Sharing The Nations by ZAINAH A ANWAR
IT’S that time of the year again when you are supposed to reflect on what it means to be Malaysian.
I am torn between wanting to see the glass as half full or half empty.
Ever the optimist who believes change is possible, I am always pulling up friends in despair, assuring them the way politics is played, business is conducted, religion is politicised in this country cannot last forever. It is just not sustainable.
That in the end, good sense will always prevail, because there is too much that is good about Malaysia for us to tear it asunder for short-term political gain.
But right now, I am just not so sure any more. Not that the good will not prevail, in the end, but that while we work hard for that to happen, the political and social fabric that have kept us together for so long might just be shredded beyond repair.
No thanks to politicians who are supposed to lead us to greater heights of development, unity, prosperity.
Let’s just look at the shameful incident of the cow-head demonstration just three days before we celebrated our 52nd birthday as an independent nation.
Obviously, the Prime Minister’s 1Malaysia campaign means nothing to those demonstrators who claim to represent the residents of Section 23, Shah Alam.
I would like to think there are more rational, wiser Muslims living there whose faith is not easily undermined by the presence of a temple in the neighbourhood.
Now that this incident has blown up into a national issue, those responsible are trying to deny their culpability.
But in today’s age of YouTube and instant communication, the whole world can view who said and did what on that day.
As far as the video showed, there was no effort to get the so-called uninvited extremist individuals in the midst to stop their deliberately provocative action.
In fact, the demonstrators marched behind the freshly slaughtered cow-head. Not only that, the leaders of the demonstration stomped on the cow-head and spewed inflammatory words and made threats in the name of race and religion.
And then, in true Malaysian style, we are all supposed to feel assured that there came the usual outcry, outrage and indignation.
Our national political leaders said the right words to calm the situation, promised investigation and action. Only for yet another outburst to take place.
Haven’t we gone through this before? From the kris-wielding, racial and religious supremacist language at the 2006 Umno general assembly, to Takaful Malaysia’s Fauzi Mustafa’s directive to his staff not to wish their Hindu clients a Happy Deepavali, to the allegation that a group of Muslim students would be baptised at the Silibin church in Ipoh, to the Umno Bukit Bendera division chief Datuk Ahmad Ismail and his “pendatang” labelling, to the inflammatory headlines in some newspapers and the predictable demonstrations after Friday prayers on real and imagined threats to Islam and Malay rights.
Is it any wonder that the cow-head demonstrators should resort to the same racialist language and threats of bloodshed should their demands in the name of race and religion be ignored?
If we do not find a way to be politically and culturally civil in our contested public engagement fast, then this deliberate strategy to construct every dispute into a threat to race and religion will eventually implode on us.
March 8, 2008, was one safety valve where the emergent diverse social forces within our society used the ballot box to express their discontent. But it seems too many of our political leaders and their earnest supporters at the grassroots remain untutored to the changing mood of the rakyat.
Enough is enough. Stop this politics of fear. Stop whipping up public sentiment to win political support.
Stop manufacturing this siege mentality to put the Malays on perpetual crisis mode, only to serve short- term political ends.
We are tired of hearing that the Malays are under threat, Islam is under threat, as if the Malays are so feeble and frail that the slightest challenge to our comfort zone would annihilate our faith and our race.
In the end, we spend so much time fighting imaginary enemies and threats instead of focusing our energy and time on the real issues that impede the progress that we should have achieved after 52 years of independence and almost 40 years of affirmative action policies that have privileged the Malays.
Time waits for no man is a much used cliché, but really as we fight over dead bodies, location of temples, loudspeakers at mosques, punitive state control over what we wear, drink, and listen to and where we hang out with our friends, other countries and other communities are getting on with being more competitive, more productive, more civil and more inclusive in their engagements. And having more fun at that.
The Prime Minister’s call for Malaysians to restore the bridges that brought us together and tear the walls that separate us is most timely.
But it must be demonstrated by deeds – immediately. For too long, our national leaders have been wringing their hands over the deteriorating race relations in the country.
Every time a crisis erupts, all kinds of solutions and suggestions are made to build bridges among the Malays, Chinese and Indians. But what has happened to all these policies?
How about the policy that university housing should ensure that roommates are of different races?
That there should not be any more single-race teams and societies in schools and universities.
And then, the compulsory ethnic relations course in universities and the five-year national unity and integration action plan. And, oh yes, the vision school.
Is it still on pilot mode after all these years? And yes, that plan to make the national school system the school of first choice for all Malaysians. Great ideas. We the rakyat would like to know their progress.
Have they really been implemented? Are they being monitored and evaluated to see if their objectives are being reached? How effective are they? Who are their champions?
I would like to know, for we urgently need to build a public culture of citizenship that cuts across ethnic divides.
We must encourage inter-ethnic civic and social associations, for it is this social capital in our society that will put a brake on any possibility of ethnic contestation turning into ethnic violence.
The fact that the residents association of a racially diverse Section 23 Shah Alam seems to be made up of only one race, one religion and one point of view on a contested issue demonstrates the challenge that faces us.
A more integrated and inclusive residents association could have stopped any effort by politicians to exploit grassroots disgruntlement and escalate it into a communal conflict to undermine political rivals.
Where are the truly visionary and committed leaders in government who make, promote, implement and monitor policies to build bridges at all levels of Malaysian society?
The Government cannot forever go on making one announcement after another to mend our fraying race relations, and yet allow those determined to build walls to separate us to get their way.
If the Government is serious, then anyone who exploits race and religion and inflame public sentiment for narrow sectarian interests must be delegitimised, not rewarded.
It is ironic that in this country, those who are actually doing the inter-ethnic bridge building are demonised as traitors to the race, anti-God, and anti-Islam.
My only hope really lies with the many actors in civil society who are consciously, tirelessly, and vibrantly working together across racial and religious divides in music, film, dance, theatre, the arts, women’s rights and human rights activism, community services, neigbourhood associations, inter-faith dialogue – all determined to keep Malaysia safe, inclusive, respectful and celebratory of our rich heritage of diversity that has always been our blessing. Shame on those who find this a threat.
The Star
Sunday September 6, 2009
Friday, September 11, 2009
Merit comes from making right choices
Musings by Marina Mahathir
Living the faith is not just about avoiding what is prohibited, but more so about doing the right things where morals and ethics are concerned.
IN this month of Ramadan, one naturally focuses on questions of faith. And indeed, with several controversies in the papers, we can’t escape it at all. Every day our lives seem to be increasingly circumscribed until the question of choice in our lives becomes irrelevant.
There are some people in our midst who seem to think that the only way to fulfill our religious obligations is by removing any sort of temptation or challenge in our paths.
Since we are prohibited from drinking, the answer is therefore to remove any form of alcohol from our sight so that we may never have the opportunity to be tempted by it.
Or, to disallow young Muslims to attend events sponsored by alcoholic beverage companies.
The assumption is that by the mere presence of liquor, we would abandon all inhibitions and imbibe.
This suggests two things. One is that the religious education of the young must be so inadequate that they feel totally uninhibited when faced with what they should know is prohibited.
Secondly, our faith is essentially a weak one since it can never restrain us from breaking rules.
There are other faiths that have food prohibitions as well. Many Hindus and Buddhists don’t eat beef. There are people who take no meat at all.
Yet, living in a world of carnivores, where the beef burger is ubiquitous and most people are oblivious of others’ dietary restrictions, they stick to their diets throughout their lives. Do they have stronger faith than Muslims?
I’m trying to imagine a world where our faith is supposedly secured by having absolutely no temptations or challenges at all.
We can ban every form of alcohol (including medicinal ones), we can cull every single pig in the land, but does that mean we will be able to float about blissfully certain that we now have a place in heaven?
In countries where alcohol is completely prohibited, an underground system invariably springs up and people
drink much more, perhaps because it is illicit.
People who are used to ham made from turkey meat and bacon from beef tend to assume, when they travel to other countries, that all the bacon and ham there are also made from the same meats.
Children who have never seen pigs gush over the cuteness of those little pink animals with the funny snouts.
But faith is about more than just prohibited drinks and foods. It is also about morals and ethics. Every day we are faced with choices that challenge our sense of morality.
Do we pay a little extra to the officer in order to expedite our applications? Do we beat the red light, thus endangering other people, just because we are a little late? Do we keep quiet about a mistake we made and let others take the blame?
It is our faith that is going to provide us the answers to these questions. And sometimes these questions can be difficult to answer. Does that mean therefore that we should just get rid of them so that our faith need never be tested?
It would be nice to get rid of corruption completely so that we never have to deal with it. But do we hear of anyone calling for a ban on it? Or mobilising religious officials to catch anyone giving or receiving a bribe?
If our faith directs our way of life, then ethical and moral questions should dog us every day. How is it that those calling for people who drink to be whipped have nothing to say about people who neglect to repay loans? Or who leave their children in destitution?
How is it that the voices that bay for rock concerts to be banned are not just as outraged by the existence of the homeless and the hungry?
Faith, as someone said, needs to be exercised regularly. Otherwise it gets flabby. In what way can it be exercised if we think that living in a religious utopia is what we should aim for?
Is it better for our faith to be exercised by the trivial rather than the big moral questions of poverty, illiteracy and violence?
God said in the Quran, “if it had been His will, He could indeed have guided you all”. (6:149)
We could all be perfectly good if He
had so willed it. But we are given
choices because that is how we earn our merits. We have the opportunity to think about what we should do and then decide.
In that way we have the chance to think about what ethics we want to apply in our lives. Take away that choice and we never have to think about morals and ethics. What sort of human beings would we be then?
The Star
Wednesday September 2, 2009
Living the faith is not just about avoiding what is prohibited, but more so about doing the right things where morals and ethics are concerned.
IN this month of Ramadan, one naturally focuses on questions of faith. And indeed, with several controversies in the papers, we can’t escape it at all. Every day our lives seem to be increasingly circumscribed until the question of choice in our lives becomes irrelevant.
There are some people in our midst who seem to think that the only way to fulfill our religious obligations is by removing any sort of temptation or challenge in our paths.
Since we are prohibited from drinking, the answer is therefore to remove any form of alcohol from our sight so that we may never have the opportunity to be tempted by it.
Or, to disallow young Muslims to attend events sponsored by alcoholic beverage companies.
The assumption is that by the mere presence of liquor, we would abandon all inhibitions and imbibe.
This suggests two things. One is that the religious education of the young must be so inadequate that they feel totally uninhibited when faced with what they should know is prohibited.
Secondly, our faith is essentially a weak one since it can never restrain us from breaking rules.
There are other faiths that have food prohibitions as well. Many Hindus and Buddhists don’t eat beef. There are people who take no meat at all.
Yet, living in a world of carnivores, where the beef burger is ubiquitous and most people are oblivious of others’ dietary restrictions, they stick to their diets throughout their lives. Do they have stronger faith than Muslims?
I’m trying to imagine a world where our faith is supposedly secured by having absolutely no temptations or challenges at all.
We can ban every form of alcohol (including medicinal ones), we can cull every single pig in the land, but does that mean we will be able to float about blissfully certain that we now have a place in heaven?
In countries where alcohol is completely prohibited, an underground system invariably springs up and people
drink much more, perhaps because it is illicit.
People who are used to ham made from turkey meat and bacon from beef tend to assume, when they travel to other countries, that all the bacon and ham there are also made from the same meats.
Children who have never seen pigs gush over the cuteness of those little pink animals with the funny snouts.
But faith is about more than just prohibited drinks and foods. It is also about morals and ethics. Every day we are faced with choices that challenge our sense of morality.
Do we pay a little extra to the officer in order to expedite our applications? Do we beat the red light, thus endangering other people, just because we are a little late? Do we keep quiet about a mistake we made and let others take the blame?
It is our faith that is going to provide us the answers to these questions. And sometimes these questions can be difficult to answer. Does that mean therefore that we should just get rid of them so that our faith need never be tested?
It would be nice to get rid of corruption completely so that we never have to deal with it. But do we hear of anyone calling for a ban on it? Or mobilising religious officials to catch anyone giving or receiving a bribe?
If our faith directs our way of life, then ethical and moral questions should dog us every day. How is it that those calling for people who drink to be whipped have nothing to say about people who neglect to repay loans? Or who leave their children in destitution?
How is it that the voices that bay for rock concerts to be banned are not just as outraged by the existence of the homeless and the hungry?
Faith, as someone said, needs to be exercised regularly. Otherwise it gets flabby. In what way can it be exercised if we think that living in a religious utopia is what we should aim for?
Is it better for our faith to be exercised by the trivial rather than the big moral questions of poverty, illiteracy and violence?
God said in the Quran, “if it had been His will, He could indeed have guided you all”. (6:149)
We could all be perfectly good if He
had so willed it. But we are given
choices because that is how we earn our merits. We have the opportunity to think about what we should do and then decide.
In that way we have the chance to think about what ethics we want to apply in our lives. Take away that choice and we never have to think about morals and ethics. What sort of human beings would we be then?
The Star
Wednesday September 2, 2009
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Use your head, not your heart
by WONG CHUN WAI
IT’S time for cool heads to prevail. The controversy over the cow-head protest, which arose because of the proposed relocation of a Hindu temple in Shah Alam, has degenerated.
Raw emotions were displayed at the meeting between Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim and the residents yesterday.
The emotionally-charged meeting turned ugly when some residents reportedly shouted profanities and even tried to throw chairs and shoes at the Mentri Besar.
Insults were hurled and insensitive remarks were made by those present, which shocked the Selangor elected representatives and pressmen.
The Aug 28 protest by about 50 people who marched from the state mosque to the state secretariat building to oppose the relocation of the 150-year-old Maha Mariamman temple from Section 19 to Section 23 has now become international news.
It would have been just an ordinary demonstration if the protestors had not paraded the head of a cow, an animal deemed sacred by the Hindus, and placed it at the state secretariat building.
The residents’ action committee has denied any involvement in insulting a religious symbol, saying the cow’s head was symbolic of the state government’s stupidity.
It is unlikely that their defence, if not excuse, would be accepted.
They could have just stopped those who brought the cow’s head and led the parade; but they didn’t. Or they failed, if their argument is to be used.
Never mind if the cow’s head was used to insult the state government. They simply didn’t use their head to think it over because the protest was over a Hindu temple. To use a cow’s head was sheer stupidity.
It has now put the Government in a fix. Police have interviewed over 70 people and have submitted their report to the Attorney-General for a decision.
The AG has sent the report back to the police asking for more details.
Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein has given his assurance that no one is above the law.
He has said clearly that those who brought the cow’s head should be hauled to court, and that the action should not be tolerated as the cow is considered sacred in certain religions.
Hishammuddin said the ministry viewed seriously issues that could undermine the harmony, national security and stability of multi-racial Malaysia.
It is important that such reassuring statements are made by our leaders because no one should give the impression, not even the slightest one, that such seditious actions are tolerated.
If they are allowed to get away with it, then the whole mission of 1Malaysia would be jeopardised.
The Government must not let one group hijack what they are trying to do for a better Malaysia.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak sent a clear message when he said Muslims should refrain from condemning or insulting other religions and their believers.
Follow the true Islamic teachings of showing respect, he said.
He added that Prophet Muhammad allowed believers of other religions to practise their creeds and forbade his followers from going against them. The Prophet guaranteed the rights of the minorities under the Medina Constitution.
In fact, Muslims are obligated to protect and honour any house of worship that is dedicated to God, even if it is a church, temple or a synagogue.
Any attempt to prevent the followers of any other faith from worshipping God, according to their own rights, is condemned in the Quran as sacrilege.
The history of the Islamic empires shows that in dominant Muslim societies, people of other faiths were allowed to flourish.
Just study the history of the Moghul Empire in India where there are huge numbers of Hindus and temples.
In Baghdad, under the Abbasid Khalifahs, the Jews and Christians enjoyed the freedom of religion that they never allowed for each other.
These historical facts are well documented and any student of basic Islam would learn about the tolerance showed by true followers of the faith.
The religious rights of minorities must never be ignored. Muslims in some European countries, for example, have found themselves being discriminated against when it comes to building mosques because of opposition from Christian residents in some areas.
In May, about 250 people protested against the Attakwa mosque in a Belgian neighbourhood and in 2007, Germans staged a protest during the opening of a mosque in Berlin.
In contrast, a massive mosque stands on Nathan Road in Kowloon even though the area is predominantly Chinese. It is accepted and even promoted as a tourist destination. And rightly so too.
Muslims may be minorities in these places but they have the right to worship. Any place where people gather to honour God is always good.
Closer to home, Penang Island is predominantly Chinese but Mesjid Kapitan Keling sits majestically in George Town. It is the pride of not just the Muslims but Penangites of other faiths.
We have to be careful when we use terms like “majority” and “minority” because Malaysia is a multi-racial country where one community would outnumer another in some areas.
Malaysia must encourage more multi-racial neighbourhoods like Subang Jaya in Selangor.
Enclaves with one race sometimes breed intolerance and the voice of a noisy and demanding minority can sometimes drown those of a moderate majority.
Moderate Malaysians must rise to the occasion as the world is watching how we are handling the the cow-head protest.
We have no place for hot-headed people who invoke God’s name with no understanding of tolerance and peace. Let’s use our head.
Sunday September 6, 2009
IT’S time for cool heads to prevail. The controversy over the cow-head protest, which arose because of the proposed relocation of a Hindu temple in Shah Alam, has degenerated.
Raw emotions were displayed at the meeting between Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim and the residents yesterday.
The emotionally-charged meeting turned ugly when some residents reportedly shouted profanities and even tried to throw chairs and shoes at the Mentri Besar.
Insults were hurled and insensitive remarks were made by those present, which shocked the Selangor elected representatives and pressmen.
The Aug 28 protest by about 50 people who marched from the state mosque to the state secretariat building to oppose the relocation of the 150-year-old Maha Mariamman temple from Section 19 to Section 23 has now become international news.
It would have been just an ordinary demonstration if the protestors had not paraded the head of a cow, an animal deemed sacred by the Hindus, and placed it at the state secretariat building.
The residents’ action committee has denied any involvement in insulting a religious symbol, saying the cow’s head was symbolic of the state government’s stupidity.
It is unlikely that their defence, if not excuse, would be accepted.
They could have just stopped those who brought the cow’s head and led the parade; but they didn’t. Or they failed, if their argument is to be used.
Never mind if the cow’s head was used to insult the state government. They simply didn’t use their head to think it over because the protest was over a Hindu temple. To use a cow’s head was sheer stupidity.
It has now put the Government in a fix. Police have interviewed over 70 people and have submitted their report to the Attorney-General for a decision.
The AG has sent the report back to the police asking for more details.
Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein has given his assurance that no one is above the law.
He has said clearly that those who brought the cow’s head should be hauled to court, and that the action should not be tolerated as the cow is considered sacred in certain religions.
Hishammuddin said the ministry viewed seriously issues that could undermine the harmony, national security and stability of multi-racial Malaysia.
It is important that such reassuring statements are made by our leaders because no one should give the impression, not even the slightest one, that such seditious actions are tolerated.
If they are allowed to get away with it, then the whole mission of 1Malaysia would be jeopardised.
The Government must not let one group hijack what they are trying to do for a better Malaysia.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak sent a clear message when he said Muslims should refrain from condemning or insulting other religions and their believers.
Follow the true Islamic teachings of showing respect, he said.
He added that Prophet Muhammad allowed believers of other religions to practise their creeds and forbade his followers from going against them. The Prophet guaranteed the rights of the minorities under the Medina Constitution.
In fact, Muslims are obligated to protect and honour any house of worship that is dedicated to God, even if it is a church, temple or a synagogue.
Any attempt to prevent the followers of any other faith from worshipping God, according to their own rights, is condemned in the Quran as sacrilege.
The history of the Islamic empires shows that in dominant Muslim societies, people of other faiths were allowed to flourish.
Just study the history of the Moghul Empire in India where there are huge numbers of Hindus and temples.
In Baghdad, under the Abbasid Khalifahs, the Jews and Christians enjoyed the freedom of religion that they never allowed for each other.
These historical facts are well documented and any student of basic Islam would learn about the tolerance showed by true followers of the faith.
The religious rights of minorities must never be ignored. Muslims in some European countries, for example, have found themselves being discriminated against when it comes to building mosques because of opposition from Christian residents in some areas.
In May, about 250 people protested against the Attakwa mosque in a Belgian neighbourhood and in 2007, Germans staged a protest during the opening of a mosque in Berlin.
In contrast, a massive mosque stands on Nathan Road in Kowloon even though the area is predominantly Chinese. It is accepted and even promoted as a tourist destination. And rightly so too.
Muslims may be minorities in these places but they have the right to worship. Any place where people gather to honour God is always good.
Closer to home, Penang Island is predominantly Chinese but Mesjid Kapitan Keling sits majestically in George Town. It is the pride of not just the Muslims but Penangites of other faiths.
We have to be careful when we use terms like “majority” and “minority” because Malaysia is a multi-racial country where one community would outnumer another in some areas.
Malaysia must encourage more multi-racial neighbourhoods like Subang Jaya in Selangor.
Enclaves with one race sometimes breed intolerance and the voice of a noisy and demanding minority can sometimes drown those of a moderate majority.
Moderate Malaysians must rise to the occasion as the world is watching how we are handling the the cow-head protest.
We have no place for hot-headed people who invoke God’s name with no understanding of tolerance and peace. Let’s use our head.
Sunday September 6, 2009
Cow Head Demo
Thursday September 3, 2009
Let’s stamp out racism
BRAVE NEW WORLD
By AZMI SHAROM
Not only must we condemn the cow-head protest in Shah Alam last week but we must look into ourselves and make sure we don’t think and speak like racists.
THE cow-head protest in Shah Alam last week left me feeling utterly disgusted. The men who organised and participated in that foul act are nothing but rank racists, and by cloaking their activities in a veil of piousness they show themselves to be even more despicable.
Yes, I was furious, but sadly I was not surprised. How can I be and how can anyone else be? We have allowed racists to have their way for so many years now.
Their appalling words and actions get progressively bolder and it just builds and builds until we have these men feeling they have the right to insult another religion in the most vile and brutal manner.
In the light of how Malay and Islamic supremacist thinking and expression have caught hold in the last few years, this sickening behaviour is simply a natural progression.
It happened because we allowed it to happen. Those bigoted thugs did what they did because we did not stamp down on the racists among us hard.
We allowed racist politicians to spout their garbage about “immigrant races”; we allowed them to tell our brothers and sisters to “go back to where you belong”; we allowed them to wave weapons of war; and we allowed them to ask for the weapons to be bathed in blood.
It’s too late for any politician to condemn something now when all the other acts of bigotry that have been brewing in the past few years were not even protested against because they suited their political needs.
It is too late to be making pleas of unity on National Day when not enough has been done before.
Let’s look at something recent. Two books that attacked the Mentri Besar of Selangor and Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim are blatantly racist.
They claim that Selangor is for Malays only. They claim that the Pakatan Rakyat state government threatens Malays because they hire non-Malay staff.
In other words, the government must only hire Malays so that only Malays get benefits from the government. This is racism pure and simple. But because it suits the ruling party, as these books attack Pakatan, nothing is said.
Racism is racism, be it some vile words published in some cheap self-published drivel, or a bleeding cow head stomped and spat upon. Racism is racism and it must be fought.
When it is not fought, when it is not faced down every single time, then those without the courage to fight it are merely accomplices who, through their cowardice or selfishness, support it.
And how should we fight it? The law that should be used is the Penal Code. The Sedition Act is a blunderbuss of a law and could be used against genuine dissent as well. Let us not look to that archaic leaving of the British.
Use the provisions in the Penal Code that make incitement an offence. Charge these people under the Penal Code and lock them away.
But that is for the authorities to do, if they so choose to. We, the people, must look into ourselves and make sure we don’t think and speak like racists. We must be even more careful that we do not infect our children.
We should speak out against racism and we should tell our political leaders that if they do not fight racism then they are supporting racism and we will not support them.
We must make sure that what happened in Shah Alam faces utter and complete public contempt. Only in that way can we ensure it is not repeated.
The Star - 3 September 2009
Let’s stamp out racism
BRAVE NEW WORLD
By AZMI SHAROM
Not only must we condemn the cow-head protest in Shah Alam last week but we must look into ourselves and make sure we don’t think and speak like racists.
THE cow-head protest in Shah Alam last week left me feeling utterly disgusted. The men who organised and participated in that foul act are nothing but rank racists, and by cloaking their activities in a veil of piousness they show themselves to be even more despicable.
Yes, I was furious, but sadly I was not surprised. How can I be and how can anyone else be? We have allowed racists to have their way for so many years now.
Their appalling words and actions get progressively bolder and it just builds and builds until we have these men feeling they have the right to insult another religion in the most vile and brutal manner.
In the light of how Malay and Islamic supremacist thinking and expression have caught hold in the last few years, this sickening behaviour is simply a natural progression.
It happened because we allowed it to happen. Those bigoted thugs did what they did because we did not stamp down on the racists among us hard.
We allowed racist politicians to spout their garbage about “immigrant races”; we allowed them to tell our brothers and sisters to “go back to where you belong”; we allowed them to wave weapons of war; and we allowed them to ask for the weapons to be bathed in blood.
It’s too late for any politician to condemn something now when all the other acts of bigotry that have been brewing in the past few years were not even protested against because they suited their political needs.
It is too late to be making pleas of unity on National Day when not enough has been done before.
Let’s look at something recent. Two books that attacked the Mentri Besar of Selangor and Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim are blatantly racist.
They claim that Selangor is for Malays only. They claim that the Pakatan Rakyat state government threatens Malays because they hire non-Malay staff.
In other words, the government must only hire Malays so that only Malays get benefits from the government. This is racism pure and simple. But because it suits the ruling party, as these books attack Pakatan, nothing is said.
Racism is racism, be it some vile words published in some cheap self-published drivel, or a bleeding cow head stomped and spat upon. Racism is racism and it must be fought.
When it is not fought, when it is not faced down every single time, then those without the courage to fight it are merely accomplices who, through their cowardice or selfishness, support it.
And how should we fight it? The law that should be used is the Penal Code. The Sedition Act is a blunderbuss of a law and could be used against genuine dissent as well. Let us not look to that archaic leaving of the British.
Use the provisions in the Penal Code that make incitement an offence. Charge these people under the Penal Code and lock them away.
But that is for the authorities to do, if they so choose to. We, the people, must look into ourselves and make sure we don’t think and speak like racists. We must be even more careful that we do not infect our children.
We should speak out against racism and we should tell our political leaders that if they do not fight racism then they are supporting racism and we will not support them.
We must make sure that what happened in Shah Alam faces utter and complete public contempt. Only in that way can we ensure it is not repeated.
The Star - 3 September 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)