Integration and religious conversions? Being Malaysian, respecting the Constitution, etc

30 05 2010


Given below is a number of articles (some in extract form) expressing what may be called non-mainstream views.

The first article speaks about religious conversions and integration during Abbasid’s rule. But is anyone expecting integration via religious conversions in Malaysia? Not that we know of. Isn’t expecting that an extremism of a kind?

The second and third articles, written by a Malaysian student overseas, talks about complaints when filling forms requiring stating one’s race, and states that there is no such thing as a Malaysian race or Bangsa Malaysia. How do we identify ourselves then? And the writer is not proud to be a Malaysian. Not yet, he says. For reasons that are yet to be fully justified.

So many Malaysians ask the rakyat to respect the Constitution of the country when talking about integration and national unity but the writer of the fourth article below asks BN, the alliance of political parties in power, to respect the Constitution. He talks about “constitutional guarantees .. lack of press freedom .. high achievers of all races living overseas” not wanting to come back and “Every day cases are being filed in the courts by people of different races challenging laws and decisions on Constitutional grounds”, says he. Pretty strong words but see if he provides the proofs or justifies his statements in the article.

The article after that talks about the institution of rulers. It sounds seditious as the institution is protected under the Sedition Act. It also subverts Article 153 guaranteeing the position and the role of the rulers and the Special Position of the Malays which, the British Colonial Secretary told the British Parliament in the 50s, has been there “since day one”, recognised and accepted by them since they first had contacts with this country. It shows the extent people go to further their objective. This kind of acts makes integration and national unity difficult. It is hoped that the authorities would take action on such seditious and subversive writings.

The last article dwells on what a lawyer wrote in Nanyang Siang Pao asking what else do the Chinese want. Another writer in China Press says the Chinese is unable to compete in a situation of no power (“tiada kuasa”). Having got economic power and control, they still talk about political power. Is that being reasonable? Shouldn’t there be give and take? Shouldn’t it be on the basis of the population ratio in the country? And, isn’t it that the Malays are being asked to compete, and on an uneven playing field? On vernacular schools, the Dong Zong, having been allowed to continue using Mandarin as the medium of instruction in Chinese schools, despite Article 152 on Bahasa Malaysia, wants more.

The fact that the Chinese have the means to run quite a few newspapers and other forms of mass media makes it appear as if there is a lot of dissent in the country. It is not true; the dissent is limited. The same groups of people talking and getting published here and there. There is a silent majority out there which has not been vocal due to their accomodating and pleasant nature, their sense of responsibility and respect for the Constitution, and having limited financial resources to acquire the means to speak up, either newspapers, computers, private TV, radio stations, etc. It is expected that affirmative action will continue and it will enable more of the silent majority to acquire wealth and education so that an increasing number of them would speak up to balance the demands for action in terms of integration and national unity.

Let’s discuss these.

This may be a long posting but, having been given the synopsis above, you may choose the articles you wish to read in detail. However, reading the articles alone without reading the comments made by the readers may not be doing justice to yourselves because the other side of the coin is usually in the comments.

Everyone is welcomed to comment, either in Bahasa Malaysia or in the English language for maximum audience coverage.



Integration with integrity — Art Harun
May 21, 2010

One of my favourite examples of pure racial and religious integration is the one which existed during the Abbasid rule.

In an atmosphere as culturally and intellectually vibrant as Baghdad was during the Abbasid’s rule, inter-faith and inter-religion relations were at their best. In Baghdad, Christians lived near a Jacobite monastery on the bank of the Tigris. Muslims would take part in Christian celebrations such as the Palm Sunday and likewise the Christians would honour the Eid-ul-Fitr together with the Muslims.

The people were free to practise their respective religions, without fear and without any kind of compulsion. A medieval Egyptian historian noted that the mixing and matching of festivals “was a sign of mutual respect and brotherhood between the religions…moreover, some of the converts to Islam, as Muslims, continued their old practices even after accepting Islam.”

Now that account shows not only a pure, unadulterated integration between various races of different faiths, but also assimilation of them into one single society.

Harun al Rasyid’s relationship with the Byzantine’s Empress Irene in Constantinople meant a peaceful co-existence between the two religious powerhouses. But when Irene’s finance minister, Nicephorus, overthrew her, the situation changed immediately.

After a letter from Nicephorus saying that Harun should be giving the Byzantine his wealth and blaming the peaceful co-existence between Harun and Irene to “weakness of women and their foolishness,” Harun marched into central Anatolia and captured Heraclea.

It was at this time that Christians were treated shabbily in Iraq as Abbasid nationalism ruled the day.

At about the same time, the peaceful co-existence also existed in Muslim Andalus, especially in its capital, Cordoba, which was ruled by the remnant of the Umayyad Caliphate who fled from the Abassid after the infamous “dinner of reconciliation” in Damascus.

Muslims, Christians and the Jews were living in harmony. The Court doctor was a Jew. The trading network was monopolised by the Jews. Jewish translators were used to translate the works of Aristotle, Plato and Socrates. Christians were running the Caliphate. In fact, in the last bastion of Muslim Andalus, Granada, Samuel ibn Nagrela, better known as Nagid (a Hebrew term for “Governor”) was the Muslim army chief, who fought for his country, alongside Muslim soldiers whom he commanded. He was also oversaw public works, building of a library, mosque, gardens. He even wrote extensively on Hebrew dialects.

Samuel was succeeded by Joseph, his son.

Again, just as it was fragile in Baghdad, it was also fragile in Muslim Andalus. It took a Muslim to destroy Samuel’s legacy and Joseph.

His biggest enemy was a Muslim, Abu Ishaq. Abu Ishaq was out of favour with the Berber Princes who ruled Granada. Driven by envy, Abu Ishaq would berate the Granada prince for having “an infidel as his secretary”. He said:

“through him (Joseph), the Jews have become great and proud and arrogant… and how many a worthy Muslim humbly obeys the vilest ape among these miscreants. And this did not happen through their own efforts but through one of our own people who rose as their accomplice. Oh why did he not deal with them….. Put them back where they belong and reduce them to the lowest of the low, roaming among us, with their little bags, with contempt, degradation and scorn as their lot, scrabbling in the dunghills for coloured rags to shroud their dead for burial.”

Joseph was dragged by a mob, beaten and crucified. Hundreds of Jews were subject to terror and death in 1066 Granada.

Bigotry also existed on the Christian side. Before the Granada episode, a Jewish monk, Isaac, had sought to start anti-Islam revolt simply because he was disappointed at the rate of conversion from Christianity to Islam.

He started this by appearing before a leading Muslim judge and said that Muhammad wasn’t a true Prophet and that he would go to hell. After refusing to recant, he was sentenced to death, prompting a Christian revolt that lasted eight years.

About 50 Christians including women, young and old, sought death sentences by denouncing Islam and were promptly sentenced to death by the Muslims. Some of them were canonised by the Church, including one Eulogius. The story of these Christian martyrs was later used to rouse anti-Islam sentiments until the Muslim kingdom fell to Ferdinand and Isabella in 1492.

We could learn a thing or two about integration from that part of history.

i. Integration comes with a complete understanding and acceptance of different cultural background and faiths;

ii. Integration exists in periods of peace and security when everyone of different races does not have any kind of racial fear or complexes;

iii. Integration is fragile. It has to be constantly and consistently nurtured and practised. We have to continuously be conscious of our neighbour’s sensitivities, needs and limitations;

iv. Its fragility may see it destroyed in a few moments. Political or personal agenda (Abu Ishaq’s envy); religious agenda (Isaac’s scheme); unnecessary or unbridled nationalism (Harun al Rasyid’s war against the Byzantine); hatred and bigotry (Abu Ishaq’s declaration).

Notice what Abu Ishaq said. Is it not the same with the “pendatang” and “second class” pronouncements here? Notice Abu Ishaq’s rave that the Jews are rich and well off. Is it not the same with statements made by some of our leaders — past and present — and the likes of Perkasa?


At the end of the day, we cannot rely on others, and that includes the government, when it comes to racial integration. This affects our daily lives.

And so we have to take it upon ourselves — the man in the mirror, so to speak — to take steps, no matter how small they may be, towards integration.

And if we have not done so yet, I would say today would be a good day to start.



Ethnic Descent, Nationality and Race: What is a Malaysian?

Written by johnleemk on 11:44:39 am Jul 21, 2008.

If there were a “Stuff Middle- and Upper-class Malaysians Like” listing to complement the several other blogs about such topics out there (Stuff White People Like being the most famous), one entry that would definitely have to be on the list is making an issue out of the need to declare our ethnic origin on government forms. Every once in a while, this issue flares up, and a lot of people take a good point too far, suggesting that we eradicate the notion of race altogether from the public sphere by filling “Malaysian” as our race in on all forms. This is a very misplaced idea, which does not do justice to the real, pragmatic world we live in.

I am probably among the most committed to race-blindness out there. I don’t think we should judge race in itself as a positive or negative qualification; it may be correlated with intelligence or physical ability or what-have-you, but because we already have measures for intelligence and physical ability, there is no need to incorporate a test of racial origin. Heck, I am one of the very few people in Malaysia who would openly say that yes, there is a trade-off between being Malaysian and being Malay/Chinese/Indian/Kadazan/whatever — and that when in doubt, we should err on the side of being Malaysian.

I don’t see the need to pretend race doesn’t exist. For one, ethnic descent has a huge correlation with culture and mindset: the way I think and the way a Malay thinks are very different. Although it is actually very difficult to generalise in this area — I differ a lot from the way many Chinese think — we do not have a better test for determining mindsets and beliefs just yet.

Nobody has ever eradicated racism from their society. The easiest way to tell if racial discrimination is going on is to look at the way the typical person from one race treats the typical person from another race, and yet if we maintain the fiction that race does not exist, there is no way to tell that discrimination is going on. If we do not look at the demographics of individual ethnic communities, we can maintain the fiction that all is well, but if one community is clearly lagging behind the rest, it will be very obvious to the man on the street — and this does not bode well for maintaining race-blindness.

In essence, I am arguing for something between looking at race in everything, and looking at race in nothing. There are clearly times when it is important for an institution to know someone’s ethnic background, and there are times when it is obviously irrelevant. To apply one blanket rule simply for the sake of applying a blanket rule is ridiculous.

Of course, in difficult and complicated issues like this, charting a course of compromise can be practically impossible. In an imperfect world, you cannot perfectly implement perfect ideals; there will be an unnecessary intrusion of race into some areas of policy, and in other areas, we will unnecessarily shrink from race out of the fear of being politically incorrect. But it is important, I think, to make it clear that although race should rarely be a relevant issue when it comes to making determinations about an individual person, there are times when it is necessary.

This goes beyond merely collecting demographic information, after all. Putting aside the impossible issue of how to define “black” or “white”, in the US, blacks take different medication for heart disease than whites. There is evidence that Chinese and whites do not have the same ideal body mass indexes. And, as alluded to earlier, when one community lags dramatically behind another in some measurable manner, this information can be incredibly helpful in policy formulation and implementation.

Yet, there is something a little icky about declaring your “race” on a form. The stark nature of the term and the weight of its historical baggage make it seem almost wrong to declare that your “race” is “Malay” or “Iban” when you think what really ought to matter is that you are Malaysian. It’s easy to see where the “My race is Malaysian” crowd is coming from.

But as many a pedant has troubled to observe, there is no such thing as a Malaysian race. Making a statement about your race is simply making a statement about your ancestors. When we ask for your race, we are not asking about your Malaysian ancestors; we are asking who your ancestors were before there was a Malaysia. To describe them as Malaysian is really a bit of falsehood.


This may seem like quibbling over semantics, but language is particularly powerful when it comes to a loaded issue like ethnicity and nationality. We have to be really clear that we have gone beyond the petty racism of apartheid or the racial lynchings of the American Jim Crow era. The issue in modern society is not race or what it has to do with your nationality; it is simply, for the purposes of record-keeping, who you trace your descent back to.

My ethnic descent is not Malaysian; I am Chinese with some Filipino thrown in. But my nationality is Malaysian. My nationality entitles me to make my home in Malaysia, to have a say in how Malaysia is run. But my ethnic descent is where my roots lie, and is an important aspect of defining what Malaysia and being Malaysian means to me. It is the same for any other Malaysian; we bear the traces of our roots in how we think and act. There are differences between a Malaysian of Malay descent and a Malaysian of Indian descent, and to deny these differences is foolishness. But rather than dwelling on these differences, as the label of “race” might have us do, let’s celebrate how regardless of who our ancestors were, we all have one homeland, one tanah tumpahnya darahku.


3. Proud to be Malaysian?

Written by johnleemk on 4:11:05 am Sep 29, 2007.

One holds that Malaysia is so behind compared to other nations; that it is regressive, either in physical, mental, or cultural infrastructure.

The other holds that Malaysians have much to be proud of, much to cherish, much to make us happy, and that we just don’t appreciate it.

Being an overseas Malaysian myself now (at the moment, for my studies; I have no firm plans for my post-graduate life), I feel I can better appreciate and sympathise with both views.

It is definitely quite easier to criticise the country at home; you are presented a warped view of the outside world. The government paints home as paradise, foreign establishments paint their homes as paradise; the human instinct to perceive the grass as greener on the other side kicks in.

Likewise, it is extremely difficult not to appreciate what Malaysians have that other countries don’t. We complain about racial tension, but racial jokes which barely raise an eyebrow at home are crazily controversial in that supposed bastion of freedom, the United States.

The thing you really miss most about home as a Malaysian, I would suppose, (other than the food of course) is the people. That’s hardly surprising; the people are what make any country what it is, and Malaysia has been blessed with one of the most plural and interesting mixes of people you could expect.

It is thus difficult for me to sympathise with those who insist that Malaysia is vastly inferior, that it ought to simply ape other countries; there is a lot others could learn from us, a lot that we have which other countries don’t. In short, we have a lot to be proud of.

But at the same time, it is impossible for me to declare that I am proud to be a Malaysian. I have no doubt that Malaysia is a country that one can be proud of.

Yet at the moment, it is a country that one cannot be proud of. How can I be proud of my country when I am told it is not my country? How can I be proud of my country when millions of my countrymen are denied access to the opportunities I had?

How can I be proud when a citizen can be tossed in jail for something he did not even write, without even being charged for a crime? How can I be proud when even academics have no freedom to think?



BN must respect the constitution — David D. Mathew
May 19, 2010

MAY 17 — After years of slumber, the guarantees contained in Malaysia’s most important document is slowly rising like a phoenix from the ashes to shine into the hearts and minds of ordinary Malaysians.


Ibrahim Ali claims that the Chinese are ungrateful for not voting Barisan despite the many election goodies thrown at them.

The Prime Minister believes that the Barisan machinery in Sibu moved in old and traditional ways and that the coalition needed to be more creative and energetic.


In a wave that has begun with the Chinese and Christians all over Malaysia, voters are voting with enlightened minds inspired by the drive to see to it that Constitutional guarantees are met.

Thanks to initiatives such as the MyConstitution campaign by Bar Council’s Constitutional Law Committee to simplify the Federal Constitution and to reach out to 6 million households, Malaysians are no longer ignorant about their most precious of rights.

The promise of a new bridge will no longer guarantee you a man’s vote unless you can guarantee that he can assemble his friends and walk freely in a group across that bridge without first having to seek police permission.

The promise of a new school will no longer guarantee you a man’s vote unless you can guarantee that his child is entering an education system that is blind to colour but alive to need.

The offer of millions of ringgit for development will no longer guarantee you a man’s vote unless you can guarantee that his freedom to enjoy that development will never be taken away without due process.

The promise of three million ringgit for missionary schools will no longer guarantee you a man’s vote unless you can guarantee him that he can practice his religion freely without restrictions such as on the words he uses.

The promise of a flood mitigation system will not guarantee you a man’s vote because he realizes that he has, in the first place, a fundamental right to live safely and freely without having to worry about floods.

The fact that two polling centres were forced to open an hour late last Sunday because the Rejang River broke its banks is illustrative of this. Voters who had to wait for the waters to recede must have wondered why they were unable to exercise their right to vote because a necessity like a flood mitigation system was not already in place.

Money for this flood mitigation system should not be a problem given the fact that millions upon millions are poured into significantly less urgent matters like defence spending and not one but two Formula One teams.

Until and unless the BN begins to let itself be guided by the Constitution, it will continue to bleed support.

Eventually, the spread of Constitutional awareness and the demand that its guarantees are implemented will engulf the hearts and minds of every person of every race in Malaysia.

Young people of various races are already walking around in the sweltering heat reading newspapers upside down in protest against the lack of press freedom in the country. High achievers of all races living overseas are demanding for meritocracy and equal opportunity before they return.

Non-governmental organizations comprising of members from all races are calling for reforms with fiercer urgency. Every day cases are being filed in the courts by people of different races challenging laws and decisions on Constitutional grounds.

The spirit of Constitutional guarantees will outlive the laws and policies that seek to stifle them.

It may take awhile but there will come a day when all who stand against the fundamental liberties will be marginalised.




Rakyat dan institusi Diraja — Mohd Rashidi Hassan
May 21, 2010

21 MEI — Sejarah tidak pernah menafikan bagaimana eratnya hubungan antara orang-orang Melayu dengan institusi Diraja. Sejak zaman dahulu kala, orang-orang Melayu begitu sinonim dengan ketaatan dan kesetiaan kepada Raja.

Di atas ketaatan dan kesetiaan itulah yang memungkin wujudnya system beraja di sembilan buah negeri di Semenanjung Malaysia, walaupun penjajah British dan Umno-Barisan Nasional sudah menukarkan fungsi Raja-Raja Melayu daripada pentadbir kepada Raja Berperlembagaan sahaja.

Dalam apa pun keadaan, kedaulatan dan kemuliaan Raja-Raja Melayu tetap dipelihara dan dijunjung rakyat jelata di seluruh pelusuk negara.

Buktinya, Perkara 181, 153, 152 dan lain-lain (dalam Perlembagaan) yang berkaitan dengan kuasa Diraja termasuk Perkara 38 dan 43 di mana Yang di-Pertuan Agong mempunyai kedudukan tertinggi dalam system beraja tetap terjamin dalam negara.

Fungsi Raja sebagai payung kepada orang-orang Melayu khususnya, dan juga sebagai Ketua Agama Islam di negeri masing-masing, sehingga kini begitu ditaati dan dipatuhi setiap rakyat.

Namun, dewasa ini wujud di kalangan rakyat yang dilihat semakin berani mempertikaikan titah Sultan dan Raja.

Mengapakah keadaan ini boleh berlaku sekarang? Apakah Sultan atau Raja begitu maksum sehingga tidak boleh menerima nasihat dan disanggah sama sekali?

Ada dua elemen yang boleh mendorong Raja disanggah. Pertamanya, baginda tidak adil. Keduanya, baginda tidak memelihara kesucian agama.

Ketidakadilan seseorang Raja boleh dikaitkan dengan tindakan penguatkuasaan pemerintahannya yang berat sebelah.

Misalnya, apabila Mursyidul Am PAS, Tuan Guru Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat hendak berucap di Masjid, ada titah yang melarang beliau berbuat demikian, atas alasan PAS membawa politik dalam masjid. Seharusnya pihak berkuatkuasa agama menyatakan bukti, pada bahagian mana ucapan Tuan Guru bercanggah dengan Islam atau melanggar titah Raja.

Bandingkan pula dengan tindakan Umno-BN, yang menganjurkan solat hajat dan bacaan yassin untuk memenangkan calon BN yang bukan Islam. Jelas, BN menggunakan masjid untuk kempen politik, malah mendoakan kemenangan untuk memuliakan bukan Islam di masjid.

Bukankah tindakan Umno-BN ini mencemar kemuliaan masjid dan melanggar titah Raja? Mengapa tiada institusi agama yang bangkit? Mengapa tiada titah Raja dikeluarkan dalam hal ini?

Barangkali di sini, bukan salah Raja. Tetapi Umno-BN melalui institusi agama yang dikuasainya, memperalatkan Raja untuk kepentingan politik mereka. Ini tidak adil!

Perkara yang kedua terpenting ialah soal kesucian agama. Raja sebagai tonggak negeri, Raja sebagai Ketua Agama Negeri.

Untuk itu golongan Diraja seharusnya mengelakkan wujudnya beberapa insiden yang mencemarkan institusi Diraja. Raja-raja, anak-anak Raja, bakal-bakal Sultan, dilaporkan pernah terbabit dalam insiden yang memalukan, sebagaimana yang dilaporkan media massa sebelum ini.

Ada yang dilaporkan berpeleseran di kelab malam. Ada yang didakwa mabuk sehingga bergaduh sesama sendiri di kelab malam. Ada yang dikatakan kuat berjudi.

Pokoknya, golongan istana harus memahami bahawa di zaman moden ini, tiada aral komunikasi, rakyat boleh melihat dan mengetahui dengan jelas perilaku mereka, tambahan pula jika ada kalangan golongan ini yang sentiasa bergelumang dengan maksiat.

Persoalannya, bagaimanakan golongan ini layak dihormati dan didoakan pada setiap kali solat Jumaat, jika sifat peribadi serta perilaku baginda tidak secocok sebagai Ketua Agama Negeri?

Justeru, jangan salahkan rakyat, jika rakyat bersuara, walaupun ianya kelihatan “menyanggah titah Raja”.

Raja yang akan dihormati dan didaulatkan, adalah Raja yang adil kepada semua rakyat baginda, tanpa mengira latar belakang bangsa, agama dan pemikiran politik.

“Raja adil Raja disembah, Raja zalim Raja disanggah.” —

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


Apa lagi pengundi Cina mahukan? — Mohd Khuzairi Ismail
May 26, 2010

Seorang peguam, Lee Shu Hua menulis mengenai perkara ini menerusi akhbar Nanyang Siang Pao terbitan 22 Mei lalu.

Penulis ini cuba menjawab persoalan yang sering diajukan selepas pilihan raya itu iaitu apakah sebenarnya yang dimahukan oleh pengundi Cina. Menurut Shu Hua, sejak 52 tahun negara merdeka, orang Cina hidup dalam persekitaran yang tidak sama rata.

Apabila kerajaan memberi sedikit kelebihan, mereka dipaksa untuk berterima kasih. Menjelang pilihan raya pula, mereka dipaksa mengundi kerajaan, jika tidak akan dianggap sebagai kumpulan lupa daratan dan tidak mahu berterima kasih.


Seorang penulis, Lee Zang menerusi akhbar China Press terbitan 23 Mei pula menjelaskan, orang Cina bukan sahaja mahu berubah, tetapi perubahan juga terpaksa dilakukan.

Orang-orang Cina tidak mahu menyokong BN kerana masih di takuk lama dan tidak mahu berubah.

Mereka juga tidak mahu cara lama BN berterusan dalam membawa Model Baru Ekonomi kerana ia hanya untuk kepentingan segelintir dan kroni-kroni yang menjadi kaya.

Kebanyakan rakyat di negara tanpa mengira kaum ini amat risaukan masa depan mereka. Bukan sahaja memikirkan mengenai mereka tapi untuk generasi akan datang terutamanya generasi baru kaum Cina.

Apa yang mereka mahukan ialah keadilan, terbuka, bebas dan menjadi negara maju. Ramai yang berpendapat jika mahu melihat negara ini maju, politik tidak boleh dimonopoli oleh sebuah parti.

Jika politik ini masih ditakuk lama, tidak ada masa harapan pada masa depan untuk mereka. Tulis Lee Zang lagi, dahulunya rakyat di negara ini dimonopoli oleh beberapa orang dalam BN menggunakan satu model dari satu kaum untuk memonopoli semua kaum.

Pemikiran dan model lama ini tidak memberi apa-apa kepada masa depan kaum Cina. BN hanya memberi kepada beberapa orang Cina menjadi menteri.

Jika BN menganggap satu hari nanti kaum Cina mendapat jalan ke arah kehidupan yang indah, ia hanyalah satu impian yang kosong. Pemikiran orang-orang Cina di negara ini lebih jauh dari itu.

“Kenapa saya berkata begitu? Kerana generasi akan datang akan bertanya: Kenapa kita juga rakyat Malaysia tetapi kita disekat daripada melakukan apa yang orang lain boleh buat? Apa yang boleh kita jawab? Kita akan memberitahu nasib kita telah digadai dan diputuskan oleh beberapa pemimpin yang bersejarah. Bukankah begitu?” tulisnya.

Lee Zang menambah, penduduk kaum Cina di negara ini semakin berkurangan. Jika polisi-polisi kaum di takuk lama itu masih tidak berubah, orang Cina tidak dapat bersaing dan kekal dalam keadaan “tiada kuasa”. Maka generasi Cina akan datang juga akan tetap disisihkan.


KPI Kementerian Pelajaran dan SRJKC

Sementara itu, akhbar Sin Chew Jit Poh menyiarkan sebuah artikel sekolah aliran Cina dan kaitannya dengan usaha Kementerian Pelajar mencapai sasaran indeks petunjuk prestasi (KPI).

Artikel bertajuk Masalah SRJKC dan panduan KPI itu ditulis oleh penulis yang menggunakan nama samaran Mai Siang. Menurutnya, imbuhan yang diumumkan oleh kerajaan sempena sambutan Hari Guru lalu menunjukkan Kementerian Pelajaran bersungguh-sungguh mencapai KPI.

Tetapi orang ramai tidak yakin adakah SRJKC juga dimasukkan dalam skop NKRA itu? Ini kerana selama 50 tahun sekolah aliran Cina, banyak masalah dan penyakit timbul kerana tidak dapat disetarafkan dengan pendidikan negara. Contohnya kekurangan guru yang mana timbul masalah apabila guru bahasa Cina diletakkan ke bahagian bahasa Melayu.

Keadaan ini berlaku kerana pendidikan kita terpisah kepada dua kategori iaitu bantuan penuh dan bantuan separuh.

Mengikut konsep 1 Malaysia yang sebenar, NKRA perlu dijalankan di semua jabatan di Kementerian Pelajaran termasuk di bahagian pembangunan SRJKC. Setiap tahun, gariskan keperluan guru-guru, bantuan dan penambahbaikan sekolah serta bilangan sekolah baru.

Masukkan perkara itu ke dalam bajet tahunan kewangan negara. “Dalam proses perlaksanaan itu, perlu diselaraskan semua bentuk perlaksanaan dengan NKRA. Ambil perhatian serius dan sepenuhnya surat-surat yang dikemukakan oleh Dong Jiao Zong dan cuba buat penambahbaikan dalam semua proses,” tulis Mai Siang.





32 responses

30 05 2010

The not proud to be Malaysian guy – this kind says “Give me what I want then only I give what the country wants”. Study overseas dont make them open their eyes and ears. Never heard John Kennedy said “Asked not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country”.

31 05 2010
SSS Admin


Pride in one’s country stems from a sense of belonging to the country. An acceptance of all the characteristics of the country, the good and the bad. Far too often that pride is absent in citizens who do not think of permanence in the country. When persuading the Malays to accept the non-Malays as citizens during the discussions on independence, the British had said that many of them were, after all, “transient”.

This was borne out by the fact that many migrated since Merdeka. The process went on continuously through the years, increasing during times of uncertainty. Thus, when the Vietnam War was turning for its worst and the communists appeared to have the upper hand over the American and Vietnamese forces, many Chinese in Malaysia, fearing a communist walk over Thailand and entering Malaysia, disposed of their assets and left for Britain, Australia and Canada in droves. Those Malaysians from the former Straits Settlements of Malacca, Penang and Singapore, who could claim British Overseas Citizenship (BOC), could easily get permanent stay in Britain and many went there. Immigration records for the period would bear this out.

As and when their relatives or friends find suitability of their stay in the foreign country concerned, others in Malaysia get attracted to the idea of joining them. Some months ago newspapers reported about a thousand of the so-called BOCs being stranded in England after tearing out their passports or renouncing their Malaysian citizenship at the Malaysian High Commission, on the wrong advice that doing so would enhance their prospects of getting permanent stay as the British Government had ceased recognising the BOC status a few years earlier. Still, many Malaysian Chinese continue migrating to Australia and Canada. Advertisements for migration to these countries abound in this country. Such migration agents are both local Malaysians as well as nationals of those countries concerned. In blogosphere and elsewhere one finds people talking about “having bags ready” to go for “greener pastures”.

Those who leave and are planning to leave are not necessarily “brainy”. The so-called “brain drain” is not an accurate terminology. Granted, they include University graduates but the number is relatively small. Those who leave or planning to leave no longer have (perhaps have never had) their hearts fully in this country. Whether it is a loss to this country or not is seriously doubtful. They are among those who criticise and lambast the weaknesses and inadequacies existing in this country. As if those countries close to their hearts are perfect. The grass is always greener the other side.

30 05 2010

Why you talk nonsense? Parameswara came malaka a Hindu from somewhere and you say Melayu. Arabs did many things in their country and you talk Muslim conversion. Who want integration Muslim conversion.

Melayu no Admiral Zheng He protect Melaka become Thai. Zheng He came seven times. Thais attacked Malays how many times. Now Patani also Thai. Google, google, google la, then you know what.

31 05 2010
SSS Admin


You need to learn more of history, of the Malays, the Arabs and the Muslims in order to be respected in your views and comments on them. In the interest of better understanding and mutual respect, we will try to inform you the relevant facts here.

Parameswara was a Malay prince from Palembang in Sumatra, the centre of the Malay Empire known as Srivijaya (7th-13th Cent). There was strong Indian influence on the Srivijayan kingdom at that time – well before Islam came from south India and Arabia. Buddhism and Hinduism had found their way into Palembang. Palembang became a place to study Sanskrit for Chinese Buddhists in China going on pilgrimage to India, the birth place of Buddhism which the Chinese had adopted as one of their religions by the 6th Century. The famous pilgrim, Buddhist monk Yiqing, recorded his visits to Palembang and Kedah in the 7th Century. Read the Early History volume of the Encyclopedia of Malaysia to know more.

Parameswara became a Muslim when he became the first Sultan of Malacca. His subjects, who were practically all Malays before the advent of Malacca as an entrepot, followed him.

The Malays would not have become Thai had there been no visits by Admiral Zheng He. The history of China was one of isolationism, not of foreign conquests and rule of the seas. Except for brief periods, throughout Chinese history the Chinese were forbidden overseas travel. China has no history of foreign conquest and colonisation. Zeng He was sent out on missions of peace and nowhere in the historical records is written of Chinese naval forces sent out to protect the Malacca Sultanate and Kingdom against Thai attacks.

Thai incursions into Kedah and Perak were during a much later period than of Zheng He. So were the incursions and conflicts with the Thais since the time of the kingdom of Langkasuka which existed in the present-daya Patani area well before the arrival of Zheng He. Patani became a part of Thailand only in the 19th century.

You need to distinguish the reliable from the non-reliable information that you Google about. You should be aware that, for example, Wikipedia is information that can be edited and changed by practically anybody as can be seen from the various “edit” comments on the articles. It may result in unscrupulous and ill-intended people writing unacceptable views being googled. In one instance, for example, it was said that the Malays caused the Larut Wars of the 19th Century when in fact the wars started from the Chinese secret societies, thugs and gangsters killing their opposite numbers in the rivalry between the Ghee Hin and the Hai San clans doing tin mining there.

31 05 2010
Eyes Only


I “pening” reading your firsy para… what are you trying to tell?

1 06 2010
SSS Admin

Perhaps he disagrees with the notion of integration via religious conversion. But nobody is talking about that. If the writer of the first article implies that, he is not being realistic.

This is a multi-racial country. The status quo in terms of religious affiliation of Malaysians must be left intact. That’s why there were protests against the use of the word “Allah” because of perceived conversion purposes. There should not be any missionary activities on any body, including Orang Asli and Bumiputeras of Sabah and Sarawak who also have their own original religious beliefs. They may convert to other religions only out of their own volition.

Similarly, those practising Confucianism, Buddhism, Taoism, Hiduism and so on. Let them continue with their religious beliefs without any attempt by any others to convert them into any other religion. Integration has to be via other means.

30 05 2010

Ya, apa lagi yang dia orang mahu? Sudah dapat kerakyatan masakan mereka semua tidak bernegara (stateless) diseluruh Bretes merintah dulu. Dapat bantuan Bretes berniaga. Dapat kaya begitu banyak, kontrol ekonomi.

Hak Istimewa Melayu pun nak dendamkan. Pada hal itu balasan bagi kerakyatan diaorang. Dah dapat kuasa, ada berapa Menteri diaorang sekarang. Nak kuasa lebih lagi. Melampau nampaknya.

31 05 2010

salam… beginilah, wawasan satu negara bangsa wajar didokong setiap warga. Rukun Negara menjadi asasnya perlu diterima tertanam disanubari dan dapat dizahirkan dengan bangganya menjadi warga pertiwi. Indonesia dan Thailand adalah contoh yang menunjukkan rakyatnya bangga dan lantang mengatakan mereka adalah bangsa Indonesia ataupun Thailand. Perundangan yang wujud serta langkah2 yang diambil berkesan. Singapura dikuasai keturunan Tionghua/Cina, tidak amal vernacular. Tetapi, keturunan Tionghua/Cina ketara mengasingkan masyarakat mereka bagai wujud daerah autonomi. Masyarakat ini jelas amat pentingkan diri dgn pelbagai tindakan melampau yang berunsurkan sikap tidak sedar diri, tamak, jahat utk kemewahan secara rakus, tidak adil, melanggar undang2, dan seumpamanya. Mereka tidak kenang budi, dan telah diberi ruang utk khidupan di Tanah Melayu. Keturunan dari India juga mengambil pendekatan sama. Perihal pelembagaan berkaitan Melayu dan Islam wajib dihormati. Ia bukan merampas hak tetapi pertahanankan yang sedikit ibarat kek dibahagi.. yg tinggal sedikit kepunyaan sendiri agar tidak diambil org setelah sbhgian besar, telah diambil secara baik atau tidak. Yang kbanyakkan membinasakan kelestarian hidup dan keseimbangan alamsekitar. mereka tidak mahu mengakui / terima benarnya tanggapan sebegini yang ketara dilakukan semacam warisan leluhur. Allah lebih mengetahui sesuatu. sekian, terima kasih

1 06 2010
SSS Admin


Rukun Negara, Perlembagaan, Kontrak Sosial perlu dihormati oleh semua rakyat Malaysia. Melayu hormatkan hak kerakyatan bukan Melayu dan bukan Melayu hormatkan Kedudukan Istimewa Melayu. Ini perlu disebut dan diulang selagi mana yang perlu. Tidak ada so’al bosan mendengarnya sebab selagi diperkatakan perlu diberi penerangan selanjutnya.

Tiada siapa meminta integrasi secara Thai, Indonesia dan Filipina dimana pendatang terpaksa menggunakan nama tempatan, memakai pakaian tempatan dan sebagainya. Dan menerima hakikat bahawa mereka pendatang dan tidak perlu sensitif diatas penggunaan kalimah tersebut. Pendatang perlu hormat dan patuh kapada Perlembagaan negara sepenuhnya. British telah mengatakan bahawa Hak Istimewa Melayu telah ada sediakala – “since day one” dan diakui mereka sejak mula berhubung dengan negara ini. Jika tidak menghormati dan patuh kapada Perlembagaan, integrasi menjadi masalah besar dan keharmonian negara retak.

Pemerintah mempunyai berbagai kuasa undang-undang untuk menentukan rakyat hidup berlunaskan dan tidak melanggar peruntukan-peruntukan Perlembagaan. Termasuk Akta Hasutan, ISA, Akta Polis dan sebagainya. Hanya so’al sejauh mana Pemerintah sanggup menggunakan kuasa tersebut. Membiarkan tindakan melampau akan memecah apa yang retak. Kita tidak mahu peristiwa 13 Mei 1969 berlaku lagi. Maka setiap pihak harus berwaspada dan membuat apa sahaja bagi mengelakkannya.

31 05 2010
SSS Admin


Inilah masalanya yang perlu dibincang dan diperkatakan. Sabenarnya Hak Istimew Melayu dibawah Perkara 153 Perlembagaan itu tidak boleh diungkit, perso’al atau pertikaikan sebab ia dilindung dibawah Akta Hasutan. Mereka yang membuat demikain boleh diheret ke mahkamah dan didakwa dibawah Akta tersebut. Kerajaan yang lemah dipemerintahan yang lalu, yang digelar “flip flopping, auto-piloting and sleeping” telah membiarkan perbincangan dalam perkara ini.

Maka melanda-ladalah sekarang mereka yang tidak minat dengannya. Mereka tidak menghormatkan Kontrak Sosial diantara pemimpin-pemimpin Melayu yang telah menyetujukan kerakyatan bagi bukan Melayu dan, sebagaibalasan baginya, pemimpin-pemimpin bukan Melayu menyetujui Kedudukan Istimewa bagi orang Melayu.

Sabenarnya, telah diperkatakan oleh Setiausaha Jajahan (Colonial Secretary) British diParlimen Britain dimasa membincangan Kemerdekaan Malaya dalam tahun 50an bahawa Kedudukan Istimewa Melayu itu telah ada sediakala – “from day one”, katanya. Diakui Britain sejak mula mereka mempunyai hubungan dengan negara ini beratus tahun dahulu. Maka apa yang dimaktubkan diPerlembagaan negara Malaya pada masa itu adalah pengesahan diatasnya. Maka dengan itu hak kerakyatan bukan Melayu juga telah dikanunkan juga didalam Perlembagaan. Tidak ada tolak ansur didalam perkara ini. Jika Hak Istimewa itu diperso’alkan, maka hak kerakyatan anak cucu bukan Melayu itu juga boleh diso’al, dan ini tidak baik bagi kesejahteraan negara.

Mestilah ada pendirian berpatutan dikalangan mereka yang sudah menguasai ekonomi negara dan mempunyai kekayaan dan majoriti jawatan didalam bidang professional dinegara ini. Tidak eloklah jika mereka ternampak sebagai mahukan kesemuanya, atau mahukan lebih, lebih dan lebih, sentiasanya. Kita mesti meikirkan hidup saling menhormati dan bersama-sama menghormati Kontrak Sosial dan Perlembagaan negara.

30 05 2010
Orang Muda

Writer No. 4 says, ” High achievers of all races living overseas are demanding for meritocracy and equal opportunity before they return. Non-governmental organizations comprising of members from all races are calling for reforms with fiercer urgency. Every day cases are being filed in the courts by people of different races challenging laws and decisions on Constitutional grounds”.

But he has not given any examples, any names, any proofs of what he says. I know those things exist or take place but the extent of it is highly questionable. This man appears to be a glib talker and shoots from the hip.

31 05 2010
Eyes Only

perhaps afraid to show themselves???

1 06 2010
Tuan Tanah

Yo Eyes Only,

What the heck are they afraid of? There’s no ISA or Sedition Act there lah! Malaysian laws have got no jurisdiction there lah. That’s why the ball-less RPK can issue his meaningless and dumb challenge to the Government to try him in UK courts.

Those traitors should grow some balls.

1 06 2010

Mebbe they are the eunuch type … no balls … all potong one … swoosh ….. no anything down there …… Not acceptable to PKR boss oso.

But they carry a lot of balls … those who pay them …… stay nice apartment beside Hyde Park, I hear

2 06 2010
SSS Admin

Tuan Tanah,

Perhaps those people are afraid of coming out from “safe haven” like the UK which have allowed all sorts of dissidents, particularly from communist countries, for over a hundred years. Some have been genuine political refugees while others include economic migrants, crooks, money launderers and others. They include dictators like the 80 year-old ex-general Argentinian President who was eventually sent back, tried and jailed in his own country.

Challenging the Malaysian Government to try him in UK Courts is a ridiculous idea. The Malaysian Government can try extradition proceedings against the man. But the apparent frenzy of getting votes by showing liberalism in various aspects of Malaysian life, including the economy, as seen in the words and actions of the present leadership, suggests that being a remote possibility. The “flip flopping, auto-piloting and sleepy” administration of the previous government has led to a situation where not only traitors but also the leaders of the present government needing to grow balls. The Sedition Act needs to be applied against the increasingly rampant utterances against subjects protected by that Act in newspapers, blogosphere and elsewhere. Unity requires all sectors of the population to observe the limits of freedom always.

1 06 2010
SSS Admin

Orang Muda,

It is a moot point whether those who do not accept the Social Contract and do not respect the Constitution of the country – elements of the Social contract are embodied in the Constitution – should be expected to return or not. After all, the Constitution must be the basis for determining loyalty to one’s country. And disloyal citizens are not welcomed by fellow citizens of any country.

“Meritocracy and equal opportunity” must take into account Article 153 on the Malay Special Position. It was not placed into the Constitution just for the fun of it or just for convenience. The British colonial masters who drafted our constitution said the Malay Special Position had been there “since day one” and it was written into the Constitution to reaffirm it and as a quid pro quo to the citizenship for the non-Malays who were stateless all those years under British rule and before.

31 05 2010
Abdullah Hukum

What is this art Harun guy trying to say? Whose agenda is he on? Talking about conversion during Abbasid Dynasty and saying,

“Notice what Abu Ishaq said. Is it not the same with the “pendatang” and “second class” pronouncements here? Notice Abu Ishaq’s rave that the Jews are rich and well off. Is it not the same with statements made by some of our leaders — past and present — and the likes of Perkasa?

Sure it’s not the same. That was maybe nearly a thousand years ago. Does he not realise the actual situation in this country to-day? These people not recognising the Social Contract and not respecting Article 153 of the Constitution. They’ll not be talking about “second class” treatment if they accept what their grandfathers had agreed on the Special Position of the Malays and that it was in consideration of the citizenship agreed to for them.

1 06 2010
SSS Admin

Abdullah Hukum,

There are people who get carried away with so-called liberalism and becoming pseudo-liberals and neo-intellectuals in this country. And with those having the inclination to say whatever they like, whenever they like, that had arisen under the past administration which has been referred to as “flip-flopping, auto-piloting and sleepy”. It had caused such confusion and resentment among the rakyat that that administration suffered a huge blow during the 2008 General Elections.

It is a matter of the views expressed being genuine liberalism or representing the views of those who do not accept the Social Contract and respect the Constitution. It is plainly not liberalism if it is the latter. Enough has been said in the comments and replies in this and the earlier post. The Malay Special Position was in exchange for citizenship for the non-Malays. Being sensitive to the word “pendatang” reflects lack of knowledge or non acceptance of the facts of history. Feeling “second class” stems from not accepting the Social Contract and not respecting and living by the Constitution.

1 06 2010

Agree completely with

i. Integration comes with a complete understanding and acceptance of different cultural background and faiths;

ii. Integration exists in periods of peace and security when everyone of different races does not have any kind of racial fear or complexes;

iii. Integration is fragile. It has to be constantly and consistently nurtured and practised. We have to continuously be conscious of our neighbour’s sensitivities, needs and limitations;

iv. Its fragility may see it destroyed in a few moments. Political or personal agenda (Abu Ishaq’s envy); religious agenda (Isaac’s scheme); unnecessary or unbridled nationalism (Harun al Rasyid’s war against the Byzantine); hatred and bigotry (Abu Ishaq’s declaration).


i. Who does what, unto whom, how, when and where, now?

ii. Who causes the fears and complexes and what do we do to reduce them?

iii. How to get everybody, at least most people, respect neighbours’ sensitivities, needs and limitations?

iv. Political, personal, religious agenda. Hatred and bigotry. How to control them, especially in a multi-racial society?

Aren’t all communities now involved? Isn’t politics a major factor?

1 06 2010
SSS Admin


Very pertinent questions you have raised there and wonder why the writer has not offered rather comprehensive views on them. They cover a whole host of issues and too long to address them all in one reply here.

Politics is definitely a major factor and perhaps a lot to blame for the situation we are in now. This unbridled zealousness for votes irrespective of the implications of many of the politicians’ words and actions. They range from blaming anything and everything not fitting with their political agenda, to supporting communist terrorist Chin Peng’s wish to enter Malaysia, to offering cash to vernacular schools whose existence run counter to Article 152 of the Constitution on Bahasa Malaysia as the National Language, to letting be seditious words and actions rather than apply the Sedition Act, and the erosion of the moral fibre of society especially since the time of the previous Prime Minister.

Some claiming lack of freedom and equality, others in the name of trying to get back the run-away votes of the 2008 General Elections which were disastrous to some political parties. The net result appears to be increasing polarisation among the races, the lack of respect for the Constitution of the country. If no firm and effective measures are taken, the situation may get worse and it may affect the political stability of the country, so necessary for foreign investment and the development towards a developed nation status.

Let us keep asking those questions and offer constructive views from time to time. We must have mutual respect and the closing of ranks, owning up the mistakes and weaknesses of one another so that we can see light at the end of the tunnel.

1 06 2010

O mak tuan hai, dah lama tak kemari, sekarang tengok macama macam depa cakap.

Nak sanggah Sultan lah, so’al hal do’akan Sultan salepas solat Jumaatlah. Kan hasutan tu? Kan raja-raja menjalankan tugas ikut Perlembagaan dan dilindung Akta Hasutan.

Hormatlah sikit. Umpamanya, Sultan Perak tu dulu Ketua Hakim Negara. Takkan apa yang dia lakukan ikut sesuka saja. Sipenulis ni lulus ape?

Penulis itu harus diheret keBalai Polis.

2 06 2010
SSS Admin


Hanya mereka yang sonsang pendirian Melayunya, yang gilakan kuasa hingga tidak sedarkan akar usul bangsanya, atau pseudo liberal dan neo-intellectual kerana terpengaruh oleh pemikiran Barat dengan tidak sedarkan Barat pun tidak sabenarnya begitu liberal, yang coba mengungkit sistem Raja Berperlembagaan negara kita.

Mereka nampaknya juga terbawa-bawa dengan pendirian terpesong yang suatu ketika dahulu berkata tidak masuk syurga jika mengundi kafir tetapi kebelakangan ini tidur sebantal dengan kafir. Politik yang telah menyumbang terhadap perpecahan Melayu. Sayang sekali.

Maka dengan berpecahnya Melayu berkucar kacirlah keadaan dinegara ini. Maka ditambah pula dengan perpecahan dimasyarakat Cina dan India. Bukan sahaja didalam gabungan parti pemerintah, juga gabungan parti pembangkang. Dengan itu bertambah susahlah mencapai perpaduan negara. Namun demikian kita perlu berusaha sedaya upaya untuk mendapatkan perpaduan.

1 06 2010

Ha, apa lagi yang deme mau? Tak habis, habis. Asyik nak lagi, nak lagi.

“Ambil perhatian serius dan sepenuhnya surat-surat yang dikemukakan oleh Dong Jiao Zong dan cuba buat penambahbaikan dalam semua proses,” tulis Mai Siang.

Mau saje. Beri undi tak mau. Ajak bersatu tak mau. Bahasa Malaysia tak mau pakai. Mana nak bersatu macam ni.

Melayu amacam?

2 06 2010
SSS Admin


Menyatu padukan rakyyat adalah tanggung jawab semua rakyat yang sayangkan negara. Mana yang tidak sayangkan negara tidak ta’at kapada negara. Mana yang tidak ta’at, terutamanya dari segi hormat kapada Perlembagaan, perlu memikirkan bumi mana yang mereka mahu pijak.

Mereka yang gusar kapada dasar-dasar Kerajaan boleh bersuara. Asalkan tidak memperso’alkan peruntukan Perlembagaan yang dilindungi Akta Hasutan. Mereka yang tidak menghormati Bahasa Kebangsaan dan mahukan Mandarin dan Tamil sebagai bahasa pengantar disekolah-sekolah bertentangan dengan Perkara 152 Perlembagaan. Ini nyata salah sebab kata-kata diPerkara 152 itu nyata. Hal bahawa sekolah vernakular itu sudah ada sejak Merdeka tidak bermakna ianya betul.

Kita perlu mencari pemimpin yang tegas dan berani menyelesaikan masalah sekolah vernakular ini. Yang sanggup mengambil tindakan supaya sekolah vernakular diserapkan kedalam sistem sekolah kebangsaan dan menggunakan Bahasa Malaysia sebagai bahasa pengantar.

1 06 2010

Ada di anatara artikel di atas menyalahkan sesuatu keadaan yang berlaku itu kepada soal bantuan. Dia menulis:-

Keadaan ini berlaku kerana pendidikan kita terpisah kepada dua kategori iaitu bantuan penuh dan bantuan separuh.

Betul ke pendidikan sengaja dipisahkan kepada dua kategori bantuan penuh dan bantuan separuh?

Ataupun kategori tersebut itu TERWUJUD kerana adanya Pendidikan Kebangsaan dan pada waktu yang sama Pendidikan Asing dibenarkan wujud juga?

Kenapa Kerajaan harus bagi apa-apa bantuan sekalipun kepada PENDIDIKAN ASING ini?

Itu ada juga bantuan walaupun separuh. Yang sepatutnya, LANGSUNG TAK ADA BANTUAN kepada Penidikan PENDATANG ini!!

Apa kabar BAPAK VERNAKULAR yang memporak perandakan sistem pendidikan kebangsaan ini?

2 06 2010
SSS Admin


Apa yang dikatakan sistem pendidikan dimasa penjajahan British dahulu membernarkan sekolah vernakular. Sabenarnya, tidak ada sistem dizaman penjajahan British. Mereka ikut sesuai (convenience) sahaja memberi pendidikan ala kadar dikebanyakan tempoh penjajahan mereka. Wang cukai dan sebagainya dihantar keEngland sebanyak mana yang boleh bagi menampong keperluan kerajaan Britain. Maka sekolah Cina yang dibina dan dijalankan dengan pembiyaan sendiri tentulah dibiarkan pemerintah British.

Tetapi dimasa Merdeka, terutamanya bila Bahasa Melayu (sekarang Bahasa Malaysia) dijadikan Bahasa Kebangsaan, pemimpin-pemimpin tidak menyelesaikan masalah sekolah vernakular itu. Juga kerana ikut sesuai atau convenience. Tahun demi tahun, penggal demi penggal pemerintahan Malaya Merdeka dan kemudiannya Malaysia, masalah itu disapu kebawah tikar.

Maka sekarang diberi bantuan wang tunai oleh Najib dari masa kemasa, terutamanya dipilihan raya. Kemaruknya kapada undi begitu meningkat. Sehingga banyak Melayu meluat. Juga mereka lain yang sedarkan bahawa sekolah vernakular adalah bertentangan dengan Perkara 152 Perlembagaan berkenaan Bahasa Malaysia sebagai Bahasa Kebangsaan.

2 06 2010

A few words before starting work –

What “lack of press freedom” is the writer talking about? Does he know what press freedom is? Doesn’t he realise that so much rot is talked about in the papers and in blogosphere against articles of the Constitution including that which is protected under the Sedition Act, yet no action has been taken for so long under that Act except a few times like the defacing of the Sultan of Perak’s website last year.

And most Malaysians do not know what is written in the vernacular papers. The few that have been translated and brought to the attention of others in bogs do sound seditious.

3 06 2010
SSS Admin


The fact that the Malaysian system involves annually renewable permits for the newspapers does not mean a lack of press freedom. The press in this country is free to print anything but, like in advanced countries in the world, is subject to limitations on decency, responsibility on truthfulness, accuracy, bias, libel, and – especially in a multi-racial country like Malaysia – sedition. In the West newspapers apply self censorship and and a high degree of responsibility. Ask ourselves to what extent we have those in this country. Ask how many newspapers and how often have they been suspended from publication despite all those. Hardly any.

The fact that there are so many newspapers given permits to publish is another proof that there is press freedom in this country. The number of newspapers serving the interests of the non-Malays are also disproportionate to the those of the Malays who are the majority in this country. The Chinese alone have both English and Chinese language newspapers – Sin Chew Jit Poh, Nanyang Siang Pau, Asia Times (Malaysia) in Sabah, China Press, Guang Ming, Kwong Wah Yit Poh, Oriental Daily News, Overseas Chinese Daily News, See Hua Daily News in Sarawak, United Daily News, the Sun, the Star. The Malays have only Utusan Malaysia and Berita Harian and the non-“wholly-owned” newspapers like New Straits Times dan Malay Mail.

The fact that hardly any action against opinions expressed on the Special Position of the Malays shows the extent of press freedom allowed in this country because that Special Position is protected under the Sedition Act and should not be discussed. Lack of action on seditious remarks and statement is not good as they may cause bottled up feelings on one sector of the population of the country and this is not good for national unity.

2 06 2010

I like what this man writes about what is being Malaysian. I think he is a good, responsible young man.

I agree with him “There are clearly times when it is important for an institution to know someone’s ethnic background, and there are times when it is obviously irrelevant … But it is important, I think, to make it clear that although race should rarely be a relevant issue when it comes to making determinations about an individual person, there are times when it is necessary.”

But being proud of the country “with warts and all” – can we try to remove those warts?

3 06 2010
SSS Admin


Removing warts is being done all the time. Perhaps not enough resources to do, or too many warts, or a lackadaisical attitude towards the warts. We certainly have to do more. The authorities and we as individual citizens.

No country in the world is perfect. The country said to be the most liberal in the world still practises detention without trial in Guantanamo Bay. Look at their immigration policy with respect to Middle Eastern nationals and those bearing Islamic names. A few Muslims blasted the New York Twin Towers for whatever motive and the whole lot of Muslims are made unwelcome to their country.

There needs to be a Malaysian identity and pride in being Malaysian if we are to progress as a united and cohesive nation. We cannot wait until all warts are removed before feeling proud of being one. Warts there will always be because that’s what nature – including that of mankind – will always be. Despite excellence in cosmetic surgery.

That pride arises from loyalty. That loyalty becomes inherent in a person when he/ she respects the Constitution of the country. Let’s all look again at the Constitution, understand the circumstances in the drafting of that august document – the foundation stone and the backbone of the country – respect and live by it fully. When that happens the warts will decrease by themselves. And we expect the authorities to do their part, too.

2 06 2010
Anak Jantan

What in the blazes are you people talking about here and there? Integration via conversion, discrimination, no freedom and such. Nonsense.

It’s plain and simple, man – respect the Social Contract and the Constitution that contains the Social Contract. The deal was: you people get citizenship and the Malays had their Special Position reaffirmed. No two-ways about it.

Fellows up there say the British said the Special Position had been there “since day one”. Now it is in the constitution, and you people got your citizenship, what else do you want? You control the economy and own vast wealth already for crying out loud. Be reasonable, man.

You think the Malays would just sit by and watch you making all sorts of unrealistic and unreasonable demands? No, they wont. So many are already angry at Najib for entertaining you people too much. Perkasa and the 76 Malay NGOs have already spoken. Now the Melayu Bangkit Rally will be held. Listen to what they say and be reasonable. Honour your part of the bargain.

4 06 2010
SSS Admin

Anak Jantan,

Reasonableness is the key factor. Until and unless all Malaysians recognise the Social contract and respect the Constitution, deformities continue in the character of this nation. Grudging and resentment of the kind that led to the racial riots in 1969.

The Special Position was the quid pro quo for citizenship for the non-Malays. The younger generation cannot say that that was agreed to by the leaders at Merdeka and do not concern them. They cannot expect history to begin only from the day they were born or become citizens. That’s unrealistic and unfair. The elders must teach them so.

The political parties must move on the basis of the above said. The opposition must have limits to their demands. Equality has to take into account of the Malay Special Position. True, that was the deal. All must respect the deal. The component parties of the ruling party must also observe those. They cannot be talking like the opposition. There must be decorum and decency among members of a coalition. Otherwise it will lead to a splintering of the coalition. The leader of the coalition should reign in the erring members and get them to tow the party or coalition line. Argue as much as they like within the BN meeting halls etc, but once issues are resolved, the decisions should be adhered to.

These, of course, are the business of the political parties themselves. But of late there has been an increasing need for the public to make them as their business as well.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: