The Independent Insight

Giving truth a voice

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Flickr
  • Instagram
  • Phone
  • Twitter
  • Vimeo
  • YouTube
  • Berita
  • Politik
  • Ekonomi
  • Teknologi
  • Reviu
    • Reviu Buku
    • Reviu Filem
    • Reviu Muzik
  • Rencana
  • Podcast
  • Tentang Kami
  • Hubungi Kami

Malaysian Education System Does Not Nurture Talents

May 24, 2019 By Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair

For almost a week now Malaysiakini joined liberal media outlets attacking our education minister. Malaysiakini trying so hard, publishing Op-Ed on daily basis attacking Maszlee. Its funny in some way looking at their behaviour.

I’m not a fan of Maszlee, I really not. So I will not use the pathetic tagline such as “A rakyat just like you”, like the one did by the PPBM member working in the ministry trying to disguise himself as an ordinary people.

As usual the commentators joined in spewing hatred in the comment section, a hatred that has been sown by the liberal media all along. I don’t need to mention the race of this hate spewing commentators, its obvious, you can look at it yourself.

I’m intrigued by one of the comment by Michael Yeoh, that our education system does not nurture talents, is it?

We have Dr. Wan Wardatul Amani the first Malaysian to launch a NASA satellite. Our astrophysics PhD student Nur Adlyka Ainul is a member of a team that discovers hidden supermassive black hole, an achievement which broke the internet. We also have sent our own astronaut to space!

If we look at their school background, they came from national school system. Adlyka went to Sekolah Rendah Kebangsaan Sultan Abu Bakar (2) Muar and Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan (Perempuan) Sultan Abu Bakar. Our astronaut went to MRSM Muar. They are the product of national school system.

Of course our school system has flaws, no education system in the world is perfect, not even the Finnish system. But that does not mean that we did not nurture talent. We should always improve and enhance them.

But when you did not like apple and went to say that apple is not a fruit. You are nowhere near to any talent.

Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair
Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair

Author of several books including Berfikir Tentang Pemikiran (2018), Lalang di Lautan Ideologi (2022), Dua Sayap Ilmu (2023), Resistance Sudah Berbunga (2024), Intelektual Yang Membosankan (2024) and Homo Historikus (2024). Fathi write from his home at Sungai Petani, Kedah. He like to read, write and sleep.

independent.academia.edu/SyedAhmadFathi

Filed Under: Rencana

Income inequality by Matthew P. Drennan – Book Review

April 20, 2019 By Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair

What was missing in the economic theory that lead to the financial crisis in 2008-09? This was the first question Drennan want to answer in this book. His thesis is that income inequality plays a role in the lead-up to the financial crisis by maintaining consumption through surging household debt. The second question he asks was ‘Why the economist get it wrong?’. Drennan’s answer to the second question is that the consumption theory of neo-classical economics does not include income distribution to their economic theory.

To prove his points, Drennan brought forward econometric evidence to link income inequality with the financial crisis. He also used various set of data to show that many people resort to debt to maintain their consumption, meaning that people borrow more money to buy the necessities to maintain their lifestyle. He also present historical data as evidence to show that the 2008-09 crisis is not something new and has happen before.

Drennan also noted that the two feature that were on the rise leading to financial crash were the stagnant growth of income and income inequality – although this two do not necessarily occur together. Although Drennan try to back his argument with data and statistics, layman reader will not find this useful, understandable, and almost definitely lost in the process.

What are the possible causes of rising income inequality? Asked Drennan. Economist pointed out that one of the candidates is globalization, but he cast doubt to this theory as other countries such as Japan, Germany, and France were exposed with the same globalization forces but does not produce higher income inequality. Other candidate favoured by economist to explain income inequality is skill-biased technological change (SBTC). This include higher order specialization, for example box mover can learn to operate forklift easily, but factory worker might have problems changing their career to higher-order specialization such as a programmer. Some economist listed SBTC as the cause of the rising income inequality.

But all these candidates do not give the whole picture. The more compelling cause, is the institutional structure. Drennan noted that as the economy turn from manufacturing to service economy, the labor union diminished. This is because the service sector does not have a strong labor union traditionally. The structure of the law also plays important roles in containing the labor union force, without them worker have a lower protection and had to accept lower wages as they don’t have any bargaining power.

Then there is government intervention. Contrary to free-market ideology, that income stabilize in its current level due to rigorous market forces, there are many government legislation interferences that favors the rich and enlarge the income inequality gap. Among the law includes treatment to corporate stock option award, access to bankruptcy, copyright and patent protection, to name a few. Various conservative think-tanks served as an advocacy lobby to ensure government keep policies for the benefit of the rich, their objective is rent-seeking – spending money not on production of product or service but to take advantage and enlarge their own economic pie at the expense of someone else’s share.

After presenting his theoretical background, Drennan continue with the data to back his theory. Although he emphasized in the introduction that the role of the data presentation is ‘not to obscure the fact’, he did just that for a layman reader as they lost in the jargon terms and various graph. Drennan drew from Federal Reserve’s data that there are a huge build-up of debt-to-income ratio for the bottom 95 percent whilst consumption remains more or less the same, which means that consumer are shifting to debt to maintain their consumption, this lead to financial burst eventually. These consumptions include shelter, health care, and education which are a necessary expenditure which cannot be postponed, such as taking a vacation trip.

In the book, Drennan also help explain economic principle such as the Pareto efficiency principle which stated that “any change that make one people better off, without making any other worse off, is an improvement”. This principle is a fundamental tenet of neoclassical economics, which describe the gain of top 1% of the income distribution as Pareto efficient. This is one reason why economist turn away from income inequality.

Other theory, such as Kuznets’s inverted-U hypothesis, also made economist less worry on the income inequality and its effect. Drawing from various historical data from numerous countries, Kuznets argued that the economic shift from agriculture to industrialization will lead to the rise of income inequality for some time, but as countries develop, democracy expands and more protection were given to labor causing the inequality to fall back. He also discussed Arthur Okun’s tradeoff theory although Okun provided no strong evidence.

In analyzing the data, Drennan also drew his criticism towards Milton Friedman model for theory of consumption, noting that the theory does not true for the period 1984-2007 and for the early twentieth century. He went further to underline the basic flaw of Friedman, Modigliani, and Brumberg’s model which become the mainstream theory for consumption, the models devoid of motive and proclivities, whereas in real life human behavior play an important role in their daily choices and consumption.

In his final chapter Drennan drew attention that this crash has happen before, and in his conclusion, he argue for the need to drop traditional economic theory that did not stood the empirical test from the data. Unless we take into account other element such as ‘behavior’ in our economic theory, we will be chasing unrealistic economic development using unrealistic theory.

Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair
Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair

Author of several books including Berfikir Tentang Pemikiran (2018), Lalang di Lautan Ideologi (2022), Dua Sayap Ilmu (2023), Resistance Sudah Berbunga (2024), Intelektual Yang Membosankan (2024) and Homo Historikus (2024). Fathi write from his home at Sungai Petani, Kedah. He like to read, write and sleep.

independent.academia.edu/SyedAhmadFathi

Filed Under: Reviu Buku

Tenaganita – Attorney-General’s office failed to bring justice for Adelina!

April 20, 2019 By Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair

Employer acquitted of domestic worker Adelina’s death, walks free
Where is JUSTICE for ADELINA?

Adelina Sao, 21, died in Bukit Mertajam hospital on 11th February 2018 from organ failure. When she was rescued, she was found sleeping outside the employer’s home with the employer’s dog. Her employers reportedly didn’t want the pus oozing from her body “dirtying their home”. Her arms and legs were covered in burn marks. Her face was swollen, and she was terrified when rescuers came to help her. Nurses and doctors at the hospital were in disbelief over the extent of her injuries.

Malaysians were rightly horrified and outraged when news of Adelina broke. On 14th February 2019, Minister of Human Resources M. Kula Segaran, citing how shocking Adelina’s case was, said he is launching a “war” against human trafficking and forced labour. On 18th April 2019, Adelina’s employer, S. Ambiga, was acquitted by the High Court. Where is justice for Adelina?

Tenaganita learned of the acquittal through an article in Kwong Wah Daily (dated 19th April 2019). The newspaper reported that the case was fixed for a continued hearing on 18th April, but S Ambika was granted full acquittal although the prosecution requested for a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA).

We understand that neither Adelina’s family nor her representatives in Malaysia were informed that the court date was brought forward. This is unacceptable.

On 12th February 2019, Adelina’s mother, Yohana Banunaek, said “she (her daughter) did not die because of her sickness, but because she was tortured”. We are extremely shocked and shaken by the High Court’s decision. Tenaganita and our partner JPIT in Kupang are distraught with this news. We cannot imagine the unbearable grief of Adelina’s family.

The Attorney-General’s office needs to explain why the prosecution has failed to bring justice for Adelina when there was substantive evidence in this case.

Adelina is dead. She was a young woman made to work for two years without pay. She was a young woman whose body was brutalised. Her death has to mean something. Why have our courts failed her? Why has the Malaysian government failed her? Where is justice for Adelina?

Tenaganita
Press Release
19th April 2019

Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair
Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair

Author of several books including Berfikir Tentang Pemikiran (2018), Lalang di Lautan Ideologi (2022), Dua Sayap Ilmu (2023), Resistance Sudah Berbunga (2024), Intelektual Yang Membosankan (2024) and Homo Historikus (2024). Fathi write from his home at Sungai Petani, Kedah. He like to read, write and sleep.

independent.academia.edu/SyedAhmadFathi

Filed Under: Berita

Peranan satira dalam mencorak arena politik

April 17, 2019 By Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair

Antara program satira yang saya minati adalah program yang dikelola oleh John Oliver di HBO dan Stephen Colbert di CBS.

Colbert lebih memfokuskan satiranya kepada daily political commentaries, jadi programnya berterusan dan hampir setiap hari. Dia hanya perlu mengolah semula sebarang peristiwa semalam dan dalam bentuk satira.

Oliver pula sirinya lebih memfokus berkenaan dengan sesuatu isu, isu yang mungkin berada diluar kotak politik, tetapi setiap isu yang diangkat mempunyai unsur-unsur penindasan yang diperjuangkan, seperti penindasan syarikat rokok terhadap negara kecil, isu MLM menindas pengguna, siri Oliver tidak terikat dengan isu politik domestik.

Satira mereka berkesan kerana mereka berjaya unpack setiap isu dalam pembawakan komedi yang mana selepas habis ketawa mesejnya akan kekal dalam minda penonton. Jadi satira sangat berkesan sebagai agen propaganda kerana ianya mudah dihadam, selesa (unsur humour), dan mudah tersebar. Berbanding dengan tulisan akademik yang dipenuhi bahasa jargon.

Walaupun satira berbentuk komedi, ia tidak semestinya kosong, ia boleh lahir dari fakta, cuma olahan dan penyampaiannya sahaja diberikan sesuai dengan kemampuan masyarakat awam.

Namun siri satira seperti Oliver dan Colbert mungkin tidak sesuai dengan konstruk sosial masyarakat kita, kita mempunyai sistem nilai yang tersendiri. Oleh itu kita mempunyai instrumen satira seperti TTKM. Walaupun dilabel sampah oleh golongan pemerintah, bahan mereka akan terus beredar dan sampai ke masyarakat kebanyakan. Ia lebih mudah, simplistik, menjadikannya sebuah propaganda yang baik.

Dengan hasrat kerajaan ingin menurunkan had mengundi kepada 18 tahun. Bahan-bahan satira ini lebih mudah disebar kepada generasi muda. Ia tidak memerlukan analisa yang membosankan, malah menjadi satu bentuk hiburan generasi muda dalam masa yang sama, sedar atau tidak, hiburan itu membentuk persepsi minda mereka.

Mudah untuk melebel satira sebagai sampah, tapi sukar untuk melawan pembinaan persepsi yang mereka bawa. Dan jika dengan satira dan jenaka pun kerajaan sudah meloncat, maka ada masalah besar pada kerajaan tersebut.

Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair
Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair

Author of several books including Berfikir Tentang Pemikiran (2018), Lalang di Lautan Ideologi (2022), Dua Sayap Ilmu (2023), Resistance Sudah Berbunga (2024), Intelektual Yang Membosankan (2024) and Homo Historikus (2024). Fathi write from his home at Sungai Petani, Kedah. He like to read, write and sleep.

independent.academia.edu/SyedAhmadFathi

Filed Under: Rencana

Yuran UTM-MJIIT naik 529% – Mahasiswa Bangkit Boikot Kelas

April 8, 2019 By Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair

SUDAH pelbagai cara dan alternatif yang dibangun mahasiswa UTM – MJIIT Voices, berkaitan isu kenaikan yuran yang meningkat sebanyak 529% di universiti mereka namun penguasa, pihak pentadbiran masih gagal menjawab persoalan yang dilontarkan mahasiswa.

Maka, esok (Selasa), Jam 10.00 pagi akan diadakan Aksi Demonstrasi dan Boikot Kelas MJIIT di hadapan pagar UTMKL untuk membawa tuntutan mereka dan melawan ketidakadilan yang berlaku kepada ramai pelajar dan ahli keluarga yang terkesan akibat ketidaktelusan ini terutama bagi mereka yang berada dalam B40 dan M40.

Gabungan Pembebasan Akademik akan turun bersolidariti bersama mahasiswa UTM-MJIIT Voices serta menyeru rakan mahasiswa cakna untuk turun bersama kerana kebenaran tidak datang dari langit, ia mestilah diperjuangkan.

Jika keadilan direbut, kita pertahankan!

Jika keadilan direnggut, kita rebut kembali!

#MahasiswaBersatuLawanPenindasan

Solidariti Bersama,

Gabungan Pembebasan Akademik.

Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair
Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair

Author of several books including Berfikir Tentang Pemikiran (2018), Lalang di Lautan Ideologi (2022), Dua Sayap Ilmu (2023), Resistance Sudah Berbunga (2024), Intelektual Yang Membosankan (2024) and Homo Historikus (2024). Fathi write from his home at Sungai Petani, Kedah. He like to read, write and sleep.

independent.academia.edu/SyedAhmadFathi

Filed Under: Berita

Membaca – berbicara dengan hantu

March 24, 2019 By Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair

When Books Went to War cover.

Otak manusia merupakan satu ciptaan yang mengkagumkan. Kita bukan sahaja boleh mengawal pergerakan badan dari dalam, tetapi mampu menganalisa dunia luar. Otak kita berbeza dengan makhluk lain seperti haiwan yang tidak mampu mencipta konsep dan teori abstrak melangkaui batasan dunia fizikal. Contohnya konsep kenegaraan tidak dapat difahami oleh monyet, jadi monyet dari Indonesia tidak berasa takut atau bersalah merentasi sempadan hutan dan memasuki hutan negara Malaysia.

Namun otak yang kompleks ini mempunyai batasan, kita mempunyai batasan dari sudut memori sebagai contoh. Kita mungkin dapat mengingati sesuatu peristiwa sebagai contoh, tetapi kita akan melupainya beberapa tahun akan datang. Atau kita mengingati peristiwa tersebut, tetapi kita lupa akan setiap perincian peristiwa itu. Contohnya kita ingat bahawa kita pernah memasuki sekolah rendah, tetapi lupa akan warna beg sekolah kita pada masa tersebut.

Disebabkan keterbatasan otak dan memori, manusia mula mencipta sistem tulisan, agar peristiwa, maklumat, dan ilmu dapat dikumpulkan, dipelihara, dan diwariskan kepada generasi akan datang. Seorang tabib yang hidup 100,000 tahun yang lampau sebagai contoh, ilmu tabibnya akan mati dan hilang selepas matinya dia. Generasi selepasnya perlu mengumpul semula maklumat dari sifar, membuat kesilapan yang sama, mungkin hanya sedikit ilmu yang dapat diwariskan secara oral. Tetapi tabib yang hidup pada tahun 2019 boleh mewariskan ilmu dan pengalamannya dalam tulisan jurnal, buku, blog dan sebagainya. Manakala generasi seterusnya boleh mendapat ilmu dari tinggalan tulisan ini, dan pengumpulan ilmu itu boleh ditambah pada peringkat baru yang lebih tinggi, tidak perlu dimulai dari sifar semula.

Penciptaan tulisan dan pembukuan merupakan satu revolusi yang mengubah bagaimana manusia hidup pada hari ini. Carl Sagan ketika membicarakan berkenaan dengan buku dan pembacaan menyatakan bahawa buku merupakan sesuatu yang bersifat magikal, yang membolehkan seseorang manusia berinteraksi dengan manusia di abad lain, yang mungkin sudah ratusan tahun meninggalkan dunia. Sebagai contoh, kita boleh mengetahui apa yang difikirkan oleh Annelies Frank 74 tahun yang lalu ketika dia bersembunyi dari tentera Nazi. Kita dapat tahu apa perasaannya, bagaimana emosinya setiap hari walaupun kita mungkin belum wujud pada ketika itu, kita tidak pernah berjumpa dengannya, malah kita tidak fasih berbahasa German. Perkara ini dibolehkan dengan penulisan diari, melalui usaha penterjemahan dan pembukuan.

Namun mungkin kebanyakan dari kita merasakan bahawa menulis dan membaca merupakan sesuatu benda yang biasa. Apa yang magikal tentang pembacaan sedangkan kita sudah pandai membaca sejak dari tadika?

Kita telah terbiasa dengan menggunakan membaca dalam aktiviti harian, seperti membaca papan tanda untuk mencari arah, membaca arahan kerja untuk melakukan tugas, tiada yang unik. Seperti kita telah terbiasa mengangkat gelas berisi kopi latte, ia tidak ajaib kecuali jika tangan kita telah diishtiharkan lumpuh oleh doktor. Kita akan merasakan ia sesuatu yang ajaib, seperti yang dirasai oleh Sagan jika kita menggunakannya untuk membaca bahan ilmu yang dikumpul manusia zaman berzaman melalui penulisan dan pembukuan.

Kita tidak perlu menjadi panglima perang untuk mengetahui bahawa dalam peperangan sistem logistik merupakan antara faktor penentu menang atau kalahnya sesebuah tentera. Kita tidak perlu mengambil risiko menyertai perang yang mungkin boleh mengorbankan nyawa kita. Kita boleh belajar dari kesilapan orang lain melalui pembacaan. Kita boleh membaca kisah kegagalan Jeneral Alexander Samsonov dalam pertembungan di Tannenburg dalam buku yang ditulis oleh Barbara Tuchman dalam bukunya The Gun of August sebagai contoh.

Kita juga tidak perlu mencipta mesin masa untuk kembali melihat peradaban manusia zaman silam, kita dapat memahami kehidupan tamadun silam dengan membaca tulisan pengembaraan Ibnu Khaldun dalam bukunya Muqaddimah. Atau mungkin kita hendak membaca nasihat tentang kehidupan dari seorang tua yang sedang terlantar sakit, kita tidak perlu ke hospital, kita boleh membaca buku Tuesday with Morrie.

Jika manusia yang telah mati tetapi masih hidup digelar hantu. Kebanyakan buku sebenarnya adalah hantu, ia merupakan cebisan minda manusia yang masih mampu berkomunikasi dengan manusia lain, walaupun jasad asal penulis telah mereput lama di makam-makam perkuburan.

Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair
Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair

Author of several books including Berfikir Tentang Pemikiran (2018), Lalang di Lautan Ideologi (2022), Dua Sayap Ilmu (2023), Resistance Sudah Berbunga (2024), Intelektual Yang Membosankan (2024) and Homo Historikus (2024). Fathi write from his home at Sungai Petani, Kedah. He like to read, write and sleep.

independent.academia.edu/SyedAhmadFathi

Filed Under: Rencana

23 things they don’t tell you about capitalism – Book Review

March 17, 2019 By Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair

This article is a review of Cambridge Economist, Ha-Joon Chang’s book titled ’23 things they don’t tell you about capitalism’ published by Penguin Books in 2010.

If you have read ‘Freakonomics’ by Dubner & Levitt and searching for a kind of book that provide the same unconventional, myth-busting analysis on economics occurrence, this book is definitely it!

Written in layman term without heavy technical terms, Chang open the access gate to wide range of ordinary readers about the working of economics. As he himself noted in the introduction, you don’t need to be an economist to understand his book. He lay out his aim explicitly on what he intended to do, which is to exposed free-market capitalism, he still believes that capitalism is the best economic system, his problem lay on specific type of capitalism which has dominated the world economy which is the free-market capitalism.

Chang argues that free market does not exist. Every market has rules, boundaries, and restriction which govern them. As we accept all these rules unconditionally, we fail to see them as market restriction. Labor market has many restrictions, you can’t hire child laborer this day. Also, most countries have immigration control to protect local labor market, and to hold the wage standard from falling. All these restrictions were not been put based on sound economic reason, they are political decisions. That is why Chang argues that the free-marketeer was as political as the one who opposed them. 

Workers in rich countries doing the same job are paid more compared to their counterpart in poor countries. Why is this so? It is not because of the people in rich countries are more productive, brilliant, or creative. It is precisely because of the immigration control that retain the wage standard. The gap also presented not because individual in rich countries are highly educated, it is because they have better technologies, better institutions, and better infrastructure. This line of analysis is consistent with what was presented by Turkish American economist, Daron Acemoglu and British political scientist, James A. Robinson in their famous book ‘Why Nations Fail’.

Chang discussed about Alexander Hamilton, the first Treasury Secretary and the architect of the modern American economic system. Hamilton laid out protectionism strategy to protect American industries ‘in their infancy’. Have he come up with the same policy that develop America then today, Chang argued that he will be criticized by US Treasury Department and denied loan by IMF and World Bank. Chang brilliantly argued that developed countries forced market liberalization on developing countries, whilst they themselves used protectionism policy when they were developing. In other words, the rich countries said to poor countries “do what we say not as we did”.

Why do European migrated to the U.S. in 1880-1914? – asked Chang. He argued that the New World lack of feudal legacy which led to higher social mobility compared to the Old World. The U.S. also had a massive tract of land and a shortage of labour, thus wages are three to four time higher than Europe. But he argued, today American does not have the highest living standards. They worked longer hours and had inferior healthcare system. Average income also did not gave an accurate living standard in the U.S. as she had a bigger unequal income distribution, with bigger size of underclass.

Chang also criticized many economist approaches on the question of Africa’s poverty. Chang argued that  rather than blaming free-market policy failure to develop Africa, free-market economist shift the blame towards Africa’s geography, climate, history, demography and ‘resource curse’. While all these factors are not all irrelevant, the outcome can change, for example, there are many resource-rich countries that were well developed. Some factors like geography and history cannot solve the question as they can’t be change. The most important factor, Chang noted, is policy. Policies can be change when they failed, especially and evidently in Africa.

On trickle-down economics, Chang brought evidence that the policy failed to deliver its promise and failed to accelerate growth. The book also discussed the failure of micro-credit, as a system to finance small enterprise and lift people out of poverty. The idea was famously attributed to the economist who won a Nobel Peace Prize, Muhammad Yunus and his Grameen Bank. Factors for the micro-credit failure includes the used of the funding for consumption, not for their initial intended purpose. While some used the funding for their business, the business failed to develop and re-create itself once their market was overcrowded and profit fell.

One of the most profound idea I found in the book is on how we limit our choices to make decision. Chang brought this idea base on Herbert Simon’s thought. Human cannot easily make decision when they were flooded with seas of information. That is why we develop routine, although they might be a better way to do things, people stick to routine so that they don’t have to make too many decisions. Market, Chang argued, were far more complex with billions of product, people, and companies. So, government intervention using regulations is justified, to limit the uncertainties and risk in the market, so that we can make a more rational and easier decisions.

Switzerland is one of the top few richest and most industrialized countries, but it is by far the lowest in term of university enrollment. Chang argued that excessive education does not lead to more productive economy. Subject such as history and biology does not much needed for average factory workers. He argued that knowledge-based economy is an exaggeration with many rich countries still rely on their manufacturing output, so, developing countries cannot skip manufacturing phase of the economic development.

Equality is not enough, said Chang. It does not make any sense if a rich boy and poor boy given the same opportunity to attend school, but the poor need to compete with a hungry stomach. So, its not just the opportunity to enter competition needs to be given, but the condition must be equalized.

His logic about big government is a compelling one. Big government he argued, make the economy more dynamic. When basic income was guaranteed, people will not be afraid of changing jobs from sunset industries into sunrise industries. When government provide re-skilling opportunities, people can more easily shifted from less productive industry into more productive one. People don’t afraid of loosing job because they know it will not be the end of the world, they have a safety net, and can move on.

Overall, the book is very rich with myth busting, facts, case studies, jokes, that will transform your understanding about economics. You know that the system is broken, but it is broken for a wrong reason and can be fix. The fix, as argued by professor Chang in his concluding remark, will not be comfortable or fair, but it is needed to give a chance for billions of people, and alleviate them from poverty.

Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair
Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair

Author of several books including Berfikir Tentang Pemikiran (2018), Lalang di Lautan Ideologi (2022), Dua Sayap Ilmu (2023), Resistance Sudah Berbunga (2024), Intelektual Yang Membosankan (2024) and Homo Historikus (2024). Fathi write from his home at Sungai Petani, Kedah. He like to read, write and sleep.

independent.academia.edu/SyedAhmadFathi

Filed Under: Reviu Buku

Menilai Campur Tangan Kerajaan Dalam Ekonomi

March 1, 2019 By Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair

Park Tae-Joon (Kanan) merasmikan pembukaan kilang POSCO pada April 1970.

Kita sering diberitahu bahawa tugas kerajaan adalah mentadbir, kerajaan sepatutnya tidak terlibat dalam bisnes. Bisnes perlu dibiarkan kepada orang bisnes. Logik kepada perkara ini adalah kerana keputusan bisnes biasanya dilakukan untuk mendapat keuntungan, tetapi keputusan kerajaan mempunyai kepentingan politik dan kemungkinan tidak menguntungkan. Kerajaan juga tidak mempunyai maklumat industri untuk membuat keputusan yang betul, perkara ini menyebabkan bisnes yang dicampuri tangan-tangan kerajaan tidak efisyen dan tidak menguntungkan. Oleh itu, pasaran perlu bebas dari campur tangan kerajaan. Ini adalah asas kepada free-market capitalism.

Saya ingin berkongsi satu cerita menarik yang dikongsi oleh ahli ekonomi dari Cambridge, Prof. Ha-Joon Chang dalam bukunya “23 things they don’t tell you about capitalism”.

Korea Selatan merupakan antara negara yang paling miskin di dunia pada tahun 1965, dan mereka mengeluarkan idea bodoh untuk membina integrated steel mill (kilang besi keluli). Sumber ekonomi utama mereka pada ketika itu adalah eksport barang mentah seperti ikan, bijih tungsten dan lain-lain. Juga perusahaan yang menggunakan tenaga buruh intensif seperti pembuatan baju. Jika dinilai dari segi teori ‘comparative advantage’, negara yang mempunyai tenaga buruh yang tinggi dengan kapital yang kecil tidak sepatutnya menceburi perusahaan yang berbentuk kapital intensif seperti pembuatan keluli.

Korea juga tidak mempunyai bahan mentah asas untuk menghasilkan keluli iaitu bijih besi dan coking coal. Suasana perang dingin ketika itu tidak membolehkan Korea mengimport bahan mentah dari China. Bahan mentah perlu diimport dari Amerika, Australia, atau Canada yang jaraknya 5 ribu hingga 6 ribu batu, yang mana akan menambahkan kos pembuatan.

Walaupun Korea menawarkan pelbagai insentif seperti subsidi, kemudahan infrastuktur percuma, pengecualian cukai, kos penjanaan tenaga yang rendah, tiada negara mahu melabur dalam idea mereka. Lebih menakutkan pelabur, syarikat Pohang Iron and Steel Company (POSCO) yang ditubuhkan pada 1968 merupakan syarikat kerajaan dan ditadbir oleh Park Tae-Joon, seorang bekas jeneral tentera. Korea merancang untuk membuka industri negara terbesar dan diketuai oleh seorang yang bukan ahli bisnes!  

World Bank menasihati pelabur untuk tidak turut serta dalam projek bodoh Korea ini. Pada tahun 1969 semua bakal pelabur termasuk Amerika, UK, German Barat, Perancis, dan Itali menarik diri dari projek ini. Tidak berputus asa, Korea meminta Jepun untuk menyalurkan bayaran ganti rugi perang kepada projek besi keluli mereka, juga membantu menyediakan mesin dan nasihat teknikal.

Industri keluli Korea maju dengan pesat, mereka memulakan pengeluaran pada tahun 1973 dan sekitar tahun 1980 berjaya menjadi pengeluar low-grade steel yang paling cost-efficient. Mereka naik menjadi pemain industri utama pada tahun 1990 dan sehingga hari ini menjadi pengeluar keluli ke-empat terbesar di dunia.

Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair
Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair

Author of several books including Berfikir Tentang Pemikiran (2018), Lalang di Lautan Ideologi (2022), Dua Sayap Ilmu (2023), Resistance Sudah Berbunga (2024), Intelektual Yang Membosankan (2024) and Homo Historikus (2024). Fathi write from his home at Sungai Petani, Kedah. He like to read, write and sleep.

independent.academia.edu/SyedAhmadFathi

Filed Under: Ekonomi

Ekonomi Bukan Hitam Putih

February 23, 2019 By Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair

Saya bukanlah ahli ekonomi, di sekolah belajar aliran sains tak ambil subjek ekonomi. Kali pertama belajar ekonomi masa di universiti, seingat saya nama pensyarah saya adalah Radchenko semasa belajar di Russia. Dalam kelas beliau saya pertama kali dengar nama Adam Smith dan “the invisible hand”.

Selepas keluar universiti saya ada beli buku The Wealth of Nations tulisan Adam Smith, dikumpulkan 3 jilid dalam satu naskah terbitan Bantam Books. Saya mengambil masa 8 bulan untuk menghabiskan buku setebal 1264 mukasurat. Ada bab yang mudah faham seperti “division of labour” manakala banyak yang saya tak dapat hadam, terutamanya bab yang terlalui detail dan memenatkan seperti harga jagung, nilai emas dan perak.

Tahun lepas ada satu subjek ekonomi yang saya ambil untuk ICS professional exam berkenaan dengan ekonomi pengangkutan laut dan perdagangan antarabangsa. Subjek ICS ni berjaya mencetus semula minat saya untuk membaca dan memahami subjek-subjek ekonomi.

Dalam pembacaan saya, saya dapati ekonomi bukanlah sesuatu yang hitam putih. Ia bukan sains seperti mana subjek Fizik atau Biologi, ada perkara dalam ekonomi tidak boleh diberikan definisi secara objektif. Ekonomis Cambridge, Ha-Joon Chang sebagai contoh mengatakan bahawa “95% dari subjek ekonomi adalah common sense”.

Maksud saya bukan hitam putih adalah ia boleh dilihat dari banyak perspektif. Malah banyak polisi ekonomi sebenarnya polisi politik. Saya suka pendekatan sejarawan Howard Zinn, pendekatan pensejarahan yang boleh diapplikasikan dalam bidang ekonomi. Iaitu bila dikatakan sesuatu polisi itu baik, kita perlu bertanya baik untuk siapa?

Ambil contoh kelemahan nilai matawang berbanding US dollar. Dari sudut import memang tidak baik, sebab kita terpaksa membeli barang luar dengan harga yang lebih mahal. Jika kita melancong keluar negara kita terpaksa berbelanja lebih dibandingkan dengan masa matawang kita mengukuh.

Tapi dari sudut eksport kelemahan matawang akan memberi kita kelebihan. Barang kita menjadi murah dan orang luar akan lebih membeli, eksport akan meningkat. Sebab itu China mengamalkan polisi yang menyebabkan nilai Yuan lemah secara artificial. Supaya barang mereka murah dan kilang mereka boleh eksport lebih. Yang mana merupakan punca trade war hari ini apabila US mengalami trade deficit dengan China.

Begitu juga bila sebelum ini kerajaan melaksanakan polisi protectionism dalam perusahaan automobil. Jika kita lihat dari sudut syarikat automobil negara, supplier dan vendor mereka ia memang menguntungkan. Kita juga dapat mengembangkan kemahiran pekerja dalam sektor pembuatan berat, disamping boleh menyemai semangat patriotik terhadap industri tempatan.

Tapi jika kita melihat dari sudut rakyat yang terpaksa membeli kereta tempatan yang lebih kurang kualiti dengan harga yang lebih tinggi berbanding kereta import, tentu kita nampak polisi ini menjerat rakyat. Jika sektor ini diliberalisasi rakyat akan dapat membeli kereta import berkualiti dengan harga berganda lebih murah.

Jadi bila kita mendengar ahli politik berkata membangunkan pengangkutan awam tidak menguntungkan. Kita kena bertanya, tidak menguntungkan siapa? Mungkin tidak menguntungkan kerajaan dari satu segi, iaitu syarikat berkaitan kerajaan perlu mengendali kemudahan awam dengan caj minimum dan tidak menguntungkan.

Tapi ekonomi bukan hitam putih. Apabila ada infrastuktur kemudahan awam pelbagai aktiviti komersial boleh dijalankan. Sebagai contoh, orang berniaga di stesen LRT. Ia mencipta peluang pekerjaan, kerajaan dapat mengutip lebih banyak cukai dari aktiviti ini. Pekerja juga boleh pergi bekerja dengan kos yang rendah, seterusnya menggalakkkan lebih ramai orang bekerja dan kerajaan boleh mengutip lebih banyak cukai pendapatan. Tanah-tanah di sekeliling stesen pengangkutan juga naik harga dan kerajaan boleh kutip lebih banyak cukai hartanah. Ekonomi perlu dilihat dengan menyeluruh, bukan sekadar hitam putih untung rugi syarikat GLC.

Oleh itu penting kita sebagai rakyat untuk memahami bagaimana ekonomi berfungsi dan tidak bergantung semata-mata pada air liur ahli politik. Bila disebut untung atau rugi, kita kena selalu bertanya, untung dan rugi untuk siapa?

Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair
Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair

Author of several books including Berfikir Tentang Pemikiran (2018), Lalang di Lautan Ideologi (2022), Dua Sayap Ilmu (2023), Resistance Sudah Berbunga (2024), Intelektual Yang Membosankan (2024) and Homo Historikus (2024). Fathi write from his home at Sungai Petani, Kedah. He like to read, write and sleep.

independent.academia.edu/SyedAhmadFathi

Filed Under: Ekonomi

Every Nation for Itself – Book Review

February 22, 2019 By Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair


Every Nation for Itself: Winners and Losers in a G-Zero World by Ian Bremmer published by Portfolio Penguin in 2012.

The book was written by Ian Bremmer which was also the author of ‘The End of the Free Market’. In this book, Bremmer put forward his thesis that the world is moving toward a leaderless world, a world where no single nation or group of nations can impose anything to other states to coordinate international respond and solve global problems. He termed this new world G-Zero, as opposed to the grouping of established power which created a club G7- a club of 7 powerful nation.

The G7 has diminishing power as the U.S. power slowly wane off and the EU disintegrates, while a much larger club like the G20 produces nothing of substance. On contrary, we have a number of emerging nations assuming greater economic and political power on the global arena, but none of them was capable or willing to assume global leadership.

One of the areas which are crucial for the survival of our planet is on the issue of global warming. This global problem cannot be solved by individual nation, it needs a coordinated and planned international effort. Copenhagen climate summit in 2009, for example, produced nothing substantial to come up with a global solution. India and China unwilling to cut emission that will hamper their economic development, they instead remind western counterpart that today’s problem was the result of the western industrial revolution, and they are the one who needs to foot the bill.

Bremmer explained that the waning of American global dominance is due to their swelling debt. With China on the rise, and the Chinese willingness to invest in U.S. debt, it is harder for the U.S. to impose anything on China. The U.S. also spending too much money on foreign war trying to keep the world “peace, democratic and stable”. Although many would disagree with Bremmer assessment, Chomsky for example once stated that the best way of ending terrorism is by stop participate in one. One can argue that U.S. wars were good or not, but no one can deny that it help dries the U.S. from the fund it needs for productive economic development.

China also benefited from the service of U.S. navy patrol of the major trade route but has no incentive to take over the lead. Russia on the other hand, since the fall of the Soviet Union has lost military clout and the ideological appeal for much of the developing world.

The book also is dense with ‘American exceptionalism’ which made it non-objective and highly political. Some of it was not based on fact but an assumption. For example, in discussing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Bremmer wrote that “Iran join the club but cheat”. No evidence cited for this accusation, instead,  in the following line he said Iran “generally assumes” to be hiding its nuclear weapons program. So, this accusation is not based on fact but an assumption.

In discussing the US-China trade relationship, Bremmer prediction turns to be not very far stretched, as China keeps Yuan devalued, the trade war looms as the U.S. and China have already slapped tariff to each other. China manufacturing strategies also seem to be working, especially in the telecommunication industries which has put the Western counterpart unease, the latest is the Huawei case.

Market forces were also discussed in the book, he connected the dots and explain how these forces impacted the price of commodities. The growing middle-class for example, given rise to the demand of meat-based diet. This, in turn, will push the grain price up as grain is needed so much more to nourish livestock rather than feeding human. The rising price of grain will hit poor countries the most as they spend a large portion of their income on food, whilst in rich countries, the food is highly processed and the price fluctuation usually lost after adding other costs such as processing, manufacturing and transportation.

Who are is the possible winner in the leaderless world?

To this question, Bremmer suggests that countries with broad cooperation and does not rely on any single superpower will thrive. As there is no single power can impose any standard global system, these emerging states can play using their own rules. Countries like Brazil, Turkey are possible winners, as does the African continent.

States which does not obey the American leadership (Bremmer called it rogues states) which have powerful friends will also have a good advantage in the leaderless world. As the U.S. is plagued by war fatigue, Europe troubled with fiscal austerity, the military threat was seen less credible whilst economic sanctions were ineffective and porous.

Who will be the losers?

To this Bremmer answered states that still hang on to the old power structure. They resist changes and stick to their own rules and institutions. Institutions that have already accomplished their mission but not yet decommissioned, such as NATO will also be on the losing end.

Closing the book, Bremmer comes out with what the future might look like. The future according to Bremmer depends on the U.S., China, and the other countries. This book was written in 2012, whilst this review was written in 2019. So, we already in the future and can look back at Bremmer proposed image of the future.

Bremmer suggested 4 possibilities, judging from the current world affairs the most suitable candidate will be the “Wold of Regions” where the emerging countries become stronger whilst the U.S. and China relationship becoming more hostile. We can see the trade war currently brewing between these two superpowers, with tariff been imposed on each other and the growing tension on Huawei expanding their technological reach. While other countries climbing the global political ladder. Even the U.S. sanction on Venezuela is not working as India continue to buy Venezuelan oil. Whilst Turkey ignored U.S. threat and continue purchasing Russian missiles system. 

Bremmer concludes the book on looking at the U.S. fate in the G-Zero world. He ends the book with his last touch of American exceptionalism saying that the U.S. always has a second act and can rise again. To do this they need to accept the world as it is and innovate to adapt.

Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair
Syed Ahmad Fathi Bin Syed Mohd Khair

Author of several books including Berfikir Tentang Pemikiran (2018), Lalang di Lautan Ideologi (2022), Dua Sayap Ilmu (2023), Resistance Sudah Berbunga (2024), Intelektual Yang Membosankan (2024) and Homo Historikus (2024). Fathi write from his home at Sungai Petani, Kedah. He like to read, write and sleep.

independent.academia.edu/SyedAhmadFathi

Filed Under: Reviu Buku

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • …
  • 18
  • Next Page »

Recent Posts

  • Pasca Membaca Buku Pascabaca
  • Analisis Permulaan Perang Amerika Syarikat-Israel Ke Atas Iran Pada Bulan Jun 2025
  • Retelling the Story of the Great Majapahit Empire
  • Nota PBAKL: Prosa Klise Yang Benar, Kehidupan Adalah Satu Perjalanan
  • Koleksi Refleksi di IABF: Merayakan Seni dan Sastera

Archives

Copyright © 2025 The Independent Insight