malaysiakini: Dishonouring honorary degrees... by Josh Hong

Dishonouring honorary degrees

Josh Hong
Mar 4, 2011, 4:24pm

 

Wilhelm von Humboldt, a liberal educationist and founder of the prestigious Humboldt University of Berlin, once said that “education will be good to the extent that it suffers no outside intervention; it will be all the more effective, the greater the latitude left to the diligence of the teachers and the emulation of their pupils”.

In addition, Humboldt ardently believed that education, truth and virtue must be disseminated to such an extent that the 'concept of mankind' would take on a great and dignified form in each individual.

It was this conviction that led the great German philosopher to lay down the foundation of Germany's tertiary education in its modern form. But von Humboldt would certainly be in tears had he lived long enough to witness the state of higher education today.

While one should agree genuine knowledge can only come through comprehensive learning, academic rigor, assiduous inquiry, attentive contemplation and public debate, it is sad to know that, everywhere in the world, universities - precisely the places where knowledge is processed and produced - have turned into a huge and expensive business.

Once upon a time, going to a college or university was perceived as a privilege, and those who left with a doctorate would even imply one's having achieved something extraordinary in life. It was a clear affirmation of one's academic competence and fortitude. No more, no less.

A substantive and meaningful contribution

Although not everyone has to write a voluminous thesis on a specific field in order to be conferred a PhD, it is still necessary to convince the general public that one has made a substantive and meaningful contribution to society or a certain cause before an honorary doctorate is deemed appropriate.

Therefore, Nelson Mandela (left) rightly deserves the slew of academic accolades conferred on him, for the great statesman - despite his controversial past as a firebrand nationalist leader - has indeed inspired the world with his pleas for forgiveness, reconciliation and renewal in the post-apartheid South Africa.

So did Martin Luther King Jr, Mother Teresa and Mahatma Gandhi.

Not any more. Nowadays, universities look increasing like places where sheer absurdity and hypocrisy is allowed to be processed. Every now and then, we look on in helplessness at honorary doctorates being handed out to high-profile individuals who have done virtually nothing to make this world a better place, or who have yet to prove that they have made sufficient contribution to merit such an award.

In Malaysia alone, a large number of local institutes of higher learning - both national and private - are in a rush to furnish politicians with an honorary doctorate. And it was no surprise that Lim Kok Wing University of Creative Technology saw it fit to acknowledge the 'contributions' made by Mahathir Mohamad, Abdul Taib Mahmud and Ling Liong Sik.

It was largely due to these men that the arts institute has been able to become a leading player in regional education, and Lim Kok Wing himself has long been a patron of Barisan Nasional.

But what have these politicians done to make themselves truly deserving of the acknowledgement? Mahathir single-handedly destroyed our judicial system, whose erstwhile independence and fearlessness were once highly regarded within the Commonwealth, while Ling as transport minister failed to improve the chronically ill public transport systems across the country, and is now facing charges of corruption over the PKFZ fiasco.

As for Taib, he will surely be best remembered for having presided over a powerful fiefdom within the Federation of Malaysia at the expense of the people and natural resources in Sarawak.

Given the symbiotic relationship between the ruling coalition and the academic world in Malaysia, it would be fanciful to expect university officials to rise above politics. At national universities where mediocrity leap-frogs meritocracy, officials are no more than bureaucrats whose task is to ensure a culture of subservience rein supreme so that their rice bowls may remain intact.

While many of the private institutes are doing brisk business thanks to the government's effort to gradually transfer educational burden onto the private sector, they are in turn required to return their 'benefactors' with some favours in order to keep the business running.

However, quid pro quo arrangements are no longer a practice unique to the so-called developing world. Over the years, the world has seen universities dish out awards to individuals and even celebrities for various reasons. Paul McCarthy and Celine Dion were both 'honoured' in this fashion, while Barack Obama became a somewhat embarrassed recipient of no less than two honorary doctorates for merely being the first Black American to be elected president.

Kermit the Frog, honorary doctor

In 1996, Long Island University conferred an honorary doctorate on Kermit the Frog. While there were loud protests against the university making a mockery of an otherwise honorable award, the act itself managed to attract public attention and press coverage of a disproportionate scale.

Whether or not the conferring of these awards to the individuals was based on merit remains to be seen, but it is no secret that even universities that are renowned for academic excellence are not immune from temptation.

In 2008, Saif Gaddafi received his PhD from the eminent London School of Economics (LSE), and it has been revealed that the son of the Libyan leader could have plagiarised his thesis. Worse, the LSE is now being accused of having received £1.5 million (RM7.5 million) in 'donations' from the Gadaffi regime, which has prompted its director Howard Davies to resign in taking responsibility over the exposures.

The LSE's scandalous deals with Tripoli are most probably a tip of the iceberg. In fact, ever since Margaret Thatcher's famous statement to bring 'universities closer to business' in 1988, British universities have been engaged in a frenzy to source for funding by all means as the Iron Lady was 'rolling back the state', with many being forced to compromise on the principles of democracy and human rights for the sake of big money.

Seeing the ominous things to come, Oxford University had in 1985 delivered a stunning snub to Thatcher by refusing her an honorary degree in protest of her cuts in funding for education, making her the first Oxford-educated prime minister to be denied the honour since 1945. True to form, Thatcher's office issued a statement that “if they do not wish to confer the honour, the prime minister is the last person to wish to receive it”.

But one must agree all honorary doctorates are handed out in recognition of the importance of an individual's scholarly, professional or social achievements. In other words, the individual's distinction must match the award itself.

It therefore defies all logic that Najib Abdul Razak - who has been implicated in the gruesome murder of a Mongolian national and is now busily vandalising the country's beautiful landscape with his tacky 1Malaysia logos - should have been awarded an honorary doctorate by Monash University.

That a distinguished Australian university would have succumbed to the patronage syndrome as its Malaysian counterparts is indeed telling. Either the prime minister himself has successfully charmed the university, or some big money has changed hands, as is the case with the LSE.


JOSH HONG studied politics at London Metropolitan University and the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. A keen watcher of domestic and international politics, he longs for a day when Malaysians will learn and master the art of self-mockery, and enjoy life to the full in spite of politicians.

Malaysia's Phony War on Affirmative Action.... by John Lee

Malaysia's Phony War on Affirmative Action

Policies favoring the Malay majority over Chinese and Indian Malaysians must change, but progress so far has been slight, writes columnist John Lee

By John Lee  March 3, 2011

When then-Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad launched his Vision 2020 in 1991, Malaysia's reputation as a prosperous and harmonious multi-ethnic country was the envy of much of Asia. One of the key pillars of the blueprint to propel Malaysia from a rapidly developing to a fully industrialized country was to accelerate and deepen policies that transferred economic power and resources to indigenous Malays in order to ensure the "fair and equitable distribution of wealth."

Since then a number of World Bank experts and veteran Malaysia watchers, such as Professor Hal Hill from the Australian National University, are becoming increasingly worried about the country's long-term future. Even the current Prime Minister, Najib Razak, admits that reform in the sensitive but critical area of affirmative action appears to have stalled. In Najib's New Economic Model (NEM), which he announced in March 2010, a Malaysian leader for the first time criticized important aspects of these decades-old policies and linked them to many of the country's structural problems.

Najib is correct that Malaysia cannot make the transition from a middle- to high-income country without winding back these long-standing affirmative action policies. But there are significant barriers working against the possibility of meaningful reform.

As any Malaysian will tell you, the 1969 race riots between indigenous Bumiputra (the Muslim Malays who were then 50 percent of the population and constitute 65 percent of the current population) and Chinese-Malaysians remains the defining event in the country's history. The acceleration of affirmative action policies from 1971 onward was an understandable response to the national trauma of the violence. Even so, given that the race riots were largely caused by social-economic racial divisions within the country, many believe Malaysia's leaders could have responded by attempting to move the country away from ideologies and policies that emphasized and entrenched racial differences.

But one has to concede that in important indicators, such as poverty reduction among Bumiputra Malays, much progress has been made over 40 years. It is arguable that overall national economic growth is as much, if not more, responsible than pro-Malay policies in raising the living standards of Bumiputras. Nevertheless, the number of Malays living in absolute poverty has fallen from 60 percent in 1971 to between 5 percent and 10 percent today.

A Legacy of Deficits

The obsession, however, with improving the lives of Bumiputra-Malaysians rather than all Malaysians has come at a heavy price. Improving the lot of the poorest—the majority of whom remain Malays—is essential. But implementing an ever-expanding program of state-led economic "restructuring" and "redistribution" initiatives is a seductive but dangerous path for governments to take. The National Economic Policy (NEP) began in 1971 and formally ended in 1991. Many NEP affirmative action policies are still in place today (and some have even been extended). This living legacy is behind much of the pessimism surrounding the country today.

There are several major reasons for this. First, many economists are rightly skeptical of the benefits of an ever-expanding role of the state within a "free market" economy—particularly when interventionist policies are designed to engineer social objectives rather than promote growth. The primary problem is one of numbers.

In a global policy environment rightly wary of ballooning budget deficits, the fact that the Malaysian government has been in deficit every year since the introduction of the NEP in 1971 (except for a period from 1993 to 1998) is troubling. This is particularly the case since Kuala Lumpur spends much less on social services than do Western governments. The economic numbers look even more troubling when one considers that around 40 percent of the government's revenue comes from the state-owned oil and gas giant Petronas. This is the case for two reasons.

First, Petronas is forced to pay a massive 60 percent to 70 percent of its profit in dividends each year—74 percent in 2010—just to sustain the government's spending programs. And second, the company's Malaysian-based reserves (which constitute the majority of Petronas' known reserves) are due to expire in around 15 years.

Second, an essential pillar of any successful economy is the emergence of a strong, independent entrepreneurial corporate class capable of competing with the best in the world. This is where Malaysia potentially has a problem. Although it is overreach to damn all Bumiputra-run businesses as lacking creativity and dynamism, there is no doubt that economic protection in the name of affirmative action can lead to unproductive and wasteful habits. If nothing else, foreign perceptions that Malaysia's affirmative action economic environment makes the country an uncompetitive place to invest is damage enough.

Decline in Foreign Direct Investment

Much of Najib's tough talk in his NEM is to make Malaysia once again a preferred destination for foreign capital. Malaysia's net foreign direct investment (FDI) fell from $2.56 billion in 2004 to negative $7.67 billion in 2008 and recovered to only $1.95 billion in 2009—the worse decline among its developing and developed neighbors. The U.N.'s World Foreign Investment Report 2010 revealed that Malaysia's net FDI trailed such neighbors as Thailand, Vietnam, Singapore, Indonesia, and the Philippines.

Indeed, in an embarrassing comedown for the former rising star, Cambodia, Myanmar, Brunei, Laos, and East Timor are the only countries in the region attracting less FDI than Malaysia. Worryingly, even domestic entrepreneurs are voting with their capital, as public investment exceeds private investment in the economy.

Third, just as companies seek to retain their best talent, Malaysia has a reputation for pushing away its best Chinese and Indian citizens. More than 250,000 people left Malaysia from March 2008 to August 2009 (not including students studying abroad). There are no figures on the racial mix of those leaving, but overwhelming anecdotal evidence suggests that a high proportion of ethnic Chinese and Indians are in this group. Once again, not all exits can be blamed on affirmative action policies, but even Najib has admitted it is a priority to make the country more attractive so as to encourage thousands of the skilled (non-Malay) diaspora to return.

The honest appraisal of not just Malaysia's problems but the reasons behind these is admirable. But formidable obstacles block Najib. Most significant is the ruling United Malays National Organization (UMNO) reliance on such an affirmative action political and social contract between the party and Malay elites to remain in power. Among countries that hold elections, UMNO has been in government longer than any other party in the world. It is not surprising that Najib has few supporters in his own cabinet to revise and wind back existing policies significantly.

In 2004, UMNO gained 63 percent of the popular vote. After the party's shellacking in the 2008 general elections, when it gained only 50.6 percent of the popular vote and lost its two-thirds majority in Parliament for the first time since Malaysian independence (and with it the capacity to make amendments to the constitution), it is even more unlikely that the UMNO's brain trust would seek to alienate its strongest supporters—or precipitate an all-out civil war over reform.

One such manifestation of early internecine strife is the rise of Perkasa after the 2008 election. Perkasa is a nongovernmental, nationalist group lobbying to preserve and extend the economic, social, and cultural privileges of Bumiputras, and it claims to have more that 300,000 members—at least 60 percent of whom are UMNO members. Many Malays abandoned UMNO not because they wanted to abolish the affirmative action policies but because they wanted a larger slice of the affirmative action pie.

Furthermore, the role of Malaysia's 1.2 million public servants in implementing any reforms is critical. The problem is that these civil servants are the strongest supporters of affirmative action, since many of their jobs were created by a growing state apparatus designed to implement these policies. In the current political climate, Najib can hardly afford to alienate this constituency. The Prime Minister is also relying on these civil servants—95 percent of whom are Malays—to overcome the deeply entrenched pro-Bumiputra culture.

It is still too early to assess the capacity of the Malaysian government to introduce genuine reform. So far, little has been done to roll back pro-Bumiputra restructuring and redistribution policies or initiatives that would reduce the role of the state in the economy. Significantly, Najib has backed away from abandoning the four-decade-old sacred tenet that Malays own at least 30 percent of all corporate assets in the country. The Prime Minister's NEM is a brave political gamble—and a necessary economic one. But the battle has only just begun.

John Lee, who was born in Ipoh, Malaysia, is a research fellow at the Centre for Independent Studies in Sydney, Australia, and the Hudson Institute in Washington, D.C. His paper, "Malaysian Dilemma: The enduring cancer of affirmative action," was released by CIS this week.

'Interlok a classic work of Malaysian racism'...... by CPI

'Interlok a classic work of Malaysian racism'

Written by CPI Friday, 25 February 2011 09:39

Commentary

In remarks for Malaysiakini (see below the M’kini article) following his open letter calling on the Government to withdraw Interlok as a literature school text, Dr Lim Teck Ghee expressed his dismay that the book with its racially tainted messages – both direct and indirect – could have been selected as a school text.

In fact, the literary merit of the novel is suspect. When Interlok was entered in the writing competition to commemorate the 10^th anniversary of Merdeka in 1967, it only won a consolation prize. Evidently the panel of judges did not think all that highly of Interlok then.

Why did a book that failed to suitably impress the literati of its time proceed to enjoy political patronage later, he asked.

It is not unreasonable to deduce that the book’s publication in 1971 (the manuscript being revived after languishing four years in obscurity) was agenda driven. The political scenario at that time, that is, the 1969 race riots and the introduction of the NEP in the following year, was rapidly evolving and veering to an outright Malay nationalism.

Dr Lim said the decision – made only last year – to include ‘Interlok’ in the reading list, is equally suspect as the 40-year-old book had in the interim not gotten any rave reviews from either the reading public or the writing fraternity.

In today’s terms, Abdullah Hussain would be deemed guilty of offensive stereotyping aimed at the minority communities whilst celebrating the virtues of the Malay race, culture and value system. Some quarters, in fact, see it as the classic Malaysian racist book, said Dr Lim.

He emphasised that nobody was calling for the book to be banned in the same way in which the Government has banned so many other books. However, it should not be in the prescribed literature curriculum and certainly not let loose on young and impressionistic minds.

More emphatically, it should be not made an exam text where students are liable to be coerced into giving an “officially correct” interpretation in their answer papers, and whose correctness is determined by the authorities marking the test.

Although some liberals may be tempted to invoke the concept of freedom of expression, Dr Lim countered that the same “freedom to offend” would not be granted if the offence was against the majority race.

He expressed concern at the prospect of racially biased literature teachers, mainly coming from one community and teaching the novel and its racially slanted messages. In his view, this would poison young minds and bring unintended harmful consequences to race relations in the country.

Dr Lim further described the selection of the special panel to review the book and remove its offensive bits as a politically motivated strategy which should have been rejected. He was surprised that the panel members would agree to have their hands tied right at the start and work only to deal with the so-called offensive parts.

The transparency of the exercise was suspect, he added, when previously the government had succumbed to the Malay pressure groups, citing the example of how the New Economic Model (NEM) mooted by the prime minister was held hostage by Perkasa.

Last month, an ultimatum had been issued by Federation of National Writers Association (Gapena) whose executive secretary Abdul Aziz Mohd Ali said that the only acceptable change that could be made to the novel was to add a glossary for the word ‘pariah’.

In Dr Lim’s view, it was not paragraphs or sections of the book that were at question although there were innumerable instances of racial stereotyping, historical errors and misrepresentation of Chinese and Indian culture and society.

Instead it was the sum total of the book that needed to be rejected. Although the rejection of the book on grounds of its unsuitability as a school text was not part of the terms of reference, he hoped that the review panel would have the courage to arrive at this decision in view of the overwhelming evidence presented on the racially offensive overall thrust of the book.

Whatever the outcome of the review process, he challenged Cabinet members to personally read the book – or translation of the book – and decide for themselves whether they would permit their own children to be exposed to it.

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

'Interlok a classic work of Malaysian racism'

Feb 24, 2011
Malaysiakini

Centre for Policy Initiatives (CPI) director Lim Teck Ghee has added his voice to calls for the novel Interlok to be removed from the Form Five Malay literature syllabus due to its perpetuation of “offensive stereotyping” of minorities.

This, while the controversial novel celebrates the virtues of the Malay race, culture and value system.

As such, Lim noted, it has led some quarters to see the novel as “the classic Malaysian racist book”.

In remarks e-mailed to Malaysiakini today, the former academician-turned-social activist said some may be tempted to invoke freedom of expression to justify maintaining the book as required reading in secondary schools.

That same “freedom to offend” would not, however, be granted if the offence were against Malays, he noted.

There is concern, furthermore, with the prospect of predominantly Malay literature teachers teaching students the novel and its racially-slanted messages.

While anger has been expressed mainly by Indian groups and politicians against the negative portrayal of the community in the novel - including the use of the term 'pariah' - ire has also been raised on the perpetuation of stereotypes relating to ethnic Chinese.

Stressing against the call for the book to be banned “in the same way in which the government has banned so many other books”, Lim said Interlok should not be in the prescribed literature curriculum and “certainly not let loose on young and impressionistic minds”.

It should be not made an exam text, furthermore, whereby students are liable to be coerced into giving the “officially correct” reading of the novel in their answer papers, and whose correctness is determined by the authorities marking the exam papers.

"This will poison young minds and bring unintended harmful consequences to race relations in the country,” he said.

Lim also questioned why the novel was now being made compulsory and enjoying "political patronage" when it had failed to impress the literati when it was first published in 1971 - four years after the manuscript had languished in obscurity, claimed Lim.

“It is not unreasonable to deduce that the book's publication in 1971 was agenda-driven. The political scenario at that time, that is, the 1969 race riots and the introduction of the NEP in the following year, was rapidly evolving and veering to outright Malay nationalism.

"The decision – made only last year – to include Interlok in the reading list, is equally suspect as the 40-year-old book had in the past not got any rave reviews from either the reading public or the writing fraternity,” he added.

Expressing surprise that members of the government panel tasked with reviewing the book for its “offensive bits” had agreed to working under such a limited scope, Lim said the transparency of the exercise was suspect, given that the government had reportedly succumbed to Malay pressure groups in other issues.

"It was not paragraphs or sections of the book that were in question, although there were innumerable instances of racial stereotyping, historical errors and misrepresentation of Chinese and Indian culture and society.

“Instead, it is the sum total of the book that needs to be rejected," he added.

Although the rejection of the book on grounds of its unsuitability as a school textbook is not part of the terms of reference, he hoped the review panel would have the courage to arrive at this decision in view of the overwhelming evidence presented on the racially offensive overall thrust of the book.

Whatever the outcome of the review process, Lim challenged cabinet members to read the book – or the translation of the book – and “decide for themselves whether they would permit their own children to be exposed to it.”

More against 'Interlok'

The Chinese Assembly Hall Youth also lent their weight against the novel.

Besides reinforcing the stereotype of Chinese and Indians as outsiders and immigrants, and the Chinese as deceitful and greedy, the novel also unconsciously promotes the idea of Malay supremacy, said chairperson of the Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall Youth, Ng Chong Soon.

Although this might destroy relations between the ethnic communities in the country, this "is exactly what a race-based political party like Umno would need to serve its political agenda", said Ng in a statement.

While freedom of expression should be respected,he added that narrow political interests should be kept out of education.

Echoing Lim's comments, he also said the novel is rich in racial discrimination and factual errors.

"For example, the Chinese Anti-Japanese Army was depicted as wanting to build a small China in Malaya. And Indians were described as thinking that the Indian government takes better care of the Indians compared to Malaya's government."

The Ministry of Education should not have amended the school syllabus and selected 'Interlok' as a compulsory textbook unless it is treated as an example of racial discrimination, Ng stressed.

Meanwhile, The Human Rights Party's (HRP) will hold an 'anti-Interlok' forum at the KL & Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall tonight, while the 'People's march in solidarity against Umno's racism' is set for Sunday.

'Interlok', written by national laureate Abdullah Hussein, became controversial when it was selected as a Malay literature textbook for Form Five.

Several parties then opposed it on grounds it contains words and incidents deemed demeaning to Indian Malaysians.

Education Minister MuhyiddinYassin had announced on Jan 27 that the novel would remain as a textbook for Form Five, but with amendments to parts deemed offensive by the Indian community.

------------ooooo00000ooooo-------------

Letter to the Prime Minister and Cabinet Ministers on Interlok as Literature School Text

Written by Dr. Lim Teck Ghee, CPI, Wednesday, 23 February 2011 19:07

Press Statements

Dear Esteemed Malaysians,

I am not sure if you have been following this issue which is not only causing concern amongst many Malaysians but it also has the potential to poison young minds through its insidious and divisive racial stereotyping and messages.

I feel that, purely on educational and pedagogical grounds, this book with its denigration of the various communities, and in the context of our multi-ethnic society facing one of the most turbulent periods of our history, should be subject to higher standards of acceptance before being designated as a reading text in our schools.

This is not to challenge the artistic freedom and independence of the writer in pursuing his craft and writing on any subject that he chooses. In our country there is a need for greater candor and honesty on all types of divisive issues, however sensitive there are. Writers and artists should be encouraged to write freely and without any restrictions; and all Malaysians should work harder to dismantle the constraints on our freedom of expression and other freedoms.

The concern over the Interlok book is not about restricting the writer’s freedom of expression or about its literary merits but it is about its harmful impact on young and impressionable minds in the context of our nation-building and 1Malaysia objectives.

I urge you (and other concerned Malaysians) to read the book and arrive at your own conclusion as to the desirability of retaining the book as a required literature text.

I, and many Malaysians, am of the opinion that the book should be withdrawn as a school text.

As the print media has not given sufficient coverage to the many critics of the book, I urge you – before you arrive at your own conclusion – to also take time in reading the analysis of the book and other feedback provided by concerned citizens. The following are some of the critical feedback to date that will be useful:

Hartal MSM, Chinese Sell Their Daughters in http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/from-around-the-blogs

Scott Thong, Chock Full of Insults Against Chinese Too in http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2011/02/22/interlok-chock-full-of-insults-against-chinese-too/

K. Pragalath, Imperative that the Public Lock Horns over ‘Interlok’ in http://english.cpiasia.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2129&catid=222

Jeyaseelan Anthony, ‘Interlok’: Scant understanding dangerous to schoolchildren in http://english.cpiasia.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2122&catid=219&Itemid=189

Interlok: Bishop calls for wisdom of sensitivities.... by Terence Netto

Interlok: Bishop calls for wisdom of sensitivities

Terence Netto
Feb 15, 2011, 8:36am

There is an urgent need for the wisdom of sensitivity to override other imperatives in the controversy over the literary textbook 'Interlok', said the head of the Roman Catholic Church of Melaka-Johor Diocese.

Bishop Dr Paul Tan, who is also president of the Catholic Bishops' Conference, speaking as the bishop of Melaka-Johor Diocese, said a literary text that is commended for the edification of youth in a multi-racial society should adhere to supra-partisan, supra-racial standards and values.

"By those standards, 'Interlok' won't qualify as a recommended text because there is cause for legitimate concern that it gets its history and sociology wrong," opined Bishop Tan, in comments made to Malaysiakini.

"'Interlok' has got its history and sociology wrong in much the same that a local preacher of the Muslim faith has got her facts wrong about St Valentine's Day and its supposed connection to Christian lifestyles," he elaborated.

"The ease with which some with a pedagogical role in Malaysian society get their historical and sociological facts wrong is a symptom of the gulfs that prevail and the difficulty that people of goodwill face when attempting to bridge them," he remarked.

"In situations such as this one, if you persist with a text like 'Interlok', you will only freeze people in the mental and cultural ghettoes they find themselves in and as consequence, you will make racial stereotyping easy and the desire to discover the difference between appearance and reality that much harder to promote," he expatiated.

Novel's subliminal message

Tan said he found in conversations with Hindu Malaysians a sense of their being selected for cultural and religious pummeling as a consequence of the results of the 12th general election of March 2008.

"There is a feeling that a minority is being specially selected for psychological punishment as a result of the way the vote went in the last general election.

"The book 'Interlok', in its historical and cultural miscues, is seen as a text that was selected for the goal of conveying the message that a subject people ought to compare their current status with the servitude they supposedly endured in the past," commented Bishop Tan.

He held the subliminal message of the novel was that the Indian minority in Malaysia ought to compare their plight in the light of times past and times present.

"This is a highly subjective ethos which is not suitable for the edification of youth who at the school-leaving stage ought to be fed with reading material that projects universal values and themes," he said.

He also said putting one's religion, culture and ethnicity above others goes against all sense of a desire to dialogue, understand and accept others as they are, which is the foundation of the unity of a people.

For that reason, Bishop Tan said the Education Ministry should reconsider the selection of 'Interlok' as a literary text for Form 5 students and replace it with a choice that elevates rather than estranges our youth.

Aljazeera: History’s shifting sands... by Mark LeVine

History’s shifting sands

The revolutions sweeping the Arab world indicate a tectonic shift in the global balance of people power
by Mark LeVine
Aljazeera, 26 Feb 2011

For decades, even centuries, the peoples of the Arab world have been told by Europeans and, later, Americans that their societies were stagnant and backward. According to Lord Cromer, author of the 1908 pseudo-history Modern Egypt, their progress was “arrested” by the very fact of their being Muslim, by virtue of which their minds were as “strange” to that of a modern Western man “as would be the mind of an inhabitant of Saturn”.

The only hope of reshaping their minds towards a more earthly disposition was to accept Western tutelage, supervision, and even rule “until such time as they [we]re able to stand alone,” in the words of the League of Nations’ Mandate. Whether it was Napoleon claiming fraternité with Egyptians in fin-de-siècle Cairo or George W. Bush claiming similar amity with Iraqis two centuries later, the message, and the means of delivering it, have been consistent.

Ever since Abd al-Rahman al-Jabarti, the great Egyptian chronicler of the French invasion of Egypt, brilliantly dissected Napoleon’s epistle to Egyptians, the peoples of the Middle East have seen through the Western protestations of benevolence and altruism to the naked self-interest that has always laid at the heart of great power politics. But the hypocrisy behind Western policies never stopped millions of people across the region from admiring and fighting for the ideals of freedom, progress and democracy they promised.

Even with the rise of a swaggeringly belligerent American foreign policy after September 11 on the one hand, and of China as a viable economic alternative to US global dominance on the other, the US’ melting pot democracy and seemingly endless potential for renewal and growth offered a model for the future.

Trading places
But something has changed. An epochal shift of historical momentum has occurred whose implications have yet to be imagined, never mind assessed. In the space of a month, the intellectual, political and ideological centre of gravity in the world has shifted from the far West (America) and far East (China, whose unchecked growth and continued political oppression are clearly not a model for the region) back to the Middle – to Egypt, the mother of all civilization, and other young societies across the Middle East and North Africa.

Standing amidst hundreds of thousands of Egyptians in Tahrir Square seizing control of their destiny it suddenly seemed that our own leaders have become, if not quite pharaohs, then mamluks, more concerned with satisfying their greed for wealth and power than with bringing their countries together to achieve a measure of progress and modernity in the new century. Nor does China, which has offered its model of state-led authoritarian capitalist development coupled with social liberalisation as an alternative to the developing world, seem like a desirable option to the people risking death for democracy in the streets of capitals across the Arab world and Iran.

Instead, Egyptians, Tunisians and other peoples of the region fighting for revolutionary political and economic change have, without warning, leapfrogged over the US and China and grabbed history’s reins. Suddenly, it is the young activists of Tahrir who are the example for the world, while the great powers seem mired in old thinking and outdated systems. From the perspective of “independence” squares across the region, the US looks ideologically stagnant and even backwards, filled with irrational people and political and economic elites incapable of conceiving of changes that are so obvious to the rest of the world.

Foundations sinking into the sands?
Although she likely did not intend it, when Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, warned Arab leaders in early January that they must “reform” lest their systems “sink in the sand” her words were as relevant in Washington as they were in Tunis, Tripoli, Cairo or Sanaa. But Americans – the people as much as their leaders – are so busy dismantling the social, political and economic foundations of their former greatness that they are unable to see how much they have become like the stereotype of the traditional Middle Eastern society that for so long was used to justify, alternately (and sometimes simultaneously) supporting authoritarian leaders or imposing foreign rule.

A well known Egyptian labour organiser, Kamal Abbas, made a video telling Americans from Tahrir that “we and all the people of the world stand on your side and give you our full support”. It is a good thing, because it is clear Americans need all the support they can get. “I want you to know,” he continued, “that no power can challenge the will of the people when they believe in their rights. When they raise their voices loud and clear and struggle against exploitation.”

Aren’t such lines supposed to be uttered by American presidents instead of Egyptian union activists?

Similarly, in Morocco activists made a video before their own ‘day of rage’ where they explained why they were taking to the streets. Among the reasons, “because I want a free and equal morocco for all citizens,” “so that all Moroccans will be equal,” so that education and health care “will be accessible to everyone, not only the rich,” in order that “labour rights will be respected and exploitation put to an end,” and to “hold accountable those who ruined this country”.

Can one even imagine millions of Americans taking to the streets in a day of rage to demand such rights?

“Stand firm and don’t waiver …. Victory always belongs to the people who stand firm and demand their just rights,” Kamal Abbas urged Americans. When did they forget this basic fact of history?

From top to bottom
The problem clearly starts from the top and continues to the grass roots. Barack Obama campaigned for the presidency on the slogan “Yes we can!” But whether caving in to Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, on settlements, or standing by as Republicans wage a jihad on the working people of Wisconsin, the president has refused to stand up for principles that were once the bedrock of American democracy and foreign policy.

The American people are equally to blame, as increasingly, those without healthcare, job security or pensions seem intent on dragging down the lucky few unionised workers who still have them rather than engage in the hard work of demanding the same rights for themselves.

The top one per cent of Americans, who now earn more than the bottom 50 per cent of the country combined, could not have scripted it any better if they had tried. They have achieved a feat that Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, Hosni Mubarak and their fellow cleptocrats could only envy (the poorest 20 per cent of the population in Tunisia and Egypt actually earn a larger share of national income than does their counterpart in the US).

The situation is so desperate that a well known singer and activist contacted me in Cairo to ask organisers of Tahrir to send words of support for union workers in Wisconsin. Yet “Madison is the new Tahrir” remains a dream with little hope of becoming reality, even as Cairenes take time out from their own revolution proudly to order pizza for their fellow protesters in Wisconsin.

The power of youth and workers
In Egypt, workers continue to strike, risking the ire of the military junta that has yet to release political prisoners or get rid of the emergency law. It was their efforts, more than perhaps anyone else, that pushed the revolution over the top at the moment when people feared the Mubarak regime could ride out the protests. For their part, Americans have all but forgotten that the “golden years” of the 1950s and 1960s were only golden to so many people because unions were strong and ensured that the majority of the country’s wealth remained in the hands of the middle class or was spent on programmes to improve public infrastructure across the board.

The youth of the Arab world, until yesterday considered a “demographic bomb” waiting to explode in religious militancy and Islamo-fascism, is suddenly revealed to be a demographic gift, providing precisely the vigour and imagination that for generations the people of the region have been told they lacked. They have wired – or more precisely today, unwired – themselves for democracy, creating virtual and real public spheres were people from across the political, economic and social spectrum are coming together in common purpose. Meanwhile, in the US it seems young people are chained to their iPods, iPhones and social media, which has anesthetised and depoliticised them in inverse proportion to its liberating effect on their cohorts across the ocean.

Indeed, the majority of young people today are so focused on satisfying their immediate economic needs and interests that they are largely incapable of thinking or acting collectively or proactively. Like frogs being slowly boiled alive, they are adjusting to each new setback – a tuition increase, here, lower job prospects there – desperately hoping to get a competitive edge in a system that is increasingly stacked against them.

Will Ibn Khaldun be proved right?
It now seems clear that hoping for the Obama administration to support real democracy in the Middle East is probably too much to ask, since it cannot even support full democracy and economic and social rights for the majority of people at home. More and more, the US feels not just increasingly “irrelevant” on the world stage, as many commentators have described its waning position in the Middle East, but like a giant ship heading for an iceberg while the passengers and crew argue about how to arrange the deck chairs.

Luckily, inspiration has arrived, albeit from what to a ‘Western’ eye seems like the unlikeliest of sources. The question is: Can the US have a Tahrir moment, or as the great Arab historian Ibn Khaldun would have predicted, has it entered the irreversible downward spiral that is the fate of all great civilizations once they lose the social purpose and solidarity that helped make them great in the first place?

It is still too early to say for sure, but as of today it seems that the reins of history have surely passed out of America’s hands.

Mark LeVine is a professor of history at UC Irvine and senior visiting researcher at the Centre for Middle Eastern Studies at Lund University in Sweden. He has authored several books including Overthrowing Geography: Jaffa, Tel Aviv and the Struggle for Palestine (University of California Press, 2005) and An Impossible Peace: Israel/Palestine Since 1989 (Zed Books, 2009).

malaysiakini: A sustainability-oriented social charter for Malaysia... by M Nadarajah

A sustainability-oriented social charter for Malaysia

M Nadarajah
Feb 28, 2011, 11:37am

 

COMMENT Social charters have become necessary social instruments in today's complex and highly differentiated world to consolidate, strengthen and redefine the terms of local, national and global social relationships, carefully crafted with a vision of a better future.

These days, the way forward does not seem clear without an issue-based or comprehensive social charter.

The widespread abuse of power by modern states and of position by politicians and corporate leaders is patent today; blind and runaway materialistic desires animate our uncontrolled consumption behaviour globally; unbridled selfishness and insensitivity dominate society; and ill-considered growth policies promote exclusive, not inclusive, growth.

Given these realities, we need to unambiguously and transparently re-state the terms of our relationships as a society and the assumptions they are based on.

There have been some inspiring attempts to propose rights-based social charters for Malaysia. My intention here is to contribute towards imagining a sustainability-oriented social charter for our country.

First, a word of clarification.

The word 'sustainability' is used here in a wider context than its normal reference to environmental or ecological (read nature) sustainability. I would include cultural, social, economic, technological and environmental sustainability under its conceptual territory. This provides for a comprehensive, conceptually integrated, all-round ecological understanding of the notion and practice of 'sustainability', encompassing both society and nature.

The conception is important because if we do not “design” a fundamentally sustainable social arrangement nationally and globally, there cannot be any environmental sustainability. It allows to part journey with “business-as-usual” notion and practice of sustainability.

Why do we need a sustainability-oriented social charter for Malaysia?

Multi-cultural, multi-ethnic Malaysia, seduced by neo-liberalist economic ideas, may certainly be considered to have progressed over the last few decades, but the trend has largely been down the
glittering, blinding road to all-round unsustainability.

For verification, we just have to examine global indicators such as the corruption perceptions index, cumulative illicit financial outflows estimates, press freedom index, etc. Malaysia today is in every sense unsustainable as a long-term national or human development project.

All of us are implicated in one way or another in the fate of Mother Malaysia.

Key institutions deformed or almost destroyed

Those we elected to manage our nation in the post-independence period have certainly grown Malaysia. We have a Multimedia Super Corridor, the Twin Towers, Astro, many mega-temples of consumption… but all these at what cost? Key institutions that would have matured our fledgling democracy were pushed to a back burner, deformed or almost destroyed.

We were, and continue to be, handicapped by political disenfranchisement, subject to casual public accountability, affected by wholesale and retail corruption, punished by gross misuse of the judicial process (as reflected in writings and debates of the daughters and sons of Malaysia), and paralysed by ISA-induced 'systemic fear'. This is our legacy of democracy…for the future
generations to follow!

Political and economic practices that should have improved our quality of life, enriched our everyday experience and spread happiness have largely led to the polarising of society and increasing hardship for the lower social strata and the indigenous communities.

They have increasingly “fine-tuned” ethnic sectarianism through material and spiritual corruption and consistently presented immense institutional and cultural hindrances for taking on the government for lapses in its promises and accountability, while a patriarchical system silently weighs down on women and children.

Our main cultural debates and strategies and religious shortsightedness grossly limit dialogue/multilogue and dialogical/multilogical spaces, continue to destroy a mindful,
inter-dependent living culture and contribute to worsening polarisation that stunts or destroys feelings of belonging to a nation.

One feels sad (and angry) to read some of the messages that are now circulating in the web space. How can this nation be sustainable as an idea and a practice with painful emotions captured in such messages?

Why should people build a home in such a mindless, unsustainable Present that seems to have very little sustainable prospects for the Future?

Ask the movers and they will tell you that once only expatriates moved their belongings from country to country but they see more Malaysians doing so now... “Flight” is in progress. Besides calling these people unpatriotic, what have we done to make them feel at home?

So again, how do we imagine a sustainability-based social charter in Malaysia?

First things first... the Principle orientation.

All of us are born free and equal

Fundamental to the concept of citizenship today is the notion of equality based on the modern secular Faith that all of us - regardless of sex, religion, race, social origin, language, property
ownership or any other social status - are born free and equal. (We must believe these are not given to us by governments though they like to make us think so.)

As equal citizens, we are entitled to civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights within an institutionalised, sustainable context. Because we live in a finite world, a society that espouses these features should ideally stop blindly growing materially but focus on the development of a deep cultural ethos built on “Being rather than Having”.

Sustainability in this context should be articulated in our pursuit of 'development'. This should be seen as a comprehensive economic, technological, political, social and cultural process that aims at continuous but sustainable improvement in the well-being and “gross national happiness” of the society, nurturing both individuals as well as socially and ethnically diverse groups.

Well-being and happiness in a finite world involves aspiration to “de-materialise”. Such a development process needs to be based on the free and meaningful participation of citizens. It must also have a just distribution of national and global material benefits, keeping in mind a 'culture of limits' to consumption of natural resources and a culture of social balance based on equality and equity.

To make an all-round New Sustainable Malaysia possible as a long-term humane project, we certainly need a lot of re-thinking, re-orientation, closure and rebuilding of institutions to do. All systems, processes, social groupings, indeed everything, need to be re-examined and re-framed within a sustainability framework. We need nothing less than a dynamic renaissance, a creative regeneration, guided by principles of sustainability.

We have to get material (and spiritual) corruption out of the way. We have to fight our way out of all kinds of sectarianism and exclusivism. We have to consciously move away from political and religious shortsightedness - the legacies of the old regime.

We have to rebuild our relationships and expectations, between ourselves and between nature and us. We have to strengthen our interconnectedness and mindfulness. We need to re-orient business to be governed by corporate social responsibility and to be compliant to the triple bottomline framework.

Transparent and accountable political culture

We need a political culture that is totally transparent and accountable and one that encourages mature political succession planning that is good for the nation and nature and not any one political party (with its limited agenda). We need to re-build citizens' trust and faith. We need citizens with a high sense of belonging and attachment to Mother Malaysia, not a convenient arrangement.

Maturity in our local and national dealings is crucial. 'Letting go' of past orientations and mistakes to make room for the new and the novel to re-build a New Malaysia is wanting and urgently needed. We show great levels of immaturity and in the process victimise our common Future.

Spent forces of the old regime are always an obstacle and a nuisance but they will have to eventually go, making way for the young and the novel, i.e. those who passionately believe that a New Sustainable Malaysia, based-on all-round sustainability principles, can be imagined and built.

It also means that the new forces that are growing on our national political horizon have a lot of changing to do themselves. In the immediate term, they have the task of presenting themselves with one unfaltering voice as the rightful owners of a Malaysia-in-transition.

Then, there is the mammoth task of creatively re-inventing and/or steadfastly implementing socially and environmentally sustainable national institutions that can help, significantly and symbolically, change the everyday experience of young Malaysians. This is a difficult responsibility but until it is put in process, we will inherit and continue to be influenced by the institutional ethos of the old and unsustainable Malaysia.

As much as the new forces are trying to shape a New Malaysia, they must also, in a concerted and creative manner, change the institutions of the status quo that have contributed to the sustained destruction of a Malaysia for all Malaysians... a governance logos and ethos based on sustainability is the need of the hour.

A minimum sustainability-oriented social charter acceptable by all the diverse new forces - possibly, even reluctantly acceptable by the old - would certainly help.

DR M NADARAJAH is a sociologist by training. He belongs to the Asian Public Intellectuals (API) Community, comprising filmmakers, social researchers, theatre people, songwriters, poets, activists and academics working for a sustainable global society and Asia. His work focuses on cultural and sustainability issues. The article reflects his personal views.

Professionals and top execs set for huge increments... By JOSHUA FOONG

Professionals and top execs set for huge increments

By JOSHUA FOONG
joshuafoong@thestar.com.my

The Star, Monday February 28, 2011

PETALING JAYA: Professionals from the information and communication technology (ICT) sector, accounting and finance industry, banking, logistics and sales have a lot to cheer about this year – their salaries are set to rise by as much as 30% compared with last year.

The Robert Walters Global Salary Survey 2011 for Malaysia has revealed that a wage increase of between 5% and 30% would sweep across these industries this year, partially influenced by inflation rates and market conditions.

The take-home salaries could, in fact, be much higher as these figures are exclusive of bonuses, other benefits and allowances.

Highly-qualified employees with five to 10 years’ experience are expected to benefit from this salary increase as firms in these industries are scrambling to hire and retain the best talents.

“The job market has gradually moved to become more employee-driven. Some firms are even willing to offer premiums to attract good local and foreign talent with niche skills,” Robert Walters country manager Sally Raj told The Star yesterday.

“Salary reviews can range from 5% to 15% depending on market conditions.

“The real jump in salary scale can be seen among sought-after talent – going from 10% to 30%,” she said.

For example, a 29-year-old top investment banker with some six years of working experience can earn up to RM180,000 per annum on his basic salary, she added.

Robert Walters, which has a presence in 20 countries, is among the world’s major professional recruitment consultancies.

It is to release the findings of the survey today.

According to the survey, the banking sector will see the biggest salary boom as the wage bracket for investment bankers with five to eight years of work experience increased from RM180,000 to RM288,000 per annum this year, compared with RM157,000 to RM240,000 last year.

Private equity bankers with the same number of years in work experience also saw their salaries upped from RM160,000 to RM264,000, compared with RM126,000 to RM240,000 last year.

In the ICT industry, software, voice and network engineers are expected to see up to a RM5,000 increase in their annual earnings and business application specialists, up to RM10,000 this year.

In the accounting and finance sector, cost controllers and auditors may stand to earn up to RM10,000 more while wages for account managers in charge of taxation and pricing may make some RM20,000 more.

Malaysian Employers Federation executive director Shamsuddin Bardan said while the average wage increment was expected to be around 5.5%, sectoral increases would be evident as these key industries had been given emphasis by the Government.

“Talents, especially in the 12 National Key Economic Areas (NKEA), will be in demand,” he said.
National ICT Association of Malaysia (Pikom) chairman Wei Chuan Beng said the ICT sector, which is one of the NKEAs, would see expansion with demand for highly-qualified and experienced talents to grow rapidly.

The Malaysian Institute of Accountants (MIA) estimates that about 2,500 locally-recognised accounting graduates with an estimated 1,200 members of professional accountancy bodies recognised by the Accountants Act will join the workforce this year.

“Present development which is taking place in various industries, especially changes and development in corporate governance, tightening of accounting regulations, pressure of globalisation and technology advancement across industries are contributing factors towards this trend of expansion,” the MIA said in a statement.

MySinChew: Getting fed up with all the politicking — by Lim Sue Goan

Getting fed up with all the politicking — Lim Sue Goan

February 22, 2011

FEB 22 — Sometimes, I do really hope that the next general election will be held soon so that the increasingly worsening politicisation phenomenon would end too.

There have been no end to political controversies over the last two years, the major ones being the mysterious death of DAP political aide Teoh Beng Hock, the controversy over the Port Klang state assembly seat, the current university campus elections, the debate over a proposal to set up an auxiliary police force in Selangor, the interfaith issue and the related non-Muslim affairs portfolio set up in Penang, and the setting up of the Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) campus in Serendah, Selangor.

After a long inquest, coroner Azmil Muntapha declared an open verdict for Teoh’s death. A six-member royal commission of inquiry (CI) was then set up by the prime minister. However, the Attorney-General has filed an application for a revision of the coroner’s verdict and Teoh’s family withdrew from participating in the RCI after their requests were dismissed.

Who is right and who is wrong? In addition to the loss of a precious young life, Teoh’s demise also involves the questions on the investigative procedures of the Malaysia Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and human rights. How unfortunate it is to be politicised with the focus being shifted.

Selangor state assembly Speaker Datuk Teng Chang Khim had declared that the Port Klang state seat vacant after assemblyman Badrul Hisham Abdullah had not attended sittings for six months. However, the High Court ruled that the seat is not vacant and Badrul Hisham remains the Port Klang member.

It is not the first time the court has overturned a state assembly speaker’s decision. When former Perak state assembly Speaker V. Sivakumar declared three state seats vacant following the decision of the three constituency’s representatives to withdraw from the Pakatan Rakyat, the Federal Court had, on April 9, 2009, ruled that the Speaker had no power to declare the seats vacant as it was the right of the Election Commission (EC) to confirm whether or not they are vacant.

As political dogfights continue, the check and balance mechanism of executive, legislative and judiciary is shaken and questions on whether the judiciary should intervene in the legislative have been brought up. Such events are not good for a country marching towards democracy.

It is good for the Selangor state government to suggest an auxiliary police force to maintain law and order. Unfortunately, just like the water supply issue, once it has been politicised, it can hardly be implemented.

Meanwhile, why are they quarrelling over the non-Muslim affairs portfolio in Penang since it is the state government’s right to set it up?

Even worse, the campus elections have also been affected. Campus elections are held to allow students elect their representatives to express their views in the student representative council. It is a simple election but some people have made it complicated.

The campus elections this year are full of events, including the outbreak of physical conflicts during the UM Pro-Mahasiswa press conference when a security guard actually covered the mouth of a student to prohibit him from speaking. Later, the pro-Mahasiswa accused the pro-Aspirasi of requesting funds from the MCA and Gerakan, pro-Mahasiswa candidates claimed to have received disturbing SMSes, and election campaign banners were burned while vehicles were spashed with paint. Also, a female candidate “mysteriously” went missing on the eve of the polling day and was “mysteriously” found in a mosque the next day.

It is an academic misfortune when politics penetrates into campuses. Why can’t they just leave the campus elections alone?

In short, politics should not turn out as a vulgar game in which players attack their opponents with all kinds of dirty means, including lying, slandering and bringing in national institutions. It will only repeatedly damage the country’s image.

Pan-politicisation will never stop as long as the next general election is not being held. Hence, it is good to have an early general election, isn’t it? — mysinchew.com

Sunday Star: Season of goodwill.... By Raja Zarith Idris

Season of goodwill

MIND MATTER
By Raja Zarith Idris
 
Sunday Star
Sunday January 9, 2011

If Christmas is the celebration of the birth of Isa (Jesus), a prophet respected and revered in Islam, is it so wrong to wish a blessed day for those who celebrate it?

DURING the days before Christmas last year, I wished my friends who were celebrating it “Merry Christmas” in much the same way they would wish me “Selamat Hari Raya” or “Happy Eid”.

I find it rather sad that such a simple greeting – one which I grew up with and which I have never regarded as something that would compromise or de-value my own faith – is now regarded as something so religiously incorrect for us Malaysian Muslims.

When I was at boarding school in England, I had to go to church every Sunday because it was part of the rules. My father advised me to consider it as part of my “education” and he had no doubt that the experience would strengthen rather than weaken my own faith.

I was able to see the similarities and differences between Christianity and Islam. I learned more than the average Malaysian Muslim would about Christianity. I learnt that just as we Muslims categorise ourselves according to the four different schools of thoughts of the four Imams (Imam Malik, Imam Al Shafi, Imam Abu Hanifa and Imam Ahmad Abn Hambal) and are either Sunnis or Shias, so Christians too are divided into different sects or churches.

Going to church did not make me less of a Muslim when I was a young girl, and neither does saying “Merry Christmas” make me less of a Muslim now. My faith has not been shaken just because I wished some friends a time of joy with their families. Neither will I suddenly suffer from amnesia and forget what my religion is.

What I do not wish to forget, however, is that there are good, kind people who are not of the same faith as me.

As Harun Yahya, the Turkish writer (he was selected last year as one of the 500 most influential Muslims in the world by the Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre of Jordan) noted: “Islam is a religion of peace, love and tolerance.

Today, however, some circles have been presenting a false image of Islam, as if there were conflict between Islam and the adherents of the two other monotheistic religions. Yet Islam’s view of Jews and Christians, who are named ‘the People of the Book’ in the Quran, is very friendly and tolerant.

“This attitude towards the People of the Book developed during the years of the birth of Islam. At that time, Muslims were a minority, struggling to protect their faith and suffering oppression and torture from the pagans of the city of Mecca. Due to this persecution, some Muslims decided to flee Mecca and shelter in a safe country with a just ruler. The Prophet Muhammad told them to take refuge with King Negus, the Christian king of Ethiopia. The Muslims who followed this advice found a very fair administration that embraced them with love and respect when they went to Ethiopia. King Negus refused the demands of the pagan messengers who asked him to surrender the Muslims to them, and announced that Muslims could live freely in his country.

“Such attitudes of Christian people that are based on the concepts of compassion, mercy, modesty and justice, constitute a fact that God has pointed out in the Quran.”

I do not wish to be a self-centred Muslim who expects friends of other faiths to wish me Selamat Hari Raya or, for those who are not Malaysians and therefore do not know about Hari Raya, a Happy Eid and yet do not return their goodwill when it is Christmas, Chinese New Year, Deepavali or Vesak Day.

Every year, friends who are Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs or those without any faith come to our home to celebrate Hari Raya with us. They do so with sincerity and as a mark of respect for one of the most important days in the Muslim calendar. Why should we not reciprocate their kindness, show them the same mark of respect for their religion and wish them the same joy on their holy days of celebration?

An Islamic scholar and lecturer also reminded me that as Muslims we must remember the importance of both the five Pillars of Islam and in the six Pillars of Iman (Faith), which are:

> Belief in Allah;

> Belief in the angels;

> Belief in the revealed Books (which include the Bible, the Torah and the Holy Quran);

> Belief in the Prophets (May Peace be Upon Them);

> Belief in the Resurrection and the events of Kiamah, the Day of Judgement; and

> Belief in the predestination (Qada’ and Qadar) by Allah in all things.

The prophets include not just Muhammad (May Peace Be Upon Him) as the last prophet and as the Messenger of Islam, but also in the 24 earlier ones who are mentioned in both the Bible and the Quran. Four of them are Ibrahim (Abraham), Musa (Moses), Daud (David), and Isa (Jesus).

So, if Christmas is the celebration of the birth of Isa (Jesus), a prophet respected and revered in Islam, is it so wrong to wish a blessed day for those who celebrate it?

We are now in the second decade of the 21st century. Surely, we should, now more than ever, be far more enlightened at a time when information of any sort and of all kinds are so readily available to us.

What is most important is that we regard one another as fellow citizens and treat each other with respect, regardless of our race or religion.

The writer is Royal Fellow, School of Language Studies and Linguistics, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), and holds a BA (Honours) degree in Chinese Studies, University of Oxford.

Caste System - Blame history for the 'divisions' .... by (Sanatan Dharam Sabha Kuala Lumpur)

Friday February 11, 2011 NEW STRAITS TIMES (NST) - LETTERS Pg 19

Caste System - Blame history for the 'divisions'

I REFER to the article "Who are the 'Paraiyars', really?" by Universiti Sains Malaysia vice-chancellor Professor Tan Sri Dzulkifli Abdul Razak (NST, Feb 6). 

He shed new light on the "Paraiyars", after making references to a book by Abbe Dubois. It was a good attempt to explain the issue but, as a history lover, I found the article slightly misleading.

All those who had argued about this subject, whether Indians or non-Indians, have not explained it clearly enough for the nation to understand this issue of "Paraiyars". Many are not clear about the caste system where the word "pariah" is said to originate.

One would be surprised to know that the caste system does not exist in Hinduism. In Hinduism, there is a system known as the "varnashrama", which divides society into four natural groups -- Brahmana, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra -- depending on individual characteristics and disposition.

Every human has certain tendencies by natural inclination and choice. These are divided into four divisions known as "varna" (colour). It does not relate to skin colour but to a person's aura or consciousness.

After reading a student's aura and his tendencies, the master would decide which job would suit him most, where it would allow the student to serve society in a harmonious way and not frustrate him.
A student is placed in the varnashrama of either the Brahmana also known as Brahmins (intellectuals, academics, priests), or Kshatriya (rulers, administrators, soldiers) or Vaishya (businessmen, farmers, bankers, those engaged in commerce) or Shudra (ordinary workers, those engaged in physical labour, dancers, singers).

It was never a condition that birth determines a student's division. This was a system of self-discovery and development in assisting a person to find his place in society, where he could contribute to it by doing a job in accordance to his nature.

This system is sanctioned by a book that no one commenting on the issue had referred to, namely the Bhagavad Gita, where Sri Krishna talks to the warrior Arjuna at the battlefield of Kurusethra.
It states: "According to the three modes of material nature and the work ascribed to them, the four divisions of human society were created by Me" (4.13).

"By following his qualities of work, every man can become perfect... By worship of the Lord, who is the source of all beings and who is all pervading, man can, in the performance of his own duty or occupation, attain perfection" (18.45-6).

Clearly, no one is forced into the work he dislikes. Neither is birth a criterion for determining the division he would enter for work purposes. The underlining principle in Hinduism is that work is worship and one is allowed to change the division one is in.

For example, if a soldier has had enough of battles and wants to become a priest, he will leave his Kshatriya division and enter the Brahmin division. It's as simple and flexible as that. This system allowed everyone to work according to his nature and bring happiness to himself and society. It was never meant to divide society according to materialistic divisions. The sole object was to unite people in a cooperative society in the service of God. Every individual in the divisions had equal rights.

From the above verses, there is no mention of "pariah". So what happened then?

As time went on, the varnashrama system was abused by the Brahmins, who made it a condition that those born of a parent who worked in a particular division would remain there. Switching from one division to another was not permitted. In that way, the Brahmins gained control over power and money.

This new condition was against the teachings of Hinduism. Some Brahmins and Kshatriyas opposed these new conditions. However, by this time, India was invaded.

These invaders not only massacred people, but burnt down great libraries that contained most of the information regarding the varnashrama.

A new materialistic caste system was born. When the British arrived in India, they saw the system as an opportunity to divide society further to suit their interest and twisted it with a view of converting the Hindus.

The British then created another theory -- the Aryan theory -- which stated that European nomads came by chariots and conquered India and later composed the Vedas.

Dzulkifli touched on the origin of the word Brahmin, but it was misleading. First, the Brahmins are not followers of Brahma. They, and all other Hindus, pray to the one supreme God known to them as "Brahman". Brahma and Brahman are different entities.

Second, he said the Aryan Brahmins carried out "conversion" and those who refused to convert were "cast out". This is misleading.

Scientifically speaking, there are no Aryan or Paraiyar races. The three primary races are Caucasians, Mongoloid and Negroid.

Both the so-called "Aryan Brahmin" and "Paraiyars" are related branches of the Caucasian race, which is in the same Mediterranean sub-branch. Biologically, they are of the Caucasian race.

"Aryan", or its correct term "arya", was discovered in the Vedas of the Hindus. The term "arya" means noble or spiritual and it never meant a race of people. Those who followed the noble Vedic way of life or arya dharma may be termed as arya. It is a term of respect, something similar to a "datuk".

During the 19th century, many Europeans believed that they belonged to a superior race and their religion was the best. With the racial theory of man in vogue, they thought that the fair-skinned Indians were different from the dark-skinned Indians.

At that period, similarities were discovered in Sanskrit and the European languages. Therefore, they thought that since Sanskrit was related to their languages, it must have come from a white race and not the darker-skinned Indians (compared with the Europeans).

It was a linguistic theory adopted by the British to hold power. They began interpreting the Vedas in the same racial manner. The forces of light against darkness were interpreted as white race against dark race.

Hence, their theory of an Aryan race from Europe that invaded India and gave them the Vedas. Terms were mistranslated to suit the British objective, which was to convert Hindus and to justify their rule.

Many archaeologists and researchers forwarded theories of the location of this Aryan homeland but it kept changing. An exact time period when the so-called Aryans came to India was never established.

This was also because, to the Europeans, the world was created at 9am on Oct 23, 4004 B.C. The great flood of Noah occurred in 2500B.C. So the philologist Max Muller and the rest gave the Aryan invasion date at 1500 B.C. In short, everything was mere speculation which, unfortunately, became part of Indian history.

New archaeological and scientific studies indicate that the Indus civilisation that preceded the Aryans, was Vedic and centred, not on the Indus, but on the banks of the Saraswati river and its language was Sanskrit.

The Rig Veda praises the Saraswati river in its hymns. The river dried up around 1900 B.C., which means Hinduism and those who composed the Rig Veda were there before 1900 B.C. and if the Aryans arrived in India about 1500 B.C., how did they know about this river and build their culture on its banks if the river did not exist any more?

The latest studies also indicate that the Indus sites were wiped out not by war or invasion but by a drought. The skeletons unearthed there showed no signs of injuries caused by war but by starvation or dehydration. This was the drought that wiped out civilisations in Sumeria and Mesopotamia.

Similarly, in Mohenjo-Daro, there was an absence of any signs of war, like extensive burning or weapons or any remains of armour-clad soldiers. Interestingly, evidence of temples and seals of Shiva and Vishnu exist which mean that the Vedic religion had been part of these people and not brought by any Aryan Brahmins.

In short, scholars are rejecting the invasion theory based on this emerging evidence.

Coming back to the "Paraiyars", they were indeed once land owners who lost their land, advisers to the kings, farmers, musicians, singers and members of the manual workforce who were suppressed by the British in the light of their divide-and-rule policy.

They were exploited by the British and later, "Paraiyars" was mispronounced as "paria" just like Singapura became Singapore, Pulau Pinang became Penang, Mumbai became Bombay and orang utan became rang a teng.

The term "pariah" signifies colonial oppression of farmers, musicians, singers and the manual workforce.

ARIFF SHAH R.K.

Penang

for and on behalf of
The Management Committee of
Shree Lakshmi Narayan Mandir
(Sanatan Dharam Sabha Kuala Lumpur)
68 & 69 Jalan Kasipillay, off Jalan Ipoh
51200 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Tel: 603-40412993, Fax: 603-40455857
Mobile: 012-3979776
Email: mandir@sdskl.com
FaceBook: http://www.facebook.com/sdskl

Malaysia’s GDP up 7.2pc, now equal to Singapore

Malaysia’s GDP up 7.2pc, now equal to Singapore

UPDATED @ 10:12:20 PM 18-02-2011

TMI By Lee Wei Lian

February 18, 2011

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 18 — The Malaysian economy is now roughly the same size as Singapore’s after it expanded 7.2 per cent in 2010, half the rate of Singapore’s 14.5 per cent.
At today’s exchange rates, Malaysia edges Singapore by a whisker — US$239.96 billion (RM728.62 billion) compared to US$239.33 billion.

The resource rich nation was largely saved the blushes of being surpassed by the tiny city state in 2010 by the strength of the ringgit versus the US dollar when it appreciated by about 12 per cent over the last 12 months, the most of any Asian currency except for the Japanese yen.

The former 14th state’s growth has seen it catch up and now threaten to displace Malaysia from its long held its position as the third most valuable economy in the region behind Indonesia and Thailand.

The contest for third place will be equally tight this year with Malaysia projected to grow between 5 and 5.5 per cent in 2011 which is comparable to Singapore’s forecast of between 4 and 6 per cent.

The ringgit is expected to keep its upward trend this year, appreciating about 4.7 per cent according to Barclays Plc.

Since Malaysia and Singapore, two former British colonies, parted ways under acrimonious circumstances in 1965, the tiny island nation has surpassed its bigger neighbour in numerous global rankings such as universities, liveability and economic competitiveness.

Malaysia only managed to grow its per capita GDP 20 times from US$335 in 1965 to US$6,975 in 2009  compared with Singapore which grew its per capita GDP 71 times from US$512 in 1965 to US$36,537 in 2009, leading to widespread complaints that Malaysia’s economy has been badly mismanaged.

The Najib administration recently launched reforms in an attempt to make the economy more developed and competitive such as the Economic Transformation Programme (ETP) and the New Economic Model (NEM).

It is still too early to tell, however, how effective the reform attempts will be.

Bank Negara said today that higher private and public sector spending contributed to the expansion in domestic demand in Malaysia in the fourth quarter but that slower growth in the global economy had led to weaker external demand.

Domestic demand strengthened by 5.7 per cent in the fourth quarter due mostly to the strong expansion in private consumption and capital spending which saw private consumption increase by 6.5 per cent.

Public consumption however fell 0.3 per cent due to lower expenditure on supplies and services.

Inflation which has become a key concern increased by 2 per cent in the fourth quarter attributable mainly to higher price of food and non-alcoholic beverages which rose by 2.9 per cent and the removal of fuel subsidies by the Government which resulted in an upward adjustment of 5 sen/litre for RON95 petrol and diesel prices.

Malaysia’s trade surplus widened by RM3 billion to RM25.5 billion in the fourth quarter on the back of 3.7 per cent growth in exports while net inflows of foreign direct investment doubled to RM8.3 billion from RM4.4 billion in the third quarter.

Direct investment abroad by Malaysian companies meanwhile fell to RM3.2 billion from RM5.4 billion in the fourth quarter reflecting lower net extensions of inter-company loans to subsidiaries abroad.

AmResearch senior economist Manokaran Mottain told newswire Reuters that he expects government spending to pick up after June due to the implementation of the ETP with exports also recovering and private consumption remaining steady.