Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- Dap's Extended Honeymoon in Penang
- The Battle for Umno: Infighting at the very top
- Mahathir, Lee Kuan Yew and The Lazy Native
- Malaysia losing “faith capital values”
- Post GE13 political scenarios-Part 3
| Dap's Extended Honeymoon in Penang Posted: 13 Dec 2011 03:30 PM PST Prior to the 2008 general election, the party was at the forefront in promoting and advocating local council election. What has happened to the pledge? Did the party leadership do anything substantial to prepare the state for local council elections? Leaders who were at the forefront of the campaign such as Sec-Gen Lim Guan Eng, MP Liew Chin Tong and others should help explain why the pledge was not being fulfilled.
|
| The Battle for Umno: Infighting at the very top Posted: 13 Dec 2011 08:41 AM PST Muhyiddin's name is now becoming famous in the Malay community. It has cropped up many times as a possible contender for the top post although both his image and Najib's are always presented side by side in the government-controlled media to create the perception that they are on the most friendly terms. But make no mistake, the competition between the two men has always been there. How loyal is the 'most loyal' deputy? In 2008, unfortunately for Muhyiddin, former premier Mahathir Mohamad had decided that Najib should be the one to take over from Badawi as many had predicted he would. Muhyiddin was devastated at having been beaten by Najib at the eleventh hour. But as they say, what to do? Mahathir is still a force in UMNO to be reckoned with and it would be even worse to cross him and his 'geng' or gang of right-wing political thugs. It is also interesting to note that by then Muhyiddin was as powerless as any ordinary UMNO member because he did not have the backing from the grass roots and the other UMNO leaders, not even from his home state of Johore. He was on his own and had to find supporters, if not followers. Muhyiddin was not promoted by Badawi and son-in-law Khairy Jamaluddin when Badawi was PM because there was Khairy to be groomed into power. So, it was that Muhyiddin was left on the fringes although not totally in the wilderness. It was then that Muhyiddin learnt how to survive on his own, even though he was never alone. The desire to hold the top post is still burning strong in Muhyiddin and more so now, because of his age and as opportunity knocks. Najib is weak, torn apart by the myriad of problems and dilemmas nagging him 24/7. But how sincere is Muhyiddin when he only said that he is the most loyal deputy? Did he promise not to challenge for the presidency? Will Muhyiddin just lie down and let Najib steamroll over him? Disunity Actually, Muhyiddin has already launched several maneuvers with his advisors and small group of supporters. Despite their huge handicap, we can still feel the impact when he questioned the 1Malaysia concept as soon as Najib announced it. Muhyiddin then showed his confidence when he declared he was Malay first and Malaysian next. Muhyiddin even defied Mahathir when he committed himself to teaching mathematics and science in Bahasa Melayu instead of English, which had been implemented by Mahathir. It is clear Muhyiddin is trying to be his own man and garner more grass root support for his impending revolt against Najib at the eleventh hour. That's right. Say what he will during his 'loyalty' pledge to the UMNO assembly, but Muhyiddin is bound to go neck to neck with Najib for president's seat. Same as Najib would if the shoe was on the other foot. Really, Muhyiddin has got nothing to lose. To win, Muhyiddin does not need to get 100% support from those in UMNO and he knows it. All he needs to do is to harp on the various scenarios that threaten the unity in UMNO, and Najib and his band of sycophants will be forced to heel. The pressure is already massive for Najib to step down if he wants to save UMNO from another split, more so with the next General Election or GE-13 nearing.
|
| Mahathir, Lee Kuan Yew and The Lazy Native Posted: 13 Dec 2011 08:38 AM PST One wonders if Mahathir and Lee Kuan Yew share the same philosophy. The Ultra Malay Mahathir and Radical Chinese Lee are almost always at odds with one another. From politics to policies, there seems to be infinite issues for them to brawl over and, even if there are none, they can't seem to help pulling a mickey out of one another. But read between the lines and you will realize that they share the same philosophy – the same reductionist philosophy that subjugated the region into chains of colonization in the past. But before going into the shared philosophy espoused by these leaders, it helps to first understand how a reductionist view on any subject would eventually lead to the perversion of an original idea. An idea or perception of a matter or subject is defined based on the senses and on our analytic thought. That, infused with cultural surroundings and historical impact produces the eventual paradigm in which we live. Now, that's not very hard to follow, is it? However, no matter how accurate one's senses in perceiving a subject, an observer with a reductionist view tries to simplify things by creating faulty arguments and slippery judgments. Thus, when it comes to formulating a policy, a reductionist approach is, at best, dangerous on many levels. Firstly, a reductionist may not solve the problem at hand but instead exacerbate it by not fully understanding the mechanism in the first place. In other words, a reductionist would rush to 'fix' the problem based on first impressions, hence neglecting the intricacies of the initial problem. Secondly, even if the problem is solved, it will leave an aftertaste of resentment as its early mechanism was forcibly changed in order to facilitate its new functions. This "machinery" is forced to function based on the whims of the reductionist, rather than working naturally based on its mechanics. On a third level, a reductionist distorts an original idea by implementing the interpretation of the idea into a form either unfounded or too extreme in the earlier idea. This is because the reductionist digests the original idea only in its cosmetics instead of understanding the whole dynamics and principles of the idea. For example, such a view of sociology gave birth to Communism; a reductionist view of biology gave birth to Nazism, and a reductionist view of Islam gave birth to Islamic terrorism. The same can be said about both Mahathir and Lee Kuan Yew. In his book The Malay Dilemma, Mahathir espoused the view that Malays – particularly the rural ones whom he characterized as less competitive compared to the urban and racially mixed Malays – were somewhat lacking in intelligence as compared to others. By others, I refer to the Chinese, Indians, and Malays of racially mixed background. Therefore, in his assessment an open and competitive market environment would actually cause the Malays to be weaker than permitted by status quo. Mahathir may have written The Malay Dilemma in the early years of his entry into politics, but his view remains unchanged. An example can be his recent comments – especially with regards to Premier Najib Razak's drive to promote meritocracy – as a clear sign that he has yet to ditch his post-colonialist belief in social anthropology (which ascribes to the idea that certain races are born superior than others). Does Mahathir believe pure-blooded Malays to be superior to other races? No. In fact, he believed that pure-blooded Malays are somewhat incompetent when it comes to competition with other races. It was thus written in his book, and reiterated during his post-retirement era where he concluded that meritocracy would benefit only certain races, as compared to affirmative action which, in his opinion, would level the playing field for everyone. In his paradigm, to which I believe and presume many UMNO Old Guards still adhere, affirmative action is a must to ensure all races be able to stand together and fairly reap the nation's economical benefits.
|
| Malaysia losing “faith capital values” Posted: 13 Dec 2011 08:26 AM PST On the one hand, in the short term, it may be that the economy dictates the quality and character of human life. But in the long term, character values of justice, trustworthiness, mutual respect, benevolence and peace are foundational for the flourishing of any nation that strives towards a long term growth. The lack of these qualities creates tension, instability, and eventually loss of good jobs for the nation. Ethical apathy and economic stagnation can create a cycle of decline. As Hans Kung, the President of the Foundation of Global Ethics, said to the Parliament of the World's Religion inMelbournein December 2009,
In Malaysia, about 97 percent of the population claimed to adhere to faith traditions, enriched with ethical values and customs that ought to offer significant faith-based social capital. Diverse in its ethnicity and religious traditions, Malaysia theoretically should flourish much more compared to some of its neighboring countries, like Singapore which citizens are of almost the same ethnic and faith traditions but lack of land space and natural resources. Malaysia undermines its "faith capital values" and thus retards potential economic growth, loses good jobs to other nations, and consequently, has lost almost 330,000 university graduates, especially the non-Malays; Six-hundred thousand of them have left to work in Singapore alone. If Tun Mahathir is right that 90 percent of Malaysia's tax comes from the non-Malays, then this "brain drain" crisis, occasioned in part by dissatisfaction with Malaysia's social and ethical values, further undercuts the financial capital of the nation. By recognising faith as the basis of social capital, such discourse can identify the responsibilities of the government leaders, the function of social institutions in shaping the patterns of behavior and character development of citizens, and the roles of Malaysian Muslims as the majority in the population. These three agents will have the greatest influence in bringing about change. This is not to say that public activism, marketplace dynamics, and the presence of other faiths or non-faith adherents are insignificant, but at present, they have less influence in Malaysia's pseudo-democratic context. Thus the first step in moving forward is to analyse where the three key agents fall short. Surveys conducted in the last quarter of 2010 in Malaysia and Indonesia on "Values, Dreams, Ideals – Muslims Youth in Southeast Asia" release good news that Malaysia Muslim youths, who are at the center stage of this nation's population, prioritised believing in God and becoming better Muslims over becoming rich. Almost 70 percent wanted the Quran to replace the federal constitution. However, further analysis shows a contradiction, given that those interviewed are rather lax about praying, reading the Quran, and fasting, and prefer to watch television, listen to music, or surf the internet in their free time. Data from the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) indicates that almost 65 percent of Malaysia population are internet users, a great increase from 15 percent in 2000. Youths are inclined towards technology, especially the internet and SMS text messages. Clearly, youths are increasingly consumed by the cyber world and distracted from other faith-related aspects of life, such as learning to exegete Quran passages or engaging themselves with the mosque communal gatherings and community services. Many of those interviewed denounce violence, yet 62.4 percent perceive the late al-Qaeda terror group leader Osama bin Laden as a "freedom fighter." This ethical contradiction has parallels elsewhere in society.
|
| Post GE13 political scenarios-Part 3 Posted: 13 Dec 2011 07:24 AM PST Nothing personal against Anwar. To me he remains the crowd puller who can captivate the masses with his mesmerizing oratory. He can call the birds in the trees to his palms. But I don't fancy Anwar as PM because of (a) his duplicity and deceiving nature. He wears too many masks. (2) He is compromisable. I am stating what I see as the possible outcome of post GE13. Anwar has been committed to jail by then. On the steps of parliament Anwar told someone who I know very well, that the government is bent on jailing him. He himself is convinced he will go to jail. We shall wait. As to the person who ranks according to hierarchy who should become the new PM, who sets the hierarchy? If PKR does not come out with the largest number of seats among DAP, PAS and PKR, how does one arrive at the ranking? Ini bukan suka suka mahu taruh Anwar jadi PM. He can't be PM without the concurrence of DAP and PAS. Let's examine DAP and PAS. DAP and PAS are more interested to oust the UMNO/BN government, less with the idea that Anwar MUST be the next PM. I hope PKR people get this into their cool heads. PAS and DAP can live together because they are committed to the bigger picture which is – seeing the BN out. PKR's big picture it seems to me is to see Anwar installed as PM. Hence, the "we will break prison walls mindset" this isn't about Anwar brother… As for PAS and DAP, they can't accept anyone from either party to become PM. I think PAS knows its limitations. They have the material suited to be anything but the PM. Nizar or no Nizar. He's an MB material for now. DAP can't accept any PAS leader to become PM not on account of religion (the personal views of Karpal Singh notwithstanding) but because of fears that Malaysia will regress. Now, we may not agree with this assessment, but how DAP sees things appear to have adherents especially among the Chinese in general. The Chinese in general will be troubled at the idea of having a Mullah heading the country. Why can't they accept Anwar? Because they can't afford to have a person who has just gone through a blackened period to be the immediate PM. Perhaps later when Anwar is fully rehabilitated in the eyes of the public. The views held by Anwaristas are immaterial at the moment. The voters are more important. The Anwar supporters must also come to terms that maybe they have to take one step backwards to save their leader. And also because they ( DAP and PAS) have other reasons I am not at liberty to divulge. Why is Hassan Ali, a close comrade in arms with Anwar Ibrahim since varsity days breaking ranks with Anwar? The talks of his willingness to be the bridge for unity between PAS and UMNO show that to him, Anwar is a non-factor already. So, PAS, DAP and even some sections of the PKR leadership and even those in UMNO who are waiting in the wings look out for someone with the standing, stature and respect as the next PM. My own view is that, the only person fitting the bill is Tengku Razaleigh. Why Tengku Razaleigh? Because it's important for the Pakatan to gain allegiance and support of the 20% fence-sitter voters. This section of the public has a different psychology. They want to know who the next PM is. Is the next PM going to be more acceptable than the present one? They want certainty and some confidence in the person. That person must have the substance, experience, standing and respect all around. Furthermore, the fence sitters who constitute some 20% of voters will demand to see some clarity. These are mostly apolitical and can be persuaded only if the person designated has the qualities and the wherewithal to become PM. If we put Anwar up, they may as well say, if the thing aint broken, why fix it? Whether we like it or not, the 20% fence sitter voters are not exactly enamored with the idea of having Anwar as PM. They might as well stick with Najib. Tengku Razaleigh is too old. Well, Mahathir remains PM until nearly 80. Deng Hsiopeng became leader of China in his late 70s. Many leaders become head of states at late ages. They have the stamina and wisdom and the experience. Malaysia is in need of someone of that stature. There's no past tense when it comes to political relevancy and making sense. Didn't I read that Mahathir says, if it isn't broken don't fix it? Only if we are sentimental fools. We are not going to be romantics dreaming of a perfect past in order to perpetuate all the negatives that are associated with the past. The salad and halcyon days perpetrated during the Mahathir era is now over. Of course Dr Mahathir wants a return to his era where everything is more or less decided by him. That presupposes the existence of a leader like him- non inclusive and iron willed. Najib does not have those qualities. Neither does he have the qualities to convince UMNO people the virtues of his liberal ideas.
|
| You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan