*********************************************************************************************************************
Here are articles from Sin Chew and Utusan Malaysia, etc, that were published by Malaysian Insider. They provide a glimpse of the thinking of the Malays and the non-Malays of one another. One article also provides the views of one Malay on other Malays. Let us see whether they represent mainstream, minority or isolated opinion.
Let us look at them from the point of view of national unity in the country. We believe that national unity must be based on the Constitution, respect for and living by it fully. The Constitution is the highest set of laws in the country, all other laws emanating from it. It is the foundation stone and the backbone of the country. Indeed, the Constitution is the basis of loyalty to the country, of harmony, lasting peace and progress.
Let us discuss them, either in Bahasa Malaysia or in English for maximum readership coverage.
Readers are encouraged to also read the comments and the replies to the comments as well. The meat is not only in the articles but also in the comments and the replies.
Hope you enjoy reading them. You are welcome to comment as well. However short or long the comment may be, you are welcome to participate in these discussions.
However disagreeable your views may be, your comments are guaranteed of being published, subject only to the normal rules of decency, sedition and libel.
**********************************************************************************************************************
Time to get rid of the handout mentality — Lim Mun Fah
June 02, 2010
JUNE 2 — It is simply amazing that there are still people who believe in and are continuing to advocate the so-called doctrine of equal distribution of resources and wealth today.
It is certainly surprising that the Bumiputra economic congress is still insisting on having the quota system.
Equal distribution does not necessary mean equality. These are two different concepts that should be clearly defined to avoid misunderstanding.
Equality refers to an equitable chance for every person in society to compete and share the fruits of efforts.
Equal distribution, meanwhile, is concerned with the equal sharing of resources, including wealth, without considering whether each person has or has not contributed to create or accumulate the resources.
Equality does not blindly allow everyone to enjoy an equal income.
On the contrary, equal distribution requires an exactly the same result for everyone without taking into considerations factors like productivity, efficiency and efforts.
There is no such thing called “no pain, no gain” in the doctrine of equal distribution. Instead, it advocates “sharing the fruits without equal sharing of effort”.
However, different people have different thoughts on living in reality. Their degrees of job involvement are also different.
Some people gain more because they have put in more efforts, and some people are accorded greater respect because they have contributed more to the society.
It is just simple logic that if a person works hard, he would earn more, and if he is lazy and works less, he would earn less, and if he does not work at all, he should not be paid anything. Even there may be differing end results, it does not violate such a principle of fairness.
However, we cannot deny that it is really not easy to create a society with fair competition as there are differences among the people in terms of gender, physical strength, education, intelligence, culture and lifestyle.
Because of such social handicaps among the poor, the underprivileged and vulnerable groups, policies must be made to ensure they are provided with adequate share in the distribution of the nation’s resources and wealth.
Currently, there seems to be an impression and perception that our society is saturated with the “free lunch” mentality, which is even being propagated as a right and privilege which should not be questioned and challenged by anyone.
A really fair policy will ensure that those who are truly in need are the ones who will be given the help and opportunities for education, jobs, and economic advancement.
Instead of just teaching them knowledge, it is better to teach them how to source for and gain knowledge, like teaching to fish, instead of just giving them a fish. They should be provided the resources and opportunity to develop and care for themselves instead of just depending on handouts.
A good government does not promote and practise the Santa Claus culture of just giving, giving, giving. A wise government will guide and lead the people to be responsible for their own well-being by striving to work for their share of the economic pie.
It is simply no use for the government to declare that the country will face bankruptcy one day if it continues with the subsidies and handouts. It must do something positive and viable to reform the mindset of the people, including providing them with the resources and opportunity to take care of themselves. — mysinchew.com
***************
Ibrahim Ali is bigger than Umno — Sakmongkol AK47
June 02, 2010
JUNE 2 — When Datuk Ibrahim Ali convened the meeting of 125 Malay NGOs at PWTC, it’s not them that got me worried. The party whose future is worrying is Umno’s. Umno’s voice has been taken. Its thunder is stolen. It offers no rain, now even its thunder is lost.
That reflects the ambivalent leadership of Umno as a whole. Its credibility isn’t helped by the flip-flopping Umno president who has since turned the much despised flip-flopping behaviour most associated with a former Umno president, into an art form.
Like Ibrahim Ali said — very sorry YAB President.
The Umno president is showing us a new kind of leadership. He is following instead of leading public opinion; a wet-finger-in-the-air type of leader. It’s been a long time since I heard this idiom mentioned until M. Bakri Musa’s most recent essay. Apparently the “wet finger in the air” is an idiom that has a convoluted reason behind it. When someone wets their finger and holds it up, he/she is trying to gauge the direction of the wind flow at that moment. Once they have this piece of knowledge, they could align their decision along with the rest of the majority.
Perhaps the Umno president isn’t aware of this. His unthinking-thinking circle does not update him on public opinion that originates in the street. The street is saying, it’s easy to discern the management style of the PM — he invites people to say their piece on some issue on his Facebook page. He sees which types of comments are in the majority, he decides on that basis. Then he says, he listens to the people. Who’s zooming who baby! (I love Aretha Franklin!)
This blardy finger! The finger one holds out is the index finger. Maybe it’s the 1 Malaysia finger, no? I have wanted to mock this one finger thing for a long time. One finger is not much help if we want to carry out many of our daily life’s tasks. And one finger sure isn’t enough for some other pleasurable and sensuous activity.
Can Umno convene a meeting of the same number of Malay NGO’s? It possibly cannot because Umno has lost so much credibility that its name presently is a byword of hypocrisy. It possibly can’t repeat the feat in 1946 when the original founders of Umno convened a meeting of Malay clubs at Kelab Sultan Sulaiman in Kampung Baru. If Ibrahim Ali had organised his recent convention at the Kelab Sultan Sultan Suleiman, that would be an irony of sorts.
Kelab Sultan Sulaiman is in Selangor (well WP) which is effectively controlled by PKR. That’s already sufficient symbolism about the position of Umno. Its historical link has been captured. But Ibrahim Ali held his Perkasa convention in PWTC, the bastion and inner sanctum of Umno. That Perkasa, which is non Umno, and which now claims to be the preferred voice of the average Malay can hold its convention on a premise owned by Umno, is yet another blow to Umno’s credibility and its fast eroding standing.
I have ridiculed and lampooned Ibrahim Ali for a long time. I am not about to ignore the deliciously wicked pun Mat Sabu has been claiming for a long time — that Mat Sabu is a wee bit handsomer than Ibrahim Ali or that Ibrahim Ali’s poster face would be more at home in the padi fields in Kelantan scaring away the pests and the birds.
But he has this uncanny ability to mobilise raw public opinion and his unsurpassed ability to attract disparate groupings to his cause — whichever fancies him at any one time. For that I have to say — salute! I cannot see any of the Umno leaders rivalling Ibrahim Ali in this department. The Umno Ketua Penerangan who is so forgettable is a babe in the woods compared to Ibrahim Ali.
So go past Ibrahim Ali. Look at the cross section of people who attended the recent Perkasa outing. You see people with skullcaps at the front row, ordinary Malays resplendent in Baju Melayu regalia, etc. You can’t ignore these. Well, you can actually, at your peril!
So significant that it unnerved the Umno president enough to induce him to throw away his prepared speech and he went off the cuff. In the end he has no other defence other than resorting to his incontestable claim that he is after all the son of Tun Razak.
The crowd was hostile to say the least and that serves as barometer to the feelings of the average Malay. If the PM goes ahead trivialising the raw signals from the average Malay, Umno’s future is certainly forfeited.
The only thing remaining now is for Perkasa to remain steadfast and consistent. The weakest link paradoxically is with Ibrahim Ali himself.
Therefore, it’s certainly comforting to hear that the various NGOs came out with their own individual resolution — that if Ibrahim Ali deviated from this struggle, they would harpoon him and have him politically impaled like Vlad the Impaler did to his enemies.
And I hope Ibrahim Ali doesn’t see the PM on the side and whisper — Boss, don’t worry, that is only a show or worse, he sees the PM individually and apologised for his forthrightness during the Perkasa event. Ibrahim Ali is capable of that. — sakmongkol.blogspot.com
* Sakmongkol AK47 is the nom de plume of Datuk Mohd Ariff Sabri Hj Abdul Aziz. He was Pulau Manis assemblyman(2004-2008).
****************
Two different types of Malays — Tay Tian Yan
June 01, 2010
JUNE 1 — Datuk Ibrahim Ali is a type of Malay who places very high emphasis on himself. He dismissed Amirsham Abdul Aziz as a traitor to the Malays because the New Economic Model (NEM) he proposed had betrayed the Malay race.
Ibrahim said genuine Malays would never turn their back against the New Economic Policy (NEP).
Based on his reasoning, if the government were to go ahead with the New Economic Model, the relevant leaders would no longer qualify as Malays.
In the end, there is only one Malay in this world.
Ibrahim Ali.
Oh yes, plus a handful of other people like Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.
The Malays in these people’s eyes are living in a unique space insulated from the outside world, where there are no tests for survival nor challenges.
So long as they confine themselves to this solitary capsule, they are most definitely safe and blessed.
These people believe that their wealth had been pre-destined, not created, and they therefore are entitled to 67 per cent of the national wealth based on the percentage of Bumiputeras in this country.
Such allocation theory once existed in the communist world, but then how much could be proportioned when a communist state goes bust?
If this country became cash-strapped some day, how much could these people get even if they could claim the entire economic cake?
Ibrahim did not think about this, or he simply rejected the thinking of this issue.
Amirsham is the NEAC chairman. I was there when he was briefing the media about the NEM.
He, too, is a Malay, a whole lot more good-looking and gentleman-like compared to that Ibrahim.
He admitted that the decades-long implementation of the NEP had drastically eroded the country’s competitiveness.
He told everyone Malaysia had no other options but to transform itself.
The NEM does not define a Bumiputera quota, for it is an outdated notion. The Bumi quota has failed to help the Malays grow, making them feel complacent and dejected instead, besides exhausting the nation’s vast resources.
Only by pursuing meritocracy and improving the country’s competitiveness can we get to become a high-income country. And when the majority of Malays can share the fruit of our economic success, even a goreng pisang vendor can look forward to much improved income.
Amirsham is not a politician by training. He is a banking professional who pursues nothing but the truth.
He does not speak in a fanciful and inciting manner, but has provided all the necessary evidence to prove his point.
You can say he has done this for the sake of Malaysia, and the Malays.
He belongs to that type of Malay whom I hold in very high regard.
When he proposed the NEM to the prime minister, he said admittingly that this was the furthest his authority could stretch.
In other words, whether the government will accept and implement his proposals will have to be decided by the government itself.
And Ibrahim said in front of Najib that the NEP was drawn up by his late father Tun Abdul Razak, and he was in no position to compromise or give up.
Najib responded that the NEM was only an economist’s proposal, not the government’s ultimate stand, and that the government was still consulting the Malays’ views.
Indeed, Najib should lend his ears to the Malays… but to people like Ibrahim Ali or Amirsham?
While no one should overlook the views of the Malays, the views of all Malaysians should be more paramount. — mysinchew.com
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/breakingviews/article/two-different-types-of-malays-tay-tian-yan/
**************
MPM tidak rasis — Ibrahim Ali
May 31, 2010
31 MEI — Pada 30 Mac 2010, Perdana Menteri memperkenalkan Model Ekonomi Baru (MEB) yang memfokuskan keutamaannya kepada perjuangan “menangani masalah jurang pendapatan dan membasmi kemiskinan tanpa mengira kaum” di Malaysia.
Ini sesuatu yang baik kerana MEB yang dicipta demi negara dan rakyat jelata juga mencerminkan keprihatinan serta kecanggihan inisiatif dasar dan strategi kepimpinan negara hari ini terhadap ekonomi, perdagangan dan perindustrian dalam era globalisasi.
Tetapi, MEB yang digubal oleh Majlis Penasihat Ekonomi Negara (MPEN) itu gagal mewujudkan polisi yang jelas untuk menjadikan pembangunan ekonomi Bumiputera sebagai agenda nasional walaupun Bumiputera merupakan penduduk terbesar dan terkebelakang di Malaysia.
Oleh sebab itulah, Majlis Perundingan Melayu (MPM) menganjurkan Kongres Ekonomi Bumiputera (Kongres) pada 29 Mei 2010 untuk mengkaji MEB dan memastikan bahawa soal Melayu dan Bumiputera tetap dipelihara dan terus diperjuangkan menerusi MEB selaras dengan Fasal 153 Perlembagaan Persekutuan.
Dalam konteks ini, Kongres berpendapat, agenda Bumiputera di dalam MEB mestilah tegas dan jelas supaya para pelaksananya lebih fokus dan terarah bagi memastikan Bumiputera maju seiring dengan kaum-kaum lain. Ini akan menjamin keadilan sosial dan keharmonian kaum di Malaysia.
MEB juga perlu membuka jalan baru dan peluang kedua yang dinamik untuk membolehkan Bumiputera mengejar kemajuan yang terlepas akibat kelemahan cara pelaksanaan dasar-dasar dahulu.
Seterusnya, MEB perlu memajukan ekonomi Bumiputera menerusi dasar, strategi dan program yang telus supaya ia difahami oleh rakyat Malaysia berbilang keturunan dan supaya Bumiputera tidak terpinggir dalam era globalisasi.
Kongres prihatin terhadap aspek ini kerana globalisasi mewujudkan pelbagai impak dan implikasi besar kepada masyarakat, politik, dan ekonomi di sesebuah negara.
Ini kerana globalisasi adalah antara kuasa global yang baru menjelma dan boleh mengancam survival sesebuah negara dan rakyat, jika tidak ditangani secara komprehensif dan bijaksana. Oleh sebab itulah, dinamika globalisasi perlu dianalisis daripada perspektif politik, ekonomi dan keselamatan. Ia juga wajar dikupas menerusi pelbagai paradigma.
Contohnya, pendukung paradigma realisme membahaskan globalisasi dari sudut penghakisan primasi dan kedaulatan sesebuah negara.
Para pendukung teori kritikal pula mengajak kita berfikir, sama ada globalisasi mencipta ketidakseimbangan ekonomi, dan melebarkan lagi jurang perbezaan ekonomi antara rakyat jelata di sesebuah negara
Lantaran itulah Kongres berharap Perdana Menteri sentiasa prihatin akan impak globalisasi dan MEB kepada orang Melayu dan Bumiputera di Malaysia.
Kongres memfokus kepada aspek ini kerana hasil perincian terhadap MEB mendapati bahawa di dalam usahanya mempromosikan pasaran bebas dan supaya selaras dengan tuntutan globalisasi, MEB telah menafikan wujudnya fenomena kegagalan pasaran dalam bentuk eksploitasi dan monopoli kaum Cina di Malaysia.
Fenomena eksploitasi ini dianalisis oleh Amy Chua dari Yale Law School, sebagai market-dominant minority.
Dalam bukunya, World On Fire, Amy Chua mendapati bahawa market-dominant minority dalam kalangan orang Cina di Asia Tenggara telah mengakibatkan peristiwa ngeri, rusuhan kaum dan menyebabkan ketidakstabilan di beberapa buah negara.
Antaranya, Amy Chua menegaskan, market- dominant minority boleh menyebabkan backlashatau kesan libasan kepada tiga sektor utama iaitu libasan kepada pasaran, kepada demokrasi dan terhadap market-dominant minority itu sendiri.
Kongres tidak mahu senario negatif seperti itu berlaku di Malaysia pada hari mendatang.
Oleh itu, cadangan MEB meliberalisasikan sepenuhnya semua sektor perniagaan, perdagangan, perindustrian dan kewangan di Malaysia, tanpa mengambil kira kepentingan Bumiputera dan negara, perlu ditolak dan dibatalkan. Ini kerana Amerika Syarikat (AS) sebagai sebuah negara yang cukup percaya dengan pasaran bebas pun kini sedang mengkaji semula dasar liberalisasi dan pasaran bebas.
AS berbuat demikian kerana dasar bebas itu menyebabkan AS mengalami kemelesetan ekonomi.
Pada waktu yang sama, Kongres juga mendapati bahawa para penggubal MEB mencadangkan agar Suruhanjaya Kesaksamaan Peluang atau Equal Opportunity Commission (EOC) ditubuhkan bagi memastikan tidak wujud diskriminasi dan ketidakadilan di Malaysia.
Penubuhan EOC ini membayangkan seolah-olah semua rakyat di Malaysia mempunyai peluang yang sama. Hakikat ini bertentangan dengan Fasal 153 Perlembagaan Persekutuan.
Oleh itu, Kongres berharap penubuhan EOC ini dikaji semula. Ini kerana Kongres bimbang kewujudan EOC ini akan digunakan oleh bukan Bumiputera semaksimum yang mungkin untuk menuntut pelbagai kesamarataan hak dan keadilan termasuk yang termaktub dalam Fasal 153.
Kongres memberikan pandangan ini dengan tujuan membuka mata dan minda seluruh rakyat Malaysia baik bangsa Melayu, Bumiputera dan lain-lainnya, bahawa dasar-dasar ekonomi seperti Dasar Ekonomi Baru (DEB), Dasar Pembangunan Nasional (DPN), dan kini MEB, bukannya dasar perkauman.
Dasar seperti ini dilaksanakan di Republik Rakyat China, India, Scandinavia dan di negara-negara Kesatuan Eropah. Bezanya, cuma dasar-dasar di negara berkenaan tidak dikenali sebagai DEB, DPN atau MEB.
Pakar-pakar ekonomi dan sains sosial kontemporari menggelarkan dasar-dasar ala-DEB di negara asing itu sebagai dasar Growth with Equity, Inclusive Growth, Broad Based Growth dan Equitable Growth.
Oleh itu, usaha Kongres membincangkan MEB dengan fokus kepada Bumiputera juga bukannya inisiatif rasis atau perkauman. Kongres mengambil inisiatif ini berlandaskan matlamat mewujudkan perpaduan menerusi kepelbagaian dan berasaskan kepada perjuangan pejuang-pejuang kemerdekaan tanah air menerusi Perlembagaan Persekutuan.
Kongres juga bertindak berasaskan Perkara 153, Rukun Negara, prinsip dan amalan demokrasi, keluhuran undang-undang dan selaras dengan Piagam Hak-Hak Asasi Manusia Sejagat 1948.
Pendek kata, Kongres menitikberatkan isu Bumiputera di dalam MEB ini kerana ia selaras dengan aspirasi Allahyarham Tun Razak yang menyatakan seperti berikut:
“Kerajaan sedar bahawa perpaduan negara tidak akan wujud sekiranya kedudukan ekonomi yang tidak seimbang di kalangan rakyat pelbagai kaum tidak diatasi dan kemajuan serta kemakmuran negara tidak dinikmati dengan lebih adil dan saksama”.
Kenyataan Allahyarham Tun Razak ini mempunyai maksud yang dalam. Beliau menitikberatkan aspek keselamatan serta survival bangsa Melayu, pribumi, keturunan Cina, keturunan India dan lain-lainnya di tanah air yang merdeka ini.
Namun begitu, masih ada sesetengah pemimpin politik yang sengaja mengeksploitasikan isu-isu seperti DEB, DPN dan lain-lainnya, kononnya sebagai isu perkauman.
Dalam konteks itu, Kongres jelaskan dengan tegasnya bahawa dasar-dasar kerajaan yang mesra kepada pelabur dan komuniti ekonomi swasta di Malaysia selama ini, adalah dasar-dasar yang sebenarnya menguntungkan sektor swasta bukan Bumiputera.
Terdapat dua faktor utama membuktikan hakikat ini. Pertama, dasar-dasar pelaburan dan perdagangan kerajaan telah memudahkan modal swasta tempatan yang dikuasai oleh keturunan Cina mengambil alih ekuiti yang sebelum ini dikuasai oleh pemodal asing.
Kedua, sektor swasta Malaysia menerima subsidi yang besar daripada kerajaan pada anggaran AS$80 bilion setahun.
Jumlah subsidi tahunan ini mengatasi jumlah wang yang dibelanjakan oleh kerajaan untuk melaksanakan pelbagai tindakan afirmatif untuk orang Melayu dan Bumiputera.
Hakikat ini sekali lagi membuktikan bahawa dasar-dasar ekonomi dan perdagangan kerajaan Malaysia bukannya rasis atau perkauman. Malangnya, subsidi yang besar ini tidak menerima maklum balas yang positif daripada sektor swasta tersebut sama ada kepada kerajaan, orang Melayu dan Bumiputera.
Sebaliknya, subsidi besar ini dibalas dengan diskriminasi sektor swasta bukan Melayu terhadap tenaga kerja bangsa Melayu dan Bumiputera.
Anehnya, tidak ada ahli politik bukan Melayu yang bersuara mengenai hal ini. Mereka membisu terhadap perkara ini. Tetapi, mereka juga terus mengkritik kerajaan secara selektif demi kepentingan perkauman mereka yang sempit.
Pastinya tindakan seperti ini negatif dan tidak menyumbang kepada pembinaan bangsa dan perpaduan kaum.
Oleh itu, Kongres memohon jasa baik Perdana Menteri supaya membetulkan diskriminasi seperti ini menerusi MEB.
Dalam konteks ini, Kongres mencadangkan supaya Pelan Induk Perindustrian Ketiga membetulkan paksi penciptaan peluang-peluang pekerjaan di Malaysia supaya tidak menindas orang Melayu dan Bumiputera.
Kedua-dua golongan ini perlu diberikan peluang di semua tahap pekerjaan di sektor swasta daripada tahap eksekutif sehingga ke tahap buruh kolar biru.
Inilah antara jalan pintas untuk mengurangkan kadar kemiskinan dan meningkatkan permintaan secara efektif. Inilah jalan pintasnya kerana tanpa pekerjaan, bermakna pengangguran dan kemiskinan akan terus wujud. — Utusan Malaysa
* Datuk Ibrahim Ali ialah Ahli Parlimen Pasir Mas
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/breakingviews/article/mpm-tidak-rasis-ibrahim-ali/
Kempen SSS 
It cannot be mainstream opinion – that writer talking about equal distribution of wealth. Under the NEP Malays have been talking only for 30% corporate wealth, though not yet counting other forms of wealth. But if the writer talks about equal wealth, I don’t mind. In fact Malays are 60% of the population. Should have 60% wealth in all aspects of the economy.
And don’t talk about the Chinese paying the most tax. The Inland Revenue figures show that the Chinese pay only about 30% tax. 40% is paid by Government-linked companies (GLCs) and the rest by Malays, Indians and other Malaysians. Also the foreign companies.
azmi,
The writer is trying to insinuate that the Malays do not deserve the assistance given them by the Government, by also saying “There is no such thing called “no pain, no gain” in the doctrine of equal distribution. Instead, it advocates “sharing the fruits without equal sharing of effort”. He forgot that there might have been “no Special Position, no citizenship”. They already have got citizenship and must therefore honour their part of the bargain – respect the Malay Special Position.
It has been said time and again in the comments to the previous post that the British Colonial Secretary told the British Parliament when discussing the Malaya Independence Bill in the 1950s that the Malay Special Position has always been there “since day one” and was acknowledged and recognized by the British since the time of their first contacts with this country. It was written into the Constitution to reaffirm that Special Position.
The Chinese in China also had a system of quotas given to the disadvantaged. The Manchu Emperors (foreigners who conquered and ruled China for hundreds of years until the 20th Century) allotted 25% of the Civil Service posts to the southerners who were considered “disadvantaged” compared to the northerners. The writer should have learnt the history of China and not grudge the Malays getting assistance because they are disadvantaged in this country as a result of 80 years of British colonial rule which hardly helped them or encouraged them in business and did not build sufficient schools and no English schools (the passport to success at that time) in the kampongs – unlike what they did for the Chinese. The British colonialists decided that the Malays should concentrate on food production in the country and therefore made to remain as farmers and fishermen only.
What handout mentality you talk about ha … what equality you want ha …. You don’t kira Malays Special Position ha …… Why you got citizenship allely now you want everything tak kila others ha …Don’t like that la …. Be fair la … patut patut one la …… Don’t glab glab glab kind la ………………….. You manya kaya allely lor … Banyak pandai pandai allely lor … Blitish manyak tolong lu lor … tatak tolong Mulayu lor … sikolah Inglet pu tak mau kasi lor …
Kura,
True, the Chinese own a vast amount of wealth in this country. They control the economy of this country. The control is such that they can effectively refuse co-operation in the development of Malay businesses from retail to wholesale to manufacturing to distribution to import and export. The list of billionaires in this country is full of Chinese.
They had been given the “Tongkat” or assistance as well. Look at where Robert Kuok would have been if not for the AP permits to import sugar, the license to manufacture or refine locally, and Vincent Tan, if not for the myriad of permits, licenses, approvals and projects given him since Tun Daim’s time. And he is still getting it – the latest being the football betting license.
Now, let’s not go into semantics of what constitutes Tongkat. What is important is they should give their co-operation to the effort to bridge the gap in wealth and help bring about unity. For those who don’t, the least they can do is let the Government provide the facilities for the bridging of the gap. The Malays in the GLCs etc work hard to earn their keeps and GLCs contribute 40% of tax collected – more than the 30% from the Chinese. As a community, they are still far behind economically and educationally. If the uncooperative Chinese grudge the assistance given to the Malays, they are simply being unreasonable.
National Unity. Yes. It’s a must. For peace, prosperity and progress. Yes these too.
The Constitution. Yes. It’s the basis for all those above. So. Let’s work together.
All said yes. Verbally. And they struggle accordingly.
Some said no. Secretly. And they too work maniacally.
Yet we are brothers … working for the destruction of each other.
That is not enough. We too have viruses poisoning our own blood. Ney. Leaders who lead to betray.
How laaa ini macam? Kita olang kicik, olang semut melah … siapa mau kita picaya?
Heiyya manyak shusha … hilup shusha … mati pun shusha.
Dal,
The resounding yes was at Merdeka time. After Merdeka the older ones died out. The younger ones were not told much of the struggle to get independence and the agreement between the Malay and the non-Malay leaders. History was not compulsory in school. The history taught was not much about the independence struggles and the negotiations with the British. The yes to work together slackened.
Now there are among the younger generation of today who have no clue even of what independence was all about. One wonders what was being taught them about independence from the British. Especially those who drop out from schools even before SPM. The Deputy Minister of Education said in 2008 about 25% of those from Chinese vernacular schools did drop out.
Some who have some idea of the Social contract say they are not bound by what their leaders agreed to at Merdeka. They do not even respect the Constitution which contains elements of the Social Contract whereas that Constitution was approved by duly elected representatives in Parliament.
The leaders of today do indeed have to rein in the wayward citizens. The problems are multifarious but a serious start has to be made. Positive action rather than the “flip-flopping, auto-piloting and sleepy” ways of the past administration.
I usually don’t like this Sakmongkol guy – they call him a Malay apologist and I agree. But on the article he write above, maybe OK.
Here is what one guy write in Rocky Bru and I support Ibrahim Ali:
At that convention, DS Najib said I was shouting. I didn’t, I was speaking in a normal tone. It was PM Najib who was shrieking and shouting. Your president was clearly rattled. He had to abandon a prepared speech. I talked about NEP and you know lah, for dramatic purposes, I deliberately placed a picture of Tun Razak at the back. I asked – who was the architect of NEP and I turned around and pointed at Tun Razak’s portrait and ended by saying- now we have the son of the originator of the NEP who is the 6th PM of Malaysia. What kind of son is he who betrays his father? You should see Najib’s face.
– Ibrahim Ali on what a PONDAN Najib is.
Imran,
Malay apologists there are, here and there. A few like to show that they are liberal when they are in fact pseudo-liberal and pretend they are intellectual when they are of the neo variety. They talk about wanting equality when inequalities exist even in the US and President Obama has only just got through his Health Care Plan that afforded the mostly poor Blacks, Hispanics and others health insurance in an extremely expensive health care country. They write about freedom when the US still has detainees kept without trial in Guantanamo Bay.
Sakmongkol appears to be making fun of Dato Ibrahim Ali when the latter managed to get 76 Malay NGOs follow his Perkasa movement – 76 at the last count quite some time ago at their convention at PWTC. Sakmongkol was a one-term State Assemblyman criticising the Establishment even at the State Assembly. His tenure was cut short to just one term and he appeared bitter against DS Najib. Prior to the last UMNO General Assembly and party elections, he wrote endlessly supporting and promoting Khairy Jamaluddin who was found guilty of money politics by the UMNO Disciplinary Committee. KJ has been vehemently criticised in several blogs and Najib has not given him any position in the Government.
Sakmongkol is certainly not mainstream opinion. He may not even be minority opinion. From the Malay perspective, he may be an isolated opinion. Hardly any Malay worth his or her roots does not want Malay rights and interests protected and promoted. That is what Ibrahim, Perkasa, the 76 Malay NGOs and many others want to do. The Chinese, Indians and the others are doing the same.
Yes. Rid of the handout to the Malays so that the Chinese people who controls the economy can bully them more and more.
Allow flotilla to deliver humanitarian aid.
It’s ok. In the long run. What worst could happen? At the most only a small Mei13th here and there. Now and then. Then the Malays can become the UNHR Rohingyas in their own land … lining up on the shores for intertnational MV Rachel Corries …. hoping the Singaporean gun ships forgets to intercept.
San Peng,
The Malays will not allow the facilities provided to the Malays to cease, despite the rude and sarcastic remarks like “Tongkat” and “Free Lunch”.
In the first place, the Chinese also have used the Tongkat since British colonial days. The latest case is the football betting license. Further arguments on these have already been furnished here and elsewhere. In the second place, it’s not free lunch paid by the Chinese because the Government-Linked Companies (GLCs) pay 40%, the Malays themselves and others, including the foreigners in this country contribute 30%. In the third place, it’s not free when you consider the Special Position of the Malays which the British have said was there “since day one”. It was at the huge cost of agreeing to citizenship for the Malays. Look at the problems we are having now as a result of the “free citizenship”.
Everybody should respect and live by the Constitution and not talk about Tongkat, Free Lunch and Free Citizenship for harmony, peace and progress in this country.
Wake UP!,
Your sarcasm-in-protest is duly noted. Nobody can remove or cease the affirmative action without incurring the wrath of the Malays. The Malay Special Position is written in the Constitution just as the non-Malays’ right to citizenship is. For so long as the right to citizenship continues, affirmative action for the Malays, derived from the Special Position under Artilce 153, has to continue. Even mainland China during the Manchu rule practices a quota system for the southern Chinese who were disadvantaged compared to northern Chinese.
The Malays in this country have been disadvantaged due to the British colonial policy of wanting them to continue in food production, being farmers and fishermen. Schools were built for them only at the primary level and far in between the kampongs. The Chinese had ample English schools in the towns and were given all sorts of facilities for doing business. They were in fact affirmative action of a kind – mining licenses, mining land leases, gaming licenses, trading licenses. At a time when nobody else, including the Indians in the estates and the railway coolie lines, knew about business and doing business.
Reasonableness must be the hallmark of togetherness, harmony and long term unity in this country.
While no one should overlook the views of the Malays, the views of all Malaysians should be more paramount. — mysinchew.com
Now, that’s a sensible, though rare, opinion expressed by sinchew. The operative word is ALL. Including the silent majority.
Don’t go just by Amirsham, “confident woman” Marina and such pseudo liberals and neo intellectuals. They forgot their roots and those of their kind languishing in the kampongs and struggling to make ends meet in the urban ghettos.
What “truth” is Amirsham talking about, that the writer writes about? Why is he not talking the truth about the 60% of the population owning only 18% of the corporate wealth of the country, not yet counting other forms of wealth? Is it justifiable to speed up economic progress at the expense of the Malays who had slipped back from a bit more than 20% before the Asian Financial Crisis of the late 80s and may slip again in such a similar situation?
If the NEM doesn’t include the NEP and the Malays are merely told to compete in an uneven playing field, it may lead to a serious situation.
abda,
Amirsham and the National Economic Action Council (NEAC) want to plan for the realisation of DS Najib’s wish of seeing a developed Malaysia by 2020. The question is at what price to the well being of the Malays. The draft New Economic Model (NEM) has been put out for public feedback. The Malay public has fed him back by Perkasa and the 76 Malay NGOs speaking up at one public gathering after another. The convention at the PWTC was well attended. The MPM Congress was attended by no less than 250 knowledgeable and articulate participants. Articles, comments, speeches, and memoranda have been submitted. Views have been expressed by email etc not only to NEAC and 1Malaysia blog but also directly to DS Najib himself. Let it be known that the Malays have spoken and will continue to speak on the matter.
It is just unreasonable to expect open competition from the Malays, who don’t have a culture of doing business, who started to go into business only in the 1970s, with hardly any cooperation by way of opening doors by the resources-laden, highly competitive Chinese who control the economy practically in all aspects of business, who do business on an exclusive clan association and business guilds basis. Hardly any genuine Malay-Chinese manufacturing and technology-transfer joint ventures exist. Remove “the barriers” the Chinese say. Do so, Najib seems to say. We’ll plan so, Amirsham and his team appear to echo.
The usual “cooperation” is in respect of bidding for contracts where the Chinese will be the ones executing them, pocketing the large share of “the profits” whereas what the Malays get are actually only commissions. Amirsham and his team have not mentioned about changing this and similar situations. About training and assisting the Malays in business in ways more effective than have been done in the past.
Flogging the “lazy Malays”, the “tak pandai berniaga”, “learn to compete internationally” catch phrases do not solve the problem. The grassroot level needs to be helped. Providing opportunities for further training, even just on how to operate, maintain, service a backhoe tractor would. Helping the trained ones to own tractors would. So that Malays can bid for the Class F jobs to dig drains using their own tractors. And progress to Class D and bigger contracts implemented mainly by them themselves.
Ibrahim Ali think only the Malays. Not thinking many non-Malays also poor. Father work two job morning to night time. Use motorcycle or old car. Children go to school only one clothe the mother wash evry day. Why he only ask for Malays. He Wakil Rakyat must help all.
Kit,
We feel for the poor – all of them, doesn’t matter what race they belong to. Those who are not so fortunate as to have new cars, enough school uniforms, don’t have to work more than one job and have sufficient rest time. There are many among the Chinese, the Indians and others. But, because the Malays are the majority and, as a race, generally do not have much wealth, the poor among them is many times more than the Chinese. Just go to the less developed kampongs all over the country. You’ll find so many of them just barely scratching out a living, some eating rice mixed with tapioca, even during normal economic situation in the country.
The Chinese, as a community, has a large amount of wealth. Many among the billionaires in the country are Chinese. The Chinese have the tradition of helping one another, based on clan associations and business guilds. Even those who do not agree to national schools can afford to build their own schools.
The Malays do not have such a system. They have to depend on the Government for help. Dato Ibrahim Ali tries to speak for the Malays who are far worse off than the Chinese. The allegations that the Malays are lazy, depending only on hand outs, and dependence makes them lazy forever, are incorrect, bias and unfair. Such allegations are propagated by those who do not respect the Malay Special Position. They should respect it because it was in exchange for non-Malay citizenship.
The Sinchew.com fellow obviously is ignorant of the Constitution Article 153 or he is so arrogant and ungrateful for his citizenship as to dare say, “our society is saturated with the “free lunch” mentality, which is even being propagated as a right and privilege which should not be questioned and challenged by anyone.” If the Malays are free-lunching, he and his kind are free-loading so selfishly and endlessly.
He also cheekily talks about “the Santa Claus culture of just giving, giving, giving”. He and his kind are always wanting more, more and more, does not care about the Special Position of the Malays and the circumstances that led to that situation.
He talks about “fairness” but does he know what fairness means by the Consitution of the country?
Ambiar,
The writer is obviously biased, narrow-minded, and even rude to accuse others of “free-lunch mentality”. He seems to think that, if the situation exists, he and his people are providing the free lunch. This is absurd. His narrow-mindedness is blinded by an unfounded and unjustified belief that the Chinese contribute the main bulk of the country’s revenue. He is so ignorant of the fact that the Chinese contribute only about 30%, the Government-Linked Companies (GLCs) 40% and the balance by Malays and others, including foreigners. He should have checked with the Inland Revenue Department for the correct facts.
We agree with your suggestion that the interpretation of fairness must be based on the Constitution. There is no other way of doing it than that. It is obvious that those who do not respect certain provisions of the Constitution would construe such things as preferences for the Malays under the New Economic Policy as unfair. But the NEP was derived from the Special Position of the Malays which is provided under Article 153 of the Constitution. So much has been explained about the background to the Malay Special Position and the quid pro quo (in exchange for) i.e the right to citizenship of the non-Malays. If they grudge the Malay Special Position, the Malays may grudge the right to citizenship of the non-Malays.
Bila Pak Beraim dll. pertahankan dan perjuangkan hak Melayu deme kata rasis. Bila deme tak habih habih melalak dan menyalak nak itu nak ini tak berenti renti tu apa? Sudah melampau deme ni.
Sayong,
Kumpulan pelampau itu yang kita tidak mahu dimana-mana pihak. Sepatutnya ahli-ahli gulungan pemerintah berunding dan bersetuju diantara mereka dan kemudian mempatuhi apa apa persetujuan berkenaan dasar-dasar Kerajaan.
Malangnya keadaan sudah menjadi buruk sejak pemerintahan yang lalu. Semua pihak, terutamanya pembangkang, dibiarkan mengkritik apa sahaja, sehingga mengungkit Kedudukan Istimewa Melayu dan menyo’al Dasar Ekonomi Bahru. Parti pemerintah kalah teruk diPRU12 ditahun 2008, maka semangkin naik kepala pihak membengkang, termasuk mereka yang bukan parti pembangkang. Oleh itu perkara pemberian biasiswa pun diungkit dan diperso’alkan oleh parti yang menjadi ahli kumpulan pemerintah.
Pemimpin perlu tegas dan mengambil langkah-langkah yang sesuai membendung kata-kata dan perbuatan-perbuatan yang melampau.
Can there be a compromise? Between the Ibrahim Ali and the Amirsham type? Maybe the final NEM will show this.
Victor,
The Ibrahim Ali group will say that the Malay Special Position under Article 153 of the Constitution, and the New Economic Policy (NEP) which is derived from it, is not negotiable. They are in big numbers as manifested by the presence of Perkasa and the 76 Malay NGOs at the public rallies, the assembly at PWTC and the road shows in several places in the country. The Amirsham group have not exhibited themselves in physical form, merely stating their views here and there. They have been referred to as the liberal group, though others have labelled them as pseudo-liberals and neo-intellectuals.
However, it is very safe to say that the Amirsham group is much smaller than, even miniscule compared to the Ibrahim Ali group. They are among the educated Malays practically all of whom become what they are through or from the NEP. The small group who got influenced by the ideas of liberalism they found while studying abroad mostly, but who did not take into serious account, even not fully aware, of the history of the Malays and the non-Malays in this country, the preferential treatment of the British colonial masters on the Chinese, the negotiations for independence and the circumstances in the drafting of the Constitution in which the Malay Special Position and non-Malay citizenship were embodied.
Nevertheless, because Amirsham is the Prime Minister’s appointee, he gets to the PM’s ears better than the Ibrahim Ali group. Hence the loudspeakers and the high volume of speeches at the Ibrahim Ali’s rallies, assemblies and roadshows. The PM was himself there at one such gathering; he had to put aside his prepared speech and responded to the speeches by Ibrahim Ali and others without text perhaps because he realized the importance of what were said to his very ears. One of the comments in here gives details about that.
Shortly we’ll hear whether the PM heard what were said in his presence in front of the large crowd. It is believed that the Ibrahim Ali group will go on more roadshows if what are finalised in the New Economic Model (NEM) are far from what they expect as far as the NEP is concerned.
Just imagine what will happen if the non-malays controls the federal government. If they control 2/3 of the majority, they can change the constitution. We must never forget that.
Off to the International Criminal Court you Israelis terrorists.
Wake UP!,
The Malays are the majority in this country but they are not evenly spread. The delineation of electoral constituencies cannot ensure Malays to be in control. Indeed the 1969 and 2008 General Elections have shown that the Malay-led Alliance of political parties lost 2/3 majority in Parliament.
The most damaging situation has been the split of the Malays into support for three Malay political parties. So far, even that has not caused the non-Malays to be in control of the Federal Government.
The existing arrangement has been that even the opposition agrees that a Malay leads them if and when they win in Federal elections. But the leader is fighting for survival in the Courts against a second sodomy charge brought on him. They still have second-line Malay leaders among them to choose from in the event that leader goes to prison.
Should the unexpected happens where a non-Malay appears to be the candidate for Prime Ministership, the Rulers in Council may exercise their role in providing checks and balance. The Malays would likely clamour for a Malay candidate be chosen among those who may win the majority seats in Parliament. The Rulers are duty bound to ensure peace and harmony in the country. Consenting to a non-Malay becoming Prime Minister may not bring peace and harmony. Fiji is a case in point where the non-indigenous Indians form the majority but the native Fijians resented the election results and clamoured for an alternative to majority rule. It led to disturbance of the peace and the military playing a role to bring the situation to normal.
Sori writing in English, sir. To make the racist blokes understand.
Who says “The Bumi quota has failed to help the Malays grow, making them feel complacent and dejected instead, besides exhausting the nation’s vast resources.”? Only racist blokes say these. They refuse to see the the positive results. Only dwell on the negative aspects. The Chinese don’t have negative aspects?
Who says “Only by pursuing meritocracy and improving the country’s competitiveness can we get to become a high-income country.”? Why the rush to developed status? Who will mostly benefit in the rush? You don’t care about bridging the gap that had led to May 13, 1969?
Talk about “And when the majority of Malays can share the fruit of our economic success, even a goreng pisang vendor can look forward to much improved income.” You want the Malays to continue to jual goreng pisang and enjoy the fruit of YOUR economic success?
Give the Malays time to gain a better footing economically. Don’t talk about open competition on an uneven playing field. In any case there’s the Special Position of the Malays – remember that every time you look at your i/c or Mykad. Without Article 153, you might not have a Malaysian i/c or Mykad.
Halim,
Even Tengku Razaleigh, when he was the Minister of Finance, said that economic progress could be speeded up but the Malays might be left farther behind the Chinese. Now, the question has been asked: why the rush to a developed status if it is at the expense of racial harmony and long-term peace and progress. Would there be racial harmony if the root causes of the racial clashes of 13 May 1969 are not satisfactorily addressed in the New Economic Model.
It must be realised that the Malays are far behind already. Economically and educationally. The 18% corporate wealth is far from sufficient. It has not even reached the target set in 1970. That target has not taken into account of wealth in other aspects of the economy. The Malays have a long way to go in wealth acquisition.
The Malays have not even 30% in the various professions in the country. The professions that can help the Malays progress economically should have more Malays. Accountants, Financial Specialists and the like.
More importantly, expertise in doing business must be developed. Malay wealth ownership has so far included many of those who had not been long-time businessmen. Those who got it from political patronage, the system of money politics and so on. They may not have the wealth retention capacity. The NEM should therefore include a programme to guide and develop the real Malay businessmen, the serious and the struggling, those with hands-on experience, the rough and tumble, so that they can succeed in specific areas of business. Giving them contracts is not enough; giving them the facilities to learn to carry out contracts, to have the tools and equipment to do so is as important. It must be accepted that business is competition and that the Malays do not have much knowledge and experience in business. Remember that the Malays do not have a culture of doing business and started going into business in a big way only after 1970.
Nobody should expect the Malays who have less than 40 years of business experience to quickly catch up with the Chinese who have hundreds even thousands of years of experience. To expect the Malays to compete with the Chinese on an uneven playing field is unrealistic, uncanny, even unwitting.
The Lim Mun Fah fellow goes to town with his sarcasm, snide remarks and innuendos against the Malays. He is bloody racist, ungrateful and the kind who keeps wanting more, more and more. He has got citizenship and doesn’t seem to care how the Malays have agreed to his citizenship.
Since he raised the subject by his snide remarks etc, here goes for comments on his citizenship.
His ancestors were brought into the country by Territorial Chiefs Long Jaafar and Ngah Ibrahim who wanted to upgrade their tin mines and open up more areas in Larut Perak in mid-19th Century. Some were even given capital to start tin mining by the financially loaded (tax collection, etc) Ngah Ibrahim. Instead of being grateful, they brought in secret societies, thugs and gangsters. How’s that as repayment of assistance and “Tongkat” given them?
The Chinese clan chiefs fought one another for control of the tin mines, their thugs and gangsters killed one another. Instead of controlling them, they got Ngah Ibrahim and Malay tin miners involved in the gang fights that dragged into the Larut Wars. In the process many Malay tin mines disappeared and the Ghee Hin and the Hai San Clans and their gangsters controlled the tin industry in the state and elsewhere later. How’s that for gratitude?
In wanting to get back tin mines lost to the rival gang, the Kapitan Cina and 44 gangsters signed a petition for the British Resident in Penang to enter Perak to help settle their dispute. This led to British intervention on the pretext of weak Malay leadership to control the warring goons, and finally British colonial rule. How about that for treachery?
As already stated many times here, the British helped the Chinese with mining licenses, mining land leases, lotteries and trading licenses. They prospered while the British wanted the Malays continue to be farmers and fishermen, wanting them to produce food (rice and fish) for the country.
Independence negotiations came, the British had the Malay leaders agree for the non-Malays be given citizenship – they were, after all, “transient”, they told the Malays. In consideration for that, the non-Malay leaders agreed that the Malay Special Position, which the British said was there “since day one”, be enshrined in the Constitution.
Now that they got citizenship, they don’t seem to respect the Malay Special Position. How about that for gratitude?
There’s a whole list of ingratitude that can be listed out. Lim Mun Fah and his kind are simply bloody ungrateful fellows.
Aku,
The view has been expressed in one comment a little earlier than this that, because the Malay Special Position and the New Economic Policy have been raised publicly and not accepted by a certain sector of the non-Malays, the Malays should urge the Government to carry out the Language Proficiency Tests strictly before the issue of citizenship certificates and identity cards. This is because citizenship is the quid pro quo for the Malay Special Position.
This appears to be a reasonable proposition. If it helps in making those concerned become reasonable and contribute towards mutual respect and harmony, it may be pursued.
There must indeed be reasonableness on the part of every citizen for continued harmony and for the country to be united. Nobody wishes to be left out anywhere in the world but the pursuit of the idea of not wanting to lose out must have certain limits. Nobody wins all the time and the nature of competition is that you win some, you lose some.
Political power is in the hands of the Malays in this country but economic power is in the hands of the Chinese. There must be give and take and a two-way exchange of benefits and advantages. Already the non-Malays are having a share of the political power by way of being given seats in the Government, and the Malays are having a share of the economic cake by way of the 18% corporate wealth. What is important is that the political power and the share of economic pie should be commensurate with or at least take into account the population ratio.
No one has so far been asking for 60% wealth in all aspects of the economy but let us be reasonable in the asking, on the one part, and in reacting to what is being asked for so far, on the other part. Racial polarization has been increasing and there is a strong need for reasonableness for long term peace and progress.
Katanya baru-baru ini Tun Dr. Mahathir menyeru supaya DS Najib diberi peluang untuk memimpin. DS Najib memerlukan sokongan rakyat dibelakangnya untuk memimpin.
Oleh kerana saranan ini datang dari Dr. M sendiri, maka wajarlah ianya tidak dipandang sepi atau tidak diketepikan begitu sahaja.
Tapi ianya tidak bermakna saranan ini perlu diikuti dengan membuta tuli walaupun ianya datang dari Tun M sendiri.
DS Najib sudah melampaui 100 hari sebagai PM. Beliau sepatutnya sudah mempunyai suatu gambaran yang agak jelas mengenai golongan rakyat yang dipimpin oleh beliau.
Saya hanya bimbang, kalaulah rakyat, khususnya orang Melayu hanya mempunyai satu peluang sahaja. Dan peluang ini diberikan kepada DS Najib. Apakah DS Najib akan menganggap bahawa orang Melayu akan merestui segala tindak tanduknya dalam mengemudikan negara yang terdiri dari pelbagai kaum ini? Apakah dengan peluang yang diberi, DS Najib akan menganggap ianya suatu lesen untuk beliau melaksanakan apa jua rancangan beliau?
Sudah jauh lebih 100 hari. Orang Melayu nampaknya diketepikan oleh dasar-dasar baru yang dilaksanakan oleh DS Najib. Maka orang Melayu mula bersuara, meluahkan rasa gelisah mereka. Setakat ini tidak nampak DS Najib berusaha untuk memperbetulkan keadaan.
Wajarkah “peluang” ini diberikan secara berterusan kepada DS Najib ataupun, berhenti sekejap dari bersuara, dan kita lihat apakah DS Najib kembali prihatin kepada keresahan orang Melayu?
Sekiranya DS Najib berterusan meminggirkan orang Melayu, maka amatlah tidak patut saranan Tun M itu diikuti. Kita wajar kembali bersuara menentang segala dasar-dasar yang meminggirkan orang Melayu di bumi sendiri.
“BUMI INI, BUMI ORANG MELAYU”
Semerah Padi,
Memang benar kata Tun Dr Mahathir bahawa DS Najib harus diberi peluang untuk memimpin. Tetapi memendang dari komen-komen yang ada diblog ini dan diblog-blog lain yang sama arus perjalanan, nampaknya rakyat mahukan dia juga memuaskan hati mereka bahawa dia akan mempertahankan hak dan kepentingan Melayu. Namun sekali pun dari segi kepentingan kesemua rakyat Malaysia yang mahukan keharmonian dan persepaduan. Mempertahankan dan memajukan Bahasa Malaysia sebagai Bahasa Kebangsaan, contohnya.
Kerana dia membuat kenyataan membenarkan sekolah Cina diteruskan, tambahan pula memberi bantuan wang kapada sekolah Cina dari masa kemasa sejak belom menjadi PM lagi (PRK Kuala Trengganu), maka banyak rakyat tidak senang hati dengan pimpinannya.
Dia hanya mengatakan “Percayalah saya”. Akan membantu Melayu dengan penubuhan Ekuinas dan sebagainya. Tetapi sudah disebut disana sini tidak ada nampak bukti bantuan itu. Sebaliknya dasar liberalisasi ekonominya banyak menguntugi bukan Melayu yang sudah kaya raya dan mempunyai kuasa ekonomi. Masalahnya ialah orang Melayu nampaknya susah mahu mempercayainya. Pada hal dia boleh menggunakan keseluruh jentera Kementerian Penerangan dan massa media Kerajaan bagi memberi penerangan, atau bayangan, bahawa apa-apa yang dilakukannya itu ada kepentingan Melayu tersembunyi atau terselit.
Pada hal, dalam rangka Kedudukan Istimewa Melayu diFasal 153 Perlembagaan dia tidak perlu menyembunyi atau menyelit dimana mana apa-apa rancangan atau tindakan mempertahankan dan memajukan hak dan kepentingan Melayu. Sebaliknya pula, Model Ekonomi Bahrunya yang diumumkan untuk ma’alom balas (feedback) rakyat itu tidak jelas menunjukkan kemasukan ciri-ciri Dasar Ekonomi Bahru didalamnya. Tambahan pula, ada tanda-tanda dia mahukan Melayu bertanding dengan Cina dipadang yang tidak sama rata. Maka nampaknya susahlah Melayu mahu percaya kapada dia. Ada banyak yang sudah menyatakan kesalnya tindakan DS Najib berkenaan hak dan kepentingan Melayu. Termasuk Perkasa, 76 badan-badan bukan Kerajaan (NGOs) Melayu dan lain-lainnya.
Marilah kita berharap bahawa DS Najib sedarkan keadaan ini. Demi kepentingan sokong menyokong dan menjaga hak dan kepentingan rakyat.
Dato Ibrahim Ali dan 76 Pertubuhan Bukan Kerajaan (NGO) Melayu mahukan MEB memastikan hak dan kepentingan Melayu dan Bumiputera tetap dipelihara dan terus diperjuangkan selaras dengan Fasal 153 Perlembagaan Persekutuan, dan Majlis Perundingan Melayu (MPM) menganjurkan Kongres Ekonomi Bumiputera pada 29 Mei 2010 untuknya. Ini pun dia orang tidak suka, marah, bantah, sindir, persendakan. Ini sangat tidak patut. Ini melampau.
Kalau dia orang tidak hormatkan dan mahu ungkitkan Fasal 153 Kedudukan Istimewa Melayu, kita tidak perlu hormatkan dan boleh ungkitkan hak kerakyatan mereka. Sebab hak kerakyatan itu adalah balasannya.
Kita perlu gesa Kerajaan lakukan ujian kecekapan Bahasa Malaysia seketat-ketatnya sebelom mengeluarkan sijil kerakyatan dan kad pengenalan Mykad dan sebagainya. Ini adalah balasan yang setimpal, yang kena pada tempatnya.
Once you have started with “Tongkat”, it will be impossible to do away with Tongkat and it’s human’s behavior.
When will NEP end? 20 years or 30 years from now? What if the Malays can’t reach 30% equity/wealth even with NEP?
Perhaps, we have gotten it wrong by focussing on 30% equity ownership. What is the point of having 30% equity ownership (owned by a feel big tycoons related to UMNO) whilst the majority of malays suffer? You might want to up it to 50%/60%/70% and it’s still owned by a few UMNO bigwigs and still won’t change the fact that many malays are in the disadvantage. It’s not the chinese that put the malays in a disadvantage position in the first place, it’s the policies of UMNO.
If only the focus/effort put in carving sustainable policies ie; min wage, good education, competitive human capital skills, business savvy (most malays to be in this category), then the majority of malays including non-malays will have high standard of living. Whether to buy/own equities/shares is a matter of preference and a 30% equity should not in the first place, as a goal to help Malays to be on par with the chinese.
The competition should be as a nation vs other countries and not competition between the malays and non-malays.
DO WE STILL WANT TO BE IN SUCH STATE ARGUING/DEBATING OVER ARTICLE 153? special position, citizenship, rights, birth rights, discrimination
Will it bring us anywhere?
NEP will remain as long as it takes, my friend. Yes, we would want more than 30% and in all aspects of wealth not just corporate wealth. Why shouldn’t we when we are 60% of the population?
No, not only UMNO big wigs will get them. NEM has declared a bigger spread among the Malays and we will clamour for the benefits to be spread out.
We will keep telling people to respect the Constitution which includes Art 153 for so long as there are those who grudge the NEP. It will bring more Malaysians to respect and live by the Constitution. Those who question Art 153, we’ll ask the authorities to book them under the Sedition Act as it is protected under that Act.
jebat’s friend,
Everybody has to realize that even the Chinese were given and used “Tongkat”. Since they first came to this country and until now with lottery licenses and such. “Manteri Laroot” Ngah Ibrahim provided capital for Chinese he brought in to open up his territory with more tin mines for additional revenue to him in the mid-19th Century. But the Chinese brought in secret societies, thugs and gangsters; mine ownership disputes and gangland killings led to the Larut Wars and finally British intervention and colonial rule. The Chinese clans with their underworld ended up controlling the tin mining industry and the 350 Malay tin mines disappeared.
That secret societies, thugs and gangsters behaviour is the one “difficult to do away with”. They still exist even in the corridors of the Selangor State Government as alleged by one PKR ADUN and one PKR MP some months ago. They certainly exist in all the major towns in Malaysia and the cities around the world. Their mentality and behaviour is reflected in many of the utterings and actions of the Chinese, including those who keep uttering the word “Tongkat”.
The Chinese should not be concerned about the length of the NEP period when they are getting a reasonable share in the ruling of this country. Are they not getting a reasonable share with the number of cabinet posts alotted them? They should be reasonable with their demands. Because, if not, the Malays can also question the right of their children and grandchildren to citizenship. They can certainly start demanding that the the authorities enforce rigidly the Language Proficiency Test before the issue of citizenship certificates or identity cards. For the sake of unity, let us be reasonable with one another.
It is alright to criticise the method of implementation of NEP that resulted in a poor spread of the NEP benefits, but not the concept of the NEP. DS Najib has already said that the NEM will attempt at a wider spread. Suggesting that we concentrate on competing with other countries only is a convenient way of leaving the Chinese progress further in the country and the Malays, Indians and others continue to be left far behind. That is not right. The Malays have not achieved even 30% in corporate wealth, let alone in other aspects of wealth in the country.
Article 153 is on the Special Position of the Malays and it is protected under the Sedition Act. It should not be debated as it is a sensitive issue and may bring ill feelings to the Malays and it’s not good for racial harmony and unity. What can be discussed is the implementation of the NEP and the NEM. These need be discussed to bring about greater understanding among Malaysians, and hopefully through that, greater goodwill, co-operation and unity.
You may not agree with me but the longer the NEP, all the more it will hamper growth in both ways; the country’s competitiveness and the majority malays in having a fighter spirit.
When the going gets tough, the tough gets going. You may pointed that in the past, many things happened and gave the chinese a headstart. In this real world, it doesn’t matter how slow/fast you start, you just need to get on the track to compete. I have no intention to say this to enrich the chinese and to see malays continue to be poor. I myself is just an ordinary fellow earning a very normal living.
Let’s just assumed that Malays not only 25% equity (or whatever wealth you want to categorise) and the chinese owns 65%. Assuming that everyone works equally hard, all income continue to grow equally, it will still be more or less the same percentage just in that in monetary terms, everyone has more.
Even with NEM, NEP, NEC or whatever NExxxx, wealth will not be equally distribute to all Malays. If indeed you want to see wealth equally distributed to the Malays masses, you should start to confiscate of the wealthy Malays’ assets (particulary related to UMNO) and give it the ordinary Malays. The only way to achieve equal wealth ; 60 or 65% according to racial composition is to do it through the communist ways.
As long as we are in free market practice, it just won’t work and it’s economics.
Is it really that important to see Malays beating the chinese in terms of wealth and economic activities? As you have mentioned, NEM should help the Malays but how about the Indians, the Kadazans and the Ibans?
To put it to extreme, if Chinese has to sacrifice their citizenship just to have the Malays to do the right thing, I think is worth it. I rather my children to live as a PR in Malaysia that is governed by Malays who are fair and no longer threaten the non-malays than to live as a citizen and yet bombarded by Article 153.
jebat’s fren,
You need to understand that the Malays started doing business only after the racial riots of 1969 and the start of the New Economic Policy in 1970. It’s hardly 40 years compared to the Chinese who have been doing it for hundreds, even thousands, of years since the time of their ancestors in mainland China.
Malays do not have a culture of doing business. Theirs was a culture of “barter trade” i.e exchanging goods for their daily necessities and never had the instinct of wealth accumulation until recent times. Perhaps it was because the Malays, by and large, in the 5,000 – 6,000 years the Rumpun Melayu is said to have been in existence, had no competition. Theirs was a culture of insular existence, of moving from island to island in the vast area called the Malay Archipelago and beyond.
During the colonial times, the British wanted the Malays to concentrate in food production and continue to be farmers and fishermen, not encouraged or assisted to do business and given English education like the Chinese in the towns were. Since the Malays have accepted the non-Malays as citizens starting from the time of Merdeka, the Malays were starting to get better education, etc, yet the Malay wealth in 1970 was hardly 2% and their presence in the various professions (doctors, engineers, etc) hardly 5%. You therefore need to be reasonable in your expectation of the Malay economic and educational progress. Asking the Malays to compete openly with only 18% of corporate wealth and the economy being controlled by the Chinese in practically all aspects is simply not reasonable.
The Malays have started competing and working hard. Just look around and you’ll see Malays doing, for example, auto workshops, stationery and computer repair shops that don’t require Government contracts, etc. But do you see how much assistance, or even patronage, from non-Malays, especially Chinese who control supplies of almost everything that are in the shops? Despite the hard work they do, Malay shops keep closing down. But remember, Chinese businesses also close down and Chinese also go bankrupt. Just read the newspaper notices pages to see the number being bankrupted. But the number of Chinese in business is far greater than those of the Malays. Your implying that the Malays don’t work hard is not acceptable. So is your implying that achieving increased Malay wealth can be done only through “communist ways”. Your view is skewed and your thinking even demented when saying that.
There is no problem to the Malays when you criticize and call for a wider spread of NEP benefits among the Malays and to the Bumiputeras of Sabah and Sarawak. Malays are merely asking for the kind of assistance that the Chinese received from the British in colonial times – mining licenses, mining land leases, lottery licenses, trading licenses, construction contracts etc when there were simply no Malay contractors then. There is no “bombarding” of non-Malays with Article 153 but mere pointing out that when issues are raised by the chauvinists and racists like those hogging the so-called “Malaysian Malaysia” slogan. But if you decide to have your children live as PR, that’s your choice.
Dear SSS admin
I also noticed a trend of similar justifications given by those who defended NEP is always about chinese have thousands of years of doing biz and malays have only started not long ago. Please also bear in mind that those who came to Malaysia and their subsequent generations generally are not bizmen and they are from the poor during those days, hence travelling all over the world to cari rezeki. By always going by the notion that British helps the Chinese and not the malays, why not include Indians in the special group cos they are also not given the advantage by the British. Whether doing business or under employment, just let it be market driven. We should not stereotype chinese means they are bizmen and malays generally not bizmen. If only we can discard the mindset of competing against each other, the outcome will be a greater collaboration as a whole between all races and who cares, who are in what profession.
To always justify malays only have 40 years of experience, i won’t be surprised that 20 years down the road, then the same statement will be given; only 60 years later on only 80 years. Many did it in a mere 20-30 years. Look at the countries with their success st …taiwan, korea, singapore, japan, germany, brazil, india
In your message and also from many who defended the NEP, it’s also about chinese controlling the economy and malays are not and malays are losing out. Have we ever thought about that it’s Malaysians who are controlling the economy and not foreigners?
Yes, in my opinion (not perfect) that if there is an insistent to achieve everything based on quota and racial composition (divide equally based on race) and through central planning, isn’t that the essence of communism? Communism is not a bad word and not about Chin Peng or killing, it’s the opposite of free market. But look at the classic example of China/Russia of embracing communism, everything must be fair and square and govt to plan everything, the outcome is disparity between the poor and the rich continue to widen. And one danger (can be opportunity viewed by some group) is that the wealth will always be siphoned to govt related officers and will not filtered down to the citizens. It’s some form of patronage practice.
And you know well through one of my para, most of the 20-30% malays wealth are mainly held by umno related people and if you want to be fair to the malays mass, don’t you think it’s also justified to confiscate the wealth and distribute it back to the masses? If you are not doing that, then the 30 or 40% in your target will also not end up with the malays masses. How are you going to tackle those wealth only controlled by the elites?
jebat’s fren,
Those who came to Malaysia may not be bizmen but many of their subsequent generations were. Since the days of Ngah Ibrahim in Larut in the 2nd half of the 19th Century, the junctions of major roads, however dilapidated they were, had Chinese shop houses selling sundry goods where there never were before. Over time, they became “pekan” and small towns and the land around there, acquired by the Chinese, steadily rose in value far greater than the Malay kampong land. Sketchy descriptions of those days have occasionally been found in researches by historians of recent years. Such an image has been portrayed in the Malay Annals (Sejarah Melayu) written hundreds of years ago. You have to believe that the Malays were a nation of barter traders, not of taking profits and practising wealth accumulation like the Chinese have learnt or at least seen their kind did even before migrating from China. Business as you know it, has been foreign to the Malays, until after 1970.
Yes, why not include the Indians, but in the comments here we are talking about bridging the economic and educational gap between the majority Malays and the 23% Chinese, aren’t we? Good that you are talking about discarding the mindset of competing against each other, hopefully those who call themselves “kiasu” or don’t wish to be left out will do the same. You see, that word does not even exist in the Malay language – it’s equivalent, that is.
You are not looking hard enough at the issues , the background and the circumstances, and are even wrong when saying “Many did it in a mere 20-30 years …taiwan, korea, singapore, japan, germany, brazil, india”. Japan already had an infrastructure that enabled them to turn thier industries into war machines during World War II and, despite being bombed into ruins, were able to quickly rebuild them into industrial giants soon after the War. But why not mention China? It has some 3,500 years of recorded history, a vast population, but was conquered and ruled by the Mongols for 80 years, the Manchus for hundreds of years, bullied by the Japanese and the British until the 20th Century – Hong Kong was returned to China only in 1999. Even the Chinese in mainland China were not advanced in all respects, and the Malays certainly are not, as far as business is concerned.
Nobody talks about “divide equally based on race” and nobody conceives of communism except the communist terrorist Chin Peng and the Malayan Communist Party. Communism has been banned in Malaysia and Chin Peng reduced to the Betong Salient in southern Thailand. The communists in Russia and China didn’t have “everything fair and square”, as the communist party cadres, the Pulitbureau and Party officials always have more than “the proletariat” working classes who toil to eke out an existence. Especially now in Russia and China – they still claim to be communists but are practising capitalism – the total opposite of communisim or socialism. Corruption exists everywhere, including in communist China where the penalty is death. But no one can condone corruption and let us shout out against corruption in this country together and as loud and as often as we can.
UMNO has started action on money politics in the party a lot of which has contributed to corruption and unfair distribution of NEP benefits, though a lot more has to be done about it. But corruption is not the exclusivity of the Malays. The Chinese and PKFZ, the Indians and shares for Maika Holdings are examples. Let’s shout out against corruption across the board and call for MACC be given the right to prosecute rather than depend on the AG – give them the teeth to bite.
Dear SSS Admin
I guess we will continue to be in touch as fellow netizen that has different stand on the above issue. Hopefully the progress of convergence of the above 2 thoughts will bring a more united country/community in tackling issues ranging from corruption, patronage system, cronyism and punish the govt for their sins.
jebat’s fren,
You are welcome anytime, friend. We guarantee airing your views even though we may not agree with your views.
So do we welcome other dissenting views. We reserve the right of reply, though.