Pro And Contra Views

13 02 2010

This time we publish the views of two parties that oppose SSS and two others who support SSS.

As usual, let us discuss them in a cool and amiable manner. We hope you would give your views or read the comments to this post as well. You may form an opinion on who are right based not only on what those four say but also what others who comment here say.

Both pro and contra comments are welcomed.

************************

Here are the views of Dong Zong and Huang Zong:

************************

1. From http://www.malaysianbar.org.my

Tuesday, 03 November 2009
By Kong See Hoh

KUALA LUMPUR (Nov 2, 2009) : Dong Zong (United Chinese School Committees Association) says it is against a single stream school system and will submit a memorandum to the prime minister to express regrets over recent remarks made by academics, MPs and the education minister on the subject.

Speaking to reporters after chairing the annual meeting of Dong Zong affiliates (Dong Lian Hui) in Ipoh on Sunday, the education movement’s president Dr Yap Sin Tian said the decision to submit a memorandum to Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak was reached in the meeting.

He said Dong Zong would draft the memorandum as soon as possible and seek endorsement from other Chinese groups on the memorandum, the Chinese press reported today.

Yap said the meeting also censured historian Prof Emeritus Tan Sri Dr Khoo Kay Kim for raising the subject of the single stream system.

Khoo had proposed a restructure of the national education system, including the implementation of a single stream, to ensure attainment of the goals of the 1Malaysia concept.

He said the existing school system with various streams does not help the people really understand the meaning of the concept.

This prompted calls by several MPs for the government to introduce a single stream school system as well as dissenting voices from the Chinese community.

Yap said instead of promoting national unity, the implementation of the single stream school system would hamper unity and create racial tensions.

He urged the government and political parties to state their stand on attempts by some people to use the 1Malaysia concept to achieve their political agendas of a “nation state” and a single stream school system.

He also urged all quarters to raise their guard and to stand firm against any assimilation policy.

He said Malaysians must accept the fact that Malaysia is a “multi-national state” (a state which contains two or more ethnic groups as identified by religion, language, or colour) and not a “nation state” (the concept of one country, one race, one culture, one language and a single stream school system).

Meanwhile, Hua Zong (Federation of Chinese Associations of Malaysia) president lambasted proponents of single stream school system for creating the misconception that the current multiple-stream school system and Malaysia’s multicultural traits, which are the country’s strong points, were stumbling blocks to unity.

“We must remind academics and politicians with extremist thinking not to abuse the 1Malaysia concept,” he said at the anniversary celebration of the Perak Chinese Assembly Hall in Ipoh on Sunday night.

Last week, Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin said he was all for single stream schools to promote unity and 1Malaysia.

However, he said the issue should be looked at in its totality with views from all quarters, including those of the Chinese and Indian communities.

Such schools, he said, were the ultimate objective of the Razak Report but due to circumstances involving the country’s history, it ended up with a multiple-stream system.

Last Saturday, Najib said the government would consider the views of the people before making a decision on the proposal to implement a single stream school system.

He said the government would only change any policy if it had the people’s agreement, otherwise it would retain the existing policy.

He said a change to a single stream school system required a major shift in policy and it raised the question of whether the people were ready to forgo their right to choose the type of education they wanted.

2. From the Sun2Surf, 11 February 2010

Chinese groups against national schools’ BM syllabus
Kong See Hoh

KUALA LUMPUR (Nov 17, 2009): A number of Chinese groups are against the Education Ministry’s proposal for vernacular primary schools to adopt the same syllabus used in national schools for the Bahasa Malaysia (BM) language subject, the Chinese press reported today.

Currently, the BM textbooks used in Chinese and Tamil primary schools are different from that used in national schools. So are the UPSR (Ujian Penilaian Sekolah Rendah) BM examination papers.

Responding to a report in Sin Chew Daily, which broke the story on standardising the BM syllabus on Monday, Dong Zong (United Chinese School Committees Association) president Dr Yap Sin Tian sees the move as burdening pupils from vernacular schools who have to grapple with three languages.

He pointed out that for Chinese schools, where BM is taught as a second language, to adopt the same syllabus as that used in national schools, where BM is taught as a first language, goes against the principles of the national education philosophy.

He said Chinese school pupils have to learn three languages and cannot be expected to follow the same syllabus and the same way of learning BM as their peers in national schools.

To force Chinese schools to adopt the same syllabus will also affect the character of these schools, he said.

He urged the ministry not to resort to all means to change the syllabuses in Chinese schools. National Union of Heads of School president Pang Chong Leong echoed Yap’s concern on the possibility of an added burden on Chinese schools pupils.

He was worried that Chinese schools pupils might not be able to catch up as they have one more language to learn than national school pupils.

Pang, who said he had made clear the union’s stand at a meeting with the ministry, hoped that it would think thrice on the proposal.

Hua Zong (Federation of Chinese Associations in Malaysia) president Tan Sri Pheng Yin Huah said instead of raising the standard of BM in vernacular schools, the move may backfire as the pupils, because of the medium of instruction in their schools, may have problems coping with syllabus of a higher standard.

He said pupils may end up with an aversion to the language, and “worse still for Chinese schools, parents seeking better environment to learn the national language may decide to send their children to national schools where Chinese language is already made a subject”.

United Chinese School Alumni Association of Malaysia said in a statement that Chinese schools cannot accept the proposal as it is a roundabout way of reducing the number of classes for subjects taught in Mandarin.

It has been reported that the ministry proposed that along with the change in syllabus, vernacular schools will have to teach BM an additional 90 minutes a week, at the expense of other subjects.

On Monday, Education Director-General Datuk Alimuddin Md Dom told Nanyang Siang Pau that the government is considering adopting national school BM syllabus in vernacular schools beginning with Year One in 2012.

He said if the pilot project proves successful in Year One, it would be extended to other classes.
He said the move is aimed at bring the standard of the language in vernacular schools to be on par with national schools.

However, he said it is still at the conceptual stage.

Deputy Education Minister Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong said the ministry needs in-depth studies on the proposal and has yet to make a decision.

He said he had objected to the proposal in at least three internal meetings.

************************

Here are the views of Professor Emeritus Tan Sri Dr Khoo Kay Kim and Professor Teo Kok Siong:

************************

3. From Bernama, October 22, 2009 18:26 PM

Education Needs To Be Restructured In Line With 1Malaysia – Khoo

BUKIT MERTAJAM, Oct 22 (Bernama) — Historian and academician Prof Emeritus Tan Sri Dr Khoo Kay Kim has called on the government to restructure the national education system and do away with the multiple stream arrangement.

He said that having a multiple stream system was not helpful in getting the people understand the concept.

He added that the people had been segregated since they were small either according to streams in schools or mother tongues, and when they grew up, it would be difficult for them to cooperate with one another.

“We don’t need a multiple stream system, and the teaching of mother tongues can be incorporated into the curriculum,” he told reporters after a discourse programme on “One Malaysia: Challenges and Hopes” here Thursday.

He said that there would be people who would object to the proposal, but he added that they should look into how far the existing system had been able to strengthen the country’s nation-building efforts.

Dr Khoo said that during the British era, vernacular schools were set up to allow students to learn about their countries of origin.

“However, the system is no longer needed as they are now citizens of Malaysia and should be taught to accept the country and its multiracial races as part of themselves,” he said.

He expressed disappointment over the attitude of some sections of the societies whom he said were ignorant of the country’s history.

He also took to task some politicians whom he said were more interested in pursuing personal agenda.

“There are politicians who prefer separation than integration,” he said, adding that this attitude would be a hindrance to the full acceptance of the 1Malaysia concept.

4. From malaysiakini 6 September 2009

Prof Teo: Hubungan kaum di M’sia hanya retorik

Sep 6, 09 12:25pm

Hubungan antara kaum di Malaysia hanya retorik – hanya nampak baik di luar tetapi di dalam tidak baik, kata Felo Penyelidik Utama, Institut Alam dan Tamadun Melayu (ATMA), Prof Teo Kok Seong.

“Di negara ini, sifat curiga mencurigai antara kaum yang menjadi masalah,” katanya dalam wawancara dalam Mingguan Malaysia hari ini.

“Saya juga melihat keadaan ini berlaku kerana parti yang berasaskan kaum yang jelas memperjuangkan kaum mereka sahaja dan ini akan mengheret soal lain seperti bahasa dan sebagainya,” tegas beliau lagi.

Menurut beliau, sepatutnya ada satu bahasa pengantar sahaja dan bahasa lain boleh dipelajar tanpa ada masalah.

“Namun kepentingan sistem satu bahasa adalah penting untuk memupuk perpaduan di kalangan masyarakat berbilang kaum,” tegas Prof Teo.

Katanya, politik yang bersifat perkauman sangat bahaya dalam usaha memupuk perpaduan.

“Sekarang ini kita hanya melihat perpaduan di peringkat luaran dan tidak ada interaksi yang sebenar antara semua kaum.

“Komunikasi antara kaum ini, ada yang hanya bercakap bahasa pasar sahaja, malah ada yang tidak langsung boleh berbahasa Melayu,” tambahnya.

Oleh itu, tegasnya, perlu ada usaha untuk memupuk satu interaksi tulen antara kaum supaya perpaduan yang diperjuangkan selama ini akan berjaya.

Menyentuh mengenai media, Prof Teo berkata semua akhbar vernakular Melayu, Cina dan India bersikap perkauman.

“Ini biasa terutama di negara ini yang penduduknya berbilang kaum. Apabila suratkhabar bersifat perkauman, maka ia akan bersikap membela golongan tertentu dan dari segi berita, banyak berita yang disiarkan pun ke arah golongan tertentu,” katanya.

Prof Teo berkata beliau tidak kisah dicemuh kerana pandangannya itu “kerana beliau mewakili masyarakat Cina yang berfikiran sederhana”.

Ditanya mengenai peranan pemimpin politik dalam memulihkan perpaduan antara kaum, beliau berpandangan mesti ada had dalam politik.


Actions

Information

56 responses

13 02 2010
Xavier

“stand firm against any assimilation policy”? against bringing together everybody into a united whole? Has he heard about the Thai assimilation policy where non-locals were made to change their names, wear clothes, follow all the customs and traditions of the locals? A Thai general who grabbed power did that. God forbid that happening in this country.

These people are talking only about streamlining the education system. Having one system instead of the present three. I’m alright with that.

14 02 2010
SSS Admin

Xavier,

We appreciate your visit and leaving a comment this time, too.

Indeed, let us pray that we will never have to face military rule in this country where Parliament and State Assemblies are suspended and those in power rule by decrees and decisions are made on the basis of what one or two people deem fit. We must jealously guard our democracy. This includes appreciating the limits of freedom, being reasonable and avoiding acts and omissions that would further the racial divide, spark a disturbance leading to chaos and disorder that may lead to an emergency situation like has happened before.

All of us must do our bit in bringing greater understanding, goodwill and harmony in this country. The single-stream education is aimed at that. It is well justified as Bahasa Malaysia is the National Language as spelt out under Article 152 of the Constitution.

13 02 2010
indrana

I don’t understand what Dr Yap is talking about. What does he mean by “nation state” and “multi-national state”?

I think Malaysia is already a nation. But can there be many nations in one nation?

The dictionary says “nation” is a mass of people “either of diverse races or of common descent, language, history, etc”. Since we are not of common descent, if we don’t have even a common language and history, then we are not even a nation.

Why is he saying you all are talking about one country, one race, one culture, one language by proposing a single stream school system? Is he not recognising BM as the national language and Mandarin can be studied in single stream schools?

14 02 2010
Dot

Wanting a “multi-nation state” reflects arrogance and non-acceptance of the fact that this country has always been a nation state since the dawn of the history of this region.

Read the “Early History” volume of “The Encyclopedia of Malaysia” edited by Professor Dr Nik Hassan Shuhaimi which includes articles by Professors and PhD degree holders at University of Malaya, University of Malaysia, National University of Singapore, University of Hawai, Australian National University, etc. Additionally, read the book “The Malay Civilisation” by Mohd Arof Ishak, published by The Historical Society of Malaysia, whose bibliography states scores of books written by academicians and others world wide, quoting ancient documents and manuscripts some of which were discovered only in recent times.

Here are some of the points stated in the book that are pertinent to the nation state that we have always been since ancient times:

1. The Malays were the original inhabitants of Malaysia and also of Southeast Asia. A Chinese writer named Ch’en Lun-chiung used the word “Wu-lai-yu” (“Melayu”) in his writings which were completed in 1730. This was acknowledged by no other than the well-respected historian, Professor Wang Gung-wu, in his “Community and Nation”, 1992, pp 158-167. Before that the Mainland Chinese often used the word “barbarians” when referring to ALL others outside “the Middle Kingdom”, including those who conquered and ruled them – the Mongols for about 80 years and the Manchus (Manchuria became a part of China only after World War II) for several hundred years until the 20th Century.

2. According to Ch’en Lun-chiung, people in the following places were all known as “Wu-lai-yu”: the islands of Luzon, Panay, Cebu, Mindanao, Sulu (all in present day Philippines), Banjarmasin, Brunei (in Borneo), Makasar (Sulawesi island), Maluku, Karimon (east of Sumatera), Kalapa (Jakarta), Patani (south Thailand), Kelantan, Trengganu, Pahang, Johor and Malacca. Also, people in the Asian mainland in Cambodia and Vietnam. This was also acknowledged by Professor Wang Gung-wu.

3. The Malay race is a large, ancient family of many groups, each group having its own name, like Aceh, Bajau, Bidayuh, Bugis, Chamorro, Iban, Ifugao Kadazan, Maori, Merina, Suluk, etc. They may therefore be known as Achenese Malay, Bajau Malay, Bidayuh Malay and so on. In Peninsular Malaysia there are those who are of Javanese, Bugis, Aceh etc descent but “Malay” has been an apt description of them. The term “Rumpun Melayu” aptly describes the Malays, the Indonesians and the Filipinos. Indeed, the Filipinos called Jose Rizal, their independence fighter during the Spanish colonial days, as “The Great Malay” and one Filipino history book is titled just that.

4. Many linguistic studies have been carried out by Westerners since the 19th Century and they have concluded that the various ethnic and sub-ethnic groups that settled this vast area known as the Malay Archipelago are indeed of one and the same race – the Malays. Modern linguistic studies started from the 18th Century linguist, Sir William Jones. The family of language is determined by the grammar and vocabulary used.

5. In proto-historic and ancient times there have been various Malay states in Southeast Asia. What has been commonly known was the Srivijaya Empire centred in Sumatra 600-1200 AD. Another Malay state was also established in the present day Jambi area 4th – 13th Cent AD. Malay civilisation centred in Kedah had been active during that period as well. Kedah had appeared in Chinese records in 638 AD when it sent an ambassador to China. “Pan-pan”, believed to be in the Kelantan or Trengganu area, had been in Chinese records even earlier as they were in contact with China in 530 AD and 535 AD.

6. In 607 AD, a Chinese envoy sent abroad by a Sui Dynasty Emperor recorded having passed by Langkasuka (believed to be in present day Patani) and reached an inland kingdom called “Chi tu” or “Red Earth Land”. In 671 AD, a Chinese Buddhist monk Yiqing on a pilgrimage to the brith place of Buddha in India, stayed 6 months to learn Sanskrit in Srivijaya, then sailed to “Malayu” in southeast Sumatra, then to Kedah. “Yiqing clearly stated that his voyages were all undertaken in ships belonging to Malay Kings” – Dr John Miskic, National University of Singapore, Encyclopaedia of Malaysia, pg 83. The Malays have been good hosts since ancient times and that kind nature must not be exploited.

7. The original centre of Malay civiliation is the Malay Archipelago of Southeast Asia – the largest group of islands in the entire world – measuring from end to end longer than the length of Mainland China. This Malay Archipelago comprises Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei, Philippines, small islands in the South China Sea, Singapore, a part of Peninsular Malaya that became part of south Thailand, and several islands south of Myanmar. All these areas have historically been the origins of the Malays.

8. Taiwan is also an island very important in respect of the origin of the Malays. Several studies have been done in that respect.The Cocos/ Keelings and Christmas Island (now a part of Australia) were also part of the Malay Archipelago. Large parts of Vietnam and Cambodia on the Asian Mainland were also centres of ancient Malay civilisation. The Department of Museums and Antiquities held a Seminar in 2004 on “The Campa Malay Manuscript, Heritage of a Malay Civilisation” that existed (and remnants still exist even now) in Indo-China, specifically Vietnam and Cambodia. (The proceedings of the Seminar were published by the Department and is on sale).

9. Among the works of Professors, PhD degree holders, etc used as reference materials in the book published by the Historical Society of Malaysia are: Wang Gung-wu, “Community and Nation”, 1992; Charles F. Keyes, “The Golden Peninsula”, 1977; Wolfram Eberhard, “A History of China”, 1977; Peter Bellwood, “Man’s Conquest of the Pacific”, 1979; Kenneth Hall & John K. Whitmore, “Explorations in Early Southeast Asian History; The Origins of Southeast Asian Statecraft”, 1986; and scores of others.

10. A nation state has existed in Malaysia since ancient times and no one should try to promote the idea of a “multi-nation state” now.

(See Part 2).

15 02 2010
Dot

Part 2

Not wanting a “nation state” (the concept of one country, one race, one culture, one language and a single stream school system)” means non-acceptance of the idea of a united and cohesive Bangsa Malaysia and Bahasa Malaysia being the medium of instruction in all schools for the sake of unity in the country.

Mandarin has been referred to as Chinese culture and there has been supreme pride in a Chinese culture and civilisation perpetrated since ancient times by Chinese writers referring to China as “the Middle Kingdom” and all others as “barbarians”. This view has been refuted in recent times by researchers and academicians who pointed out that Asian studies in the past relied fully on old Chinese documentation and records. They realised that old Chinese documents were heavily one-sided. They discovered that those documents were re-written several times in the course of history such that the validity of the facts became difficult to determine. The supremacy of Chinese culture and civilisation became referred to as a myth. Professor Wang Gung-wu, in his essay “Early Ming Relations with Southeast Asia” pg 36 pointed out that the assumption that only the Chinese were civilised and that others were barbarians was often proven wrong when they later met others who also had culture and civilisation.

According to Wolfram Eberhard in his “The History of China”, 1977, modern studies have shown that all ancient Chinese documents were adaptations of later periods and said “with complete certainty that all historical data recorded in written documents for the period up to about 1000 BC are not correct.” Chinese culture is not as ancient as it was believed to be.

On the origins of the Chinese people, Albert Kolb in his book “East Asia”, 1971, said the Chinese emerged from a mixture of various races and groups of people. Before 1500 BC, the Yangtze Valley and areas to the south of it were settled by various ancient Asian races like Tai, Miao, Yueh, etc. There were no Chinese yet in the southern region at that time. Wolfram Eberhard also stated that the Tai were the largest group south of the Yangtze Valley. To their west were the Tibetan race which also occupied Shensi and Szechwan.

Chinese documents stated the existence of some 3,000 groups of “barbarians”. China came into existence only with the Chin Dynasty in 221 BC. But Emperor Chin himself was not 100% Chinese -according to Wolfram Eberhard, he was a mixture of Turkish and Tibetan races. However, according to Wofgang Franke, the Chinese kept referring to all others as barbarians until the 17th Century. And Professor C.P Fitzgrald in his “A Concise History of East Asia”, 1966, pp 13-14, said that recent archaelogical research shows that the Chinese have no reasons for such an arrogant attitude.

15 02 2010
Vincent

You know that the Chinese no longer think of the Middle Kingdom or are even inspired by past glories. Even in China now they are busy grappling with not being left out of the international rat race now that their economic performance in the past many years has been phenomenal. In Malaysia, the generation that wanted to die and be buried in China has long gone and even Chin Peng wants to return and die in Malaysia, be buried near his father in Sitiawan, although not allowed by the authorities.

What the Chinese ask is a fair share of the benefits that this country offers and a reassuarance that their rights would not be trampled upon. The vast majority are law abiding and loyal citizens but you find bad hats in any community the world over.

16 02 2010
SSS Admin

Vincent,

It’s good to hear you say that, dear friend. If only the Dong Zong and Hua Zong people think like you …

But then again, why does anyone want to allow communist terrorist Chin Peng enter the country and live here until he dies? Professor Khoo Kay Kim has checked the records and verified that he is not a Malaysian citizen, unlike some other terrorists who, when given the chance to apply, did go through the formalities of citizenship application and were accorded citizenship. Chin Peng has no remorse at all, no sense of guilt for the thousands killed and property damaged, the untold suffering, misery and heartaches his terrorism caused the people during the decades since World War II. He did not make a sincere apology and arrogantly declared that he is still a communist.

We agree on the “fair share” part of your comment. However, what constitutes “fair” must be based on the Social Contract and the Constitution of our country. And, as loyal citizens, we must do whatever we can to rein in the “bad hats”, whatever creed or colour they may be, including those damaging places of worship recently some of whom have not yet been brought to book.

At the same time we need to do something about the increasing racial polarisation in the country. We believe SSS is a very good way forward.

Thank you for visiting and commenting and do drop in again.

16 02 2010
SSS Admin

Dot,

Thank you for the rebuttal against the stand taken by the Dong Zong on single-stream education and for the lengthy explanations pointing to why the nation state that Malaysia has always been must be permanently maintained and that the idea of a “multi-national state” must be rejected.

That the opinions were based on and included facts and views expressed in books written by experts in the relevant fields deserves attention. Professor Wang Gung-wu lectured in the University of Malaya many years ago and he has been a notable scholar in Chinese history.

It is interesting to note the debunking of the myth of China being “the only civilisation in the universe, all others being barbarians” and Professor Wang Gung-wu’s statement that those believing in that myth had been proven wrong. People should no longer talk about “the stronger culture overcoming the weaker ones” and make such comments as the creation of “Chinasia” in the context of overstaying Chinese “tourists”, that we sometimes find in the Internet and elsewhere. One wonders if they were written by products of vernacular schools and about the kind of Chinese culture discussed at such schools or among the parents at home. Remember that Chinese vernacular schools are not only at the primary level; there are 61 Chinese secondary schools in the country as at 2009. And one does not know what is written in the vernacular language. All those concerned should note that attempts at creating a superior race and culture had failed miserably in the past – Adolf Hitler’s attempt in World War II Germany was even destructive to himself and the “Aryan” people.

No one is forcing anybody in this country – except to follow the laws. Democracy was at work at the very beginning of self rule in the then Malaya. Leaders of the major communities discussed and agreed on what has been referred to as the Social Contract the elements of which had been embodied in the Constitution. Those denying or non-respecting that Social Contract should take note of the points you put out above.

It must be repeated again and again for the benefit of erring Malaysians that the Constitution was discussed and passed into law by Parliament. Parliament also saw fit to pass a law against sedition; the Sedition Act covers sensitive subjects that must not be discussed or questioned in view of the fragility of race relations that had erupted into violence on 13 May 1969. All citizens must respect and abide by the Constitution as well as all laws passed by Parliament.

16 02 2010
Anti-propaganda

I learnt from one boy who experienced in his primary school days of one Chinese boy in his class mockingly opening his hand beggar-style and saying, “Give me, give me” to the Malay boys. Then I remembered reading in blogs of comments saying the Malays under the NEP keep “begging” for more and more from the Government. Is this anti-NEP propaganda his elders taught him at home or elsewhere? Schools should make History a compulsory subject and the Social Contract, the agreement on citizenship for non-Malays and Special Position for the Malays taught in schools.

17 02 2010
SSS Admin

Anti-propaganda,

If that boy had meant to mock or learnt of the mocking from his elders, then it was bad propaganda and racist in nature and should be despised.

We acknowledge that there had been the use of the word “begging” in reference to the New Economic Policy made by mischievous characters in blogosphere. That naughty word must be countered as much as possible so that hopefully the culprits would one day understand and accept the rationale behind the NEP, respect the Special Position of the Malays that their forefathers had agreed in exchange for citizenship that the Malays agreed to for them after Merdeka.

It is a part of the SSS Proposal that Malayan/ Malaysian History be made compulsory in schools and thank you for bringing that up as it serves as a reminder for the authorities.

15 02 2010
SSS Admin

indrana,

Thank you for visiting again and leaving a comment.

We see that Dot has written lengthily on the subject of “nation state” and “multi-nation state”. We hope your questions have largely been answered.

We ourselves have a lot of questions on the stand taken by the Dong Zong. That was why we published the articles on what they say so that they can be discussed. Until they are answered satisfactorily, people are inclined to think they may have a sinister motive in not accepting a nation state that already exists.

Malaya and Malaysia has been a “mass of people of common descent, language and history” for a long, long time. When non-Malays came and settled down in this country, those characteristics changed a little. But no group should try to overturn the social set up and the political system in the country. The last time it was done in China under Mao Tze Dong under the name of “Cultural Revolution” in the 1960s, it became a huge social upheaval causing tremendous large-scale suffering, losses of property, productivity and lives. It ended in civil war and tens of millions of lives were lost. Mao Tze Dong’s motive was putting down his opponents.

Talking about “multi-nation state” is unacceptable, objectionable and must be rejected.

15 02 2010
SYK

Chinese kids must learn three languages. How can now want same BM sillabus some more. Dong Zong is right. Be fair to Chinese schools. Unity is same like before. Now 50 years merdeka.

17 02 2010
SSS Admin

SYK,

That the Chinese children learn three languages is their choice. When they choose to do that, they cannot blame any one else or grumble on Government policy decisions. Bahasa Malaysia is written in the Constitution and BM is compulsory in schools. It is only fair that the Government standardise the standard of BM in vernacular schools with that of the national schools.

It has been unfair that the vernacular school children could get the extra qualification i.e in another language like Mandarin with a lot of help by way of making passes in BM easy, whereas children attending national schools have to learn harder because of a higher standard and different BM syllabus.

We don’t see any unfairness done to vernacular schools. It has been very clear that BM is the National Language but vernacular schools still insist on Mandarin and Tamil being the medium of instruction. What have been there for 50 years does not mean it is right.

You cannot have unity when the races are going separate ways, pursuing diverging interests, hopes and aspirations. The slogan “Unity in Diversity” is only good for tourists and billboards and the idea of a “multi-nation state” is subversive to the concept of a nation state that has existed in this country for ages.

16 02 2010
satD

SSS Admin

Its all about the economics…..

Step 1
pull out the funding of SRJKC …let them be privately funded

Impact –> Higher cost of Education –> The “psuedo-Malaysian” will think twice about sending their “kids” there or even having any kids at all–> Lower Fertility Rate for these particular Races

Over time if the fertility rate drops below 1.2, it becomes “impossible” to sustain a “culture”…..as folks have less children…their children have lesser children…..so on and so forth….(this is why migration from India or China should be observed under the microscope)……

So with one simple policy we can tackle a lot of “problems”…..

as for the balls to do it…….must go back to the basic….our constitution….

Our education act is clearly against the spirit of the Consti n someone should file for a judicial review on it….

If Pakiam can claim Allah…..via the same means….then someone must consider to follow the same route on this matter…

17 02 2010
SSS Admin

satD,

Thank you for your segguestion.

On the basis that vernacular schools are not in line with Article 152 of the Constitution on Bahasa Malaysia, they don’t deserve any funding by the Government.

All parties must respect the Constitution, including the politicians. Don’t politicise the vernacular schools for the sake of getting votes. The unity of the country must be uppermost in people’s minds and racial polarisation has been on the increase in recent times.

The “disappearance” of foreign “tourists” and others entering the country on the so-called “Visa On Arrival” or VOA system has led to a lot of suspicions of Chinese and Indians overstaying and wanting to stay permanently but illegally in the country. Indeed, they must be watched with microscopic and corruption-free keeness on the part of the authorities. It is good that the Government has talked about scrapping or modifying the VOA system. Let us now watch and call for those words to be translated into action.

If Australia with a vast continent and short of manpower can be so strict with illegal entrants to their country and so selective in their otherwise known as “White Australia” immigration policy, even wanting to have a border post in Malaysia, we see no reason for Malaysia not to do the same.

17 02 2010
abda

That is what Hua Zong is worried about, what.

According to the newspaper report, the President said “pupils may end up with an aversion to the language, and “worse still for Chinese schools, parents seeking better environment to learn the national language may decide to send their children to national schools where Chinese language is already made a subject”.

They can learn Mandarin in national schools lah. No such thing as aversion to the language.

18 02 2010
SSS Admin

abda,

They find all sorts of excuses to have vernacular schools be continued. But the excuses may not be valid. They don’t have valid excuses for having Mandarin as the medium of instruction when Bahasa Malaysia is the National Language. Their argument on the need to study Mandarin has been rebutted by the fact that they can continue to do so even in national schools.

Now they try the excuse that children may have an aversion to the language. But the most ridiculous excuse of all is the fear that parents might find it attractive and “decide to send their children to national schools where Chinese language is already made a subject”. How selfish can that be.

Whose interest is the Hua Zong President talking about? His comment clearly shows that it’s not the children’s or the parents’ interests. So, it’s the interest of the Association, of the office bearers that he is talking about. He wants to be President of a big organisation with many members, others on the Committee also want to be proud of being Committee members of a large organisation. Pity the members who may have joined out of crowd mentality. Most of all, pity the childen who would be left out of the mainstream of society, alienated by the will of their parents and people like the Dong Zong and Hua Zong President and Committee members.

16 02 2010
Semerah Padi

Tuan Admin,

Berkenaan dgn Dong Zong, Huang Zong dan mereka-merek ayang se angkatan dgnnya.

Mari kita cuba renungkan ini.

Ah Kong, Muthu, Naina Mamak

Mereka semua asalnya pendatang tetapi bercampur gaul masyarakat tempatan. Mereka dahulukan bahasa tempatan dan adat resam tempatan disamping mengekalkan kebudayaan masing-masing tanpa terlalu menonjolkan budaya mereka sehingga melebihi bahasa & budaya tempatan (kerana di sinilah sekarang mereka menetap). Anak-anak, cucu cicit mereka lahir di sini serta membesar menjadi dewasa. Nama masih tetap Ah Lim, Devan, Merican etc dan agama masih tetap agama asal. Cuma anak, cucu, cicit ini berkomunikasi dgn bahasa kebangsaan dan mengamalkan serta mengutamakan budaya tempatan yang disulami dgn budaya asal.

Soalan : Agaknya, anak, cucu, cicit ini dikenali sebagai orang Malaysia? Melayu? China? India? Mamak? atau sekurang2nya tidak lagi dilabelkan sebagai Pendatang ? (Contoh nama – Mahathir Mohamad)

Cinapek Dong Zong, Keling Samy

Mendidik anak, cucu, cicit segala2nya cinapek, keling sampai tak bergaul dgn masyarakat tempatan dek tidak fasih bahasa tempatan. Tapi nak menumpang cari makan di bumi orang, tanpa rasa terima kasihpun. Anak, cucu, cicit lahir dan membesar dgn mengekalkan identiti cinapek dan keling. Label diri sendiri sebagai cinapek & keling kerana kuat sangat berpegang kepada identiti asing. Mereka sendiri yg mahu dikenali sebagai cinapek & keling dgn tetap mengatakan “chong cheng chong cheng Wa olang china maaa..”, “Podacit Yen na deh, I india juga punya orang”.

Soalan – Nak panggil mereka ini apa? Org Melayu? Orang Malaysia? atau lebih tepat lagi pendatang tak sedar diri ? (Contoh – keturunan Dong Zong dan yg seangkatan dengannya)

“Di mana bumi dipijak, di situ langit dijunjung”

16 02 2010
satD

How bout parasites or pohon tumpang…that sucks the life out of its host..

18 02 2010
SSS Admin

satD,

Let’s have the pohon that grows on the ground, not sucking nutrients from other pohon.

Everybody must realise the rules of decency and the limits to freedom in order to have lasting peace and harmony. Politicians must realise the limits to politicising – not every subject can be turned into issues and taken up as vote-getting avenues.

17 02 2010
SSS Admin

Semerah Padi,

Terima kasih kerana mengunjung lagi dan meninggalkan buah fikiran.

Dimana-mana pun dimerata dunia ini mereka yang datang menyesuaikan diri dan menggunakan bahasa tempatan. DiMalaysia, bukan sahaja mereka enggan berbuat demikian, malahan ada yang tidak menerima istilah “pendatang”. Tetapi kumpulan ini hanya segelintir sahaja jumlahnya. Namun demikian mereka selalu bersuara. Oleh itu, kita perlu juga bersuara mengeluarkan hujah-hujah menepis pemikiran saperti “multi-nation state” yang subversif kapada keadaan “nation state” yang negara ini telah terbina sejak zaman dahulu.

Dimasa rundingan kemerdekaan dahulu, ada pihak British yang mengatakan bahawa, jika mereka diberi kerakyatan pun, tidak banyak yang mahu menetap dinegara ini. Perkataan “transient race” telah di gunakan. Apabila mereka sudah mendapat kerakyatan, mereka mahu menetap. Banyak yang menghormati dan patuh kapada Perlembagaan negara. Tetapi ada yang tidak menghormatinya. Kapada mereka yang tidak hormat kapada Perlembagaan, negara Malaysia tidak rugi jika mereka mencari tempat lain yang mereka boleh hormati Perlembagaannya. Ada yang sudah cabut lari dan mengoyakkan paspot Malaysia bila sampai destinasi – England, contohnya, saperti diberitakan tersadai disana beberapa bulan yang lalu. Walau pun itu tindakan menderhaka, biarlah mereka koyakkan paspot Malaysia asalkan jangan dibenarkan masuk Malaysia lagi.

Yang berpegang kapada ungkapan “Di mana bumi dipijak, disitu langit dijunjung” kita terima sebagai rakan seperjuangan dinegara muda ini.

16 02 2010
Abu

“We must remind academics and politicians with extremist thinking not to abuse the 1Malaysia concept,” the Hua Zong leader said.

What “extremist” thinking is he talking about? What “abusing 1Malaysia” he is rambling on? Does he even know what extremism is? How dare he accuses the Deputy Prime Minister that. He was referring to the Deputy PM because the previous week, DPM Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin said he was all for single stream schools to promote unity and 1Malaysia.

Is he not trying to hold the country to ransom? Who is he and what votes does he have to try doing that? Is he and his group not the ones being extremist, adamantly insisting on Mandarin as the medium of instruction when Bahasa Malaysia is the national language as stated in Article 152 of the Constitution?

Prime Minister Najib should not give much notice on this kind of fellow. There are far more votes with those in favour of the single-stream education. They are not vocal publicly but they may express themselves drastically at the coming polls like they did at the disastrous 12th General Elections. Malays who are majority in the country patronise national schools and a big percentage of Chinese and Indians send their children to national schools.

18 02 2010
SSS Admin

Abu,

Thank you for visiting and commenting.

The disctionary definition of “extreme” is: outermost, farthest from centre, situated at either end.

The centre must be the Constitution of the country and nothing else.

Going away from Article 152 of the Constitution in not respecting and using Bahasa Malaysia as the National Language is one thing. Having Mandarin as the medium of instruction in vernacular schools is another. Mandarin is not even the mother tongue of the Chinese in Malaysia. It is the official language of a foreign country. If vernacular schools adopt BM as the medium of instruction, Mandarin can still be taught and learnt as an elective subject. When still using Mandarin as medium now, they even oppose the standardisation of BM syallabus. They insist on a lower standard of pass in BM for Chinese vernacular schools. They choose to learn three different languages yet they complain about the Government decision to standardise BM syllabus and standard of pass. People talk about single-stream education for unity yet they say it is a stumbling block to unity. Others want the nation state that has already existed for ages to continue with Malays and non-Malays living together in unity but they talk about a “multi-nation state” and breaking the age-old tradition already well established in this country. Are these not extremism?

As for the other side of centre – these people have not spoken for assimilation the Thai, Indonesian or Filipino way where they would have to change names to local ones, dress like locals, adopt local culture. All they ask for is have BM as the medium of instruction, the same curriculum and syllabus as the national schools. They even say have Mandarin and Tamil as elective subjects in all schools. They say the vernacular schools need not be abolished or physically changed but merely absorbed into the national schools system, the teaching and support staff can continue working with minor changes like refresher courses for the teachers. Surely these are not extremisim of any kind.

From the above, we can see who actually are the extremists.

18 02 2010
Sayong

Prof Teo berkata beliau tidak kisah dicemuh kerana pandangannya itu “kerana beliau mewakili masyarakat Cina yang berfikiran sederhana”.

Betui pun kata Prof Teo. Ada yang pelampau antara dema dalam perkara ini. Bagi betis nak peha sesangat. Mana boleh.

19 02 2010
SSS Admin

Sayong,

Perkataan yang selalu juga digunakan ialah “kiasu” yang bermakna “tidak mahu ketinggalan”. Tetapi dari segi SSS, tidak difahami tidak mahu ketinggalan dari apa.

Jika tidak mahu ketinggalan dari pelajaran Bahasa Mandarin, itu tidak munasabah sebab didalam rangka SSS, Mandarin boleh dipelajari disekolah kebangsaan.

Jenis ektremis dan sebab-sebabnya telah diterangkan diatas. Marilah kita harapkan kumpulan sederhana atau “moderates” itu akan bertambah. Yang ekstremis itu perlu memikirkan semula pendirian mereka demi kepentingan keharmonian, kedamaian dan keamanan negara yang berpanjangan.

17 02 2010
Senan

Saya setuju dengan pendapat Professor Teo Kok Siong bahawa ““Sekarang ini kita hanya melihat perpaduan di peringkat luaran dan tidak ada interaksi yang sebenar antara semua kaum … ada yang hanya bercakap bahasa pasar sahaja, malah ada yang tidak langsung boleh berbahasa Melayu,” tambahnya.

Apakah pemimpin-pemimpin negara masih tidak sedar berkenaan hal ini? Mengapakah orang-orang politik asyik sebok dengan meraih undi sahaja?

20 02 2010
SSS Admin

Senan,

Dukacita kami lambat membuat respon kapada lawatan dan komen anda, yang kami alu-alukan saperti yang lain juga.

Kami percaya bahawa pemimpin negara sedar kepencongan perpaduan tersebut. Malangnya, nampaknya mereka sangat-sangat mengejarkan undi, mengatakan gejala tiga sistem pelajaran yang ada sekarang boleh diteruskan, membuat lawatan kesekolah Cina, terima jemputan kerai’an mereka, memberi bantuan kewangan kapada sekolah Cina, memotong Peruntukan (Budget) MRSM sehingga 60%. Ini boleh dilihat sebagai mengambil dari kocek kiri dan memasukkannya kekocek kanan. Malangnya kocek itu nampaknya kocek MRSM.

Sentuhan hak Melayu banyak tidak menyenangkan hati orang Melayu. 10% tempat dikolej MARA sudah di berikan kapada bukan Melayu. Tiap satu tempat diberi bermakna satu tempat hilang. Pada hal Melayu telah meringkut hampir 100 tahun pemerintahan British dengan hampir tiada sekolah dikampong dan mana sekolah yang ada hanya diperingkat rendah. Sebaliknya, ada begitu banyak sekolah diperingkat rendah dan menengah dikawasan bandar yang hampir tiada kaum Melayu.

Dimasa Pilihan Raya Kecil dahulu, selalu diumumkan pemberian wang (grant) kapada sekolah vernakular. DiPRK Kuala Trengganu, sehingga RM50 juta diberi kapada sekolah Cina. Tetapi parti pemerintah kalah juga. Kami tidak faham mengapa pemimpin negara bertindak demikian. Banyak Melayu yang telah mengatakan “anak dipangkuan ditinggalkan”. Sehingga timbul barisan besar-besaran diatas nama Perkasa, yang menunjukkan orang-orang Melayu tidak puas hati. Marilah kita terus bersuara supaya pemimpin negara akan sedar betapa pentingnya menjaga anak dipangkuan itu.

17 02 2010
Steven

Hua Zong says you people “creating the misconception that the current multiple-stream school system and Malaysia’s multicultural traits, which are the country’s strong points, were stumbling blocks to unity.” I support.

You say vernacular schools are no good, chldren don’t mix, no unity. Where is proof? China and India now becoming big economic power. We must not be left behind. Good in Mandarin can help business and good for malayisa.

18 02 2010
satD

Steven

the Economic “power” of India or China is irrelevant to the debate, and in a “state” sponsored economy such as China where their manufacturers are subsidized by the Central Govt to compete internationally at potong leher prices …..I would’nt call that economic power at all..that is Dumping of Products into international market…which is why every country in the world have serious concern about entering into FTA with China as it does not respect intellectual property…

Now back to language- yes mandarin is useful as a language, any foreign language is useful as an additional language skills for our labour force..

But do you need to learn every subject in a foreign language?

The selective linguistic isolation of the vernacular schools has 0 value to our nation…..

18 02 2010
SSS Admin

Steven,

Thanks for visiting gain and leaving a comment.

We need to say that in the first place, we don’t understand how “the current multiple-stream school system and Malaysia’s multicultural traits” become “the country’s strong points”. Who says so? The tourists? Or people who have no clue about the increasing racial polarisation in the country? Those people must have not been reading the various vernacular newspapers and the sordid, highly chauvinistic bickering in many blogs. And we don’t even know what is written in vernacular languages we are not familiar with.

On “stumbling blocks to unity” – if you read those referred to in the above paragraph, you know the question is fully answered there.

That children don’t mix much with other races is evident from the fact that the enrolment at vernacular schools is mostly not multi-racial. This fact is known almost by everybody. Many are mostly attended by only one race. We are talking of vernacular schools throughout the country. And, if you read the news about one particular school having only one solitary pupil in one class, then you know how ridiculous the idea of vernacular schools is stretched to. The parents and the teacher are simply being intransigent, choosing to isolate themselves instead of joining the mainstream – the nearest national school. The child suffers.

18 02 2010
Andrea

People are changing from Malaysian Malaysia to Middle Malysia now. Maybe take middle road for the sake of unity.

Are you willing to change for the sake of unity? Give and take la. Mandarin is important for business with China. Malaysia wants more business to bring more money.

20 02 2010
SSS Admin

Andrea,

Thanks for visiting and commenting again.

What Middle Malaysia means is not clear. What has been clear was the so-called “Malaysian Malaysia” slogan. It was conceived and propagated by Lee Kuan Yew that led to Tengku A Rahman “kicking out” Singapore from Malaysia in 1965. It was a mischievous design to subvert Article 153 of the Constitution on the Special Position of the Malays. It did not give regard to the fact that in Malaysia equality has to take into account Article 153, and the fact that even in the US, equality is not absolute, as can be seen in the treatment of the Blacks, the Hispanics and the Asians in the country. The most recent example was the lack of help given to the Blacks during Typhoon Katrina that devastated the Mississippi region mostly occupied by Blacks.

If the so-called Middle Malaysia still has elements of the above, will it be really “middle”? Some comments in blogs have called it an attempt at a devious association with the term “Middle Kingdom” that the Chinese in China always called themselves and regarded all others as “barbarians” until the 17th Century. That turned out to be untrue and, as some one has commented earlier, the myth has been debunked by the scholar Professor Wang Gung-wu.

We at the SSS have already declared our willingness to change for the sake of unity. We proposed the concept of a Bangsa Malaysia where all citizens are the same irrespective of colour and creed and when a truly united and cohesive Bangsa Malaysia has emerged we would be identified only as Malaysians, no longer as Malays, Chinese, Indians and so on. Like you said, we give. Now we expect to take.

Indeed, Malaysia wants to “bring more money” or foreign exchange accruing from business with China. But do remember that the desired foreign exchange is from what China buys from us, not what we buy from them, what money they spend in Malaysia, not what money Malaysians spend in China. These can come from mainland Chinese visiting, negotiating business deals and opening up factories, etc, in Malaysia. These visitors usually speak English. No doubt knowledge in Mandarin would help but Malaysians don’t have to be experts in Mandarin to do business with them, don’t you think?

20 02 2010
Virdon

According to the report about the Dong Zong, “Yap said instead of promoting national unity, the implementation of the single stream school system would hamper unity and create racial tensions.” How would it hamper national unity and create racial tensions? I hope there is no implied threat of creating tensions there. It’s not good to do so.

20 02 2010
SSS Admin

Virdon,

Thanks for visiting and commenting again.

Indeed, we hope there is no implied threat of creating tensions in the Dong Zong President’s statement.

If they accept the fact that Bahasa Malaysia is spelt out in the Constitution as the National Language, Mandarin cannot be the medium of instruction of schools in the country. Single stream schooling would induce national unity by the mixing of childen at an ealry age in one-system schools. In fact, multi-stream schooling i.e with vernacular schools, would hamper national unity and create racial tensions.

Obviously, he is fully stretched out as far as arguments to support vernacular schools are concerned. He even went to the extent of reversing the arguments that, in fact, are in support of single stream schooling. We are happy to note that you also notice there is no rationale in his arguments.

22 02 2010
Aku

I also find it difficult to understand the logic of the man. Perhaps he implies that the disgruntlement of the opponents of single stream school system may “hamper unity and create racial tensions.”

But then, the opponents are a tiny percentage of the population. Many among them have said they would send their children to national schools when the national schools system is improved. Now, isn’t this what the SSS Proposal is all about – have an in-depth study done by an independent and non-partisan team of experts, determine the strengths and weaknesses of the existing system of education, remedy and improve it. Why don’t they support at least this part of the proposal? Are they scared that the Study might show negative findings on vernacular schools? I challenge them to be truthful and face up to any finding of such an independent and non-partisan study. Surely everybody can support the call for the Government to appoint such a team of experts to carry out an in-depth Study?

The majority of Malaysians – though many are silent – is certainly in favour of SSS. It’s the only logical thing to have for the sake of unity in the country – Bahasa Malaysia is the National Language and that fact is written in the Constitution. Even among the Chinese, many are moderates and are agreeable to SSS. Tan Sri Professor Khoo Kay Kim and Professor Teo Kok Siong are examples of those who even call for single stream education.

Surely the minority conforms to the wishes of the majority. That’s the natural tendency anywhere in the world. That’s the very essence of democracy. Nobody is forcing anybody but, to use the words of someone who commented earlier, we all need to be “responsible and reasonable Malaysians” and need to adjust to mainstream thinking. Unity, long term harmony, peace and progress is mainstream thinking.

24 02 2010
SSS Admin

Aku,

It looks like they are scared of the results of the Study into the education system that is being called for. There have been many misgivings expressed by the non-Malays themselves on vernacular schools: largely non-multi racial in composition, rote (repetition/ memorising) system of learning in Chinese schools, high dropout rate, ackwardness of “graduates” when in the company of others not of their own community, etc. Most of these would be noticed and reported on in such a Study and the recommendations made may not be in their favour. If vernacular school promoters and defenders are not scared, they certainly would be supporting at least the call for the Study to be carried out and have the validity of the allegations levelled against them determined by the experts.

In the coming post we will publish articles expressing such misgivings written by parents, etc.

The promoters and defenders of vernacular schools cannot be allowed to carry on with those self-alienating tendencies wihout being alerted to the consequences by unity-seeking members of society. It’s not good for the poor children. They grow up with continued sense of false pride of being superior, or superiority complex – the myth of greatness being the “Middle Kingdom”, the ones being civilized, and all others being “barbarians” has been debunked by the well-known history Professor Wang Gung-wu (see earlier comments quoting his writing). Or having an inferiority complex because of not being exposed to the multi-racial set up that we Malaysians are, feeling inadequate, unsure of themselves, uncertain how to react when in the company of Malaysians of different ethnicity.

We agree that the minority should conform to the wishes of the majority as it is in line with the principle of democracy. Democracy also says that the wishes of the minority should be listened to. But nowhere in the world does any democratic Government, on contested issues, decides in favour of the minority.

18 02 2010
samenda

Prof Teo kata semua akhbar vernakular Melayu, Cina dan India bersikap perkauman. Hampir semua parti politik pun perkauman. Nampak dari luar saja tidak tapi kalau lihat dari dalam, pun perkauman. Jadi macam mana kita?

19 02 2010
SSS Admin

samenda,

Lawatan dan komen anda dialu-alukan.

Ini sudah sejarah kemerdekaan kita. Untuk menuntut kemerdekaan dari British, pada peringkat-peringkatnya, Melayu telah menubuhkan UMNO, kemudiannya Cina tubuhkan MCA dan India MIC. Ia membawa kapada Merdeka. Perikatan, kemudiannya Barisan Nasional, hanya merupakan rangka kerjasama, bukan parti sabenarnya. Begitu juga Pakatan Rakyat adalah rangka kerjasama antara PAS, DAP dan PKR. Gerakan coba mendirikan suatu parti berbagai bangsa tetapi tidak nampak berjaya. Tidak ada timbul semangat nasionalisma, tidak ada suatu Bangsa Malaysia yang bersatu padu. Tiap satu parti dan berbagai persatuan berdasarkan etnik memperjuangkan kepentingannya sendiri. Negara tidak boleh kukuh dengan cara ini.

Mengikut amalan demokrasi, pada dasarnya, apa yang kebanyakan rakyat mahukan dijalankan. Tapi, apakah sistem parti politik yang ada sekarang ini kemahuan kebanyakan rakyat? Mungkinkah muncul seorang pemimpin yang tegas dan boleh menyatu padukan rakyat berbilang etnik? Dan, apakah kita ikutkan sahaja apa yang “dianggap” sebagai kemahuan rakyat? Mungkinkah berlaku apa yang dipanggil “dictatorship of the masses”?

Sepatutnya pemerintah membibit dan membingbing rakyat kearah yang baik untuk keamanan dan kesejahteraan negara. Mermikirkan dan merancangkan apa yang mendatangkan keamanan, kemakmuran dan kesejahteraan negara, memberi penerangan sepenuhnya kapada dasar-dasar menghala ke arah itu. Adakah ini berlaku sekarang? Pernahkah perkara menentukan apa yang rakyat mahukan dibuat secara serius dan boleh dilihat rakyat jelata? Saperti mengadakan referendum bagi menentukan sama ada kebanyakan rakyat mahukan SSS?

Kita mesti beramai-ramai sentiasa memikirkan dan mencari jawapan kapada so’alan-so’alan ini. Mudah-mudahan akan timbul pemimpin yang tersebut diatas.

19 02 2010
Adam

I don’t understand.

If the Director General of Education said “the government is considering adopting national school BM syllabus in vernacular schools”, why is the Deputy Education Minister saying “the ministry needs in-depth studies on the proposal” and that “he had objected to the proposal in at least three internal meetings”.

Is the Deputy Minister not a member of the Government? Why is he telling the public what went on at “internal meetings”?

I would expect there is cohesion in a government Ministry and that, after issues are discussed, all views heard, whatever decisions made are respected by all parties concerned – especially members of the same government. Even if the decision is merely to announce the Government’s plan. Is the Deputy Minister trying to wash dirty linen in public? Were the discussions not confidential? Were they not covered under the Official Secrets Act?

What I read about principles of government decision making is that if a politician disagrees with any issue, if after having expressed his objections, a decision is made against his wishes, if he still feels strongly about it, he should resign. In this instance, the decision must be representing the policy of the Education Ministry and the Director General had clearance to announce it. Shouldn’t the Deputy Minister resign instead of making the Ministry look ridiculous to the public?

22 02 2010
SSS Admin

Adam,

Welcome to our site and thank you for leaving a comment.

The apparent inconsistency between the MOE Director General’s statement and the Deputy Minister’s comment is somewhat perplexing. Indeed, there should be one voice coming from the Ministry.

The DG is a technocrat i.e a professional in the field of education in the country and would normally, as in this case, represent the Ministry itself i.e the Government. The Deputy Minister is a politician who, by the nature of a politician’s appointment, comes and goes. Therein lies the difference.

The newspaper that publishes the report should have presented it such that the difference is understood by readers. They could, for example, have said that the Deputy Minister was stating his own opinion, trying to please his supporters i.e the MCA Youth Section, which holds the same view as he does. But that speaks for the quality of Malaysian newspapers in general.

True, the Deputy Minister should himself have pointed out that the opinion he expressed to the reporter was his own and not that of the Ministry of Education. Politicians are entitled to do that sometimes. However, there have been many cases, the world over, of politicians resigning when disagreeing in principle on issues very dear to them. They are politicians of high principle and strong moral fibre. But this case you refer to speaks for the kind of politicians we have in Malaysia.

20 02 2010
Khairul

Macam ini tak syiok lah, Abang. Sudah diberi kerakyatan, nak macam macam pulak. Lepas tu, nak ajak bersatu pun tak mahu.

22 02 2010
SSS Admin

Khairul,

Terima kasih menziarah kami dan meninggalkan komen.

Inilah masalahnya dinegara ini. Ada yang tidak menghormati apa yang dipanggil Kontrak Sosial dimana pemimpin-pemimpin Melayu dimasa Merdeka telah menyetujui kerakyatan kapada bukan Melayu yang “stateless” sabelom Merdeka dan, sebagai balasannya, pemimpin-pemimpin bukan Melayu bersetuju Melayu mendapat Kedudukan Istimewa dan dimaktubkan didalam Perlembagaan. Ada diantara mereka yang tidak setuju sekolah satu sistem mengeluarkan hujah-hujah menggugat Kedudukan Istimewa Melayu sebagai alasannya. Ini nyata tidak patut.

Kita perlu selalu mengeluarkan suara mempertahankan Perlembagaan dan meminta semua rakyat menghormatkan dan hidup mengikuti Perlembagaan negara sepenuhnya.

20 02 2010
antubahasa

Dear Sir,

Lim Kheng Yaik, former President of Gerakan Party remarked (referring to Dong Zong?) in an interview as follows:-

…They want their mother tongue education, forgetting they are in Malaysia…

You can read more HERE.

Yes, many people forgot that they are setting foot in Malaysia. Or did they forget they are Malaysians? Or did not really want to be Malaysians?

OR MAYBE THEY ARE NOT MALAYSIANS AT ALL!!! So go home migrants!!!

23 02 2010
SSS Admin

antubahasa,

That was a fitting statement by the former Gerakan Party President. In some cases it may be more than forgetting that they are in Malaysia. In the case of the Dong Zong, the view has been expressed that they may have a sinister motive in insisting that Mandarin be the medium of instruction in schools in Malaysia and in voicing out the so-called “multi-nation state”. It may appear to even be subversive to the nation state that Malaysia has always been all this while. All citizens irrespective of ethinicity can live side by side without having “multi nations”. The idea of a “multi nation state” must be objected to and rejected outright.

Mandarin is not mother tongue. It is the national language of China. Even so, that came about fairly recently in the history of the mainland Chinese. Nevertheless, SSS does not seek to put it aside, only to not have it as the medium of instruction in schools. It can be studied as an elective sunject in all schools but the medium of instruction must be Bahasa Malaysia.

20 02 2010
Dot

Further to my earlier comments in this post, here are historical facts that may help the recalcitrant Chinese in Malaysia understand themselves better and perhaps become more amenable to the call for unity and joining the mainstream of Malaysian society:

According to Wolfram Eberhard, in his “A History of China”, 1977, during prehistory i.e before 1,500 BC or about 3,500 years ago, the area south of the Yangtze River in China were occupied by ancient Asian ethnic groups like the Tai (ancestors of the present Thais), Miao, Yueh and others. In this period of time, there were no people that can be said to be belonging to the Chinese race. In the southwest were people of the Tibetan race who also settled in Shensi and Szechwan. What later became known as Chinese were at that time settled in the north, beyond the Yangtze Valley.

The Chinese (in the north) also called those in the south “barbarians”. Ancient Chinese records bear this out. People who were called Chinese came into being only 2,200 years ago when Chin Shih Huang Di united various states in the northern part of present day China. Chinese were then still occupying only the north.

Since the Chinese in Malaysia are said to have come from southern China, it is possible that they are descended from what the Chinese (in the north) called “barbarians”, too, like the Malays and others were called. If they are indeed so descended, then the Chinese and the Malays have a common denominator right from ancient history.

The Tai civilisation is older than the Chinese civilisation. The numericals used by the Chinese are believed to have been copied from the Tais. “The bamboo tree, rice planting and the water buffalo do not represent original Chinese cultural treasure though they have all become an intrinsic core of modern Chinese civilisation” – J.E Spenser and W.L Thomas, “Asia, East by South”, 1971, pg 513. The Chinese were not surrounded by barbarians, but by advanced civilisations with their own individual characteristics. Professor C.P Fitzgerald also pointed out that recent archaelogical studies have shown that the Chinese (in the north) have no reason to think of only themselves as being civilized – “A Concise History of East Asia”,1966, pg 13-14.

Over time, various factors made the northerners move further north into the grazing lands of Mongolia, causing irritation and vengeance accumulating until the fierce and brutal Mongols, led by Genghis Khan, attacked, conquered and ruled China for about 80 years in the 13th – 14th Centuries. The Chinese also moved into the fertile areas of the south, displacing the Tai, Miao and other original settlers. They have taken vast tracts of Northwestern China (Muslim Uighers) and Tibet into their fold. Hatred and resentment have been festering against the Mainland Chinese in those areas until today. They resulted in dangerous conflagrations occurring periodically.

Such situations as the above must be avoided in this country, Malaysia. We must not allow any situation that would justify the military taking over the country like happening elsewhere – yesterday some young officers took over the Government in Niger. We must keenly and responsibly guard our democracy, preserve our racial harmony. Those not happy with and finding themselves unable to respect and live by the Constitution of the country should find other places for them to be happy in. There is no such thing as unlimited freedom and absolute equality. Everybody must be responsible and reasonable in this country.

23 02 2010
SSS Admin

Dot,

Those who have come to this country must adjust and conform. We do that everywhere we go, even on short visits. Imagine going to New York or London and spitting in public or talking loudly in hotel lobbies and restaurants. The locals will stare at us and probably tell themselves or one another that we are “barbarians”. We follow what the locals do. The English have the expression, “When in Rome, do like the Romans do.” There is such an expression in about every major language or civilisation in the world.

We must keep on putting out the desirable values in society endlessly. So that more and more of the non-conformists join the mainstream. Putting out the facts of history is one way of making people understand themselves better and, to use the often-repeated statement, “learn from history.”

Indeed, we must guard our democracy jealously. One well-known and remarkably responsible opposition leader about two decades ago, Dr Tan Chee Koon, a medical doctor, famously said when he was sufferring (and later died) from cancer, “You never realise the value of good health until you don’t have it.” Let that statement be an eye opener to those who think they can say anything they like, do anything they please, without regard for the need for unity, integration and harmony in this country. Let everybody remember or be informed that even a rule under Emergency powers requiring the military to control the security situation during the period after 13 May 1969 involved the suspension of Parliament, our democratic rights of free speech, of movement (curfew), etc. Indeed, let all citizens exercise discretion in the pursuit of freedom and equality as there are limitations to these. Let there be a sense of responsibility and reasonableness among all Malaysians.

Let the words of Dr Tan Chee Koon often stare us in the face as a reminder, modified slightly to, “You never realise the value of democracy until you don’t have it.”

21 02 2010
Unity Seeker

Why is the Dong Zong man so against being united? In all his statements so far, there has not been one single suggestion on how to go about to close ranks in the prevailing atmosphere of widening racial polarisation. Nothing beyond parroting the tourism-attraction slogan of “unity in diversity”.

Why is he so against a “nation state”? As some people have explained earlier on, we have been a nation state for ages in this country. Comments by others about a possible sinister motive now comes to mind. Is he and his group wanting to disturb the status quo? I hope not, because the repercussions would be great.

The report says, “He urged the government and political parties to state their stand on attempts by some people to use the 1Malaysia concept to achieve their political agendas of a “nation state” and a single stream school system.” I wonder if his group is supported by political parties. Wonder how many members of the Dong Zong are also members of political parties. Before the general elections he was quoted as saying they don’t support any political parties. Therefore DS Najib needs not be so concerned as to want to placate the Chinese schools.

It’s good that political partries don’t respond to his urging except one, I think. In the MCA it appears that only the Youth Section is vocal about single-stream schooling. There are many moderates in the MCA and hopefully more will emerge in the process of coming out of the turmoil the party has been in recently.

23 02 2010
SSS Admin

Unity Seeker,

Good to hear from you and see your comment again.

It looks like it’s selfishness of one kind. They have got citizenship and they adopt a devil-may-care attitude as far as nation building is concerned. They want Mandarin to be the medium of instruction in Chinese schools, their children to learn 2-3 languages, insist on a different syllabus and a lower standard of passes for Bahasa Malaysia for their children. They seem to be saying, who cares about other children (at national schools) having to go through a tougher syllabus and a higher standard of passes for BM.

Then they talk about a “multi-nation state”, an idea which is subversive and contrary to the nation state that this country has been for a long time. They must be opposed, their idea rejected. They must be told time and again that BM is the National Language as stated in the Constitution. Children at their formative ages should be mixing intra-ethnically, develop a spirit of togetherness, common hopes and aspirations for the sake of long-term unity, peace and prosperity in this country.

The state of politics in this country has been deplorable since the previous administration. What has been called the “flip-flopping, auto-piloting government” has brought about unprecedented acts and omissions by the citizenry such that some people think they can say or do anything they please, without realising that there are limits to freedom of speech and expression. The current Government must rein in those elements who, consciously or otherwise, cause consternation and disaffection among the various communities. Talking about “multi nation state” is causing such consternation and disaffection. It even appears as an attempt to upset the status quo. That must be stopped.

23 02 2010
non-sequetar

It’s the right of everybody to choose. It’s the duty of every government to provide choices for the people. As many as possible. If there are choices between national and vernacular schools, let them be.

There is no hard evidence that vernacular schools are harmful to the country. Politicians run the country and the opposition provides a check and balance. That’s good for democracy. So why not let it be.

24 02 2010
Non-seclutionist

If so many things you let them be and let it be, the country will disaster be.

Must be discerning, man. Leaders must lead, citizens carefully tread.

No hard evidence? What about the Deputy Education Minister’s statement on the 25% drop out rate in Chinese schools? It was the finding of the Ministry’s research covering a period of several years.

Choices must be determined by the country’s financial, moral and long-term unity considerations.

25 02 2010
SSS Admin

Non-seclutionist,

Thank you for visiting and commenting.

Indeed, the choices the Government provide must take into account of long-term unity considerations. We cannot go on with empty and nice sounding slogans like “unity in diversity”. Let’s think and ask what does it actually mean. We are diverse in racial composition, in religious beliefs, in culinary tastes and leisure spending, but are we united, really?

Are we united even on basic issues like respecting and living by the Constitution? This is the minimum requirement of all citizens in any democratic country in the world. Why are there vernacular schools with Mandarin and Tamil as the medium of instruction when the Constitution clearly says Bahasa Malaysia is the National Language of the country? No doubt the phenomena has existed over 50 years but it does not mean it is right and attempts are being made to right what is clearly wrong. Yet there is opposition, recalcitrance, intransigence. No doubt they come from a small percentage of the population but does that reflect “unity and diversity”?

The Constitution provides for a Special Position for the Malays in consideration for the Malays agreeing to citizenship to be given to the non-Malays who were all stateless prior to Merdeka. The non-Malays have used up their right to citizenship and become citizens but there are those raising the issue of the Malay Special Position when that subject is even protected by the Sedition Act. The Malays are of course unhappy about it. Now, is that “unity in diversity”?

Those who mention the nice-sounding and tourism-catching slogan need to think hard and face the realities of the inter-ethnic relationship in this country. There are other ways of attracting tourists and racial cohesion needs are as important, if not more important than, tourist dollars at this point in time. Improvement of the economy can be done in various ways.

In the long-term, there cannot be “unity in diversity”. How can there be when the various communities are pursuing divergent interests, hopes and aspirations? And here we are at SSS promoting the concept of single stream schooling or one type of school for all with the objective of creating a united and cohesive Bangsa Malaysia. When that Bangsa Malaysia has emerged, all Malaysians will think of themselves being the same as the other and long-term harmony, peace and progress become natural. We may have a long way to go but success will not come out from thin air and we need to promote these ideas as much as we can.

25 02 2010
SSS Admin

non-sequetar,

Thank you for your visit and your comment. We welcome even opposing views but maintain our right of reply.

Throughout history, civilisations have come and gone. The well-organised ones lasted longer than others. The ones that observed principles of human behaviour, rules of decency, avoided wars when there were other choices. Even in homogeneous societies like India, the Dravidians with knowledge of underground sewerage system thousands of years ago no longer exist as an entity. The Chinese states of Chu, Chao and Chi disappeared when Chin Shih Huang Di, said to be of Tibetan ancestry, conquered them. And they were not known as Chinese until after Chin Shih Huang Di. The Manchus conquered and ruled China for a few hundred years but disappeared into oblivion in the 20th Century. We as Malaysians have not gotten to anywhere near being great. We, in fact, need to sustain our very existence as a vaguely united and democratic country. Increasing racial polarisation might break us apart. Don’t you think we must exercise our choices very carefully to prevent that?

It is very clear that most vernacular schools are hardly multi-racial in composition. Children in their formative years should study in an environment where they can obtain and develop good values about multi-racial living, regard those of other races naturally as friends and fellow Malaysians so that they don’t feel awkward in the company of others with different skin colour and religion as they grow up. Therefore, when you see that these are not happening in vernacular schools, why should you let it be?

When political parties promote ideas and agendas that are detrimental to harmonious relations among the various races, why should you let it be? The terminology “multi nation state” was used to justify the existence of schools using Mandarin as the medium of instruction. It carries the connotation of many nations within a nation. It is repugnant and anathema to the nation state that has existed for ages and it causes consternation to others when mooted out. The political party supporting the Dong Zong and vernacular schools should not be doing so and should not be let be.

We must have a responsible opposition. But when an opposition party finds each and every excuse to politicise events and condemn the party in power to the extent of accusing MACC of responsibility over Teo Beng Hock’s death when the Police was just starting their investigation, never supporting it even on matters clearly spelt out in the Constitution, like Bahasa Malaysia as the National Language, why must you let it be?

We need responsible and reasonable citizens to help protect our democracy, friend. Let us fully and wisely consider each and every choice we have before exercising it and must not let be situations that might lead to ill feelings, tension and a break up of whatever semblance of national unity that we may have now. Let ‘s close ranks and foster long-term harmony, peace and progress in our country. SSS is in that direction.

25 02 2010
Aman

P.rofessor Teo kata mesti ada had dalam politik. Saya sokong 100%. Jangan semua nak dipolitikkan.

25 02 2010
Sher

Kudos to the Education Ministry Director General. The Ministry’s proposal that along with the change in syllabus, vernacular schools will have to teach BM an additional 90 minutes a week is good, even at the expense of other subjects which can be studied outside normal school hours.

It’s in line with the position of BM under the Constitution. It’s the least the Education Ministry must do.

26 02 2010
Noto

interesting stuff hope it works.

26 02 2010
SSS Admin

Noto,

Thank you for visiting and leaving a few words. Your hope is our encouragement.

We realise that it takes time but the concept of single stream education needs to be implemented in a multi-racial country like Malaysia. There is no other way to achieve long term harmony, peace and progress but through the merging of hopes and aspirations as as one national entity – the Malaysian entity. The Satu Sekolah Untuk Semua (SSS) aims to get there. The sooner the better as racial polarisation has been increasing for some time now.

In Indonesia, the people largely think of Indonesia the country first, as members of ethnic groups and sub-groups second, and the minority conforms to the wishes of the majority, while the legitimate interests of the minority are also protected. We must have Malaysians think like that, too, in order to achieve the long-term goal of a united and cohesive Malaysian nation, not as “multi nation” as a few people unabashedly suggested. We will keep on telling the public of the risks of not righting the wrongs that have existed even before Merdeka and extol the virtues of single stream education until the politicians find it expedient to implement the concept.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: