Categories
History & heritage Society

[1287] Of searching for the origin of Malaysian nation

A nation is not a state and vice versa, unless a nation-state is in the equation. Many however do not comprehend the difference between the two concepts. The comprehension of the difference is crucial in understanding why Malaysia as a state and a nation is not 50 years old come this August 31.

There can be no confusion that on a federated state — Malaysia — was formed on September 16 1963. The accumulation of thousands of years of history converged at that one point to allow us to live in Malaysia. It is true that the new state that is Malaysia inherits the institutions of the previous states but just as Russia is not Soviet Union, the state of Malaysia is not the state of Malaya. This historical fact alone insists that Malaysia is almost 44 years old when history remembers the 50th anniversary of a free Malaya.

The idea of state is very straight forward, unlike the concept of nation. The term nation is so vague that its beginning is open to interpretation. So, when an UMNO member from Tambun says that Malaysia as a nation is older than 50 years, he is not at all wrong. His opinion is of course dependent on an assumption that the Malaysian nation is really a Malay nation. This is not new. During a recent debate on Bangsa Malaysia, the chief minister of Johor believes that a Malaysian nation is a nation spearheaded by the Malays.

Throw away the political explosive and the emotional debate, rationally under this assumption a Malay nation would originate as far back as between the second and the sixth century of the common era, when possibly, the first recorded Malay nation was established as Srivijaya.

Even if one disagrees with idea, a Malaysian nation that is neutral of ethnicity exists before the formation of Malaysia and the day Malaya achieved its independence from the United Kingdom. Within the context of this entry, the question that needs to be asked is this: when actually is the birth of this nation? Was the beginning point 1963? Or 1957? Or 1948? 1946? 1824? When?

If the favored idea is the potpourri of nations, then this nation was born some time after the mass migration of Chinese and Indian into pre-existing nations living in Malaya, Sarawak and North Borneo. That would be in the 19th century. It is this nation — no state — that we now call Malaysia. The name may be different then but in essence, those names, refer to the same nation.

August 31 1957 signifies only one thing: a free Malaya. That however does not mean there was no Malaya on August 30 1957. Malaya as a state was established on January 31 1948, after the Malayan Union was disbanded. If Malaya is the reference point for the supporters of “50 years”, then really, logically — throw away the meanings of nation and states for a moment — 59 should be the magic number.

In conclusion, on one hand, as a nation, it is an insult to say we have lived for such a short lifespan, as if all those events, all those interactions before that day in 1957 matter not. On the other hand, as a state, it is boosterism to say that we are older than we are. No nation or state was born on August 31 1957.

I personally do not subscribe to nationalism but if an organic Malaysian nation is a goal one seeks, then embracing unvarnished history is an important step one needs to take. Without understanding one’s past as well as the difference between nation and state, Bangsa Malaysia will be an unsolved riddle, interpreted differently by different community within Malaysia, the state.

Categories
Pop culture WDYT

[1286] Of WDYT: Megatron must be stopped…

Which do you like better?

  • The Transformers: The Movie (1986) (38%, 6 Votes)
  • Transformers (2007) (63%, 10 Votes)

Total Voters: 16

Loading ... Loading ...

Let me help you: Michael Bay’s version does not have Stan Bush’s Dare.

[youtube]k1SNgRxiyF0[/youtube]

Neither The Touch.

[youtube]fB0_vJUc3o4[/youtube]

Nor cool ambient.

[youtube]h_ULg4RSy5Y[/youtube]

Would a kid cry watching Bay’s adaptation? I know I cried as a child watching Optimus Prime died.

Categories
Photography

[1285] Of the natural recycler

What goes up must come down.

On the way down from the top of Janing Barat at Endau, I snapped a couple pictures. One of them is this:

By Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved.

I think fungus makes good subject for photography. I have another mushroom shot somewhere in the archive.

Categories
Liberty Society

[1284] Of utter outrage

I repeat, utter outrage:

A Malaysian woman held for months in an Islamic rehabilitation centre says she was subjected to mental torture for insisting her religion is Hinduism.

Revathi Massosai, the name by which she wants to be known, says she was forced to eat beef despite being a Hindu. [Malaysia ‘convert’ claims cruelty. BBC. July 6 2007]

I am lost for words.

Categories
Environment Science & technology

[1283] Of mutant rice at Fortune

I read the latest issue of Fortune on rice contamination earlier yesterday:

Last November, over the howls of anti-GMO (that’s genetically modified organisms) activists, the USDA retroactively approved the Liberty Link rice, known as LL601. The department said the genes that it approved are similar to those inserted for years into canola and corn, with no apparent ill effects. The experts at the USDA, the EPA and the Food and Drug Administration, all of which bear some responsibility for regulating transgenic food, say the contamination is nothing to worry about.

Then again, the experts also have dismissed repeated warnings that genetically modified crops can’t be managed or controlled. When organic farmers worried that their fields could be invaded by genetically modified plants grown nearby, regulators told them there was nothing to fear. The biotech industry promised that experimental, gene-altered plants could be grown in open fields and never, ever end up in the neighborhood Safeway.

Oops.

In any event, after last year’s contamination became public, and after rice prices took a tumble, and after Europe said it no longer wanted any American rice, and after several other countries, including Japan and Iraq (!), demanded rigorous testing of U.S. rice, the industry moved to contain the damage.

[…]

Deeter, Ventria’s CEO, says there’s no chance that the pharma rice will find its way into the food supply, as Liberty Link did: “We’re more strictly regulated, by a factor of ten – not for any good reason, by the way.”

In the USDA ruling, Rebecca Bech, an APHIS administrator, wrote, “The combination of isolation distance, production practices, and rice biology make it extremely unlikely that this rice would impact the U.S. commercial rice supply.”

In other words, there’s nothing – nothing at all – to fear. [Attack of the mutant rice. Marc Gunther. Fortune July 2 2007]

Spot the humor.