Archive for the ‘Ideology’ Category
Posted by ella-mae on August 8, 2009
Posted in Anwar Ibrahim, Bangsa Malaysia, BN, Crime, Current Affairs, Dandelions, ella-mae, government, Human Rights, Ideology, Mainstream Media, Malaysia, malaysiakini, malaysian, MIC, Music, Najib Tun Razak, News, Observation, Observations, PAS, People, PKR, Politicians, politics, Racism, Raja Petra Kamarudin, Samyvellu, the dandelions, UMNO | Tagged: AbolishISA, Anti-ISA, Bloggers Against ISA, ISA, Malaysia, malaysiakini, MalaysianIndian, Malaysians, MCA, Merdeka, Michael Jackson, Mkini, Najib, Rosmah, UMNO | 5 Comments »
Posted by barbie on June 9, 2009
I applaud the decision by the Malaysian government to dismiss and not entertain any idea of allowing Chin Peng the ‘former terrorist’ to return to this country.
Government Will Not Allow Chin Peng To Return, Says Najib
PUTRAJAYA, May 27 (Bernama) — The Malaysian government will not allow former Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) leader Chin Peng to reside in the country.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said the return of the former terrorist would lead to dissatisfaction among the people, especially those who fought the communists and families who lost their loved ones during the CPM’s revolt from 1948 to 1981 (known as the Emergency).
The government is absolutely right, many victims suffered during the communist insurgency, Chin Peng and his commandos killed many people in the past and they certainly do not deserve any consideration from us. No, I didn’t say that. Our very wise, informed and cultured Datuk Datuk Seri Utama Dr. Rais bin Yatim said that.
Several quarters and individuals, including Information, Communication and Culture Minister Dr Rais Yatim, have opposed the idea.
“Chin Peng and his commandos killed many people in the past and they certainly do not deserve any consideration from us,” Rais had said.
“The communists abused this country and we had been shackled through killings and terrible actions committed by them,” he added.
We should never allow Chin Peng to come back to Malaysia. Thanks to our sensitive Defence Minister Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi for putting it in context.
Defence Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi had said his return would be an insult to the families of nearly 50,000 British colonial and government troops who died during the “Malayan Emergency”. (psst, the 50,000 figure is a crap is you ask me)
But I have some disturbing questions.
1. Isn’t Chin Peng was just a puppet for the Chinese Communist Party? His party, Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) was supported by its China main counterpart throughout their four decades in Malaysia. My question is, why punish the puppet, but not the master? Obviously we should punish China!
Let’s severe our all our diplomatic and bilateral ties with China to show our sensitive considerations to the suffering families that went through killings and terrible actions committed by the communists. Let’s show them Malaysia is serious about its past history, goddammit!
2. If I am not mistaken, China is ruled by Communist Party of China (CPC). So, let me get this right, China is ruled by a bunch of communists and why the hell we are courting them now? What happened to ‘the communist abused this country’ and ‘they certainly do not deserve any consideration from us?‘
What is our beloved Prime Minister doing frolicking in China then? Is he not worry that his visit would lead to dissatisfaction among the people, especially those who fought the communists and families who lost their loved ones?
I repeat, let’s severe our all our diplomatic and bilateral ties with China to show our sensitive considerations to the suffering families that went through killings and terrible actions committed by the communists. Let’s show them Malaysia is serious about its past history, goddammit
3. If I remember correctly, the British and Japanese also killed a lot of people during their occupation of Malaya no? The British sure killed and injured a lot of people back then. Remember the fights by Tok Janggut, Dato’ Bahaman, Mat Kilau, Maharaja Lela? I bet my last cent the British killed more people here during their occupation compared to the emergency period.
How about the war crimes and astrocities the Japanese commited against the people of Malaya during World War II? Wait, did the communists kill less people than them?
Let’s severe all our diplomatic and bilateral ties with Japan and British (now Great Britain) to show our sensitive considerations to the suffering families that went through killings and terrible actions committed by the Japanese. Let’s show them Malaysia is serious about its past history, goddammit!
Well, I do not agree and I don’t really care if Chin Peng was a freedom fighter, but that’s beside the point. Just how much longer we want to live in the shadows of the past? May 13th, Malaya Emergency etc. often quoted by our leaders to ‘remind’ us, about what? You should know better. Selective issues, don’t you think? Why it is only Chin Peng not allowed to come back to Malaysia? How about other CPM leaders?
Conclusion: Only in Malaysia, it would seem like history has to dictate how we we live tomorrow. Rather sad.
ps: I am sure Chin Peng was not a freedom fighter. He’s taking arms for fun, just like how I shoot people for fun at my Counter Strike game. Okay, Let 4 Dead lah, nobody play CS now. Okay, bad joke.
pss: What is this ‘my father’, ‘my father’ and ‘my father’ crap keep repeated by Najib? He has no backbone to stand on his own? To claim his own credit, other that relying on his father’s name?
Posted in barbie, BN, communism, Current Affairs, government, hypocrite, Ideology, Mainstream Media, Malaysia, Najib Tun Razak, Politicians, World | Tagged: British, chin peng, communism, Communist Party of China, Communist Party of Malaya, CPC, CPM, Double Standard, Emergency, Freedom Fighters, History, Hypocrisy, Japanese, Malaysia | 13 Comments »
Posted by jingoisticbuthornydesperado on November 3, 2008
Lately, I have been having various epiphanies. There are too many paradoxes in this world and that as for this moment; I am still having problems really understanding why human beings need paradoxes to survive. Let me highlight a few of my thoughts that have been ringing of late.
1. Medical science have been a gift to all of us. We are able to live longer with better medical care. More and more dangerous illnesses and hereditary diseases can either be cured or circumvent around, allowing people to live healthier and hopefully happier lives. But in all these medical wonders, a few scientists have voiced concerns about how the advances in medical sciences (excluding genetic sciences) are hindering the evolution of human beings; some even claim that we are taking a step back in evolution. Here is why, whether it is something we observe in nature or Darwin’s wannabe protégées, the underlying principle is still the same, the survival of the fittest. Some scientists argued that by allowing the weak to live through the aid of medical sciences, we are effectively allowing the weak to survive and propagate, seeding ‘bad genes’ (like the ones that cause anaemia, Parkinson’s and diabetes) into the general population. By allowing the weak to survive, we have reduced the survivability of our species by the spreading of ‘bad genes’. If some disaster is to strike, we might then have been too genetically regressed to be able to adapt to the disaster. Then there is this controversial question of genetic manipulation, that we shouldn’t become Mother Nature or God to manipulate genes. If there should be no genetic manipulation, how are we to circumvent around genetic regression that we have unconsciously create ourselves or should we just do away with medicine completely?
2. Another thing that has been bothering me is economics. Of late we have heard news about economic recession, bad news for us, and good news for the environment. To improve the standard of welfare for everyone is also to undeniably place more burden on nature’s limited resources. I was once as naïve to say that wealthy people can buy more environmentally sustainable stuff but I was damn wrong. Research has shown that the wealthier one gets, the more burden is piled on to Mother Nature. On retrospect and in a more detail study of human psychology, I concurred similarly nonetheless. We have almost unlimited desires, and our desires get more expensive (financially and environmentally) the richer we get. When I was poor I drink water from the tap; now I drink champagne. When I was poor, I walk 2, 3 miles to do grocery shopping in a shop that occupies less than a quarter of a football field; now I drive 10-15miles in my electrically powered Rolls-Royce (supposedly more environmentally friendly but relative to what?) to do grocery shopping in an air conditioned hypermarket, Carrefour. When I was poor, my playground were the trees, stray dogs and cats; when I am rich, I am too old to use the playground but if I can use it without stigmatise, it would be those supposedly environmentally friendly yet colourful plastics, from the slides and swings to the monkey bars. I care about improving the living standards of the poor; unfortunately I have to suck up to the undesirable consequences to the environment. That is not to say that we should give up being environmentally conscious, we can still use our environmental knowledge to decelerate the demand on our planet’s resources for example riding on Harley Davidson to do grocery shopping rather than in a 4-wheel drive Land Rover, while waiting for a Star Trek like technology that can transmute excrement into food.
3. Human beings have the tendency to try to create or identify their own existing antithesis or to the extreme, a bugaboo to fight against. We need challenges otherwise we can’t survive. I personally view challenges as a constructive approach to knowledge and I admit I cannot survive without a challenge. But what worries me is the fine line between a constructive obstacle and an obstacle that leads to mutual self-destruction. We learn more about ourselves when we challenge ourselves and allow our minds to be open about new experiences and knowledge however ludicrous it may seem to us initially to what we thought we know before. However, I feel when people start cocooning themselves against the very antithesis that could have helped them to grow more well-rounded, they start displaying extreme hostility and paranoia on something unfamiliar to them. They increase their gibberish and propaganda while they are seemingly oblivious to the butterfly effect in promoting more jingoistic schism in human society fuelled by extreme paranoia and blind ideology rather than pragmatism. I do believe that we always need a Yin and a Yang, a thesis and an antithesis. Yet, is blind jingoism as an ideological adjective necessary or self-defeating? I do think it is self-defeating but I could be wrong.