The Independent Insight

Giving truth a voice

Refuting Hafidz Baharom’s article in Malaysiakini: On Israel and Malaysian hypocrisy

By

I was surprised reading this article, not that because it was written by a Malay Muslim but by its poor reasoning and lack of grip to the issue. Actually, this kind of reasoning is nothing new, if you joined a closed FB group full of Islamophobes like GE-Global, you’ll find this argument repeated everywhere. Hafidz is just parroting the same argument.

Ok, lets go into the specific detail on what he wrote. Lets start with his underlying thesis which is the bulk of the article. He argued that “why did we banned the Israeli, not others who violate human right such as the U.S., Russia, Saudi Arabia, Myanmar, China”.

There are 2 main flaws with this argument. The first one, its outlandish if not idiotic that whenever we stand for some right we are hypocrites because there are other violation elsewhere. It’s like a Penang Environment Group (PEG) voicing out about the deforestation of their mountains, was jeered off because there are other cases of deforestation in Kelantan, Sarawak, Selangor, Indonesia, Uganda, Micronesia, Palau, Panama, Mexico etc. So PEG is hypocrites unless they also championing the violation in other states. So if we used his logic, we cannot stand for anything unless we stand for all the right in this world all at once, which is impractical and almost impossible.

Second, it is a clever diversion from the real issue. Instead of arguing the substance, he resorted in moving the goal post. It will never end. Say we banned Israeli and U.S. athlete. Then someone can say what about Russia? We banned Russian. Then he will ask what about Turkey? We banned Turkish. He will ask what about Zimbabwe? It will be an infinite whataboutism. If the international community subscribed to his logic, Apartheid South Africa will still exist today as they cannot adopt a concerted targeted effort to end a particular injustice.

Reading through his article. It is not what he wrote were the only dishonest argument that I find, but what he left behind. I only can conclude that Hafidz Baharom was a real hypocrite rather than Tun or Syed Saddiq. We may not banned other athlete from other countries which we had a diplomatic ties, but Malaysia was far from silence. In case of Yemen, Malaysia pull-out our servicemen from the Saudi-led campaign. In the case of Uighur, Malaysia defied China by releasing Uighur detainees. In case of Rohingya, we even built them a hospital! So, while we might not banned their athletes, we respond according to the situation with a diplomatic ties we have. We, on the other hand, never recognized Israel, we have no ties with them. If he had a problem with that, maybe he can try apply an Israeli citizenship.

Then, things get more interesting. Why we singled out Israel? He claimed “Probably because it is convenient, and that is all. It is easier to ban a small, tiny nation we don’t have to trade directly with rather than the superpowers of the world.” Tun made it clear why, instead he used his made-up imagination to put up his case.

Nevermind, let’s look at this flimsy imagination. If we look at the fact, this argument collapsed spectacularly. He failed to mention that Israel is a “mini-military superpower” and was the 7th largest arms exporter in the world. Israel is armed to the teeth with a nuclear capability. Israel even wield huge political power influencing the U.S., Israel has meddled in U.S. through AIPAC long before the accusation of Russian meddling, that is why they are immune to UN resolutions. Just last Monday, U.S. senate advances bill to combat the boycott of Israel. If a country is a tiny country base on its geographical borders, tell me how come a small European island called Britain can colonize India for 200 years.

Hafidz is plain wrong and don’t even know what he is talking about.

Lastly, and this is the most funny of all. Where he used his assumption to make a case which he did not substantiate. He said, I quote “you won’t find Malaysian Muslims suddenly insisting of boycotting haj and umrah packages to Saudi Arabia over Yemen ever.” Farouk Musa of IRF has indeed call for boycott of Saudi Arabia over war in Yaman. So, again, his argument i.e. imagination collapsed miserably.

Sidang Media MJIIT, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia berkaitan Isu Yuran Melampau

By

 

Seramai 50 mahasiswa/i telah melakukan sidang media untuk mendedahkan yuran tambahan yang menindas di bawah fakulti Malaysia-Japan International Institute of Technology di Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Kuala Lumpur. UTM mengenakan yuran tambahan sehingga RM5,000 untuk sebuah semester berbanding RM700 yang dijanji surat tawaran UTM.
Yuran tambahan menjadikan bayaran untuk 4 tahun sebanyak RM40,000 yang bersamaan dengan yuran di IPTS. UTM merupakan sebuah universiti awam yang menerima subsidi daripada cukai rakyat. Selepas hampir 3 tahun mencari resolusi secara saluaran diplomatik, MJIIT-Voices, UTM (gerakan yang melawan isu yuran melampau) telah melakukan sidang media untuk menekan pentadbiran UTM yang senyap selama 3 tahun.

Tuntutan MJIIT-VOICES adalah;
1. Hapuskan yuran tambahan MJIIT
2. Bayar balik (refund) yuran tambahan sejak 2016
3. “Transparency” dalam pengurusan yuran mahasiswa

UTM diberikan masa 30 hari untuk respon kepada tuntutan MJIIT Voices. Sidang media turut dihadiri oleh komrad daripada Gerakan Pembebasan Akademik, Pemuda Parti Sosialis Malaysia, Malaysia Muda dan SUARAM sebagai tanda solidariti. Mahasiswa daripada UNITEN, IUKL, UKM, UM & UIA telah juga turut memberikan mesej solidariti.

Pendidikan Hak Asasi Manusia
Student Power @ Residensi Utmkl

Mendemokrasikan intelektualisme

By

 

“Apabila berfikir menjadi suatu jenayah,
Hanya perlu mengambil tafsiran cendiakawan berjubah,
Ia suatu yang haram bagi awam,
Lalu keilmuan pun tenggelam karam.

Apabila mimpi digari,
Kemajuan apa yang boleh di cari,
Apabila idea dipenjara,
Bangsa mati penuh sengsara.”

Puisi ini boleh di dapati di kulit belakang buku saya, namun tulisan ini bukanlah untuk tujuan promosi buku. Sekiranya anda sedang mencari bahan bacaan, saya cadangkan anda mencari buku-buku tulisan Chomsky. Sekadar mahu menjelaskan tulisan yang bersembunyi disebalik ayat abstrak.

Jika kita membaca discourse berkenaan social justice kita sering akan berjumpa dengan terma “class society”, yang membawa maksud wujudnya sekumpulan elit yang berkuasa menentukan bagaimana manusia biasa lain hidup – rakyat kebanyakan. Kelas elit mempunyai kuasa ekonomi, politik, taraf sosial yang lebih tinggi, mereka menentukan polisi. Classical proletariat vs bourgeoisie.

Dalam kehidupan seharian kita juga, sama ada kita sedar atau tidak, kita mempunyai kelas elit intelektual. Yang menentukan bagaimana manusia lain berfikir. Mereka sering dipanggil expert, mempunyai autoriti untuk memberi definisi, dimana definisi berlawanan adalah salah, tidak tepat, kolot, anti-moden dan lain-lain.

Mungkin kalau dalam studi berkenaan orientalisme kita bercakap bagaimana kita memahami kebudayaan timur mengikut definisi dan analisa barat, begitu jugalah kita, sentiasa memerlukan kelas intelektual untuk memberi kita definisi berkenaan dengan aturan sosial, tatacara politik, susunan ekonomi dan lain-lain. Mereka meletakkan pagar sempadan pemikiran.

Saya teringat kata-kata ahli ekonomi di Cambridge, Ha-Joon Chang dalam syarahan beliau, beliau menyebut “95% of economics is common sense”.

Kelas intelektual yang saya maksudkan bukanlah spesifik kepada ahli akademik atau agamawan, tetapi terbuka kepada mana-mana persona yang menutup ruang fikir, termasuk saya sendiri. Persepsi minda yang saya ingin bawakan adalah bukan untuk menolak golongan intelektual, tapi berani berfikir meskipun berlawanan dengan autoriti. Kerana sering kali kita menerima kesimpulan kerana kita tidak faham hujahan, kita terima dan berkata “dia betul, aku yang terlalu bodoh untuk faham”.

Sebaliknya apa yang saya ingin bawa adalah kita mendengar hujahan baik dari orang yang bergelar intelektual atau tidak, dan berfikir sendiri kebenarannya, adakah ia masuk akal atau tidak. Bukan percaya buta orang dengan semua yang diberikan kepada kita hanya kerana dia mempunyai tag intelektual. Akal itu bukan milik eksklusif mana-mana kelas, ia adalah anugerah buat semua.

Untuk membina bangsa yang berjaya, ilmu tidak boleh bersifat eksklusif.

 

Masalah pada sistem demokrasi

By

 

Hari ini saya berpeluang berdiskusi dengan seorang rakan berkenaan dengan Malaysia dan polisi yang ada. Walaupun kami berbeza pendapat, kami dapat berbincang dengan rasional. Saya mendengar pandangannya dan saya kemukakan pendapat saya. Kami akhirnya setuju untuk tidak bersetuju antara satu sama lain.

Antara yang kami bincangkan adalah masalah dalam sistem demokrasi. Ramai yang berpandangan demokrasi boleh membawa perubahan, saya pula berpandangan bahawa ia tidak boleh mendatangkan perubahan. Ia boleh mengubah kerajaan, tetapi bukan polisi.

Argumen untuk hujah ini adalah demokrasi berfungsi dengan kuasa majoriti. Ramai menyangka pemimpin politik sentiasa mengutamakan kepentingan rakyat. Ini adalah salah faham utama. Ahli politik sentiasa mengutamakan kepentingan pengundi. Perbezaan ini perlu difahami. Tidak semua rakyat adalah pengundi. Orang gila sebagai contoh, tiada parti yang memperjuangkan hak orang gila. Mungkin orang gila adalah rakyat, tapi dia tidak ada voting power.

Sebab itu polisi berdasarkan ras pada pandangan saya akan terus kekal, at least for now. Kerana ia adalah concern besar buat majoriti yang mempunyai kuasa undi. Menamatkan polisi ini akan menyebabkan parti hilang undi majoriti. Sama ada polisi berdasarkan ras adalah baik atau tidak adalah beyond the scope of this writing. Mungkin boleh dikupas dalam penulisan lain kali.

Dalam konteks Malaysia, argumen kedua saya berkenaan dengan mengapa polisi ini akan terus kekal, adalah faktor demografi. Pertumbuhan kaum cina sebagai contoh, mengikut statistik, semakin menurun. Manakala orang melayu terus bertambah, orang Melayu Islam terus mempunyai keluarga besar walaupun dalam keadaan ekonomi mencabar. Mungkin kerana anak dianggap rezeki bukan liabiliti ekonomi.

Argumen ketiga saya mengapa sistem berdasarkan ras ini akan kekal adalah pendidikan. Pendidikan berdasarkan ras, sekolah vernakular akan terus mengekalkan status quo. Masyarakat tidak akan berintegrasi. Ahli politik tidak akan berani mengubah sistem ini kerana mereka akan akan hilang undi.

Kawan saya bertanya bagaimana keadaan ini boleh diubah. Saya kata secara praktikalnya, kita harus berubah kepada sistem good dictatorship, dimana polisi boleh diubah tanpa pemimpin takut hilang kuasa dari pengundi. Dan perubahan boleh dilakukan dengan konsisten tanpa terganggu dengan perubahan polisi setiap kali pilihanraya. Namun masih ada risiko ia menjadi bad dictatorship.

Kita boleh duduk dimana-mana spekrum politik, kanan, kiri, atau centrist. Ia tetap tidak akan mengubah kenyataan bahawa sistem demokrasi ada masalah dan limitasi.

Malawan naratif apologis Maszlee

By

Saya ingin mulakan penulisan ini dengan satu quote yang sehingga hari ini masih terngiang-ngiang di minda saya. Ia merupakan petikan dari novel ‘The Kite Runner’ yang ditulis oleh Khaled Hosseini, seorang doktor dari Afghanistan.

There is only one sin, only one. And that is theft. Every other sin is a variation of theft. When you kill a man, you steal a life. You steal his wife’s right to a husband, rob his children of a father. When you tell a lie, you steal someone’s right to the truth. When you cheat, you steal the right to fairness, there is no act more wretched than stealing.

Apologis Maszlee sering menggunakan ayat, “tengok banyak perubahan baik yang dibuat, kenapa asyik fokus pada kasut hitam”. Ya betul dari satu sudut seolah isu remeh yang diketengahkan, sedangkan banyak isu lain yang lebih mendesak dan penting. Tapi ini tidak menjawab punca permasalahan sebenar. Mengapa masih ramai yang tidak dapat menerima menteri ini walau “banyak” perubahan baik baru yang dibawa?

Kita sering mendengar bahawa sesuatu perkara perlulah dimulakan dengan baik. Dalam hal ini kita melihat bagaimana ahli politik menipu untuk mendapatkan undi. Walau apa pun kebaikan yang dibawa, dia akan sentiasa dihantui penipuannya. Penipuan seperti janji pemansuhan tol, penangguhan bayaran pinjaman pendidikan, perlu dibetulkan dahulu jika mahu mematahkan kritikan. Jika tidak, masih berdolak dalih, kritikan itu tetap valid, rakyat berhak membenci penipu, sehinggalah dia membetulkan penipuannya.

Bagi saya, pujian terhadap perkara yang baik tidak boleh memadamkan kritikan terhadap perkara yang tidak baik. Kerajaan dahulu pun ada juga kebaikan yang dilakukan, tetapi kenapa dahulu tidak puji sebaliknya fokus terhadap keburukan? Pendidikan membangkang seperti inilah yang membentuk pola bangkangan hari ini, cuma berubah wajah. Bila kena muka sendiri baru terasa panas?

Begitu juga dengan tulisan-tulisan satira, padahal dahulu dialah yang rajin menulis satira. Sehingga terpaksa memadam pantun “siakap senohong gelama ikan duri, bercakap bohong lama-lama jadi..”. Semasa zaman dia menulis satira, apologis ini tidak pula membawa dalil-dalil agama melarang satira. Apabila satira terkena muka sendiri dibawa dalil agama, bukankah itu namanya menunggang agama? Menggunakan agama untuk menutup penipuan sendiri.

Saya kira, ini adalah punca kebencian kebanyakan rakyat. Ahli akademik yang diharap membawa pembaharuan terhadap panorama politik baru, sebaliknya hampa ditipu sama seperti ahli-ahli politik lain. Selagi “barang yang dicuri” (janji kepada pengundi) ini tidak dipulangkan, selagi itu kebencian dan kritikan rakyat adalah adil.

Gambar hiasan (tiada kena mengena dengan penulisan, sekadar ulangkaji sejarah), ‘Haymarket Affair’ – dimana golongan pekerja melakukan protes menuntut sistem bekerja 8 jam sehari, sistem yang kita nikmati hari ini. Peristiwa yang juga merupakan asal usul sambutan hari pekerja.

Sang penguasa yang jatuh dari takhta

By Leave a Comment

Sejarah adalah kumpulan cerita berkenaan dengan peristiwa dan manusia di masa lalu. Howard Zinn berkata bahawa orang yang tidak mempelajari sejarah umpama anak kecil, yang tidak mempunyai pengalaman lampau. Dia mudah diperdaya oleh orang lain. Dalam susur galur sejarah kita membaca bagaimana pemimpin-pemimpin megah jatuh dari takhta kuasa. Kuasa yang dipegang seolah-olah kebal akhirnya runtuh umpama tanah di lereng bukit yang dimajukan di Pulau Pinang. Nampak gah diluar tetapi asasnya terhakis, kuasa yang korup akhirnya akan jatuh juga.

Ferdinand Marcos di Filipina merupakan antara kisah sejarah yang wajar kita ambil pengajaran. Marcos merupakan presiden Filipina ke-10 bermula pada tahun 1965. Beliau memerintah secara diktator dan mengunakan undang-undang tentera. Beliau terkenal dengan korupsi, kemewahan dan pemerintahan yang brutal. Beliau jatuh dari takhta kuasa pada tahun 1986 melalui People Power Revolution. Beliau kemudian lari meninggalkan Filipina dan tinggal di Hawaii. Isteri beliau, Imelda Marcos meninggalkan 508 baju gowns, 888 beg tangan dan 1060 pasang kasut di Istana Malacanang. Marcos menghembuskan nafas terakhir pada tahun 1989 di Honolulu, Hawaii.

Viktor Yanukovych juga merupakan kisah sejarah yang wajar kita pelajari. Yanukovych dilantik menjadi presiden Ukraine ke-4 pada tahun 2010. Yanukovych tinggal di sebuah kompleks mewah yang dinamakan Mezhyhirya yang bernilai 300 juta USD, yang kini telah diubah menjadi muzium yang memaparkan kehidupan mewah beliau. Kejatuhan beliau dari kuasa bermula dengan protes kecil yang dipanggil Euromaidan, yang menolak polisi pro-Moscow beliau, protes ini merebak ke skala nasional apabila polis mula menggunakan kekerasan. Beliau kemudian melarikan diri ke Russia pada tahun 2014.

Zine El Abidine Ben Ali merupakan presiden Tunisia ke-2 dari tahun 1987 hinggalah beliau digulingkan pada tahun 2011. Beliau dianggarkan mengumpul kekayaan sebanyak 17 billion USD di akaun-akaun luar negara termasuk Argentina, Cayman Islands, Virgin Islands, Qatar dan UAE. Protes rakyat bermula apabila Mohamed Bouazizi, seorang peniaga sayur jalanan membakar diri apabila barang jualannya dirampas pihak berkuasa. Protes ini kemudian merebak menjadi revolusi rakyat yang marah dengan kadar pengangguran tinggi, harga barang makan yang mahal, korupsi dan sekatan kebebasan politik dan bersuara. Ben Ali kemudiannya melarikan diri ke Arab Saudi dan mendapat suaka politik.

Najib Razak merupakan perdana menteri Malaysia ke-6 dari tahun 2009 hingga 2018. Beliau telah memperkenalkan GST pada era pemerintahan beliau bagi mengimbangi pendapatan kerajaan yang berkurangan apabila harga petrol dunia menurun. Langkah ini tidak disenangi kebanyakan rakyat. Semasa pemerintahan beliau juga telah berlaku skandal 1MDB yang mengumpulkan hutang yang dianggarkan sebanyak 12 billion USD. Serbuan polis ke rumah beliau mendapati 1400 tali leher, 567 beg tangan, 2200 cincin, dan 423 jam tangan dirampas. Najib tewas dalam pilihanraya ke-14 pada 9 Mei 2018. Setelah tewas Najib melarikan diri ke facebook dan mula memuat naik status troll terhadap Lim Guan Eng.

 

1948: The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine

By Leave a Comment

There are several competing narratives about the tragedy that befell Palestinians in 1948. The Palestinians regarded the event as ‘Nakba’ or catastrophe in English. The Israeli regarded it as their victory and the foundation of their modern state. Ilan Pappe, the Chair in History at the University of Exeter, UK, however, challenge these two narratives. He argues that what happened in 1948 was a clear-cut case of a war crime, a systematic and planned ethnic cleansing which rooted from the Zionist ideology.

The result of this crime was the expulsion of 800,000 Palestinians, 531 villages destroyed and 11 urban neighborhood emptied. Pappe argued that the evidence of this crime is abundance, it is possible to reconstruct the historiographical account of the crime, and the names of the criminal are known. He argued that all these criminals must be brought into a special tribunal and serve justice.

Pappe described in the book how British, with the work of their officer, Orde Wingate, helped train Jewish settlers combat tactic. Wingate who was enchanted with the Zionist ideology transformed the paramilitary organization, the Hagana to become a military army. Wingate attached the Hagana with British forces to crush the Arab revolt, which they jointly attacked villages. The Hagana also gained valuable military experience by volunteering in British war effort in the second world war.

Pappe also disclosed detailed data collection and studies done by the Zionist called ‘The Village Files’ which gather information on every single village by the help of professional topographer, photographer, surveyor, and a network of spies. These files include data on political composition, religious affiliation, quality of land, water springs, main sources for income, the name of the mukhtars, and during the final update in 1947, the files focused on ‘wanted list’ for each village. This intelligence was crucial during the execution of the ethnic cleansing operation in 1948.

Early on the Zionist leadership understand that the major problem to established an exclusively Jewish state is the vast population of Palestinians living in their desired territory. Ben-Gurion, the architect of the ethnic cleansing admits this reality to his Mapai party in 1947, that 40% of the Jewish population will not create a stable state. To overcome this problem the Zionist encourage Jewish immigration in a public venue as a solution. But they know this will not be enough, in their closed meeting the solution on the table was expulsion by force.

The initial Zionist strategy is to used retaliation as a pretext to expel Palestinian villagers. Although many of the villages have been attacked up to December 1947 the mood on the ground did not give the Zionist this pretext. Palti Sela, Zionist intelligence officer reported that although many Jewish settlements have turned their residence into a military outpost. Many Palestinians villages continue to live as normal, in fact, many received him during his visit with a warm greeting as a potential customer for trading. The Zionist knew they need a new strategy as they did not have any pretext to retaliate.

Pappe noted the betrayal the Palestinian has suffered from their Jewish neighbor, who they themselves had invited to come and stay with them in the Ottoman period. The Jew arrived in Palestine wretched and penniless from Europe, they shared their thriving metropolitan city only to be expelled and betrayed by their neighbor.

Starting in February 1948 the operation to ethnically cleanse Palestine become more systematic, no longer sporadic as in December 1947. Qisayra was the first village to be explled in its entirety on 15 February 1948 under the watchful eyes of the British troops stationed nearby. The Zionist in their operation will blow up houses while the families still sleeping inside, which left many dead children. Up to this moment, the Palestinians still reluctant to fight, the Zionist later codified their operation into a well-defined plan to uproot the Palestinians en masse from their homeland. The massacre in Deir Yassin also was discussed in the book, the Hagana sent Irgun and Stern Gang to absolve themselves. Many villagers were massacred in cold blood, sparing not even children, and women were raped.

Arab leaders at that time were not serious in defending Palestine while the king of Jordan made a secret pact with the Jews on dividing the land between themselves. The Arab leader also knew that their young nations have inferior military power compared to the Jews. Although the leaders are weak, their citizens demanded action, as the event evolved, although their leaders betrayed the people, volunteers and soldiers on the ground fight heroically, some defied their leader’s order to retreat.  Among them, worthy of mention include the volunteer from the Muslim Brotherhood, volunteers and soldiers from Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan.

Looking at the historical archive, Pappe dispelled Israeli myth about Palestinians voluntary flight. Popular among traditional Israeli historians that they made way for invading Arab armies, the reality, however, is that hundred thousands of Palestinians already been uprooted and expelled even before the war began. This sheer fabrication according to Pappe – “holds no water”. Many of the massacres committed by the Jews were re-told vividly by Pappe from survivors account. One survivor, Muhammad Nimr al-Khatib described the massacre that took place in Tantura “The Jews gathered all women and children in a place, where they dumped all the bodies, for them to see their dead husbands, fathers, and brothers..”.

Despite the cowardice and betrayal from Arab leaders, Pappe recounted the bravery of individual soldiers, who defied orders to retreat and hold ground to defend the villagers. Captain Abu Rauf Abd al-Raziq for example, decided to stay behind and defend the village of Taytaba and Qalansuwa. There is also an account of Lebanese soldiers, crossing the borders to help defend Palestinians villages.

Then there are cases of rape. The most chilling was the case on 12 August 1949 by soldier based in Kibbutz Nirim where they abducted 12 years old Palestinian girl. She becomes a sex slave for the Jewish platoon, 22 soldiers participated in this barbaric act. The soldiers shaved her head, gang-raped her and in the end murdered her.

The Jews not only committed genocide and land grab. They also were responsible for what Pappe termed as ‘memoricide’ – a systematic act backed by the apartheid state to erase the memory of the Nakba in 1948. This was done by demolishing the villages, renaming the site with a Jewish name, reconstructing settlement on top of the ruin villages, and also planting a forest to cover the destroyed villages. This policy of erasing the memory and history of the Palestinians on their stolen land was the main job of the Jewish National Fund (JNF).

At the end of the book, Pappe highlighted that there are minority Jews that are not blind and deaf to the crimes committed by their army. Although their numbers are few, they hold the key to reconciliations with the Palestinians, as Pappe believes that peace only can be achieved, when these crimes were acknowledged and the right of return for refugees are respected. Overall the book is about how Palestinian been betrayed by their elites, Arab leaders, British, UN, and their Jewish neighbor. All of whom left them to bleed to death, savagely massacred by the Jews fueled by the Zionist ideology. If you did not cry reading this book, you have lost your heart.

 

 

Netizenism: Feeding the Monster

By Leave a Comment

One of the fine book to understand how propaganda and social media works best was Ryan Holiday’s work through his book ‘Trust me I’m lying’. He brilliantly explained how publicist and propagandist used readers emotion such as anger and hate, to put forward their argument, swayed public opinion for their political purpose, and market their products. But, Holiday argues that often these tactics of consuming public anger given rise to many negative implications, such as permanent hatred and in worst cases, death. He used a metaphor of “feeding the monster”. Often a seemingly harmless person working with keyboard and screen resulted in great damage in society.

Returning to local politics here in Malaysia, today we saw Malaysians netizens bashing the new government almost every day. Every government move, whether good or bad, was smacked with insult, sarcasm, criticism, and all sort of condemnations.

The newly formed government seems to have lost their game in the social media arena. Minister of the religious affair for example, after waves of criticisms about his conduct, has back-off saying that “netizen is not at the same level as him” for him to argue with. More embarrassingly was the education minister, who cheated voters with his promise to abolish toll and put an end to political appointment in local universities. He used to troll the previous government with his witty criticism, now embarrassed with his own words, he had to backtrack and delete his past postings as a swarm of netizens used his very words against him. The more recent case was a punk-hair YB in Melaka who threaten to sue villagers who made his rude video gone viral. A nationwide netizen joint forces mocking his hairstyle and rude behavior, he finally brought down and apologize for his misconduct.

The apologist and defender of the current government always lamented this fact. They argued that the netizen only knows how to bash and criticize their government without having real picture and facts in hand. They spew hate to discredit the government, always irrational and out of their mind. The netizen has become a monster, and they are on the loose. But who actually created them?

No one can tell for sure, but what is clear is that the current government during their time in opposition is the one feeding the monster in the past before they came back to bite them. They used to feed on people’s anger for their campaign, always without giving them any room to think rationally. They objected to all what the government did, whether good or bad. Cash payment for lower income group branded as bribery and ‘dedak’, infrastructure projects are attacked, foreign investments are mocked as selling off national sovereignty, even criminal cases are politicized squeezing the judicial branch to exercise their independence. Today, the same monster they have been feeding in the past, came haunting them back.

That is why when I heard the apologist argument to salvage people’s trust, I find it very laughable. If they are searching for somebody to blame they just need to look at the mirror. They only have themselves to blame.

 

Brain Research: Understanding Young Mind

By Leave a Comment

 
This book explored the minds of young people, how they operate and how we can harness them instead of suppressing them. Adults, Siegel observed, usually loved routine, predictable schedule, which do away with creative exploration and makes life boring, almost lifeless. This is very different from a young mind, adolescent, which always experimenting, and seek ways to do things differently. Their passion for adventure and longing for a thrill.

Siegel also discussed the differences between old and modern times. During the old days, after a child enters puberty and adolescent, they quickly married and built a new family. Modern times however prolonged the period before adolescent ends, the need to be employed before starting a new family delayed this process for a decade or more, always with no clear endpoint. This is one of the challenges facing teens on modern age, as they search for meaning in the longer period of adolescence.

Siegel explained that the mind is not static but plastic. It can be shaped and build through experience. This plasticity remained at any age, we always can have a new experience and change the type of circuit connection we had in our brain, we can train our brain to learn and master new things at any age.

One of the parts which I liked the most is when Siegel explained that sometimes our emotion exploded, we cannot control our mind, we flipped our lid. Common views are when a person burst into anger, they revealed their true self. This is simply false. This happens to all human when their brain is in chaos and rigidity, at that moment there are little they can do. The best way to deal with this kind of situation is to remove oneself from the scene when the emotion builds up, and return when rational thinking was back again.

The period of adolescence must be viewed as a period full of potentials to nurture, not just to survived. The tendency of teenagers to seek novelty and experiencing thrills must be acknowledged, nurtured, and channeled in a productive way. This will create a win-win situation for teenagers and adults. The essence of the adolescent mind, their purpose, is to solve problems in new and innovative ways. This is important for human survival, as they look at the problem at hand and applied solution suitable for their era. This, in turn, promotes sustainability. The mind of an adolescent, which always experimenting and searching for novelty, is an important piece of puzzle for human to stay adaptive on earth.

Reading the mindsight tool on taking time-in, the concept was very similar to the main thesis of Eckhart Tolle in his book ‘The power of now’ where he advised the reader to be present, to feel the present moment and train the brain to get rid of the distraction of thinking about the past or worrying about the future.

Siegel also discussed how we create attachment models during our early years with our parent. These model will be the basis of how we communicate and interact with others later on in our life. Due to this reason, we must always be mindful when nurturing our children, it is important that they feel safe and have the bravery to explore the world when they were nurtured with a solid fundamental model.

In the modern world, we are not a sole parent, we practiced ‘other parenting’. What this means is that we share child rearing with other trusted adults which may include babysitter, teachers, and others. It is very important that all these figures mold a safe attachment model for the children. Some parent does not create a secure attachment model not because they don’t love their child, they simply did not have that skill to connect with their children.

Sometimes rupture does happen in our relationship with our children and others. In an event such as this, it is important that we initiate repairs and reconnect with them. We should apologize for our contribution to the conflict.

In his last mindsight tool’s section, Siegel emphasized the importance of lifelong learning. Lifelong learning will keep us sharped and keep our brain growth. It is also a source of challenges that hinder ourselves from falling into boredom. He also touched on how schools often kill creativity by setting up a standard of what is right and wrong, often cage student into a little box which they cannot think outside of it and explore.

In his conclusion, he wrote that we need to “embrace notions of spirituality and there is a deeper meaning to life directly”. Overall it was definitely a good read especially for readers who wish to understand the human mind, its development, plasticity in the face of experience and how we can harness its potential to create a better world.

This article is a review of “Brainstorm: The power and purpose of the teenage brain” by Daniel J. Siegel, M.D. published by Jeremy P. Tarcher/Penguin, New York, 2015.

 

 

Xifu Naser Pensyarah Lembu UIAM

By Leave a Comment

 

Siswazah Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Malaysia (UIAM), Huda Ramli membalas kritikan yang dilemparkan kepada aktivis yang melakukan duduk protes sebagai membantah pencabulan autonomi universiti oleh Menteri Pendidikan, Maszlee Malik.

“Kalau aku dikatanya lembu, jadi dialah bapa lembu” tulis Huda dalam kenyataan yang dikeluarkan di laman Facebook beliau. Hal ini kerana Xifu Naser adalah pensyarah beliau yang mengajar subjek ‘Critical Thinking’. Beliau juga mula hilang hormat dengan sikap Xifu Naser yang kini bersikap lunak dan tidak lagi kritis dengan tindak tanduk rakannya Maszlee Malik. Kononnya pelajar tidak faham akan philosophical autonomy juga kedengaran dangkal, seolah-olah merendahkan intelek mahasiswa.

Sebelum itu, pensyarah UIAM, Abdul Naser Tun Abdul Rahman atau dikenali sebagai Xifu Naser menulis tulisan bertajuk “Jangan jadi lemboo protest demo” di lama Facebooknya:

“Kerajaan dah buka platform di universiti untuk debat politik seluas-luasnya but few students pilih demo protest yang tak perlu guna otak pun. Duduk-duduk dan tunjuk poster je. Buatlah debat falsafi di universiti dan gunalah speaker’s corner. We must minimize such emo protest and demo and cultivate a critical culture.”

Beliau berkata demikian dipercayai merujuk kepada sekumpulan pelajar yang duduk bantah di kementerian pendidikan menuntut Maszlee Malik meletak jawatan sebagai presiden UIAM yang merupakan satu pencabulan terhadap autonomi universiti.

Tulisan beliau ini kedengaran seperti bias dan nampak seperti ingin mengampu pemerintah elit. Dalam sejarah dunia sendiri banyak perubahan berlaku apabila ada direct action seperti demo dan protes. Malah demonstrasi seperti di Mesir dalam menjatuhkan pemerintahan kuku besi merupakan satu yang diangkat sebagai method yang demokratik dan berkesan. Mengajak pelajar membuat debat falsafah dikala autonomi universiti dicabul secara jelas membuatkan ramai orang tertanya-tanya adakah Xifu Naser lebih lembu dari pelajar yang digelarnya lembu? Bayangkan dikala rakyat Afrika Selatan dicabul dengan dasar pemerintahan Apartheid, Nelson Mandela hanya membuat debat falsafah dan beri ucapan di speaker corner.

Pencabulan autonomi universiti ini menjadi polimik apabila Menteri Pendidikan Pakatan Harapan, Maszlee Malik dilantik sebagai presiden UIAM. Perkara ini jelas bercanggah dengan aspirasi Pakatan Harapan yang kononnya ingin membebaskan universiti dari campur tangan politik. Ia mendapat tentangan dan kritikan dari semua pihak.

Ketua pemuda UMNO, Dr Asyraf Wajdi Dusuki dalam satu kenyataan terkejut dengan lantikan politik ini. Beliau mengingatkan bahawa Maszlee sendiri pernah membuat kenyataan pada 7 Jun 2018 berbunyi “This is a new era. I will make sure that the Pakatan Harapan (PH) government will never misuse universities for political interests… this includes me.” Perlantikan ini mencerminkan sikap hipokrit beliau.

Malah Ahli Dewan Undangan Negeri (ADUN) Kampung Tunku dari DAP, Lim Yi Wei turut menggesa Menteri Pendidikan, Dr Maszlee Malik melepaskan jawatannya sebagai Presiden Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Malaysia (UIAM) yang baharu kerana wujudnya konflik kepentingan.