Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Monday, January 31, 2011
Surviving the Coming Hard Time !
By Stanley Koh
Stanley Koh was the head of research unit at MCA.
COMMENT
It turns out that the government you voted in will not hold your hand to see you through hard times. Instead, it will make sure to add to your suffering because that is the easiest way it can avoid going bankrupt.
Barisan Nasional has apparently decided that the time has come to remove or cut subsidies — the kind of subsidies that poor people depend on, not the kind enjoyed by big corporations and monopolistic suppliers of utilities and infrastructural support.
So what is the use of a government that will eagerly shake your hand during election time but will not hesitate to pull the rug from under your feet when it needs to save itself?
Few believe that the removal of subsidies on essential food items and fuels can save the Malaysian government from possible bankruptcy. If it does go bankrupt, it will be because it has failed to cleanse a corrupt system.
It is better for Malaysians to be rich and to control a bankrupt government than to be poor and controlled by a corrupt government. Many countries have rich citizens with bankrupt governments.
You do not need an economist to tell you that RM100 in Malaysia today does not buy as much as it did last year.
In what we may call the Malaysian Misery Index, we can see that food prices have been spiralling upwards for years. For example, fresh tenggiri, which was RM13.23 a kilo in 1997, now costs RM40 a kilo. A roasted duck cost RM13.47 in 1997, but is now at least RM38. And Malaysians have become used to the doubling in price of some food items during festive seasons.
Most Malaysians do not expect the situation to improve. Food prices will continue to go up and there is little hope that they will come down again.
Two years ago, the BN government announced that it had set up a US$1.25 billion fund to increase food production and that it was targeting 100% self-sufficiency in rice consumption. What has happened to the fund and the target?
Double whammy
When the GST (goods and services tax) is fully implemented in 2011, it will be a double whammy for poor and middle-income households, pensioners, the unemployed and single parents.
Some have argued that imposing GST on Malaysian does not make much economic sense when only 6.8% of the population are taxpayers and a large majority earn low incomes. Furthermore, it is acknowledged that most of us are paying hidden taxes in highway tolls and electricity tariffs.
Indeed, the future looks bleak.
Yet, quite a number of us are gullible enough to think that the government will protect consumers. Are we not being stupid? Isn't it better to be wiser and brace for tougher times ahead?
Instead of believing the promises of a government that has a dismal performance record, we should believe the law of inflation, which says, “Whatever goes up will go up some more.”
Ronald Reagan once described inflation as a violent mugger, a threatening armed robber and a deadly hit man. In the Malaysian context, that is an apt description not of inflation, but of the BN government’s behaviour and policies.
So how do we fight the inflation of food prices?
Economists generally agree that the average Malaysian household spends about 75% of its income on food. Food price hikes will therefore have an adverse impact upon disposable income and force us to make a lifestyle change.
To fight inflation
Here are some of the things we can do:
- Stop eating at expensive restaurants.
- Boycott traders, hypermarkets and hawker stalls that charge unreasonable prices.
-Shop intelligently for value and do not be too impressed by branding.
-Work out a budget before buying. Look out for special sales.
- Prevent wastage by not buying more than you can eat.
- Tell friends and acquaintances about shops that charge excessively.
- Avoid buying expensive beverages or foodstuff and find alternatives for nutritional value.
- Boycott chained markets and fast-food joints. They are monopolised by a few large companies and can therefore raise prices at whim.
Perhaps economist Milton Friedman was right when he said, “If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara desert, in five years there will be a shortage of sand.”
Malaysians do not take the official Consumer Price Index (CPI) seriously. They know it does not accurately reflect price rises in essential foodstuffs.
Many suspect that the government uses it as an instrument to deceive the public into thinking that things are hunky-dory when they are not. The government develops statistics so that the inflation-weary public would direct its hostility towards businesses, and not blame official mismanagement.
The average household consumption expenditure over the last 20 years has increased by 181.8%. In 1973, it was RM412. By 1993-94, it had gone up to RM1,161. In 1999, it touched RM1,631.
According to Prof Lim Teck Ghee, real household income has been growing, but at the snail-pace rate of 0.9% per year. More than half of the population are in the low-income category.
Today, a family of five spends 50% to 60% of household income on food compared with 20% in 1998 and 15% in 1988.
Not long ago, there was official acknowledgement that 95% of families are finding it hard to cope with the rise in food prices.
In fact, the biggest failure of the Ninth Malaysia Plan is that it did not help Malaysians improve their quality of living. Inflation, whether it is imported or locally generated, raises the cost of living and lowers the quality of living.
'Why not change the government?'
In 2006, when Najib Tun Razak was Deputy Prime Minister, he asked Malaysians to change their lifestyle in the face of the rising cost of living.
A blogger by the name of Chong wrote in response: “Perhaps, the prime minister should have done some simple calculations himself. People like us basically have no lifestyle, just merely surviving with our earnings. So how are we going to change (our lifestyle)?
“Inflation has gone up 4.5% (and above) and the government is pushing the cost of living higher by increasing electricity tariffs, but our income remains the same.”
Others felt it would be easier to change the government than to change a non-existent lifestyle.
“Instead of listening to Najib asking us to change,” one critic remarked, “why not we change the government at the next general election?”
To me, that makes a lot of sense. Any government that is willing to build air-conditioned toilets around a city at more than RM100,000 each has no business planning a national economy.
When such a government decides to cut subsidies, many of us will wonder whether the so-called “savings” will instead go towards more majestic arches, fanciful lampposts, refurbishments of VIP residences, luxurious government bungalows and fruitless overseas trips by ministers.
Any government that stands accused of having wasted RM320 billion in 20 years — through corruption, wastage and mismanagement — definitely does not deserve to be re-elected.
Stanley Koh was the head of research unit at MCA.
Stanley Koh was the head of research unit at MCA.
COMMENT
It turns out that the government you voted in will not hold your hand to see you through hard times. Instead, it will make sure to add to your suffering because that is the easiest way it can avoid going bankrupt.
Barisan Nasional has apparently decided that the time has come to remove or cut subsidies — the kind of subsidies that poor people depend on, not the kind enjoyed by big corporations and monopolistic suppliers of utilities and infrastructural support.
So what is the use of a government that will eagerly shake your hand during election time but will not hesitate to pull the rug from under your feet when it needs to save itself?
Few believe that the removal of subsidies on essential food items and fuels can save the Malaysian government from possible bankruptcy. If it does go bankrupt, it will be because it has failed to cleanse a corrupt system.
It is better for Malaysians to be rich and to control a bankrupt government than to be poor and controlled by a corrupt government. Many countries have rich citizens with bankrupt governments.
You do not need an economist to tell you that RM100 in Malaysia today does not buy as much as it did last year.
In what we may call the Malaysian Misery Index, we can see that food prices have been spiralling upwards for years. For example, fresh tenggiri, which was RM13.23 a kilo in 1997, now costs RM40 a kilo. A roasted duck cost RM13.47 in 1997, but is now at least RM38. And Malaysians have become used to the doubling in price of some food items during festive seasons.
Most Malaysians do not expect the situation to improve. Food prices will continue to go up and there is little hope that they will come down again.
Two years ago, the BN government announced that it had set up a US$1.25 billion fund to increase food production and that it was targeting 100% self-sufficiency in rice consumption. What has happened to the fund and the target?
Double whammy
When the GST (goods and services tax) is fully implemented in 2011, it will be a double whammy for poor and middle-income households, pensioners, the unemployed and single parents.
Some have argued that imposing GST on Malaysian does not make much economic sense when only 6.8% of the population are taxpayers and a large majority earn low incomes. Furthermore, it is acknowledged that most of us are paying hidden taxes in highway tolls and electricity tariffs.
Indeed, the future looks bleak.
Yet, quite a number of us are gullible enough to think that the government will protect consumers. Are we not being stupid? Isn't it better to be wiser and brace for tougher times ahead?
Instead of believing the promises of a government that has a dismal performance record, we should believe the law of inflation, which says, “Whatever goes up will go up some more.”
Ronald Reagan once described inflation as a violent mugger, a threatening armed robber and a deadly hit man. In the Malaysian context, that is an apt description not of inflation, but of the BN government’s behaviour and policies.
So how do we fight the inflation of food prices?
Economists generally agree that the average Malaysian household spends about 75% of its income on food. Food price hikes will therefore have an adverse impact upon disposable income and force us to make a lifestyle change.
To fight inflation
Here are some of the things we can do:
- Stop eating at expensive restaurants.
- Boycott traders, hypermarkets and hawker stalls that charge unreasonable prices.
-Shop intelligently for value and do not be too impressed by branding.
-Work out a budget before buying. Look out for special sales.
- Prevent wastage by not buying more than you can eat.
- Tell friends and acquaintances about shops that charge excessively.
- Avoid buying expensive beverages or foodstuff and find alternatives for nutritional value.
- Boycott chained markets and fast-food joints. They are monopolised by a few large companies and can therefore raise prices at whim.
Perhaps economist Milton Friedman was right when he said, “If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara desert, in five years there will be a shortage of sand.”
Malaysians do not take the official Consumer Price Index (CPI) seriously. They know it does not accurately reflect price rises in essential foodstuffs.
Many suspect that the government uses it as an instrument to deceive the public into thinking that things are hunky-dory when they are not. The government develops statistics so that the inflation-weary public would direct its hostility towards businesses, and not blame official mismanagement.
The average household consumption expenditure over the last 20 years has increased by 181.8%. In 1973, it was RM412. By 1993-94, it had gone up to RM1,161. In 1999, it touched RM1,631.
According to Prof Lim Teck Ghee, real household income has been growing, but at the snail-pace rate of 0.9% per year. More than half of the population are in the low-income category.
Today, a family of five spends 50% to 60% of household income on food compared with 20% in 1998 and 15% in 1988.
Not long ago, there was official acknowledgement that 95% of families are finding it hard to cope with the rise in food prices.
In fact, the biggest failure of the Ninth Malaysia Plan is that it did not help Malaysians improve their quality of living. Inflation, whether it is imported or locally generated, raises the cost of living and lowers the quality of living.
'Why not change the government?'
In 2006, when Najib Tun Razak was Deputy Prime Minister, he asked Malaysians to change their lifestyle in the face of the rising cost of living.
A blogger by the name of Chong wrote in response: “Perhaps, the prime minister should have done some simple calculations himself. People like us basically have no lifestyle, just merely surviving with our earnings. So how are we going to change (our lifestyle)?
“Inflation has gone up 4.5% (and above) and the government is pushing the cost of living higher by increasing electricity tariffs, but our income remains the same.”
Others felt it would be easier to change the government than to change a non-existent lifestyle.
“Instead of listening to Najib asking us to change,” one critic remarked, “why not we change the government at the next general election?”
To me, that makes a lot of sense. Any government that is willing to build air-conditioned toilets around a city at more than RM100,000 each has no business planning a national economy.
When such a government decides to cut subsidies, many of us will wonder whether the so-called “savings” will instead go towards more majestic arches, fanciful lampposts, refurbishments of VIP residences, luxurious government bungalows and fruitless overseas trips by ministers.
Any government that stands accused of having wasted RM320 billion in 20 years — through corruption, wastage and mismanagement — definitely does not deserve to be re-elected.
Stanley Koh was the head of research unit at MCA.
Sunday, January 2, 2011
Pertahankan Selangor demi Menyelamatkan Malaysia
2011 – 365 days; 8760 hours - what lies ahead?
2011 is not only the beginning of a new year but also the beginning of a new decade. I do not know what lies ahead but what I know for sure, it would be a challenging year for Malaysia.
It begins with Selangor (the heart of the nation) being on the brink of a Constitutional Crisis. The appointment of the State Secretary would be the talk of the nation. The fed is bending the law, and trying to put in their own chosen candidate without consultation with the Mentri Besar.
Worst still, the palace bureaucrats seem to be in league with the Feds. Announcements and invitations to the swearing-in ceremony have already been sent out. The Selangor Constitution is specific in that the SS must be sworn-in in the presence of the Mentri Besar (effectively, his immediate boss) The same constitution is silent on the role of the Sultan in the swearing-in.
So, will the MB disobey the palace and refuse to attend the ceremony – and refuses to acknowledge the appointment of the SS?
I strongly believe that the MB should call for an Emergency State Assembly sitting, where the people’s voice through their elected representatives should be heard. A vote should be taken as to whether the nominated SS is acceptable or not; if not, ask the Fed to propose another name or select from one of those proposed by the MB.
This I believe is in the spirit of the Pakatan Rakyat manifesto of respecting the Voice of the Rakyat.
The Feds would probably not respect the vote of the State Assembly; let them do so at the risk of facing the wrath of the people.
The next step, would be going to the courts to resolve this constitutional problem. Let the courts decide on how the SS should be appointed. Again, we all know the Courts are controlled by the Feds with little or no respect to the Rule of Law. Let it be, because this is yet another nail into the coffin of the BN Government.
All this would remain fresh in the memories of the voters come the next elections as long as the rakyat are continuously reminded of this.
In the meantime, without an SS, the State would be in a limbo. The EXCO would need to work extra time to get the administrative arm to continue working. However, it cannot afford to use the non existence of the SS as an excuse for things not moving.
This would be an excellent test for the Pakatan Rakyat State Government on crisis management. Perhaps, Kelantan to be a good direction to look to for guidance and previous experience.
This would be a tremendously challenging task to start off the year on. Of course January 2011 will end with the Temang by-elections; the result would set the mood for the rest of the year.
2011 is not only the beginning of a new year but also the beginning of a new decade. I do not know what lies ahead but what I know for sure, it would be a challenging year for Malaysia.
It begins with Selangor (the heart of the nation) being on the brink of a Constitutional Crisis. The appointment of the State Secretary would be the talk of the nation. The fed is bending the law, and trying to put in their own chosen candidate without consultation with the Mentri Besar.
Worst still, the palace bureaucrats seem to be in league with the Feds. Announcements and invitations to the swearing-in ceremony have already been sent out. The Selangor Constitution is specific in that the SS must be sworn-in in the presence of the Mentri Besar (effectively, his immediate boss) The same constitution is silent on the role of the Sultan in the swearing-in.
So, will the MB disobey the palace and refuse to attend the ceremony – and refuses to acknowledge the appointment of the SS?
I strongly believe that the MB should call for an Emergency State Assembly sitting, where the people’s voice through their elected representatives should be heard. A vote should be taken as to whether the nominated SS is acceptable or not; if not, ask the Fed to propose another name or select from one of those proposed by the MB.
This I believe is in the spirit of the Pakatan Rakyat manifesto of respecting the Voice of the Rakyat.
The Feds would probably not respect the vote of the State Assembly; let them do so at the risk of facing the wrath of the people.
The next step, would be going to the courts to resolve this constitutional problem. Let the courts decide on how the SS should be appointed. Again, we all know the Courts are controlled by the Feds with little or no respect to the Rule of Law. Let it be, because this is yet another nail into the coffin of the BN Government.
All this would remain fresh in the memories of the voters come the next elections as long as the rakyat are continuously reminded of this.
In the meantime, without an SS, the State would be in a limbo. The EXCO would need to work extra time to get the administrative arm to continue working. However, it cannot afford to use the non existence of the SS as an excuse for things not moving.
This would be an excellent test for the Pakatan Rakyat State Government on crisis management. Perhaps, Kelantan to be a good direction to look to for guidance and previous experience.
This would be a tremendously challenging task to start off the year on. Of course January 2011 will end with the Temang by-elections; the result would set the mood for the rest of the year.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Hidup Suara Rakyat
As Shawal comes to an end, I sit here at the Café reflecting on the past two months beginning with Ramadhan.
No, Im not muslim: Im a Christian of Chinese cultural heritage, a Malaysian citizen and a proud Anak Bangsa Malaysia.
As our Muslim brothers exercised their Islamic duty to fast, I joined them at numerous breaking fast events, joining together the celebration. In the 30days, I had visited 6 mosques and around 15 suraus and at every location my presence was most appreciated; including breaking fast with His Highness, the Sultan of Selangor. I took the effort to dress in traditional Malay baju at each occasion and that was also very much appreciated.
Thus, I was most disappointed when the MP Serdang was chastised for entering and speaking at a Surau. Adding salt to the wound was the fact that she was also called for her statement to be taken by the police, supposedly to assist with investigations. Due to no fault of her own making, she had also to make an apology to the Sultan.
During this period also, there was the issue of the school principal tearing apart our fabric of unity. Race has always been a sensitive issue in our community and played up for political interests. Many have been disturbed by it but I still see unity and strength in our diverse culture.
Instead of continually harping and commenting on race issues and the problems within the political parties, we as Anak Bangsa Malaysia should be looking at highlighting our society’s strength and progress .
Let the papers and politicians shout and scream at each other over race and politics and whatever else, but let us continue to Unite as One Voice.
In the spirit of Shawal, to forgive and forget – we must as concerned citizens, encourage our politicians from both sides, and remind them of their duty to serve. It is also our duty as citizens to play our role of being the watch-dog to monitor the elected representatives.
Each political party would have their internal fights and struggle but ultimately, at the ballot box, it is our vote that matters most. So, let us use that vote wisely, let us be responsible in exercising our duty on polling day.
Meanwhile, like a parent, when their kids quarrel, the parent takes no sides. Good or bad, right or wrong, the children are still their own flesh and blood. Likewise, when both the government and opposition side quarrel, we take no sides. Both are a part and parcel of our democratic system; and both must respect us, the voters, the rakyat – “the parent”
However, as citizens we look and evaluate the strength of each party – we hear the arguments of each side, we see the action of each side. Like the parent, we silently ad quietly decide in secret, who to leave our property in the will (our vote)
We should not lower ourselves and start joining in the fray and arguing with the politicians in public. However, it is our duty to engage each side and discuss and perhaps clarify issues and understand their thinking. Engaging with the party does not mean we support their stand.
When citizens start being positive and encouraging when engaging with the politicians and civil servants, we can definitely see positive changes. Similarly, as a parent, we encourage our children; when they fall, we are there to pick them up, and guide them.
Thus the change that the citizens demanded in March 08 will only bear fruit when citizens also become agents for change; and not let politicians bring about the changes. We must not be complacent and sit back – we must keep them on their toes.
The current direct elections being introduced by PKR is yet another example where we should see the goodness in it, rather than the negative parts. Yes, there are teething problems, there are in-house quarrels, so be it. Let PKR solve it – if they do and come out stronger, we vote for them come next elections, if not; we punish them by putting our X somewhere else.
We want to see us being able to put enough food on our tables, to have a solid roof over our heads with our hard earned ringgit. We want to be able to put aside a little something every month for the rainy day ahead. How can PR or BN assure us of that?
My X will go to the one who can tell me, assure me and convince me.
Honestly, am I really concerned if the Deputy Party President is “nyanyuk” or a Trojan horse or an ultra or whatever other terms is being used. I am not convinced just by seeing you wear the 1-Malaysia logo everyday but I see how you behave, the things you actually do – not just the sweet words you whisper?
My X goes to the one who does and speaks the same thing, not to the one who speak one thing and does another.
Bread and butter issues are of utmost importance. However, to ensure security for my son, true sustainable UNITY is important too. I feel and I know, there is real UNITY on the ground. However, for their political advantage and/or survival, some politicians keep telling us that there is no UNITY and that we must give them our X to ensure there is UNITY.
These same politicians are in fact tearing apart our fabric of unity.
All we need to do is look around us and see the multi racial celebrations during the open house this past Syawal.
In the many programmes that I have attended, little children seeing me in my Baju Melayu would take my hands and bring it to their forehead as a sign of respect. On other previous occasions when I am not wearing my Baju Melayu, they would shake my hands and no more. This is not their fault but simply the way they were brought up.
I am not offended when they just shake my hands but I am proud and delighted when they bring my hand to their forehead. I see it as progress and there will come a day soon, when our children will see others as Malaysians and not as Malay or Indian or Chinese.
Hidup Suara Rakyat – Hidup Anak Bangsa Malaysia
Monday, September 20, 2010
Malaysia's religious problems: The way forward
"You are my brother and I love you. I love you worshipping in your church, kneeling in your temple, and praying in your mosque. You and I and all are children of one religion, for the varied paths of religion are but the fingers of the loving hand of the Supreme Being, extended to all, offering completeness of spirit to all, anxious to receive all.
I love you for your Truth, derived from your knowledge; that Truth which I cannot see because of my ignorance. But I respect it as a divine thing, for it is the deed of the spirit. Your Truth shall meet my Truth in the coming world and blend together like the fragrance of flowers and becoming one whole and eternal Truth, perpetuating and living in the eternity of Love and Beauty."
— Kahlil Gibran, A Tear And A Smile (1914)
Religious pluralism is a cornerstone for achieving harmony in societies with people of varied faiths. Yet in multi-religious Malaysia politicians shy away from discussing religious pluralism. It is difficult to get straight answers about their stand on or commitment to it.
Take for example the recently concluded panel discussion on 'National Unity through Religion, Law and Shared Values' at UCSI University in KL. It is unclear whether religious pluralism or religious bigotry were fruitfully discussed. The contents of the discussion are not made public enough. It can be gleaned from news reports that there were barely satisfactory answers to barely satisfactory questions.
What is conspicuous is that there is an excruciating lack of focus on the heart of the issue.
Here I refocus attention on what really matters.
Good values and spirituality should be the essence, not religion per se
If a religious position is to be taken by any political party or any citizen that is founded on respect for religious beliefs and support for the freedom to practice any religion (or none at all), then this position should encourage living a life guided by a universal set of shared moral values and one containing aspects of the spiritual, whatever the religious or non-religious route taken. It follows that religion is a means towards these larger goals. This awareness is cardinal. Unity is achieved as a result of these common goals, not by having or propagating any particular religion.
What we should first abandon is the ambition to create a state of “one mankind under one religion”. We should not harbour false and childish hopes that only through one religion for all can we get people to step onto the expressway of righteousness and practice moral values, or that only thus can we lead everyone to the promised land of God-realisation, as if it is our duty and right. Such an aspiration is but a certain road to perdition.
Instead, we should be enlightened and courageous enough to consider accepting that people can take many valid paths towards goals of spirituality and right living.
We should be enlightened and courageous enough to consider admitting that no religion or belief system has a monopoly of or is exclusively privy to these moral values or “steps to the ultimate blessings of God or heaven”.
We should awaken to the fact that moral values and spiritual teachings are not exhaustively found in any one religion. The teachings of one religion can be instructive to adherents of another religion and vice versa.
We should be able to say that the choice of religion is a personal one; that in line with the right to freely practice one's religion as one shall practice it, religion and religious practices should not be imposed upon any individual such as by the authorities or the state, or by a society that has been so conditioned by state policy that it passively imposes religion upon its own members.
Should there be a public demand for religious guidance or for places of worship, then this shall be provided. In no uncertain terms should this be seen to imply consent for the imposition of religion or its practices by a righteous authority.
These are among the things that the so-called religious democrats should be forthright about, but are not.
This is what we should be striving for if we believe in a Malaysia that is just, free and harmoniously multi-religious, but are not.
There are serious obstacles to these that we are reluctant to come to terms with, but must.
Religious chauvinism as a disease to eradicate
These specific obstacles are almost never clearly enunciated. Here they are:
The desire amongst members of society to preach their religions as better or superior alternatives to the religions or belief systems of others and thereby to seek to convert others to their own religion
The related belief that non-believers are lowly, of unequal standing or blessing and their religions inadequate and contemptible
The refusal or inability to approve the values or truths contained in other religions or belief systems regardless of their merit
The related fear that this might shake one's faith in one's religion, or render one's religion comparatively less glorious, or disadvantage one's religion in the competition for religious propagation
The myopia of "only one brotherhood through one way of God" that prevents the acceptance of all religious adherents under an umbrella of one humanity in which other belief systems are acknowledged as valid.
This condition and process, which can for brevity be termed religious chauvinism, is the eye of the storm in all the religious tensions and misunderstandings we have witnessed in Malaysia.
The mentality described is widespread and fairly entrenched. The psychology of insecurity and the politics shaping it are interesting and worthy of separate examination.
But the implication is unequivocal. It clashes with the hopes of building a Malaysian society that is genuinely accepting (not merely “tolerant”) of a diversity of religions and cultures.
It means that lasting peace and unity amongst our people is to remain out of our reach so long as this is left to get out of control.
What remains to be done and a challenge to the politicians
It is for the preceding reasons that this matter must be urgently addressed. If a united Malaysia is in our interest, then an honest, open and peaceable national dialogue on this must commence. It should involve the issues mentioned here and others, such as religious propagation, its targets and the ethics of its methods.
Relegating religious talks of understanding to practically useless and toothless inter-faith panels behind closed doors is a cowardly act of evasion. Understanding and consensus must emerge from the majority — the entirety of Malaysians.
We should also cease deceiving ourselves with superficial multi-cultural and multi-religious images and slogans that are purpose-crafted for international consumption or national celebrations. This lulls us into inaction.
To dodge discussion by offering excuses (e.g., "Malaysians are not ready for this") is an unacceptable denial of reality and maturity. To delay further is to permit more, avoidable conflicts. It is to shirk from the shared responsibility of nation-building.
We need to stop the factors that perpetuate religious chauvinism, remedy existing attitudes and inculcate multi-culturalism and multi-religiousness as the definite Malaysian way.
In view of this, to the politicians and policymakers of Umno, MCA, PAS, PKR and DAP, I put the following question:
Do you have the guts, will and conviction (i) to discuss the issue of religious pluralism and bigotry clearly and openly; (ii) to establish multi-culturalism and religious pluralism as a prime policy and encourage it amongst your supporters and colleagues within your political parties; and (iii) to act decisively to correct the problem of religious chauvinism and prejudice such as those highlighted here?
By Pak Sako
I love you for your Truth, derived from your knowledge; that Truth which I cannot see because of my ignorance. But I respect it as a divine thing, for it is the deed of the spirit. Your Truth shall meet my Truth in the coming world and blend together like the fragrance of flowers and becoming one whole and eternal Truth, perpetuating and living in the eternity of Love and Beauty."
— Kahlil Gibran, A Tear And A Smile (1914)
Religious pluralism is a cornerstone for achieving harmony in societies with people of varied faiths. Yet in multi-religious Malaysia politicians shy away from discussing religious pluralism. It is difficult to get straight answers about their stand on or commitment to it.
Take for example the recently concluded panel discussion on 'National Unity through Religion, Law and Shared Values' at UCSI University in KL. It is unclear whether religious pluralism or religious bigotry were fruitfully discussed. The contents of the discussion are not made public enough. It can be gleaned from news reports that there were barely satisfactory answers to barely satisfactory questions.
What is conspicuous is that there is an excruciating lack of focus on the heart of the issue.
Here I refocus attention on what really matters.
Good values and spirituality should be the essence, not religion per se
If a religious position is to be taken by any political party or any citizen that is founded on respect for religious beliefs and support for the freedom to practice any religion (or none at all), then this position should encourage living a life guided by a universal set of shared moral values and one containing aspects of the spiritual, whatever the religious or non-religious route taken. It follows that religion is a means towards these larger goals. This awareness is cardinal. Unity is achieved as a result of these common goals, not by having or propagating any particular religion.
What we should first abandon is the ambition to create a state of “one mankind under one religion”. We should not harbour false and childish hopes that only through one religion for all can we get people to step onto the expressway of righteousness and practice moral values, or that only thus can we lead everyone to the promised land of God-realisation, as if it is our duty and right. Such an aspiration is but a certain road to perdition.
Instead, we should be enlightened and courageous enough to consider accepting that people can take many valid paths towards goals of spirituality and right living.
We should be enlightened and courageous enough to consider admitting that no religion or belief system has a monopoly of or is exclusively privy to these moral values or “steps to the ultimate blessings of God or heaven”.
We should awaken to the fact that moral values and spiritual teachings are not exhaustively found in any one religion. The teachings of one religion can be instructive to adherents of another religion and vice versa.
We should be able to say that the choice of religion is a personal one; that in line with the right to freely practice one's religion as one shall practice it, religion and religious practices should not be imposed upon any individual such as by the authorities or the state, or by a society that has been so conditioned by state policy that it passively imposes religion upon its own members.
Should there be a public demand for religious guidance or for places of worship, then this shall be provided. In no uncertain terms should this be seen to imply consent for the imposition of religion or its practices by a righteous authority.
These are among the things that the so-called religious democrats should be forthright about, but are not.
This is what we should be striving for if we believe in a Malaysia that is just, free and harmoniously multi-religious, but are not.
There are serious obstacles to these that we are reluctant to come to terms with, but must.
Religious chauvinism as a disease to eradicate
These specific obstacles are almost never clearly enunciated. Here they are:
The desire amongst members of society to preach their religions as better or superior alternatives to the religions or belief systems of others and thereby to seek to convert others to their own religion
The related belief that non-believers are lowly, of unequal standing or blessing and their religions inadequate and contemptible
The refusal or inability to approve the values or truths contained in other religions or belief systems regardless of their merit
The related fear that this might shake one's faith in one's religion, or render one's religion comparatively less glorious, or disadvantage one's religion in the competition for religious propagation
The myopia of "only one brotherhood through one way of God" that prevents the acceptance of all religious adherents under an umbrella of one humanity in which other belief systems are acknowledged as valid.
This condition and process, which can for brevity be termed religious chauvinism, is the eye of the storm in all the religious tensions and misunderstandings we have witnessed in Malaysia.
The mentality described is widespread and fairly entrenched. The psychology of insecurity and the politics shaping it are interesting and worthy of separate examination.
But the implication is unequivocal. It clashes with the hopes of building a Malaysian society that is genuinely accepting (not merely “tolerant”) of a diversity of religions and cultures.
It means that lasting peace and unity amongst our people is to remain out of our reach so long as this is left to get out of control.
What remains to be done and a challenge to the politicians
It is for the preceding reasons that this matter must be urgently addressed. If a united Malaysia is in our interest, then an honest, open and peaceable national dialogue on this must commence. It should involve the issues mentioned here and others, such as religious propagation, its targets and the ethics of its methods.
Relegating religious talks of understanding to practically useless and toothless inter-faith panels behind closed doors is a cowardly act of evasion. Understanding and consensus must emerge from the majority — the entirety of Malaysians.
We should also cease deceiving ourselves with superficial multi-cultural and multi-religious images and slogans that are purpose-crafted for international consumption or national celebrations. This lulls us into inaction.
To dodge discussion by offering excuses (e.g., "Malaysians are not ready for this") is an unacceptable denial of reality and maturity. To delay further is to permit more, avoidable conflicts. It is to shirk from the shared responsibility of nation-building.
We need to stop the factors that perpetuate religious chauvinism, remedy existing attitudes and inculcate multi-culturalism and multi-religiousness as the definite Malaysian way.
In view of this, to the politicians and policymakers of Umno, MCA, PAS, PKR and DAP, I put the following question:
Do you have the guts, will and conviction (i) to discuss the issue of religious pluralism and bigotry clearly and openly; (ii) to establish multi-culturalism and religious pluralism as a prime policy and encourage it amongst your supporters and colleagues within your political parties; and (iii) to act decisively to correct the problem of religious chauvinism and prejudice such as those highlighted here?
By Pak Sako
Saturday, September 11, 2010
SELAMAT HARI RAYA
Wishing All Selamat Hari Raya Aidil Fitri - Maaf Zahir dan Batin
Ketika kau menjelajahi lingkaran sejarah mu itu,
Ketika kau disambar lintasan ilham yang menyentuhi kalbu,
Tanyalah tentang intisari cinta kasih yang mertabat dan
memperkasakan rakyat
Sebagai pedoman abadi, pada hari yang mulia ini.
Ketika kau menjelajahi lingkaran sejarah mu itu,
Ketika kau disambar lintasan ilham yang menyentuhi kalbu,
Tanyalah tentang intisari cinta kasih yang mertabat dan
memperkasakan rakyat
Sebagai pedoman abadi, pada hari yang mulia ini.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)