RACISM AS RACIST POLITICS

OF COW HEADS-COWARDS AND KOW TOW

Isn’t the actions of the Cow Head protesters like the comments of Datuk Ahmad Ismail being taken a bit too seriously and blown out of proportion altogether? Aren’t the Chinese after all descendants of ‘squatters’ like most other migrant races to Malaysia are? Let us take the comment of Ahmad Ismail first and place it in its true context before we get too precious about it all.

The reaction to Ahmad Ismail’s comment about Pendatangs by a mainly Chinese led alternative media in Malaysia, is somewhat,  dare I say hypocritical. It is the constituency of this same group, otherwise so vociferous in promoting a Singapore type totalitarian Chinese domination in Malaysia that now cries foul because an indigenous Malay has called them what they are: Pendatangs. Migrants.

Their spamming of anything and everything anti Malay is somewhat ignored in all of this debate because they believe what they are doing is championing the cause of democracy and freedom of expression. They achieve this by barring any  responses or criticisms on their websites that dares question their assertions they call fact, that rebut their claims and arguments or the basis for their arguments  especially where it challenges them  to cite their sources of ‘fact’.

The statement (Ahmad Ismail) itself by any definition and in any language can not be regarded as racist. Perhaps factually incorrect but certainly not racist unlike Raja Petra Kamaruddin’s lunatic rantings and ravings which would have rendered him liable to punishment for breaches of the law in any other civilized nation.

What’s ignored most of the time is that Raja Petra Kamaruddin’s support base is fundamentally and almost exclusively Chinese with a sprinkling of Indians and Malays for that tokenistic effect. 

A further example of the hypocrisy in the feigned outrage directed at Ahmad Ismail and the Cow head statement by  these precious lilly livered ‘champions of free speech’ can be found in their unquestioning support of a more racist, bigoted and provocative Theresa Kok, Lim Kit Siang, Raja Petra Kamarudddin and Jeff Ooi.

Today these hypocrites appear to have found an ally in an Indian community, a community in disarray and confused as to where they belong in the political spectrum.

THERESA KOK-PETRA KAMARUDDIN FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

Theresa Kok, inspite of espousing her so called Catholic beliefs on her website is undemocratic and by her own admissions led by her religious values, non secular in her thoughts words and deeds.

Material posted on her website in addition to statements attributed to her elsewhere, including those statements attributed to her Church which underwrites her political ideology is, in itself a statement of bigotry and chauvinism. 

Theresa Kok like Kit Siang make it clear that they stand exclusively first for their Chinese constituents and treat others as collateral to their primary political purpose of advancing Chinese only causes. All this in a country like Malaysia is unfortunate, provocative and sad.

Their websites exclude those without a knowledge of Chinese as a language. For good measure they include some English for a national audience that is 65% Malay and also 10% Indian.

RACISM AND THE MALAYSIAN BAR

Take a casual read of the highly politicised Malaysian Bar website (admittedly there has been some post Ambiga reconstruction of its form to its credit). 

The Malaysian Bar stands out an outstanding example of racial and political partisanship, bias and pathetic ignorance of politics and the law in Malaysia. Yet this is a quarter from which the nation expects a lot more tolerance, intelligence, knowledge, balance and legal responsibility which it does not receive.

By implication of their unsubtle support for the Theresa Kok, Lim Kit Siang and Raja Petra Kamaruddin’s of this world they show themselves to be a paragon of the same racism and unaccountable conduct they so vociferously and selectively  allege exists elsewhere (like in government).

PETRA-KIT SIANG AND THERESA KOK CONTINUED

These so called champions of democracy have a habit of censoring the views of those they disagree with on their highly offensive, controversial and divisive blogs. They participate in any campaign that is discriminatory of Malays by claiming to be anti BN (Barisan Nasional) and anti UMNO.

We are all entitled to our freedoms. But together with these freedoms comes responsibility. Playing the martyr is no evidence these bloggers and opposition politicians are without blemish or not guilt of the same offences they accuse government of; or as they wish us to believe that they are of a superior intellect or have a right to that moral higher ground they claim when attacking UMNO, the Malays, Muslims and government.

These are plainly bigoted individuals who seek  anarchy as an alternative to their inability to dominate others they consider a lesser species. Because some Malay individual may have been bigoted does not give an immediate right to anyone let alone Kit Siang and Kok to respond in an equally bigoted way as he and Kok have done on behalf of the rest of the community.

EXAMINING AHMAD ISMAIL’S COMMENTS

Ahmad Ismail made a statement that is in part correct in part incorrect. It is by no means racist. Racist by definition is;

“The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others”.

How on earth then can one extrapolate what Ahmad Ismail said in that controversial remark to re define that statement of his to either being racist or discriminatory or racially sensitive is beyond human logic. Such an assertion is not only objectionable but also questionable. Controversial maybe, racial vilification definitely not.

The arrest and detention of this group is one of the very few good judgement calls made by the Badawi government. Interestingly enough, as a catalyst Ahmad Ismail’s statement served to bring out of the wood work the real racists.

The MCA a partner in the BN government remained deafeningly silent and went on a rampage of insults when the Hindraf demonstrators who were merely attempting to petition the British government in KL were attacked by the Badawi government.

CHINESE SENSITIVITY

At the height of the Hindraf affair the race sensitive Chinese community were silent sitting on the fence for an outcome. It was after all the Indians to who they ran during the May 13 incident in 1969 calling them “Brothers” then when it was expedient to do so. However when the tide turned they turned on the Indians exploiting them in the extreme blaming it on the Malays.

The MCA came out in favour of Badawi’s actions during the Hindraf demonstrations. Not racist?? In fact it is now known  that key elements of the MCA and Chinese business community were instrumental in provoking the high handed Badawi response against Hindraf. Badawi did not act of his own accord.

It was the mainly Chinese reporters and editors of the press corps that were vitriolic in their condemnation of Hindraf The British may yet rue the day they sought the assistance of their Kuomintang allies in the region to thwart in a most brutal way the legitimate aspirations to justice by Hindraf.  

THE NOT TOO SUBTLE MEANING OF THIS REBELLION

This entire organised blogging and campaigning against the Barisan National and UMNO without slightest reference to the other two parties that constitute the Barisan is nothing short of an attempt to take over Malaysia like the Chinese communists attempted by more violent means in the 1950’s in the name of anti colonialism.

Their targets then were the same. The Malays. Their subversion tactics to undermine racial harmony through communalism is the same as that which is described in Lee Kuan Yew’s memoirs of their activities and methods as Chinese chauvinists in the 1960’s. 

All right thinking Malaysians should uphold the rights of Malays against an economic bulwark led racist attack on them under a thin veneer of Chinese sensitivity crying foul. And it occurs when they feel injured and isn’t that all the time?

THE HAND WITHIN THE GLOVE

The voice of the Malaysian Chinese community is found in the leadership of a neighbouring government who to this very day instigates the troubles of the region by conveniently and often provoking incitement in the name of efficient government and equal opportunity.

Often allowing themselves to be a parking lot for foreign intelligence agencies, banking opium warlords like Lo Sin Han (SBS TV Helen Vatsikopolous) and selling arms to the Tamil Tigers and other guerilla groups out of the inventories of their arms Industries the Singapore government is a hive of ani Malay activity in the region. 

It is they who speak for the Chinese in Southeast Asia with the occasional public comment from that states leaders. They admonish others but would not in a fit allow dissenters in their own turf to even whisper in dissent without dire consequences for them. When they hear dissent on their own turf they bankrupt then banish their dissenters to any other place that would have them as refugees.

All that the Chinese who feel offended by this criticism in Malaysia have to do is to look around them and to ask themselves this question. Would it be better that the Malays engage in the same sort of nationalization the Thais, Burmese, Indonesians, Filipinos,Viet Namese and Cambodians have engaged with impunity in their countries against migrant groups like the Chinese for so long?

The nationalization I  refer to here has been characterised by the forcible changing of all ‘foreign names’ (Chinese names and characters) into local names. Prohibition on vernacular schools, prohibition on the public display of Chinese cultural icons and symbols including Chinese characters on their shop fronts.In its place local languages and dialetcs.

What further accommodation and concessions do the Chinese want in Malaysia to stop vilifying the Malays? Malaysia is a country that voluntarily eschewed those prohibitions found in the rest of Southeast Asia and its various forms of cultural oppression. 

IS IT FAIR TO GENERALISE ABOUT THE CHINESE?

Those right thinking Chinese  who have thus far conveniently stood by as silent spectators to this debate, which is an  unprecedented and unnecessary onslaught on Malays and Muslims, have a responsibility to stand up and to be counted. They have an obligation to rid their community of  chauvinists and their allies like the Anwar’s and Petra Kamaruddin’s once and for all or be tainted by them in their silence.

CONCLUSION

This tit for tat is not over by a long shot yet. Malaysians like any other group have to question the motives of those who stir up trouble for the slightest cause in a volatile environment as Malaysia is today.

The argument that is raging against the Barisan may be legitimate. But no one is asking the question, who is the Barisan? Is it just UMNO or is it UMNO and others. Is it also the unaccountable former deputy finance minister whose husband is the owner of a large public bank in the country who benefitted greatly from the insider knowledge he and his bank enjoyed as a result of her use of confidential cabinet sensitive information? if not why did she not disclose her potential for conflict and her position as a shareholder of the bank? She is Chinese and not Malay.

Worse still no one asks who pays the piper playing the tune of the anti Malay anti Muslim campaigns using a small band of disgruntled Malays as their shield. And no one yet has had the intelligence to query the motives and the character of those making these bilious and vitriolic statements against individuals and groups of people like the Malays without a proper mandate from anyone but themselves yet claiming to act for the ‘righteous democratic majority’. Yep sure!!

Gopal Raj Kumar