Category: Liberty

Categories
Conflict & disaster Economics Liberty

[2402] The cost to the Beijing development model

The rapid and successful economic development of China so far has been presented as the superiority of central planning over the approach taken, for example, by India. It is the Beijing development model as some would say. Authoritarian top-down approach gets things done, unlike the messy democratic means from the bottom up. All those criticisms weigh things down needlessly.

The recent high-speed train disaster that killed nearly 40 persons[1] should give advocates of the authoritarian approach a considerable pause the next time they try to sell the Beijing model over democratic ones. Reports are coming out that these infrastructure projects were rushed for the 90th anniversary of the Communist Party.[2] Results do not look good for the Chinese government.

The Beijing way of doing things has become controversial, especially after the accident.

How much of infrastructure projects all around China suffer from abuse of power or corruption in general? Was the accident a symptom of a rotten system?

Between authoritarian and democratic states, the former lacks real mechanism to make the state accountable. It will be hard to answer the questions even in democratic states, much less in ones like China’s.

Typical of authoritarian governments, the Chinese government is trying to muzzle investigations into the incident.[3] This is amid angry allegations of corruption with respect to these projects and specifically, the high-speed train system. That is an example how there is little accountability in China. Any reprimand is for public show only. Such reprimands have proven to be inconsequential. In Malaysian parlance, small fish.

Even before the train disaster, the system was already suffering from service interruptions, barely weeks after its official opening. Something must be wrong when so many glitches happened so frequently so soon.

Something is rotten in the state of China. That rottenness is the cost of the authoritarian model. There is a cost to absence of check and balance, of accountability, of freedom. It is a shame somebody has to die to learn that.

While India suffered from embarrassing criticisms before and during the last Commonwealth Games due to perhaps their incompetence in meeting deadlines, at least we knew the problems before it was too late. Remedies were taken. For China, there is a guessing game: which one is the facade and which one is real. As the train disaster showed, we found out about the rotten apples way too late.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[1] — BEIJING—The first high-speed train passed through the tracks where a deadly train collision occurred in eastern China, as authorities sought to soothe public concern over safety and the handling of the accident as well as jitters about the future of its prized high-speed rail system. [Norihiko Shirouzu. Beijing Seeks to Soothe Train Jitters. Wall Street Journal. July 26 2011]

[2] — China’s high-speed rail line between Beijing and Shanghai has been beset by glitches in the two weeks since it opened to great fanfare on the eve of the Chinese Communist Party’s 90th anniversary celebration. [David Pierson. China’s high-speed rail glitches: Racing to make errors?. Los Angeles Times. July 16 2011]

[3] — BEIJING — China has banned local journalists from investigating the cause of a deadly high-speed train crash that has triggered public outrage and raised questions over safety, reports said Tuesday. [Allison Jackson. China seeks to muzzle reporting on train crash. AFP. July 26 2011]

Categories
Liberty Society

[2401] No to the Ministry of Non-Muslim Affairs, again

I am a secularist. I strongly believe in the separation of the state and religion. At the very least, the state should not interfere in personal belief within libertarian constraint and religion should not influence the state to the extent that it transgresses individual liberty.

Although there are other concerns I have written throughout this blog of mine, my primary concern here contextualized within the latest development on the issue revolves around negative individual liberty.

Religion and other personal beliefs are private matters. As long as these beliefs do not contradict individual liberty, the state should get out of the bedroom so-to-speak. Recall the base function of the liberal state: the protection of individual negative liberty.

The separation between the state and religion prevents religion from hijacking the state, and the state from controlling any religion. At one fell swoop, the separation goes a long way in guaranteeing freedom of religion and other individual rights that might come into conflict with religious beliefs.

This is not just some academic concern. It is a real worry in Malaysia. Existing institutions apply highly corrosive effects on individual rights granted through individual liberty. There are religious police in Malaysia.

Within Malaysian context, the roles of Islam in the state are repulsive. Before I am being misconstrued, I am referring to the relevant religious institutions in Malaysia, not the religion itself.

There is a need to reduce the prominence of these Islamic institutions that exert unduly coercive influence on liberty. The state controls Islam and the Islam as in the form sanctioned by the state and through apparatus of the state exerts suffocating stranglehold on individuals who refuse to bow.

The latest news has it that Roman Catholic Church in Malaysia will lobby for the formation of a non-Muslim affairs ministry, again.[1] I wrote again because it has been raised since as early as 2007. This should be seen in parallel to the state of Islam in Malaysia.

Will non-Muslims be forced to fit the mould of certain religion they identify themselves with? Will the government try to interfere in how non-Muslims practice their religion?

Even if the answers are no, it will give the state a piece of the pie. The Church and its merry men, which themselves have not-so-impeccable reputation as far as individual liberty are concerned, will have to share that pie of tyranny.

For an illiberal government eager of telling individual what to believe in, perhaps the formation of that ministry is consistent.

Yet, an illiberal government is not the ideal government for me.

I oppose the formation of the ministry. The formation will give greater legitimacy to moral policing within Islam. It gives legitimacy to the division and compartmentalization of society to coerce free persons. We already have two laws in this land, one for one group and another one for another. One is free, and the other is not as far as libertarians are concerned. The establishment of non-Muslim affairs ministry will strengthen that illiberal dichotomy.

Religion should play less significant roles in the state. That ministry will only enhance the roles of religion, and at the same time, the scope of the state. There should be less government, not more. There is already a lot of room for tyranny in the state. Why should more space be made for tyranny?

A certain somebody a long time ago said the era of government knows best is over. Now is yet another chance to prove whether that statement was made in good faith or not. Prove it by not dictating private individual beliefs. Prove it by rejecting the religious lobbyists out right.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[1] — KUALA LUMPUR, July 26 — The Roman Catholic Church here will lobby for a non-Islamic affairs ministry now that Malaysia has formalised ties with the Vatican, says Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur Tan Sri Murphy Pakiam. [Debra Chong. Catholic Church plugs for non-Muslim affairs ministry. The Malaysian Insider. July 26 2011]

Categories
Liberty Politics & government

[2397] Reminded of my misgiving of PAS

I do not believe in specific individuals or organizations. I believe in institutions to make everybody honest, so-to-speak. I truly believe for governance in Malaysia to improve, political competition must flourish at the federal level. The first step is to have Barisan Nasional served some time in the opposition.

While the blood reference is excessive, the spirit of Jefferson’s “[t]he tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants” underlines the need for BN to lose its political power. It is about bloodletting. Power corrupts whoever whom holds it for too long. Hopefully, the bloodletting will flush out the worst within the ranks of BN. They will need to improve and be better than its rivals in order to survive. This applies to everybody as well. The competitive force will keep everybody on their toes.

A near loss is not enough. The so-called Pekan lesson is not good enough. Nobody truly remembers it because it was merely a near miss. BN has to lose.

Despite my harsh criticism of BN, I am not against BN per se. At least, not in the last year or so. I think I have grown out of that pure anti-BN sentiment. Now, it is simply an institutional requirement for me.

Pakatan Rakyat is the obvious candidate to replace BN. Within democratic institutional dynamics, I am supportive of PR.

Since PAS is an essential member of PR, I have discovered that somehow I am subconsciously trying to be more mild and measured in my criticism against PAS. This is all the more important because I increasingly see PKR as the most incapable of the lot in PR. PAS is the party that needs to pick up that slack. I do not believe DAP can do that in the short run. DAP needs to widen its base before it can cover for PKR.

And really, PAS has been moving to the center now, much to my delight. Obviously, my positions are very far from PAS in many ways but the distance is somewhat narrowing. So, it is not just that I am giving PAS a blind eye, there is also less for me to criticize on.

Until this week.

What happened in Kedah with respect to Ramadan dan entertainment outlets reminds me why I am distrustful of PAS in the first place. The PAS-led Kedah government has decreed that several types of entertainment outlets need to close during Ramadan, which is the Muslim holy month.

This is an effort at moral policing.

I reject moral policing through and through and I do not want to be voting for PAS to only to have them biting me. I do not mean to rear a boa that will swallow me whole later.

Voting for PAS has always been problematic for me. I voted for them in the last election. I am not so sure for the next election.

A friend has suggested that I change my address to solve my problem. That is really a creative way addressing it but it does not solve it. It only circumvents it. If PAS becomes part of the federal government, no amount of address changing will solve my problem, unless I move abroad again.

I thought the institutional requirement argument would be good enough for me to vote for PAS. But then I do not want to change from one bad scenario to another. I want a better scenario. I do not want to shortchange myself by eliminating choice. I do not want to guarantee PAS my vote.

I am a nobody. I realize that. So, I should make the following demand with humility. Nevertheless, for me to vote for PAS in the next round, I will need a guarantee from PAS that such moral policing will not happen.

Or maybe, a guarantee from PR is enough. Or least, from either PKR or DAP. Maybe I cannot rely on PKR due to how they have argued that non-Muslims need not worried if hudud is implemented. I am not impressed with that. Besides, their words are becoming less and less of value to me. Only BN has worse reputation.

So, under a system of consensus, I am looking at DAP. I am looking at that one golden vote to prevent the moral police from roaming the streets. If DAP can guarantee the existence such consensus system requiring unanimous agreement (which exists, I think), and that they can guarantee that they will always oppose moral policing on anybody, Muslims or non-Muslims alike, then I will vote for PAS in the next general election.

Until then, I will not, unless someone moderate contests in my area.

(Dr. Lo’ Lo’, the current Parliamentarian for Titiwangsa, will not do. I have seen her debated in the Parliament while I was working with a Member of Parliament in the last few months. I can say that I am not her greatest fan. But I guess, Dr. Lo’ Lo’ will not be contesting the next time around due to her health, hence the point on a moderate contesting. As far as her health is concerned, I wish her well.)

Categories
Liberty Photography

[2396] Second thought, Mr. FRU?

I enjoyed photographing the police in their balaclava and boots during the first Bersih protest. It was no different last Saturday.

This particular member of the Federal Reserve Unit had his uniform out of color and he did not seem to be paying attention to the moment. His face shield was up as well. While I shot this, a small crowd from the old Kuala Lumpur railway station was already marching.

Maybe, he was having a second thought about suppressing the protest. Maybe.

Realizing that this particular squad was blocking the way, the crowd circumvented the police. Much like how the Germans did to the French during the Second World War. The first confrontation was thus averted. But not for long.

Categories
Liberty Photography

[2395] Tangkap! Tangkap!

A long time ago, probably three to four years ago, there was a candlelight vigil in front of a police station. A small crowd was waiting for the police to release several individuals after being arrested for protesting something. I think it was against the Internal Security Act.

The police was unhappy. So they warned the crowd to disperse. After some warnings, an officer shouted, “Tangkap! Tangkap!” A game of cat and mouse began.

Literally, tangkap it means capture in Malay. A more enlightened translation within context will be, arrest them.

I was reminded of the story when a small crowd of probably 500 tried to join the main Bersih protest group yesterday…

…only to be chased by a horde of charging cops.

The group dispersed with each person tried to run away. No fighting back. This is what typically will happen when a peaceful protest is met with brute force (note what some of the officers were holding; you can download this picture and see it more clearly.).

Berita Harian and the New Straits Times had to doctor a picture to show that the Bersih protest was violent.

I thought the situation was particularly funny. I almost laughed when I shot the scene. I would have laughed if I had not been too worried about my own safety. Safety from whom?

From the cops of course. In Malaysia, if you merely practice your individual rights when the government does not like it, the police will get you. Hell, wearing yellow shirt will get your arrested. Lighting a candle will get you arrested. Etc.