Politics & Governments

You are currently browsing the archive for the Politics & Governments category.

Undak Not Undi

April 24, 2012 in Politics & Governments by Zain

Recently Juana Jaafar wrote an article on spoilt votes. I’ve had this discussion at length with her and some of our friends, repeatedly some time back. It is an interesting concept that is rarely explored in what I might call an immature democracy in Malaysia. Understand that a vote for the lesser evil, is a vote for evil too, however exaggerated that term is in this application. Consider reading her article as well as other literature on spoilt votes, or undak as some call it (UNDi-rosAK).

Spoilt Votes Count Too by Juana Jaafar via Malay Mail:

THE general election seem imminent and the stakes are high for Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat in a contest touted as the “mother of all elections”.

Almost every other issue is now an election issue and social media is abuzz with people making a case for why their friends and followers should vote for one party and not another — despite the fact that the names of election candidates have not been announced. Some are not so blatant when making their stand, offering only the advice to “vote wisely”. Sure.

And what if in all your wisdom you realise that none of the candidates contesting in your constituency represent your ideals? Worse still, if they and their political parties take a contrary position on the issues most important to you?

“Better the devil you know than the devil you don’t” or “Choose the lesser of two evils”. We have heard these too many times in conversations about politics. But are these really our only options? ]

No, you can choose to spoil your vote.

Many young friends say they are not aware of this option. Some thought spoilt votes were merely a technicality where people mistakenly spoilt their ballots when in fact they had meant to vote for a particular candidate. This is true in some cases.

Others have been outraged that casting a spoilt vote was even brought up as a topic of conversation, and one has been accused of being “irresponsible”. After all, you are only given the opportunity to vote once every five years or so and it is your civic duty to mark that ballot. The latter is true.

However, no one should feel compelled to vote for any “devil” or “lesser evils”. In France, Spain, Colombia and the Ukraine for example, voters have the option to vote ‘none of the above’ (NOTA) either on the ballot or by casting a blank vote.

This option is based on the principle that all legitimate consent requires that individuals also have the ability to withhold their consent. In other words, if your conscience does not allow you to vote for any of the candidates, you don’t have to. In fact it lets you go a step further to put on record that none of the candidates appeal to you.

The inclusion of NOTA on our election ballots did not make it onto the list of demands by the Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections (Bersih). But Malaysians can still vote ‘none of the above’ by simply spoiling their ballots.

It is completely legal to do so and it does not make one’s vote any less legitimate.

You are still performing your civic duty by participating in the electoral process, and you are voting according to your conscience.

There will be those who will say the act of deliberately spoiling a ballot is “as irresponsible” as not registering and showing up on polling day. This is not true.

So why show up at all? Well, there are at least two reasons to show up on polling day despite the spoilt vote.

The first is the sad state of our electoral roll. When the deceased are still registered as valid voters and individuals are registered in multiple constituencies, there is plenty of room for abuse. Show up on polling day to ensure no one else is voting in your name.

The second is to make a statement. The same way others are voting to express support for a candidate, a person who spoils the ballot is making a statement that she/he does not support any of the candidates. Every vote counts.

 

How to Measure Growth? At What Expense?

January 27, 2012 in Change, Discourse, People, Politics & Governments by Zain

Do comfortable people realize, that thought the unprivileged must work to earn theirs, sometimes the playing field is not fair? Do people of countries realize this, when comparing theirs with another country?

Last night I read a tweet from Accenture citing a World Economic Forum on economic growth forecast of India, that will grow twice as fast as Russia’s, in the next 3 years. A few things popped in my head, and the following were some of them, in the tweet form that I put out.

At what expense/sacrifice? RT @Accenture: #wef study on growth: Nxt 3 yrs, India’s economy grow twice as fast as Russiahttp://bit.ly/y5msQO

It’s unfortunate, tho to some level understandable, tht our measure of ‘growth’ is often (solely) on economic terms. It’s difficult to escape(but shldnt be ignored,better still addressed),tht economic growth often has negative impact in othr areas.

Jst bcz u dont hear about others experiencing negative impact fr positive economic growth doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.

Jst bcz that voice of dissent is not loud,or strategically or constructively voiced,doesn’t negate the reality of the injustice.

U must keep in mind, the groups/segments of society tht is often at tht rotten end of injustice,dont hv the same resources u do. By tht reality,their platform4voicing out d injustice they go thru at d expense of the progress by others,isnt ‘democractic’ Bcz it’s not the same level playing field anymore (as they have as compared to those who have benefited).

Perhaps it might help ur perspective,looking at it on global platform,esp since the upper n mid class r more ‘international’. U cant compare the powers of a developed country (esp former imperial powers) w/ tht of a developing country (esp ex colonies). The measurements we compare today of what btwn the 2 have,was built upon based on the resource available 2 them. Worse still, if the resources of the developed, was plucked (exploited) fr the resources churned out by the developing. Not to mention,tht thru out the time the ‘developed’ was building themselves up, the ‘developing’ was busy working 4 the former.

So now take tht illustration, n look into d local context w/in a country,btwn the balance of the upper class n the lower class.

Look into the sector of access to education (opportunities), healthcare access, economic potentials. It goes a long way. When u look at it tht way,u might b more careful calling someone ‘kampung’ or ‘jakun’ n understand the gap in thinking/lifestyle. Bcz tht gap is socially n economically constructed, to benefit a segment of society, n to deprive another segment.

To some extent tht gap is inevitably, but tht does not discount the smart, by allowing them to be ignorant. That doesn’t discount the rich, to distant from the poor. If that’s not enough to knock some sense,imagine if u were in the shoes of the deprived and ignored. K. Aku penat. Slamat malam.

Tags: , , ,

Undi Atau Keluar Dewan – Peaceful Assembly Bill 2011

January 19, 2012 in Discourse, Politics & Governments, Published by Zain

This was a piece I wrote, my second published in Sinar Harian, sometime late December 2011. It is on the Walkout by the opposition coalition Pakatan Rakyat, when the Public Assembly Bill was bulldozed through the Parliament. My discussion is on the issue of the Walkout itself (that received backlash including from their own supporters), between action by principle, theory and impact.

Banyak yang berlaku di gelombang politik Malaysia semenjak duamenjak ini, yang saya hampir resah untuk pilih apa yang mahu di bincangkan, tanpa mengelirukan isu-isu yang patut diperhatikan, dengan paras emosi yang tidak berlebihan. Lebih hangat isu tersebut, lagi lama harus ditunggu untuk mengemukakan perbincangan yang lebih teratur tanpa tindakbalas yang kurang sihat.

Baru – baru ini, Rang Undang-undang Perhimpunan Aman 2011 telah diluluskan oleh Dewan Rakyat. Ia merupakan satu draf undang – undang yang membenarkan pihak berkuasa menyekat rakyat untuk berhimpun, hingga ke tahap mengekang kebebasan mereka.

Rang Undang – undang adalah satu draf kepada undang – undang, yang sebaik sahaja diluluskan, menjadi undang – undang yang berkuatkuasa atas semua yang tertakluk padanya. Proses pelulusan ini adalah melalui undian dalam Parlimen. Proses undian ini, adalah satu komponen penting untuk satu draf diangkat menjadi undang – undang. Perdebatan juaga adalah sebahagian daripada proses ini.

Namun demikian, satu perkara di luar kebiasaan telah berlaku di Dewan Rakyat dalam hal ini. Pihak yang mengusulkan rang undang – undang ini tidak membuka ruang untuk perdebatan. Pihak yang membangkang pula, tidak mengundi menentang rang undang – undang ini. Tetapi, apa yang berlaku ialah mereka keluar daripada sidang Parlimen.

Apa yang dilakukan oleh pihak kerajaan sudah dijangka. Untuk memastikan rang tersebut diluluskan, mereka tidak memberi ruang untuk ia didebatkan dan terus mengusulkan supaya undian langsung diadakan. Tetapi, tindakan melangkah keluar daripada pihak pembangkang tidak dijangka dan ini menyebabkan ramai yang terperanjat. Banyakpihak yang saya tahu amat sedih dengan situasi ini di mana mereka akhirnya memutuskan untuk tidak lagi berbincang tentangnya dan malah bertindak menuding jari ke pihak lain sebagai punca masalah ini.

Dewan Rakyat terdiri daripada politikus-politikus yang mewakili kita, rakyat. Secara teori, apa yang kita fikir, sentimen dan perhatian kita seharusnya dicerminkan oleh wakil – wakil ini. Jadi kelihatan aneh apabila berlaku kejadian melangkah keluar dewan ini. Dan oleh itu, para penyokong pihak pembangkang amat tidak berpuas hati dengan tindakan ini.

Mari kita lihat konsep keluar dewan dalam sistem demokrasi.

Tindakan keluar dewan ini adalah tanda protes, bukan sekadar tanda tidak bersetuju.

Menurut Wikipedia, “aksi keluar dewan ini sering dilakukuan kerana menentang kehadiran seorang pembicara atau menentang konteks sesuatu ucapan yang sedang berlangsung dalam sebuah mesyarat… seringkali sebagai satu cara senyap, dan tidak ganas untuk menunujukkan penolakan.”

Ini bermakna mereka yang memprotes ini tidak cuba menghalang ia daripada berlaku kerana mereka tiada kuasa untuk menghalangnya. Tetapi mereka dengan jelasa sedang menunjukkan penolakan mereka, dengan cara melangkah keluar daripada Dewan Rakyat.

Pandangan terhadap mana – mana rang undang – undang yang sedang dibentangkan biasanya ditunjukkan dengan cara mengundi menentangnya. Mengapa dalam hal ini, aksi keluar dewan yang diambil?

Di sini datangnya isu prinsip.

Mengundi menentangsesuatu, adalah cara normal untuk menunjukkan pandangan kita. Kadang – kala, apabila kita ingin menekan lagi pandangan kita, kita melangkah keluar daripada perdebatan.

Secara prinsip, aksi keluar juga boleh dilakukan terhadap mana – mana tindakan yang kita rasa tidak adil dan kita tidak mahu mengakui tindakan tersebut.  Cuba kita bayangkan, perselisihan faham antara rakan-rakan dan berasa sedih kerananya, atau tidak mahu menghubungi seorang rakan atas tindakan yang kita tidak bersetuju dengannya.

Sekarang, kita kembali ke Rang Undang-undang Perhimpunan Aman dan Dewan Rakyat.

Pertama, tempoh perdebatan yang biasa telah diabaikan. Kedua, rang undang-undang itu sendiri dilihat tidak mematuhi perlembagaan (bermakna tidak boleh diterima sama sekali, bukan hanya sekadar pendapat) oleh pengamal dan pakar undang – undang. Itulah yang menjadi asas kenapa pihak pembangkang menentang tindakan kerajaan dalam hal ini. Jadi, mereka bertindak melangkah keluar dari Dewan Rakyat.

Jika mereka tetap berdiam tidak melangkah keluar, paling tidak mereka hanya bolehmengundi dan tindakan mereka akan direkodkan dalam Hansard (rekod sidang Parlimen) yang boleh dirujuk pada masa akan datang. Tetapi, apakah impaknya?

Berdasarkan apa yang telah saya katakan, tindakan pihak pembangkang sememangnya munasabah. Tetapi, para penyokongnya tidak merasakan sedemikian, apatah lagi rakyat. Kebanyakan yang mengikuti hal ini, berhujah yang oleh kerana terlalu banyak tindakan keluar dewan ini dilakukan, kesannya tidak lagi dirasai.

Pada masa yang sama, satu lagi pihak mengatakan, yang walau pun secara prinsip ia tindakan yang bagus, satu aksi simbolik seperti ini tidak dapat difahami oleh mereka yang tidak mempunyai pendidikan yang mencukupi dalam politik. Oleh kerana itu, saya telah menulis artikel ini.

Saya bukan seorang ahli politik. Saya menulis kerana saya tahu yang politik, seperti ekonomi atau pendidkian, berkati rapat dengan kehidupan kita.

Saya merasakan yang perkara ini amat membingungkan. Baik daripada apa yang telah berlaku, kepada apa yang sepatutnya berlaku, kita memerlukan satu jawaban kepada perkara ini kerana para pemimpin kita berkata yang kuasa ada di tangan kita, para pemuda dan pemudi.

Jadi, jika kita harus mengambil keputusan, apa yang seharusnya kita lakukan?

 

Modern BRIC Values?

January 13, 2012 in Change, Discourse, Politics & Governments by Zain

The following are some tweets I put out recently on the measure of success and power, and how such definitions aren’t professed by only those who aspire, but those who observe, become victims of this narrow thought.

Interesting piece on Russian recent (few decades) politics, history, rule of law, and transition. Newsweek January 2nd edition. Click here.

Gd tht Russia,China..BRIC countries nw r emerging powers. Lessening U.S. But I’m skeptical over their neglect for justice. N ppl everywher celebrate d emerging powers,merely cz they dnt like U.S. Shows tht what we value is economy $$$. Other values?

Thts problematic cz this reflects how we c things,domestically,in our own homes,in ourselves.Fikiran wang & materialisme (shj). N whn we hv social issues,tht stems fr family values,&lives of d rich&stupid r threatend,theyre unable 2 articulate root prob.

Did we go through/for civilization,education,globalization, to become less wise & more wealthy?Less community & more self?

If education is teaching us to be destructive, then it’s not knowledge we’re learning.

Okay post dinner thots are done. Empty plates, and an open magazine here in an empty resto. They nak tutup. Time to walk home. #AdaAkuKisah?

*Pic above from Guardian.

Tags: , ,

Malaysia Kehadapan

January 7, 2012 in Change, Discourse, Politics & Governments by Zain

Kita hendak kehadapan, tetapi tidak bersedia untuk pemajuan pemikiran.

Kita hendak kehadapan, tetapi tidak bersedia untuk pengorbanan kemajuan.

Kita hendak kehadapan, tetapi tidak bersedia untuk berhadapan pembaharuan.

The above, are comments I left on a picture uploaded by a staff librarian from UiTM whom I gather, is not fond of the pro-establishment propaganda mooted by some students. I was moved to write that, based on other comments I read.

To an extent, I commend the students to take action and put up such banners, albeit I find their messaging, or more accurately their thinking, ignorant or non-progressive. But I too fall trap in that category, on a number of issues, I’m sure.

What I like about the people who were behind this, was that they were obviously not in agreement with the current state of things, certain student groups fighting for academic political freedom, and they took action for their (albeit poor) views.

Something that these students might not realize is that by doing this, they too are doing what those other students are fighting for. Participating in the public sphere for life, as oppose to being a observer or a mere follower.

Tags: , , ,

A Year in Learning

December 28, 2011 in Change, Discourse, Ideas, Politics & Governments, Published, Self by Zain

Article for my column in The Star published today. Was requested to write a retrospective piece on 2011. Well done again to UndiMsia (not just for making the pic article) and Teach For Malaysia. I love you two, for the very ground up development that you’ve had to work through and for.

I think this piece could have been better written. So to emphasize my point/theme here, look at the bigger picture. Some people can see that better if they’re educated with the knowledge, and perspective (though I’m not sure how to begin with the latter, but I assume engagement and discussion is a good start).

*Credit to The Star and Star R.age team. Happy new year to you, and special thanks to my editors and such: Ivy Soon, Niki Cheong and Melody Goh.

A Year in Learning

THE common thread running through 2011 for me was education. That’s my takeout when I look through the various chapters of 2011. I took part in initiatives such as the campaign to encourage people to vote UndiMsia, discussions on the teaching of Maths and Science in English (PPSMI), and the Bersih 2.0 rally for clean and fair elections. I was also involved in projects like Teach For Malaysia and permaculture.

UndiMsia (www.undimsia.com) is a voter education campaign started by a random group of Malaysians, and their numbers have grown by tenfold, at least. They’re active and have an open concept for others who are interested to participate by joining their meetings every Saturday at 11am in Bangsar, Kuala Lumpur.

UndiMsia is a non-partisan youth citizen movement. 

Besides educating people to vote for the right reasons – meaning to vote issues and not politicking – it called for a more participatory democracy by the rakyat, beyond voting. Generally, UndiMsia focuses on three issues: Food and housing, freedom of expression and the education segment of the national Budget.

As I became more active in society, I was more aware of things that are part and parcel of my private and public life. Politics – partisan or not, institutional or not – was something inevitable that I had to take an interest in. So, when the Bersih 2.0 chapter took off, I got involved.

It was enlightening for me to discuss why clean and fair elections were necessary and how it benefited Malaysians beyond politics and government.

I was also active in public discussions on the Government’s decision not to teach Maths and Science in English. I might not be a teacher but I did home tutoring for SPM candidates in Maths, for six years.

Initially, I was supporting the call for Maths and Science to be taught in English, but I have since changed my stand. It’s because I believe teaching these subjects in English would widen the polarity in Malaysia. Everyone deserves equal access to education, and teaching Maths and Science in English could render these subjects inaccessible to some students.

In 2011, two of my friends – Keeran Sivarajan and Dzameer Dzulkifli – started Teach For Malaysia (TFM), an initiative to improve the quality of teaching in schools. They are recruiting university graduates to work for two years as teachers before going on to whatever career path they choose.

It’s an amazing platform for Malaysians to build themselves but more importantly to focus on helping poor performing schools. Their mission for education equity for all is truly inspiring.

To close the 2011 book, I explored permaculture, which the all-knowing Wikipedia defines as “an approach to designing human settlements and agricultural systems that is modelled on the relationships found in nature.”

I started having plants at home in the middle this year to test if I had a greenthumb or not. I’m not sure if I do but I am recognising the impact of living around elements of nature. I’ve been looking to adapt my home to not just include planting my own greens, but also to be environmentally conscious beyond using recyclable bags and reducing water wastage.

This year has only been a piece of the puzzle. Likewise, don’t look at these issues and initiatives in isolation. Let’s look at how they are part of a bigger picture, so we can piece together our next move in 2012.

Zain HD writes occasionally at ZainHD.com and tweets excessively at twitter.com/ZainHD.

Flag-gate and Perjuangan Mahasiswa

December 21, 2011 in Discourse, Domestic, Politics & Governments, Published, Self by Zain

Friends- Syahredzan Johan and Woon King Chai, both fellow LoyarBurokkers, today published an article they wrote together and credited me for what little I shared on the issue (see below).

Take note that there were other remarks I made (via email) about the issue that was not included. That said, I won’t add on to what they said or comment on it, but I would commend them for the effort of taking action to write about it and get it out there. It helps the discourse, for people to better understand the issue, if not more than that.

Taken from LoyarBurok.com, follow them on Twitter.com/LoyarBurok:

Both Syahredzan Johan and Woon King Chai look at the ramifications of last Saturday’s infamous ‘flag incident’ at PWTC and ponder where the mahasiswa go from here.

BEBAS (Source: The Malaysian Insider)

 

Surely you must have heard the latest and hottest news in town: of Adam Adli, an UPSI student and coordinator of Legasi Mahasiswa Progresif (LMP), coming under fire for his actions in a student march which culminated at PWTC on 17 December 2011.

Both of us were not at the scene of the march, so what we know will be based on the news report as well as eyewitness accounts of those who were at the protest.

The march began at Masjid Jamek LRT station and the objective was to a present memorandum at PWTC and at SUHAKAM headquarters. The march itself was without incident, in fact what was noteworthy was the cooperation given by the Royal Malaysian Police (PDRM) to the protesters, in which they facilitated the march instead of trying to stop it as what usually happens. This is much welcomed, and hopefully this will herald a new approach to policing and future protests be handled similarly.

The police executing their responsibilities professionally by directing traffic and escorting the peaceful street protest of the students. (Source: The Malaysian Insider)

 

The current controversy is in relation to an incident in PWTC. It would seem that emotions got the better of some of the students at PWTC. A flag, bearing the Prime Minister’s face, was lowered and replaced with the flag of BEBAS. It happened briefly, the original flag was raised back up as quickly as it came down. The incident took place not more than 5 to 10 minutes, and in the words of@KohJL on Twitter:

Never has so much been said about so little. I saw incident and didn’t even think it was newsworthy. I’ve been proven very wrong

But newsworthy it was indeed. The storm of controversy that followed the aftermath of the incident (Flag-gate, anyone? You heard here first, on LB!) is well documented. In fact, the flag incident has overshadowed the march of the mahasiswa so much so that no one seems to be talking about the real issue behind the events that Saturday. It would appear that all we that we took from the march was the Flag-gate incident.

Snap-shot of Adam Adli at the flag pole (Source: online blog)

 

It is interesting to note how much this incident has garnered divided opinions and perspectives, from within the mahasiswa movement itself and the larger civil society.

Those in support of what Adam did say that it is a flag with the PM’s face and not the Jalur Gemiling. Some say that students did not burn nor trample the flag and merely lowered it. To them, there is nothing wrong with the action – it is a display of dissent and dissatisfaction with the government. Some have even accorded the act with a sense of symbolism, when quite clearly it was something which was not planned at the time did not have the endorsement of the organisers. It was only later that BEBAS did so retrospectively. As such, to say that the act is supposed to a symbolic one sounds like an afterthought and a rather disingenuous one at that.

On the other side of the spectrum, those against what Adam did described it as lacking courtesy at best, and biadap at worst. @ZainHD described it on Twitter (edited for clarity):

Whatever your affiliations, get it right. Don’t step into someone’s PRIVATE PROPERTY & do something that will LIKELY INSULT them. Understand respect.

Some students themselves (within the movement and the same circle) feel that the actions by BEBAS do not represent the entire student segment of the citizenry. Even though they walked with BEBAS on Saturday, or have been ardent supporters of the movement to expand student freedom and university autonomy, they do not agree with the act. They use the analogy of someone coming by your house, your very own private property, and starts messing around with your garden on your property.

Unfortunately, Flag-gate has degenerated into a partisan farce. Those in UMNO are going after Adam and BEBAS. Those in PKR meanwhile have thrown their support behind Adam and BEBAS. It is with this backdrop that the public discourse regarding Flag-gate is taking place.

BEBAS had no control what Adam did and it would appear that the movement did not plan to do what Adam did. So they could not be held responsible for what happened. What we disagree to is the response by BEBAS to the backlash. Instead of taking a step back to re-evaluate the situation and to take in the bigger picture of how political liberalization is an evolutionary process, they have instead opted to go forth with guns blazing.

Make no mistake, we condemn the threats against Adam, which so far includes threats to slap and spit on him. And while we do not agree in principle with Adam’s act, we also think that the backlash is disproportionate to the ‘crime’. It is after all just a flag with the Prime Minister’s face and it was just briefly lowered.

But BEBAS could have seen the bigger picture. They were asked to apologise, and while we do not see a need to do so, they could have instead chosen the more reconciliatory approach. The confrontational stance they have taken and their retrospective endorsement of Adam’s act have ironically damaged the movement and the cause.

Detractors of the cause are now using Flag-gate to discredit the cause. They are using this incident as proof that the mahasiswa should not be given their freedoms. The erstwhile @mpkotabeludtweeted:

Next it’ll be burning, spitting, tearing & stepping on Jalur Gemilang. Why the hell not? It’s freedom of speech & expression what!

The hardliners in UMNO have also found their ammunition against Dato’ Saifuddin Abdullah, one of the few true progressives in the party who not only talk of it, but also acts on it. We find it sad thatFlag-gate is being used against the mahasiswa movement’s benefactor and greatest ally in government.

Dato’ Saifuddin Abdullah receiving the memorandum from the students in front of PWTC on Saturday. (Source: online blog)

 

Time to put things back into perspective. It was a historic march, the culmination of years and years of mahasiswa empowerment. It should symbolise the coming of age of student activism, the day when the mahasiswa showed to the world that they no longer are afraid of the shackles of AUKU, placed upon them by a government fearful of the mahasiswa. The fact that the students marched peacefully to forward their cause for academic freedom without any violence or sabotage from anyone should take precedent over Flag-gate.

The very fact that SUHAKAM, through its commissioner Muhammad Sha’ani Abdullah, received the memorandum is recognition of the inalienable rights of the mahasiswa by the statutory body. Similarly, the fact that the memorandum was received by Dato’ Saifuddin Abdullah, Deputy Higher Education Minister and stalwart supporter of student political participation, is tacit acknowledgment by the government of the perjuangan.

Lest our views are misconstrued as losing faith in the students’ ability to handle the responsibility of political expression and affiliation, we reiterate a popular quote from Evelynn Beatrice Hall, in her work “Friends of Voltaire”:

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

Likewise, while we disagree with the methods and tactics employed, we must stand in solidarity together with those who believed in the same cause of advancing student freedom and university autonomy. Flag-gate must not be allowed to be used as an argument to take away from the very same struggle that has been fought for by many generations of students for over four decades.

Those fighting for the cause, regardless of whether it is BEBAS, PKR, PAS, Dato’ Saifuddin, youth wings within Barisan Nasional and civil society must stand together instead of being divided overFlag-gate. The cause is a political cause, but it should not be allowed to become a partisan one.

The cause is far, far bigger than Flag-gate. Let us turn Flag-gate into a positive. BEBAS, while possibly causing damage to the cause, have also put the focus on its movement. Before Nelson Mandela promoted his cause through dialogues, writing, speeches and thereafter reconciliation, he also committed acts of sabotage. It was part and parcel of the struggle. Maybe this is also part and parcel of the perjuangan mahasiswa. And since the nation’s attention is already on this issue, let use it to bring the spotlight onto the cause itself, rather than the incident.

Syah and King Chai are respectively a constitutionalist and a student-rights activist. They would also like to thank ZainHD for his assistance in the completion of this co-authored piece.

 

Palestinian Film Festival Malaysia, 2-11 December

November 30, 2011 in Ad, Politics & Governments by Zain

Language Massaging History

September 22, 2011 in Middle East, Politics & Governments by Zain

what a fascinating article! not on israel-palestine per se but focus on the historical/linguistic angle. paragraph 6 onwards.

http://www.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/2702/obamas-palestine-problem-and-ours

 

Sept 16 Pride Without Prejudice Event

September 15, 2011 in Politics & Governments, Religion & Faith, Self by Zain

While I don’t always agree with the organizer’s, Sister’s In Islam (SIS), approach and outlook towards issues and how they tackle things, they do do some good work. But more importantly, it would be wrong for you to disengage yourself with someone who is either you’re in disagreement with, or that is wrong.

To put into context, it’s like you like the colour blue and refuse to talk to anyone who likes yellow. Or refuse to shake hands with someone who is a thief, because he is a sinner in one clear way (like yourself too, in a way that might not be as obvious).

Now back to the poster above, each speaker will focus on one prejudice area, such as age, nationality, caste etc. Mine is on political prejudice. Whether or not you attend the talk or read it’s content afterwards, it’s important to make clear first to yourself, what does prejudice means. It sounds basic, but a good amount of pointless argument and discussion can ensue should something as simple as this, is not understood let alone agreed.

« Older entries