Categories
Education Liberty Personal Society

[1783] Of breaking free from a cursed shackle

I experienced a tremendous surge of security today and I have not felt such feeling in such a long time. The only regret I have is that I did not set a higher target for myself. I might have set a goal too low for myself. Ever since graduation a few years ago from Ann Arbor, life has consistently tried to bring me down and the toll it took on my confidence was breaking me. My self-esteem suffered but after a few rallying personal events, I am on my way back up.

I am happy because I am overcoming the shadow of my former self. I am winning against myself.

I have secured my path into the future. That path was in the state of flux previously and I really did not know what I wanted in life. There were too many unknowns to think of, too many factors to consider, too many calculations required. Too many a time, I found myself staring blankly outside to see everything but see nothing.

Now, however, now, the path forward is as clear as daylight and all I need to do now is walk down the lane and never to look back. I have earned a place for a post-graduate work abroad.

If everything goes well for the next few months, I should be out of this country again. The only issue that may pull me back is matter of finance. A back-of-the-envelope suggests I need to raise approximately RM100,000 in the next few months to live comfortably, on top of whatever savings that I have at the moment. Despite the my training, I was surprised of the requirement for additional fund. I had budgeted that I would be able to fund myself through this journey. As it turned out, I have not considered my whole expected expenses in a comprehensive manner. That is my only fear.

Despite concerning regarding the additional money which I need to raise, the fact that I am able to depend on my ability through and through thrills me. It thrills me because this is the chance for me to escape from one criticism which I think is unfair and I extremely deplore.

In A Malaysian Journey, Rehman Rashid writes something to the effect that the Malays are cursed of not knowing whether he had succeed because of his ability or because of affirmative action. My personal experience has taught me the truth of those words. Given my unfriendly position with respect to the flawed affirmative action in Malaysia, my critics have used that very same idea raised by Rehman Rashid against me.

I went to the Malay College and I attended the University of Michigan. While Michigan accepted me based on merit, it is really hard to say if the government scholarship which I received to go to Michigan as well as the somewhat subsidized education which I was obtained at the Malay College was on merit or simply because of the affirmative action. I therefore grappled to answer criticism against my position to the affirmative action.

I cannot live with that. Only the stars know how much I want to silent my critics and a spot in a post-graduate program gives me the chance to do everything on my own, the personal responsibility which I am undertaking, provides everything that I need.  It provides me the hammer for me to use to break free from that curse, once and for all, and more.

I earned my time to bask in the sun and nobody, nobody, can rob me of this. I am now free in one more aspect of my life.

Categories
Politics & government

[1782] Of clowns and doomsayers

Were we in a crisis? Were race relations as bad as the Prime Minister had implied? Did the specter of May 13 loom just beyond the horizon?

I find myself at the top of a hill and ahead I see only green fields as far as the eyes could see. The sky is blue and the breeze is soft. There wais s no wolf and the sheep are safely grazing.

Yet, behind me there is a commotion of the grandest scale. On their soapboxes, the doomsayers preached of an impending disaster that may tear down the towers which we have built. Amid the sordid apocalyptic tales, the doomsayers offered a panacea so conveniently held in their possession. Only they could save us all from the Leviathan.

“To me, to me, rally to me”, they shouted so rude and loudly. The future, according to them, would be haplessly bleak. Dare I ask why?

There beyond is an open plain and an open sky for all. Never was a day tailored so perfectly for victory and there is no better day than today to reach for the sky. It’s perfect and if we miss it now, the next time this moment comes again, we will be laying on our beds waiting for the end to our miserably lives. As the inevitability of death comes upon us, we will look back and wonder why we did not take the leap.

That will not be my fate. My fear of that worthless fate is greater than the stories spewed by the doomsayers. I fear not of the bogeyman outside my window and I fear not the monster under my bed. This is because there are none to fear.

Only fear is holding me — and us — back.

The doomsayers have nothing for us but this illusion of fear. Of disorder. Of death.

The fear, however, is theirs alone and not ours.

They need us to alleviate their fear. They need us to cower in the cold rain so they can live immorally in the warmth.

They want us to bend over and satisfy them. They take pleasure in doing so. We believed them once too many times, holding on to our false prophets’ promises.

No more. No more. Enough seeds of lies have been sowed and enough have been reaped. It is time to till the land, weed out the lies and begin anew for we know they need us and we know we do not need them.

All we need to do is to march forth and leave them behind on their rotten soapboxes half eaten by termites. Leave them be with their foolish blabbering but we shall march forth.

There are only limitless possibilities for us to explore. Or were.

Crisis only hit us when they imposed their crisis on us. Who was it that started shouting, ”Fire!” first?

Why has suddenly trouble in their own camps translated into our trouble?

How did the problematic internal relationship between parties within the Barisan Nasional translate into our problem?

The fate of the Barisan Nasional and the fate of Malaysia should never be the same. The fate of Malaysia must be independent of any political party, be it the Barisan Nasional, Pakatan Rakyat or any other. The fate of the country is far too important to be tied to a political party. For this reason alone, it is crucial to weed out any political party that embeds itself into the state.

Any conflation between the two fates requires urgent erasure and correction. Even the blind differentiate the day from night and why should there be a conflation?

There was a moment of cognitive dissonance for me when a mainstream newspaper paraphrased the Prime Minister: “Race relations not at healthy level.”

Dazed, my question was whose relations, really, are at an unhealthy level here?

I find it hard to believe such statements when I have no problems talking to friends of different backgrounds. I look around and I see no opportunity for a spontaneous riot to take place. People are sharing jokes and laughing and even going as far as ignoring the dull political clowns of this huge distasteful circus.

When the Prime Minister has so little credibility left in him, I prefer to trust my own faculties instead, and my faculties tell me that it is not relations between various races in Malaysia which are at stake. On the contrary, it is the relations between race-based parties of the Barisan Nasional instead. This whole fiasco began in the Barisan Nasional and the adverse effects are shaking its very foundations.

The clowns in the circus were too excited and cracked the tall pillars supporting their tent. When the tent threatened to come down, they wanted us to pay for the repair.

But why should we pay for it?

Let the clowns pay from their own pockets. Unable to humor us with their woefully inadequate sick jokes, they switched their profession and assumed the role of doomsayers, trying to impress upon others that their problem was ours too.

Sick and tired of these old clowns and doomsayers, I turned to Facebook to relieve myself from the filthy lies they tell incessantly. There, one of the status updates: it is high time the insecurities of our politicians be decoupled from the security of the country.

I have had enough of clowns and doomsayers. The green plain awaits me. And you too if you care to join me.

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

A version of this article was published in The Malaysian Insider.

Categories
Politics & government

[1781] Of the battle of credibility

With September 16 passed without a change of government despite the promise of Anwar Ibrahim, members of Barisan Nasional wasted no time to point out how the promise is merely hot air. The Barisan Nasional government still stands on the day after despite Pakatan Rakyat’s threat. In the media aligned to the ruling coalition, there is a clear hint of celebration and contempt against Pakatan Rakyat.

Anwar’s credibility is on the line at the moment and with the influence Barisan Nasional over the mainstream media, it is not hard to encourage the public to question Anwar’s credibility. Anwar has only himself to blame for allowing him to be openly attacked in such manner.

Even the Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi openly challenged Anwar’s reputation. I do not think I have seen the Prime Minister using so harsh a tone one national television. Given the grandfatherly nature of the Prime Minister, I found myself almost at a state of shock watching and listening how the Prime Minister was directly undermining Anwar’s credibility and the words which he used.

The Prime Minister was referring to a letter which Anwar sent to him early. Anwar stated that he mentioned about power transfer and request for refrain from declaring emergency rule but the Prime Minister revealed to the media that Anwar’s statement is untrue.[1]

As the Prime Minister continued speaking, I began to feel how ironic the whole situation is. Here is the Prime Minister and the President of Barisan Nasional, who has repeatedly damaged his own reputation through inconsistent policies and flip-flopping, questioning another person’s credibility.

A colleague shared his opinion with me earlier in the morning at work on how Anwar has more credibility than the Prime Minister. I cannot help but nod in agreement with him. I have no doubt that Anwar’s credibility suffers from his failure to stick to the promise of September 16. Yet, for me personally, Anwar still have more credibility than Prime Minister Abdullah.

After the Prime Minister was no more on the television, I concluded that he should be the last person on television to talk about credibility.

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

[1] — PUTRAJAYA: PKR adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s letter to the Prime Minister only mentioned national security, the leadership and problems on morality and politics and had not touched on the transfer of power to the Opposition. [‘Anwar’s letter didn’t mention transfer of power’. V.P. Sujata. The Star. Accessed September 17 2008]

Categories
Liberty Politics & government

[1780] Of is the defection by SAPP immoral?

Without doubt, there are individuals and groups which oppose Pakatan Rakyat’s idea of forming the federal government via defection. These groups rationalize their opposition by stating the voters elected the current government into power and not the current opposition. That rationale could be deconstructed further: voters’ main factor in voting a candidate into office is his political association and not the political belief or the characteristics of the candidate himself.

Given this, I wonder how the groups view SAPP’s defection from Barisan Nasional. Is it as immoral as Pakatan Rakyat’s idea?

I see no difference between SAPP’s action and Pakatan Rakyat’s proposal. Both violate the rationale of the individuals and groups which oppose formation of government via defection. I therefore expect the individuals and groups to oppose SAPP’s decision to quit Barisan Nasional and still retain the seats which SAPP won on March 8.

I personally do not buy the idea because the fact remains that in the system we live in, we vote individuals into office, not political parties. As a result, there is nothing undemocratic about forming a government via defection. Besides, willing defection is about freedom of association.

Categories
History & heritage

[1779] Of the myths surrounding the formation of Malaysia

Several myths about the formation of Malaysia require addressing.

First revolves around the notion that Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore joined Malaya in 1963 to form Malaysia. This is simply untrue because all member states of Malaysia federated to form a new federation called Malaysia. Nobody joined Malaya in 1963.

The second myth concerns how Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore joined Malaysia. This is at best inaccurate and at worst downright false. The rationale against this myth is the absence of Malaysia as a state in prior to 1963. Instead Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore helped establish Malaysia.

Those who believed in either the first or the second myth tend to cite the United States of America as an example of how changes in the number of membership do not affect a state as an entity. The comparison however is flawed because the history of the US does not run parallel to that of Malaysia.

It differs in a way that 37 states other than the original 13 states of the United States joined a pre-existing union. The United States was formed as an entity in 1776 and 37 other states joined that union after 1776.

In the case of Malaysia, nobody joined any pre-existing entity simply because there is no pre-existing entity to join into. There was no Malaysia as a state to join into prior to September 16 1963. What existed were the Federation of Malaya, Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore.

The example of the US is only applicable for Malaysia if there are changes in membership after 1963. Just how addition of new member states into the union does not affect the United States’ status as a state after the formation of the state, any change of membership of the federation — save total dissolution of Malaysia — after 1963 will not affect the status of Malaysia as a state. It is for this very reason that Malaysia still exists after Singapore was expelled in 1965. If Brunei is to join Malaysia in 2009, Malaysia will still be the state it was in 1963.

Third myth is about Sabah, Sarawak, Singapore and Malaya coming together to form Malaysia. This too is false though compared to the other three myths, this does come closer to the truth since the contrary is certainly arguable given how the Malaysia Agreement was signed and executed. Nevertheless, all 14 member states of 1963 Malaysia, each as a separate entity, federated to form a 14-state federation and this is made clear in the Malaysia Act 1963.[1] It was not a 4-state federation. The member states of Malaya did not participate in Malaysia as a unitary Malaya but rather, they joined the new federation on individual basis. In forming Malaysia, the Federation of Malaya was immediately dissolved to allow the 11 states of Malaya along with three other states to federate; the Federation of Malaya ceased to exist upon the establishment of Malaysia.

The final myth confuses Malaya with Malaysia. The difference between Malaya and Malaysia goes beyond superficial change in name. The 20-point agreement between signed at the time between Sabah and the would-be federal government of Malaysia specifically mentioned that the Constitution of Malaysia is not the Constitution of the Federation of Malaya.[2] Therefore, the two Constitutions are two different documents and each document governs different state.

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

[1] — (1) For the purpose of enabling North Borneo, Sarawak and Singapore (in this Act referred to as “the new States”) to federate with the existing States of the Federation of Malaya (in this Act referred to as ”the Federation”), the Federation thereafter being called Malaysia, on the day on which the new States are federated as aforesaid (in this Act referred to as ”the appointed day”) Her Majesty’s sovereignty and jurisdiction in respect of the new States shall be relinquished so as to vest in the manner agreed between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Federation and the new States. [Malaysia Act 1963. Office of Public Sector Information. Accessed September 16 2008]

[2] — Whilst accepting that the present Constitution of the Federation of Malaya should form the basis of the Constitution of Malaysia, the Constitution of Malaysia should be a completely new document drafted and agreed in the light of a free association of states and should not be a series of amendments to a Constitution drafted and agreed by different states in totally different circumstances. A new Constitution for North Borneo (Sabah) was of course essential. [20-point agreement. Wikipedia. Accessed September 16 2008]