`


THERE IS NO GOD EXCEPT ALLAH
read:
MALAYSIA Tanah Tumpah Darahku

LOVE MALAYSIA!!!


 


Monday, July 22, 2013

Bak Kut Teh, bible burning and selfish politics


One of the most profound and admirable aspects of the holy month of Ramadan is the idea that fasting helps us develop empathy for the suffering of others.

In learning to experience the hardship of others and developing self-denial, we are encouraged to direct our energies towards the betterment of our fellow human beings, instead of focusing on more and more self-aggrandisement.

In Annie Dillard's words: "The life of sensation is the life of greed; it requires more and more. The life of the spirit requires less and less."

Sadly, a dearth of these qualities has come to define those who lead our nation. It feels like it is an excess of selfish politicking and a galling lack of principled statesmanship that is behind a growing number of controversial issues of late.

The test to see whether this is true is to examine whether the actions of the authorities appear to reflect a genuine concern for the long term well being of the rakyat, or selfish political aims. Such assessments are of course subjective, but if we try to remain as unbiased as possible and make suitable adjustments for those who seem to be arguing from a self-interested perspective, perhaps we will be able to see what is really going on.

Bak Kut Teh vs Bible Burning

The latest controversy started over an extremely distasteful Ramadan joke concerning bak kut teh made by Alvin Tan and Vivian Lee, collectively known as Alvivi.

NONEFurore erupted, Alvivi removed their postings and apologised publicly, but Attorney General Abdul Ghani Patail sought out blood anyway, and had the duo charged and imprisoned without bail until their court hearing in late August.

Cyberspace and civil society were the next to erupt, crying discrimination and unfairness that Alvivi should be treated so heavy handedly, whereas the likes of Ibrahim Ali and Zulkifli Nordin still walk free. The former had called for the burning of Bibles with the word "Allah" in them, whereas the latter insulted various aspects of Hinduism.

The burning question seems to be: is there a double standard?

Minister of Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Abdul Rahman Dahlan was one of the most prominent representatives of the government to jump in the fray.

Known for his admirably active engagement with the public, especially via Twitter, Abdul Rahman argued thus: no action was taken against Ibrahim Ali because he later explained that all he meant with regard to Bible burning was that given using "Allah" was a misprint, the "error-filled" Bible should be disposed of via burning, as is done with the Quran. Ibrahim Ali's intent was thus sanguine, and no further action was therefore necessary.

Such an argument stands in quite stark contrast to the wordsIbrahim Ali actually used, as quoted in Free Malaysia Today on Jan 19.

"Muslims must unite to protect their religion. They must seize those Bibles, including the Malay editions, which contained the term Allah and other Arabic religious terms, and burn them. This is the way to show our anger against disrespect to our sensitivity."

NONEIbrahim Ali has never contested the accuracy of this report by filing a lawsuit of any kind.

So, the public is left asking: did Ibrahim Ali make a friendly suggestion as to how one might employ the proper Muslim method of disposing of holy books, or did he call upon Muslims to "seize those Bibles … to show our anger"?

The comments defending Ibrahim Ali were made by no less than a full cabinet minister (one would be hard pressed to find a higher ranking representative of the Malaysian government), while the rest of the cabinet seem to remain mostly silent - a state of affairs which has been the case for the prime minister for months now.

The public deserves to know: what is the government's official stance? Is it alright to condone burning Bibles, or is it not? Are people jailed only if Muslims are perceived to be offended, or are people jailed if people of other religions are offended too?

A just government must above all be consistent in its application of the law. Is there 1Malaysia for all? Or one Malaysia for one group, and another Malaysia for the rest?

This issue may have been almost academic except for the fact that Alvivi will be spending over a month in prison (a place we must never forget is in Malaysia one of extreme inhumane trauma), and face the prospect of many, many more. 

We cannot punish people based on whether we like them or not, we can punish them only in accordance with a transparent application of the law that is consistent across the board. 

Maybe Alvivi's future may not be as "bright" as that of the young bowler who committed statutory rape on a 13-year-old girl, but as the AG and judiciary play God with Alvivi’s lives, we must ask: did their actions really cause more harm or set a worse precedent than the bowler’s?

Perhaps most importantly, let us compare levels of contrition. Abdul Rahman argues that there's nothing wrong with Ibrahim Ali’s actions because he has explained himself. Of course, an explanation is not an apology, and Ibrahim Ali once famously remarked on another issue, "I won't apologise even with a gun to my head."

Compare this with the thorough and unreserved apology that Alvivi made in their video.

So, the government forgives the man who provides an explanation that does not tally with his actual words, while imprisoning the duo who offer humble contrition? Maybe Alvivi should indeed have gone the "it was actually Chikuteh" route after all.

I for one am perfectly happy for no one to be jailed, because just as I believe that non-Muslims are not stupid enough to go waving pork in the faces of Muslims at dusk simply because of something a sex blogging duo posted on the internet, I also believe that Muslims are not stupid enough to heed a madman's call to go on a Bible burning rampage.

Post GE 13: Regression to divisive politics?
The points above have been made and repeated ad nauseum. More important are the very disturbing trends over these last few months that I believe will bear further reflection and exposition if we want to make any actual progress in Malaysia.

Where Abdul Rahman is concerned, I confess I generally dislike the man. I am not however so stupid or blinded by hate as to believe that he is some Christian hating bigot. Ultimately, alongside some dashes of commonplace arrogance and pettiness, Abdul Rahman's ridiculous decision to defend Ibrahim Ali was ultimately defined by politics. He saw someone who was (relatively) on “his side” being attacked vigorously by people he perceived to be on the “other side”, and reacted in his usual thoughtless, hack and slash manner.

More and more, as GE 13 fades away, we see people trying to make their name at the expense of others. Lost as the man is, I do not believe for a moment that Abdul Ghani (of all people) believes he is somehow defending the sanctity of Islam (an institution, Zurairi AR eloquently argues, that is in itself perfect and therefore in fact impossible to insult.

All he has done is found a scapegoat that he can sacrifice at the altar in the hopes of appearing like a big bad wolf to the Umno base that will determine the next president of Umno in the upcoming party elections.

We see this behaviour at play everywhere, especially in the way that issues are not really issues - just abused pawns on a rotten political chessboard.

On the other side, we see Lim Guan Eng's recent public criticism of Khalid Ibrahim - a move calculated perhaps to bolster one Pakatan Rakyat party at the expense of another while having a negative nett impact, as well as the somewhat personal, heated exchange between Rafizi Ramli and Lim Teck Ghee over the TITAS issue. 

Meanwhile, in apparent agreement with Ibrahim Ali instead of PAS, the rabidly pro-Azmin Ali account @PecatFaekah tweeted: "Malaysian Christian group shows lack of tolerance. Pushing Cabinet to use Allah instead of Tuhan. Allah is the one and only God in Quran." Some might even argue this very article is proof of its own arguments.

Fast fading (or long gone) is the intra-coalition unity we saw in GE 13. Are we seeing it give way to a gabble of individuals and factions, viciously trying to climb over one another's heads, while using and abusing all manners of issues to get one step higher on the rung? We look to those few darlings in politics that progressives love to praise to provide the voice of reason, and are met with only silence and a fear of saying what might be politically incorrect.

There are unmistakable signs that our worst fears may be unfolding slowly before us: that we are regressing back to the very worst aspects of Malaysian politics - endless infighting, fermenting social division for political gain, and putting selfish interests above national ones.

Clawing our way out of the problems we now face together as a nation (the full how of which is a story for another time) is only possible if we return to having sound principles as our anchor and moral compass. It may also require radical rethinking, as well as more direct, long term political involvement than most of us have been historically inclined to. The changes we must begin to ponder now may seem drastic, but those may be the only ways to affect the drastic improvements we hunger and thirst for.

Many Malaysians worked desperately hard for change in the last general elections. It turns out that once in five years is not enough. Ramadan is not after all, I humbly believe, a month to act holier than we act in other months, but rather, a month to remind us of how we should act every month.

Nathaniel Tan is in a state of transition. He tweets @NatAsasi.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.