Islamisation

Is it just cultural religious and racial intolerance and fear masked as a worthy cause OR should we have serious concerns about prevalence of Islam and it's teachings in non-Islam regions?

http://sioe.wordpress.com/about

Interested in people's views.

we should be worried about thugs and bullies..

especially thugs that carry holy books, because they're the most difficult to deal with...

I certainly believe we should fight any theocratic moves on democratic government and the state should remain secular at all times - but that holds across all religions.

I agree with Neil. If the anti-democratic sentiments we see from the Islamic community today is intrinsic to the faith itself, then yes, the Western world should be concerned about Islamisation.

If, on the other hand, one can tease apart the thuggery from the faith, then EVERYONE involved -- both muslims and non-muslims -- have to work together to suppress rise of extremism.

one apparent problem with Islam is that the religion itself seems to be quite prescriptive in terms of a political sense - that can make it difficult.

I agree with both gummi and neil

sad to say but I seen it all coming

I meant garethw and neil rather

if the west would stop bullying those in the middle east we might not face all them extremists our actions have and are creating

religious nutbars are often ignored if there is no reason to follow them - yet we keep giving them reasons

yes we should fear extremists... both from there and here (USA)

we're heading towards a (potential) confrontation with Islam, this is I believe is of our making

you keep pushing and eventually someone says enough

I agree with the sentiments expressed so far.

And I think they raise a further question: how much uncertainty is there really about what Islam is and what values it stands for? I'm prompted by gummi's comment here, "If the anti-democratic sentiments we see from the Islamic community today is intrinsic to the faith" - how much of an "if" is there?

I don't want to generalise or tarnish all Muslims with the same brush but surely there exists an answer to the question whether the Islam faith preaches and teaches anti-democratic values...?

I mean just take the principle that the State should remain secular at all times, which I totally support, how can Islam possibly co-exist with that given that it is more than just a religion and incorporates a political and legal system?

the roots of islamophobia bob go way back hundreds of years and what we witness now is but the latest chapter in a long saga

I'm looking forward to when the aliens arrive to shake all the religious nutjobs' beliefs rather like the mongols did when they invaded

I'm aware of that NR but due to certain key resources and waterways the bullying has taken on a much deadlier form in recent times

whilst we all ask what are their values etc regarding their nations - we should really be focusing on the loss of freedoms we have going on in the west as a direct respons to our fear...

freedom is something we should be guarding - against any extremists, and the ones in our own backyards pose more of a direct threat than anyone in the middle east currently

in a sovereign state we have no right to impose our beliefs or political systems on them - what is good for the goose is good for the gander

the sioe is responding to the perceived threat in their back yard

and yes I agree our own western leaders have imperilled our liberties, no more so than in the US and Britain, in all sorts of ways, not the least being unbridled immigration from societies totally alien to western traditions

the two are not mutually exclusive at all b_d. one can combat islamisation of say Europe in the same breath as increasing protection for fundamental rights and freedoms.

with that said i perceive some conflict with the right to religious freedom, but all rights have limits and as far as i'm concerned right to religious freedom can be restricted left right and centre

I disagree.

I was born, raised and schooled in an Islamic country which practices democracy socially, politically and legally, since independence.

There are issues of course, as with any other country, with corruption, cronism, conservatism etc.

But of late, the rise and demand in more transparency and exercise of democratic power by the people, has been really prevalent within this tiny nation. The Muslims themselves are very aware of the power of their voice and vote - and in this somewhat historic instance... have taken their votes away from the 50 year ruling party (with consistent 2/3 majority seat wins in every election bar 1 in the 60s)

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/2/story.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10497181




Islam doesn't preach anti-democratic values.

If it did, you'd never have democratic Islamic nations which I mentioned in the first place.

In comes right down to the eye of the beholder or interpretor. That's what people need to realise. It's not the book itself - it's the person holding the book.

so Islam is open to the same double standards and bullshit as Christians

well bugger me we are all the same species after all

of course you're not a Arab are ya - its our role to hate & fear them cause we've been taught to

Uhh? From its birth, Islam has been a religion of conquest. Which religion burned the Library of Alexandria saying "the only book they need is the Koran"?

The West didn't respond to Islamic conquest with terorrism - we met them on the field of battle.

Logical fallacy. A nation might not truly follow Islamic precepts...

Europeans who's been fucking around with Muslims since the middle ages being hypocritical again. While all you fuckwits are running around protesting for Tibetan buddahism which promotes slavery and feudalism yous are all turning a blind to the suffering of all the muslims around the world because of the evils of your democratic goverments!!!

DAYS OF REVENGE MOTHERFUCKERS!!!!

These are the days of revenge so sweet.
Can you feel it? Can you feel it?
There is a fear in the air that I have prayed for, for my whole life.
Can you feel it? And do you fear it?
And Malcolm was right:
The hate that we've sown has come home in the night.
So wake up. It's time to die.
Can you feel it? Can you feel it?
'cause we've reached the end of the lies:

Just take a look at the papers, and your leaders:
they're killers and they're liars.
See what they do in your name to make the bodies pile higher.
The murders and the terror, they've done it forever
as we sit back and smile at the script that they sell us.

So now they come for me.
So now they come for you.
We didn't hear and now there's nothing we can do.

Holy Mother of Columbine,
say a prayer for me and the USA.
Blessed martyrs of Palestine,
come and strike us down.
How dare we pray?

Osama is the demon that keeps you all safe in your cells.
Believe it. Oh sweet revenge...
And Jesus himself would condemn us all to this self-made hell.
Can you dig it? Oh sweet revenge...
Hell is the sign of our times:

But now the victims, they're rising;
their numbers are multiplying.
They want their revenge for the years that they've been dying.

So now they come for me.
So now they come for you.
We didn't care and now there's nothing we can do.

Holy Mother of Columbine,
Save a prayer for me.
Blessed martyrs of Palestine,
Come and strike us down.

Oh sweet revenge...

you sound like a bitter and twisted man dark_light

what's the angle of your dangle?

umm yeh slightly distiurbing aye

I like it, another opinion is all good as this forum is becoming a knitting circle

angle of your dangle - awesome!

Whether or not it truly does also lies in the eyes of those who interpret the Quran. And what do you know about Islam enough to judge whether a nation is truly following its precepts?

Malaysia's ruling Sultan's were Muslims. The founding fathers and parties were Muslim. The state leaders and leaders of the state must be Muslim (as the constitution requires it). The government is made up of majority Muslims. The constitution states that it is an Islamic nation. 3 of its states now are ruled by the "extremist" Muslim party (that means segregation of male-female sexes, no more bars and alcohol, etc etc). Syariah law exists side by side with the inherited British legal system.

No matter how you look at it, it's very much an Islam-influenced nation. It is just that government, and the Muslims as a whole, take a very moderate interpretation of the Quran and its teachings. This is no secret.

Unless you're saying that the Al-Qaeda, Jihad-mongering version of the Quran is the true version of Islam?

But then again.. what would you know about a religion that you don't practice, haven't had to live with, hasn't had such a huge impact in your upbringing (especially when you're a minority non-Muslim) and haven't had to observe, respect and conform to even on the most cursory of levels?

If you did, you'd know that like the followers of Christ, we're all the same people under the sun.

so what you're saying is that it's an undemocratic muslim country...

Only a Sith deals in absolutes.

Seriously, while Iraq is still burning, Palestinians are still being humilated and Iran is going to be attacked soon for NO reason. You guys are paranoid over "muslims" are gonna take over?!

How is muslims going to take over New Zealand exactly?

Are you complaining that Muslim girls are wearing hajibs or burqas?!

Or are you all complaining that some of them like to hold onto their culture too tightly to intergrate?!

Maybe it's because once they arrive in an European dominiated country they realise that everyone want them to feel ashamed about their own identities and culture, hence they realise the hypocricy of this so called "democratic" society and hence as a reaction, holds onto their religion and culture even tighter.

Maybe you people should stop fucking up their countries so they don't have to come here.



I am not Middle Eastern by the way, or a muslim.

You deny that that all of the middle east are shaped by Western intervention?!

Not much, which is why I said *might* :>

The WEST is shaped by Muslim intervention. Centuries of aggression.

You complain about the crusades but the crusades were a response to Muslim invasions!!

One issue is that you smear everyone on this forum as being typical Western hypocrites or liberals, without realizing there are some diverse intellects operating in the CA Forum, or that just because someone in here argues about or for one point in particular regarding a topic, it doesn’t necessarily mean they stand for now being for against some larger political ideology.

You’re also introducing a very complex history to this thread, that is essentially a side issue to the topic, i.e. is Islam anti democracy?

Not to mention I have always had difficulty with discussing Middle Eastern issues with people who simply assign cut-off points in history as the result of various outcomes, i.e. the Middle Ages, when the development of the political dynamic in the Middle East is ancient and very complex, dating as far back as Samaria.

I see debates in the Middle East as coming down to what force or combination of mitigating or aggravating forces are the largest contributors to various behavioral outcomes and event we are observing, whether it be the ossification of rational dialogue or the ability of ethnicities to compromise due to historic bitterness and religio-centric differences.

However a lot of this recent upheaval is in my mind, more the hangover from recent geo-political pressures, such as WWI and the division of the Ottoman Empire for its role in siding with Germany and holding a large amount of the world’s oil resource, constituting a major threat to Western stability and making its division after the war a necessity. Or the colonial powers with mandates over the various territories, mistreatment of the local cultures inhabitants and the various resulting resentments and the siding of various groups with Hitler during WWII. Not to mention the divided regions being used for proxy manipulation by the USA and Russia all through the Cold War.

Despite having some minor periods of tranquility where the ethnicities lived together in relative compromise, this region has never been left alone as far as I can tell. It’s quite a retched cacophony in my mind and a situation I urge New Zealand to stay out of.

I think you're completely missing the point of what we're discussing dark_light...

That is bullshit.

When the pope sanctioned the first Crusade he didn't mention anything about the Moors in Spain, nor the other Catholic states gived a toss about the Moor taken regions.

The Moors brought new technology and knowledge to the region and did not commit massacre that almost emptied an entire city!

What have you precious Catholics brought to the middle east when they invaded?!

Good suggestion, especially stop all the anti-islam bullshit.

what wrong with questioning the place of religion in society?

If a religion is an affront to the values we hold dear then it's place should be questioned... that applies equally for islam, christianity, judaism or whatever..


Religion isn't an untouchable subject..

I certainly recoil from the American religious right and its ill begotten ways and its adherents over here

1. The Reconquista was a sanctioned Crusade.
2. Nobody disputes they brought new technology and knowledge. But the west has done exactly the same in the middle east. Things like, well, cars, television, oil drilling technology...
3. You're a fantastic troll.
4. How can you invade somewhere that is rightfully yours?

How so?


Or rather - you show me what a "truly democratic" nation is, and i'll tell you on which end of the spectrum Malaysia sits.

Sure - we're not a pure democracy, whatever that may mean. Even with political ideologies, the interpretations and applications will still differ. As far as the fundamental tenets go, Malaysia is as democratic as New Zealand (having gone through both systems).

With the possible exception that our "indigenous people" are probably the most well taken care of amongst any other colonial nation's indigenous groups....

"our" being NZ or Malaysia?

Simply curious here, not looking for a point to debate

Sorry - I meant Malaysia.

I'm geographically confused.

thanks to NZ's efforts in the 1950s to save you from the Indonesians!!

You are a fuckwit.

For starters, this all suggests Malaysia is far from secular...

The leaders of the state must be Muslim??! and you think thank makes it just as democratic as NZ?! I want want whatever you're smoking..

Malaysia is petit theocracy by your description, not a democracy at all. A democracy means more than just having elections....

one of the yardsticks of a healthy democracy is how well that society handles dissent - either political or religious and how separate are the powers of state and religion

Don't forget that they also need third countries to transfer across their poverty.

*third world countries* I wish this forum has the "edit post" function :S

Ugh an edit function still wouldn't improve some of the dribble you are coming out with in this thread dark_light.

The CA forum is not like the lounge. You are expected to come in here with informative and thought-out posts rather than being insulting offensive and acting like an idiot. You will not be respected here unless you show some respect to other posters.

No one in this thread has been 'hatin' on Islam' and there is therefore no need for you to accuse us of anti-Islam bullshit and what not. The question asked in the original post is what people's views are about the prevalence of Islam and it's teachings in non-Islam regions. There are strong views amongst many groups in Europe that Islam is anti-democractic. That is what this thread is concerned with. Is it or is it not? If it is, what is it place in democratic states?

The CA forum is about informed debate, you are expected to keep to that standard.

this might be the appropriate forum for some of your views dark_light

http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2008/03/20/47217.html

in the comments section

Yeah probably.

But how does that come into the argument?

The quarrel then was more over the Borneo states than the peninsular

Thanks for the education.


So, just because the leaders of our state have to be Muslim, that makes us un-democratic and un-secular.

Malaysian politics is complicated. The incumbent party is an alliance of the 3 very strong Malay, Chinese and Indian parties. They all work in tandem. Neither can command the majority without the help of the other. With that in mind, no policy developed by the government can be brush swept without consultation towards its allies. All 3 parties have reps in the Cabinet, and all 3 parties form the majority in Parliament.

You might think that this akin to the coalition government we have here. With one key difference though, the National Front is actually, for all purposes, just ONE party in essence. They were the founding parties for independence, and have stayed allied and as one for the past 50 odd years.

While the Head of State or the Prime Minister must be Muslim, the Cabinet, Parliament etc are all a mix of all races. We’ve got far more Chinese and Indians in Parliament than NZ has Maoris in the Beehive.

There is no “Islamic” law being forced onto citizens. Only Muslims have to adhere to Syariah and that’s they’re problem. The rest of us live by our inherited Commonwealth legal system.

The only real influence Islam has on law making is conservatism. But that is reflection of Asia rather than a nation as a whole.


As a Muslim nation, our tolerance towards secularity is more than what NZ currently has.

I’ve never had an issue growing up as a Christian. Temples, mosques and churches are side by side. We celebrate each others religious days and we respect each others customs.

We don’t brand Muslims as terrorists, and they don’t brand Christians as infidels. The Chinese don’t get called communists and the Indians aren’t slaves or pariahs.

Secularity is more than just saying the nation is tolerant towards all religions. On the face of it, NZ’s Christian beliefs dominate a lot of its views and cultural norms. In Malaysia, the fusion is much more prevalent. The cultures are shared, not exclusive of each other. Political ideals may be influenced by Islam, but are tempered by strong factions that represent the other minorities.

We are used to different races. We are used to being tolerant. Here, you get posts like these. You get people shouting on the street for you to go home. You get people calling you Osama if you wear a turban (even though you might be a Sikh). You get called a terrorist if you go to a Mosque.

Why? Because NZers have less experience living with other cultures and religions. This isn’t their fault. But it is a good explanation as to why they fear what they don’t understand. And to understand, you need to do more than just read or watch… or smoke that pot and think that everyone else is high except for you.

No system of democracy is perfect. Is NZ’s? Like I said, tell me what a perfect democracy is and I’ll tell you on which end of the spectrum Malaysia’s political ideologies sit.

Right now you’re just making uneducated comments and casting a blanket of prejudice towards anything that doesn’t sit within your boundary of tolerance or views.

I lived in NZ for almost a decade, and in Malaysia for 2. I call both home. There’s nothing I can do in NZ that I can’t do in Malaysia. The reverse isn’t true though.

Fine with me if you think that NZ has the perfect system. I never said Malaysia did. I just wanted to make a point that Islamic nations can be democratic, tolerant and as normal as normal can be. Perfect is far from my claim. There are so many things I hate about my country and also much more things that I love. It’s the same with NZ. Neither are perfect but I’m happy with both.

To quote a former Prime Minister: “I’ll take a little of Marxism, a little of democracy, a little of this and a little of that. I’ll take what works for us, not for others.”

The perfect system is what works for your country.

thankyou for clarifying that karhoo1

I especially liked the smoking that pot bit

woah.. way to be ultra defensive

But why point is that if you think NZ democracy and Malaysian democracy are about the same then you're wrong.

Just a side note (because specific points are always better than being vague), but on the 2007 Democracy Index rankings (by The Economist) puts Malaysian in the "Flawed Democracy" category with a score of 5.98. NZ has a score of 9.01 (South Africa, which is where I'm from, has a score of 7.91).

Ranking are based on

1. "Whether national elections are free and fair";
2. "The security of voters";
3. "The influence of foreign powers on government";
4. "The capability of the civil servants to implement politics".

Tell that to the people who tried to organise an opposition rally before the recent elections in Malaysia then. Weren't they protesting the glaringly obvious bias against non-Muslims in pretty much every area of the business sector in Malaysia?

R

btw karhoo1, have you actually read the Malaysian constitution..

Is freedom of speech, assembly and association guaranteed by the constitution?

No it doesn't

In fact, aren't most public gathering of people (i.e. protests etc) without a licence illegal in Malaysian?

How about owning a printing press without a licence?

Or publishing a box that is critical of the government or Islam?

and what about those trumped-up sodomite charges against a former leader's heir apparent

I was in Malaysia during that time.

The rallies did happen. The media just didn't report it - and the international media interpreted that As the rallies not being able to proceed.


Your comment on the bias towards Muslims is true, but only to a certain extent. Specifically, you refer to the fact that Malaysian law requires a Bumiputera to sit on the Board of Directors for a listed company. Also, government contracts can provide preference towards Bumi-led companies, or companies with some Bumi shareholding in it.

Like I said, there are things I absolutely hate about Malaysia and given the chance, I would change it.

It’s difficult for me to explain on a forum things like these. You’d need to have a fair understanding of the historical factors that have drove the economic policies (the one you mentioned is part of the NEP, which is heavily focused on the redistribution of wealth).

The underlining philosophy that the founding fathers took was that, in order to achieve social harmony, you needed social equity. An extremely deprived underclass will always be cause for social chaos.

Malaysia has 3 distinct ethnic classes. The population split of those is large enough that any dissent in one class has the potential to bring the entire nation down.

The flipside of that, is that unlike countries like Indonesia (where 95% is the dominant majority class), Malaysia has a more balanced split. This means that there is a potential to weigh up and balance the scale more appropriately than you can in Indonesia, where the 5% stand a great risk of being oppressed.

None of the races in Malaysia are oppressed. The Bumiputeras (indigenous people) are privileged, like the Maoris. But this is also because they form 65-70% of the population, and at the founding of the nation, they were the most impoverished race of all.

Hence, the economic policy then was to raise the standards of living for all Bumis – ie redistribution of wealth.

The collective wealth of Malaysia, is held by the Chinese, who are about 20% of the population.

The Indians dominate the legal fraternity (some say this is due to the proficiency in commanding both English and Malay as a language – as Malaysian courts used Malay, but most contracts are written in English).

So in essence, yes, there is a bias in terms of policy making. But this is NOT religiously influenced. Of the 70% Bumis, Muslims are maybe 50% of that. The other 50% can be Kadazans, Nonyas, Portuguese (yes, they are indigenous in Malaysia) etc. These folks are mostly Christians too, mind you.

Now, considering the factors above, take into account these factors:

1. Listed companies must have a Bumi director
2. The Chinese control most of the national wealth (in terms of the largest companies)
3. Most Chinese companies are actually family owned and inheritance based. They aren’t listed.

So, apart from the legal requirement – where is the bias? Everyone’s eating their own bread.

the point, however, is not whether Malaysia is a democracy on par with NZ (because that is obviously not the case). The point really is whether Islam and democracy are compatible. In which case the question becomes one of whether Malaysia's undemocratic ways are the result of Islam, or something else.

Cool. So lets all live by the stats now.

What does the USA rank, I wonder?

Yes! By definition!

But putting that to one side, Malaysia does seem like a country where Islam can be the predominant religion and yet democracy and freedom remain in place. Sharia law hasn't been imposed in the country's legal practices from what you're saying...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Constitution doesn't use the term Bumiputra, but instead uses Malay? And, according to the constitution, to be defined as Malay you have to be Muslim (I'm thinking about Article 160 here)?

No. But I can tell you all of those are practiced fairly wide and fair on the ground itself. Ever been to a protest in Malaysia? I have.

Also - the limitations on assembly was driven by the '63 riots - and the fact that Malaysia is a nest hub for triad activities.

When you see 200 triad members walking down the street - you want to be able to arrest them before they meet the other 200 walking down from the other end.

Public gathering licenses are not difficult to obtain at all. It's what you want to gather for that's the issue.

If you want to organise a protest - all you need to do is to get a police permit. They happen, contrary to popular belief.





Erm, which nation doesn't have media control laws? NZ has them. I've just been working on it as well. Licensing is a typical form of control, IP protection and public standards, believe it or not.




Erm.. that applies to Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism or whatever else is out there. It’s NOT just Islam.

You are wrong.

Malay and Bumiputeras are not the same.

A Malay is a Bumi. But not all Bumis are Malay.

Malays have to be Muslim. But not all Bumis are Muslim.

The US gets 8.22, which really gives you an idea of how bad Malaysia is...

I'm sorry, what part was wrong?

Does the constitution use the term Bumiputeras or not?

Something else. You can take my word for it if you want or not.

It's more to do with the racial composition.

Once again - I'm not saying that it's a perfect democracy. I'm saying that it is. You made a correct statement there which I've been trying to get in all along - it's "which end of the spectrum of democracy" that's the point here. But in order to tell you that, I need to know where your 10/10 is.

I don't need a licence to publish anything in NZ.

I can't write a book that is critical of of the government, or of any religion, or containing material that people in the government might find offensive (there are of course things I can't publish, but to compare this with the situation in Malaysia is just plain stupid)

I can gather in a public place without a permit, and regardless of whether they are easy to obtain in Malaysia they still need to be obtained and can therefore be easily denied.

I can't be arrested and held without charge. In Malaysia I could be arrested and held without charge for an indefinite period of time.


btw, NZ would be pretty close to my 10/10. Other places like maybe iceland would be a little bit closer...

Sorry Neil. In reference to the Constitution protecting the freedom of speech, yes, it expressly does.


FYI clauses 2,3 and 4 relates to the power of Parliament to impose restrictions on these by law. So if you're talking about absolute freedom of speech then no, Malaysia' constitution doesn't guarantee it. Which country does btw?

Re: Bumiputeras

The term Bumiputeras is derived from the Consitution. From there, the Government defines who is a Bumi and who isn't. Bumiputera literally means "prince of the land" - so, the definition is based on natives, not immigrants to the land.

Malay is a "race" - Bumiputeras is a "collective of races".

The fact that the Consitution defines what a Malay is, separate from the discussion on Bumis.

Re: USA and rankings.

My point on the ranking was - I have to wonder if you take any rankings as being accurate. Especially when Western ideals normally dominate what the meaning of democracy or freedom means. The USA copied Malaysia in its use of the Internal Security Act, after criticising us for years. How well can you trust the Economists measurements? If you do, fine by me too. Once again, I'm by no means preaching perfection here.


RE: Leaders of state

Correction. There is no provision that The Head of the Executive (PM), has to be a Muslim.

State constitutions vary from state to state, and some states do have that provision in.

To clarify - Malaysia is a Federation made up of states.


Ps: If you guys are going to continue rapid-firing questions at me... then I won't be able to respond to all of them.

I'm not an expert on the Malaysian Constitution - I just grew up under it so I can give you a realistic view of how it's being interpreted and used. Whether that is good enough for you or not, is really up to you.

What situation exactly Neil? The NZ Government still has the power to ban publications and they have!

This is no more prevalent or absent in Malaysia than it is here. Do you honestly believe everything you read in the media?



So what? You need a police permit to organise a protest here too.

Same in Malaysia. You don't get arrested for standing 5 in a group.



Yeah. Same if you were in the USA bro. That 8.22 score there looking really good right?

Also, the way in which the ISA is applied is more stringent than you think. It relates to matters of national security and stability. Like the USA.

For EVERYTHING else your right to trial is GUARANTEED by the constitution... EXPRESSLY.




Fine. I'd give Malaysia a 7 based on that benchmark.

The negative 3 goes towards corruption, cronism, not enough transparency AND (this is my biggie) the abolishment of double-classed identity cards which distinguishes a Bumi from a non-Bumi.

Nothing of those negatives goes towards religion or the tempering of certain freedoms for national stability.

I'm sorry, but I very much would not like to see some idiots sparking racial discomfort by preaching hate messages or taunting other races when their party wins some seats. If I have to live with the ISA just so that my generation don't see another Black May like my parents did, I'm happy to do so.

Syariah - No it hasn't.

If you look at the Malaysian constitution and legal system, it is very much similar to that of any Commonwealth state.

Syariah only applies to Muslim-Muslim situations. Muslims vs all others come under the domain of the national system.

Re: Head of state - refer to my other post. The Federal Constitution doesn't disallow a non-Muslim to be the Head of Executive. But certain State Constitutions might.

Also, the bias towards "Bumis" is one of the several issues in debate during this elections.

The protests (on the whole) was mainly being pushed by Hindraf, who were dissatisfied with the representation they got from the MIC, which is their ethnic party in the National Front.

The MIC's top 3 lost their seats as a result of this, and are no longer in Cabinet.

Doesn't Malaysia have some pretty odd positive discrimination policies? I know a malaysian family who moved to NZ because they were ethnic chinese and pretty much every education avenue for their two kids were closed off - despite them both being total guru's - simply because they were chinese and not malay.

Isn't their basic system such that, for example, medical school will only offer x% of places to this group because they make up that percentage of the population?.. Previously (as in Singapore and Thailand too) certain ethnic groups which were minorities totally dominated certain professions (like doctors) so Malaysia just made entry (and some registrations once trained) pegged to the relative population make-up by ethnicity?

R

Yes.

But again - the quotas are for Bumis and not just Malays.

I dislike that as well.

Even though, to be honest, most mid-class etchnic Chinese and Indians prefer to send their children overseas anyway... I still don't like that policy.

In saying that, it comes back to the fact that the Malays 50 years ago were a lot poorer than they are now. They were the labourers back then. Most families could not afford foreign education. Hence, the quota system was introduced in an effort to provide preference to them. Chinese and Indians are still entitled to government scholarships for foreign studies.

One thing that I think needs to be taken into context is whether or not "policies" is a representation of a nation's adherence towards democratic ideals.

Policies such as this, or the NEP, are not uncommon to Malaysia itself. The US still practices forms of this. In New Zealand we've got the Electoral Finance Act, which is arguably a move against the freedom of speech.

Policies, or laws, such as this is more a reflection of a nation's unique needs rather than a disintegration of democracy itself.

Which is why I believe that overall, Malaysia, even as a Muslim nation, is a democratic nation. It may have some laws and policies which can be constituted as being contrary to basic rights etc - but the processes in which it follows to introduce these Acts and policies are a product of democracy itself.

No nation in the world promises a democratic nirvana. In my view, the EFA in NZ alone is a thorn in democracy. But that is no reason to believe that as a nation, NZ isn't democratic.

Furthermore, rankings and ideals aside - as a multi-racial nation we have lived through 50 years of peace and harmony.

Black May is an incident in every Malaysian’s mind – and no one in their right mind wants a repeat of that.

I’m not an idealist. I believe in pragmatism. I do not think that democracy, in its most perfect of forms, is the answer to Men’s problems.

In this context, and taken into account the racial complexities that exist in Malaysia, I’m happy to forego some “freedom” ideals so that my family and theirs can create their own wealth, live well, be friends with their neighbours, and never for a day in their life worry about their safety or future within the nation.

This circularity and co-dependence between the races was created out of need, and the desire to prevent a self-destructive nation going down the path of civil dissent. At one point 50 years ago, a group of people from different races got together and said – this is what needs to be done. Compromises will need to be made from all races, and hopefully 50 years from now, the next generation of Malaysians will have their future secured.

If the policies that made Malaysia the way it is today wasn’t in place then – imagine having an impoverished underclass which forms the 70% majority of the nation today? Would you not have another East Timor or Indonesia on your hands?

There were 2 million Indonesians in Kuala Lumpur alone when the racial riots happened in Indonesia. I remember the fears around when people were scared that the sentiments would spill over and morph into some sort of Malay nationalistic pride in Malaysia, and coupled with the migrant Indons, will start their own little war in our home.

But the Malays were quick to reassure their fellow citizens, that nothing of that sort would happen. Down on the street or up in Parliament everyone banded together. The nation as a whole felt reassurance that we will not go down the path of Indonesia.

Malaysia today has a substantially higher proportion of mid-high class Bumis than they previously had. As a result, these people are now educated, they bring back their western ideals and push for more reforms within their own parties. They are also now a class of people which have something “worth living for” – and that means not doing anything stupid enough to destroy their own nation.

Yes, I do not conform 100% to the notion of absoluteness when it comes to democracy or freedom. If I am to be criticised for it, I do not mind. I still take the position that I do and hold the beliefs that I do.

As I said, there are a lot of things I would change about Malaysia, but there are also a lot of things that I won’t. Ultimately, as a developing nation I’m happy we did not have to go down the pathways of Indonesia, or the African nations etc to get where we are today.

from wiki

Are you reinforcing the point that separation of powers is provided for by the Msian constitution - or that it wasn't?

Thats like just your opinion man!!!!

I think democracy is bullshit. But thats a different story...

well it's pretty clear you're a proto-fascist

anarchist you idiot.

whats an anarchist doing with a computer

capitalist swine

anarcho-syndicalist?

you don't know yourself yet

Nah, coffee shop anarchist

Seems to me an excellent and nuanced account of balancing ideals and reality and get to some approximation of a healthy society. You will find that many westerners have grown up with a more monolithic view of what's right and wrong and an inability to consider the historical context. I find you've done a good job of explaining the Malaysian story to me. Canada seems to have soem similarities - they had to somehow balance the needs and aspirations of frankophones, anglophones and First nations who were occupying the same territories without mass slaughter, and managed to do so without any of the civil wars, world wars and holocausts that happened at the same time elsewhere. That is not to say that they weren't injustices carried out but in comparison they pulled it off quite peaceful.

Do you think that Malayisa, having achieved what it set out to do, will now work towards a framework that is less racist?

-----. Indians are us?: Culture and genocide in native North America. Monroe, ME: Common Courage Press, 1994.
E 98 .P99 C28 1994 West Stacks and Hayden Stacks (check availability)

Gibbons, Rosemary and Dax Thomas. The residential school experience: A century of genocide in the Americas. Bozeman, MT: Montana State University, 2002.

Jaimes, M. Annette, ed. The state of Native America: Genocide, colonization, and resistance. Boston: South End Press, 1992.

Neu, Dean and Richard Therrien. Accounting for genocide: Canada's bureaucratic assault on aboriginal people. Black Point, N.S.: Fernwood Pub.; London; New York: Zed Books, 2003.

http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/mydocs/indian/chrisjohn.htm

I hope that it will, and if recent times are anything to judge by, there is a rippling flow of change that might just turn into a wave.

The former PM, Mahathir Mohammad, became the first PM to suggest a staged withdrawal of the privileges accorded to the Bumis. His words were "We gave you a walking stick, now it's time to stand on your own feet and take that stick away".

That didn't go down well with a large faction of Bumiputeras. Still, he is the most respected leader of the nation, regardless of his own faults.

When he penned the book the "Malay Dilemma" - he expressed for the first time how Malays and Bumis have become so dependent on their privileges, that they have used that as an excuse "not" to do anything for themselves.

This was all about 8-10 years ago now. He made these statements when he was on his way out, handing over power to his designated successor.

When his successor took over, and went into elections, the National Front won a 93% majority in Parliament. He was widely recognised as being the "squeaky clean" leader who promise to cleanse the country of corruption and cronism, and create more transparency over government actions.

Most think that he has failed to do this and live up to his promises. On the background, fueled by support and lobbying from Mahathir, "certain" members of the royal family, opposition leaders and a new generation of politicians - the Indians and Chinese began voicing out that it is time to radically assess whether or not the Bumi status still needs to be kept in this day an age.

The elections just gone, the second one since Mahathir's successor took over, saw the National Front lose about 47% of the seats in Parliament, to a coalition opposition - made up of Conservative Chinese, the People's Justice Party (the guy accused of sodomy), and the extremist PAS Islamic party.

The NF lost 5 of 13 states, as well as the Federal Territory (capital of Malaysia), making it 6 regions in total.

Of these 6, 3 are considered to be the crown jewels of the nation - Penang, the manufacturing hub - Selangor, the trade and commercial hub - and Kuala Lumpur, the capital.

For the first time in 50 years, all parties stayed away from any form of "racial politics".

When I talk to my mates in Malaysia and to my family - they all seem content in a way that neither party went down the path of trying to appeal to their own races. Essentially, people saw through the risk that each party will only fight for their own race, and not for others.

Traditionally, even the Malays don't vote for PAS. Their ideals are to extreme. Segregation of sexes, complete ban of alcohol, full adherence to syariah law etc. For years they have tried to convince voters that they would not force their views on ordinary Malaysians. This time around, some of that got through.

There is an acceptance even for them, who know that extreme Islamic views will never gain the support of the masses. If they want to have any influence at all in Malaysian politics, they must take into account the views of the other races, and the only way to convince the masses of that is to work together fluidly with other strong opposition parties that represent other minorities.

I hope that Malaysia will one day as a nation see no need to differentiate between Bumis and non-Bumis. After 2-3 generations, everyone should be Bumis or "princes of the land". I don't want my children to be so-called "second class" citizens.

Even if, on some levels, this is only a superficial distinction - still, why have it at all?

I think that the new generation of Malays, Chinese and Indians, the ones whom I have grown up with, played with, got into mischief together with etc etc - all see that we are one an equal.

Perhaps the children of our father will see that our father's ways are no longer needed...

Interesting posts, I agree with Jay_dubb, your posts Karhoo1 have convinced me somewhat that it is this way in Malaysia because of some historic complexities between culture and ethnicity.

It makes me think about our own Maori seats in Parliament which places strict democracy into question too... but might be quite necessary in the scheme of things.

ah ha, can't handle more European atrocities huh?

Gwynne Dyer: Dirty tactics reappear in nation's political minefield

Reasing the first reports about the accusations against Malaysia's opposition leader, Anwar Ibrahim, I had to check the date at the top of the page. Has there been a time-slip? Is this file 10 years old?

For Anwar to be accused of sodomy again, 10 years after he last challenged the position of Malaysia's Prime Minister and ended up in jail for sodomy (a crime in Malaysia), stretches the notion of coincidence to breaking point.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/466/story.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10520230

wtf?!