BERIKUT ADALAH KUPASAN-KUPASAN SERTA PANDANGAN-PANDANGAN DIKELASKAN SEBAGAI 'THE THINKTANKS' YANG DIFIKIRKAN WAJAR UNTUK KITA RENUNGKAN BERSAMA. FIKIR-FIKIRKAN LAH!
21 April 2009
Dilema Pemuda Batu: Hasil Yang Diperoleh Bukan Seperti Yang Diharapkan
Posting sebelum ini menghuraikan bagaimana bezanya harapan Pemuda IKS terhadap Proton Exora dan hasil keluaran sebenar model kenderaan nasional itu. Ramai tertanya, mengapa buat posting berkenaan automotif sedangkan blog ini adalah blog politik. Sebenarnya, cerita Proton tu sekadar pembuka cerita kepada kekeluhan asal Pemuda IKS.Pemuda IKS cuma ingin mengaitkan cerita Proton tu dengan apa yang berlaku dalam Pemuda hari ini. Hasil yang diperoleh bukan seperti yang diharapkan. Hasil apa? Harapan siapa? Mari kita kupas satu per satu.Terdapat dua hasil yang ingin diketengahkan. Hasil pertama yang dimaksudkan adalah intipati perjuangan politik yang diagendakan hari ini. Hasil kedua pula adalah kesinambungan ke atas pemilihan pemimpin tempoh hari. Letakkan objektif posting ini pada peringkat umum dan tidak menyentuh mana-mana pihak. Namun, siapa makan cili, terasa pedasnya.Apakah intipati sebenar yang ingin kita perjuangkan? Kembali kepada asas perjuangan. Demi Agama, Bangsa dan Negara. Walaupun terdapat segelintir individu yang menyertai parti politik untuk kepentingan peribadi, masih terdapat mereka yang lurus dalam garis perjuangan. Ramai yang menyangkakan penyertaan terhadap UMNO akan menggiatkan diri dalam aktiviti kemasyarakatan. Tetapi zahirnya melihatkan kronisme.Apakah hasil terhadap pemilihan pemimpin yang menjadi tumpuan semua? Adakah kita menyokong seseorang kerana terikut orang lain atau ianya satu arahan ataupun memang ikhlas? Ini dipersoalkan kerana apabila terlantiknya seseorang itu selaku pemimpin kita, walhal semasa musim pemilihan kita langsung tidak mengenal erti budi dirinya, akhirnya kita meragui sifat kepimpinannya, keikhlasan hatinya dan arah tuju perjuangannya. Ini sering berlaku, menyokong seseorang tanpa siasat, dan kecewa dengan hasilnya.Harapan yang diberikan juga ada dua kategori. Harapan pemimpin kepada pengikutnya dan harapan pengikut kepada pemimpinnya. Ada pemimpin yang letih melayan anak buahnya yang "sembang lebih, tapi meeting tak datang" dan "datang kalau makan ada makan free". Ada pengikut pula yang bosan dengan ideologi kuno yang dibawa oleh pemimpinnya sedangkan dialah yang mengundi mereka.Perkara yang perlu ditegaskan di sini adalah harapan daripada golongan di peringkat akar umbi. Dan selalunya, perkara ini diambil remeh. Bak kata orang di peringkat akar umbi, "Siapa nak dengar suara kita? Diorang tuh sibuk dengan hal kat atas".Inikah caranya untuk kita menarik minat masyarakat untuk menyertai parti keramat ini? Mereka sudah mual dengan agenda, sikap dan budaya orang UMNO. Terpulang kepada kita untuk memperbetulkannya. UMNO perlu ada tarikan untuk menarik minat golongan muda. Ini juga salah satu punca mengapa orang yang sedia ada di dalam UMNO berputus asa dengan UMNO itu sendiri.Kita ada lebih kurang tiga tahun untuk memperkasakan UMNO sebelum PRU seterusnya. Kita nak tunggu musim pilihanraya ke nak gerak sekarang?
oleh Pemuda IKS pada 8:00 AM
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Is The Singapore Straits Times Out Of Touch?
As a patriotic Malaysian, I have never been too pleased with the Singapore Straits Times, what with its own brand of government propaganda that sometimes touches too raw a nerve to be considered neighbourly. However, I find this posting by Rocky interesting. In it Rocky questions whether the Straits Times is trying to put DS Najib and Tun Dr M at loggerheads with each other.
At the very least, the attempt could be to imply a cooler relationship than what has been captured by the Malaysian media, i.e. warmth to the discomfort of even some UMNO stalwarts!
However, my observation may be more damning for the Straits Times, as I wonder... HAS THE SINGAPORE STRAITS TIMES LOST TOUCH WHEN IT COMES TO MALAYSIAN NEWS? This observation is cemented by:
Evidence of hearsay that runs contrary to even non-MSM and blog related news in Malaysia; i.e. there is no hint of the incident described by the Straits Times of a closed door meeting between DS Najib and Johor UMNO, which would have included the TPM, TS Muhyiddin, who was backed by Tun Dr M in his recent party polls victory and a host of other sympathisers of either Tun or his ideas, where the scenic bridge was supposedly discussed.
The crooked bridge is not high in the agenda in Malaysia at the moment, just as the KL-SG high-speed rail connection is also not on the table. It would be silly for Singapore to think that its concerns and priorities are the same as ours. Of course, the Straits Times could be forgiven for being Kiasu...
The 2 UMNO leaders mentioned as 'reliable sources' are no longer at the hub of governance in Malaysia. Datuk Shahrir Samad is no longer in the Cabinet; he claims to have resigned after losing badly at the UMNO elections, but there were indications that his position in Cabinet was untenable from the moment DS Najib was to become PM. And DS Najib is his cousin!
The second UMNO leader mentioned, Datuk Nur Jazlan, also lost his insider knowledge with the departure of KJ and his other buddies from the Fourth Floor. Datuk Nur Jazlan unfortunately is also suffering from ridicule aimed towards him still for putting up his hand to be a candidate for UMNO's Deputy Presidency... he's seen as too young, inexperienced and still leaning on his father Tan Sri Mohamad Rahmat's political legacy.
Is that enough reason to question the Straits Times' credibility in reporting the goings on in Malaysia in the post-Pak Lah era? I supppose it was easier with Uncle Kali, Brendan and KJ around...
Posted by Akhramsyah Muammar Ubaidah bin Sanusi at 5:50 AM
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
THE PROTOCOLS OF THE LEARNED: Protocol No. 1
1. Putting aside fine phrases we shall speak of the significance of each thought: by comparisons and deductions we shall throw light upon surrounding facts.2. What I am about to set forth, then, is our system from the two points of view, that of ourselves and that of the GOYIM [i.e. non- Jews].3. It must be noted that men with bad instincts are more in number than the good, and therefore the best results in governing them are attained by violence and terrorization, and not by academic discussions. Every man aims at power, everyone would like to become a dictator if only he could, and rare indeed are the men who would not be willing to sacrifice the welfare of all for the sake of securing their own welfare.4. What has restrained the beasts of prey who are called men? What has served for their guidance hitherto?5. In the beginnings of the structure of society, they were subjected to brutal and blind force; after words - to Law, which is the same force, only disguised. I draw the conclusion that by the law of nature right lies in force.6. Political freedom is an idea but not a fact. This idea one must know how to apply whenever it appears necessary with this bait of an idea to attract the masses of the people to one's party for the purpose of crushing another who is in authority. This task is rendered easier of the opponent has himself been infected with the idea of freedom, SO-CALLED LIBERALISM, and, for the sake of an idea, is willing to yield some of his power. It is precisely here that the triumph of our theory appears; the slackened reins of government are immediately, by the law of life, caught up and gathered together by a new hand, because the blind might of the nation cannot for one single day exist without guidance, and the new authority merely fits into the place of the old already weakened by liberalism.GOLD7. In our day the power which has replaced that of the rulers who were liberal is the power of Gold. Time was when Faith ruled. The idea of freedom is impossible of realization because no one knows how to use it with moderation. It is enough to hand over a people to self-government for a certain length of time for that people to be turned into a disorganized mob. From that moment on we get internecine strife which soon develops into battles between classes, in the midst of which States burn down and their importance is reduced to that of a heap of ashes.8. Whether a State exhausts itself in its own convulsions, whether its internal discord brings it under the power of external foes - in any case it can be accounted irretrievable lost: IT IS IN OUR POWER. The despotism of Capital, which is entirely in our hands, reaches out to it a straw that the State, willy-nilly, must take hold of: if not - it goes to the bottom.9. Should anyone of a liberal mind say that such reflections as the above are immoral, I would put the following questions: If every State has two foes and if in regard to the external foe it is allowed and not considered immoral to use every manner and art of conflict, as for example to keep the enemy in ignorance of plans of attack and defense, to attack him by night or in superior numbers, then in what way can the same means in regard to a worse foe, the destroyer of the structure of society and the commonweal, be called immoral and not permissible?10. Is it possible for any sound logical mind to hope with any success to guide crowds by the aid of reasonable counsels and arguments, when any objection or contradiction, senseless though it may be, can be made and when such objection may find more favor with the people, whose powers of reasoning are superficial? Men in masses and the men of the masses, being guided solely by petty passions, paltry beliefs, traditions and sentimental theorems, fall a prey to party dissension, which hinders any kind of agreement even on the basis of a perfectly reasonable argument. Every resolution of a crowd depends upon a chance or packed majority, which, in its ignorance of political secrets, puts forth some ridiculous resolution that lays in the administration a seed of anarchy.11. The political has nothing in common with the moral. The ruler who is governed by the moral is not a skilled politician, and is therefore unstable on his throne. He who wishes to rule must have recourse both to cunning and to make-believe. Great national qualities, like frankness and honesty, are vices in politics, for they bring down rulers from their thrones more effectively and more certainly than the most powerful enemy. Such qualities must be the attributes of the kingdoms of the GOYIM, but we must in no wise be guided by them.MIGHT IS RIGHT12. Our right lies in force. The word "right" is an abstract thought and proved by nothing. The word means no more than: Give me what I want in order that thereby I may have a proof that I am stronger than you.13. Where does right begin? Where does it end?14. In any State in which there is a bad organization of authority, an impersonality of laws and of the rulers who have lost their personality amid the flood of rights ever multiplying out of liberalism, I find a new right - to attack by the right of the strong, and to scatter to the winds all existing forces of order and regulation, to reconstruct all institutions and to become the sovereign lord of those who have left to us the rights of their power by laying them down voluntarily in their liberalism.15. Our power in the present tottering condition of all forms of power will be more invincible than any other, because it will remain invisible until the moment when it has gained such strength that no cunning can any longer undermine it.16. Out of the temporary evil we are now compelled to commit will emerge the good of an unshakable rule, which will restore the regular course of the machinery of the national life, brought to naught by liberalism. The result justifies the means. Let us, however, in our plans, direct our attention not so much to what is good and moral as to what is necessary and useful.17. Before us is a plan in which is laid down strategically the line from which we cannot deviate without running the risk of seeing the labor of many centuries brought to naught.18. In order to elaborate satisfactory forms of action it is necessary to have regard to the rascality, the slackness, the instability of the mob, its lack of capacity to understand and respect the conditions of its own life, or its own welfare. It must be understood that the might of a mob is blind, senseless and unreasoning force ever at the mercy of a suggestion from any side. The blind cannot lead the blind without bringing them into the abyss; consequently, members of the mob, upstarts from the people even though they should be as a genius for wisdom, yet having no understanding of the political, cannot come forward as leaders of the mob without bringing the whole nation to ruin.19. Only one trained from childhood for independent rule can have understanding of the words that can be made up of the political alphabet.20. A people left to itself, i.e., to upstarts from its midst, brings itself to ruin by party dissensions excited by the pursuit of power and honors and the disorders arising there from. Is it possible for the masses of the people calmly and without petty jealousies to form judgment, to deal with the affairs of the country, which cannot be mixed up with personal interest? Can they defend themselves from an external foe? It is unthinkable; for a plan broken up into as many parts as there are heads in the mob, loses all homogeneity, and thereby becomes unintelligible and impossible of execution.WE ARE DESPOTS21. It is only with a despotic ruler that plans can be elaborated extensively and clearly in such a way as to distribute the whole properly among the several parts of the machinery of the State: from this the conclusion is inevitable that a satisfactory form of government for any country is one that concentrates in the hands of one responsible person. Without an absolute despotism there can be no existence for civilization which is carried on not by the masses but by their guide, whosoever that person may be. The mob is savage, and displays its savagery at every opportunity. The moment the mob seizes freedom in its hands it quickly turns to anarchy, which in itself is the highest degree of savagery.22. Behold the alcoholic animals, bemused with drink, the right to an immoderate use of which comes along with freedom. It is not for us and ours to walk that road. The peoples of the GOYIM are bemused with alcoholic liquors; their youth has grown stupid on classicism and from early immorality, into which it has been inducted by our special agents - by tutors, lackeys, governesses in the houses of the wealthy, by clerks and others, by our women in the places of dissipation frequented by the GOYIM. In the number of these last I count also the so-called "society ladies," voluntary followers of the others in corruption and luxury.23. Our countersign is - Force and Make-believe. Only force conquers in political affairs, especially if it be concealed in the talents essential to statesmen. Violence must be the principle, and cunning and make-believe the rule for governments which do not want to lay down their crowns at the feet of agents of some new power. This evil is the one and only means to attain the end, the good. Therefore we must not stop at bribery, deceit and treachery when they should serve towards the attainment of our end. In politics one must know how to seize the property of others without hesitation if by it we secure submission and sovereignty.24. Our State, marching along the path of peaceful conquest, has the right to replace the horrors of war by less noticeable and more satisfactory sentences of death, necessary to maintain the terror which tends to produce blind submission. Just but merciless severity is the greatest factor of strength in the State: not only for the sake of gain but also in the name of duty, for the sake of victory, we must keep to the programme of violence and make-believe. The doctrine of squaring accounts is precisely as strong as the means of which it makes use. Therefore it is not so much by the means themselves as by the doctrine of severity that we shall triumph and bring all governments into subjection to our super-government. It is enough for them to know that we are too merciless for all disobedience to cease.WE SHALL END LIBERTY25. Far back in ancient times we were the first to cry among the masses of the people he words "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity," words many times repeated since these days by stupid poll- parrots who, from all sides around, flew down upon these baits and with them carried away the well-being of the world, true freedom of the individual, formerly so well guarded against the pressure of the mob. The would-be wise men of the GOYIM, the intellectuals, could not make anything out of the uttered words in their abstractedness; did not see that in nature there is no equality, cannot be freedom: that Nature herself has established inequality of minds, of characters, and capacities, just as immutably as she has established subordination to her laws: never stopped to think that the mob is a blind thing, that upstarts elected from among it to bear rule are, in regard to the political, the same blind men as the mob itself, that the adept, though he be a fool, can yet rule, whereas the non-adept, even if he were a genius, understands nothing in the political - to all those things the GOYIM paid no regard; yet all the time it was based upon these things that dynastic rule rested: the father passed on to the son a knowledge of the course of political affairs in such wise that none should know it but members of the dynasty and none could betray it to the governed. As time went on, the meaning of the dynastic transference of the true position of affairs in the political was lost, and this aided the success of our cause.26. In all corners of the earth the words "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity," brought to our ranks, thanks to our blind agents, whole legions who bore our banners with enthusiasm. And all the time these words were canker-worms at work boring into the well-being of the GOYIM, putting an end everywhere to peace, quiet, solidarity and destroying all the foundations of the GOYA States. As you will see later, this helped us to our triumph: it gave us the possibility, among other things, of getting into our hands the master card - the destruction of the privileges, or in other words of the very existence of the aristocracy of the GOYIM, that class which was the only defense peoples and countries had against us. On the ruins of the eternal and genealogical aristocracy of the GOYIM we have set up the aristocracy of our educated class headed by the aristocracy of money. The qualifications for this aristocracy we have established in wealth, which is dependent upon us, and in knowledge, for which our learned elders provide the motive force.27. Our triumph has been rendered easier by the fact that in our relations with the men, whom we wanted, we have always worked upon the most sensitive chords of the human mind, upon the cash account, upon the cupidity, upon the insatiability for material needs of man; and each one of these human weaknesses, taken alone, is sufficient to paralyze initiative, for it hands over the will of men to the disposition of him who has bought their activities.28. The abstraction of freedom has enabled us to persuade the mob in all countries that their government is nothing but the steward of the people who are the owners of the country, and that the steward may be replaced like a worn-out glove.29. It is this possibility of replacing the representatives of the people which has placed at our disposal, and, as it were, given us the power of appointment.
Posted by paneh at 3:47 PM
Labels: Agenda Asing
Defining Malaysian socio-political structure
April 21, 2009 by jebatmustdie
We have delved into what is actually democracy in Malaysia in the previous article. From the comments received, I believe most people do not understand what is democracy in the context of Malaysian social structure. Many have rubbished the analysis made by the astute commentator without even giving a viable anti-thesis to impress upon us their very own definition of what democracy is. What we had was a barrage of complaints over purported lack of freedom or examples of law abuses made by the government.
Some had erroneously defined democracy as the right of an individual to protest. To some extent, that is agreeable to the principles of democracy. But when the same individual decidedly trying to destroy the peace and livelihood of other individuals, then he or she is no longer prescribing to the concept of democracy. They have in reality, subscribed themselves to another form of social political structure - Anarchy.
Realistically speaking, no government is perfect. Even the great opposition governments in all 4 states are facing so many problems by which, their remedy is often slant towards the same style of governance of the ruling federal government. We have yet to see any feasible socio-political structure that suggests new type of social fabric for Malaysians to analyze in replace of the current social and political structure.
In this light, before anyone could jump into conclusion or trying to cough up new set of rules on how Malaysia should be, it is better for each one of us to learn what Malaysia is. We must learn the intricacies that balance each of the elements within our nation’s scope of existence.
Below are a few factors that must be known in order to ascertain the very nature of our society. There is no right or wrong in the degree factors as every country is unique with each other. I hope I had simplified this quite dry subject into something that is palatable to everyone.
1. Individualism vs. Collective rights
Individualism means the rights of an individual are more important than groups that they may belong to. It aims to let each person grow or fail on their own. Collective rights simply means that the rights of the family, group and country is much more important than the individual. It sees individualism as selfish and short sighted. I firmly believe that the US is number one here in the first category and followed closely by Great Britain and Australia. Malaysia and other Asian countries on the other hand are somewhere in the latter category.
2. Equal opportunity vs. Equal outcome
Equal opportunity means equality in the rights of individual in accessing prospects and chances for a better position in life. Everyone is entitled to get the same amount of opportunity regardless of their own social background and the overall outcome. Meanwhile, equal outcome seeks to find equilibrium in the outcome among everyone in the society. If in the pursuit to have equal outcome, any individual is being discriminated by an affirmative action, then the collective rights of the society take precedent. Most homogeneous countries take the first category while multicultural, and multiethnic countries fall in the second category. The multi-ethnic US unfortunately falls somewhere in the first category when instead they should focus on the second. As the result, their income disparity and unemployment rate between the variety of ethnics are high.
3. Sacred authority vs. Secular authority
Theocracy is one of a few factors that most countries are saddled with in recent times. It infuses religious hegemony in all aspects of the government and the free society. Secular authority simply means separating religion from governance. Malaysia and to a lesser extent, the US fall in between the two categories where religion are practiced unobtrusively and had permeated in everyday lives of the people whether in governance or in lifestyles. However, the laws of the land is largely secular. To simplify this further, the phrases ‘God Bless America’ and ‘In God We Trust’ are prevalent in the minds of Americans. This strong belief of a Higher Being is equally important in the mindset of Malaysians too. On the other hand, communist countries clearly separates religion from administration with very minimal religious overtones and references in their governance. At the opposite end of this communist countries are the pure theocratic nations of Saudi Arabia, the Vatican and Iran.
4. Social assimilation vs. Social segregation
Most of the countries in the world assimilate their citizens with a common unifying factor. National language, standardized culture or even one paramount religion are used as the based factors in determining the degree of assimilation in a particular country. United States lead the way of assimilating its people which goes as far back in the early 19th century when John Quincy Adams, the 6th President of the US, said that in the effort towards nation-building, “immigrants must cast of their European skin, never to resume it” and Horace Mann, a US early education reformer in the 19th century noted that national schools was built “with the need to make Americans out of Europeans”. Many other countries in Asia follow this approach such as Thailand, Philippines, Australia, Singapore and Indonesia. These countries opted either to have a common language or a standardized culture onto their people. If there were an assimilation index, or a scale on how to measure a country’s assimilation rate, then the most probable quantitative measure would be the degree of similarities of the main community and the ones with foreign ancestry.
5. Masculinity vs. Femininity
Each country has the unique peculiarity in the roles of gender among its people. Traditional gender roles are more prevalent among the males within Asian countries as opposed to the countries with western values. Men are generally considered aggressive and competitive while arguably, women are expected to be domesticated and more gentle. Countries which value masculinity over femininity include Japan, China, surprisingly Austria and Venezuela. Malaysia falls in this category too.
6. Meritocratic capitalism vs. Social obligation
Meritocratic capitalism can be summed up as ’survival of the fittest’. While social obligation simply means, the rich is subsidizing the poor. Many countries try to subscribe themselves to the first category although more and more countries such as the US, under the present President Barack Obama is indulging themselves in socialism in order to maintain social fabric by subsidizing the poor. It is ironic that the strongest economy in the world, which built its strength virtually through market capitalism is so fragile when faced with an economic crisis. In fact, it is more fragile than governments who had laid more importance in social obligation. Malaysia is categorised to be in the second category whereby Asian values of ‘prospering thy neighbours’ and strong, empathetic family ties remain the pinnacle of its culture. However, social obligation will only work should there is a strong centralised authority managing the government apparatuses.
Below is the web chart of the factors above:
Note : Theories partly composed from works of Geert Hofstede, Georg Hegel and Fons Trompenaars.
Posted in Socio-economy 1 Comment