One can drive a very large truck of suspect cargo through the door marked ‘patriotism’. Once the integrity of the nation is invoked and the spectre of social and communal unrest is seen as being at stake, the state buys for itself a lot of room for actions that might have otherwise seemed unpalatable. In that sense, the decision to impose some kind of regulation on social media in the aftermath of the Assam violence and the events that followed, might have passed muster on the whole, despite its problematic nature.But when it comes to social media, even this filter is effectively absent. The question that might well lie at the heart of this debate is about the changing nature of the public and the private. Social media promotes a form of private musing that gets picked up by microphone and relayed all over the world; in its intimacy and immediacy it gives us the illusion of a private opinion expressed softly, but in its real time connectedness it makes the private extremely loud and public. We superimpose the codes of privately expressed opinion on a public platform in the name of freedom, without acknowledging that such freedom has never been available to us. In private thoughts and conversations, we are free to abuse people, make inappropriate jokes, wish them grievous harm, fantasise luridly about them and impute motives but we cannot do so in our public utterances without attracting potential consequences. Even in private conversation, we do not enjoy absolute anonymity as is often the case with social media. As the private becomes more public both wittingly and otherwise, the need to mark the boundaries and guard them zealously will grow. The real issue is here as much about the demarcation of the private, the ‘freedom from impression’, as it were, as it is about freedom of expression. While the right to personal expression has always been an integral part of democracy, the right to a public platform with enormous reach, velocity of transmission and permanence has certainly not.
So what does that mean for Teresa Kok Malai Si-yah, why she did not say Malaysia? Well, any step to say that will defeat her agenda of anti-Malay and anti-Islam and Chinese empowerment that conflict with Najib might see the red light of the day.this is personality cultism no doubt the Chinese people will be voting for only DAP.is a mindset poriborton.Titiwangsa MP Datuk Joha comes from Malay heartland, traces DAP decline toTeresa Kok a “experts of racial politics” .This is an unambiguous attack on Malay culture spawned and endorsed by the DAP adviser, without Lim Kit Siang support still be an understudy rather than an heir apparent. PerhapsTeresa Kok ’s own career is on the wane since she is Chinese wallah .But that does make her wrong..
Lim Kit Siang has promised today said he would ask Teresa Kok to apologise and withdraw her “Onderful Malaysia” video if anyone can show that the video is anti-Malay or anti-Islam .
The DAP adviser said he watched the 11-minute video closely several times but could not find anything that is remotely un-Islamic.but The denial of Lim Kit Siang that he made the statement which the Malaysian Insider is immaterial. There is voluminous evidence available with regard to the pliability of Teresa Kok has a history of anti-Malay and anti-Islam Dap manipulated the Malaysian even independent of his retracted statement.Like a true nerd, I dissected Teresa Kok’s anti-Malay and anti-Islam video closely ,she having engineered Kok had produced a Chinese New Year greeting video, entitled “Onederful” Malaysia CNY 2014
,wants chinese renaissance, is its DAP mascot ’s interview transcript . She used the term ‘empower in Chinese of Malai Si-yah
’ 25 times, mostly in the context If you were to listen to the video was a “stinging critique” on the alleged failures of the Najib administration to resolve pressing national concerns.
election rhetoric, that’s not honest takeaway. There’s so much chest thumping about how DAP, how we had the most amazing leaders, the finest Chinese culture, the best Chinese schools of learning, the most exciting Chinese politics. It’s all about Destroying of Malay rights? If MCA dare not object when they are humiliated in their own building and openly in front of their member. Lim Guan Eng ask how MCA can fight UMNO to defend Malaysian rights? No wonder, in such a complex world, where your friend could well be owned by your enemy, young Chinese want a leader who can take Malays where Malays is today. They think DAP is that party. they have a track record of inspiring change. Unlike MCA which has always enshrined the status quo. And young Chinese believe, it’s the status quo that hurts Chinese most.The DAP adviser said he watched the 11-minute video closely several times but could not find anything that is remotely un-Islamic.Instead, Lim said the video was a “stinging critique” on the alleged failures of the Najib administration to resolve pressing national concerns.
“We can agree or disagree as to whether Teresa’s video was good, bad or even atrocious… but what is completely unacceptable is resort to lies and falsehoods to accuse Teresa’s video as anti-Malay and anti-Islam,” he said in a statement today.the evil Teresa Kok scion, who had offered herself up for the sacrifice. They shouted so much at News Hour to be heard over each other that she started coughing and spluttering, adding to the senseless cacophony.
“I will ask Teresa to withdraw and apologise for the ‘Onederful Malaysia’ video if anyone can show there is any part which is anti-Malay and anti-Islam,”.Not everyone thrives on high decibels and rhetoric, and presented insensitive, albeit lacklustre persona the lampooning began. Leading the pack were political opponents and senior journalists, gleefully moving in for the attack. on Najib Most of them past their prime, having seen the best and worst of times, now sharpening their wits at the expense Malay Islam and Najib And then began the lampooning. Now, I agree that lampooning public figures is a fine art when executed by cartoonists, writers and artists. But, in the wrong hands, and employed for selfserving purposes, it becomes a vicious weapon of attack used by all to vent their spleen. And this is what happened when jokes on Najib started flying hard and fast. It seems most of us are just looking for an opportunity to ridicule the powerful. said Titiwangsa MP Datuk Johari Politics has no space for lost-and-found options. What is lost, remains lost.Johari’s suggestion that the time has come Lim Kit Siang to reconsider seems lost in the immediate din. At one level, this will be written off as a DAP’s lament..A core problem with DAP democracy is the sanctimonious worship of Lim Kit Siang. Some issues are placed on an altar high above all levels of debate. Even discourse is sacrilege . It is not a question of right and wrong; or, more accurately, if what was right six decades ago continues to remain equally right today. One could make a persuasive case But why should any subject be banished from discussion? Why cannot we introduce the thought of amendments: that those Malayswho have flourished from reservations should be excluded from further positive discrimination so that benefits can accrue to the less fortunate among them?
The polarization of votes represents DAP’s best chance and this can be best achieved through the idiom and language.I’m often asked how I handle being confronted by verbal and emotional abuse. I am open to discussions, even heated ones, but I am completely put off when people turn to mud-slinging, profanity or cruelty. To reply in the same coin isn’t me, and to put up with it only gives them license to continue. I mostly handle bad behaviour with humour. If someone is using foul language, I’d make a joke by getting a cotton bud and cleaning my ears in the middle of an argument, humorously stating, “too much dirt flying around, can we keep it clean?”, or pulling out a condom and laughingly saying, “put this on your tongue, it’s continuously f***ing, so please practise safe sex”. Or a wide-eyed loud “beep” every time they curse.
There have been times when anger outweighs logic and I’m confronted by the typical “Who are you?” (Emphasis on the “Who” ) dialogue and I put on my best puzzled look and state, “Do you generally argue with people you don’t know?”, or sometimes I’ve called up the person’s mobile, had my name flash and say, “Oh! You have bad memory. You do know me.” But there are times when arguments outlive humour and people still haven’t learnt to fight clean. I then use the ‘24 hour’ disconnect theory.
If someone crosses emotional and familial boundaries or spews from a gutter mouth, I say “24 hours” and go absolutely silent on them. No text. No acknowledgement. They may be in the same room, and I could be laughing and chatting with everyone else, but that person is invisible to me for 24 hours. When you do this a few times, the person realises that attacking you fails, and that if they want to reach a resolution or make a point, they have to keep it clean.
Turns out that when it comes to vote bank politics,DAP are worried the new Muslims. vote bank is not quite as secure and predictable as it used to be (probably because Muslims have figured out the political games played with them). support a party in large numbers, provided you can win their trust. Of course wooing Chinese whether individually or as a group, is easier said than done. Certainly, repeating the term ‘Chinese’s empowerment’ two dozen times atrocious. is not going to to cut it.
The sense that any public utterance can, in the name of freedom of expression, come without consequences is what drives a significant strand of behaviour on social media today. in theory, such consequences might exist, but we have seen very few examples of these being visited upon those that are guilty of crossing the lines that have been laid down. As last week’s column argued, in the new world of democratised and decentralised information flows, the reflexive support for the freedom of all expression that is rooted in the assumptions of an earlier era need to be revisited. Till that happens social media will remain a space that bristles with the anarchic energy of freedom without providing adequate protection against the misuse of this freedom. This time, the government’s incompetence might have made it easy to summon up outrage and push back hard, but more subtle and insidious efforts are likely to follow. The fault line that exists between the technologies of democratisation and power structures that seek centralisation is a defining one in our times, and the battle between the two is by no means over.
Penang Umno has released a series of denials that they were behind several tense situations which occurred in the state over the past week, but expressed empathy with DAP involved in the incidents had the agitation been aimed at the real problem at the refusal to be browbeaten by throwing his weight around, the choice of this mode of protest would have not appeared as inappropriate. If the goal was to show up the local police for the lazy, inefficient and corrupt institution that so many citizens believe it to be, there were several other ways of going about it.The trouble with DAP is that while it is fired by a powerful idea, that of revitalising democracy by ‘cleaning up’ politics, it lacks the ideological filling that converts ideas into coherent and sustainable practice. The position it has taken against the political establishments wins for it many adherents, all of them extremely passionate but most equally vague about how to convert an inspiring idea into an on-going reality. ‘Cleaning up politics’ and NOT‘listening to the voice of we Muslims ’ are not ideas but hand waves, expansive gestures rich with intent but lacking in substantive content. The people who come together under this banner have little in common by way of worldview, and in the absence of ideology, the ‘how to’ part of the equation creates big problems for this new outfit. It is relatively easier to learn the ropes of administration but ideology steeped in a larger worldview is not that easy to acquire through experience.
There is a deep sense of unease about the present and future in the sprawling urban malignity that Penang turned into midway through the Left Front regime. The anxiety, stemming from the brutal Christians , reflects the foreboding that the folllowers son of Allah , primarily upper caste, respectable and privileged with some access to landed property or wealth and with a claim to a liberal education, are fast being supplanted by the Muslims” or the unlettered, uncultured lower order.It is a particularly grim reminder of DAP’s s prophetic words about the demise of theMalays in Penang: “We do not know how the end will come, whether through a cataclysmic holocaust or a slow putrid decay.
The admonishments keep flowing in and suddenly it seems as DAP that had fired so many imaginations can do nothing right. And while it does seem that the party has made some grave errors, some of the arguments being made against Islam are unfair, and care needs to be taken to separate the party’s mistakes from some legitimate if unusual choices that it has made. The criticism that it is inappropriate for Muslims has been widespread, and deserves some scrutiny. To argue that the act of governing carries with it an implicit decorum is another way of saying that rulers must embrace the surrounding aura of gravitas that has historically been associated with power. They must be seen to be spending time in acts of governance, and not be seen shouting slogans and confronting the police. Now while this is conventional wisdom, there is no intrinsic reason why this must be the case. Why is it all right for political leaders to spend time includes giving meaningless speeches, cutting ribbons and laying foundation stones and generally be so involved in the ceremony surrounding the act of administration and not acceptable if they agitate for what they believe in? A new political culture means that some old customs must give way to the new. Using the power of public opinion to agitate for a cause is an option available to everyone, the CM included. If anything, a protest like this, if held peacefully and for the right reason reinforces the idea that democratic persuasion is an on-going process and not a once-in-five-years phenomenon.
Christians went for Sunday mass in Penang yesterday and found banners which read “Allah is Great, Jesus is the son of Allah” outside several churches, at a time when the mercury is rising over the use of the word “Allah” by non-Muslims.
As the world is becoming more intricately connected, its relationship with information is changing in a fundamental way. Three unconnected events -the killing of innocent Sikhs at a Wisconsin gurdwara, the exodus of North-Easterners from many parts of India following rumours and the continuing saga of Julian Assange and Wikileaks all shed light on changing nature of our engagement with information and the new anxieties that surround its use and abuse.
In the case of the gurdwara shootings, what is striking is the power of ignorance that is determined not to know better. In a world overloaded with information, it would have taken a few milliseconds to find out a little more about Sikhism and come to the conclusion that it had nothing to do with 9/11 or any attacks on Americans. Horrific as all hate crimes are, here the horror is given an added edge by the fact that the shooter got his hate wrong by targeting people, who even by his warped standards, were unconnected with the imagined grievances he harboured in his mind. The incident suggests that no amount of information, however widely circulated and easily accessible can by itself overcome determined ignorance and pre-conceived prejudice. In a larger sense, in spite of the dramatically higher volume of information that circulates through the world today, it has made little dent on the volume of prejudice.
One of the pressure groups livid with Seputeh MP Teresa Kok’s Chinese New Year satire explained they are angry because the character spoofed was recognisably the prime minister’s wife.
Does Malays have no future? If you were to listen to Lim Guan Eng election rhetoric, that’s not honest takeaway. There’s so much chest thumping about how DAP, how we had the most amazing leaders, the finest Chinese culture, the best Chinese schools of learning, the most exciting Chinese politics. It’s all about Destroying of Malay rights?
sop opera that was a tearjerker for DAP Teresa Kok The group, comprising Chinese professionals from various fields, said the timing of Kok’s “Onederful Malaysia” release was bad.”Why must she release the video during Chinese New Year? If she wanted to politicise an issue, that is a separate matter.”But why do it during Chinese New Year?”The group, comprising Chinese professionals from various fields, said the timing of Kok’s “Onederful Malaysia” release was bad. Kok was only thinking of herself and had forgotten her responsibilities as an elected representative.
“We are against the culture of hatred. But it seems that many individuals are now only thinking of themselves and forgetting their duties and responsibilities,”
The Penang government will not bow to UMNO religious extremists and racial bigots, said Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng following this morning’s attack on a church in Lebuh Farquhar.
He said the state government will instead use the “weapons of social justice and sustainable development” to defeat the acts of violence and hatred in Penang.
“In this critical hour with shadowy extremists and racist forces conducting sustained aggression to destabilise the Penang state government, the 1.6 million Penangites must reaffirm the commitment for the past 200 years to protect, preserve and promote respect for cultural diversity, racial and religious harmony by rejecting both violence and hatred,” he said in a statement today.
Whatever it is, the arrival of Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng has shaken up the entire political establishment. Whether they succeed or not, whether their policies work or not, there is talk of innovation in the political process and the big guns are on their toes now, just like the competitive APP ecosystem. We can safely assume that the days of political complacency will be gone soon, for good.
Time for us, to kickout Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng rejoice and hope that election r ‘20148 truly turns out to be a very Happy to all of us
Utusan Malaysia today launched a stinging attack on non-Malays, accusing them of insulting Islam, Muslims and the Malay rulers, and warning them to know their “limits”.”laidback, compromising” attitude of the Malays had led to non-Malays overstepping their boundaries and daring to question previously off-limit subjects.”Non-Malays have apparently forgotten that Malaysia’s majority population is Malays. They have no respect at all for the Bumiputera. Why has this happened? It is because we are too compromising, too afraid to take action against those who have insulted Malays and Islam.”In the end, it appears as if non-Malays are the landlords and Malays are the tenants, immigrants and the minority in our own country,” wrote Azman Anuar in his article entitled “Melayu, Islam dihina di Tanah Melayu!”.
“Ever since respected and knowledgeable Malay leaders withdrew several years ago, non-Muslims have become emboldened in insulting the Malay community and Islam,” he said, without naming the Malay leaders.
He said non-Malays appeared to have forgotten that their ancestors became Malaysian citizens due to the Malays’ compromise.
“Now that they have prospered and gained a firmer foothold both economically and politically, non-Malays forget that it was given to them by the Malays,”
Saying non-Malays were playing with fire, Azman, who was recently promoted to his current post in the paper, also accused them of refusing to respect Malay culture, language and customs.
“It is just a matter of time before the hornets who are attempting to defend their nests against intruders will retaliate.”
He said until today, “the hornets have not revealed their sting” as they are merely making noise and appearing to go on the offensive so that intruders would feel apprehensive.
“This is the actions of Malays who are still patient in the face of various provocations. But if pushed further, the hornets will not keep silent.
“If the nest is invaded and burnt just so that the honey can be taken away, Malays will not be so tolerant anymore,” he went on with his metaphors.
As such, the paper said the recent cash reward offer by several Malay organisation to anyone who slapped Seputeh MP Teresa Kok, over her satirical online video which angered Umno leaders, was merely a stern warning.
“Moreover, their actions are no longer secretive and discreet, it is being done openly. Look at the comments in the social media and blogs,”
The sudden exodus from the North East from many Indian cities is almost entirely the result of a surfeit of information, the multiplication of motivated rumour by social media. Both the Mumbai violence and the North Eastern exodus were enabled by social media, in the former case, by way of morphed pictures and videos using footage from incidents outside Assam and in the latter by falsehoods and exaggerations. Even when the state uttered many assurances and for once politicians across parties closed ranks, the rush to leave continued unabated. The power of unsubstantiated rumour is hardly a new phenomenon; we have many instances of it in India. it occurs in almost every riot, political scandal and once in a while in the form of miracles like Ganesha drinking all over the country, but in this case the key role was played by a new technology, one that promises to free up information from being controlled by a few, enabling greater transparency.
In the third instance, we see how the truth too can be deeply contentious. The attack against Assange is unprecedented in the naked use of every instrument that is available to governments in shutting him down and locking him up. His offence is one that strikes at the heart of the anxieties of the state in having its inner mechanisms revealed. Wikileaks tells us for sure what we have otherwise suspected – that the state acts in ways vastly different from what it professes, and does so quite cynically. But the issue is not merely about showing us the true colours of most regimes; it has to do with the presumption that all information has automatic value.
By demonising all private information as a sinister form of secret, and making the truth, no matter how private or how sensitive, a public commodity, Wikileaks builds a crude model of our reality, one which ignores the need sometimes for information to be cloaked and for appearances to be maintained. Not all truth sets us free, and while the withholding of information has undoubtedly been used to create power asymmetries, not all information can carry an air of presumptive righteousness. By setting it free in its rawest form, Wikileaks shows us that truth too has limits on its value. Wikileaks makes the truth pornographic, by making it a titillating display of undifferentiated wares, a laying bare of the inner for the satisfaction of sight alone.
In an earlier era, when the transmission of information was centrally regulated, it was easier to think of it as a resource that needs to be shared more widely and made more accessible. More information was almost always better, and the battle to extract more was often a heroic one. The reason why journalism was seen through a lens of romance was because it represented the act of extricating the truth from the jaws of the powerful and the corrupt. The RTI act in India for instance has been a key instrument in enabling greater transparency and accountability of powerful and hitherto opaque institutions. But with the greater penetration of the market into media and the dramatic democratisation of information, not just in terms of being able to access but also in being able to broadcast it, the default belief in its inherent and limitless legitimacy needs to be rethought.
As media gets seen as having an axe to grind, its coverage of issues gets to be consumed with a filter in place. This creates many parallel narratives of truth, each claiming that it represents reality better. We don’t really know what happened in Assam for the news comes to us contaminated and our 0doubts about it taint it even further. And social media, which bypasses traditional channels of information, is in the name of freedom of expression, able to re-circulate rumours that speak to the deepest anxieties of those vulnerable. The valorisation of the freedom of expression is a product of its context; as information becomes less scarce, more motivated and less inhibited in its expression of human frailties, it might be time to evaluate whether we need more robust mechanisms for creating some sense of order. The value of free expression was derived in part from its scarce availability; today’s problem is the one that comes with its chaotic plenty. Not regulating this in any way may not be as a romantic an idea as it once was.