Agenda Palsu

Kita tidak perlu pergi jauh untuk melihat sendiri kenapa PKR merupakan sebuah parti yang tidak layak menerima sebarang undi di pilihanraya yang terdekat di dalam kelompok Pakatan Rakyat. PKR sebuah parti yang pada mulanya dilihat sebagai mampu menjadi wadah perjuangan rakyat berjiwa demokratik dan progresif kini saban hari, langsung setiap detik bergerak dan berubah menjadi parti yang tidak lainnya sama seperti UMNO and Barisan Nasional. Yang berbeza hanyalah warna kumpulan mereka. Gerak-geri, akal and paelnya tetap sama. Mungkin inilah akibatnya bila rata-rata pimpinan dan keahlian parti itu merupakan gerombolan mereka yang kecewa daripada parti yang lain jesteru menganggotai PKR atas kedangkalan ideologi.

Kepincangan ideologi PKR ini amat mengecewakan dan merupakan asas utama mengapa undian tidak boleh diberikan kepada mereka di dalam PKR. Mungkin di dalam bandar sekadar satu dua kerusi tetapi untuk dinobatkan sebagai peneraju Kerajaan Persekutuan Malaysia (dengan sokongan kerusi Malaysia Timur), tidak boleh. Mungkin selepas 30 tahun lagi bila mana ia telah mencapai kematangan sebagai sebuah parti politik berideologi dan bukannya sebuah parti politik untuk meletakkan seorang insan tertentu sebagai PM.

Bagi orang Malaya, pilih sajalahlah PAS atau DAP ataupun PSM. Pimpinan parti-parti selain PKR ini telah lama bertapak di persada politik negara dan berjuang berasaskan ideologi mereka yang kukuh. (Lebih jelek lagi jika ada yang bercita-cita mengundi KITA ataupun mungkin Amanah ataupun Perkasa. Mintak simpang malaikat 44! Mereka itu sama saja macam PKR.)

Pendapat saya ini bukanlah baru. Hatta saya telah menulis berapa kali melalui laman blog saya ini sejak beberapa tahun yang lalu. Memang saya amat kecewa dengan keterampilan pimpinan PKR yang langsung tidak mencerminkan semangat untuk membawa sebarang bentuk pembaharuan di dalam suasana politik tanahair dan juga tidak pula menonjolkan sedikit keazaman untuk memberikan pencerahan minda dan melonjakkan tatacara untuk mengumpil anak watan membantu membentuk sebuah masyarakat yang dinamik, progresif and bersedia untuk terus membawa nusa ketahap maju.

Mengapa saya berpendapat begitu?

Contoh pertama dan terbaru, di dalam ucapan dasarnya, seorang ketua PKR ini telah dilaporkan berkata yang beliau mahukan sistem raja berpelembagaan itu dimartabatkan semula. Menurutnya, sistem beraja mampu menjadi ‘pengimbang dan penegak ketertiban dengan mengambil peranan aktif menyekat sebarang tindakan melampau’. Bunyi memang sedap dan mampu melindung kedangkalan pemikiran yang bercanggah dengan prinsip keadilan di sebalik kata-kata politikus itu. Siapakah pula yang akan memeriksa tindakan raja itu? Apakah tindakan raja itu tidak akan dibayangi hawa nafsu raja tersebut? Apakah raja melayu itu – ada yang tidak berketurunan melayu jati, akan sentiasa memberikan keputusan yang adil dan tidak punya kesilapan? Kalau sistem sekarang tidak baik, bukankah bermakna ada sesuatu yang kekal sejak dulu lagi yang tidak baik? Jika diibaratkan umpama radio buruk yang tidak lagi berbunyi dengan jelas sedangkan arialnya telah beberapa kali ditukar ganti, bukankah bermakna ada komponen lain yang perlu ditukar juga? Demokrasi yang telus dan tulen yang berlandaskan ketuanan rakyat tidak mungkin tercapai jika kelompok yang menganggap mereka itu adalah ‘tuan’ kepada rakyat berterusan wujud dan berkuasa tanpa diperiksa oleh sesiapa. Bagaimana untuk menimbang cara mereka? Cita-cita untuk berubah bukanlah sekadar bayangan perubahan yang digembar-gemburkan oleh politikus. Apa yang hendak diubah dan kaedah untuk berubah mestilah diperjelaskan. Oleh kerana semua parti politik sekarang tidakpun mengariskan bagaimana mereka akan memgubah kaedah yang mengkorupkan ini, maka sebenarnya tiada mana-mana satupun antara mereka layak menerima undi jika kita mahukan pembaharuan yang menyeluruh, komprehensif and adaptif untuk membawa tanahair maju kehadapan.

Keduanya, setelah bertahun-tahun berpolitik, pimpinan PKR masih lagi meletakkan matlamat mereka meletakkan DSAI sebagai PM. Walaupun tidak tercatat di dalam Buku Jingga, laungan demi laungan diperdendangkan mengenai DSAI sebagai PM. Apakah PM DSAI akan menyelesaikan segala permasahalahan negara? Apakah nilai-nilai kuno UMNO lenyap daripada DSAI? Apakah nilai-nilai kuno lenyap daripada penyokong dan pengampu beliau? Apakah nilai-nilai tidak demokratik BN lenyap daripada mereka yang merajuk lalu berbondong-bondong memasuki PKR dan seterusnya diletakkan sebagai pemimpin, wakil rakyat dan ahli parlimen? Dengan dendangan laungan yang menyeru kepada pihak ketiga untuk aktif berpolitik, memperbetulkan politikus atau pentadbiran yang dianggap tidak betul bermakna pemimpin yang membuat seruan itu sendiri tidak faham prinsip keadilan dan hak kebebasan insan di dalam ruanglingkup kerajaan sekular dan demokratik. Bagaimana wujudnya pihak ketiga – yang sejarahnya membuktikan yang mereka itu amat korup dan mudah dipengaruhi pihak luar, di antara mana-mana dua pihak yang berusan sesama mereka – yakni politikus dan rakyat, mampu menjamin pemacuan ekonomi yang mapan dan tinggi? Apakah ketirisan yang dianggarkan RM28 billion setahun itu akan lenyap dengan mengekalkan dan mempertahankan pihak ketiga yang fuedal? Kenapa kita harus letakkan kepercayaan kepada seorang yang bertanggungjawab mengadaikan seluruh aset rakyat kepada golongan elit dan berhasrat untuk menggunakan wang rakyat sekali lagi untuk membeli semula aset-aset yang telah diswastakanya dulu? Sanggupkan rakyat dipertanggungkan kos memperbetulkan kesilapan seorang Menteri Kewangan lampau?

Ketiganya, mengapa ‘melayu’ masih menjadi kayusukat dan kayularas di dalam parti yang memperjuangkan prinsip keadilan sejagat? Jika dilihat dari laporan isu-isu semasa, jelas memperlihatkan perbedaan pendapat, pemikiran, dan kaedah antara PKR melayu dan yang bukan melayu. Maka, benarkah realiti ini menjamin suasana yang lebih baik daripada perhubungan melayu, cina dan india di dalam BN melalui UMNO, MCA, Gerakan dan MIC? Mengapa perlu dicabar UMNO untuk menjanjikan ‘melayu’ kekal PM sedangkan mereka telah meletakkan PM melayu yang bersilih ganti sejak merdeka sedangkan PKR masih hanya bermimpi-mimpi untuk meletakkan DSAI sebagai PM melayu pertama? Ini tidak masuk akal! Ada banyak lagi permasalahan yang menimpa rakyat khususnya di Johor malangnya pemimpin PKR memilih isu ini untuk diketengahkan. Mengapa isu ‘Melayu’ diperdendangkan senada dengan isu memartabatkan raja? Ini menunjukkan pemimpin hanya fokus kepada cara untuk ke Putrajaya dan bukanya untuk menyelesaikan masalah rakyat. Belas ehsan raja sebagai pihak ketiga amat diperlukan untuk menjamin kerusi utama di Wisma Perdana lebih-lebih lagi bilamana orang yang hendak duduk dikerusi berkenaan memerlukan pengampunan raja untuk menjadi PM yang sah. Maka, ini menunjukkan tiada bezanya dengan Perkasa yang memperkudakan isu melayu sebagai modal meraih sokongan demi kelangsungan politik semata yang lazim maha mengetahui yang mereka hanyalah proksi kepada UMNO dan BN. Jangan di tanya UMNO di mana ‘melayu’ sebagai PM sebaliknya apa yang patut ditanya ialah di manakan takrifan melayu itu di dalam PKR sekaligus PR dan apakah rancangan untuk membetulkan maksud ‘melayu’ itu di dalam Buku Jingga. Apakah dengan kesanggupan meletakkan PM Melayu itu memberikan keadilan sosial dan membanggunkan insan secara menyeluruh? Apakah dengan adanya PM Melayu itu boleh meyakinkan kalangan negara ASEAN untuk menerima Bahasa Melayu sebagai Lingua Franca? Kekeliruan dan ketidakfahaman tentang takrif melayu itu diperlihatkan dengan jelas juga di dalam masalah PPSMI yang mana PKR menyokong pemansuhannya dan tidak pula membentangkan sebarang penyelesaian menyeluruh mengenai kadeah pendidikan negara. Pemikiran yang tidak demokratik turut dipertontonkan lagi bilamana PKR menyokong Menteri Pendidikan yang merampas hak ibubapa untuk memilih corak pendidikan yang sesuai untuk anak mereka. Apakah ini yang dimaksudkan di bawah objektif ketiga Buku Jingga? Apakah seorang menteri daripada PKR tidak akan menrampas hak rakyat untuk membuat keputusan di dalam hal yang bersangkutan dengan pendidikan dan cara hidup mereka? Sudahkah kita lupa siapa yang memulakan kempen Cintai Bahasa Kita sehinggakan bahasa lain diabaikan terus di dalam sistem pendidikan? Selagi ada pemimpin yang memainkan kata ‘melayu’ itu dan dilunakkan dengan ‘raja’ bermakna mereka masih lagi mempunyai elemen feudal yang tidak mungkin boleh bertukar dan tidak sama sekali mungkin dapat memimpin berasaskan konsep keadilan sosial dan ketuanan rakyat.

Selayang Pandang

Sekali sekala jenguk dan imbas.
Tinjau perkembangan Nusa semasa.
Kalau dikira memang malas.
Cerita jenayah dan propaganda seperti biasa

Beberapa tahun telah berlalu.
Nusa masih dalam ingatan.
Harapan tetap semacam dulu.
Kapan mungkin di dalam Pakatan?

Bertahun-tahun duduk selepok.
Hasil yang dipunggah bertimbun-timbun.
Sisa yang tertinggal dibiar berlapok.
Tuah bersama yang dapat bermiliun-miliun.

Biaya diberi supaya berfaedah.
Bekalan dibawa dari jauh.
Tempat Merenung terbongkar sudah.
Sebagai ganti titik peluh.

Tempik tempelak makin lantang.
Tonggak terjah terus lulus.
Apakah corak yang akan datang.
Hanya berpaut pada yang mengurus.

Tonggak tua diterjang keluar.
Yang muda bersilat terus masuk.
Dalam sama beza hanya di luar.
Kijang meloncat semacam dirasuk.

Satu pusingan telah tamat.
Bertapak semula di tempat asal.
Adakah tangkal yang ada azimat.
Nikmat serata tiada yang menyesal.

Old Politics, Old Baggage

I understand the feeling of disgust. Why would Malaysians living the good life abroad – especially in western countries, care about voting back in Malaysia? These people are cowards! That’s why they left the country and let the rest of their countrymen suffer.... tup tup tup...want to vote pulak? Apahal? Dah la tak bayar cukai, nak vote pulak?

This line of thinking is of course not reflecting an ounce of understanding of individual rights and protection provided by the Federation of Malaysia constitution. However, with the current system of stressing on the Malay-Islam-Raja-Rights only from early age; and glossing over the details of the constitution up until Form 5; and stressing only on Malay rights, no wonder many are not aware, let alone critical of their rights prescribe by law.

Right to vote is a constitutional issue not a fiscal issue such as taxation that can be decided by the Government in power. What is so difficult about extending the postal vote, for example, beyond members of the security and defense forces? Why not extending the right to vote to those living abroad as there are reportedly over 1 million Malaysians living abroad on long term basis which is undoubtedly much more when compared to back in 1969?

If we start to selectively apply conditions to what is otherwise given under the constitution, where will such intervention end? Will a rich man, paying more in tax have more say than a farmer who pays no tax?

To deny rights prescribed under the constitution is tyranny and utterly undemocratic. Anyone with half a brain would know. Such an act will surely attract international condemnation.

To hear such an idea – not allowing Malaysians living abroad a vote by law, from someone who still claims to be a Malaysian and frequently commenting on Malaysian issues from the comfort of his home in Western USA is indeed disappointing. I can understand some folks currently living abroad have this feeling as well. What more, many Malaysians currently residing in the country already feel that Malaysians living abroad are less patriotic and less deserving/worthy perhaps to call themselves Malaysian in any case.

I think the kind of statement made regarding what the government should do i.e. creating a law with an intention that is wholly against the spirit of constitutional liberty, is what Thomas Sowell described in his book, Intellectual and Society (Basic Books, 2009) as ‘public intellectuals’ with ‘vision of the anointed’ making decisions for the masses and trying to influence like-minded people in power. But actually, to interpret the law or promoting law that go against the basic liberty (in this case or context as enshrined in the Federation of Malaysia constitution) is also not new especially for those living in the West. Perhaps a short read of what Bastiat had written back in 1840s could be a good start since it’s just 50-odd pages long and will give a sort of perspective on the Wests long journey on human rights.

But can we ask ourselves why would the Malaysian government in power willingly agree to allow additional million-odd potential voters currently living abroad and out-of-reach of their sphere of influence, to vote for change in Malaysia?

Of course people can petition to ask for the government to allow them to vote. But why would one expect the government to agree to such a request now when we are mere months away from next GE?

Just because you think you will win in GE13 and the government in power should agree and make changes to increase your chances of winning is it? I know we all think the incumbent politicians in power are dumb but do you think they are that dumb?

Actually, if you are already living abroad on long term basis, forget Malaysian politics. It’s too destructive. You don’t need the Malaysian government to ban you from voting for having been living abroad permanently. You just should not bother voting in the first place! It’s your choice after all to vote or not.

Don't be too quick to subscribe to the 'third force' nonsense. Idealists make lousy politicians. lousy politicians can never be effective. Effective politicians require a totally different political system. And since none of the current political parties aspire to change the system, any good that come out from any change will only be temporary. Read about France, Brazil, China, India, Russia, Spain, Germany. Read about how they evolve and abandon what did not work in their political system. Look at Indonesia and Thailand. Japan and Korea. Even Vietnam. Even Iran for that matter. Consider Tunisia. Egypt.

So apparently, only Malaysian are delusional thinking that change is easy.

We will win next GE!

Just choose the other party!

Have 2 party system!

ABU!

All mere slogans, I tell you.

Better to channel your energy to helping fellow Malaysians in however small way you can. Here in Southeast Queensland, I am proud to cite as an example that when some of our fellow countrymen were affected by the floods of 2011, we all rallied together to help out. Cultural bond and religious ties are much stronger than politics.

Korean War Memorial Aug 20, 2011

Anas participated in his first taekwondo demonstration today. Today is also his birthday which made the event extra special for our family. We took the opportunity to spend the rest of the day enjoying Gold Coast...if only we could eat and enjoy the food.... Ended up iftar at Nandos and maghrib at a park in Broadbeach. Long day!

Real Change is Hard

Everybody wants to be the leader for change these days. After all it is very easy to say that you are representing some sort of association, organization or grouping and barking statements demanding some sort of change. Merely set up an organization with you and your shadow and quite possibly two or three of your mates as the founding members, and presto! You are now a leader of a newly formed NGO or some sort of body and ready to demand populist changes. The next step is as simple as calling a couple of journalists as your audience and off you go! Of course, it would be great if you could find some sort of acronyms that have some sort of historical, spiritual or racial nuances to adopt as the short name for your newly found platform. It would be even better if you are already a politician and a member of some sort of feudal caste; and pissed off that you are not getting your millions because your old chums don’t like you anymore.

Nowadays, everybody is talking about wanting change in Malaysia but the kind of change that they are after are often the kinds of changes that are very easy to accomplish if only there is a will to make them happen. Only the realpolitik that is preventing from making sweeping ‘hanging fruits’ changes. If you were born into one of the Abrahamic religions and have been living a secular lifestyle until you recently re-discovered your faith, you will understand the concept of repentance. Hence, once you repent and abstain from wrongdoings and strive to comply with all requirements of your faith, everything should be good again. God willing, all is forgiven. This is how I see the solution that most opinion leaders in Malaysia seem to be asking for. If only those responsible simply make amends and change their ways, all will be sweet again.

There is nothing to it. The law is already there for all to follow. No need to pull strings. No need to bribe anyone. No need to get some greedy feudal person to organize dinners just to talk to someone in the Government to get something done.

So when it comes to the so-called political changes in Malaysia, many are simply asking to stop the kleptocratic practices and constitutional abuses that have now been viewed as being too widespread and affecting all spectrum of governance at all levels of society. So theoretically, if everyone involved – the incumbent politicians especially, simply mend their ways and follow the rules – play by the book, then everyone will be happy again. Repent and all will be good. That is all!

But to ask for this kind of change – while very easy to fix if the incumbent politicians have half-a-brain, is really not looking at things realistically. In fact, I think it is downright foolish to expect the Feudal Class and the Klepto Class to repent. Afterall, we are not talking about some intangible things or concepts such as reward in the afterlife or the concept of God iteself! We are talking about millions of ringgit if not billions. When all you think about is how the changes are affecting or going to affect your rich-and-famous lifestyle, then the solution becomes tad more complicated.

We are smart enough to understand that is impossible to achieve yet we are prepared to be sucked in by equally silly and self-interested group of disgruntled politicians and demonstrate on the streets asking for the impossible. How could we have made such poor judgments? I think it was Thomas Sowell who said in one of his recent book that many so called intellectuals, despite having intelligence, made wrong judgments because they lack wisdom. Perhaps we all lack this wisdom and keep asking for the impossible.

So let’s get real.

It takes years to transform a society. In our case, when we have a group of people who have been in power for more than half a century, why do we expect change to come without any price?

What more, the kinds of changes that we are after are only treating the symptoms and not really addressing the root causes? The changes that we are after are merely reactionary. They are not fundamental changes. So what difference will the demands make?

We have to appreciate the relationship between the triumvirates of our politics and understand how external forces influence each triumvir. I think those who have read Polanyi’s The Great Transformation, will appreciate the fact that at the end, self interests of certain class within the society will react in a way which will best serve their interests.

In our country, our triumvirates comprise the Rulers (Feudal aristocrats), the Politicians (Kleptomaniacs) and the People (Serfs). Many people tolerated the feudal and the kleptomaniacs as they continue to receive benefits under this triumvirate system despite the inefficiencies. When those in power able to satisfy the basic wants of the Serfs, you can expect peace and harmony. The Feudals and Kleptomaniacs knew this. Although the Klepto Class have their own critics within the same class, but they are well aware of the need to maintain the triumvirate as it remains the best way to serve their ultimate interest that is run the country by assuming federal governance of this rich nation. I need not point out that being kleptomaniacs, we all know why all of the Kleptos want to run this country. Whichever way you slice and dice this gratuitous relationship, the People will continue to be the Serf as the other two parties – the Feudals and the Kleptos, fully understand what happens otherwise. What more, the same two classes share one common trait that is greed. Because of this greed both the Feudals and the Kleptos are not only easily prone to external influences (economic interests) but at times also as demonstrated throughout our history, have actively sought external influence to ensure they achieve their goals (Pangkor Accord comes to mind).

I purposely left economic (or business) motives out of this triumvirate as I have now realized that the whole money-making ways is merely a subset of the society; and the degree of economic progress and sophistication can only reflect the functioning of the society as a whole. With our Feudal lords and their Kleptocratic mates avarice lifestyles, it is not surprising to me that they insist on maintaining the current system in which they thrive and the sad reality is that the Serf came out in droves to support them!

The people want change, the Kleto Class say they want change and recently we have also heard that the Feudals want change as well. There has been a growing trend among the Feudals to demand active involvement in policymaking and legislation. Certain quarters within the Klepto Class swifly take advantage of this trend and attempt to entangle the Feudal Class closer to their specific causes.

So the Serf Class has to beware. Whatever the outcome, any changes made to the Klepto Class with tacit or explicit involvement of the Feudal Class will only mean the condition of the Serf Class will hardly improve for the better.

Consider this for a moment: Imagine your favourite clothes hanging in the closet at home. The one you purchased many years ago and have been wearing it far too many times. Does it still look as good as the day you bought it? No wear and tear? Gets better with age like wine or tapai? What do you think will happen to it eventually? Let it hang there in the closet for yonks but just wear other clothes? Even if you can replace it, would you go back to the same shop and buy the same exact same one?

So everything has ‘use-by’ date.

I get it!

I get it! Nothing is what it seems in this world. If you believe 100% what the news say, you are the most deceived person on earth. I get it. I understand. What more, I am a Malaysian…of course I don’t believe what the main stream media says! It goes without saying!

Recently, I came across comments by a fellow Malaysian on the current unrests in the Middle East. According to that person - as a person who has been living in that region for many years, the news of the unrest and the reactions of the respective governments portrayed by the general media especially of that the west are viewed as distorted and inaccurate.

I can understand this point of view.

Of course, there is a strong possibility of bias journalism. So frustrated by the apparent lack of understanding by the western media, that person posted short articles online criticizing the demonstrators. Among other arguments, that person argued that when one lives in luxury, where all the convenience and amenities are provided for by the government of the time, what are the grounds or basis for wanting freedom and democracy in society? When you are given free access to education, free healthcare, free welfare, free housing and what not, what else do you want? What kind of freedom can give all that have been given for free? Can the most democratic country of the world provide free housing, free education, lump sump payment to families for every child birth, so practically free everything to every citizen?

I am shocked by such an argument and shallowness of intellect. The level of ineptness is beyond my comprehension. Perhaps such an argument would work for the tribes in the interiors of Sarawak…after all they have been voting for the same government since the joining the Federation of Malaysia.

I don’t want to comment on what the Middle Eastern governments do or not do for their citizens. How the Arab governments take care of their own people is relatively of no interest to me.

What of higher importance to me is how Malaysian thoughts shape political action in Malaysia as I believe that political actions affect lives; that local political actions affect local lives first.

And the argument presented by that particular person, to me, reflects the general backwardness of political thoughts among the center and center-right of the so called educated middle class of Malaysia (and I can say this because I know the person’s background). So my comments are not to be viewed as to support the need for political action in the Middle East but instead to illustrate why meaningful political change is needed in Malaysia instead of merely wanting to put ex-BN people in power…for the second time around.

Firstly, is it really true that EVERYTHING is provided for by the governments of the Middle East for their citizens? According to one article on the measurements of the Arab Countries on the Knowledge Economy in 2009, (http://arabstates.undp.org/contents/file/newfiles/AKR09_E/A3.pdf), the normalized values of indicators for knowledge for the region trail below median in all areas except for GDP. Hardly a surprise for a region producing about 29.5 million barrels of oil daily in 2009, making a cool $2.2 billion/day (at approximately $75/barrel in 2009) to split among 350 million people. Then again, given so much wealth, shouldn’t the region be leading in all knowledge indicators instead of lagging but in one? So where did all the money go? Back to our homeland, is all our money going into right places? So when people demand more freedom, could it be that they want more freedom in the manner how public money is spent? Wouldn’t the typical Aminah, Ah Mei and Kumari like to make sure their tax money is well spent?

Secondly, the comment made also reflect the shallowness of thought where success is only measured in material terms. Just because everything is being provided therefore everyone is expected to live in harmony and luxury and forget about everything else that is important to us as human being. Even if indeed all people in the Middle East are living in luxury, so many Arab scholars have highlighted the need for structural economic reforms to meet challenges by rising unemployment and shrinking job prospects for locals but at the same time rapidly increasing labor workforce. Back home, though we have quite large middle class population, what are we going to do for the future amidst some more than 1.5 million legal low-to-no skill foreign workers and their more than 1 million illegal counter-parts on top of some 90,000 refugees taking up other low wage jobs? Why should the citizen focus of work, eat, sleep, and procreate and leave all such matters to the elite few – in almost all cases also the corrupted few?

Thirdly, people protest for various reasons and must be considered as part of natural instrument for political action. For example, yesterday as I was walking to work along Edward St, I noticed a car parked by the roadside decorated with signs claiming corruption is acceptable in Queensland. That is a form of political action on an individual level. A couple of days ago, there were talks about having ‘Slut Walk’ in Brisbane to fight for women’s freedom to dress as they please. The issue of interest to outsiders with regard demonstrations in some parts of the Middle East is how the governments respond to contain or handle this type of political action. I don’t really have an opinion whether the people there like or dislike their ruling regime. If we take Thailand for example, on a personal level, why do we as Malaysians care which ‘Shirt’ rule? Red, Yellow, Blue, Green, Orange, Maroon, Pink…what do we care? But we at least respect the Thai’s desire for change.

Fourthly, a regime remains in power as long as the people wanted it. Perhaps this is a foreign concept for Malaysians as the regime in power is destined to remain in power until kingdom come or until the country falls into pieces, whichever comes first. But for our neighbors in Thailand, Philippines, and Indonesia, this is a fact. (I purposely excluded Singapore and Brunei for obvious reasons). The people give legitimacy to political action including the government.

Consider what is happening in Libya. Granted that Gadaffi is not the best of all leaders, but do you think the so called people leaders negotiating with NATO powers are legitimate leaders and have mandate to represent the entire Libyan people?

Consider, for example, US’s unilateral action to kill a foreign citizen in a foreign country. How the champion of democracy and freedom could commit such act of state terrorism and yet not a single American is calling for President’s resignation? The point is, when the people (usually in millions not in hundreds or thousands) decided to take to the streets to express their anger at a regime, is that a sign that some thing is terribly wrong in the country?

So legitimacy is a sore point in many countries where the governments and those individuals in power are usually proxies for others either externally (other nations) or internally (interest groups). This comes to another point why some people think that the demonstrations – in the case of the Middle East, is instigated by foreign powers to destabilize the region and secure Israel’s position. Perhaps this is true. But if the people knew their leaders are idiots, why can’t they change their leaders? Should the system be configured in such a way to facilitate this? I think honestly we all know the answer to this. We weren’t born yesterday. No one who is in the position of power and wealth – as is the case in all third world countries, will hand over the reigns easily. Even Mubarak took a long time to step down and if we look at Ben Ali, he did not leave without taking tons of gold with her.

So let’s not be so naive to say that since the government has provided everything, the rakyat should just enjoy life and be happy as a clam.

Local Action for Cultural Heritage

There are many reasons why people decide to settle in a completely new place or environment instead of ‘living the dream’ in their home town, state or country. For most people – in my opinion, the main reason is the desire to seek a better place for their future - be that for themselves or for their children’s future. People who are living as expatriates are different as typically they moved to a new place because of work and therefore their outlook and experience are different from those who decided to pack their belongings and live elsewhere for good. Eventually, after having settled into a new area, one quickly grows familiar with the surroundings and eventually will feel very much at ‘home’. It is the classic chapter in a life often best described by the humble adage, ‘home is where the heart is’.

In the context of a Malaysian migrant living abroad, one will find there are many who never really felt belonged in their new realities. In the case of the Malays, many will cite religion as a key factor preventing full integration with the local community and western society at large. Concern with the realities of western living on their children’s spirituality is of utmost importance and constantly in their minds. For the Chinese, spirituality is not a problem preventing them from being fully integrated; however, ‘culture’ is a problem as many find they have to work double hard compared to back ‘home’ despite not enjoying many benefits according to the Malaysian system. It seems that ‘yellow outside, white inside’ mindset is not sufficient to ensure success in the west. They end up having to rely on fellow migrants for business and not really integrated into the western society as one would expect. Malaysian Indian seems to be integrating a lot better – in my opinion. Perhaps it’s in their genes. LOL! (I have visited many places around the globe but I cannot recall coming across Malaysian Indian restaurant.)

But of course, first generation migrants’ experience is different than those of the subsequent generations. The younger and future generations’ realities are more deeply rooted in their local environment and have less attachment to their parents’ cultural heritage. They are more assimilated and accustomed to the western style of things as they are proud citizens. They understand their parents’ mother tongue but they think exclusively in the language of their local environment. I remember trying to communicate with a Vietnamese German on a train in Munich in June 1996. He dressed up like a punk with spike hair, black eye liner, and sleeveless denim jacket, spike leather collar around his neck and wrist, and practically dresses in the same manner as his two other Vietnamese homeboys. He doesn’t understand a word of English speaks exclusively German with his friends and I don’t speak Vietnamese so he had to endure my bad and broken German. Eventually I was able to get my point across and was able to have some sort of conversation during the 20 minutes ride. The point I am trying to highlight here is that although the kid was born in Vietnam and came to Munich when he was five years old, he doesn’t speak Vietnamese outside of his home. Despite growing up in a German environment, he hangs out with exclusively Vietnamese Germans.

But it is not wrong to hang out with people from the same cultural background. It’s perfectly understandable. I was told in Canada for example, it is not unusual to find people who were born there and have been living there for thirty, forty or more years and yet their English is undistinguishable from recent migrants with similar cultural heritage. In fact, this phenomenon should not come as a surprise to a Malaysian at all. Many Malaysian Chinese and Indian for example still cannot speak Malay well despite having live there for most of their lives. But they are proud Malaysians nonetheless.

However, despite having foreign cultural heritage, our – speaking exclusively from a migrant perspective, political outlook must always be local. This is because what is happening in our local environment affects us directly. There must be, on our part, an effort to enhance cultural understanding in the local context and not from the political context of where we come from. After all, this is our home now. We have made this new place as our home and therefore it is natural that we must be responsible enough to make it a much better place than where we were. This point should also be easily understood by Malaysians as the country has pluralistic cultural heritage.

The reality is however not all share this view about the need for local political activism. For some, although they have been naturalized, their hearts and soul still belong to the motherland. In countries where multiple citizenships are allowed, such as India, this is not really a problem. One can be a proud Westerner but also a proud Indian. But for Malaysian migrants – especially for Malays in the West, they have to be more pragmatic.

From my personal experience, I find Malaysian Malays (or ex-Malaysian Malays) remain confused of their cultural heritage and typically resulting in them splitting into two distinctive camps with two seemingly diverging core beliefs or outlook. One camp is more Islamic-centered and the other is more culturally-centered. These core beliefs are products of Malaysian-style politics and education/worldview which in my opinion should not be adopted by the Diasporas around the world. Hence, any form of political activism must be centered on what is relevant for the Diasporas and must not be clouded on what is happening ‘at home’ notwithstanding the fact that current telecommunication technologies enable rapid dissemination of news from ‘home’ countries.

This is why I reject any attempts to mould opinions and political actions for example among Australian Malays according to political trends in Malaysia. The reality is PAS and UMNO or even PKR politics have no material impact to the life of Australian Malays. And there shouldn’t be as the Malaysian political parties are fighting for political actions in Malaysia, therefore, for Malaysians and not for Australians.

So when I recently saw pictures of a Malaysian political figure (or is it a fugitive?) with so-called Malaysians in Australia, I wonder how many of these so called Malaysian are also Australians. Beyond the realm of political science studies at Australian universities and foreign policymakers, why would an Australian bother about Malaysian politics? Why would the so-called Malaysians living abroad – in this case Australia, care about the future of Malaysian politics if they would not be living there to make any credible political impact or be a part of a powerful political mobilization? Unless, of course, they are living abroad for ‘cari makan’ and will return ‘home’ when ‘pencen-oredi’ in which case this should only be appropriate for Malaysians who are permanently residing abroad but not a naturalized citizen of that country since Malaysia does not recognize multiple citizenships.

Another reality is that there are so many members of the Malaysian elite living abroad on permanent basis. Malaysia is often the place where they make their money and the west is often where they enjoy the good things in life. To this people, Malaysian politics is real for any changes may affect their rice bowl or pot of gold.

But for the commoners, why should they care?

It is unfortunate that Malays from Malaysia have adopted the Malaysian legal and therefore constitutional definition of Malay and often completely unaware of their common cultural denominators with others from Southeast Asia. Often, this tunnel view of cultural identity prevents them from appreciating the importance and impact of their culture to the world and enhancing ties with others with similar heritage from the region. But these consequences of the false sense of identity made worse by nation-state ideologies are not exclusive to Malaysian Malays. I know that some Malays from Malaysia would not want to socialize with Indonesian Acehnese or Sundanese for example. In fact, once I smiled at a young guy wearing black baju melayu after Eid ul-Fitr prayers and his first question to me was, ‘Are you Bruneian?’ Apparently he saw me in my baju melayu and he thought I was his fellow countrymen studying at University of Queensland. I put on a fake smile but I feel so sad and angry. We are both of the Malay-heritage and all he cared about is whether I am from the same country as he is. How screwed up our respective political systems to deny our common heritage! So it is up to the Diasporas to rectify this unfortunate cultural exclusivity now that they are no longer bound by the same ideological imperatives.

So for Malays living in the West, their focus should be how to collectively engage in protecting and enhancing cultural heritage and at the same time promoting and enhancing understanding in their respective society.

For those who study Malay heritage or familiar with the subject, they will appreciate the role of Islam in injecting progressive mindset among the people so much so that Islam has been successful in replacing feudal practices and promoted modern governance via trade prior to European conquests. Following colonization period, modern Islamic thoughts at the turn of the twentieth century in particular influences from the enlightenment movement in Europe and more so from Egypt sparked radical changes in the people’s political psyche in Southeast Asia. I recently read a blog article by a Malaysian politician pointing out the fact that the Muslim Malay-Indonesian society of today is the largest Muslim society in the world. He therefore stressed that the Muslim Malay-Indonesian society must be seen as the future center of the Muslim world and must spearhead the reconstruction of the ummah. Never mind the fact that this statement came from a politician whose party has no manifested ambition to make any meaningful change other than wanting to be in the driver seat of the country under the same political system, his statement is a manifestation of growing realization of the inclusivity of the Malay heritage. In another example, an Australian Islamic scholar recently pointed out that Islam first initiated contact with the Aborigines in Australia around 1650 almost two centuries prior to English settlement via Southeast Asia or more specifically in current terms from Sulawesi, Indonesia. Clearly there is an opportunity for people with Malay cultural heritage to be proud of their contribution to the Australian society at large. The Malay Diasporas in the west should take example of their Cape Malay brethrens in South Africa where their cultural heritage is proudly recognized and celebrated.

Perhaps, only time will tell. But in the mean time, consider any political activism at the local level. Forget the baggage from elsewhere. Focus on keeping the culture alive at home.