For more about me, please read this.
When I criticize those that share my skin color, those that do not share my skin color celebrate me as a liberal.
When I criticize those that do not share my skin color, they denounce me as a racist.
That is most unfair. Nobody is immune from criticism.
I think many people have yet to free themselves from primitive communal thinking.
Should the state stop meddling in marriage institution?
As Nancy Polikoff, an American University law professor, argues, the marriage license no longer draws reasonable dividing lines regarding which adult obligations and rights merit state protection. A woman married to a man for just nine months gets Social Security survivor’s benefits when he dies. But a woman living for 19 years with a man to whom she isn’t married is left without government support, even if her presence helped him hold down a full-time job and pay Social Security taxes. A newly married wife or husband can take leave from work to care for a spouse, or sue for a partner’s wrongful death. But unmarried couples typically cannot, no matter how long they have pooled their resources and how faithfully they have kept their commitments.
Possession of a marriage license is no longer the chief determinant of which obligations a couple must keep, either to their children or to each other. But it still determines which obligations a couple can keep — who gets hospital visitation rights, family leave, health care and survivor’s benefits. This may serve the purpose of some moralists. But it doesn’t serve the public interest of helping individuals meet their care-giving commitments. [Taking Marriage Private. Coontz, Stephanie. New York Times. November 25 2007]
Though the article is written with the US society in mind, the idea is applicable in Malaysia too. Plus, the act of shooing the state out of marriage institution may be one of many methods to dismantle Malaysian moral police.
Among many metropolises in the US, Chicago is the city I have visited the most. It is one of my favorite cities, beautiful during autumn and winter time, much better during spring and summer. I wish my old hard drive had not died on me. Too much of my past is buried in that hard drive, driving me insane, losing my mind for a time. For me to get to Chicago from little Ann Arbor, I always rode along I-94 highway. Crisscrossing the Midwest, it took me some time to notice a town called Gary in Indiana. My recent hiking trip brought me passed Rawang and the surprisingly bustling town north of Kuala Lumpur reminds me of that town in Indiana.
Gary is a typical, mostly uninteresting town around Lake Michigan. By comparison, Ann Arbor is richer in so many ways despite being slightly larger than Gary. Gary’s history however pulls it out of obscurity, if one cares to learn about its dark past.
Apart from being the home of the Jackson family and for fans of Star Wars, Ralph McQuarrie, the city was closely linked to the steel industry. It was the home of the largest integrated steel mill in the northern hemisphere, owned by the United States Steel Corporation. Perhaps, needless to say, in times when environmentalism has yet to firmly take hold in public consciousness, heavy industries like steel manufacturing produce heavy pollution. For Gary, the air, water and earth were not spared. Nothing escaped the unwanted byproducts of steel manufacturing. Hurley writes:
Every evening the mills presented viewers with a display of giant torches, erupting sparks, and massive factories engraved against a glowing red sky. Day and night, black and red smoked wafted through the atmosphere while oils, greases, and chemicals streaked across rivers and lakes. [Environmental Inequalities. Huxley, Andrew]
While on my way to St. Louis to celebrate Thanksgiving, I remember passing through Gary and explaining to a friend why Gary was remarkable as far as the steel industry is concerned. Unlike what had been pictured by my readings however, Gary nowadays does not suffer from the pollution it once had to endure any longer.
Prior that trip that brought me to Rawang, years ago, it was a forgettable town. The only thing that kept Rawang inside my consciousness was the fact that the town sat at the very end of the Malayan Railways’ electric train service. Now, it is an active town with respectable night scene and noticeable traffic congestion, perhaps signaling the economic growth it is undergoing.
My friends and I stopped at Rawang for dinner. It was not long before we found ourselves leaving Rawang, hopping on the North-South Highway back to Kuala Lumpur, back to home. Just after the Rawang toll gate, visibility suddenly dropped to an alarming level. Naturally, the question had to pop up: “Wassup?”
A friend on the wheel explained that Rawang is home to a large cement mill. “Dust is everywhere”, he said. Just a few kilometers behind, APM, a cement producer, churned more cement that many dependent on, undoubtedly contributing to the bad air quality.
“Had anybody complained?”
Sadly, “yes and it is falling on deaf ears.” He continued further by stating that foreign companies enjoy lower cost in Malaysia because of lower environmental standards. In developed countries, the environmental requirements are so tight that it makes economic sense to move out and operate elsewhere where the cost is cheaper.
I am unsure how much a parallel Rawang is to Gary but the dusty, smoggy Rawang air does somewhat perfectly fit the bill I had in my mind for Gary. I will not be happy in Rawang, coughing all the day, clearing my throat of residuals from industrial activities related to cement production.
Al-Jazeera interviewed S.K. Devamany of the Malaysian Indian Congress, asking his opinion regarding the recent HINDRAF-organized rally.
The following is a rough transcript which I transcribed and wish to share with the readers of this blog. There are some unclear words as interjections occurred throughout the interview. The Malaysian accent itself does not help.
The interview begins in the middle of the video.
[youtube]rlWmafBG1Mo[/youtube]
Al-Jazeera: Joining us now for some reaction on the phone from the Malaysian state of Pahang is S.K. Devamany. He is a Member of Parliament for the Malaysian Indian Congress which I should point out is part of the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition government. Sir, can I ask you to begin with, why is it appropriate for the police to be using tear gas and liquid chemical to disperse a peaceful crowd?
S.K. Devamany: Hello…?
AJ: Yes, sir. I’m just asking you why is it appropriate to use force?
SKD: Yes… I think that… Hello? Hello?
AJ: Sir, I’m asking you Why is it appropriate for the police to be using tear gas and liquid chemical to disperse a peaceful crowd?
SKD: First of all, this country Malaysia has been independent for 50 years. And peace has been order of the day. And we have brought tremendous development to this nation. And I must tell you that if this gathering has been orchestrated by people who are not responsible, then it is no good for nation building.
AJ: But…
SKD: 50 years of nationhood has been great.
AJ: …but sir, the, the protest was proceeding peacefully. You said it was illegal but for all intents and purposes, it was a peaceful protest. So, why react with force?
SKD: So, probably the last protest also was reacted in the same manner. If the crowd was probably not… — also unprecedented. And I am not there to see how the police is actually handling the situation. But I must tell you in Malaysia, we don’t have a culture of protest this way. We are a democratic country, people can [unclear] through their ballot boxes, their patrons for candidates, and other presentations.
AJ: Why then—
SKD: And then… [unclear]…
AJ: —why then if there is a democratic process in place do you not allow protest to take place. These people had requested for a permit and you turned it down. Why is that necessary?
SKD: I think the intention was… was wrong. I think because religion [unclear] used and religion issue is very sensitive in this part of the nation. [unclear] multi-religious nation and things can go out of place when emotions are flaring.
AJ: But hold on…
SKD: [unclear] very careful when we are dealing with emotion.
AJ: …you seem to be suggesting that the protesters were causing the violence but in fact that was not the case. It was—
SKD: [unclear]
AJ: —clearly the… the police that were taking the aggressive stance by firing tear gas and spraying chemical through water cannon. They—
SKD: [unclear]
AJ: —were not provoked by the protesters.
SKD: [unclear]. We have to see the type of people who came for the demonstration. I am not there, but I wish that the demonstrators are mature and know how to handle themselves—
AJ: Sir, what do you mean by… what do you mean by type of people? …
SKD: —[unclear].
AJ: … Are you referring to the fact that these people are of.. are of Indian ethnicity? Is that something the government cannot accept, Indians taking to the streets?
SKD: No, no. I don’t think so. I don’t think so. The PM Prime Minister has been giving tremendous allowances for openness, and feedbacks from the people, the press has been given freedom, legislatively, the freedom has been given the last 4 years.
AJ: Okay.
SKD: And the result of [unclear] because of the openness. And I think the reaction could be instigated by one or two incidents which could have been overshot, overblown. And that is a reason. A layman doesn’t know exactly what is being done.
AJ: Alright. S.K. Devamany on the phone. I’m afraid we have to leave it there. But we do appreciate you giving us your comment.
SKD: If you asked me, my, my… [unclear].
AJ: S.K. Devamany from the Malaysian Indian Congress.
So, did the MP answer the question?
The new Rudd administration vows to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. As far as environmental policy is concerned, I am quietly celebrating the fall of the Howard administration in favor of the incoming one. Nevertheless, I doubt Australian ratification of the Protocol will directly affect global greenhouse gases emissions. That however does not mean having Australia amounts to nothing.
Politically, it puts pressure on the United States to do the same. Furthermore, ratification of the Kyoto Protocol or more importantly, clear directed action to reduce greenhouse gases gives Australia the moral authority to pressure developing countries, specifically China and India to improve their emissions.
There are only 5 more years before the Protocol lapsed and while I do hold high hopes for it, results from the Protocol have been mixed so far. The disastrous handling of emissions permits in Europe is especially disheartening, perhaps suggesting and illustrating how emissions permits-based policy may be practically inferior to Pigovian taxes, despite theoretically being an equivalence. But take hearts for discussion on the son of Kyoto to improve the Kyoto Protocol in already under way. The conference in Bali in December this year is the next important step towards that direction, almost 15 years after the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro.
Just earlier this week, the final part of the 4th Assessment Report was released by the IPCC. The key point of the report is that we as a species now are more certain that human is the cause of the current climate change. That has helped steered debate on climate change away from “what caused it?” to “how to prevent and mitigate its effects?”.
On other front, the award of two Nobel Prizes to climate change related topics increases public awareness on the issue. In fact, being a person that loves to go against the flow, with so many people now a green-convert, I think it is now unfashionable for me to be a green. But at least, I could say, I became a green before you became a green. Hah!
Meanwhile, allow me to congratulate all Australians. I, as a citizen of ASEAN, will look forward to embrace a more understanding, cooperative and respectful Australia.