SHEER Arrogance: New Home Minister tells unhappy Malaysians to emigrate


May 16, 2013

Sheer Arrogance, Zahid Hamidi

Zahid HamidiNewly-appointed Home Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said Malaysians who are unhappy with the country’s political system should leave the country, stressing that loyal citizens should respect the Rule of Law.

In his first opinion piece printed in Utusan Malaysia since receiving the portfolio yesterday, Ahmad Zahid wrote that the illegal gatherings held across the country by Pakatan Rakyat was a form of escapism and the denial of the fact that it failed to take control of Putrajaya.

The Minister added that the Opposition was over-confident with the support it received from voters.

Despite the fervour shown by their supporters, some PR leaders acknowledged that no concrete change will manifest from continued rallies. — File pic Malaysian Insider

Despite the fervour shown by their supporters, some PR leaders acknowledge that no concrete change will manifest from continued rallies. — File pic Malaysian Insider

“Even if it is true that the Opposition had claimed a greater majority, the measurement used by the opposition had been manipulated to follow the list system or the single transferable vote system,” he said in column entitled “Perhimpunan haram sebab tak terima hakikat gagal kuasai Putrajaya.” (Illegal gathering because refuses to accept failure in controlling Putrajaya)

“Malaysia inherited the political system from the United Kingdom and many Commonwealth countries also use the first past the post system where political parties contesting in the election will only have one representative in each constituency with the principle of a simple majority of votes,” he added.

Malaysia inherited the political system from the United Kingdom and many Commonwealth countries also use the first past the post system where political parties contesting in the election will only have one representative in each constituency with the principle of a simple majority of votes !

Malaysia inherited the political system from the United Kingdom and many Commonwealth countries also use the first past the post system where political parties contesting in the election will only have one representative in each constituency with the principle of a simple majority of votes !

He said opposition leaders, especially those from PKR and DAP, have been irresponsible in confusing young Chinese voters and their followers who are “politically blind” to dress in black to protest against the result of the 13th general election which they believe is for them due to the popular vote.

“If these people wish to adopt the list system or the single transferable vote used by countires with the republic form of government, then they should migrate to these countries to practise their political beliefs. Malaysia is not a country to translate their political beliefs, even if they are really loyal to this country, they should accept the political system and the existing system to form a government as enshrined in the Federal Constitution,” he said.

He said PR must recognise and accept that the voters have rejected their rule in accordance to the first past the post system.

“Illegal gatherings organised as roadshows are just an escapism by the opposition to run away from the fact that they have failed to capture Putrajaya. The Opposition was actually over confident with the support of the voters and manipulated the various issues with false promises in its manifesto that they know will not be able to implement,” he said.

He also pointed out that PAS President Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang had already accepted the results  and disagreed with the illegal gatherings by PKR and DAP.

“People are getting fed up with the behaviour of a number of opposition leaders who are dragging in the young, especially those of Chinese descent, by fanning the flames of hatred and racism in a pluralistic society which has already fostered a sense of harmony. The Opposition is also questioning the authority of the Election Commission (EC) which had allegedly manipulated the votes. It is an outrageous accusation when the EC have observed most of their demands including the use of indelible ink that is only used by the third world countries,” he said.

PKR queries 1MDB’s RM7bil transfer to the Caymans


April 23, 2013

PKR queries 1MDB’s RM7billion transfer to the Caymans

by http://www.malaysiakini.com

PKR has questioned the RM7 billion said to have been transferred by 1Malaysia Development Bhd’s (1MDB) to an allegedly “secret account” in the Cayman Islands.

The information was revealed in 1MDB’s annual report and also questioned in a report in the business weekly The Edge, said PKR Strategic Director Rafizi Ramli.

“(Incumbent Prime Minister) Najib Razak needs to answer immediately on the RM7 billion transfer, as he has full authority over 1MDB,” he said in a statement today.

According to Rafizi (right), 1MDB had raised RM5 billion through government-guaranteedRafizi-Ramli bonds for several investment ventures, for example Petro Saudi International (PSI) whose activities and origins he alleged were “dubious”.

“From business dealings with PSI that has been shrouded in mystery, RM7 bilion is reported to have been transferred to a secret account in the Cayman Islands,” he said.

Rafizi said the transaction “went against principles of transparency and best practices that ought to be observed by a government investment body like 1MDB”.

“I fear that should BN lose in the coming general election, the RM7 bilion will disappear without a trace, meaning the government would have to bear the loss for the RM5 billion bond by 1MDB.”

NONEHe added that BN politicians and its associates had been identified as holding offshore accounts, including former PM Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s son Mirzan Mahathir, incumbent Federal Territories Minister Raja Nong Chik (left) and a UMNO-linked businessman Michael Chia.

“Secret offshore accounts are only used for dealings that need to be hidden from view, because such countries have laws that protect businesses even if there are elements of crime or corruption,” he said.

Rafizi, who is PKR’s candidate for the Pandan parliamentary seat, said he plans to lodge a report with the Police and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) tomorrow and Thursday respectively.

He has called for the funds to be returned to Malaysia immediately and for the parties responsible to be “brought to justice”.

Najib’s zombie apocalypse


April 15, 2013

Najib’s zombie apocalypse

by Mariam Mokhtar@http://www.malaysiakini.com

Najib in doaIn keeping with the unhealthy obsession with cerita hantu (ghost stories) and the supernatural, which is displayed by the rakyat – especially the Malays – caretaker Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak should be applauded for converting some Malaysians into zombies.

The living dead are characterised by their lack of self-awareness and the inability to think for themselves. Najib’s zombies may not crave human flesh, but they do feast on cash handouts and freebies. In the zombie culture, human brains are considered a delicacy.

Perhaps UMNO has seized on the rakyat’s minds as a means to spread their evil. They have mentally enslaved us and used this exploitation to satisfy their greed for material goods, and hunger for power.

Six decades ago, Malayans had to decide – either continue to be ruled by the British, or accept change and take charge of running the country. The operative word was change.

We had to manage the nation’s finances, defend the country and administer self-rule. It was no mean feat. Malayan brains, intellect, and toil made Malaya (later Malaysia), a success story. Change to self-rule required the combined effort of Malayans, and not just one particular section of the community.

Change took place in 1957. It can happen again in 2013. Today, the word ‘change’ is anathema to our leaders. Our great-grandparents were more open-minded and embraced change more readily, but Najib and former PM Dr Mahathir Mohamad are trying to deceive us when they say that change is not necessary.

Racist UmnoNajib may have promised to deal with corruption after GE-13, but why should we believe him? For years, we witnessed his failure to address problems in society.

If he was worried about graft, why did he employ leaders who were corrupt? Najib appointed Mohd Isa Abdul Samad as chairperson of FELDA despite objections from the public and criticism from Mahathir, who is no stranger to money politics.

Going to the Polls

In three weeks time, we go to the polls. What will happen then?  If we elect BN, aren’t we condoning a government which is corrupt, and which breaks the laws whenever it chooses? The corruption network involves people from the junior office boy to the PM. Those at the bottom make petty sums whilst those at the top amass huge rewards. There has been little enforcement despite plenty of evidence, but the complaints of the public have been completely ignored.

Restoring confidence in the Government?

If the Opposition were to win GE13, what steps should they take to restore confidence in the government? Anwar has reiterated that he will not go on a witch-hunt; but he cannot ignore the rakyat’s desire for justice. Many lives have been crushed, families destroyed, livelihoods devastated and communities ravaged, because of corrupt BN leaders.

Many people have painful experiences to relate. The business deal of one acquaintance was scuppered by allegedly dodgy people in the Defence Ministry. After years of maintaining a good working relationship with his American and Taiwanese partners, millions of ringgits were lost when the ministry supposedly reneged on a deal.

Despite spending vast sums on engaging lawyers and waiting at the court’s pleasure, this man learnt – after a brief appearance in court – that his case had been dismissed. He lost everything.  In Malaysia, justice goes to the highest bidder. There are presumably several cases of miscarriages of justice like this in the country as well.

So, should a new government purge all officials and businesspeople connected with the previous BN regime? To what extent should this process be continued? Should the top brass and business cronies only be punished? Should the crony business be made to cease operations?

NONEIt is easier to deal with those at the top, whose personal gain and lust for power broke several laws. Their unexplained wealth can be traced, by the paper trail, to offshore bank accounts and overseas properties.

Will the more educated among us adopt a different approach to the cleansing ritual? Mahathir’s brand of politics left deep trenches in the minds of many Malaysians.

How will the different sections of the community react to the purge post-GE13? How should we treat the junior civil servant, who in the old regime, took advantage of a crooked system?

Perhaps, the more obscure cases will be found in the private sector, where businesses helped prop up the UMNO government in deals that enriched both corrupt politicians and business people. How should the new regime resolve these cases? It would be naive to think that any government contract came without strings attached.

How should civil servants or businesspeople who denounced the corrupt practices of the old regime be dealt with in the new order? Should their positions be enhanced? What if their actions were entirely self-serving when they jumped ship?

How would you deal with the civil servants who refused to become involved in corrupt acts of the previous government? Do you promote them despite their lack of expertise and seniority? How would the new government deal with false accusations? How would they deal with politicians who are Trojan horses of frogs?

Not enough time, resources

After GE13, we cannot go after everyone whom we perceive to be corrupt because we do not have the time and resources to manage this laborious process. Anger and resentment will simply build and this will feed into the rakyat’s racial and religious prejudices, as well as accentuate other insecurities.

To add to the problem, our judiciary and police force have been corrupted by Mahathir. We will have to find a system to maintain law and order in the transition from the old guard until a just and effective police force and judicial system is formed.

We certainly must recover the large sums, several of which are said to be in excess of RM40 billions which have been allegedly stolen by several BN ministers and tycoons acting in collusion with them.

Najib’s incessant refrains of “I help you, you help me” to the rakyat has created a zombie apocalypse in Malaysia. Therefore, radical change is necessary to reclaim our souls and save the nation.

Vote to end the Era of Mahathirism


April 9, 2013

GE-13: End the Era of Mahathirism?

by Dr Neil Khor@http://www.malaysiakini.com

Dr Mahathir and Baroness Thatcher

COMMENT: Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher died yesterday. Within minutes, Facebook and Twitter were buzzing. Almost everyone old enough to remember her when she was PM said in unison that her death was “the end of an era”.

Those who know of her only from the recent Academy Award-winning film based upon her life have also huddled irrationally together “to express their sympathy” for someone they have never met or even heard of until very recently.

This phenomenon of missing someone whom we do not know personally is a by-product of the influence of the mass media on our lives. Social networking has made this effect more pervasive, creating group identities.

NajibThis new situation means that leaders have to be celebrities to win elections.That was why Najib Abdul Razak asked Malaysians whether we trusted him or Anwar. He was addressing young voters, who will decide if BN claws back its two-thirds majority.

The politician as celebrity started with Thatcher, one of the world’s most ‘constructed’ leaders. Her global image was as coiffured as her hair. Nothing was left to chance and there was no time to spare in her sprint to transform herself into a celebrity prime minister. The first woman British PM, she led the way with Barack Obama as her media savvy heir.

Thatcher did not have many admirers but she had many imitators. Imitation, as the British know so well, is the best form of flattery. In Malaysia, she wrote in her autobiography, “there was a man who said ‘buy British Last’, I let him host CHOGM and he never turned back”. No other Third World Leader learnt his lesson better than Malaysia’s Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

Today, Mahathir is seen as the BN’s last great hope. He is campaigning for BN because he feels indebted to BN for all the years it has supported him.

NONEUnlike so many other ingrates, Mahathir knows how to repay his debts. There is little doubt in the minds of most Malaysians that he continues to pull the levers in the BN. He can decide when a BN prime minister should step down and whom to elevate.

Mahathir modeled himself on the world leaders of his generation. This did not include nationalist leaders of the Third World but the ‘strong’ leaders of the West. Thatcher was one of them.

There is very little in the public domain about their relationship except for a little-known book about the Pergau Dam project. In it, the man who promoted ‘Buy British Last’, was actively courting British arms manufacturers.

‘All the world’s a stage and we merely players’, especially so when Mahathir launched the very public anti-British campaign while in private, British commercial interests proliferated.

Malaysia and Singapore remain the West’s strongest allies in Southeast Asia. Mahathir’s adroit handling of his public persona as the ‘voice of the Third World’ and his masterful facilitation of Western interests have ensured ‘peace’ for Malaysia.

Thatcher may have dismantled industrial Britain but Mahathir used FDI from the West to industrialise Malaysia. The reality is that Malaysia has remained ‘safe’ and secular under BN and especially during Mahathir’s long administration.

He successfully kept the Islamists at bay. This is the “devil you know”, so do you really want to take risks?

Mahathir’s immense influence

As we await the countdown to GE13, many of the older generation will be looking back nostalgically to the time when we had a strong leader.There was nothing silly that came out from the mouth of the PM like “the era of government knows best is over”. There were no direct handouts, no need to massage the inflation figures and no ambiguity about the national vision.

There were no ‘ifs’ and ‘buts’ when implementing policy. If the press was pesky, we simply closed down the papers. If the royals went too far, we removed their immunity from prosecution. When the judiciary began to veer off course, we removed the Lord President.

And the PM led the BN to five electoral victory never losing its two-thirds majority because so many Malaysians voted for them. The PM was never more popular than the party.

Whilst both Thatcher and Mahathir rose above all their contemporaries to emerge as ‘strong’ leaders by mastering the media and cultivating an image as ‘conviction politicians’, enter the Internet and the rise of social media.

In the case of Mahathir, the social media was the tool he used to get his message across. He unseated his hand-picked successor by systematically demolishing Abdullah Ahmad Badawi , who will be forever remembered as the “sleeping PM”.

Today, Mahathir is once again using his immense influence over the electorate to make sure the BN wins big in the coming GE. He said very clearly that the BN formula is the only one that works because Malaysians will never be mature enough to see beyond their own race and religion.

He celebrates Ibrahim Ali and PERKASA as custodians of the special Malaysian formula of ‘Malay leadership’ of a diverse multi-ethnic nation. He has made it clear that Selangor needs to be saved from another term of Pakatan Rakyat rule.

Some call this fear-mongering but it is a great pincer strategy. Whilst Najib is free to portray himself as cosmopolitan and a strong proponent of 1Malaysia, Mahathir appeals to the baser instincts of Malaysians at the lower end of the economic ladder.

Preying on their insecurities and the basic instinct to survive, he is indeed paying BN back for all the years the coalition has been of service to him. It was, after all the MCA and Gerakan, that saved him when UMNO was declared illegal in 1988 and when the Malays abandoned UMNO in 1999.

Perkasa president Ibrahim Ali and former Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad frontBy supporting Perkasa and Ibrahim (left in photo), Mahathir has set the stage for the ultimate triumph of his worldview and his formula for Malaysia. Tunku Abdul Rahman recognised this cynical view and rejected Mahathir, dying outside of UMNO and the coalition he fled.

The same with Hussein Onn, who preferred to join Semangat 46 that was led by Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah. When Najib fails to obtain the two-thirds majority that he so confidently thinks he can get, Mahathir will be there to tell us that Malaysians have rejected 1Malaysia.

So, to those who want to see Thatcher’s death as the end of an era – that is, the end of the era of divisive politics, of cynicism and of egomaniacal leaders – please think again.

It was the political philosopher Edmund Burke who said “those who have been intoxicated with power can never willingly abandon it”. So it is with Mahathir and his quest to ‘save’ Malaysia, the Malaysia created in his own image.

It is now up to us to go to the polls and decide for ourselves whether it is truly the end of the Mahathir era!

Learning from Golf and Family


April 2, 2013

Learning from Golf and Family: Honesty is Non-Negotiable

“Golf is such that honesty is non-negotiable. You score yourself. You are frequently the only person who will know if the ball moved before you hit it or not. If integrity is not part of your make-up, the game will degenerate into chaos before long.”–G. Migliaccio

giorgio-migliaccio.I was talking to a friend the other day and the chat — as it invariably does — came round to golf. It got me thinking about what we can take from golf that can be translated to business. Of course, after that, and thanks to this same friend, I thought about how these lessons resonate with family.

You know how we so often hear about poor so and so, the “golf widow”! Really! There is more to golf than the obsession that takes the husband away the whole day — and then some; at the 19th hole. Here’s why I should be allowed to play it: as much and for as long as I want to.

Technical Competence

Arnold Palmer

Arnold D.Palmer–The King of Modern Golf

To be a golfer of sorts, you need certain competencies and skills. At a basic level, you need to know how to swing the club, whether it is a driver, a fairway wood or an iron. Then, you need to learn how to hit a draw or a fade.

While we can try to teach ourselves, the reality is that all of us need to see a coach. It’s the same with business; you need certain competencies — management and leadership, strategy, finance, marketing, HR skills.

Family is no different, although the challenge is more demanding. There is no readily available school that teaches you how to be a good parent or spouse. Still, there are key skills we all need to have good relationships: empathy, caring, patience, active listening, compassion, sharing, discipline, and more. 

Most of these we get from our early role models — parents, peers, teachers — and others we learn along the way. But it’s fair to say that without these technical skills we wouldn’t be very successful in relationships. As with golf, you need to develop and update these skills continuously.

Psychological Competence

It’s said in golf that whether someone will have a good round or not is determined well before they step on to the first tee; it’s played out in the player’s mind. We need to understand the psyche of the game of golf; we need to manage ourselves over 18 holes.

We need to deal with the good, by avoiding arrogance or becoming blasé. The moment you think you’re on top, you will start making silly mistakes.

We also need to deal with the bad; to put the bad hole behind us and concentrate on the holes ahead. Learn from the bad hole and apply the lessons to the holes ahead.

palmer_family_new

Family is one of the most wonderful institutions we have, but if we have a negative mind set it can be dysfunctional and destructive. Henry Ford put it this way: “Whether you think you can or you think you can’t, you’re right!” It is as applicable in golf as it is in family life.

Deal with the environment

In golf this entails the wind and rain, as well as the lay and course of the fairways; the shapes, and lay and speed of the greens. They change all the time. They call for how you shape the ball, and which of your 14 clubs you need to do it with. 

This is equally true for families. Events and changes in the day-to-day environment have knock-on impacts. Changes in employment or redundancies could affect the children’s schooling, split relationships, put pressure on finances.

You need to be vigilant, to develop strategies as circumstances demand, and to be tactical in your implementation to counter the unexpected.

Be values-driven

Here we refer to values such as integrity and character. Golf is such that honesty is non-negotiable. You score yourself. You are frequently the only person who will know if the ball moved before you hit it or not. If integrity is not part of your make-up, the game will degenerate into chaos before long.

Swinging Seve

Already I see signs of people playing to win above all else. The tragedy is that the prizes of golf at the amateur level are such that it does not explain this liberal interpretation of the rules.

Not that the nature of the prize should play a role! The saying goes: “To lie to others is immoral — to lie to yourself is pathetic!”

Integrity and trust are the foundations of any strong family unit. It’s too easy to give in to temptation, especially now with the Internet such a pervasive element in our lives. But as a family, we make a commitment to stand by and support each other, and that means being honest and feeling safe enough to share our issues and problems.

Respect and Humility

These are important in golf. You need to show up on time, dressed appropriately. When the other player is playing, you stay still, out of the person’s line of sight. You do not chat while your playing partner is addressing the ball. You do not keep the players behind you waiting.

You repair your pitch marks and your divot holes. You show respect — to your team and to the field as a whole.

In the family, you pay respect to your parents, children, and extended family. You show respect to the community you live in. Like respect, humility is a key trait in success. No arrogant person will have any long-term sustainable relationships.

So there you have it; golf and the family. Where we are short in any aspect, remember the 1 Per Cent way to bite-sized action?

Where else can we draw lessons from, and what do you think? Drop me a line, or post a comment. I’d love to hear your thoughts.

* Giorgio is a proud family man, devoted dad, golf hack, extroverted introvert and all-round nice chap. As director of Coaching Services Australia, Giorgio helps people create careers they love, facilitates team communication as well as help small businesses make money. Follow him at @CoachGiorgio or contact him at info@coachingservices.com.au.

Mahathir: Today’s Undergraduates are greedy ingrates


March 30, 2013

Mahathir: Today’s Undergraduates are greedy ingrates

by Bernama

The greedy attitude and complacency with the prosperity achieved by the country are making the present generation of undergraduates to be ungrateful for the facilities provided by the government to them, said former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad today.

mahathirs-up-yoursHe voiced this concern as there were irresponsible groups who were exploiting the situation to influence the undergraduates to do negative things to go against the government.

“The government had been providing numerous facilities to the undergraduates from before. The previous undergraduates who had enjoyed the facilities had been very grateful but the present students are too comfortable and even look at these facilities as a normal thing that the government does for them. This drives them to be greedy for more facilities.

“The comfort and greed have made them blind to the financial limitation of the country in giving them the facilities in order to ensure that the country is managed properly. This is aggravated by the lies spread by certain groups who promise to give free education and many other things,” Dr Mahathir said.

He said this when delivering his keynote address in the programme “Together With Statesman Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad” entitled “Undergraduates and Graduands Inheriting National Leadership” at Universiti Teknikal Malaysia, here.

Also present were his wife, Tun Dr Siti Hasmah Mohd Ali and Malacca Chief Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Ali Rustam.

More than 10,000 undergraduates from public and private institutions of higher learning in the state participated in the programme.

Dr Mahathir said an undergraduate must be wise in evaluating what was good or bad based on the wisdom that they had instead of their emotion and desires.

In order to be an excellent leader, the undergraduate must learn to be close to their leaders and understand them. Meanwhile, when asked on the claim that certain groups tried to create chaos during the 13th general election, he said the opposition would try to create chaos so that the people would have doubts about the general election. — Bernama

GE-13:Anwar Ibrahim pushes ahead with his Reform Agenda


March 20, 2013

Anwar Ibrahim pushes ahead with his Reform Agenda

by Terence Netto (03-19-13)@ http://www.malaysiakini.com

Pakatan Rakyat chief campaigner Anwar Ibrahim said that good leadership would smother threats posed by ‘Little Napoleons’ in the civil service who may not like the egalitarian thrust of the Opposition coalition’s manifesto.

The PKR adviser was speaking yesterday at a dialogue session organised by his party’s Johor Baru division for representatives and activists from Indian-led NGOs in the state.

NONESome 200 people attended the session which was held in the early evening after which the Pakatan supremo hurried off to Skudai to speak at a huge rally to mark fellow coalition member DAP’s 47th anniversary celebrations.

At the dialogue session, Anwar sought to placate Indian fears of continued marginalisation, a situation participants at the dialogue session felt would persist because ‘Little Napoleons’ in a Malay-dominated bureaucracy could baulk alleviative measures mandated by a Pakatan federal government.

Anwar was asked to respond to the observation that in Malaysia “a Malay problem is a national problem, a Chinese problem is a racial problem, and an Indian problem is no problem.”

Anwar said that it would be “a question of leadership” when and if the implementation of Pakatan policies is resisted by ‘Little Napoleons’ in the civil service.

“When I was Finance Minister, I was asked why a non-Malay (Clifford Herbert) was appointed as the ministry’s Secretary-General,” cited Anwar, as an example of what he meant when he said good leadership focused on national priorities can overcome sectarian considerations.

Anwar, who was Finance Minister for eight years (1990-98), fended off pressure from Malay higher-ups in the civil service unhappy at Herbert’s appointment by citing the man’s “good macroeconomic view” and “sound grasp of fundamentals” of the Malaysian economy as the appointee’s merits.

“I’m sure people in the civil service will respond to good leadership that is focused on national priorities,” said Anwar.

Stateless Indians

Once again Pakatan’s putative PM-designate reiterated what he has said several times in the recent past – that within 100 days of the coalition’s federal empowerment, the problem of stateless residents would be resolved.

Indians constitute a disproportionately large percentage of stateless residents, conjectured to be 350,000 out of a probable half million, others being Chinese, and Dayaks and Kadazan in remote parts of Sarawak and Sabah.

“I’m not proposing to grant citizenship to someone who only came here from Chennai yesterday,” quipped Anwar.

“I am proposing to give it to people I know such as a case in Batang Kali who was born in 1943 and till today has not got an identity card. These are fundamental guarantees in the constitution and after half a century if cases like these persist, it is a crying shame,” said the PKR adviser to resounding applause.

Anwar said no leader should without censure question the fundamental right to citizenship of Malaysians qualified for the privilege.

Bersih co-chairperson - Ambiga SreenevasanThis was said in apparent deprecation of attempts to question the fitness for Malaysian citizenship of such government critics as Ambiga Sreenevasan (left), co-chair of electoral reform advocacy group Bersih.

On the question of entry qualifications to universities, Anwar said these would be based on merit to promote and sustain “quality education.”

“We will give intensive additional courses to students who are poor and have fallen short of the qualifying mark so that they can then qualify,” he said.

“To sustain quality tertiary education, we must insist on merit-based entry qualifications,” he stressed.

“This is like our policy towards the different language streams in primary education. We will aid all such schools but we will insist that in every language stream, be it Mandarin, Tamil or Arabic, pupils must be proficient in Malay and at the secondary level, there must acquire proficiency in English,” he said.

The dialogue session lasted an hour and a half at the end of which Anwar was given a resounding ovation and was mobbed as he made his way to the lifts in the hotel where it was held.

Musa’s candor is bipartisanship’s grist


March 15, 2013

Musa’s candor is bipartisanship’s grist

By Terence Netto@http://www.malaysiakini.com

COMMENT: Finally, (Tun) Musa Hitam had something to say about theTun Musa 2 party of change (read: Pakatan Rakyat) and, by implication, the party of the status quo which, needless to say, is BN.

It’s not his style to have declined to say something, given the gravity of the issues before the electorate and of the decision that voters must make at GE-13.

To have avoided making a comment would have been contrary to his instincts as a politician, albeit a retired one, and his stature as an elder statesman in Malaysian councils.

Someone in his situation could not be expected to have let current matters pass without comment of the objective sort. UMNO man though he is, a reflexive partisanship is just not his style.

When matters facing the nation are fraught, Musa can be expected to lift anchor and float intriguingly in the space between a concern for the where the country is headed and the understandable partisanship of a party man.

One remembers the remarks he made when there was a rush by Malays to join PAS in the aftermath of Anwar Ibrahim’s sacking from government and UMNO in late 1998. The expulsion and public humiliation of the former Deputy Prime Minister became an international cause celebre and generated a tidal movement towards signing up for PAS.

After observing the phenomenon for some time – a year on from September 1998, PAS had doubled its membership from 400,000 – Musa confessed to being amazed at the magnetism of the Islamic party, whereupon one of the party’s columnists, Subky Latif, offered to “sediakan borang” (fetch Musa a membership form).

One Man One VoteOf course Musa, admiring though he was at the rush to sign up with PAS, wasn’t going to join the cavalcade. But his readiness to observe and remark candidly on the phenomenon was reflective of a trait all democrats ought to have: common sensical acknowledgment of easily attributable happenings.

Absent this quality, the competitive process in a democracy will be reduced to a raucous shouting match and is bound to become a turnoff to voters.

The trait of candid acknowledgment of easily ascribable phenomena is sine qua non of all parties to the democratic process in which competing coalitions vie for the privilege of ruling the country.

Musa’s last hurrah

In his most recent instance of unabashed recognition of compelling realities, Musa was reported to have said that Pakatan Rakyat won’t want to bankrupt the Treasury simply because they would want to be returned to power at GE-14 should they win GE-13.

So even if certain planks in the Pakatan manifesto appear impossible to fulfill, Musa was saying that a desire to be returned to power would slow, if not halt, a gallop to the fiscal precipice.

Pakatan cannot hope for a more candid acknowledgment from one from the other side of the country’s political divide about their seriousness as contenders for national governance not just now but for decades to come.

ahmad mustapha book lauch by musa hitam 141107Pakatan have in Musa a credible candidate for the role of speaker of the Dewan Rakyat should it gain Putrajaya at GE13.

This is not to suggest that Musa was angling to be appointed to the role by his recent remarks on Pakatan’s viability.

Some time ago, Subki Latif suggested Musa for the role on the basis of his credibility as a personage on the national political scene.

Pakatan would embellish its claims to bipartisanship by appointing Musa to the role should they win power at the next polls.

And Musa would relish a last hurrah in national affairs as fair-minded interlocutor between two competing coalitions which are likely to run each other close at the general election.

Parliament would be an elevated arena for debate on issues. Rare would be the repeat of demeaning instances of the past when unparliamentary language and actions debased the arena.

Musa would have just the right combination of elegant speech and enlivening humour to steer proceedings along elevating channels. He will be 79 next month; there’s no reason these days to think that a person would be past it in his ninth decade in this world.

A prospective role in Malaysia’s 13th Parliament’s elevation would bring his career to a coda that recalls the poet Robert Frost’s lines on old age:

No memory of having starred
Atones for later disregard
Nor keeps the end from being hard
Better to go down with boughten friendship at your side
Than with none at all. Provide, Provide.

UMNO, Mahathir, and The Fate of Ordinary Malays


March 14, 2013

UMNO, Mahathir, and The Fate of Ordinary Malays

by P. Gunasegaram@http://www.malaysiakini.com

QUESTION TIME: When former Prime Minister (Tun) Dr Mahathir mahathir_mohamadMohamad said in typical acerbic but unsubstantiated fashion that Malay rights, privileges and its position would be affected if the opposition were returned in Selangor, it begged two other questions.

What did he do for the ordinary Malay during the long 22 years he was in power from 1981 to 2003, and how much was he responsible for the lack of their progress? And to broaden the question further, how much has UMNO done for the Malay on the street and in the kampung?

A good starting point to answer the question is to look back at the New Economic Policy (NEP) of the seventies which provided the framework and target for economic redress between the races. The noble twin aims of the policy which few argued with were the eradication of poverty irrespective of race and the elimination of race identification with economic function.

This restructuring was supposed to have come from an increasing economic cake so that no community would feel deprived from the process which would be made over 20 years.

LAGI ABUUUUBut the reality was different. While there was much effort in equalisation of opportunities initially through the education of Malays and giving them chances for jobs in the government service and the private sector, the policy morphed into one that focused on the equalisation of outcomes instead.

This resulted in drops in educational standards and minimum qualifications to accommodate weaker students instead of helping weaker students to cross existing bars by increased and better tuition.

The push to get more Malay teachers into the education system by lowering standards resulted in a plunge in teaching standards and led to the current problem that we have of poor teaching to weak students. Standards had to be dropped to ensure more students passed, resulting in a deteriorating public education system right from the bottom to the top.

The national education system now is much worse than it was before and directly affected Malays – most of whom depend on this system to get their educational qualifications. The quality of graduates from our public universities deteriorated so much so that thousands of them, mostly Malays, are unemployable.

There was a misplaced emphasis on displacing English in the education system, a role prominently played by Mahathir in the early years, eventually to the detriment of the Malays, most of whom were in the national schools. Even as UMNO politicians decried English, many of them sent their children to private schools and overseas for an English-based education.

In government, Malays were prematurely promoted over their non-Malay counterparts, many of whom were much more experienced and competent, to the detriment and efficiency of the civil service. The imbalance has been more than rectified with the scales now tipping in the opposite direction with much less non-Malays in government especially at top levels.

The perversion of the NEP

The NEP, in the process, was perverted and the common standard for its success became the 30 percent target for Malay/bumiputera ownership in companies, the measurement of which remains substantially flawed. For most Malays, this figure was meaningless because they had no corporate ownership, except perhaps for those who were able to subscribe for shares in the national unit trust scheme, Amanah Saham Nasional.

In the corporate sector, companies were forced to divest 30 percent of their stakes to bumiputeras, thus raising the possibility of abuses through patronage and front companies which were bumiputera only in name.

Government contracts were given to Malay companies, many of whom did not have the capability or capacity to undertake them, bringing in other partners to do the job instead. They earned the moniker “Ali Baba” whereby the contracts are obtained by Malay companies while the work was actually done by others.

Standards were dropped to enable bumiputera contractors to get approval for the projects and there was a substantial fall in the quality of work done over the years even as costs increased.

Mahathir himself lamented that there were as many as half a dozen sub-contracts, leaving the final person who does the job very little profit margins, and therefore turning out substandard work. But he did nothing to stop it during his time.

Instead he quite publicly stated that there was a need to create a bumiputera business class, including some billionaires. He went about assiduously to do just that, with initial prime beneficiaries being the former Finance Minister Daim Zainuddin and his cronies and subsequently extending to others during his later years in power as he reportedly fell out with Daim.

imej-umno

Mahathir deliberately used the privatisation process to dish out prime concessions such as roads, mobile licences, independent power production, water services and others to private businessmen at concessionary rates, directly putting valuable government resources into private hands at very low prices.

Corruption and patronage led to leakages of government resources to an array of favoured businessmen – Malay and non-Malay – through negotiated tenders, outright granting (instead of auction) of licences, and land transfers and conversions. Instant millionaires, and some billionaires, were created in matter of a few years.

The goal of re-distributing an increasing economic pie were subverted through these leakages as much of the government resources which should have been channelled back to the people – and especially the poor, most of whom were Malays – were diverted to the moneyed class.

Over the years, UMNO has transformed from a party of teachers to one dominated by businessmen most of whom are dependent on government contracts and handouts for their income and lavish lifestyles.

umno-corruptThe UMNO elites still champion Malay rights, but they do so to remain in power so that they will get the benefits of all the perversion of the NEP that has happened. Even if it means that they would deprive and impoverish the very race that they purport to help.

Has UMNO helped Malays? Yes, but some of them very much more so than others. The tragedy of UMNO is that it has neglected the vast majority of Malays, despite the huge mandate that the community has given the party all these years.The reason for that in one word is this: Corruption.

Wawancara Bersama Dr. Bakri Musa (Bahagian 8)


March 11, 2013

http://suaris.wordpress.com

Wawancara Bersama Dr. Bakri Musa (Bahagian 8): Pendidikan untuk Malaysia

Suaris: Dr banyak menulis dan membentangkan kertas kerja mengenai pendidikan yang sebaiknya untuk Malaysia. Adakah dasar dan sistem hari ini mampu membawa orang Melayu mengharungi gelombang masa depan? Apakah yang perlu diperbaiki, diatasi atau diganti?

Dr Bakri: Ternyata dasar dan sistem pendidikan sekarang tidak mampu Bakri Musamembawa anak-anak, khasnya anak Melayu, menghadapi masa depan. Rakyat tidak puas hati walaupun berkali-kali kerajaan buat kertas putih dan cetak biru (“blueprint”) untuk “mentransformasikan” sekolah dan universiti kita. Semuanya tidak berkesan. Di sini saya maksudkan aliran awam; pihak swasta cemerlang, tetapi tidak ramai penuntut Melayu di antaranya.

Tanda jelas pendidikan awam kita tidak mengagumkan ialah pertumbuhan cergas sekolah antarabangsa dan kolej serta universiti swasta. Di Alberta, Canada, sekolah dan universiti awam mereka handal. Oleh sebab itu saluran pendidikan swasta tidak laku. Begitu juga di Singapura. Pertumbuhan sekolah dan universiti swasta yang rancak di Malaysia bukan tanda sektor pendidikan kita beres dan subur, tetapi sebaliknya.

Pramoedya Ananta Toer menulis dalam novelnya Bumi Manusia, “seorang terpelajar harus sudah berbuat adil sejak dalam fikiran apalagi dalam perbuatan.” Itulah tujuan pelajaran, untuk mendidik rakyat yang adil. Pendidikan Islam bertujuan membina makhluk yang soleh. Istilah “soleh” saya ertikan “berguna atau memberi manfaat kepada masyarakat.” Rakyat yang adil dan soleh, itu tujuan pendidikan.

Bagi masyarakat berbagai kaum dan budaya seperti Malaysia, saya tambah atau beratkan satu lagi tujuan, iaitu meningkatkan persefahaman antara kaum supaya kita lebih berfikir sebagai satu dan tidak lagi terikat kepada prasangka kaum kita. Tanpa tujuan ini, kita mungkin menjadi saperti penduduk Northern Ireland, berpendidikan tinggi tetapi bermusuhan antara satu dengan lain. Di sana kaum Katholik dan Protestan tidak habis-habis bermusuhan.

Betul pada intinya seorang yang “adil dan soleh” tidak akan membuat demikian, jadi tujuan kedua ini mungkin berulang atau termasuk dalam kandungan “adil dan soleh.” Walaubagaimanapun kita mesti beratkan sudut ini.

Falsafah pendidikan mesti menyifatkan murid sebagai pisau untuk diasah atau tajamkan. Tetapi sekarang kita sifatkan mereka sebagai tong kosong yang mesti disumbat dengan fakta, maklumat, dan propoganda.

Fikirkan, di tangan pakar bedah, pisau tajam ialah alat memyembuh barah; di tangan ahli seni pahat, (untuk) mereka patung kayu yang indah. Sebaliknya, di tangan penyangak pisau menjadi senjata membunuh. Itu mustahaknya tujuan adil dan soleh dalam pendidikan.

Dengan tong yang diisi, apa yang mungkin kita dapatkan balik hanya apa yang telah disumbat. Itu sahaja! Itu pun bukan semuanya sebab banyak yang terlekat atau bocor keluar di bawah.

Munshi Abdullah menulis, di antara mereka yang berguru dan mereka yang meniru, jauh bezanya. Seorang yang berguru, dan berguru cemerlang, tidak terhad pencapaiannya. Mereka yang pandai meniru terhad hanya kepada menghafizkan apa yang diberi atau diajar. Itu sahaja, seumpama burung nuri.

Pendidikan tidak menjamin kita semua menjadi pemimpin, hanya mengajar pemimpin mana yang patut diikuti (education can’t make us all leaders, but it can teach us which leader to follow). Itu (yang disebut) Horace Mann, pendidik Amerika terkemuka. Dia menambah, tidak ada ciptaan insan yang lebih hebat lagi untuk menyamakan keadaan manusia (education … beyond all other devices of human origin, is a great equalizer of the conditions of men ..)

Di dunia ini, yang paling bertuah atau beruntung ialah mereka yang fasih dalam dua (atau lebih) bahasa, dan satu daripadanya ialah Bahasa Inggeris (BI). Itu sebabnya Negara China, Jepun dan Korea Selatan berlumba mengajar penuntut mereka BI. Yang paling rugi atau lemah ialah mereka yang hanya tahu satu bahasa sahaja, dan bahasa itu lain daripada BI. (manakala berada) di tengah-tengah terletak mereka yang fasih hanya dalam BI. Mengapa BI dan bukan Mandarin atau Swahili yang penting dalam dunia sekarang saya tidak tahu. Sepatutnya Mandarin sebab bahasa itu yang paling ramai pengunanya. Pada satu masa dahulu, bahasa Latin. Mungkin pada masa depan dengan kehandalan kemajuan negara China, Mandarin akan menjadi bahasa pilihan.

Kebanyakan orang Melayu fasih hanya dalam satu bahasa sahaja, dan bahasa itu bukan BI. Kaum bukan Melayu di Malaysia fasih dalam dua atau tiga bahasa: BI, BM(Bahasa Malaysia) dan bahasa ibunda. Itu sebabnya mereka maju, dan bukan atas alasan keistemewaan budaya atau bangsa mereka. Cina yang fasih dengan Hakka atau Hokkien sahaja terhad ke pasar minggu dan gerai atau kedai. Dengan cara pendidikan yang bijak, murid Melayu pun boleh juga fasih dalam tiga bahasa, BI, BM, dan Bahasa Arab.

Mengikut kajian neuroscience, banyak tambahan keistimewaan otak kepada mereka yang fasih dalam berbagai bahasa, antaranya kebolehan berfikir “luar kotak” dan dari berbagai sudut. Itu sebabnya universiti terkemuka Amerika memestikan mahasiswa mereka fasih dalam dua bahasa.

Selain daripada bertujuan berkebolehan dua (atau tiga) bahasa, sistem pendidikan kita mestilah beralasan kukuh atas sains dan ilmu hisab, serta mengalakkan murid berfikir. Sains membolehkan kita memahami alam di sekitar serta di dalam (diri) kita. Sains ialah kajian “Quran Kedua” yang dimaksudkan oleh Hamka. Ilmu hisab pula, tanpa kemahiran dalam mata pelajaran itu, kita tidak boleh berfikir dengan tepat, hanya agak- agak sahaja. Dan tanpa berkebolehan berfikir sendiri, rakyat akan jadi Pak Turut dan senang dipengaruhi.

Had sekolah patut dipanjangkan selama 13 tahun untuk semua, dengan empat mata pelajaran asas – BI, BM, Sains, dan Ilmu Hisab – dimestikan setiap hari dan setiap tahun. Mata pelajaran lain dipilih oleh sekolah dan pelajar. Saya tidak kira apa bahasa pengantar, sama ada BM, Swahili, atau Mandarin. Di Amerika sekarang sudah jadi kebiasaan untuk semua bersekolah 15 tahun, prasekolah ke darjah 12 (13 tahun) dan dua tahun kolej.

Saya mencadangkan pada tahun 10 hingga 13 (sekolah tinggi) penuntut disalurkan kepada tiga jurusan –akademik (untuk bakal mahasiswa), biasa (untuk bakal askar, kerani dan jururawat), dan vokasional, untuk melatih pembuat perabut, juru mekanik, dan tukang jahit. Murid boleh menukar saluran hanya semasa Tahun 10 dan 11. Ini cara Jerman, tetapi di sana saluran itu dimulai lebih awal lagi, pada tahun lima.

Selain daripada itu saya (cadangkan supaya) tambahkan peruntukan kepada sekolah yang mempunyai (komposisi) murid yang mencerminkan masyarakat Malaysia. Saya tidak memaksa tiap- tiap sekolah mengambil beberapa peratus murid Melayu, Cina dan sebagainya, tetapi sekolah yang berjaya mendapat murid berbilang kaum akan dihadiahkan dengan meningkatkan peruntukan wang, guru dan kelebihan lain, tidak kira apa bahasa pengantarnya. Begitu juga, saya akan melebihkan peruntukan untuk sekolah di mana muridnya terkumpul daripada keluarga miskin, seperti di luar bandar.

Saya tidak hapuskan sekolah terhad kepada satu kaum. Jauh sekali! Hanya sekolah tersebut jangan harap mendapat bantuan satu sen pun dari kerajaan. Tentang agama, itu patut di ajar hanya sebagai satu mata pelajaran sahaja dan bukan memenuhi seluruh masa atau sukatan pelajaran. Sekolah agama mesti mengajar empat mata pelajaran asas yang saya sebutkan dahulu (BI, BM, Sains, dan Ilmu Hisab). Saya tidak kira apa bahasa pengantar sekolah agama, samada Arab, BM, Mandarin (seperti di Negara China), atau B.I (seperti di Amerika). Sekolah agama Kristian di Amerika ramai penuntut bukan Kristian termasuk Islam oleh sebab mutu akademiknya tinggi.

Kalau sekolah agama Malaysia tinggi tarafnya, mungkin ibu bapa bukan Islam akan menghantar anak mereka. Tengoklah dahulu, Tun Razak dan Hussein Onn hantar anak mereka ke sekolah “mission” (satu jenis sekolah agama) Kristian!

Kelemahan yang nyata di antara murid Melayu ialah kemorosotan taraf BI. Saya anak kampung, ibu bapa saya tidak tahu langsung BI, dan bahasa itu jarang digunakan di sekitar alam saya semasa kecil. Tambahan pula saya bersekolah semasa negeri dijajah. Tetapi saya fasih dalam BI. Sepatutnya sekarang kita sudah merdeka, pimpinan negeri dalam tangan Melayu, kemudahan untuk murid Melayu untuk belajar BI semestinya lebih senang bila dibandingkan dengan masa dulu. Tetapi sebaliknya yang berlaku!

Apa sebab? Masyarakat dan pemimpin kita tidak memberatkan hal itu. Mereka menyifatkan mengalakkan BI bermakna kita tidak “memartabatkan” atau cinta bahasa kita. Itu kesilapan terbesar.

Oleh sebab taraf BI di (kalangan) murid kampung sudah jauh merosot, saya cadangkan mengadakan “immersion schools” mengunakan hanya BI selama sekurang kurangnya lima tahun dari prasekolah hingga ke darjah empat atau lima. Bahasa lain termasuk BM tidak diajar. Oleh sebab BM digunakan di sekitar luar sekolah dan di rumah, tidak mungkin murid akan lupa bertutur dalam itu.

Saya mensyaratkan satu sahaja. Iaitu murid dihadkan kepada mereka yang bahasa ibunda ialah BM, bahasa itu biasa digunakan di rumah serta sekitar, atau murid itu sudah fasih bertutur dalam BM.

Kalau seorang murid Cina sudah pandai bertutur dalam BM (seperti Cina Baba misalnya) mereka boleh masuk sekolah “English immersion.” Kita mesti mengadakan Sekolah Jenis Kebangsaan (Inggeris), di mana bahasa penghantar ialah BI, di kawasan kampung Melayu.

Bakri on EducationSatu cara lagi untuk meninggikan taraf BI antara murid Melayu ialah dengan menubuhkan Sekolah Agama yang menggunakan BI sebagai bahasa pengantar, seperti di Amerika. Sudah tentunya murid di sekolah itu akan fasih dalam BI, BM dan Bahasa Arab!

Itu dengan ringkasnya cadangan saya untuk membaiki, mengatasi atau mengganti sistem pendidikan kita. Saya kembangkan dengan lebih mendalam lagi melalui buku saya, An Education System Worthy of Malaysia (2003).

Untuk menutup (wawancara ini), saya bentangkan tiga unsur asas. Pertama, ibu bapa sahaja yang tahu apa yang baik untuk anak mereka. Maknanya, kita tidak boleh paksa ibu bapa menghantar anak mereka ke sekolah ini atau itu. Pilihan itu semestinya terletak di tangan ibu bapa, dan hanya kepada mereka dan bukan pemimpin politik atau pegawai pendidikan.

Kedua, mengikut kebijakan bekas Canselor German Willy Brandt, hanyaEducation_for_all_UNESCO satu sahaja bahasa rasmi di dunia ini, iaitu bahasa pelanggan kita. Kata Brandt, kalau saya ingin menjual, saya mesti menggunakan bahasa bakal pembeli.

Kalau saya membeli dari kau, kau mesti gunakan bahasa saya (Jerman)! Kalau kita ingin menjual lebih banyak lagi getah dan kelapa sawit kepada negara China dan Amerika, kita patut belajar bahasa mereka!

Ketiga, dan pandangan ini khas untuk orang Melayu sahaja, kita mesti ingat atas perbezaannya penting antara memajukan Bahasa Melayu dan memarakan Bangsa Melayu. BM boleh maju tetapi itu tidak bermakna Bangsa Melayu akan turut bersama. Tetapi kalau Bangsa Melayu maju, semestinya bahasa kita akan turut bersama.

Lebih penting ialah sebaliknya, iaitu jika Bangsa Melayu bangsat, tidak ramai yang ingin belajar BM. Itu termasuk orang Melayu sendiri. Lima puluh tahun dahulu negara China bangsat; tidak ramai berminat belajar Mandarin. Sekarang Negara China sudah maju, Mandarin ialah bahasa kedua yang sangat diminati oleh pelajar Amerika.

Pakatan Rakyat stays ahead with GE-13 Manifesto


February 25, 2013

Pakatan Rakyat stays ahead with GE-13 Manifesto

PR GE-13 Manifesto

Pakatan Rakyat has headed off BN by announcing the coalition’s election pledges first for the 13th general election today.

The document, dubbed ‘The People’s Pact, The People’s Hope’, appears to expand on the three parties’ common policies outlined in their Buku Jingga document. Pakatan’s manifesto is available in six languages and can be downloaded from the coalition’s official website. A list of top 10 issues raised, as chosen by Malaysiakini, follows:

1. Shutting down the Lynas plant

Lynas ProjectAs part of the coalition’s environmental sustainability policy, Pakatan pledges to stop the Lynas rare earth refinery in Gebeng, Pahang. “Environmental sustainability is a hallmark of Pakatan’s economic policy,” read the document.

Additionally, Pakatan promised to review the oil refinery project in Pengerang, Johor; halt the construction of damaging dams in Sarawak and reform logging laws.

2. Abolishing the AES

Pakatan argues that the automated enforcement system (AES) for traffic AESoffences has endangered lives and enriched cronies, and thus will be immediately stopped. “Any summonses issued will be rescinded.”

In place of the AES, Pakatan pledges to emphasise on safer road infrastructure, education for road users and warning measures instead of the current punitive approach.

3. Putting the brakes on healthcare tax

Pakatan promises to provide free basic healthcare and thus will stop longstanding plans to introduce a healthcare tax, which the Najib Abdul Razak Administration has dubbed the 1Care system.

4. Promoting media freedom

free mediaThe coalition says it will abolish all legislation that restrict media freedom, including the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984 (PPPA). Additionally, it seeks to corporatise RTM and ensure all media organisations practice “media freedom with integrity”.

5. Freeing all ISA detainees

Apart from a thorough review of all legislation which are in conflict with principles of “justice for LL and freedom of the people”, Pakatan promises that its administration will apologise to all Internal Security Act detainees from the past to the present.This is to be undertaken within the first year.

6. Affordable housing

Pakatan says it will build 150,000 affordable homes in the low-cost category Affordable Housing(below RM75,000) and medium-cost category (below RM250,000) within its first term. It will also establish a National Housing Corporation to build, regulate and develop affordable housing.

7. Policing

To deal with rising crime, Pakatan says it will reallocate human resources to increase the size of the Criminal Investigation Department by reducing the General Operations Force and other non-core task personnel. Additionally, Pakatan says it will increase remuneration by 15 percent in stages.

8. Free education, abolishing PTPTN

Describing education as the people’s right and the government’s Education_for_all_UNESCOresponsibility, Pakatan says its administration will bear tertiary education fees and subsidise fees in private institutions. Additionally, it will provide cost of living allowances for students of public institutions in need and abolish the National Higher Education Loan Fund (PTPTN), which the coalition blamed for a rapidly expanding private education industry.

“PTPTN will not be needed when higher education is provided for free to the people.A specific mechanism to overcome the students’ debt dependency due to PTPTN will be introduced to ensure that every student’s welfare will be taken care of,”the document states.

9. Lowering fuel, electricity and water charges

Pakatan’s manifesto argues that the country’s oil revenue should be shared with the people in the form of cheaper fuel prices. As for electricity, Pakatan argues that the country loses RM25 billion annually in the form of gas subsidies to independent power producers, a sum which the coalition wants to channel to the people by reducing their electricity bills.

On highway toll charges, Pakatan promises to take over the nation’s highways, with the “intention” of “gradually” abolishing toll charges.Pakatan said that these policies, including reducing water tariffs, will help reduce the cost of living.

10. Reducing foreign workers by 1 million

Foreign Labour in Malaysia

Pakatan said it will introduce a “comprehensive package” to ensure the removal of one million foreign workers within five years to allow locals to take up the jobs.

Warancara dengan Dr Bakri Musa (Bahagian 5)


February 25, 2013

Warancara dengan Dr Bakri Musa (Bahagian 5):Islam cara Ismaili atau Talibanlisme

“BANDINGKAN mereka dengan Taliban di Afghanistan. Taliban maknanya pelajar tetapi mereka sibuk membakar sekolah dan melempar asid ke muka anak dara yang ingin belajar. Pemuda Taliban sibuk belajar mengunakan letupan C4 dan senapang AK 47, pelajar Ismaili tekun menyelesaikan masalah sains dan ilmu hisab…”

Suaris:  Dr dilihat amat sinikal terhadap perkara yang dibalut dengan nama Islam. Ramai yang faham bahawa Dr kurang berminat dengan Islam konservatif sepertimana amalan kebanyakan penduduk Islam hari ini, bukannya

Dr Bakri  Saya dilahirkan dan mengamali Islam. Saya percaya kepada Bakri MusaTuhan dan Muhammad (SAW) Rasul terkemudiannya. Selanjutnya saya percaya atas kelima-lima landasan agama kita. Itu memanglah disetujui oleh semua umat Islam.

Apakah intisari ajaran agama kita mengikut kitab suci dan Nabi Muhammad SAW? Amalkan yang baik, jauhi yang jahat. Ayat itu disebut beberapa kali dalam al-Quran dan hadis. Itu juga tidak jadi soalan antara umat Islam, semua setuju.

Itulah yang saya utamakan dan sifatkan Islam, atau dalam kata lain, ajaran emas atau “golden rule” agama kita. Saya kurang berminat dengan label; itu senang saja dicetak. Isi atau kandungan hal lain. Maknanya, kalau pemerintah atau negeri tidak mengamalkan kebaikan dan menjauhi kejahatan, saya tidak anggap pemerintahan atau negeri itu Islam tidak kira apa labelnya. Mengukir “Allah” dan “Muhammad” di pintu gerbang dan bangunan besar senang saja, begitu juga bagi pemimpin memakai serban dan jubah menjela-jela.

Soalannya, adakah rasuah, makan suap dan menyalahgunakan kuasa amalan menjauhi kejahatan? Begitu juga jika pemimpin tidak membela dan membaiki penderitaan dan kemiskinan rakyat, adakah itu amalan yang baik? Bila saya menimbang keislaman pemimpin atau negara, itulah landasan yang saya kira, bukan berapa kali pemimpinnya ke Mekah atau berapa indah tajwidnya membaca al-Quran.

Liberating the Malay MindSeorang rakyat Singapura pernah menganggap negaranya lebih Islam daripada Indonesia. Di Singapura tidak ada rasuah dan penyelewengan kuasa di antara pemimpin. Rakyat pun tidak mengganggur atau bangsat. Kemiskinan mendekati kekufuran, dan kekufuran nanti mendekati kekafiran. Pergilah ke Riau dan kebijakan perpatah itu ternyata. Kita tidak boleh salahkan orang Indonesia. Orang China semasa dulu pun macam itu juga akibat kebangsatan hidup mereka.

Mengikuti asas Islam – amalkan yang baik, jauhkan yang jahat – susah hendak mempertikaikan pandangan orang Singapura itu.

Saya kurang faham dengan erti “konservatif” dan “liberal.” Saya faham maknanya dalam bahasa asal (Inggeris), tetapi bila digunakan dalam bahasa kita, perkataan itu bertukar 180 darjah! Itu sebabnya saya enggan mengunakan kedua-dua label itu.

Lebih bermakna jika diberi contoh umat dan pemimpin Islam yang saya sanjung tinggi dan patut kita contohi, dan bandingkan dengan satu masyarakat dan pemimpin Islam yang enggan saya mencontohi. Bukan tempatnya untuk saya mengatakan yang mana lebih Islam atau puak mana yang akan masuk syurga. Itu Tuhan saja yang tahu, dan Dia tidak memberi tahu saya atau makhlukNya yang lain.

Kaum Islam Ismaili tidak melebehi 15 juta, lebih kurang sama dengan orang Melayu di Malaysia. Mereka tidak ada negeri sendiri pun, tetapi kuasa, sumbangan dan pengaruh mereka serta kebajikan mereka kepada dunia amnya dan masyarakat Islam khasnya beberapa kali ganda melebihi bilangan mereka.

Kaum Ismaili memberatkan zakat, dan duit itu mereka laburkan dalam syarikat membuat ubat dan membina sekolah, universiti dan hospital. The Aga Khan University Hospital di Pakistan hanya dibina pada tahun 1985, tetapi sekarang ia satu pusat terkenal. Kaum Ismaili tidak mengutamakan sama ada perempuan mereka berhijab; mereka pesat dilatih menjadi doktor, jururawat, cikgu dan engineer supaya boleh menjadi makhluk soleh, maknanya, membuat baik untuk masyarakat.

Bandingkan mereka dengan Taliban di Afghanistan. Taliban maknanya pelajar tetapi mereka sibuk membakar sekolah dan melempar asid ke muka anak dara yang ingin belajar. Pemuda Taliban sibuk belajar mengunakan letupan C4 dan senapang AK 47, pelajar Ismaili tekun menyelesaikan masalah sains dan ilmu hisab.

Masyarakat mencerminkan pemimpin. Pemimpin Ismaili ialah Aga Khan. Betul, dia mewah, membela kuda lumba, dan bapanya pernah berkahwin dengan Rita Hayward, pelakon Amerika tercantik. Tetapi dia berkelulusan Harvard dan mengunakan kaitannya dengan cerdik pandai Amerika untuk memikat mereka mengajar di universiti-universiti yang ditubuhkannya di Asia.

Pemimpin disanjung tinggi oleh Taliban ialah Osama. Dia pun mewah, berkelulusan kejuruteraan dari universiti Saudi. Tetapi ia menggunakan kekayaan dan kepandaian dia untuk menjahanamkan bangunan dan membunuh orang.

Siapa yang lebih mengamali baik dan menjauhi buruk, Aga Khan atau Osama? Terpulanglah kepada pembaca untuk memutuskan sama ada kaum Melayu lebih dekat dengan Ismaili atau Taliban. Bersama itu, terpulanglah kepada pembaca sama ada masyarakat Ismaili atau Taliban yang patut kita contohi.

Kita heboh dengan hudud dan hijab sementara masalah dadah dan membuang bayi tidak terhad lagi. Apa sebab beratkan hudud tetapi tidak menghukumkan semua termasuk sultan membayar zakat? Zakat satu daripada lima landasan Islam, hudud tidak.

Kalau semua (kecuali si miskin) membayar zakat mal (2.5 peratus nilai harta) dan kita ambil pakar ekonomi untuk mentadbirkan modal itu, tak terhingga akibat baik yang tercapai. Itu yang diberatkan oleh kaum Ismaili dan membolehkan mereka membina sekolah dan rumah sakit. Apa berkat zakat kaum Taliban? Kalau kita beratkan hudud, banyak yang tidak bertangan. Siapa nak menyuap mereka makan dan bagaimana mereka hendak mencari nafkah untuk keluarga?

Kita lebih membentengkan keislaman kita dengan mengutuk dan tidak bertolak ansur dengan pemimpin yang menipu, tidak adil, pecahkan amanah, dan terang-terangan melakukan rasuah. Itu disyaratkan oleh kitab kita.

Betul, kita mesti ambil Islam dengan sepenuhnya tanpa memilih mana yang kita suka sahaja. Soalannya ialah apa sebab kita beratkan hijab dan memotong tangan tetapi mengabaikan tekun belajar dan menentang rasuah?

buya-hamka1Ambil (contoh) tekun belajar. Hamka pernah berkata Tuhan memberi kita dua Quran. Quran pertama kita sedia maklum. Quran kedua ialah alam indah di sekitar dan di dalam kita. Tuhan memberi Nabi Muhammad SAW untuk memimpin kita belajar Quran pertama. Untuk Quran kedua, Dia merestukan umatNya dengan akal supaya kita boleh memilih antara yang benar dan palsu, yang baik dari yang busuk. Kita diwajibkan belajar kedua-dua Quran.

Ahli sains menyelidik virus polio boleh disifatkan mengkaji Quran kedua ini. Akibatnya ialah suntikan yang membasmikan penyakit yang dulu melumpuhkan ribuan kanak kanak. Itu perbuatan baik. Tetapi kaum Taliban menyifatkan suntikan polio sebagai racun rekaan si kafir! Akibatnya, polio masih lagi merajalela di Pakistan! Sekali lagi, berlandaskan ajaran emas agama kita, adakah itu perbuatan baik?

Di permulaan agama kita, ulama tidak membezakan antara apa yang disifatkan sebagai ilmu ain dan ilmu kafiyah. Ilmu itu ilmu, dan berasal dari Tuhan. Ulama dulu juga pakar sains, perubatan, dan ilmu hisab. Mereka tekun belajar Quran kedua itu seperti Quran pertama. Tetapi ulama sekarang tidak memberatkan bahkan mencaci mengaji Quran kedua ini, kononnya itu perusahaan untuk dunia bukan akhirat. Akibatnya kita tidak boleh memberi sumbangan yang sepatutnya untuk membuat kebaikan di dunia.

Itu yang patut kita bincang, bagaimana mendidik anak-anak kita supaya mereka boleh membuat baik di dunia ini. Kalau kita membuat baik di dunia ini mungkin Tuhan tidak akan lupakan kita di kemudian hari.

Fikirkan hadis mengatakan seorang pelacur masuk syurga sebab dia memberi air kepada anjing yang nak mati dahaga. Perempuan seumpama itu pakai hijab ke? Satu lagi hadis mengatakan seorang itu masuk syurga sebab ia membuang duri dari tengah jalan. Kalau membuang duri dari jalan satu perbuatan yang baik, berapa baiknya jika seseorang itu membina jalan?

Kita boleh lebih menunjukkan keislaman kita dengan membina jalan yang tidak bahaya atau jambatan yang tidak senang runtuh. Tidak ada gunanya mengukir ayat-ayat Quran di bumbung kalau jurutera kita lalai atau tidak mahir dan bumbung mereka bina runtuh dalam ribut mencederakan kanak- kanak sekolah.

Dr  AsriBeberapa tahun lalu ada perbahasan antara Datuk Asri Zainal Abidin (Dr. Maza) dengan Astora Jabat berkenaan tajdid. Mereka berdua adalah antara pemikir Melayu yang amat saya hormati. Tetapi dalam tiga jam perbahasan itu, mereka bertengkar sama ada rambut perempuan disifatkan aurat dan patut ditutup! Hanya di penghujung ada seorang menyoal apa sebab kita beratkan pasal hijab sementara di negara kita rasuah sudah tidak terbendung lagi.

Soalan asas itu tidak sempat dijawab! Kita mesti buat tajdid Islam supaya kita boleh mengatasi perkara ini serta lain-lain masalah sosial yang pesat dalam masyarakat kita. Jangan heboh pasal hijab.

Bila kita dengar perbincangan agama di radio, masjid atau universiti, haluannya sehala sahaja, dari ulama ke pendengar. Kebanyakan masa ditelan dengan menyebut ayat-ayat Quran dan hadis. Bila sebut saja hadis atau ayat Quran, habislah perbicangan. Sepatutnya ayat-ayat Quran dan hadis semestinya memulakan dan bukan penghabis perbincangan!

Fikirkan hadis yang mengatakan kaum Islam akan berpecah ke 73 puak tetapi hanya satu sahaja yang tulen. Yang 72 lain itu masuk neraka! Tiap-tiap ulama dan orang Islam sangkakan puak mereka sahaja yang tulen. Apa akibatnya dengan sikap itu? Kita terdesak “membaiki” orang Islam lain dengan alasan untuk menolong mereka ke syurga! Itu sebabnya Taliban membakar sekolah dan menyembur asid ke muka perempuan!

Mengikut statistik, kemungkinan kita betul hanya satu daripada 73. Can (peluang) tak sampai 1.5 peratus pun! Kita patut berasa insaf dan rendah hati serta ingin belajar dan faham fikiran, fikih, dan puak Islam yang lain. Mungkin satu di antara mereka yang betul dan tulen!

Saya bermastautin di Amerika. Melalui kebebasan di sini saya boleh baca kitab Shiah atau Ahmaddiyyah dan tidak bimbang diganggu oleh wakil jabatan Islam. Di Malaysia kita sudah diberitahu terus terang oleh ulama kita bahawa ajaran Shiah itu sesat. Baca kitab mereka dan kita akan dipenjarakan tanpa bicara, seumpama seorang komunis! Soalan yang penting, adakah prasangka demikian membawa kedamaian dan keamanan atau pertengkaran dan permusuhan antara umat Islam?

Seperti Astora Jabat, saya tanpa bermazhab. Saya masih belum tahu lagi Astora Jebatyang mana di antara 73 puak itu yang tulen. Apa yang saya tahu ialah kealiman, kearifan, dan kebijakan tidak terhad kepada sesuatu bangsa, kaum atau mahzab. Dalam perkataan lain, saya masih lagi boleh belajar dari kaum Shia, Ismaili, Salafi, dan Wahabi, antara lain tentang kebenaran dan kemuliaan agama suci kita.

Di Hari Kemudian kita akan disoal tentang perbuatan kita di dunia. Kita tidak boleh memberi alasan bahawa perbuatan kita ialah akibat mengikut ajaran ulama itu atau mahzab ini. Agama kita teristimewa sebab tidak mempunyai kelas paderi tertentu. Kita mesti fikir sendiri. Patutkah kita ikut ajaran ulama yang menyuruh kita membencikan orang bukan Islam atau menyifatkan orang Islam yang politiknya kita tidak setujui sebagai kafir?

Balik ke pangkal, fahaman Islam saya ringkas sahaja: amali yang baik, jauhi yang jahat. Yang lain hanya contoh dan hiasan.

http://suaris.wordpress.com/2013/02/13/islam-cara-ismaili-atau-taliban-dr-bakri-musa/

‘Allah’, a non-issue really


February 16, 2013

‘Allah’, a non-issue really

by Bishop Paul Tan

For centuries, Christians in Islamic countries, especially in the Middle Eastern countries where Islam was born, have been using the word Allah without stirring up any storm in the tea cup.

COMMENT


The reason why I write this short article is to dispel all doubts about facts, truths and rationality in the use of the word Allah, a non-issue really. It becomes an issue when it is being politicised which is the case in Malaysia. This article is not intended to be polemical.

First, allow me to make a few introductory remarks.

(1) I do not pretend to speak for every Christian, less still for everyone. I speak for many people who do not profess the Islamic faith in Malaysia and perhaps for a number of Muslims in and out of Malaysia.

(2) I do not claim that Christians must use the word Allah. It is up to everyone in accordance to his or her conviction.

(3) I only claim for every human being the right and freedom to use any word found in any language. Upholding this principle, I personally claim that I have the right to use the word Allah.

In this present Malaysian context, it must be said explicitly: it is not that Christians want to use the word to confuse Muslims; rather, it is taking a stand that no one has the power to take away the God-given right to a human person the freedom to use whatever word he or she wants to use provided the rights of others are not being violated.

If certain Muslims in Malaysia feel that their rights are being violated, they have only to look at history to know that for centuries, Christians in Islamic countries, especially in the Middle Eastern countries where Islam was born, have been using the word Allah without stirring up any storm in the tea cup.

To say that using the word Allah may confuse the Muslims in Malaysia is tantamount to casting aspersion on them because it is accusing them of having a faith so weak that, unlike their Muslim brothers and sisters in other countries, they are easily shaken because people of other faiths use the word Allah for God. Sikhs, Bahai’s, Maltese, Mizrahi Jews, etc., use Allah. More of this later.

In the same setting, I would like to emphasise that Malaysia is a constitutional or parliamentary democracy and not a theocratic state, in concrete, an Islamic state; say what you want, the fact remains that at the inception of the Federal Constitution, our founding fathers did not want Malaysia to be an Islamic state.

Our founding father Tunku Abdul Rahman’s statement on the matter is the best testimony.

The Sultan of Selangor and the Sultan of Pahang have banned non-Muslims from using the term Allah. Our Federal Constitution does not give any sultan the power to dictate to people of other faiths what religious rules that they must follow.

People of faiths other than those of Islam have their own religious heads who govern and tell them what is right or wrong in accordance with their religious beliefs.

Facts and reasoning

My claim of human right for everyone on the use of any word from any language, in this case the word Allah, is based on the following facts and reasoning.

Allah is a pre-Islamic word used by Arabs, e.g., the Arabs in Mecca, before Prophet Muhammad was born. For these Arabs, the word, Allah, means “creator deity”. It is therefore not an Islamic creation and Muslims have no exclusive claim to it although they may and have injected into it specific nuances.

If the Holy Prophet Muhammad wanted Muslims to use a specific word with special connotations that others did not have, he would have created a new word and not use a word already used by the Arabs and Arab-Christians before his time.

Besides, Christians, Mizrahi Jews, Bahai’s, Maltese, Sikhs, and others use the same word. The Skhs have publicly proclaimed that their Holy Scriptures have used the word Allah 37 times. The Sikhs ask the rhetorical question: Are they also forbidden to read and pray their Scriptures?

This word Allah and its cognates are found in many languages. Just to give a few examples:

in Urdu/Persian/Dari/Uyshur, it is the same word, Allah; in Bengali, and in Bosnian languages, it is also Allah; in Czech and Slovak languages, it is Allach, etc.,

In the Holy Quran, it is written clearly that Jews, Christians, Sabeans worship Allah. Allow me to quote only one surah – surah 2:62: “Those who believe in the Quran and those who follow the Jewish Scriptures and the Christians and the Sabeans… who so believe in God (Allah) and the last day…

In our own country, in Sabah and Sarawak, our Bumiputera, e.g., Kadazans, Ibans, Bidahyus, Melanaus, etc., have been using the word Allah in their languages for umpteen years.

No country in the world, including the Arab countries in the Middle East and, closer to Malaysia, Indonesia, forbids non-Muslims from using the word Allah. Christians in these countries have been using it for centuries. At present, there are about 10 to 12 million Arab Christians using the word Allah for God.

If some Malaysian Muslims claim that non-Muslims cannot use the word because the Malaysian Muslims’ understanding of Allah is unique to them, then logically they are saying that the Arab Muslims also have a different understanding of Allah from their understanding because the Arab Muslims use the word Allah for God and allow Christians to use the same word.

Consequently, we would be a laughing stock of enlightened people in the world if we were to continue to make criminals of people of faiths other than those of Islam because they use the word Allah.

I have in my possession a Dutch Gospel according to St Matthew or in Malay Language, Injil Matius, in the book “Nuevve Testament.” It was translated into the Malay language in 1629. In it, the word for God is translated as Allah. There are other Christian literatures translated into the Malay language after 1629 using Allah for God.

There is only one God

Permit me to quote wholesale Malaysiakini on what lawyer Annou Xavier said:

“The May 4, 2009 order by the court, according to Annou, stated the applicant (Jilil Ireland Lawrence Bill, a Melanau Christian) be given a declaration that it is within her legitimate expectation to use the word Allah and have ownership, to obtain, use and import such materials including printing items with the word for her own practice.”

He further brought MAIS’s attention to a circular, dated April 11, 2011 and endorsed by Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak himself, which stated that the government has agreed that non-Muslims may import, buy, print, distribute, read and use the bible in any language, including Bahasa Malaysia.

Further to this, although the issue is still pending on the appeal to the court of appeal, KL High Court has ruled on Dec 31 2009 that the ban on the use of the word “Allah” by people of faiths other than those of Islam is illegal.

There is only one God, call Him/Her/It whatever you want, Brahman, God, Almighty, Absolute, Allah, Shang Ti or Tian or Tian Zhu. The One Creator does not change just because we humans change the word or the meaning of the word. He is the One Creator of all creatures.

Hence, to forbid people who profess faiths other than those who profess Islam is to say that Allah is not the creator of non-Muslims.

This would indeed be a blasphemy to Allah. A greater insult would be to confine Allah to Muslims and consequently logically to admit that there are other gods, true or false, besides Him/Her/It. This would be against the very tenet of Islam that there in only one God.

God does not speak in human words. Words are created by the human mind that wants to convey to others that which he or she sees, hears, smells, touches and tastes.

From what comes through these senses, the human person extrapolates with his/her intelligence all the common features of similar things and comes up with a symbolic word, e.g., that is a “tree”.

God is spirit. The Absolute has no human body through which It comes to know. The Almighty does not speak in any human language. He/She/It is beyond and above all limited human language.

Why must one pray in a particular language, be it in Latin or in Arabic or in Pali, etc.,? This human rule seems to say that God or Allah can only understand that one language. This is tantamount to limiting the power of God to being able to understand only one language.

It is also equivalent to saying that there are other gods who can understand other languages. It defeats the basic belief of the monotheist religions that believe that there is only one god, one god, creator of all things.

Hence, to limit that absolute being to any human word would be equivalent to making Him/Her/It a human being. This is what we humans say: “to anthropomorphise” the Absolute Almighty. It would be an insult to make Him/Her/It less than what IS.

From the above, it is clear that to forbid anyone from using any word for that Absolute Almighty is to fall into irrationality and absurdity. It is against all reasoning, all facts and truths.

Bishop Paul Tan is the immediate past president of the Catholics Bishops’ Conference of Singapore, Malaysia and Brunei

Note: if you have the time and patience please read this: http://english.cpiasia.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2272&catid=78

The Ugly Malaysians we have become


February 15, 2013

The Ugly Malaysians we have become

by Prof. Dr. Ibrahim Baijunid*

THE worst and the best of personal cultures are emulated in homes, schools, community, the media and politics.

MalaysiansThe espoused ideal of Malaysia is to create a knowledge and virtues-based society, a kind of Utopia.

The best society can only occur when there is a critical mass of people, the mainstream, particularly those in power and in the corridors of power, who uphold the highest principles and culture.

There are uncouth people in all societies with ugliness in behaviour. The notion of ugliness is not about looks or beauty, but rather ugliness in thoughts, intentions, schemes, conspiracies and behaviour.

Such ugliness leads to a Ku Klux Klan kind of mentality and ethnic cleansing drives. Ugliness transcends every code of decency.

Bad people with hatred in their minds and hearts have some kind of psychological disconnect with humanity, although they may profess to have good connects with their in-groups.

Other societies, for instance Americans, have heartily criticised ugly Americans, those in politics and in daily lives. The Ugly American, for instance, is a political novel by Eugene Burdick and William Lederer, published in 1958.

The novel was so influential that a movie starring Marlon Brando was made. The Ugly American failed to understand not just local culture, but human nature.

Ugly Malaysians are those with double standards in everything, from Perkasa Manpersonal behaviour to public actions. They are those who plan and instigate riots, as differentiated from those who organise peaceful and legitimate demonstrations; those who lie to family, friends, neighbours, the community, the people and to themselves; those who, when abroad, distort every fact about Malaysia; those who hate others and hate themselves.

They are those who sneeze into other people’s faces and cough into other people’s food; who clear their throat gutturally or blow their noses while people are eating; those who smoke and intrude into people’s breathing space.

They are school and road bullies; political bullies who become little “Hitlers” when they have a little power. They have ill intentions towards others.

Ugly people anywhere tend to be arrogant, greedy, envious, lustful, slothful, loud and ostentatious. They expect others to conform to their culture, attend to their needs and obsequiously address their every political or cultural whim and fancy.

Not-so-beautiful Malaysians take themselves seriously as individuals and groups which cannot err. They can attack others harshly and be ungenerous in every way, but will not entertain the slightest criticism of themselves.

Mature societies are willing to criticise, joke and laugh at themselves. In the American television comedy series, All in the Family, the character of Archie Bunker is presented as bigoted, but lovable and decent.

There are Malaysians who are bigoted, but neither decent nor lovable, some would say. There was a time when the nation was very political in the struggle for independence but society was not politicised, and when Malaysians could joke and laugh at themselves.

The humour in many of P. Ramlee’s movies was evidence of the ability of society to reflectively laugh at itself and its racial, cultural or even religious stereotyping.

Education Masterplan

It is not enough for the nation or individual institutions to highlight the academic successes of their students with a string of As. The ultimate outcome which really matters is whether the education system has educated a generation of students who respect democratic principles, participate actively and contribute meaningfully to the betterment of societies.

Any educational reform must give priority to outcomes of genuine positive behaviour beyond the cognitive domains. The affective domain is about the feelings and matters of the heart, respect for people, filial piety, love for country — about right behaviour, good manners, courtesy and civility.

In terms of values, knowledge and behaviour, the school system must reinforce the best from home culture. In every classroom, there are the dynamics of class, culture and aspiration in play.

Teachers and principals are at the centre of managing the dynamics and ensuring that the best behaviour, not the worst, become the norm.

A university, for example, must set the highest standards and culture, and not allow squatter-like survival culture to be the norm, whether in the cafeteria, in discourse, in writings and thinking.

Educational institutions and the media must also shape personal cultures to ensure that high culture opportunities are made available to all children and citizens.

Prof. Dr. Ibrahim Baijunid  is  Deputy Vice-Chancellor, INTI Laureate International University, Malaysia-www.nst.com.my

Year of the Snake could spell disaster, say Asian Astrologers


February 7, 2013

Year of the Snake could spell disaster, say Asian Astrologers

by Beh Yi Li, AFP @http://www.malaysiakini.com

snakeA stock market slide, escalated conflict between Japan and China and more Gangnam-styled success for South Korean singer Psy will shape the incoming Year of the Snake, say Asian soothsayers.

Those who make predictions according to the study of feng shui – or literally “wind-water” – are influential in many parts of Asia where people adjust their lives or renovate houses and offices based on the advice.

As they bid farewell to the Year of the Dragon, the fortune tellers warn that the ‘black water snake’ that emerges to replace it on February 10 – the first day of the Lunar New Year – could be a venomous one that brings disaster.

Previous Snake years have been marked by the September 11, 2001 terror strikes that killed nearly 3,000 people, the crushing of the 1989 Tiananmen pro-democracy protests and the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour in 1941.

The 1929 stock market plunge that heralded the Great Depression also occurred in a snake year.

Hong Kong’s celebrity feng shui master Mak Ling-ling predicts the stock markets will enjoy a smooth first half before becoming turbulent in the second half of the year, which she links to the characteristics of the reptile.

“It’s just like the movement of snakes – fast, aggressive and sharp, but cunning and tricky at the same time,” she told AFP.

Mak warned that despite early market optimism there would be no full recovery in the crisis-hit eurozone, while the economy of the United States would not gather a strong pace until 2014. She added that President Barack Obama needed to “be less conservative” in his attempts to revive the economy.

Astrologers say this year’s snake is identified with the element of water – symbolising fear – that sits on top of the fire element, representing joy and optimism. They say conflict between the two will bring turbulence in May.

“This is a disaster year… a lot of things will not go smoothly,” said Singapore’s ‘Grand Master’ Tan Khoon Yong of geomancy consultancy Way OnNet Group.

“The European Union may split, the euro may be in trouble,” the 59-year-old said, adding that the bloc would be threatened by division in May.

Hong Kong astrologer Chow Hon-ming said a disharmonious May would see an ongoing dispute between Japan and China possibly escalate into a “brief” war, as two “snakes” are going to clash, according to his reading of the Chinese almanac.

“May is known as the ‘snake month’ and it’s the Year of the Snake so between May 5 and June 6, these two snakes will meet. This is why things will be very intense between Japan and China. Tensions will rise to a peak and they will possibly go to war.”

Snake style

Chinese fortune telling is based on ancient philosophy and belief dating back thousands of years that events are dictated by the different balances in the five elements that make up the universe: metal, wood, water, fire and earth.

A person’s fortune can be calculated by using the exact time and date of his birth, with the relationship of each of the elements.

The lunar calendar is based on the cycles of the moon and associates each of the 12 years forming a rotating cycle with an animal – with the snake assuming the sixth position out of the 12 animal signs.

China’s new leader Xi Jinping and ‘Gangnam Style’ singer Psy, two of the psy2most famous people born in the Year of the Snake, will see success despite entering a year matching their Chinese zodiac, usually considered to be a bad thing.

But China’s Xi, born in 1953, and 36-year-old South Korean pop sensation ‘Psy’ Park Jae-sang will be spared, due to their favourable birth dates and elements.

While the 60-year-old Chinese leader is set to see a smooth leadership transition in March from predecessor President Hu Jintao, there may however be the odd bump in the road.

“He needs to watch out for his health. He might suffer a fall in November if he travels,” Chow said, recommending Xi avoids “Europe or Russia” that month.

CLSA, one of Asia’s leading brokerages, creates its own tongue-in-cheek annual ‘feng shui index’. This year it states that while stock markets will be volatile in the second-half, the presence of the market-driving ‘fire’ element gave reason for optimism.

“We’ve got the fire element so we’re pretty hopeful,” CLSA analyst Mariana Kou said, predicting this year markets will have a “decent finish” this year.

Past Snake years give little encouragement, with the three most recent ones seeing Hong Kong’s Hang Seng Index finish down, falling 33.5 percent in 2001.

“As befits ‘skin-shedders’, Snake years are marked by major transformation and change – and sometimes great upheaval,” CLSA said.

- AFP

Merdekakan Minda Melayu:Temuramah dengan Dr. Bakri Musa (Bahagian ke-2)


February 4, 2013

Merdekakan Minda Melayu: Temuramah dengan Dr. Bakri Musa (Bahagian ke-2)

http://suaris.wordpress.com

Bakri MusaDALAM siri temuramah Suaris bersama Dr Bakri Musa bahagian kedua, Dr menyatakan pentingnya orang Melayu bersama pemimpin-pemimpinnya melakukan anjakan dengan mengubah pemikiran mereka ke arah kemajuan dan rasionaliti. Mereka tidak sepatutnya taksub kepada ajaran mahu pun arahan yang meminta mereka supaya berfikiran jumud, mundur ke belakang sekalipun arahan itu datangnya dari seorang ulama atau pemimpin utama. Mereka juga diseru supaya membuang kebergantungan berlebihan mereka kepada tongkat (bantuan kerajaan) supaya mereka lebih berdikari dan percaya diri.

Ikuti temuramah tersebut selengkapnya.

Suaris:  Dr Mahathir dalam satu rancangan di Astro Awani beberapa hari lepas berkata orang Melayu akan terus ketinggalan sekiranya tidak dibantu, yang diistilahkan beliau sebagai tongkat. Adakah Dr bersetuju orang Melayu terus diberikan tongkat berkenaan. Sampai bila bantuan ini perlu diteruskan?

Dr Bakri:  Kalau orang Melayu sekarang masih lagi kebelakangan selepas lebih daripada 55 tahun di “bantu” oleh kerajaan UMNO, kita patut periksa dengan teliti apakah yang disifatkan “bantuan” itu.

Sebagai ibu bapa kita sedia maklum betapa mustahaknya cara kita membantu anak anak kita. Kalau kita selalu sahaja memanjakan, jangan harapkan mereka menjadi cemerlang. Kalau kita terlalu kuat atau “strict,” mungkin mereka akan hilang ketegasan sendiri (self-confidence). Begitu juga kalau kita selalu memburukkan dan memberatkan kelemahan mereka.

Dalam rawatan moden, seseorang yang sudah dibedah tulang punggungnya jarang diberi tongkat; kalau diberi hanya untuk seminggu dua sahaja. Sebaliknya, pesakit diberi physiotherapy untuk tujuan berjalan sendiri tanpa tongkat. Pesakit yang saya bedah, pada keesokan harinya saya menyuruh dia bangun berjalan tanpa pertolongan.

Banyak bahayanya jika si pesakit terbaring sahaja di atas katil, antaranya darah beku (blood clot) yang boleh mengakibatkan maut. Pesakit yang saya bedah kerana appendicitis biasanya keluar dari hospital pada esok hari dan kembali berkerja dalam tempoh seminggu. Dua puloh tahun dahulu, si pesakit seumpama tinggal di hospital lebih seminggu.

Satu wawasan perubatan ialah jika badan kita (sama ada urat, tulang, danLiberating the Malay Mind juga otak) tidak di kerjakan atau dilatih ia akan menjadi lemah dan reput. Jika saya ikatkan bujang (pemuda) yang kuat dan sehat di atas katil dan “bantu” dia makan, mandi dan sebagainya supaya dia tak payah pun bergerak satu urat, tak sampai seminggu hamba Allah itu tidak akan boleh bangun sendiri; dia akan memohon tongkat sebab badannya sudah menjadi lemah. Itu bahayanya “menolong” berlebih- lebihan.

Kita perlu kaji dengan teliti mengapa “pertolongan” yang diberi kepada kaum kita oleh kerajaan UMNO tidak berkesan.

Dr. Mahathir pernah merawat pesakit. Kalau si pesakit tidak sembuh dengan ubat dan rawatan yang diberi, patutkah si doktor terus dengan ubat dan rawatan yang sama bertahun- tahun? Mungkin si pesakit patut dibantu dengan Penicillin, bukan Panadol.

Kadang kadang, walau pun ubat yang diberi itu sesuai, mungkin sukatan yang diberi tidak mencukupi atau berlebihan. Betul, Panadol akan menurunkan demam, tetapi hanya jika diberi dalam sukatan yang berpatutan. Kalau diberi suku pil sahaja, demam takkan turun, dan kita akan salahkan ubat!

Kalau kita bagi ubat berlebihan, itu pun boleh menjadi bisa dan bahaya. Di Amerika setiap tahun berapa orang kanak-kanak maut kerana ibu memberi Tylenol (ubat seperti Panadol) berlebihan mengikut sukatan yang sesuai untuk orang dewasa.

Kalaupun kita bagi ubat yang sesuai serta sukatan yang berpatutan tetapi pesakit masih tidak sembuh, ini bermakna kita patut dan mesti tukar “diagnosis” dan rawatan kita. Penyakit seperti appendicitis memerlukan pembedahan, bukan penicillin.

Mungkin pembaca kurang selesa dengan metafora perubatan, jadi saya gunakan gambaran peladang. Di ladang, kalau kita tidak cabutkan dengan habis-habisan termasuk uratnya, lalang akan gembur dan menimbun serta merosakkan tanaman yang berharga. Apa lagi kalau kita “tolong” lalang itu dengan membajakannya!

Kebun UMNO sekarang ditimbuni lalang. Kalau kita hendak menolong UMNO dan orang Melayu pada umumnya, kita patut semburkan racun Round Up untuk membunuh lalang-lalang itu supaya kita boleh tanam benda yang berguna dan mereka berpeluang bangun. Tetapi apa yang kita buat sekarang? Kita bajakan lalang! Alasannya, betul lalang, tetapi lalang Melayu! Kita mesti tolong sebab Melayu!

“Pertolongan” yang dihebohkan oleh Dr. Mahathir dan pemimpin-pemimpin UMNO saya sifatkan seumpama membajakan lalang. Akibatnya banyak dan lumayan lalang Melayu sekarang; Isa Samad sekarang sembur sebagai peneraju FELDA. Dia dibuktikan bersalah “wang politik” oleh kerabatnya dalam UMNO beberapa tahun lepas. Khir Toyo satu lagi lalang Melayu yang sekarang sembur dalam istana kayangannya yang dibiayai oleh (wang) rakyat.

Di bahagian swasta, lalang Tajuddin Ramli hampir mengorbankan kebun MAS. Banyak lagi lalang di Utusan dan New Straits Times. Dalilnya, pembaca NST sekarang tak sampai separuh daripada sepuluh tahun dahulu. Lalang Melayulah yang menimbun dan akhirnya memusnahkan Bank Bumiputra. Kita tidak hairan dengan kehijauan dan kesuburan lalang, walau pun lalang Melayu!

Pemimpin Melayu seperti Mahathir patut tekun mencari jalan lain yang lebih bererti dan berkesan untuk menolong kaum kita. Jangan hanya suka memuaskan hati dengan mencaci dan membangkitkan kononnya kelemahan bangsa kita. Masyarakat Melayu sekarang berkehendakkan pertolongan racun Roundup bukan baja Urea untuk menghapuskan ahli lalang dalam masyarakat kita. Kebun kita sudah dibanjiri lalang.

Ada pepatah Kristian yang saya terjemahkan lebih kurang seperti berikut. Kalau kita menolong si miskin dengan memberinya seekor ikan, dia akan dapat makan hanya sehari. Tetapi kalau kita tolong dengan mengajar dia mengail, dia akan dapat makan selama hidup. Kalau tolong lebih sedikit, seumpama memberi pinjaman untuk membeli sampan, dia akan mengail laut yang luas dan dapat menanggung sekampung.

Kita tidak menolong kaum kita dengan memberi kuota masuk universiti dengan senang, lesen mengimport dan kontrak-kontrak lumayan, atau menyuruh perusahaan bangsa lain mengambil pengarah-pengarah (biasanya ahli politik) Melayu. Jauh sekali! Itu hanya membajakan lalang. Mereka hanya “ersatz capitalists” atau perusahaan menenggek, bukan tulen.

Pertolongan yang lebih bermakna dan berkatnya berpanjangan ialah jika kita menolong orang Melayu berfikir sendiri. Bebaskan otak orang Melayu. Kalau ungkapan kita masa tahun lima puluhan dahulu ialah “Merdeka Tanah Melayu,” sekarang slogan kita mestilah, “Merdeka Minda Melayu!

visiItulah tema buku saya terakhir, “Liberating The Malay Mind.” Apakah yang saya maksudkan dengan minda merdeka? Konsep ini lebih terang dijelaskan melalui cerita seorang alim, Mullah Nasaruddin. Ia terkenal kerana mengajar melalui contoh yang ringkas dan jenaka diri sendiri.

Dia ada jiran yang suka meminjam keldai Mullah tetapi lalai untuk mengembalikannya. Pada satu hari jiran itu datang untuk meminjam binatang itu. Pak Mullah, (yang telah) menjangkakan permintaan itu, telah dulunya menyorokkan binatang itu di dalam reban dan tidak ternampak dari luar. Bila jiran itu memohon, Mullah Nasaruddin dengan lenang membalas, “Keldai ku sudah dipinjam oleh abangku semalam.”

Bila jiran itu kecewa pusing balik, dia kedengaran binatang itu melaung dalam reban. “Kau katakan keldai telah dipinjam oleh abang kau.”

Mullah serta-merta menjawab, “Kau lebih percayai ringkikan keldai lebih daripada suara Mullah?”

Seorang yang mempunyai minda merdeka lebih mempercayai laungan We the Rakyatkeldai itu; mereka yang mempunyai minda yang masih dipenjarakan oleh adat dan budaya akan turut mempercayai Mullah walaupun keldai itu ada di hadapan mata.

Kita mesti melatih orang Melayu supaya bila kita dengar laungan keldai kita mesti mempercayai telinga kita walau pun Pak Lebai mengatakan itu hanya suara rekaan sahaja.

Dalam buku terakhir, saya mengemukakan empat cara untuk membebaskan minda Melayu. Pertama, membebaskan sebaran am dan punca-punca maklumat dan berita serta pandangan. Kedua, mengadakan sistem pendidikan yang bebas (liberal education) dan berlandasan kukuh atas asas sains dan matematik.

Ketiga, mendorongkan perusahan dan perdagangan dalam masyarakat kita; iaitu mengalakkan orang Melayu menjadi kaum perusahaan. Bila kita berdagang, kita sifatkan orang bangsa lain bukan sebagai pendatang tetapi bakal pelanggan kita. Maknanya, asas keuntungan kita!

Keempat, kita mesti kaji semula bagaimana kita mengajar agama kepada anak- anak kita serta bagaimana kita mengamalkan agama yang suci ini. Islam telah membebaskan kaum Bedouin Arab yang kanun, membebaskan mereka dari Zaman Jahiliyah kepada Zaman Cahaya. Begitu juga Islam patut membebaskan orang Melayu memulai dengan membebaskan minda kita.

MahathirTanpa membebaskan minda Melayu, tidak kira berapa billion pertolongan kita beri, seberapa lumayan kontrak, AP serta kuota-kuota lain kita hadiahkan, atau berapa senangnya anak-anak kita masuk universiti, itu semuanya tidak bermakna atau berkesan. Semuanya itu bukan “pertolongan” yang tulin, bahkan hanya candu untuk syok sendiri dan hisapan khayalan sahaja. Semuanya saya umpamakan membajakan lalang.

Sebagai negara merdeka Malaysia telah mencapai banyak kejayaan. Kalau kita merdekakan minda Melayu, tidak terhad kejayaan kita sebagai perseorangan dan juga sebagai masyarakat. Yang indahnya, bila minda kita merdeka, ia tidak boleh lagi dipenjarakan.

Tidak payahlah kita ragukan unsur-unsur seperti globalisasi dan neokolonial. Kita tidak lagi bimbang bila anak kita fasih dalam bahasa Inggeris atau bahasa asing. Dengan minda merdeka kita tidak akan berasa terancam bila makhluk Allah lain menggunakan istilah ‘Allah’.

Merdekakan minda Melayu! Itulah satu pertolongan yang berkesan dan tak terharga!

Berbalik semula ke ‘tongkat’ yang paling dihargai oleh Mahathir dan kerabatnya dalam UMNO, bagaimana kita boleh mengharap orang-orang kampung membuang tongkat kecil kayu mereka sedangkan tongkat emas yang beberapa lagi indah dan besar diberi kepada sultan-sultan, raja- raja dan menteri- menteri?

Kita marah bila Pak Mat di Kampong Kerinchi menyelewengkan wang pinjaman MARA dua tiga ratus ringgit untuk memajukan warung kopinya untuk membeli baju sekolah anaknya, tetapi bila suami menteri menyelewengkan berjuta- juta duit rakyat untuk membeli kondo mewah, pemimpin seperti Mahathir senyap sahaja.

Melayu tak payah diberi tongkat apa-apa pun. Pertolongan yang patut diberi ialah untuk membebaskan minda kita. Kalau hendak beri pertolongan, hanya tolonglah sedikit mencabut lalang di kebun kita supaya pisang, timun dan kacang kita boleh berpeluang tumbuh. Kalau enggan berbuat demikian, tolong janganlah bajakan lalang tu!

(akan disambung…)

Nordic Countries: Lessons in Good Governance


February 2, 2013

http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21570835-nordic-countries-are-probably-best-governed-world-secret-their

LESSONS

The secret of their success: Good Governance and Pragmatism

The Nordic countries are probably the best-governed in the world

Nordic Countries

CECIL RHODES ONCE remarked that “to be born an Englishman is to win first prize in the lottery of life.” Today the same thing could be said of being born Nordic. The Nordic countries have not only largely escaped the economic problems that are convulsing the Mediterranean world; they have also largely escaped the social ills that plague America. On any measure of the health of a society—from economic indicators like productivity and innovation to social ones like inequality and crime—the Nordic countries are gathered near the top (see table).

Why has this remote, thinly populated region, with its freezing winters and Swedenexpanses of wilderness, proved so successful? There was a time when most of its population would have unhesitatingly praised their government, which for most of the 20th century meant the social democrats in one of their various national guises. The government had provided the people with cradle-to-grave welfare services, rescuing them from the brutal life of their 19th-century forebears, and stepped in to save the capitalist economies from their periodic crises.

But free-marketers have poked holes in the pro-government explanation and offered a powerful alternative. In the period from 1870 to 1970 the Nordic countries were among the world’s fastest-growing countries, thanks to a series of pro-business reforms such as the establishment of banks and the privatisation of forests. But in the 1970s and 1980s the undisciplined growth of government caused the reforms to run into the sands. Free-marketers put the region’s impressive recent performance down to its determination to reduce government spending and set entrepreneurs free.

NorwayGovernment’s role in improving equality is also being questioned. Andreas Bergh, of Sweden’s Research Institute of Industrial Economics, argues that the compression of Swedish incomes took place before the arrival of the welfare state, which was a consequence rather than a cause of the region’s prosperity—and almost killed the goose that laid the golden eggs.

This special report has supported some of the free-marketers’ arguments. The Nordic countries had got into the habit of spending more on welfare than they could afford and of relying more on a handful of giant companies than was wise. They are right to try to trim their states and make life easier for business. But it would be wrong to ignore the role of government entirely.

The Nordic countries pride themselves on the honesty and transparency of their governments. Nordic governments are subject to rigorous scrutiny: for example, in Sweden everyone has access to all official records. Politicians are vilified if they get off their bicycles and into official limousines.

The Nordics have added two other important qualities to transparency: pragmatism and tough-mindedness. On discovering that the old social democratic consensus was no longer working, they let it go with remarkably little fuss and introduced new ideas from across the political spectrum. They also proved utterly determined in pushing through reforms. It is a grave error to mistake Nordic niceness for softheadedness.

Pragmatism explains why the new consensus has quickly replaced the old one. Few Swedish Social Democratic politicians, for instance, want to dismantle the conservative reforms put in place in recent years. It also explains why Nordic countries can often seem to be amalgams of left- and right-wing policies.

Pragmatism also explains why the Nordics are continuing to upgrade their model. They still have plenty of problems. Their governments remain too big and their private sectors too small. Their taxes are still too high and some of their benefits too generous.The Danish system of flexicurity puts too much emphasis on security and not enough on flexibility. Norway’s oil boom is threatening to destroy the work ethic.

It is a bad sign that over 6% of the workforce are on sick leave at any one time and around 9% of the working-age population live on disability pensions. But the Nordics are continuing to introduce structural reforms, perhaps a bit too slowly but stolidly and relentlessly. And they are doing all this without sacrificing what makes the Nordic model so valuable: the ability to invest in human capital and protect people from the disruptions that are part of the capitalist system.

Getting to Denmark

Most of the rich world now faces the same problems that the Nordics facedDenmark in the early 1990s—out-of-control public spending and overgenerous entitlement programmes. Southern Europe needs a dose of Nordic tough-mindedness if it is to get its finances under control. And America needs a dose of Nordic pragmatism if it is to have any chance of reining in entitlements and reforming the public sector.

The Nordics are hardly blushing violets when it comes to advertising the virtues of their model. Nordic think-tanks produce detailed studies in English about how they reformed their states. Nordic politicians fight their corner in international meetings and Nordic consultants sell their public-sector expertise around the world. Dag Detter played a leading role in restructuring the Swedish state’s commercial portfolio in the 1990s, representing more than a quarter of the business sector. He has since advised governments in Asia and across Europe.

FinlandYet it is hard to see the Nordic model of government spreading quickly, mainly because the Nordic talent for government is sui generis. Nordic government arose from a combination of difficult geography and benign history. All the Nordic countries have small populations, which means that members of the ruling elites have to get on with each other. Their monarchs lived in relatively modest places and their barons had to strike bargains with independent-minded peasants and seafarers.

They embraced liberalism early. Sweden guaranteed freedom of the press in 1766, and from the 1840s onwards it abolished preference for aristocrats in handing out top government jobs and created a meritocratic and corruption-free civil service. They also embraced Protestantism—a religion that reduces the church to a helpmate and emphasises the direct relationship between the individual and his God. One of the Lutheran church’s main priorities was teaching peasants to read.

The combination of geography and history has provided Nordic governments with two powerful resources: trust in strangers and belief in individual rights. A Eurobarometer survey of broad social trust (as opposed to trust in immediate family) showed the Nordics in leading positions (see chart below). Economists say that high levels of trust result in lower transaction costs—there is no need to resort to American-style lawsuits or Italian-style quid-pro-quo deals in order to get things done. But its virtues go beyond that. Trust means that high-quality people join the civil service. Citizens pay their taxes and play by the rules. Government decisions are widely accepted.

 

The World Values Survey, which has been monitoring values in over 100 countries since 1981, says that the Nordics are the world’s biggest believers in individual autonomy. The Nordic combination of big government and individualism may seem odd to some, but according to Lars Tragardh, of Ersta Skondal University College, Stockholm, the Nordics have no trouble reconciling the two: they regard the state’s main job as promoting individual autonomy and social mobility. Any piece of Nordic social legislation—particularly the family laws of recent years—can be justified in terms of individual autonomy.

Universal free education allows students of all backgrounds to achieve their potential. Separate taxation of spouses puts wives on an equal footing with their husbands. Universal day care for children makes it possible for both parents to work full-time. Mr Tragardh has a useful phrase to describe this mentality: “statist individualism”.

Nordic people take this attitude to government with them when they go abroad. In the 19th and early 20th centuries some 1.3m people, a quarter of the Swedish population at the time, emigrated, mostly to the United States. America created an entire genre of jokes about “dumb Swedes” and their willingness to obey rules. These dumb Swedes created the best-governed enclaves in America, such as Minnesota. Even today Americans with Nordic roots are 10% more likely than the average American to believe that “most people can be trusted”.

Size isn’t everything

Economists frequently express puzzlement about the Nordic countries’ recent economic success, given that their governments are so big. According to a professional rule of thumb, an increase in tax revenues as a share of GDP of ten percentage points is usually associated with a drop in annual growth of half to one percentage point. But such numbers need to be adjusted to allow for the benefits of honesty and efficiency.

The Italian government, for instance, imposes a heavy burden on society because the politicians who run it are mainly concerned with extracting rent rather than providing public services. Goran Persson, a former Swedish Prime Minister, once compared Sweden’s economy with a bumblebee—“with its overly heavy body and little wings, supposedly it should not be able to fly—but it does.” Today it is fighting fit and flying better than it has done for decades.