The Independent Insight

Giving truth a voice

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.

 

Why America is losing in Iraq and Afghanistan

By 1 Comment

 

As Howard Zinn brilliantly puts it “you cannot be neutral on a moving train”. This book was written from the perspective of American’s interest on why they are losing their wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The short answer is that America doesn’t have a clear quantifiable objective. Now, let’s deplore the long answer as Michael Scheuer puts it in his book ‘Imperial Hubris’.

Scheuer was part of the American intelligence community in the CIA specializing in Osama bin Laden, he uses his insight and specialty to argue the reason of the American failure and the options it had to move forward. The central thesis of his book is that the animosity the Muslim world had with America and its allies is not because of the values they hold dear, such as democracy, representative government, feminism, women empowerment, gender intermingling etc. While Islam may disapprove of these values, they are not the reason why people are blowing up themselves. The real reason Scheuer argues were specific policies such as attacks on their brethren, occupying Muslim lands, support given to corrupt tyrannies, and unconditional support towards Israeli brutal aggression on Palestinians. He wrote:

“To make this so, we send forth U.S. diplomats, politicians, officials, and preachers to coercively persuade Muslims to Westernize the Koran and the Prophet’s traditions and sayings, especially the parts of the Islamic canon dealing with education, charitable giving, the non-separation of church and state, and manage an Islamic Reformation that makes Muslims secular like us, all this unfortunate, nonsensical talk about religious war will end and Muslim will be eager to keep God in the same kind of narrow locker in which the West is slowly asphyxiating Him” pg 166.

Since the demolition of Ottoman Caliphate by the British in 1924, there is no central authority to wage offensive Jihad. But defensive Jihad is an individual responsibility that does not need authorization from anyone, once the religion is under attack it becomes an individual responsibility for each Muslims to defend the religion using whatever power he had.

Commenting on Afghanistan, Scheuer attributed the failure to the failure of America to learn from history. In what he called ‘the checkable’ which America should do before they enter Afghanistan. The vast amount of resources was not utilized, America failed to learn from history even though America has a vast knowledge to be tap with its 13-years program of supporting the mujahideen pushing back the Soviet. The biggest mistake was the American initiative to install secular democracy, a foreign idea to Afghanistan’s tribal tradition. A tribal tradition that will be united to repel foreign power be it the British, the Soviet or America, and again fight each other when they are gone. America naively thinks that they can depend on Afghan proxy to do their dirty work.

But reading the list of Al-Qaeda victories compiled by Scheuer, it’s hard not to think that he has oversimplified things. Different insurgencies have their own local context, to add it all and put it under Al-Qaeda is plain wrong. Although all of them are Muslim, they fight for a different cause. The Uighur are fighting China due to the Communist iron fist control over their communities. The Chechen are fighting Russia for their liberation. Palestinian are fighting Israeli occupation. They may share the same faith, but not the same goal.

Scheuer also dispelled the myth that the rage the Muslim have towards the West was because of the declined Islamic Civilization, but rather because of what the West has done in the Muslim world. Their post-colonial arrangement and support the tyrannies, limiting the population their freedom and wellbeing.

America ineffective force Scheuer argues is because it views the threat as a terrorist which had to deal with law-enforcing strategy. The need to do all the fighting abiding laws and under thorough media scrutiny, while the enemy wage unrestrained insurgency and never read the Geneva convention. He also explained the differences between US agencies such as FBI and the CIA. While FBI collecting data abiding the national law, CIA has done the opposite. CIA compiled data by torture, theft and luring foreigner to do an act of treason. Mixing and confusing these two agencies Scheuer argues, will make the matter worst.

Another reason why America is ineffective when the war with Afghanistan began, is the obsession of building coalition which delays the operation and dragged American feet. Although the coalition gave little impact on the overall operation.

At the end of the book, Scheuer concludes that American left with only two choices. The first, it changes its foreign policies towards the Muslim world, by withdrawal from their current aggression, stop supporting tyrannical regimes in the Muslim world, and do justice to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The second option, retain the status quo policies and prepared to shed more American blood and drain national treasures.

 

 

Kepentingan negara: Perspektif dekonstruk

By Leave a Comment

Antara pemikiran Howard Zinn yang sangat mengesani pemikiran saya sehingga ke hari ini adalah dekonstruk terhadap konsep kepentingan negara (national interest). Dalam melihat dan menilai sesuatu keputusan, soalan yang pertama yang perlu ditanya adalah ianya baik untuk siapa?

Dalam dekonstruksi pemikiran ini, Zinn menerangkan bahawa konsep kepentingan negara adalah satu konsep yang digunakan oleh golongan elit pemerintah untuk mendapat sokongan dari rakyat majoriti. Walaupun pada hakikatnya setiap lapis dan golongan masyarakat mempunyai kepentingan tersendiri. Bagi golongan miskin apa yang penting adalah menaiktaraf keadaan hidup. Bagi golongan peniaga apa yang penting adalah keuntungan berterusan dan kelangsungan perniagaan. Bagi ahli politik kepentingan mereka adalah kuasa pemerintahan. Bagi golongan pengemis kepentingan mereka adalah makanan esok hari.

Jadi setiap lapis dan golongan masyarakat mempunyai kepentingan yang berbeza, apa yang mereka anggap sebagai prioriti dan keperluan mendesak. Menggunakan terma ‘kepentingan negara’ bermakna mencampurkan semua lapis ini dalam satu bekas, seolah-olah mereka semua mempunyai kepentingan yang sama. Ia adalah salah, Zinn menulis “we are not one happy family”.

Kenapa dekonstruksi pemikiran ini penting? Kerana ia akan membantu kita menilai setiap polisi yang diketengahkan. Bila ahli politik memberitahu kita bahawa sesuatu itu baik untuk negara, kita perlu bertanya “baik untuk siapa?” 

Dalam landskap politik negara hari ini, kita melihat status quo telah berubah. Kita mempunyai golongan elit baru (walaupun bukan semuanya baru) menggantikan golongan elit lama. Namun masih ada sebahagian besar masih belum boleh keluar dari realiti lama, mereka masih sibuk memuji dan memuja kerajaan, walaupun kerajaan lama telah ditumbangkan.

Sekiranya mereka faham, misi untuk menjatuhkan kerajaan lama telah tercapai. Apa yang kita perlukan sekarang bukan lagi kata-kata ampu untuk menyedapkan hati elit pemerintah, tetapi proses semakan. Rakyat perlu sentiasa menyemak kerajaan, setiap keputusan salah perlu diberi kritikan keras, bukan lagi dibelai dengan ampuan yang akhirnya akan menjadikan kerajaan baru ini berperangai seperti kerajaan lama dalam sekelip mata. Apa guna mengampu parti politik andai kepentingan rakyat tergadai.

Kerajaan tidak mempunyai kepentingan yang sama dengan rakyat, mungkin kenyataan ini kedengaran ekstrem dan sukar dihadam, namun ia adalah realiti yang konsisten sepanjang sejarah peradaban manusia.

“The game is not a fair one. It is rigged. What you call profit, I call exploitation” – The Young Karl Marx, 2017.

 

Titik biru malap

By Leave a Comment

 

Voyager-1 dilancarkan pada 5 September 1977 dari Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida, Amerika Syarikat. Antara misinya adalah untuk mengkaji planet-planet dengan lebih dekat. Pada 14 Febuari 1990, Voyager-1 telah mengembara jauh, sekitar 6 billion kilometer dari bumi, tempat asal ia berlepas. Namun berkat hasil tangan manusia dengan akal kurniaan tuhan, Voyager-1 masih dapat menerima signal arahan dari NASA Deep Space Network di bumi.

Dari jarak 6 billion kilometer ini, Carl Sagan, seorang ahli astronomi yang merupakan salah seorang penyelidik dalam NASA memohon agar kamera Voyager-1 di halakan ke bumi bagi mengambil gambar ‘Family potrait’ bumi bersama adik-beradik planetnya yang lain. Permintaan beliau diluluskan. Gambar tersebut menyaksikan ruang kosmos yang luas, dan ada satu titik pixel kecil berwarna biru pudar terapung ditengah sinaran matahari. Dari 640,000 pixel di dalam gambar tersebut titik bumi hanya sebesar 0.12 pixel. Dalam syarahan beliau di Universiti Cornell pada tahun 1994, Sagan berkata “That’s here. That’s home. That’s us”.

Sagan kemudian menulis buku bertajuk ‘Pale blue dot’ sempena gambar istimewa ini. Dalam bukunya Sagan menulis bertapa pengkajian astronomi merupakan satu perjalanan yang sangat merendahkan diri (humbling). Bertapa bumi ini sangat kecil apabila dibandingkan dengan kosmos yang terbentang luas, ibarat sebutir habuk. Bertapa manusia sangat angkuh dan bongkak, manusia yang kagum dengan ideologi masing-masing, sanggup membunuh dan dibunuh untuk merebut sebahagian dari habuk kecil ini. Gambar titik biru pudar ini sepatutnya mengingatkan mereka, bertapa kerdilnya mereka, dan belajar untuk hidup bersama.

Kita tidak pernah mendengar sekumpulan kucing di Arab Saudi berkomplot untuk membunuh spesis kucing lain di Yaman. Tetapi manusia, manusia yang mengaku mempunyai tuhan, mengaku mulia dengan agama, manusia yang dikurniakan akal, membunuh spesis mereka sendiri dengan cara yang kreatif. Mereka mencipta pelbagai jenis persenjataan moden dan canggih untuk membunuh spesis mereka sendiri beramai-ramai. Menggunakan guided missile, hydrogen bomb, kalashnikov, gas kimia, senjata biologi, dan seribu satu cara lain. Malah seronok dan berbangga dengan perbuatan mereka. George Carlin, seorang pelawak berkata, dalam banyak-banyak spesis kehidupan, hanya manusia yang membunuh spesis sendiri untuk keseronokan.

Jika kita melihat situasi negara kita hari ini, kita akan nampak bibik-bibik kebencian antara satu sama lain. Kita gagal menerima perbezaan, melihat orang lain yang berbeza dengan kita dengan penuh kebencian. Kita bersifat prejudis terhadap orang yang berbeza agama, bangsa, bahasa dan fahaman politik. Walaupun pilihanraya sudah berakhir kita terus saling membenci, memburukkan orang lain, memfitnah, menyebar kebencian, saling perli memerli di media sosial. Kita lupa raison d’être negara kita adalah perpaduan. Perbezaan adalah fitrah, kita perlu belajar hidup berbeza bersama.

 

Whose Bible Is It?

By 1 Comment

 

The Bible has many versions. We have King James Version, Revised Standard Version, New Revised Standard Version, Jerusalem Bible and a lot more others. Pelikan asked, what if a person want to buy the Bible, the whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible? Which one he should purchase.

To answer this question, Pelikan brought the readers back to the ancient time, to understand where does it all began, how it evolved and ended up as what we have today.

He started by introducing readers to the God who speaks. This is a crucial fact that the scriptures were based on spoken words, long before it was written down. This was a natural way even for us as human, as a child, we learn how to speak first, before we learn how to write. Pelikan cited the famous thinker Socrates, he was well known but never written any book. All of Socrates wisdom were spoken words, which later recalled and written by his disciples. This, Pelikan argues, is also true about Jesus. He speaks but never writes anything. His deeds were written “at least three or four decades” later.

The words were spoken by the prophets. The Jewish Tanakh carried a heading Nevi’im which means “the Prophets”. To explain this concept, Pelikan cannot solely depend on Judaeo-Christians tradition, he went to explain that in the tradition of the Quran, Allah declares that the message was brought through a man, Muhammad, which Muslims refer to simply as ‘the prophet’.

Pelikan reiterates the primacy of spoken words; “Modulating the tone of voice, speaking loudly or whispering, pausing, speeding up or slowing down, gestures, grimaces, and smiles – all of these are dimensions of oral communication and tool of persuasion” that no writing system can hope to reproduce.

Pelikan then drew attention to the question of language on his second chapter “The truth in Hebrew” from Latin translation of “Hebraica veritas”. “The Jewish Tanakh makes up at least three-fourths of the Christian Bible,” wrote Pelikan. Part of Jewish Tanakh, in Nevi’im, contained biographies which are not “idealized” according to Pelikan. Because it contained among others, the unexpurgated account of David’s adultery with Bathsheba and murder of her husband Uriah.

The Hebrew Tanakh consists of Torah or the Pentateuch which contain divine law and legislation. Followed by Nevi’im or the Prophets which contain historical background and setting of the prophets and formed a commentary on the history of Judah and of Israel. Then come to a section called Kethuvim or the writings which are a collection of sacred writings.

By the third and second centuries BCE, Jews has been dispersed throughout the Greco-Roman world, many younger generations did not speak Hebrew and only understand Greek, which was a fashionable language at that time. One of the cosmopolitan cities with significant Jewish population was Alexandria, Egypt. 72 Jewish scholars from 12 tribes of Israel were dispatched to Alexandria to translate the Tanakh to Greek. The translation was later called Septuagint, the Latin word for seventy.

This translation has a profound effect on the writing of the New Testament. For example, Hebrew Tanakh described the birth of Immanuel by a young woman without specifying any status. The Septuagint uses the word “parthenos” which later quoted in the Gospel as “virgin”.

Commenting on the cultural significance of the Septuagint, Pelikan wrote:

“..the creation of the Septuagint brought it about that the Bible became, willy-nilly, part of world literature. Anyone who could read Odyssey could now read the Book of Exodus, even though some of its Greek might seem rather quaint to a pagan Hellenistic reader (which was, of course, true of the archaic Greek of Homer as well). By contrast, the Qur’an would remain locked in Arabic for many centuries after it had been revealed and committed to writing, and would, therefore, continue to be inaccessible to friendly outside inquirers, not to mention all its enemies.”

Translation means that some meaning might be lost in the process. Pelikan noted that what is said in Hebrew does not have the same force when translated into another language. The Septuagint later acquired a special and inspired status in the Christian church, it became a Christian Bible. ‘The baptism of the Tanakh’ as Pelikan puts it, gave way for Christians to claim a long and distinguished lineage.

Commenting on the New Testament, Pelikan wrote that it was a work of several authors. The Gospels dealt with the life and teaching of Jesus, the Acts tells stories about early Christianity, the Epistles are letters by various leaders and the Revelation is an apocalyptic literature. The Epistle to the Philippians for example, was Paul’s personal letters. The second Thessalonians although said to be written by Paul, the authorship was disputed by biblical scholars. In light of the history of emancipation, in the Epistle to Philemon, Paul plead that a runaway slave, Onesimus, to be treated kindly, but does not demand him to be set free. Pelikan then wrote about how some Epistle such as Jude was appeared in some canon but rejected by others. Pelikan also questions evocative and anatomically explicit love poem in the Song of Songs. He asked, “what is such a book doing in the Bible?”.

At a later stage, having already been translated to Greek and called Septuagint, the Bible was translated to Latin by the work of Jerome (Eusebius Hieronymus), this Latin version was called the Vulgate. In the Reformation age, the call for the return to the primary source in Hebrew resulted in the access of Hebrew text such as the Jewish Kabbalah. The mysterious world of the Kabbalah, the ultimate mystery of Being now can be manipulated to support the doctrine of the Trinity.

Pelikan also mentions Erasmus in the Reformation age, where he omits several dubious lines which has no backing in Greek but creeps into Latin edition. After receiving protest, that this omission might undermine the concept of Trinity, he includes them back on the newer edition. During the Enlightenment critical examination was addressed to all form of authority, from political, intellectual, to religious authority. Commenting on the different level of militarism between old and new testament, Pelikan wrote that this is due to the different political setting. The new testament was written when there is no political power. This is the reason why Christ said, “Pay to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and to God what belongs to God”. Which beg a question, what kind of things belong to Caesar without belonging to God first? The critical method also probing the question of authorship. Whilst this question is not so important to the faithful. How does one really explain Moses writing his own obituary by describing himself died in the land of Moab? In the concluding chapter, Pelikan noted the ‘contrary lifestyle’ which existed in the Bible. How one square militarism in the Tanakh with the message of peace.

This article is a book review of “Whose Bible Is It?” written by Jaroslav Pelikan. Published by Penguin Books in 2006.

 

Statement by UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Filippo Grandi on World Refugee Day 2018

By 1 Comment

TOPSHOT – Thousands of migrants and refugees walk through the port of Piraeus after arriving from the Greek islands of Lesbos and Chios on February 1, 2016. (Photo credit : LOUISA GOULIAMAKI/AFP/Getty Images)

Geneva, 20 June 2018 – Today, World Refugee Day, is a time for solidarity with refugees – and with the communities that welcome them. As conflicts emerge, recur, persist and deepen, 68.5 million people are uprooted around the world. Nine out of ten are in their own countries or countries next door, and the impact is massive – on refugees themselves, and on the communities that open their doors to them. Now, more than ever, taking care of refugees must be a global – and shared – responsibility. It’s time to do things differently.

A new model is now being tested, with positive results – based on equity, on justice and on humanitarian values and standards. Countries and communities need more systematic, long-term support as they take on the job of helping uprooted families. Refugees themselves need to be included in new communities, and given the chance to realise their potential. And solutions are needed – to help refugees return home when the time is right, or build new lives elsewhere. The Global Compact on Refugees – to be adopted this year – aims to make these happen.

Getting laws and policies right is vital. But it’s local people and communities that are on the frontlines when refugees arrive, and whose welcome makes the difference – the difference between rejection and inclusion; between despair and hope; between being left behind and building a future. Sharing responsibility for refugees starts there.

We see this every day – in Beirut, Lebanon; Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh; Yumbe, Uganda; Frankfurt, Germany; Lima, Peru and countless villages, towns and cities around the world. It’s the men, women and children there, the local organisations and faith groups, the teachers, local business people and municipal leaders who make the difference – with humanity, compassion and solidarity.

Often, these communities are themselves on the margins – in remote border areas, or with few resources of their own. Yet, overwhelmingly, when refugees arrive, they share what they have motivated by compassion, and a sense of human dignity. And when people work together, the results are powerful.

Who are these everyday heroes? People who know what it means to belong to a community – and are ready to help others belong too. By extending a helping hand directly, or working together – as part of a local church or mosque, a school group, sports team, cooperative society, or youth group. Some have been refugees themselves, and know what that means. Through their generosity, they shine a light on the potential of refugees – and the endless opportunities to help them.

Helping refugees rebuild their lives needs all of us – working together so that they can achieve what most of us take for granted – education, a place to live, a job, being part of a community. Over time, the impact is enormous – for refugee families and those who welcome them.

On World Refugee Day, it’s time to recognise their humanity in action – and challenge ourselves, and others, to join them – in receiving and supporting refugees in our schools, neighbourhoods, and workplaces. This is where solidarity starts – with all of us.

 

Politik Islam dan Melayu

By 1 Comment

Buku ini merupakan kumpulan tulisan Dr. Asyraf Wajdi Dusuki yang membicarakan berkenaan dengan politik orang melayu dan Islam. Kebetulan saya menghabiskan pembacaan ini selepas PRU14 di mana buat pertama kali dalam sejarah Malaysia, UMNO hilang kuasa pemerintahan negara. Buku ini saya kira baik bagi ahli UMNO jika mereka ingin bermuhasabah dan bangkit kembali. Saya kira ia merupakan penulisan yang baik, namun dalam banyak bab penulis sering kali mengulangi tragedi 13 Mei sebagai hujah sehingga ia seolah-olah kedengaran seperti sebuah propaganda.

Antara kritikan awal beliau adalah amalan politik wang dan rasuah yang membarah di dalam UMNO. Amalan ini menyebabkan pemimpin-pemimpin yang rosak dan penyangak dilantik mengemudi parti yang akhirnya menyimpang dari agenda perjuangan. Tidak lagi membela bangsa tetapi mengayakan diri dan kroni. Pemimpin lebih mengutamakan projek sehingga timbul kata-kata terkenal “satu undi untuk UMNO adalah satu undi untuk kontraktor”.

Beliau juga memetik kata-kata Dr. Mohd Asri Zainal Abidin (MAZA) berkenaan dengan kepentingan tajdid (pembaharuan). Dari sudut agama ia bukan bererti membawa agama baru, tetapi pemahaman baru berkenaan dengan agama agar ia segar dan bersesuaian dengan keadaan semasa. Dari perspektif parti, ia bermakna untuk kekal relevan UMNO perlu menarik lebih ramai golongan muda, agar ia terus segar bagi generasi mendatang. Kehilangan generasi muda ini adalah disebabkan perjuangan yang sudah lari dari maksud asal. Sibuk dengan urusan kebendaan sehingga bakti kepada rakyat diperkesampingkan. Malah anak-anak pemimpin UMNO sendiri menjauhkan diri mereka dari parti.

Beliau mengungkapkan bahawa “kehancuran UMNO adalah kehancuran melayu”. Saya kira kenyataan ini boleh dilihat dari dua sudut. Dari satu sudut, ya, kerana tidak ada parti lain yang memperjuangkan bangsa melayu secara eksklusif (mungkin kini sudah ada dengan penubuhan Parti Peribumi Bersatu). Dari sudut yang lain, melayu akan terus wujud namun ia tidak lagi dominan dan eksklusif. Hari ini kita melihat kerajaan baru cuba membawa agenda ‘Malaysian Malaysia’ dengan menggunakan slogan ‘Malaysia Baharu”. Sejauh mana konsep ini boleh mengekalkan keharmonian kaum di Malaysia, akan boleh dilihat dalam tahun-tahun yang akan datang.

Beliau juga memuji semangat sukarela yang ada di dalam aktivis PAS, sesuatu yang hilang di dalam UMNO. PAS dilihat aktif mengadakan ceramah menerangkan isu pada rakyat, sementara pemuda UMNO hanya mampu menghimpunkan penunggang motosikal. Tokoh-tokoh wanita juga tidak menonjol kerana hanya melakukan program bersama kakitangan tadika KEMAS sahaja. Akhirnya UMNO hilang peranan di dalam masyarakat dan tiada kekuatan akar umbi.

Dr. Asyraf Wajdi juga menyangkal hujah yang mengatakan perjuangan bangsa adalah rasis. Hal ini kerana setiap manusia di lahirkan di dalam sesuatu bangsa dan secara fitrah dia akan cenderung dan sayang terhadap bangsanya. Apa yang menjadi kesalahan adalah sekiranya perjuangan itu menafikan hak bangsa lain dengan zalim. Hakikatnya UMNO memperjuangkan nasib bangsa Melayu yang miskin satu ketika dahulu, dengan pegangan ekonomi yang tidak seimbang sehingga menimbulkan konflik kaum. Oleh itu perjuangan bangsa tidak boleh dilihat sebagai rasis selagi ia berlandaskan perlembagaan dan menjamin hak kaum minoriti.

Beliau juga menafikan persepsi yang dibawa oleh PAS bahawa UMNO menolak Islam. Beliau membandingkan kepesatan penyebaran syiar Islam di Malaysia berbanding negara lain seperti Tunisia, di mana negara mereka digenggam sekularisme walaupun 90% rakyatnya adalah Muslim. Beliau memetik kata-kata Sheikh Rachid Ghannouchi yang datang melawat Malaysia pada era pemerintahan Mahathir kali pertama (sekarang kali ke dua). Ghannouchi berkata “ternyata ruang dan peluang dakwah begitu luas sekali bahkan dibantu oleh kerajaan secara terbuka”.

Menyentuh hal ekonomi, beliau mempertahankan penyusunan semula masyarakat melalui Dasar Ekonomi Baru (DEB). Pegangan ekuiti korporat bumiputra pada tahun 1970 hanya sekadar 2%, DEB mensasarkan peningkatan jumlah ekuiti kepada 30% menjelang 1990. Namun pegangan ekuiti bumiputra hanya mencapai sekitar 20.4% pada tahun 1990. Walaupun target asal tidak dicapai, namun paras kemiskinan dapat diturunkan dengan ketara, dari 49.3% pada tahun 1970 kepada hanya 5.1% pada tahun 2002.

Malaysia juga adalah antara pelopor sistem keewangan Islam yang berjaya. Ia diiktiraf oleh negara-negara Arab, Iran, Sudan malah UK. Iran walaupun antara negara awal yang memperkenalkan perbankan Islam tidak dapat menyaingi Malaysia kerana pendekatan yang diambil terlalu drastik, terburu-buru melalui revolusi. Manakala Malaysia mengambil jalan yang lebih perlahan namun berterusan, melalui proses evolusi, agar sistem baru dapat diterima masyarakat dalam masa yang sama, tenaga pakar dan infrastuktur dibangunkan secara bertahap.

Menyentul hal bahasa, beliau berdiri teguh mempertahankan penggunaan bahasa Melayu didalam pendidikan. Beliau membawa hujah sejarah dimana selepas tragedi 13 Mei, Majlis Perundingan Negara dibentuk. Antara resolusi yang dibentangkan adalah Dasar Pendidikan Kebangsaan yang diasaskan dari Penyata Razak 1956 dan Laporan Rahman Talib 1960. Keperluan menjadikan bahasa Melayu sebagai bahasa kebangsaan adalah penting bagi membentuk identiti kenegaraan. Ia merupakan salah satu asas yang mengikat pelbagai bangsa bagi mewujudkan kefahaman, toleransi dan keharmonian.

Antara perkara lain yang disentuh adalah perbezaan pemikiran. Ia merupakan perkara semulajadi yang harus diiktiraf dan tidak diperbalahkan. Malah Islam tidak menghalang perbezaan pandangan dan mengiktiraf fungsi akal. Keghairahan me niru model negara lain seperti Turki juga di bincangkan. Hakikatnya ahli akademik dari Turki sendiri mengakui suasana politik sekular di Turki mengekang Islam, dan Malaysia mempunyai tapak yang lebih subur dan harus bergerak dengan model kita sendiri. Beliau juga menolak perubahan sistem secara total. Beliau berhujah bahawa setiap perkara yang baik biarpun dari tamadun lain boleh kita guna dan sesuaikan dengan situasi kita di Malaysia. Mengambil contoh sejarah, cendiakawan Islam sendiri menterjemah karya Yunani dan Parsi bagi dikaji dan digunakan. Seharusnya kita membuat perubahan secara bertahap, memperbaiki sistem sedia ada sesuai dengan perkembangan masyarakat.

Akhir sekali, beliau membicarakan berkenaan dengan muzakarah (perbincangan) antara UMNO-PAS. Beliau menekankan bahawa matlamatnya bukanlah untuk membubarkan parti dan bernaung di bawah satu parti sahaja, tetapi mencari ruang dan peluang bekerjasama dalam perkara yang disepakati untuk kebaikan bersama.

Artikel ini adalah ulasan buku ‘Politik Islam dan Melayu’ tulisan Asyraf Wajdi Dusuki yang diterbitkan oleh Yayasan Dakwah Islamiah Malaysia (YADIM) pada tahun 2014.

Mao: From librarian to Chairman of Communist China

By 3 Comments

 

This small book which tries to tell a story about one huge world leader, really helps readers in a sense that you can understand a huge subject with fewer pages. Of course, it needs simplification, and also selection, in order to achieve this goal. A layman about the subject, I find the book helpful in my journey as readers. As I get to understand the subject in a less painful way (you need to sip through a few thick tomes to understand it as a whole).

I find Mao life story, struggle, family life, as interesting, strange, and often paradoxical in many cases. Born in 1893 at Hunan, he moved from being a librarian to the chairman of communist China. In the early life, Spence collected the habit of Mao, particularly his love for reading. Early in Changsha, Mao read rigorously in a library founded by late Qing’s reformist. He had a great interest in world geography and history. One of this early teacher was Yang Changji (Mao married to his daughter later in his life), which reiterate the importance of exercise. Mao absorbs this idea and would regularly go hiking with his friend and swim in the Xiang River.

Mao also active in organizing student association to go on strike against Zhang Jingyao, famously known as General Zhang, a military governor in Hunan. Mao also loves poetry, one of his beautiful poem written to his wife, Yang Kaihui in 1923:

I’m begging you to sever these tangled ties of emotion.

I myself would like to be a rootless wanderer.

And have nothing more to do with lovers’ whispers.

 

The poem was written by Mao as he left Yang Kaihui and their newborn child for National Guomindang Congress. The ties with Guomindang in a United Front later shattered, during this time Mao utter a mistake in party leadership, which neglected military affairs. He said that Chiang Kai-shek (his arc enemy) was right by raising in power with a gun in his hand. He then famously said, “We must know that political power is obtained from the barrel of the gun!”. This development later evolved into a civil war.

Guomindang latter suffered a great lost against Japanese invasion. The ‘rape of Nanjing’ by Japan in 1937 brought a literal end to their power and finally retreated deep inland to Chongqing. Japan then suffered two atomic bombs and later surrender. The communist with the help from Russia quickly taking over, and in 1949 Mao announce the formation of the People’s Republic of China at Great Tiananmen gate south of the Forbidden City.

The book also recalled Mao conversation with Stalin. On how propaganda is the main apparatus to achieve any goal. Stalin advised Mao to send propaganda team to Taiwan to foment an insurrection (Chiang Kai-shek has now retreated to Taiwan). On the final pages, Spence draws readers attention on how Mao grows into isolation and detached from realities. This caused a disastrous policy forced through the masses. Spence also noted that Mao rarely helps or promoted his family member to power. During the Cultural Revolution, Mao purged his dissenter such as Peng Dehuai causing further chaos and violence. He has several heart attacks and died in 1976.

This article is a book review of “Mao” written by Jonathan Spence. Published by Phoenix in 2000. Picture credit: Britannica.

Kenapa asyik cakap tentang kelemahan pembangkang? Takut berubah ke?

By 1 Comment

 
Post ini tidak bertujuan untuk meraih undi untuk mana-mana parti. Terpulanglah kepada setiap individu menggunakan akal dengan sihat bagi menilai dan membuat keputusan bagi menentukan hala tuju politik 5 tahun akan datang. Sekiranya mahu kerajaan baru boleh undi pembangkang, sekiranya selesa dengan kerajaan sedia ada boleh beri undi pada kerajaan (sekarang kerajaan sementara kerana parlimen sudah di bubarkan).
 
Apa pun pilihan anda kita kena berlaku adil. Yang salah tetap salah dan tidak boleh di sorok, agar kita faham siapa yang kita pilih. Agar kita boleh letakkan harapan yang realistik. Sekarang, di kehangatan pilihan raya yang bakal tiba, ternampak semula ulang tayang kononnya warga Bangladesh di import bagi mengundi kerajaan.
 
 
Satu laporan tribunal rakyat bertarikh 25 Mac 2014 telah menyimpulkan bahawa perkara ini hanya spekulasi dan tiada bukti yang jelas.
 
“Some of the evidence about “foreigners” voting was somewhat speculative (people who “appeared” to be foreign), which would not satisfy burdens of proof required in a court, and it is hard to draw any firm conclusion about this.”
(Findings, Point 7, page. 58) Boleh download dan baca.
 
Laporan tribunal ini bukan diterbitkan kerajaan, tetapi oleh NGO Bersih. Perkataan ‘Bangladesh’ hanya disebut 1 kali sahaja pada laporan tersebut pada mukasurat 72.
 
Seperti biasa selepas itu pembangkang menafikan mereka pernah menuduh dan melakukan u-turn. Tetapi dari Mei 2013 hinggalah perkara ini di sahkan tidak benar menurut laporan pada Mac 2014, hampir 1 tahun persepsi dibina bahawa pilihan raya ini kotor. Dan walaupun fakta itu sudah terbukti salah, persepsi dan sentimen itu kekal. Kemarahan yang dibina itu berterusan menjadi modal.
 
 
 
Mungkin bagi sesetengah orang akan berkata “apa ini ungkit-ungkit kisah lama, please move on”. Kelakar apabila calon perdana menteri pun di kitar semula. Move on? Jika benar nak berubah, berilah perubahan yang sebenar kepada rakyat. Jujur dalam berpolitik, bukan guna taktik fitnah dahulu, kalah saman kemudian.
 
Taktik fitnah dahulu minta maaf kemudian ini mungkin sebab DAP mengkritik PAS yang menyokong akta anti berita palsu. Lim Guan Eng sebut “Adakah PAS parti pembangkang atau pemerintah, ini berikan gambaran macam PAS sebahagian daripada BN.”
Kenapa nak takut kalau tak sebar berita palsu? Ini negara demokrasi, PAS boleh beri sokongan jika akta itu di rasakan baik, PAS dipilih oleh rakyat dan mewakili rakyat. PAS bukan mewakili DAP.
 
Apa pun keputusan pilihanraya nanti, di harap kita dapat menerima nya dengan waras. Selamat berkempen sehingga 9 Mei. Semoga selepas itu kita kembali bersama bermuafakat membangunkan negara tercinta ini, siapa pun yang memerintah.
 
Ini kali lah!

Senarai hujah-hujah politik yang kelakar

By Leave a Comment

 

1. Jangan di ulang-ulang sejarah lama. Kita perlu pandang ke hadapan.

2. Kalau Anwar pun boleh maafkan, kenapa kita tak boleh.

3. Kita perlu pilih syaitan kecil berbanding syaitan besar.

4. Apa-apa pun kita kena jatuhkan rejim sedia ada, ini saja cara nak suburkan demokrasi.

5. Dia dah bertaubat, biarlah dia betulkan kesilapannya yang lalu.

6. Kita letak dia di situ supaya kita boleh dapat undi Melayu luar bandar. Tapi kami tak amalkan politik perkauman.

7. Kita nak lawan kezaliman sedia ada, bukan kezaliman lampau.

8. Saya intelektual dan tak setuju politik perkauman. Tapi bila terjun dalam bidang politik kita kena realistik. Jadi saya sertai parti berasaskan kaum.

9. SPR ini kotor dan tidak adil. Maka saya akan letak jawatan dalam NGO dan bertanding dalam PRU anjuran SPR.

10. Kita nak cadangkan jawatan tertinggi di hadkan hanya 2 penggal, tapi MB negeri kami dikecualikan.

11. Walaupun eksport dan GDP kita meningkat, negara kita akan bangkrap.

12. Pelaburan dan pinjaman dari China tanda pelabur asing percaya pada kebolehan ekonomi negeri kita. Kita akan batalkan projek pelaburan China jika berjaya jadi kerajaan.

13. Kita nak galakkan rakyat keluar mengundi, jadi kita akan buat undian di hari Rabu, ditengah minggu bekerja.

14. Kita percaya dalam sistem demokrasi semua orang ada hak untuk menyuarakan pendapat dan bertanding. Tapi parti-parti lain ni pengacau dan memecahkan undi.

15. Tengok Singapura, maju. Walaupun bayar pelbagai cukai dan bayar GST tetapi gaji mereka tinggi. Kita akan tingkatkan gaji dan mansuhkan GST.

16. Presiden parti Islam ni selalu ponteng persidangan berdasarkan laporan media online, tapi saya pun tak pasti sama ada presiden parti lain hadir dengan kehadiran 100% atau tidak.

17. Lihat pemimpin mereka disiasat SPRM, ini tandanya parti mereka korup. Siasatan SPRM terhadap pemimpin kami bermotifkan politik, akta SPRM bertentangan dengan perlembagaan.

18. Hanya parti kita yang bawa Islam sebenar, sokong parti lain berdosa.