==> Pls visit new site at http://malaysia-today.net/ <==

MALAYSIA IS FASCIST!

bkho.********.com

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 6

Umno have lots to hide so they don't like what we write.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 14

Basically, when we fight for Freedom, we should realize that we have to fight for Freedom of expression ... but to express what ?? The Freedom of our minds & souls, of course ! This, the Barisan Najis has created shackles to tie down our minds and souls, especially the Malay minds and souls which form the majority of the population.

It has been Barisan Najis' strategy all along to brainwash these people and instill in them a form of feudalistic mentality that they are beholden to the elite Melayu who rule the country and they are given privileges as a direct result of their blind and unthinking support.

It was always Barisan Najis' strategy to keep the people ignorant of historical facts that do not support their theories and arguments and also to indoctrinate via Biro Tata Negara and UiTM and such "Brainwash shops" racist ideals especially in the minds of the Malay majority that they want to control so they can stay in power. Hence the backward and totally inadequate education system in Malaysia, totally skewed and jaundiced in its implementation.

These DESPOTS have been doing all this for decades to ensure their political survival, and they have sacrificed the future of Malaysia just so they can stay in power to plunder and enrich themselves and their families. After 51 long years it is time to put a STOP to this, and we, the Rakyat have to do it !!

It is time to awaken our sleeping Malay brothers and sisters to this inconvenient TRUTH that the TRUE ENEMY of Malaysia, Malaysians, and the Malays is Barisan Najis !!

It is time for our 2nd Independence Day ... Independence from the DESPOTIC and DICTATORIAL Barisan Najis !!

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 10

It appears to me that in Malaysia today you have plenty of ignorance, virtually no freedom and total chaos reigning

In fact your theory is totally arse-about and is the sort of nonsense argument I would expect from someone who's attitude towards Freedom of Speech is "its perfectly all right so long as I agree with what you have to say""

In Control Freak Land this is a widely held philosophy

I would argue completely the opposite to you. That without Freedom of Expression you cannot have a Liberal education... viz Malaysia

Without Freedom, nobody has the right to criticise anything so that the powers-that-be ride roughshod over everyone's opinions and do exactly as they wish. In a Totalitarian society the first thing to suffer is education.

Also contrary to your statement " that an ignorant society cannot handle freedom". Tell that to the Greeks and all those other countries which have had Freedom of Speech for the last 200 yrs or so..... None of those societies are totally liberally educated

This is more of the repressive bullshit that people like you have been feeding Malaysians for the last 50 yrs to prevent them from developing maturity, identity and a liberal outlook on life

report abuse

disagree 2

agree 4

Here is an 14 year-old experiment with wearing Obama and McCain T-Shirts and the responses from her teenage classmates and teachers: http://www.chicagotribune.com/...84.column. This is a very interesting reading and we can compare it with our society. Anybody want to experiment with wearing Najib and Anwar T-Shirts?

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 0

Dear densemy,
I believe you misunderstood. And yes, you could argue it as you would.
Like I said, I do agree with freedom of expression - but it has to go hand in hand with a liberal education.


To those offended by my take on Zul, those who believe that Zul's hypocrisy & sweet-talk makes him an intellectual giant - my humble apologies.
It's just personal opinion.

Cheers guys.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 2

You seem to believe that we are a product of our educational system and that the growth potential within each of us is only confined to this environment. I am not saying that education do not have a major impart on our prejudices and our view of the world. What I am saying is that our growth potential extends beyond the confine of our classrooms. If a liberal education environment could be created within the school system couldn't it also be part of the wider social context ?

More than anything else a liberal environment is of no use if there is no capacity in each of us for self-reflection. And unfortunately this is a very rare quality even in a liberal society. Rationalisation and self-defeating and self-deluding argument will always lead us on to the wrong path. Truth can never be arrived at in a straight logical or reasonable path from A to Z. We have to make a lot of mistakes and a society that allows and accept this is highly liberating.

In light of this let us look at the equation :

Ignorance freedom = chaos.

Whenever there is a change chaos had always been an essential element. What is important for a community is that those effecting the change be mindful that such change could lead to disaster if the chaos is not a controlled chaos. Controlled chaos is an oxy-moron but what I am suggesting is the creation of powerful and compelling attractors such as Mahatma Gandhi non-violence, integrity, accountability etc. All these are not only compelling but right true in all honest and right thinking people.

What then is the alternative ?

Ignorance oppression = corruption.

Between these two I would choose the first any time of the day.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 2

Looks like a catch-22 situation to me.
We don't have the luxury of a lifetime of reeducation to bring about a change in worldview that will be more accepting of change.
I know of Malays who have gone overseas after their SPM to modern, western democracies for their tertiary education but their viewpoints reflect perfectly the stuff the UMNOputras used to shackle the rakyat.
So, yes chaos is a distinct possibility but what other options are there?
I do not think the UMNOputras will willingly go about reforming the education system so that its product will be citizens who are open to change with critical and creative thinking!!

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 1

written by chiongguo, November 15, 2008 18:58:29
What then is the alternative ?
Between these two I would choose the first any time of the day.
...
written by educationist, November 15, 2008 21:00:41
So, yes chaos is a distinct possibility but what other options are there?

========================

Considering the circumstances that are presented before us by Umno, we don't have much of an option - as intended by certain quarters.
One thing though - I don't believe the term "controlled chaos" is an oxymoron. In society, it is possible with education - which is what I meant to say.

Although, I'd prefer not the prospect of chaos, maybe it can be minimised through increased social awareness/ education (more so among the Malays) so as to minimize the prospect of confusion. A commenter "Ty" suggested the words "critical pedagogy" to describe the education required.

When I speak of education though, I do not refer merely to classroom "critical pedagogy" - it also includes the media, blogs and what not.
There has to be more effort to penetrate the majority who don't have access or aren't conversant in English (most critical writing in Malaysia are in English, while the majority are Malay-speaking). This would in a way set the stage for the perception that these "new" ideas are elitist/foreign.
Which is why UUCA, PPPA and OSA has to go, along with the ISA.

ps
At the recent Bangsa Malaysia discourse Perdana Leadership foundation (led by u-know-who, aided by professional spin-doctors), "some people" are attempting to repackage Ketuanan Melayu as "Kesinambungan Kedaulatan Melayu" (whatever that means),
and DAP's Malaysian Malaysia as Mahathir's "United Malaysian Nation".
Go to "Another Brick in The Wall" for more.

It is this kind of half baked ideas that need to be challenged by the people, who by and large, tend to swallow all the repackaged msm political spin (especially those in Malay).

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 3

They will never change. We have to change them for Good. When? In the coming General Election. A Lesson they have to pay very heavily. Last election they lost 5 states and with their on-going actions, which has brouhgt abut the wrath of the Rakyat, the coming General Election for sure will bring their complete 'wash-out'.

Pro Bapa Malaysia

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 3

Cruz, I understand your concerns on ignorance freedom. However I think there is a strong hint of underestimating the qualities of humans. This is the usual argument used by those in power wanting to restrict freedom. Chaos brings a picture of destruction. Actually this is not the case when there is freedom be it with ignorance. Freedom of speech do not only allow freedom to say what you like but also opens the door to information that you would otherwise would not be able to obtain.

What is this chaos that you want to warn us about? The real chaos is not so much as mass violence but rather the break down of the status quo or the order of the day. Mass violence may or may not arise from it, who can say? Whether this is good or bad depends on the situation. Some argue that revolutions bring progress and benefits even at the cost of lives.

The other problem is that restrictions on freedom of speech will always lead to ignorance. Examples are censorship and sedition laws. You want society to be enlightened, then you need to expose the ignorant to freedom of speech.

There is an argument for controlled freedoms. Again this is mainly from those who are have more concerns for the order of the day than actual societal progress. Controlled change is pointless as it can get out of hand anyway or if too restrictive defeats the whole purpose in the first place.

My opinion is to trust the people. There will always be the ignorant but everyone wants a better life for themselves. Give them their freedoms and watch how they use it. Sure there will be extreme cases but you have this anyway whatever you do. Let the freedoms create checks and balances in society such as if you have one party pushing for a bad thing, you will have opponents checking them. Let the freedoms educate the masses.

If you want to make more observations, just take a look at the world wide web. It is a microcosm of a free society. There are lessons that we can learn from it to apply into Malaysian society. Do not be afraid of chaos. Just break it down and find out what this chaos you worry about is all about first lest your undefined worry stifle you.




Anyway, I once pointed out that freedom of speech should not be absolute. This is because it needs to be balanced out by social responsibility. Note here that social responsibility is not a binding law and is dynamic. I also mentioned that we should push back the boundaries of social responsibilities and hoped for a day when freedom of speech becomes absolute and is compatible with social responsibility. This is where education comes in to help achieve this ideal.

In regards with RPK's article I sense that it wasn't about absolute freedom of speech but rather it was against unqualified restrictions to freedom of speech placed by the government.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 1

Asam Laksa... Freedom of speech MUST be absolute... The alternative is what you have in Malaysia now. The Constitution says you have it but UMNO says NO!!!!. Who will be the arbiter ... you??... me??? or the some narrow minded bigot in a position to use fear to get his way.

You talk about social responsibility... I'd prefer to call it Social Constipation... its yet another way of one person trying to control someone else's freedoms.

Oh.. you cant scratch your balls in public, its socially irresponsible!!!!!

My question is once again... Who will be the Arbiter??

In a Free Society its common sense for minor problems and the Courts for major problems. After all the Courts are supposed to be the place where Society's norms interface with the law

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 0

AsamLaksa,
True what you say.
Point noted - you do articulate yrself quite well ...
Like I said, rulers create a situation that warrants controls - and use it to impose newer restrictive laws. It's the dictators "wet dream", what we have now.
My concern is how the sectarian nature of "political awareness", confusion and even freedom, can by itself be exploited by some quarters.

Actually, what triggered this off wasn't what RPK wrote - that was cool, and I know what he meant.
It was Robbespierre's quote demanding "There must be absolutely no limits on liberty...."- I thought it was rather 'extreme' and is prone to be misconstrued.
It does have some 'unsettling' qualities in it - to idealistic.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 1

See what I mean, AsamLaksa?
Densemy does have a point y'know.....

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 0

Cruz, I agree Densemy has a point, a big one in fact which appeals to my idealistic side. However there are finer points in social responsibility that he is missing. Social responsibility is not a fixed rule nor a full barrier. It is dynamic. It changes. It is a limit that society sets, not lawmakers. Thus in his example of crotch scratching, it is irresponsible but not unlawful. I would suggest Densemy learn more about social responsibility before condemning it outright.

It's difficult to define social responsibility as today's definition may not be valid tomorrow due to it's dynamic nature. Breach of social responsibility does not necessarily lead to sanctions. Everyone learns social responsibility by mixing in society, there's plenty of breaches but nothing happens. It all depends on the society.

For example wearing red to a Chinese funeral is socially irresponsible as it is insensitive to the bereaved. If you are not aware of such taboo, it is always best to ask around before making a faux pas. The repercussion? Well, people talk behind your back and you may end up a social outcast.

I disagree with laws that restrict speech. However there should be laws in place for others wronged by this freedom to seek redress, meaning action by individuals, not action by governments. This is usually seen in defamation and privacy cases, though it is more about tort rather than social responsibility.

Thus, does social responsibility restrict freedom of speech? Yes. The next question is to what degree and how reasonable it is. We also have to see human rights as a whole, not just champion one aspect of it. Freedom of speech may infringe on your right to lead a private life. Again a balancing act.

My opinion is that there should be no direct laws to restrict speech. I am not afraid of the dangers of absolute freedom of speech but my concern is on the effect on individuals who suffer from irresponsible use of this freedom. This is where the balance that I mentioned comes in. Densemy's ideal is possible but will take more time for society to progress to that stage. Thus I am not in total opposition of Densemy's ideal but I am concerned of the safeguards that needs to be in place.

Cruz, if you are concerned about freedom of speech being exploited, then the answer is social responsibility. Fairness is part of social responsibility thus if the principle is applied correctly, it is less likely for freedom of speech to be exploited. Such as absolute freedom of speech means that you can post compromising photos of anyone on the net for all to see but if you act within social responsibilities, you know that is simply wrong and won't do it. Thus a restriction but a reasonable one.

Social responsibility is not a law nor is it all about restricting rights. It is really empowerment for society to act. What does it mean to be a responsible person in society? Well, first thing is to be aware of issues affecting the society. It also means to evaluate the issues, find out more if needed and allow every party a fair chance to express their opinions. Then if there is a breach of principles such as corruption, deceit, slander, etc, society should act to redress it.

One example is Ahmad Said's pendatang speech. I say let him speak as it is his freedom to express his opinion no matter how socially irresponsible it was. I do not want him arrested and charged as a criminal. Instead the repercussion I am hoping for is for society to get their act together as a responsible society recognising wrongs and the denouncing him and make sure he lose office or never gain office. Note here social responsibility does not restrict his freedom of speech but rather to act against the breach he committed.

Germany where social responsibility is a big issue with it's Nazi past still allows certain neo-Nazi activities which goes to show social responsibility isn't a full barrier against freedom of speech.

Many of my points still need fine tuning.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 1