saya membaca artikel bertajuk changing the malay mindset oleh farah fahmy yang tersiar di web berita the malaysia insider, dengan rasa terganggu. bagi saya, jurus fikrah ini bersifat amat semberono, dangkal dan basi. di bawah adalah respons saya terhadapnya:
--------------------------------
think again farah. being well-travelled and educated, don't you think that your observation does not befit your station of life? do you still believe that these papers represent the malays or what being a malay is all about? is it not true that they are the mouthpieces of the powerful and moneyed people using the mask of being a malay to protect and project their unmalay interests, worldview and sense of value or right and wrong?
is it not true too that for years the people so duped have been kept away from their own true self of being a malay, i.e., a localised muslim speaking the malay tongue and living according to its worldview, culture and customs? and that the 'malays' that you are talking about have nothing to do with being malay in that cultural, historical and ideological (or even legal) definition save for their skin color and physical cultural symbols. at best they are merely nominal malays.
with deeper understanding on the issues at hand, i think you should rewrite the title of this piece to 'changing the unmalay mindset' for those 'values' or 'qualities' that you deem wanting from the malays of today are actually their organic personality that was destroyed and attacked by all quarters intent of capitalising on them when it does not benefit themselves along our long historical path.
it is the trusting, humble, cultured and accommodating nature of the malays that get them into trouble in the first place, when those characteristics were seen as weaknesses by unworthy manipulating peoples who capitalise on it for their own interests and agendas.
and suddenly everything was wrong about the malays or being a malay. their religion, culture, language, personality and ways of thinking and doing things are just not up to standard and needed to be changed for their own good, or is it?
once the malay kampung folks were first attacked for being lazy people living a sedentary uneconomical and unmodern lives and pushed to the cities to become factory and office workers uprooted from their cultural and religious identities to eventually become the 'ugly malays' that this writer is talking about now.
when the malays were 'poor' and 'lazy' then, they are wrong, but when they are 'rich' and 'powerful' now, they are wrong too. is it not that the 'ugly malays' of today are the 'lazy malays' of yesterday who have embraced all of the prerequisites of a modern and successful people - selfish, individualistic, manipulative, abrasive, religion and value-free and all.
at the other level, those kampungs left behind by these malays in their quest to become modern and up to the standard were swallowed first by the government, the glc's and finally private corporations to be turned into plantations or resorts or hotels and gated housing estates so that the rich and powerful, owners of those factories and offices, can move in to enjoy their success in a serene, peaceful, cultured, healthy and lazy country style living.
the difference between them is that, the new owners read shakespeare, wilde and tolstoy in their spare time, while the old ones enjoy raniri, fansuri and singkel or celebrate their birthdays with cakes and candles, while the other do it with doa selamat and kenduri.
meanwhile the malays, the original owners of these 'kampungs', now have to struggle their way out from their cramped, unhealthy flats and terrace houses - their promised modernity and success - to someday own a dream home and life worthy of a modern, up-to-date and internationally accepted man!
try living in a traditional malay padi planting kampung, a chinese new village, an indian estate dwelling or a multi-peopled up-town flats and one will see who really need to change their lifestyles, mindsets and all.
hey, when the orang asal are now coming to the fore to defend and demand the rights to their ancestral and cultural land, identity and lifestyles - and, in so doing, are being supported by many a quarter on the basis of human rights etc - should the malays then continue to dance the music of those unworthy manipulative peoples who understand not but the language of power, money and turmoil?
malaysia will then have to choose either to deal with the noisy, abrasive, manipulative and uprooted nominal malays or with the humble, fair, principled and cultured ones.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Pencuri Kota Baghdad
it would seems that the bold emperical arrow unleashed by SP struck the very middle at the Liberal Malay's forehead; and at the same time his bow of reasoning rattles the core of the nominal Malay's foundation of worldviews.
yet WHO is this humble, fair, educated, principled, cultured etc., and Islamic Malay???
Should be PAS .., but ..., of course not PKR.
Should there be a third force?
tuan pcb,
to the question of who, to my mind, as a group, pas is nearest to being the humble, fair, principled and cultured malay.
as explained somewhere else, being a malay is preconditioned on (1)islam, (2)language, (3)culture (4)time and place of birth, and (5)parentage thereof.
based on this; a malay is principally a muslim within a specific linguistic and cultural context, here being the malay language and culture, just as the hui in china, malabari in india, kashmiri in the himalayas and so on, so forth.
as for the 'third' force, surely all muslim/malay can be considered primarily as such because their first and foremost allegiance will always be to god and the prophet/s (a.k.a to truth and justice), while loyalty to others is conditioned upon that primary and basic allegiance.
"there will be no loyalty to the created in disloyalty to the creator" is the credo.
opppssss...tuan pkb....,
methinks it'd be better if the writer's article is shown here. then only can we, or in this case i, judge the rhetorics. my stance however lies in that in this globalised world, race ceased to be a question as we are looking for humans who understands his needs and wants, regardless of race or culture. we are placed as gardeners in this place called earth and as such, must take care of it as God wants it.
thank you very much tuan aa for the comment. the original article by farah can be reached from the link provided.
as for being human regardless of race and culture etc etc, can one care to explain or comment on maya karin's recent separation from her newly-wed foreigner-teacher-husband? is she not 'international' a lady enough to be able to fit in as that human free of race and culture? what was her comment on it?
Pencuri Kota Baghdad
Tuan Akmal, firstly the term "gardeners" is a wee bit too green to define the context of the actual term applied as for the role of human on planet earth i.e. "khalifah".
Secondly, this rather popular yet such confusing arguement that "race ceased to be a question" as we are looking for humans who understands his needs and wants, "regardless of race or culture" .., defied and denied the very basic elements in life.
Race NEVER ceased .., whether as a question or an answer. It is a fact of life which will always be a vital factor and must be dealt with. The same goes with culture, or religion for that matter. Both and all are the very fundamental of humankind.
No amount of denial will be suffice to ignore this basic truth be it in a globalised world such as here and now .., or any other period in time.
The problem is we the human race seems to ALWAYS accepted that diversity of race/culture/religion as a PROBLEM. As a bone of contention for what-ever reason when the Holy Quran itself clarified that the creation of those diversity is the SIGN of The Creator's greatness and a cause to rejoice among those creations.
We give too little credit, too little trust to ourselves be it who-ever we are.
We highlight and celebrate our own damnation.
So when pokok-hujan choose to celebrate and sing praises of my kind .., the human kind,
count me in as a choir boy,
everytime.
For i stand with the dignity of a human and the liberty of a creation.
Insya'llah.
thank you tuan pkb. in the film robin hood of kevin costner, there was one very short and simple scene that explains it all:
litte girl: did god painted you black?
azim: yes, he did.
little girl: why?
azim: because god loves diversity.
this is the essence of god's creation - diversity. it was never a problem in the islamic worldview and hajj is the everlasting proof of it.
we can only come to know and appreciate each other by being different and in so doing enrich ourselves and move nearer to our destined perfection as god's best creation.
differences only became a problem with 'nation states' and 'national interests' minus justice, truth, values etc etc or, in al-quranic term, minus at-taqwa. then it becomes asabiyah, which is unacceptable and anti-human.
this human minus race and culture thing to me is a hollow idea that can only exist in one's mind, never in reality. it has no history, nor future; no ground, nor sky. ask lennon and he will tell you why.
Post a Comment