of “Point made and point taken”

The second Abdullah Cabinet is a disappointment all round with no signs from its first meeting yesterday that it will be reformist and get cracking to make up for the past four years of broken pledges of reform.

Even the promise of judicial reform which was the rationale for the surprise appointment of Datuk Zaid Ibrahim as the de facto Law Minister to undertake judicial and legal reforms to restore national and international confidence in the independence, integrity and quality of the judiciary after two decades of ravages of the cardinal principles of a truly independent judiciary and just  rule of law has come up against a stonewall.

Zaid’s proposal that the government should apologise to the victims of the 1988 judicial crisis, which many have regarded as grossly inadequate to address the series of judicial crisis of confidence in the past two decades, could not find support in the Cabinet yesterday, with Zaid making the revealing comment after saying that  he had presented his view that the government should apologise to Tun Salleh Abas, Datuk George Seah and the late Tan Sri Wan Suleiman Pawanteh:

“Well, I am afraid the view has yet to be considered.

“There are many people who are more experienced and who are wiser than me. So we have to wait.”

What Zaid meant is clear and simple –  he has not received any support in the Cabinet to take the first step for meaningful judicial reforms, to rectify the wrongs and injustices which had caused the plunge of Malaysia’s judicial system from internationally-acknowledged as world-class two decades ago to its parlous state today.

It is also disappointing that the first meeting of the second Abdullah Cabinet yesterday gave no signs that it has heard the people’s voice in the March 8 general election and is seized of the urgency to make up for four years’ of failure to deliver the reform pledges made by Abdullah when he became Prime Minister, particularly:

1. Immediate and unconditional release of the five Hindraf leaders, P. Uthayakumar, newly-elected DAP Selangor State Assemblyman for Kota Alam Shah M. Manoharan, V. Ganabatirau, R. Kenghadharan and T. Vasantha Kumar from Internal Security Act (ISA) detention.

2. Full commitment to establish  First-World Parliament.

3. All-out drive to eradicate corruption with the elevation of the Anti-Corruption Agency as an autonomous agency answerable only to Parliament.

4. Full implementation of the 125 recommendations of the Royal Police Commission to create an efficient, incorruptible, professional world-class police service to reduce crime, eradicate corruption and uphold human rights, particularly the establishment of an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC).

5. All-party inquiry to enhance Malaysia’s international competitiveness including having a world-class education system to enable the country to successfully face the challenges of globalization.

All in all, it is a bad start for the second Abdullah Cabinet despite the claim of the Prime Minister that he has heard the “message” of the people in the March 8 political tsunami  – that “Point made and point taken”.  Clearly, the point made by Malaysian voters in the March 8 general election has  still to be “taken” by the Prime Minister and his Cabinet.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 27 March 2008, 11:35 am and is filed under
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi
,
Election
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Public inquiry into several billions of ringgit of Wang Ehsan “black gold” expenditures in Terengganu

The constitutional crisis in Terengganu over the appointment of Datuk Ahmad Said as the new Mentri Besar  has come to an end with the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi backing off from his  original nominee of the former Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Idris Jusoh.

As a result, the front-page article  of former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad in
The Sun
on

“Role of rulers in picking mentri besar”
 has been overtaken by events.

However, Mahathir’s views on two ongoing controversies – Wang Ehsan and the judicial crisis – are very pertinent.

On the Wang Ehsan issue, Mahathir wrote:

Terengganu is blessed with petroleum deposits.  It should get 5% of the total earning from oil production.  The Federal Government; fearing the previous PAS government might use this money wrongly had withheld payment.

But when the Barisan Nasional (BN) regained Terengganu the money, now called “Wang Ehsan”, was lavishly spent by the Federal Government on Terengganu. It is not a small sum. Over these years “Wang Ehsan” totalled several billion.

We know that since the BN regained Terengganu in 2004, all kinds of projects have been developed in Terengganu. This includes The Monsoon Cup, luxury housing for sale to foreigners, Crystal Mosque and theme park, university, etc.  Some of these projects are very good but many are totally unnecessary and wasteful.

But what the Terengganu people are saying is that all these mega projects costing billions of Ringgit have been contracted out to people outside Terengganu. Terengganu contractors got practically nothing.

But additionally, they say the contracts all went to one person and they are suspicious that behind this person are members of the first family.The rumours also say that the previous Mentri Besar was responsible for these things happening and of course, they think that he might have benefited financially.

The rumours went on to say that the Prime Minister might have influenced the Mentri Besar into doing wrong things. These are all rumours. It will be quite impossible to prove anything as the perpetrators are skilled in hiding themselves.

This is not good for a Government keen to abolish corruption and be transparent. To clear its name, an investigation should be made.

With former Prime Minister Mahathir coming round to the view that there should be an investigation into the expenditures of Wang Ehsan, Abdullah should take up the challenge to institute a public inquiry on accountability and integrity of expenditures of  several billions of ringgit of “black gold” through Wang Ehsan in  Terengganu in the past seven years since 2000.

In his article, Mahathir also denied any fault, culpability or responsibility for the two-decade crisis of confidence in the judiciary, particularly the 1988 “mother” of judicial crisis which saw the arbitrary and unconstitutional sacking of Tun Salleh Abas as Lord President and Datuk George Seah and the late Tan Sri Wan Suleiman Pawanteh as Supreme Court judges, as well as the suspension of three other Supreme Court judges.

This is what Mahathir wrote:

Even other accusations against me, including the dismissal of judges, were not my doing and I do not feel obliged to apologise.  Ask the Tribunal to apologise.

The person asking that the Government should apologise for what happened to Tun Salleh Abbas may have forgotten that as President of the Muslim Lawyers Association, he fully supported the action that was taken. He castigated the Bar Council for condemning Tun Hamid Omar over the dismissal of judges. Now he wants to be more correct than correct. I wonder why.

If Mahathir  could suggest an inquiry into the investigation into the expenditures  of several billions of ringgit on Wang Ehsan in Terengganu, he should also support a public  investigation into the two-decade crisis of confidence in the judiciary, starting with the “mother of judicial crisis” in 1988.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 28 March 2008, 1:21 pm and is filed under
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi
,
Good Governance
,
Judiciary
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


ISA release of Hindraf 5 – first post-March 8 test for MCA, MIC, Gerakan

The refusal of the Home Minister, Datuk Syed Hamid Albar to release newly-elected Selangor DAP State Assemblyman for Kota Alam Shah and four other Hindraf leaders, P. Uthayakumar, V. Ganabatirau, R. Kenghadharan and T. Vasantha Kumar from Internal Security Act (ISA) detention should bring Malaysians back to reality – that the second Abdullah administration has not really heard the voice of the people in the March 8 political tsunami for change towards a more democratic, accountable, just and progressive  Malaysian society.

Hamid’s explanation is completely unacceptable. He said:  “We cannot simply react to political parties’ calls. We have to give priority to public safety and peace and will give due consideration only if there is no threat to national security.”

This is because the ISA detention of the five Hindraf leaders last  December – purportedly linking them with “terrorist organizations” which have proved to be completely baseless – was the result of calls by Barisan Nasional component parties, particularly Umno and MIC, and had nothing whatsoever to do with national security.

Having myself being detained twice for a total of 35 months under the ISA, I can vouch that ISA detentions had been used as political instruments to suppress dissent which have no relationship whatsoever with national security – and the ISA detention of the five Hindraf leaders  fall directly under this category!

The first Cabinet meeting last Wednesday created all-round national disappointment as there were no positive indications that  the second Abdullah administration would be  a reformist one, to fulfill the Prime Minister’s many reform pledges – though four years late.

Proposals for far-reaching judicial reforms to address the two-decade long subversion of the independence, integrity and quality of the judiciary came up against a stonewall in the Cabinet – where even the unsatisfactory and inadequate proposal by the de facto Law Minister, Datuk Zaid Ibrahim that the government should apologise to the judges who were victims of the 1988 judicial crisis could find no acceptance.

Hamid’s refusal to release Manoharan, Uthayakumar, Ganabatirau, Kenghadharan and Vasantha Kumar from ISA detention despite the very clear desire of the Malaysian voters is the second solid proof that Abdullah’s claim that he has heard the “message” of the people in the March 8 political tsunami – that “Point made and point taken” – is clearly not the case.

After the March 8 political tsunami, the other Barisan Nasional component parties, particularly MCA, MIC and Gerakan had blamed UMNO for  their electoral debacle – declaring that they would no longer stay silent against the arrogant, undemocratic and unjust policies and attitudes forced on them by Umno Ministers and leaders.

Let the immediate and unconditional release of the Manoharan and the other four Hindraf leaders from ISA detention be the first test of MCA, MIC and Gerakan post-March 8 political tsunami:

•	firstly, whether  the MCA, Gerakan and MIC Ministers and Deputy Ministers are prepared to ask the Cabinet next Wednesday to end the ISA abuse and detention of the five Hindraf leaders; and

•	secondly, whether MCA, Gerakan and MIC national leaderships are prepared to submit a joint memorandum to the Prime Minister for the immediate and unconditional release of the Hindraf five from ISA.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 29 March 2008, 10:50 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Election
,
Hindraf
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


“Results of space tests out soon” – Opinion

[Dr. Lee Wei Lim, a a Marie Curie Fellow and Malaysian brain scientist in Maastricht University, the Netherlands, has several queries on  today’s
Star
 report

“Results of space tests out soon”

re: Angkasawan Dr. Sheikh Muszaphar Shukor.

[Dr. Lee’s comments (in bold) accomapnies the Star report viz:]

Results of space tests out soon

PENANG: The results of experiments carried out in space by Angkasawan Dr Sheikh Muszaphar Shukor will be released next month.

The experiment was carried out at the International Space Station or in the “Space” ?

The results of various experiments with proteins and the effects of micro-gravity and space radiation on cells and microbes would be shared with international researchers soon, the country’s first cosmonaut said during the closing of Brain Awareness Week 2008 at Universiti Sains Malaysia yesterday.

How can an Orthopaedic surgeon carry out protein research in the field of molecular biology? Why do we have to focus on space radiation on cells and microbes since we are living on the earth? How does this contribute to the science?

“I have spoken to the scientists and researchers involved in the project and they said the results will be published soon – in about a month’s time,” he said, when responding to questions by students attending his talk on Brain in Space: Our New Frontier.

The results will be published in which international peer reviewed journal? What is the significant scientific background of it?

His talk on the “Brain in Space”, is he qualified to speak about that? Has he been trainned as a neuroscientist? Does he have strong background on the brain? Please see www.pubmed.com and type in “Sheikh Muszaphar Shukor”, no scientific publication related with the brain!

Asked why the experiments had to be carried out in space, the 35-year-old orthopaedic surgeon said it was because zero gravity allowed the specimens to be studied in their 3D form.

Just because to study the specimens in 3D dimension?? Would it be too costly? First of all, how can an orthopardic surgeon involves in scientific neuroscience research? What is the link between the brain and bone (orthopaedic)? Similarly, would you send a dermatologist to study the brain?

“Zero gravity allows specimens to be studied in 3D form”, why did this study have to be carried out in the “space” or the space station just for the cell 3D form investigation? In fact, on the earth, we have such “vacuum chamber model” to carry out research on the morphology of cells with “confocal microscopy”, “two-photon microscopy” or “electron microscopy” approach, this will give us even a better control view of the cells in terms the cell morphological changes and technical manipulation aspect. And again, how can an orthopaedic surgeon carry out such complicated and high technique on cells manipulation in the “space”? Is he a cellular biologist? Please look at the Harvard University website on Neurobiology.

“If studied on earth under a microscope, the cells would have been flattened slightly because of the effects of gravity. In space, we can view the specimens as if they were in the human body,” he explained, adding that he was keen on returning to medical practice.

And again, the research was carried at the “International Space Station” or in the “Space”, there is a clear distinction between these two!

Cell flattened??? Please see my previous opinion on vacuum chamber model.

What type of cell did he want to study? What is the hypothesis and scientific support for such a huge cost of investment?  “In space, we can view the specimens as if they were in the human body,” based on which scientific publication to support this notion of sentence?? If so, how about carry out such experiment in the vacuum chamber (low cost) of zero gravity with better manipulation on the cells and more scientifically grounded?

“I miss seeing my patients and being in the operating theatre. I also hope to one day find the cure for cancer,” he said.

Miss seeing patients? When a person left his medical career for more than 5 years, is he still eligible to perform his clinical works efficiently? May be, he is exemption.

To find cure for cancer? What is the link between his work in space and cancer as well as the brain?

The experiments were conducted while he was on the International Space Station. On Oct 10, Dr Sheikh Muszaphar made history by becoming the first Malaysian to fly to space.

The experiment was conducted at the International Space Station and not in the “Space”? What sort of experiment? Why can’t it be carried out in the scientific laboratory, with lower cost, more reliable internationally-accepted methods for scientific publication? He is an orthopaedic surgeon with no scientific publication in brain and cellular research, how on earth he knew the works of a professional histologist or cell biologist or brain scientist?

Later, Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak launched the book Reaching for the Stars, which was written by Sheikh Mustapha, also known as Ajil, the late brother of Dr Sheikh Muszaphar.

No comments.

The book is Ajil’s personal account of Dr Sheikh Muszaphar’s journey from the time he was short-listed, trained, and selected as Malaysia’s first astronaut to his journey into space late last year.

No comments.

But Ajil had a fall and slipped into a coma while his brother was still in space and died days after Dr Sheikh Muszaphar’s safe return to earth.

No comments.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 29 March 2008, 1:00 pm and is filed under
science/technology
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Release of Hindraf 5 – pressing agenda of 82 MPs and 196 State Assembly members from DPP

One of the major breakthroughs of the March 8 political tsunami was the transformation of “Makkal Sakti” from a call for the end of the long-standing marginalization of the Malaysian Indians into a rallying and  symbolic cry by all Malaysians to end all forms of marginalization against any Malaysian or group, regardless of race or religion.

It is distressing therefore that despite assurances by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi that he has heard the voice of Malaysians on March 8 for change, actions taken by the second Abdullah administration have proved otherwise – in particular the statement by the Home Minister, Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar refusing to release newly-elected Selangor DAP State Assemblyman for Kota Alam Shah and four other Hindraf leaders, P. Uthayakumar, V. Ganabatirau, R. Kenghadharan and T. Vasantha Kumar from Internal Security Act (ISA) detention.

A pressing  agenda for 82 MPs and 196 State Assembly members from DAP, PKR and PAS in Malaysia   is to work out a common strategy for the immediate and unconditional release of the five Hindraf leaders from ISA detention and to ensure that the second Abdullah government understand the meaning of “Makkal Sakti”.

(Speech  at the DAP Bukit Glugor general election thanksgiving dinner to celebrate re-election victory of Karpal Singh as MP for Bukit Glugor  at Long Say Building, Burmah Road, Penang on Saturday, 29th March 2008)

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 30 March 2008, 9:37 am and is filed under
Election
,
Hindraf
,
Human Rights
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.