Why is our education system so chaotic?

Why is our education system so chaotic?

By LIM MUN FAH
Translated by Adeline Lee

Following the revelation that the state Departments of Education had tried to convert teachers who could not speak the mother tongue of the students but were deployed to teach Bahasa Malaysia to lower primary students in Chinese and Tamils schools, to academic tutors, it is now learned that Chinese schools are asked to reduce the number of classes.

Who issued the order?

Johor State Education Department Director Markom Giran said: "The instruction is from the Ministry of Education."

Deputy Minister of Education Datuk Ir Dr. Wee Ka Siong said: "It is not the idea of the Ministry of Education."

One is the Director, the other the Deputy Minister. But are they talking to each other? Who shall we listen to in the end?

If we pursued the matter further, I am afraid the answer would be "it is a communication problem", and the issue would be swept under the carpet again. Whether it is a case of "the top has their policies, those at the bottom have their measures of getting around the policy", it does not really matter, for in truth it has become an "annual event". The "Little Napoleons" will continue to be "Little Napoleons". What can you do to him?

Yes, no doubt that the directive from the Ministry of Education has been issued after much expectation. But the fact is that many of the non-Chinese speaking teachers who have been deployed to teach primary one and two students in Chinese schools still remain at the school, waiting for other assignment by the Department of Education. And because many of the principals worry about being taken to task subsequently, they therefore decide to play it safe, and not to act rashly.

On the one hand, the Ministry of Education is formally issuing the order that only bilingual teachers can teach primary one and two students in Chinese and Tamil schools, on the other hand, the Johor state Department of Education has demonstrated its amazing "efficiency" in quickly sending a number of Malay teachers to teach English and Malay to upper primary students to Chinese and Tamil schools.

The former group is still lingering behind in the school and yet this group is coming thick and fast. This has resulted in the surplus of Malay teachers in some Chinese schools, giving the school administration a big headache, and making the parents deeply worried over their children’s progress.

The schools which have been instructed to reduce the number of classes also have the problem of excess teachers. It is said that the extra teachers will be deployed to teach in other schools, making the teachers upset and anxious. Some relief teachers may face the misfortune of being laid off and the sudden loss of their ambition and favourite career has put them into a helpless predicament.

In contrast, Johor still faces a serious teacher shortage. According to state Education Director Markom Giran, Chinese and Tamil primary schools in Johor are still short of 1,125 teachers; and secondary schools, 559 teachers. As for the new teacher trainee graduates, they have to wait until February to take office. But they only number about 200.

It is reported that currently there are 1,950 graduates holding teachers’ bachelor’s degrees who completed their studies in December 2010. They have yet to be assigned to schools to teach, because there is a delay in the recognition of their degree qualifications. The new school term has begun for several days, but the already graduated and qualified teachers are still unemployed. This is an incredibly chaotic situation!

Why is this absurd imbalance in the teachers’ training programme continuously repeated? When will the chaos in our education system ever be resolved?

Sin Chew Daily

MySinchew 2011.1.7

看RPK如何反击回教国课题。 Is it yes or is it no?

Is it yes or is it no?

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Tuesday, 18 January 2011 Super Admin

Another way of looking at this Bernama report would be that as long as PAS remains in Pakatan Rakyat then Malaysia can never be turned into an Islamic State and only if PAS joins Barisan Nasional can Malaysia be turned into an Islamic State. That is the implication or suggestion of this Bernama report.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Pas a casualty in Opposition alliance, say analysts

Pas will not be able to pursue the Islamic State agenda through the opposition alliance as it is strongly opposed by the DAP, said political analysts.

Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) Terengganu political science lecturer Asri Salleh said PAS would be a political casualty in the alliance if it continue to pursue the agenda.

"While the DAP has been outspoken against the idea, the PKR (Parti Keadilan Rakyat) has yet to state its stand on whether it is supporting the agenda. So PAS is forced to compromise its struggle to support the common agenda of the opposition.”

"As such, it is better for PAS to be outside the alliance. Otherwise it is feared that it will eventually be in disarray," he told Bernama here today.

On Jan 9, PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang was reported as saying that the party would pursue the Islamic State agenda and would not bow to pressure from members of the alliance.

However, in his blog the next day, Abdul Hadi denied the report and retorted that PAS would be the guardian of the trust entrusted to strengthen Islam as the official religion where changes made would be within the ambit of the constitution.

Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia's Institute of Ethnic Studies director Prof Datuk Dr Shamsul Amri Baharudin, who also feel that PAS should leave the alliance, said off late PAS was seen to be distancing itself from the alliance in the wake of its foray on the Islamic state agenda.

"This is a sign that PAS wants to get out of the opposition alliance," he said when contacted by Bernama.

He said the Islamic State stance was also aimed at testing the acceptance of PKR adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and the DAP. "No harm done if PAS get out of the alliance. Discussions on Islamic State should be convened with a Malay party."

"If PAS is with Barisan Nasional, definitely it will be in a better position. In the opposition alliance, it doesn't get anywhere. So it should think about the unity government again in the interests of the people," he said. -- Bernama

*********************************************

The above news item by Bernama and carried by The Malay Mail paints a very negative picture of PAS indeed. It is not so much the news that is negative but the way they have presented the news. Actually, if you read it properly, it is very positive for Pakatan Rakyat.

But that is how things are done. It is not so much the substance that is the issue but the packaging of the issue. And in the case of PAS, it is a victim of bad packaging. I mean; if you know how to package properly, even boys in Thailand can be made to look more delicious than girls and you would not find out till it is too late that you are a victim of very clever packaging (or that you never realised all these years what you have been missing).

Okay, MCA is telling the Chinese to be very careful of Pakatan Rakyat. If Pakatan Rakyat were to form the federal government then PAS would dominate the government and then Malaysia would be turned into an Islamic State.

Umno, on the other hand, is telling the Malays the opposite -- and that is if Pakatan Rakyat were to form the federal government then DAP would dominate the government and the Malays would be left behind (as if the Malays are not already left behind -- except for the Umno cronies -- with almost 54 years of an Umno-led government).

I have already said this before many times and I will say it again. How can PAS dominate the government when it contests only one-third the seats and wins less than half those seats it contests? Don’t you need a two-thirds majority in Parliament to amend the Federal Constitution of Malaysia to turn Malaysia into a Republic or an Islamic Republic or a Caliphate or an Absolute Monarchy or whatever (from its present Constitutional Monarchy Westminster System of Government)?

But today the government-owned mainstream media is telling us that PAS will never be able to turn Malaysia into an Islamic State because DAP, its partner in Pakatan Rakyat, will block this move. Why are they saying this?

Ah, that is why they are very clever. They are trying to say that DAP is an enemy of Islam. That is the underlying message.

And to reinforce this “DAP is an enemy of Islam” message, they have also raised the issue of the Selangor local councils refusing to bar Malays from being employed by businesses in the state that sell liquor. And they are pointing their fingers at Ronnie Liu -- as if Ronnie from DAP is anti-Islam.

But how can the state bar businesses that dabble in liquor from employing Malays? Does not PERNAS-owned businesses that sell liquor also employ Malays (and is not PERNAS government-owned)? Does not businesses in the KLIA -- such as tax-free shops that sell liquor -- which is in Selangor, also employ Malays? Does not MAS, which dabbles in liquor (and which is government-owned), also employ Malays?

If they really want to bar Malays from being employed by businesses that sell liquor then it first has to be national policy and a law passed by Parliament and the federal government must also do the same. Can the Selangor government raid all the businesses in KLIA and close them down if they sell liquor and employ Malays (since KLIA is in Selangor)?

Even airlines owned by Muslim countries don’t have this policy and even airports in Muslim countries have tax-free shops that sell liquor. And they also do not bar Muslims from drinking on these airlines or from buying liquor in their tax-free shops.

The trouble is they have not thought through this spin properly and if you just put on your thinking cap you can see that this is a bad spin that can blow up in their face.

The objective of this spin is to create friction between PAS and DAP and to show the Chinese that PAS has dangerous Islamic State tendencies and to show the Malays that DAP has dangerous anti-Islam tendencies. They sing one tune to the Chinese and another (opposite) tune to the Malays. But when the Chinese and Malays sit down and compare notes they can see that each community is being told the opposite of what the other community is being told.

“So PAS is forced to compromise,” said the Bernama report. That is negative (they use the word ‘forced’).

"This is a sign that PAS wants to get out of the opposition alliance," said the Bernama report. That is also negative (actually PAS is quite happy in Pakatan Rakyat).

"If PAS is with Barisan Nasional, definitely it will be in a better position,” said the Bernama report. But they did not say in what way PAS will definitely be in a better position if it joins Barisan Nasional. Better position to do what? To turn Malaysia into an Islamic State? Explain, please, explain! In what way will PAS be in a better position if it leaves Pakatan Rakyat and joins Barisan Nasional?

See how Bernama has spun the story with innuendos but with no clear explanation? “PAS is a casualty by remaining in Pakatan Rakyat”. “It would get a better deal by joining Barisan Nasional”.

How has PAS become a casualty in Pakatan Rakyat and how would it get a better deal in Barisan Nasional?

Look, if PAS wants to turn Malaysia into an Islamic State and if DAP is blocking the move (as they say), are they trying to say that if PAS leaves Pakatan Rakyat and joins Barisan Nasional then its aspiration of turning Malaysia into an Islamic State would be realised? Do they mean to say that Barisan Nasional will agree to turn Malaysia into an Islamic State if PAS leaves Pakatan Rakyat and joins Barisan Nasional?

Another way of looking at this Bernama report would be that as long as PAS remains in Pakatan Rakyat then Malaysia can never be turned into an Islamic State and only if PAS joins Barisan Nasional can Malaysia be turned into an Islamic State. That is the implication or suggestion of this Bernama report.

Can we now hear what the other 13 non-Umno members of Barisan Nasional have to say about this? What have MCA, MIC, Gerakan, PPP and the almost ten Sabah and Sarawak parties got to say? Do they agree with what Bernama said?

Be careful what you spin because we too know how to counter-spin. And we can counter-spin better than you can spin. And once we counter-spin we will catch you with your pants down.

Anyway, on another issue, many scream, rant and rave that the Malaysian Civil Liberties Movement (MCLM) should stay out of the elections because we don’t want to see three-corner fights. Let it be straight fights between Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat to ensure that Pakatan Rakyat would win enough seats to form the next government.

That is what they scream, rant and rave.

Fine, let us make sure that Pakatan Rakyat wins the next election and every by-election in between.

Pakatan Rakyat lost the last two by-elections in Kelantan and Sabah. At the end of this month we will be facing another by-election in Johor. And Malaysia Today has asked for donations to help Pakatan Rakyat win the by-election in Johor at the end of this month.

And do you know how much donations have come in? The UK bank account that we advertised saw only RM200 in donations. And the Bank Islam Kuala Lumpur bank account saw less than RM20,000 in donations.

So don’t talk lah! You all scream, rant and rave but when we ask you to help Pakatan Rakyat we can’t even see RM100,000 in donations (I was hoping to see at least RM200,000 in donations). Barisan Nasional spends RM100 million for every by-election (when you include the overnight development they pour into the constituency). And you expect Pakatan Rakyat to fight Barisan Nasional’s RM100 million with less than RM20,000?

Now do you know why I whack those who talk too much? Yes, I may be cocky and arrogant in my replies to your comments. And that is because you scream, rant and rave but are not really serious about ensuring that Pakatan Rakyat wins the elections. And if the height of your commitment is less than RM20,000 for a by-election then shut the fuck up. Don’t talk too much.

http://malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/37496-is-it-yes-or-is-it-no

Do they value the presence of the PM more than God?

God-fearing Christians would have defended the crucifixes, Jesus Christ and God. Do they value the presence of the PM more than God?

By Jackson Ng (former journalist)

BEFORE I start whacking the organisers of the Christmas Eve gathering at the St John’s Cathedral, let me state clearly that I am not a Christian.

I am a free thinker but I believe in the existence God and I am God-fearing.

I have decided to pen my thoughts because I see this as an issue about God-fearing principles. It is not just a Christian issue.

Then, you may say that I have no right to talk about Christians but I have every right to talk about universal acceptance of basic principles and the rights of mankind.

The removal of crucifixes and banning of singing hymns at St John’'s Cathedral constitute a violation of religious freedom guaranteed under Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak’s aides ordered the removal, claiming the crucifixes would be offensive to the prime minister.

That is too ridiculous for me to fathom.

Of course, the issue has naturally become political but my concern is not with the PM or his pea-brain aides who are, in my view, beyond redemption.

But I do take offence and take to task the event organisers.

Are they not God-fearing Christians, just like Muslims are also God-fearing?

Why then did the organisers remove the sacred crucifixes? Isn’t it logical to deduce that they are not God-fearing beings but Satan-fearing arse-licking politicians who claim to be Christians?

God-fearing Christians would have defended the crucifixes, Jesus Christ and God.

Do they value the presence of the PM more than God?

I say the organisers could have just politely told the PM’s pea-brain aides that the crucifixes cannot be removed and neither could hymn-singing be stopped on the eve of Christmas.

Then leave it to the PM and the pea-brain aides to decide whether they want to attend the function or not.

As it was, the organisers, for reasons best known to them, felt the presence of the PM was more important than their Jesus Christ and God.

To them, it was more important for the PM to grace the function and, therefore, abandon Jesus Christ and their God.

Disgraceful and shameful are two words best to describe the organisers.

God-fearing Christians must therefore start defending Jesus Christ and their God by throwing out the organisers from their holy house of worship. If not, they too are condoning what they did.

The Prime Minister is most welcome to visit any place of worship but conditions should not be imposed, as freedom to practice religion is guaranteed under the Constitution.

If he had felt offensive about the place of worship, there is then no necessity for him to visit is there?

http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/letterssurat/37165-blame-the-arse-licking-non-god-fearing-organisers-

Unfair to deny Anwar’s defence access to documents, says Bar Council

Malaysia

Unfair to deny Anwar’s defence access to documents, says Bar Council

By Boo Su-Lyn

November 25, 2010

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 25 — The Bar Council has called the courts’ refusal to allow Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim access to documents in his Sodomy II trial a violation of his right to a fair trial.

Recently, the High Court here denied the Opposition Leader access to three Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL) doctors’ medical notes, although the court subsequently granted him access yesterday to a proforma report prepared by HKL forensic pathologist Dr Siew Sheue Feng.

A proforma report is a form or a list prepared by a doctor before performing an examination on a patient.

In January, the Federal Court had also denied Anwar access to key documents he sought to prepare his defence, and ruled that he was only entitled to documents and materials related to the charge that had already been provided to him.

“Some of these recent court decisions...have been myopic and regrettably regressive,” said Bar Council president Ragunath Kesavan in a statement today.

“They have in fact whittled down the strength of this vital tenet, rendering it meaningless and subverting the accused person’s right to a fair trial,” he added, referring to section 51A of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) that covers the production of documents and information in a trial.

Ragunath pointed out that section 51A of the CPC was meant to reduce inequalities between the prosecution and the defence.

“We believe that, in enacting section 51A of the Criminal Procedure Code to expand and strengthen the principle governing production of documents, the government made plain its intention to level the playing field between the prosecution and the defence, and to increase

transparency and fairness in the country’s criminal justice system,” he said.

Among the documents that the Federal Court had refused Anwar were chemist reports, medical notes, CCTV recordings, DNA samples, witness statements, and a witness list.

Ragunath pointed out that it was crucial for the prosecution to fully disclose information to all parties so that a judge could make an informed decision.

“It is the responsibility of all parties, including the judge, to ensure that the prosecution complies with full disclosure in terms of the information provided to the parties involved and produced in court,” he said.

“Only when all these elements are present can the judge make an informed decision on the credibility of the witnesses, and the weight to be given to their testimony,” he added.

Ragunath claimed that refusal to produce documents or information would mar public perception of the criminal justice system.

“Non-production of any documents and information merely gives rise to the perception, in the public mind, of a cover-up and would surely erode public confidence in the criminal justice system,” he added.

Anwar, the 62-year-old PKR de facto leader, is currently facing sodomy charges for the second time in his life.

The former deputy prime minister is charged with sodomising Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan at Unit 11-5-1 of the Desa Damansara Condominium in Jalan Setiakasih, Bukit Damansara here between 3.01pm and 4.30pm on June 26, 2008.

Anwar has denied the charge, describing it as “evil, frivolous lies by those in power” when the charge was read out to him. He is charged under section 377B of the Penal Code and can be sentenced to a maximum of 20 years’ jail and whipping upon conviction.

The trial is taking place 18 months after Anwar was charged in court in August 2008.

He was charged with sodomy and corruption in 1998 after he was sacked from the Cabinet and was later convicted and jailed for both offences.

He was freed in September 2004 and later resurrected his political career by winning back his Permatang Pauh parliamentary seat in a by-election in 2008, which had been held in the interim by his wife.

He had two years ago led the loose opposition pact of PKR, DAP and PAS to a historic sweep of five states and 82 parliamentary seats in Election 2008.

“The Malaysian Bar urges the court to exercise its discretion...to preserve the rights of accused persons and in the interest of justice,” said Ragunath today.

“This concern is relevant not only to the Anwar Ibrahim case, but is applicable to the entire criminal justice system,” he added.

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/unfair-to-deny-anwars-defence-access-to-documents-says-bar-council/

Rewriting History: Kota Gelanggi (the lost city)..

Rewriting History: Kota Gelanggi (the lost city)..

A small piece of History for our future generation.. Why Kota Gelanggi (lost city) touted as earliest civilization in Malay Peninsula news were banned as they were Buddhist The Johor find of 2005 which was quietly dropped was none other than Kota Gelanggi lost city reflecting Srivijaya and its Buddhist splendour.

But they deliberately disregarded it because that would have sidelined Malacca Empire and Islam which was smaller and came some 500 years later. I met Dr Lee Kam Hing, a former History prof at MU in Singapore recently at a seminar. Dr Lee, who is now Star research director, told me he was
trying his best to highlight Kota Gelanggi, but that the govt killed it off. This is clearly another case to cover up the real history of Malaya and fool the younger generations into believing that our history only began from Malacca

1400.. Not only that, they try to show Parameswara as Malay and Muslim, but actually he was Hindu! If one were to condemn these UMNO scumbags on how they distort history, it will never end....the condemnations will more than cover 10 PhD thesis!

A small piece of History for our future generation Hitler's public relations manager, Goebbels, once said, 'If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.'

Once again our government wiped out any references to a famous Melaka prince as being Hindu and
belonging to the powerful Hindu empire Sri Vijaya.

So all of a sudden our museums, school text-books etc. all refer to Parameswara as a Malay prince.
What race ruled or did not rule is besides the point. What is important is not butchering history to create your own truths. You cannot change your race even if you convert - Parameswara could have been responsible for Umno's proud heritage of ' Ketuanan Melayu '.

If this is what it is based on, there is no ' Ketuanan Melayu '. The lineage of Melaka Sultans are Indians, not Malays. It is no secret that Parameswara was an Indian and a Hindu prince. It is clear from records that Parameswara never converted to Islam. He was an Indian Hindu who fled Palembang in Sumatra to eventually found Melaka circa 1400 AD. It was Sri Maharaja who converted himself and the court of Melaka to Islam, and as a result took on the name of
Sultan Muhammad Shah sometime after 1435.

The most famous of Indian Hindu Kings were Raja Chola and his son Rajendra Chola who invaded Southern Thailand, Kedah, Perak, Johor and Sumatra about 1000 AD. This is Raja-raja Chola - the Indian/Hindu kings and not Raja Chulan - a Malay king. But what is really sad is that our children are
taught as though Malaysian history suddenly began in 1400 with an Islamic Melaka. We are led to believe that the Indians and Chinese first arrived on the shores of Malaysia in about 1850 as desperate indentured labourers, farmers and miners . Nothing could be further from the truth.

The cultural influences of India in particular, and China, in South East Asia span over 2,000 years,
starting with the arrival from India of the Brahmanical prince/scholar - Aji Saka in Java in AD78, through to Vietnam, Cambodia (Indo China), Thailand,Burma, Indonesia, Bali, Borneo, Brunei and beyond.

The findings at Bujang Valley speak of an ancient Indian/Hindu presence in Kedah. There were Chinese settlements in Pahang and Kelantan around the 13th-14th century and in 12th century in Singapore. The early Brunei Sultanate had a Chinese Queen. One need not ponder at length the implications of Angkor Wat and Borobudur or that 40%-50% of Bahasa Malaysia comprises Sanskrit/Tamil words.

To illustrate, some of these word are :
bumi = boomi
putra = putran

raja = rajah
desa = thesam
syakti = sakthi
kolam = kulam
bahaya = abahya
jaya = jeya
maha = maha
aneka = aneha
nadi = naadi
kedai = kadai
mahligai = maaligai
mantra = manthrum
tandas = sandas
(This list can go on)
An extremely important archeological find that pointed to one of the greatest empires in history

- the Raja Cholan empire that ruled from the Maldives through India, Sri Lanka and right down to South East Asia found deep in the jungles of Johor a few years ago and made headlines in the mainstream newspapers in 2005, suddenly disappeared from the news…..

The time has arrived for us to record our history as the facts tell us and not as we would like to wish it.

The truth will never hurt anyone. Lies, always will .

http://national-express-malaysia.blogspot.com/2010/01/rewriting-history-kota-gelanggi-lost.html

Everyone in M’sia is racist except certain people

By Suresh Kashuerin, Free Malaysia Today

By Suresh Kashuerin

COMMENT It’s incredible that one line in Malay in the Namewee video – You tak baca? Siapa buat Malaysia kaya? – (You didn’t read? Who made Malaysia rich?) could cause such uproar among the guardians of Malay pride. Is it a case of “siapa makan cili rasa pedasnya (if the cap fits, wear it). Where were these same guardians of Malay pride when school principal Siti Inshah Mansor abused her Indian and Chinese pupils in outrageous language? There wasn’t even a peep out of them. She wasn’t accused of racism. In fact, she’s even being treated by the Education Ministry with kid gloves despite non-Malay uproar. It wouldn’t be surprising if she’s kicked upstairs soon as one of those modern-day heroines in Malay celluloid.

Then, there was the later case of a principal up north who advised the Chinese pupils of the school to go back to China since AirAsia flights were now every cheap. This was after they were caught eating at the school canteen by the principal during the fasting hours. They were accused, in some kind of warped logic, of not respecting the holy Muslim fasting month of Ramadan.

What their own gnawing hunger has got to do with Ramadan and respect was not explained to the errant students.

Now, there’s a real possibility that this Namewee character will be charged soon with sedition. This emerged after police, who don’t seem to have better things to do with their time, grilled him for three hours. Sedition, put simply, is the act of stirring up rebellion against the state.

Within any context, a racist can be defined as one who denies others their place in the sun. Déjà vu? If one stands up for his or her place in the sun, without denying others their rights, the question of being racist does not arise.

In Malaysia, the definition of racism is the reverse.

Ibrahim Ali and Mahathir Mohamad of Perkasa routinely twist and turn every issue into a racial issue in order to play to the gallery and force the Malays to circle their wagons under one platform, that is, Umno. They are hailed as great heroes standing up for Malay rights.

Their hidden agenda is to mask the “thievery” that goes on under the guise of development. Government procurements and contracts cost twice, thrice and even up to 10 times what it should cost the taxpayer. So, behind the rhetoric and polemics generated by Ibrahim and Mahathir to pull the wool over the people’s eyes, they are in cahoots with their “comrades in crime” who steal the people’s sweat from the public treasury.

When Hindraf Makkal Sakthi kicked up a fuss over the continuing marginalisation of the Indian underclass in the country, they were accused of being racists. The New Economic Policy (1970-1990) pledged, among others, that poverty would be eradicated irrespective of race, religion, class and caste.

Elsewhere, when Hindraf pointed out that Article 153 of the Federal Constitution provides for the legitimate aspirations of the non-Malays and non-Natives, they were accused of questioning Malay special privileges. In fact, Article 153 doesn’t mention special privileges at all.

Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim himself, ironically fighting on a platform of change and reform, accused Hindraf of being racists and questioning Malay rights and privileges. He was playing to the gallery, like Umno, to project himself as the great protector of the Malays but at other people’s expense.

Hindraf was further accused of stoking racism when it stressed that Article 153 only mentions a reasonable proportion for the Malays and Natives in four specific areas, namely intake into the civil service; intake into government-owned institutions of higher learning and training privileges; government scholarships; and opportunities created by the government to do business.

The implication is that Article 153 is a “sapu bersih” (clean sweep) policy which gives a licence to commit the worst transgressions in the name of race.

Ninety per cent of the staffing strength in the civil service today is Malay, a number which is way above the 60% they represent in the population. When this was pointed out, the Chief Secretary to the federal government explained with a straight face that intake was based purely on merit and that there was no quota system. In short, the Malays and Natives don’t need the protection of Article 153 to secure jobs in the civil service.

Again, the NEP pledged that there would be no identification of race with economic function and place of residence.

It’s like a “heads I win, tails you lose” kind of policy in government. This means certain people are always on the winning side while others are forced to be born losers all the time through no fault of their own. This is not racism, according to the perpetrators.

On the other side of the South China Sea, there has been no Borneonisation of the federal civil service as pledged by the Malaysia Agreement. Almost all the top jobs are held by Malay civil servants from Peninsular Malaysia in the fashion of the British colonialists.

The federal government is also not being shared equally by Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak.

In politics, the local proxies of the ruling elite in Putrajaya are used to prevent the majority community – Dayak in Sarawak and the KadazanDusunMurut in Sabah – from heading the state administrations or being appointed as governors or ambassadors.

At the board level in Petronas, and its numerous subsidiaries, there’s not even one person from Sabah or Sarawak. When queried recently in Parliament, the reply from the federal government is that race is not used by Petronas as a criterion in appointments to the board. If that’s the case, why is that all Petronas board members, and subsidiaries, are from the same community? Not racism!

Everyone in M’sia is racist except certain people

READ MORE HERE.

http://malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/newscommentaries/34281-everyone-in-msia-is-racist-except-certain-people


http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/fmt-english/opinion/comment/9950-everyone-in-msia-is-racist-except-certain-people

Stocktaking Malaysia

Stocktaking Malaysia

By Deborah Loh | 31 August 2010 |

Not Malaysia's finest moment

LAST year, the Merdeka Day spirit was dampened by the actions of the Shah Alam residents who used a severed cow head to protest the relocation of a Hindu temple to their largely Muslim neighbourhood. This year, the run-up to Merdeka saw a school head in Kulaijaya, Johor, who, besides other slurs, told her charges that non-Malay Malaysians are just passengers in this country.

These are not the only issues that beleaguer our nation as we celebrate our 53rd year of independence. From race politics to human rights to plunging foreign direct investments (FDI), there’s a whole host of challenges our young nation is facing.

And so, more than half a decade after we gained independence, how far we have come as a nation and where we are headed?

A glossy surface

Confirmation bias at work?

Of course, there has been progress. Our country is modern, it’s infrastructure admirable. The middle-class has grown while the lower income group is aided with public health, education and housing. We are apparently the 37th best country in the world to live in, and this is supposedly proof that we are not corrupt.

Malaysia has also improved in its competitiveness rankings from 18th place last year to 10th this year, the IMDB World Competitiveness Yearbook 2010 said. That’s progress, considering that Malaysia was ranked 22nd in 2006. The government attributes this improvement partly to initiatives like the Government Transformation Programme and the National Key Result Areas.

We also weathered the 1987 currency crisis, and the 2008 global financial crisis. The local economy is now exceeding expectations, with Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth hitting 9.5% for the first half of this year, thanks to domestic demand and exports. It’s a good performance and a sign that our recovery is on track, analysts say, given that the rest of the world economy is still struggling with uncertainty.

These are the kinds of indicators the government blows its trumpet over. However, competitiveness rankings merely indicate the ease of starting or doing business in a country. At the same time, GDP figures don’t tell the full story of whether a country’s wealth is being equally shared.

Additionally, do these measurements really tell us anything about the nation’s soul?

The underbelly

There are other studies that suggest another story about Malaysia (© Lainie Yeoh)

There are other indices and reports that suggest another story about Malaysia.

Take the Gini coefficient of income disparity, where a higher score closer to 1.0 indicates greater inequality. It’s been noted that despite the New Economic Policy, we’ve not made progress in reducing the gap between rich and poor, not only between the different races but within the same race.

Our overall Gini coefficient in 1990 was 0.442 and remained on the increase till 2004, when it was 0.462. It came down to 0.441 in 2007. The government plans to reduce the gap to 0.35 by 2020, as stated in the Mid-Term Review of the Ninth Malaysia Plan. But will we get there when suggestions for meritocracy and liberalising the economy are not discussed rationally but instead slammed as seditious?

Then there is data that tells of how we value our women. Malaysian women remain economically disadvantaged. Their participation in the Malaysian workforce hasn’t changed much since 1980, when women made up 44.1% of the workforce. In 2008, female labour participation was only slightly up at 45.7%. And yet, studies have shown that the more women are able to work, the more the economy benefits as do their families.

Marina Mahathir (right) negotiating with a police officer (© pic courtesy of Sheiko Reto)

Women are also increasingly discriminated, especially Muslim women who don’t have the same freedoms as non-Muslim women, activist Datin Paduka Marina Mahathir has noted.

Malaysia intends to have 30% of women in decision-making positions under the Ninth Malaysia Plan. But with only 10% of Parliament comprising women, and 8% of 505 state seats occupied by women assemblypersons, we are below the world average of 16%.

Women’s low participation in the workforce and in politics earned Malaysia 101th place in the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index 2009. Malaysia’s ranking on this score has been steadily declining since we were ranked 72 in 2006.

Malaysia’s poor civil liberties and human rights track record is also well-documented, in its treatment of migrants and refugees, handling of human trafficking, and use of repressive laws. There has been little progress whether under prime ministers Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi or Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

Partly not free? (© publik15 | Flickr)

International human rights monitor Freedom House ranks Malaysia as a “partly free” country in its Freedom in the World 2009 survey. In its press freedom rankings for 2010, it ranks Malaysia as “not free” at a position of 141 out of 196 countries, and 31 out of 40 countries in the Asia Pacific. Reporters Without Borders marked an increased score in Malaysian press freedom in 2009, but the country’s position was still low at 131 out of 175 countries.

Telling figures

Our track record on human rights, including political and press freedom, has some impact on our standing in other indices, such as the Corruption Perception Index (CPI), and FDI. Corruption finds a comfortable environment when a government rules without transparency and with impunity, when the media is curbed from reporting fearlessly, when critics are regularly silenced, and when judicial independence is suspect.

So it’s little wonder that Malaysia doesn’t show improvement on the CPI, which gauges the perceived level of corruption in the public sector. We were 43rd place out of 179 countries in 2007 and have slid to 56th out of 180 in 2009.

Corruption is of course not the sole reason why Malaysia‘s FDI has plunged, but it does have a part in affecting confidence. We recorded our largest FDI drop — the biggest decline in Southeast Asia — of 81% from US$7.32 billion to US$1.38 billion between 2008 and 2009, according to the World Investment Report 2010. What a height to fall from when Malaysia was once a regional powerhouse. We are now only just a little better than Cambodia, Myanmar, Laos, Brunei and Timor Leste in attracting FDI.

And not too dissimilar with our brain drain problem, there is also more Malaysian money flowing out (US$8.04 billion) in overseas investments than there is foreign money coming in (US$1.38 billion). Do Malaysians not have confidence in their own country anymore?

Where confidence lies

Muslims visiting the Hindu temple in Shah Alam (pic courtesy of Maz Hamzah)

If there is confidence, it lies in the things that can’t be quantified, like the fact that Malaysians were living as 1Malaysia long before it was made a propaganda slogan. It’s in citizens who take it upon themselves to be peacemakers. Like the predominantly Muslim-Malay group who visited the Hindu temple in Shah Alam that was at the centre of the cow-head protest. Or the Fast for the Nation, Peace for Malaysia event on Malaysia Day, 16 September, in 2009.

Often, it is citizens, not politicians, who make a difference. Indeed, from the indicators cited, it is the politicians in power who seem bent on undermining what this country is capable of.

And so as a citizen, what would you do to make Malaysia a better place? Also, as a citizen, if you could make one suggestion for how the people in power can improve our nation, whether politically, economically or socially, what would it be?

This Merdeka, and onwards, let’s remember that independence isn’t about relinquishing control to the powers-that-be. Independence is about reclaiming power and control over the nation we call home.

http://www.thenutgraph.com/stocktaking-malaysia/