Norman Mailer died a few days ago. Although I've never read a single book he's written, I came across his name countless times. However, I cannot remember exactly when or where I did. Nevertheless, when I read that he had died, I pored over several articles singing his praises in lieu of his passing. Something in one of those articles, published in the New York Times, caught my eye. It was a description of what Mr. Mailer did during his sophomore years. He changed his major from aeronautical engineering to literature, because he found it to be more of his liking. What was more interesting though, he "set himself a daily quota of 3,000 words of his own, on the theory that this was the way to get bad writing out of his system". So, seeing that he became a great writer because of or at least in part due to what he did, I'll try and do so too. Maybe not 3,000 words, but some words definitely on things I find out everyday that make me think. I don't intend to be a professional writer, just being a good one will suffice. Hopefully this works out well. Here's to Mr. Norman Mailer, who continues to inspire even after death.
Here's something that made me think today. An article in Counterpunch.com written by Alan Gresh, the editor of Le Monde Diplomatique. It was about the United States' new backyard: the Middle East. From what I understand, being the U.S.' backyard means that the focus of their worries are on you. Previously, Latin America was the worry because of its close geographical proximity. Nowadays, with the great advance in technology, distance supposedly means less. People, or more specifically terrorists, are now able to cross borders much faster, which makes the Middle East, where supposedly most of the terrorists come from, a region to be very much concerned about. However, the Middle East differs from Latin America because the latter was "never a crucial battlefield in a third world war". Europe was. It's the Middle East now. It's where the "crucial ideological battle" is being fought. So, the Middle East in the 21st Century is of much greater concern because it is the new U.S.' backyard and it's where all the action is. Hence, be sure to check in on your local news channel later. They might mention something about this.
Sunday, November 11, 2007
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Malaysia: The 120th State Most Likely To Fail
Fellow comrades,
Foreign Policy magazine and the Fund for Peace has released its annual Failed States Index for 2007. Malaysia has managed to rank 120th out of 177 states. Quite an achievement, I must say. The states were ranked based on 12 indicators comprising Social, Economic and Political aspects.
Our lowest score was 3.6/10 for "Chronic and Sustained Human Flight", meaning "Brain Drain" and voluntary emigration of the middle class. Being in Australia, and witnessing first hand the arrivals of these "Brains" and emigrants, I'd have to agree with this one. The are so many (ex) Malaysians who are living in Australia today, and more of them keep coming every year to study and apply for PR and settle down here after they graduate. This mindset is becoming the norm, rather than the exception among students.
Our highest score was 6.6/10 for "Uneven Economic Development along Group Lines". That's our highest score and we barely passed? Given that it means that we still have "group based inequality", "group based impoverishment" and "rise of communal nationalism based on real or perceived group inequalities", I'd say they were pretty lenient on marking us for this particular indicator. The "rise of communal nationalism" part is getting worryingly starker, particularly among young Malays. There seems to be a rise in the number of what I'd call neo-UltraMalays. They're pro-Malay, in the same style as Tun Mahathir was, but are different in their reasons for being so. Rather than supporting affirmative actions such as the New Economic Policy for the advantages that it gives to the Malays who were deprived of significant economic participation under the colonial masters, they're suppoting such policies because they believe Malaysia belongs to the Malays and as such government policies should benefit the Malays only. To say that these people are misguided would be an understatement. Probably a history lesson or two would help. I guess Tun Mahathir himself said it best: "Melayu Mudah Lupa".
Godspeed,
Fadli
You will find that the State is the kind of organization which, though it does big things badly, does small things badly, too - John Kenneth Galbraith
Foreign Policy magazine and the Fund for Peace has released its annual Failed States Index for 2007. Malaysia has managed to rank 120th out of 177 states. Quite an achievement, I must say. The states were ranked based on 12 indicators comprising Social, Economic and Political aspects.
Our lowest score was 3.6/10 for "Chronic and Sustained Human Flight", meaning "Brain Drain" and voluntary emigration of the middle class. Being in Australia, and witnessing first hand the arrivals of these "Brains" and emigrants, I'd have to agree with this one. The are so many (ex) Malaysians who are living in Australia today, and more of them keep coming every year to study and apply for PR and settle down here after they graduate. This mindset is becoming the norm, rather than the exception among students.
Our highest score was 6.6/10 for "Uneven Economic Development along Group Lines". That's our highest score and we barely passed? Given that it means that we still have "group based inequality", "group based impoverishment" and "rise of communal nationalism based on real or perceived group inequalities", I'd say they were pretty lenient on marking us for this particular indicator. The "rise of communal nationalism" part is getting worryingly starker, particularly among young Malays. There seems to be a rise in the number of what I'd call neo-UltraMalays. They're pro-Malay, in the same style as Tun Mahathir was, but are different in their reasons for being so. Rather than supporting affirmative actions such as the New Economic Policy for the advantages that it gives to the Malays who were deprived of significant economic participation under the colonial masters, they're suppoting such policies because they believe Malaysia belongs to the Malays and as such government policies should benefit the Malays only. To say that these people are misguided would be an understatement. Probably a history lesson or two would help. I guess Tun Mahathir himself said it best: "Melayu Mudah Lupa".
Godspeed,
Fadli
You will find that the State is the kind of organization which, though it does big things badly, does small things badly, too - John Kenneth Galbraith
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Long Live P. Ramlee
Fellow comrades,
On Tuesday, we marked the 34th anniversary of P. Ramlee's passing. The brilliant/legendary/genius composer/actor/director/musician has entertained millions of Malaysians and others around the world with his acting/songs/movies and continues to do so ever since his untimely death on 29 May 1973 at the age of 44. He was, is and will always be loved by everyone especially Malaysians and particularly for his wonderful movies. My earliest memories are of the funny scenes and catchlines from Bujang Lapok, Madu Tiga, Tiga Abdul, Ahmad Albab, and many, many more. His shows remain fresh and hilarious, despite being rerun every year by the RTM1. And I do mean EVERY year. His dramas touched on the hardships of life faced by the ordinary bloke in the days of yore Malaya and even today the problems he showcased can still be related to.
I only realised the moral messages hidden among the quips and wisecracks in his movies a few years ago when I bought a whole bunch of his movies on VCD to bring to Canberra. As I sat in the Burton & Garran Hall computer lab watching Pendekar Bujang Lapok, trying my best not to burst out laughing at almost every sentence uttered by Ramlee, Sudin and Ajis, I began to realise the lessons that P. Ramlee was trying to convey. Ethnic relations, marital problems, post-colonial development, familial ties, religion, et cetera. All these issues were touched upon one way or another in his movies. Be it in the witty remarks (e.g. Apa oi oi oi oi. Lu taktau ka bahasa melambangkan bangsa?) or the more dramatic ones (e.g. Mengapa tidak kau dilahirkan sebagai binatang?) every sentence had its purpose and beckons the audience to think. If I were a lecturer, doesn't matter what or where I teach, I'll be sure to include a scene or two from one of his movies. I'm sure we can all learn more on how to be a better person watching his movies than listening to a lecture on Neo-Cons for an hour.
Oddly enough, I find a divergence among my peers on the level of interest that they have on P. Ramlee's works. There are those who say his flicks belong to the era that they were made; that we can no longer subscribe to any of the message that his movies bring, regardless of whether they've actually watched a single scene. Although they seem to be able to appreciate the works of Charlie Chaplin, Noel Coward and Beethoven. Budget modern/Western laa konon.
Yet, thankfully, there are still those who are wise enough to appreciate P. Ramlee's oeuvre and the gems that are hidden in every scene in his movies and every line in his songs. Although most of those who do are from P. Ramlee's generation, I do hope that his works will continue to inspire and engender greater understanding among Malaysians in the future. Probably continuing to rerun his movies every year and/or naming an airport after him will do the trick. Heck, if it was up to me, when I go back to Malaysia this year, I'll be landing at P. Ramlee International.
For more insights into his personal life, here's a very recent interview with his son, Nasir. Also, transcripts of his movies are currently being compiled and kept for future references. I'd love to see it be made public on a website or sold as a book. I'll be first in line on the day it's released. Sadly, I'll never be able to get it signed by the author.
Godspeed,
Fadli
On Tuesday, we marked the 34th anniversary of P. Ramlee's passing. The brilliant/legendary/genius composer/actor/director/musician has entertained millions of Malaysians and others around the world with his acting/songs/movies and continues to do so ever since his untimely death on 29 May 1973 at the age of 44. He was, is and will always be loved by everyone especially Malaysians and particularly for his wonderful movies. My earliest memories are of the funny scenes and catchlines from Bujang Lapok, Madu Tiga, Tiga Abdul, Ahmad Albab, and many, many more. His shows remain fresh and hilarious, despite being rerun every year by the RTM1. And I do mean EVERY year. His dramas touched on the hardships of life faced by the ordinary bloke in the days of yore Malaya and even today the problems he showcased can still be related to.
I only realised the moral messages hidden among the quips and wisecracks in his movies a few years ago when I bought a whole bunch of his movies on VCD to bring to Canberra. As I sat in the Burton & Garran Hall computer lab watching Pendekar Bujang Lapok, trying my best not to burst out laughing at almost every sentence uttered by Ramlee, Sudin and Ajis, I began to realise the lessons that P. Ramlee was trying to convey. Ethnic relations, marital problems, post-colonial development, familial ties, religion, et cetera. All these issues were touched upon one way or another in his movies. Be it in the witty remarks (e.g. Apa oi oi oi oi. Lu taktau ka bahasa melambangkan bangsa?) or the more dramatic ones (e.g. Mengapa tidak kau dilahirkan sebagai binatang?) every sentence had its purpose and beckons the audience to think. If I were a lecturer, doesn't matter what or where I teach, I'll be sure to include a scene or two from one of his movies. I'm sure we can all learn more on how to be a better person watching his movies than listening to a lecture on Neo-Cons for an hour.
Oddly enough, I find a divergence among my peers on the level of interest that they have on P. Ramlee's works. There are those who say his flicks belong to the era that they were made; that we can no longer subscribe to any of the message that his movies bring, regardless of whether they've actually watched a single scene. Although they seem to be able to appreciate the works of Charlie Chaplin, Noel Coward and Beethoven. Budget modern/Western laa konon.
Yet, thankfully, there are still those who are wise enough to appreciate P. Ramlee's oeuvre and the gems that are hidden in every scene in his movies and every line in his songs. Although most of those who do are from P. Ramlee's generation, I do hope that his works will continue to inspire and engender greater understanding among Malaysians in the future. Probably continuing to rerun his movies every year and/or naming an airport after him will do the trick. Heck, if it was up to me, when I go back to Malaysia this year, I'll be landing at P. Ramlee International.
For more insights into his personal life, here's a very recent interview with his son, Nasir. Also, transcripts of his movies are currently being compiled and kept for future references. I'd love to see it be made public on a website or sold as a book. I'll be first in line on the day it's released. Sadly, I'll never be able to get it signed by the author.
Godspeed,
Fadli
Monday, May 14, 2007
One who cannot be patient for a moment will have days and months of trouble (Chinese proverb)
Fellow comrades,
An update on the impending Singaporean PM's visit to Malaysia quoted our Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar as saying that another issue that will be discussed won't be as contentious as the others but is just as important: the Iskandar Development Region. Not knowing that much about the IDR, I visited its website. The layout of the webpage was nice although the content was slightly amatuerish. On the right hand corner, the IDR was said to offer investors, among other things, "our resources" and that "we are pro business" (surprisingly blatant). The website seemed up-to-date and had a link to a recently updated (19 April 2007) FAQ section. From the website, I understand that the IDR's main purpose are to fully exploit the logistic triangle: Senai Airport (North), Port of Tanjung Pelepas (South West) and Johor Port (South East) as well as allowing foreign companies to take advantage of the Indonesia-Malaysia-Singapore Growth Triangle (IMS-GT) around it. Having a free trade area of sorts may lure in foreign investors, pretty much like Hong Kong. Nevertheless, prudence is necessary. Already there are discontent among certain sectors of the community, namely the Malays and more particularly Tun Mahathir, when the government decided to make the IDR truly adopt the ideals of a "free trade area" and not have any affirmative action policies in place. The government gave ground and set up a "Social Action Fund" that will be managed by the Iskandar Regional Development Authority. Investors might be a little worried about this and, with the ease of capital flight nowadays, decide to invest elsewhere. Although, "elsewhere" might need 'patient capital' as well.
Godspeed,
Fadli
An update on the impending Singaporean PM's visit to Malaysia quoted our Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar as saying that another issue that will be discussed won't be as contentious as the others but is just as important: the Iskandar Development Region. Not knowing that much about the IDR, I visited its website. The layout of the webpage was nice although the content was slightly amatuerish. On the right hand corner, the IDR was said to offer investors, among other things, "our resources" and that "we are pro business" (surprisingly blatant). The website seemed up-to-date and had a link to a recently updated (19 April 2007) FAQ section. From the website, I understand that the IDR's main purpose are to fully exploit the logistic triangle: Senai Airport (North), Port of Tanjung Pelepas (South West) and Johor Port (South East) as well as allowing foreign companies to take advantage of the Indonesia-Malaysia-Singapore Growth Triangle (IMS-GT) around it. Having a free trade area of sorts may lure in foreign investors, pretty much like Hong Kong. Nevertheless, prudence is necessary. Already there are discontent among certain sectors of the community, namely the Malays and more particularly Tun Mahathir, when the government decided to make the IDR truly adopt the ideals of a "free trade area" and not have any affirmative action policies in place. The government gave ground and set up a "Social Action Fund" that will be managed by the Iskandar Regional Development Authority. Investors might be a little worried about this and, with the ease of capital flight nowadays, decide to invest elsewhere. Although, "elsewhere" might need 'patient capital' as well.
Godspeed,
Fadli
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Eye on Singapore
Fellow comrades,
NST reported today that Pak Lah and Singaporean PM Lee Hsien Loong have decided on having a cruise together next Tuesday at Langkawi. According to our Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar, the "get together" was held because "the Singaporean Prime Minister expressed a desire to visit Malaysia" and Pak Lah decided to invite him over. Considering the current "warm" relations that we're having with the island Republic, the FM suggested that it was pertinent that the "outstanding" issues that we have with Singapore i.e. water sold to Singapore, KTM Berhad land in Singapore and the use of Malaysian airspace by the Singapore Air Force; be resolved. Although he said that no set agenda was planned, the mentioning of these issues seem to suggest that they would be the hot topic during the get-together. It would be hard to expect much from this meeting as PM Lee will only be here for a night. Lets look at the outstanding issues and see how important they are to our interests:
1. Water sold to Singapore - Half of Singapore's water comes from Malaysia through agreements that runs until 2061 and 2061. We've been selling it at $0.007 per 1000 gallons while they've sold treated water back to us for $0.13 per 1000 gallons. Although they've been accused of profiteering from this deal, Singapore has argued that the cost of treating water is much higher and in fact they're the one who's losing money. Most recently, when the crooked/scenic/farcical bridge negotiations were at its peak, Singapore's Second Foreign Minister Raymond Lim mentioned how the demolition and replacement of Malaysia's side of the causeway would result in the disruption of the pipeline that has been used to send our water to Singapore. Pak Lah mentioned back then that they've always been worried about us cutting their water supply although it has never been our policy to do so. I've remember clearly reading in a foreign publication that we've actually been using the water issue as a bullying tactic to force Singapore in submitting to our every wishes. Clearly, our Cabinet's decision to scrap the bridge plan dismisses this suggestion. Singapore has been building water recycling and desalination plants in order to alleviate its dependence on our water supply. We may lose this bargaining chip in a few years since they've been so good at making their own water to the point where they might even be exporting them soon.
2. KTM Berhad land - I remember reading in a foreign publication once that we've removed a sign that said "Selamat Datang ke Malaya" from that plot of land as a nice gesture to the Singaporeans. Now they want us to remove everything else that we own there. This is a very complicated issue that can find its roots from the days of yore when the Brits were still in power. This article has a very detailed explanation in the last few paragraphs. Suffice it to say and if I'm right: we have land there that we may not legally own if we don't use - they want it - they're willing to exchange it for another plot of land that's of equal value - for some reason we don't want to let go of it. Beats me.
3. Use of Malaysian airspace by the Singapore Air Force - this issue probably gained prominence most recently when Singapore wanted it as part of the bridge agreement. Our FM has reportedly said that allowing this won't affect our sovereignty. How that can be justified is unclear to me. Although I would have to say that should the roof on my house be invisible, I'd be a tad worried. And allowing my neighbour to watch me from above while I'm on the throne is the least of my worries.
An additional issue brought up by former Culture, Arts and Tourism Minister today:
4. The return of Central Provident Fund (CPF) to Malaysians who were employed in Singapore - reportedly, Malaysians have contibuted RM$2 billion to Singapore's CPF. Legally, Singapore is on the right as the pensioners agreed to having the CPF taken from their wages before being employed. So, what they actually want is for Singapore to be nice and give them back that money for them to live out the rest of their days in comfort.
Clearly, there have been plenty of mistrust and disagreement between our two countries even before our separation in 1963. Hopefully the future bodes well for us. Our people share a lot of things in common, last of which is hatred for one another. Should our leaders take note of this, maybe the rhetorics can be toned down and the benefits that a closer partneship can bring about, particularly on both our economies, will be realised.
Godspeed,
Fadli
NST reported today that Pak Lah and Singaporean PM Lee Hsien Loong have decided on having a cruise together next Tuesday at Langkawi. According to our Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar, the "get together" was held because "the Singaporean Prime Minister expressed a desire to visit Malaysia" and Pak Lah decided to invite him over. Considering the current "warm" relations that we're having with the island Republic, the FM suggested that it was pertinent that the "outstanding" issues that we have with Singapore i.e. water sold to Singapore, KTM Berhad land in Singapore and the use of Malaysian airspace by the Singapore Air Force; be resolved. Although he said that no set agenda was planned, the mentioning of these issues seem to suggest that they would be the hot topic during the get-together. It would be hard to expect much from this meeting as PM Lee will only be here for a night. Lets look at the outstanding issues and see how important they are to our interests:
1. Water sold to Singapore - Half of Singapore's water comes from Malaysia through agreements that runs until 2061 and 2061. We've been selling it at $0.007 per 1000 gallons while they've sold treated water back to us for $0.13 per 1000 gallons. Although they've been accused of profiteering from this deal, Singapore has argued that the cost of treating water is much higher and in fact they're the one who's losing money. Most recently, when the crooked/scenic/farcical bridge negotiations were at its peak, Singapore's Second Foreign Minister Raymond Lim mentioned how the demolition and replacement of Malaysia's side of the causeway would result in the disruption of the pipeline that has been used to send our water to Singapore. Pak Lah mentioned back then that they've always been worried about us cutting their water supply although it has never been our policy to do so. I've remember clearly reading in a foreign publication that we've actually been using the water issue as a bullying tactic to force Singapore in submitting to our every wishes. Clearly, our Cabinet's decision to scrap the bridge plan dismisses this suggestion. Singapore has been building water recycling and desalination plants in order to alleviate its dependence on our water supply. We may lose this bargaining chip in a few years since they've been so good at making their own water to the point where they might even be exporting them soon.
2. KTM Berhad land - I remember reading in a foreign publication once that we've removed a sign that said "Selamat Datang ke Malaya" from that plot of land as a nice gesture to the Singaporeans. Now they want us to remove everything else that we own there. This is a very complicated issue that can find its roots from the days of yore when the Brits were still in power. This article has a very detailed explanation in the last few paragraphs. Suffice it to say and if I'm right: we have land there that we may not legally own if we don't use - they want it - they're willing to exchange it for another plot of land that's of equal value - for some reason we don't want to let go of it. Beats me.
3. Use of Malaysian airspace by the Singapore Air Force - this issue probably gained prominence most recently when Singapore wanted it as part of the bridge agreement. Our FM has reportedly said that allowing this won't affect our sovereignty. How that can be justified is unclear to me. Although I would have to say that should the roof on my house be invisible, I'd be a tad worried. And allowing my neighbour to watch me from above while I'm on the throne is the least of my worries.
An additional issue brought up by former Culture, Arts and Tourism Minister today:
4. The return of Central Provident Fund (CPF) to Malaysians who were employed in Singapore - reportedly, Malaysians have contibuted RM$2 billion to Singapore's CPF. Legally, Singapore is on the right as the pensioners agreed to having the CPF taken from their wages before being employed. So, what they actually want is for Singapore to be nice and give them back that money for them to live out the rest of their days in comfort.
Clearly, there have been plenty of mistrust and disagreement between our two countries even before our separation in 1963. Hopefully the future bodes well for us. Our people share a lot of things in common, last of which is hatred for one another. Should our leaders take note of this, maybe the rhetorics can be toned down and the benefits that a closer partneship can bring about, particularly on both our economies, will be realised.
Godspeed,
Fadli
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
Sukhoi Sensation
Fellow Comrades,
Tun Mahathir's interview with Malaysiakini, published on 9 May 2007, provided an interesting note on the Defence Ministry's "purchase" of 18 Russian-made Sukhoi jet fighters supposedly worth $900 million. Tun M said that the purchase was made through "local agents" appointed by the Russians. Who are these "local agents"? We probably won't know for sure. But this is probably one of many questions that I, along with the public, ponder upon about this purchase. Probably it's one of those deals that shouldn't have been known to the public in the first place.
This article made me think about several things: Were the $900 million the total sum of 19 jet fighters or part of a bigger deal which involved sending our first astronaut into space? Or more simply, what is the breakdown of the $900 million? If the sum total of the 18 jets is $900 million, which makes each jet worth $50 million, how come the Vietnamese only got the same type of jets for $30 million? On the other hand, if the deal included the astronaut's flight ONLY, then wouldn't that make the cost of sending the astronaut $360 million? Or was the higher cost for the jets due to the extra requirements of the Su-30MKM jets that we asked for e.g. replacing the Israeli electronic countermeasure in the jets with those from South Africa? On another note, who had the last word in making the purchase? Was it really agreed upon after Russian President Vladimir Putin met Tun M in Kuala Lumpur? Was it Najib's decision? Was it the Defence Ministry's decision? The answers to these questions might not be known to the public for a very long time, if ever. This is probably the first arms purchase that has generated so much attention in Malaysia. That's only because the Defence Minister has somehow been implicated and charged with profiting from the deal. Did he really? The questions just keep coming.
Tun Mahathir's interview with Malaysiakini, published on 9 May 2007, provided an interesting note on the Defence Ministry's "purchase" of 18 Russian-made Sukhoi jet fighters supposedly worth $900 million. Tun M said that the purchase was made through "local agents" appointed by the Russians. Who are these "local agents"? We probably won't know for sure. But this is probably one of many questions that I, along with the public, ponder upon about this purchase. Probably it's one of those deals that shouldn't have been known to the public in the first place.
This article made me think about several things: Were the $900 million the total sum of 19 jet fighters or part of a bigger deal which involved sending our first astronaut into space? Or more simply, what is the breakdown of the $900 million? If the sum total of the 18 jets is $900 million, which makes each jet worth $50 million, how come the Vietnamese only got the same type of jets for $30 million? On the other hand, if the deal included the astronaut's flight ONLY, then wouldn't that make the cost of sending the astronaut $360 million? Or was the higher cost for the jets due to the extra requirements of the Su-30MKM jets that we asked for e.g. replacing the Israeli electronic countermeasure in the jets with those from South Africa? On another note, who had the last word in making the purchase? Was it really agreed upon after Russian President Vladimir Putin met Tun M in Kuala Lumpur? Was it Najib's decision? Was it the Defence Ministry's decision? The answers to these questions might not be known to the public for a very long time, if ever. This is probably the first arms purchase that has generated so much attention in Malaysia. That's only because the Defence Minister has somehow been implicated and charged with profiting from the deal. Did he really? The questions just keep coming.
Godspeed,
Fadli
Fadli
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
Greg Sheridan (heart) Pak Lah
Fellow comrades,
I haven't blogged for a loooonggg while. But here goes.
The opinion page in The Australian a few days ago had Greg Sheridan, " the most influential foreign affairs analyst in Australian journalism", writing about his latest interview with Pak Lah. As before, he praised Pak Lah's calm, pragmatic and dignified demeanour. It seems typical of Western analysts to praise those they deem to be "moderate" or, more correctly, "quite". They despise of loud and tough leaders like Tun M and Robert Mugabe.
Rightly so. It is clear that those gung-ho leaders speak as they do just for their respective domestic audience. Sure, they'll get the respect and fear they crave, but this also risks scampering away foreign investors. Nevertheless, their ideas and words should not be disregarded completely eventhough its primary purpose is as rhetoric.
The injustices that the First World has imposed on the Third World should not be taken lightly and seen as an argument for a bygone era. In fact, it is now more pertinent than ever that we question the underlying purpose of First World exports. And I don't mean Big Mac or IPOD. I mean liberal democracy and free trade. Not to say that the imposition of these ideas as part of Third World government policy has not been beneficial. But it is necessary to consider the impact that it has had when imposed fully and freely. Indonesia's racial riots in 1998 serves as a good example of what can happen. Probably Mohammed Ayoob's idea of subaltern realism or Amy Chua's thesis in her book "World on Fire" can serve as thinking points for those Western analysts and Malaysians espousing the goodness of having full-fledged democracy in Third World countries.
That's all for now folks.
Godspeed,
Fadli
I haven't blogged for a loooonggg while. But here goes.
The opinion page in The Australian a few days ago had Greg Sheridan, " the most influential foreign affairs analyst in Australian journalism", writing about his latest interview with Pak Lah. As before, he praised Pak Lah's calm, pragmatic and dignified demeanour. It seems typical of Western analysts to praise those they deem to be "moderate" or, more correctly, "quite". They despise of loud and tough leaders like Tun M and Robert Mugabe.
Rightly so. It is clear that those gung-ho leaders speak as they do just for their respective domestic audience. Sure, they'll get the respect and fear they crave, but this also risks scampering away foreign investors. Nevertheless, their ideas and words should not be disregarded completely eventhough its primary purpose is as rhetoric.
The injustices that the First World has imposed on the Third World should not be taken lightly and seen as an argument for a bygone era. In fact, it is now more pertinent than ever that we question the underlying purpose of First World exports. And I don't mean Big Mac or IPOD. I mean liberal democracy and free trade. Not to say that the imposition of these ideas as part of Third World government policy has not been beneficial. But it is necessary to consider the impact that it has had when imposed fully and freely. Indonesia's racial riots in 1998 serves as a good example of what can happen. Probably Mohammed Ayoob's idea of subaltern realism or Amy Chua's thesis in her book "World on Fire" can serve as thinking points for those Western analysts and Malaysians espousing the goodness of having full-fledged democracy in Third World countries.
That's all for now folks.
Godspeed,
Fadli
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
New World Order...right?
Fellow comrades,
Wahington Post had an article today about the new World Court, the International Criminal Court, which is now in full operation. Reading the headline, I thought to myself what a field day the conspiracy theorists must be having. I've been reading plenty of conspiracy theory materials about the impending New World Order. Besides the long and winding articles on dodgy websites, I've read a couple of well-published books including Pat Robertsons's aptly titled "New World Order" and A. Ralph Epperson's magnum opus "The Unseen Hand". The latter's title, I might add, is a brilliant take on Adam Smith's theory of the "Invisible Hand". According to the authors, the purpose of such an Order is the creation of a global dictatorship that prohibits any form of individual freedom. Frankly, I'm far from convinced that such a conspiracy exist. From their writings, it is clear that this is just another case of Americans, and most if not all of the conspiracy theorists are Americans, subscribing to the "American exceptionalism" idea. The so-called "agents" of the New World Order movement have all been American or are of particular concern only to America (e.g. the Rockefellers, Patriot Act, the Freemasons, Skull and Bones, gun control, et cetera). Granted, the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and the United Nations have been blamed as well, but mostly on the premise that all of those organisations are under the control of the American government. The evidences produced by these conspiracy theorists, albeit coming from reputable sources, have all been either overblown or simply circumstantial. The best example of how misguided they are in evaluating historical facts and figures is in their predictions of the Soviet Union, particularly circa 1970s-1980s. Among them are the unification of the United States and the Soviet Union, the creation of a United States of Europe that unifies Europes's political economic and social systems (very different from the European Union we see today) and the Soviet Union's unification with China followed by the fall of all Asian countries under Communist rule. All these were predicted to happen before 1990. This just goes to show that the case is still strong on the side of the "Accidental View of History" and predicting human and social behaviour is an otiose practice.
Today is the 50th anniversary of Holland-Malaysia diplomatic ties. I was suprised at Holland's Ambassador to Malaysia Lody Embrechts's notion that Malaysia's "good business relations" with Malaysia can be traced as far back as 100 years ago. Hmmm... did he forget about the Dutch East India Company which had an outpost in Malacca in the 17th Century? Or is it because he didn't want to mention the Company's methods of maintaining its monopoly over certain industries in the region which included, and I quote from the Wikipedia article, "violent suppression of the native population, not stopping short of extortion and mass murder"? Lest we forget? Or should we just let bygones be bygones? You decide.
Godspeed,
Fadli
If there ever was in the history of humanity an enemy who was truly universal, an enemy whose acts and moves trouble the entire world, threaten the entire world, attack the entire world in any way or another, that real and really universal enemy is precisely Yankee imperialism. - Fidel Castro
Wahington Post had an article today about the new World Court, the International Criminal Court, which is now in full operation. Reading the headline, I thought to myself what a field day the conspiracy theorists must be having. I've been reading plenty of conspiracy theory materials about the impending New World Order. Besides the long and winding articles on dodgy websites, I've read a couple of well-published books including Pat Robertsons's aptly titled "New World Order" and A. Ralph Epperson's magnum opus "The Unseen Hand". The latter's title, I might add, is a brilliant take on Adam Smith's theory of the "Invisible Hand". According to the authors, the purpose of such an Order is the creation of a global dictatorship that prohibits any form of individual freedom. Frankly, I'm far from convinced that such a conspiracy exist. From their writings, it is clear that this is just another case of Americans, and most if not all of the conspiracy theorists are Americans, subscribing to the "American exceptionalism" idea. The so-called "agents" of the New World Order movement have all been American or are of particular concern only to America (e.g. the Rockefellers, Patriot Act, the Freemasons, Skull and Bones, gun control, et cetera). Granted, the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and the United Nations have been blamed as well, but mostly on the premise that all of those organisations are under the control of the American government. The evidences produced by these conspiracy theorists, albeit coming from reputable sources, have all been either overblown or simply circumstantial. The best example of how misguided they are in evaluating historical facts and figures is in their predictions of the Soviet Union, particularly circa 1970s-1980s. Among them are the unification of the United States and the Soviet Union, the creation of a United States of Europe that unifies Europes's political economic and social systems (very different from the European Union we see today) and the Soviet Union's unification with China followed by the fall of all Asian countries under Communist rule. All these were predicted to happen before 1990. This just goes to show that the case is still strong on the side of the "Accidental View of History" and predicting human and social behaviour is an otiose practice.
Today is the 50th anniversary of Holland-Malaysia diplomatic ties. I was suprised at Holland's Ambassador to Malaysia Lody Embrechts's notion that Malaysia's "good business relations" with Malaysia can be traced as far back as 100 years ago. Hmmm... did he forget about the Dutch East India Company which had an outpost in Malacca in the 17th Century? Or is it because he didn't want to mention the Company's methods of maintaining its monopoly over certain industries in the region which included, and I quote from the Wikipedia article, "violent suppression of the native population, not stopping short of extortion and mass murder"? Lest we forget? Or should we just let bygones be bygones? You decide.
Godspeed,
Fadli
If there ever was in the history of humanity an enemy who was truly universal, an enemy whose acts and moves trouble the entire world, threaten the entire world, attack the entire world in any way or another, that real and really universal enemy is precisely Yankee imperialism. - Fidel Castro
Monday, January 22, 2007
Latent Lebanon
Fellow comrades,
Best Wishes,
Fadli
Homer: Kids, you tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is, never try. - Homer J. Simpson
Malaysia has sent 257 of its troops to Lebanon as part of the UNIFIL contingent. Overall, 365 personnel have been sent. I would've been fine with it had they been sent last year, say sometime before the massive flood in Johor. However, now that the flood has hit and keeps on hitting us hard, I wonder if it's right to use our military resources to solve another country's problems. I know that some of our soldiers are already helping out flood victims, but would having more of them help out hurt? Lebanon seems to be fine nowadays, worrying more about labour strikes and kids failing at school rather than an imminent attack by Israel. I understand that they're still facing some problems, but I think our own problems need more attention. Of course, we've declared that we were able to send 1000 troops to Lebanon before, but that was way before the floods. So, international extolment for our contribution to global peace and security; or national praise for our soldiers rolling-up their sleeves and helping flood victims? Quandary, no?
On a much lighter note, The Simpsons Movie's plot has been revealed. Interesting, indeed.
Best Wishes,
Fadli
Homer: Kids, you tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is, never try. - Homer J. Simpson
Thursday, January 18, 2007
Have you heard the one about the national newspaper that sued the bloggers?
Fellow comrades,
That's right. Bloggers Jeff Ooi and Ahirudin Attan were both sued by the Malaysian daily newspaper New Straits Times. A news-site's take on the news was rather interesting, particularly its headline. I have been an avid reader of their blogs. They have a knack for exposing unfavourable, yet rarely heard, news about the government. Their articles are always fresh and honest. It is very worrying that this has happened, as the internet is the only independent medium to obtain information. Bloggers, particularly Malaysians, will fear for their income everytime they hit the "publish" button, which may result in less people willing to speak up. Independent Malaysian news-sites, such as Malaysia Today, Malaysiakini and others, have improved greatly since they began to prop up in the late-90s (when the Anwar Ibrahim scandal burned the bellies of Malaysians to obtain alternative news). They have turned themselves from poorly-designed, hosted-by-geocities sites to well-maintained ones. Even my uni subscribes to Malaysiakini. Back to the libel suit. The Wall Street Journal's and Barron magazine's online articles have been sued before. The WSJ case, which was heard in the U.K., was thrown out since only five people have read it. However, the judges in the Barron case, which was heard in Australia, allowed for it to be sued, albeit the article was only read by nine people. The results of the Malaysian case will be very, very interesting indeed.
Godspeed,
Fadli
Of what use is freedom of speech to those who fear to offend? - Roger Ebert
That's right. Bloggers Jeff Ooi and Ahirudin Attan were both sued by the Malaysian daily newspaper New Straits Times. A news-site's take on the news was rather interesting, particularly its headline. I have been an avid reader of their blogs. They have a knack for exposing unfavourable, yet rarely heard, news about the government. Their articles are always fresh and honest. It is very worrying that this has happened, as the internet is the only independent medium to obtain information. Bloggers, particularly Malaysians, will fear for their income everytime they hit the "publish" button, which may result in less people willing to speak up. Independent Malaysian news-sites, such as Malaysia Today, Malaysiakini and others, have improved greatly since they began to prop up in the late-90s (when the Anwar Ibrahim scandal burned the bellies of Malaysians to obtain alternative news). They have turned themselves from poorly-designed, hosted-by-geocities sites to well-maintained ones. Even my uni subscribes to Malaysiakini. Back to the libel suit. The Wall Street Journal's and Barron magazine's online articles have been sued before. The WSJ case, which was heard in the U.K., was thrown out since only five people have read it. However, the judges in the Barron case, which was heard in Australia, allowed for it to be sued, albeit the article was only read by nine people. The results of the Malaysian case will be very, very interesting indeed.
Godspeed,
Fadli
Of what use is freedom of speech to those who fear to offend? - Roger Ebert
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
Ba(ra)ck again...
Fellow comrades,
Well, haven't blogged for a while. Had some problem signing in a few weeks ago and decided to give up. But, thought I'd drop by and write something. Since, obviously, I'm having no problem signing in, I may just write much more frequently in the coming days. The news item that caught my eye was Barack Obama's decision to launch a "presidential exploratory committee" for the 2008 Presidential campaign which is another way of saying "I'm doing this just in case I decide to back off later so that it won't hurt my career as badly as launching a full-fledged campaign AND I'm able to start my campaign early, albeit partly-fledged, without suffering from burnout BUT, should I decide to run anyway, I'll have plenty of money raised already". This, after months of avoiding the issue and giving few hints as to whether he would run. An article by Charles Krauthammer about Senator Obama written in October 2006 was particularly interesting. It explained how the Senator would "win by losing", should he run for the Presidency in 2008. Only God, and Senator Obama, would know whether the article had any influence on his decision.
I, however, have just recently discovered the virtues of Chuck Hagel. Basically, he's a Republican, Vitenam-vet, experienced businessman and Senator from Nebraska. In recent years, he has quite publicly distanced himself from the Bush administration. What's more interesting is the Israel lobby's "effort to marginalize Chuck Hagel for saying fairminded things about Israel/Palestine ". Interesting, no?
That's all for now, folks.
Godspeed,
Fadli
"When I was a small boy growing up in Kansas, a friend of mine and I went fishing and as we sat there in the warmth of a summer afternoon on a riverbank we talked about what we wanted to do when we grew up. I told him that I wanted to be a real major-league baseball player, a genuine professional like Honus Wagner. My friend said that he'd like to be President of the United States. Neither of us got our wish." - Dwight D. Eisenhower
Well, haven't blogged for a while. Had some problem signing in a few weeks ago and decided to give up. But, thought I'd drop by and write something. Since, obviously, I'm having no problem signing in, I may just write much more frequently in the coming days. The news item that caught my eye was Barack Obama's decision to launch a "presidential exploratory committee" for the 2008 Presidential campaign which is another way of saying "I'm doing this just in case I decide to back off later so that it won't hurt my career as badly as launching a full-fledged campaign AND I'm able to start my campaign early, albeit partly-fledged, without suffering from burnout BUT, should I decide to run anyway, I'll have plenty of money raised already". This, after months of avoiding the issue and giving few hints as to whether he would run. An article by Charles Krauthammer about Senator Obama written in October 2006 was particularly interesting. It explained how the Senator would "win by losing", should he run for the Presidency in 2008. Only God, and Senator Obama, would know whether the article had any influence on his decision.
I, however, have just recently discovered the virtues of Chuck Hagel. Basically, he's a Republican, Vitenam-vet, experienced businessman and Senator from Nebraska. In recent years, he has quite publicly distanced himself from the Bush administration. What's more interesting is the Israel lobby's "effort to marginalize Chuck Hagel for saying fairminded things about Israel/Palestine ". Interesting, no?
That's all for now, folks.
Godspeed,
Fadli
"When I was a small boy growing up in Kansas, a friend of mine and I went fishing and as we sat there in the warmth of a summer afternoon on a riverbank we talked about what we wanted to do when we grew up. I told him that I wanted to be a real major-league baseball player, a genuine professional like Honus Wagner. My friend said that he'd like to be President of the United States. Neither of us got our wish." - Dwight D. Eisenhower
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
