This is a letter I wrote a few weeks back, supposedly for theStar. I mailed it to the editor, but it never saw the daylight of publication :(
Too long? Too controversial (haha, I'm beginning to reek of controversies)? You be the judge. Censure me in your wisdom, and all that. I wrote the letter in about an hour, so it's not exactly Martin Luther King. All the same, I put my views forward and if you like, you can do so too. There's a handy little 'comment' button down there :)
As of late, much has been said regarding the role of English as a teaching medium for Science and Mathematics in our current education system. More recently, we’ve had many worried parents expressing their concerns on the apparent indecisiveness of the government on the medium of teaching for the two subjects.
In 2002, the government announced its decision for the introduction of English as the medium for teaching Science and Mathematics, two subjects that were constantly evolving and changing. The decision was based on the justification an English medium would better prepare Malaysian students for a world that was rapidly being globalised. The teaching of Science and Mathematics in English, while not a new concept has only been implemented since 2003 and already there is talk of reverting back to Bahasa Malaysia for teaching.
If we are indeed to revert to Bahasa, let us first examine the rationale for this decision. Firstly, it has been claimed that many teachers are incompetent for the teaching of Science and Mathematics in English. This comes as no surprise, as even veteran teachers would have initial difficulty in adapting to the new method of teaching. Moreover, the younger and less experienced teachers would have even greater difficulties adapting, considering most of their training was facilitated in Bahasa Malaysia (verify claim). However, should these teachers truly be competent and well-versed with their knowledge of their subjects, it should be a relatively simple to acclimatize themselves to the new teaching environment.
Unfortunately, many parents still have qualms about the standard of teaching being imparted to their children. Clearly, the issue of competence among our school teachers has to be addressed. It is foolhardy to abolish the current system because of this. Put in perspective, the move could be likened to refusing medicine simply because it was difficult to swallow it. Furthermore, if there is a genuine inability on the part of the teacher to teach adequately in English, reverting back to Bahasa Malaysia is definitely no cure. In all probability, the teacher’s inadequacy stems from the fact that as a student, he or she did not receive as English based education, hence the inability to express himself in English as a teacher. Hence, it is critical that we realize this is a self-propagating cycle that must be broken. And if not now, when? Simply put, reverting back to Bahasa Malaysia for Science and Mathematics will only compound the problem, not solve it.
With this is mind, I see absolutely no reason for reverting the medium for teaching Science and Mathematics back to Bahasa Malaysia. Proponents of the move might justify it with the most recent examination results, in which it was shown that many students chose to answer the papers in Bahasa Malaysia, compared to English, or that students generally performed better when the Science and Mathematics was taught in Bahasa Malaysia. However, I believe this issue is closely entwined with the competence of the teacher. Given time and proper training, the teachers should become familiar teaching in English, and the performance of students should follow suit.
Returning again to the original vision of the government in its 2002 declaration, the situation has not changed. It is still imperative that Malaysian students are well equipped for the globalized world. Knowledge is power, but practicality helps a great deal as well. To be brutally honest, Bahasa Malaysia has no value where Science and Mathematics are concerned. In the world today, a large portion of the advancements in technology are carried out in English. Hardly anywhere in the world is research being done where Bahasa Malaysia is the language of instruction. For this reason, it is totally impractical to further the teaching of these subjects in Bahasa Malaysia. Countries such as Japan and Germany are still able to maintain the teaching of Science and Mathematics in their own native tongues because it is of some use. These countries are bustling hubs for research and development of new technologies, while Malaysia, unfortunately, does not even come close in this regard.
However, one cannot doubt the role of Bahasa Malaysia as a unifying subject, as common ground on which the races can build their foundations of harmony. As the national language, it will be used for the teaching of most of the non-science subjects, but with the continuation of English based Science and Mathematics subjects, a healthy balance of both languages can be introduced, and hopefully this will encourage a proliferation of English proficient students.
In recent years, many of our local graduates have found difficulty in getting employed, chiefly because of their poor command of English. If we examine this retrospectively, we find that these are the students who have been subject to a wholly Bahasa Malaysia based syllabus. As a result, there is practically no room for the development of their oral and written English skills. They may be able be score A1s for their SPM English, but in reality any grasp of a coherent sense of the language is lost to them. A language is not something that can be mastered through the teaching of the language alone. Consistency and regular usage are necessary to be English proficient. At least, with a few subjects taught in English, students will have to read, write and speak it on a regular basis, which will help them better grasp the language.
For the reasons I have stated, I wholeheartedly advocate the teaching of Science and Mathematics in the English language. In a world being shaped by rapid globalization, we cannot deny the fact that English has become one of the most important languages in the world. Teaching in English will not result in the corrosion of our culture and our national language. Let not misguided patriotism blind our judgment. Let us not politicize our education, as it has been oft done in the past. All we want is for Malaysia to advance as a country, and I believe it begins with education.
Hai, it's me agein.
Remember, COMMENT, COMMENT, THINK, THEN COMMENT AGAIN.
Tenkiu very much :)
Showing posts with label serious. Show all posts
Showing posts with label serious. Show all posts
Monday, September 22, 2008
Monday, September 8, 2008
And we've waited 51 years to get here
I know I haven't been blogging for some time, but I'm really not my usual self right now, so I'll just be talking a bit about the Malaysian political scene (yes, again).
For those who don't follow the happenings, I'll quickly bring you up to speed.
Recently, during the Permatang Pauh by-elections, both BN and PKR were campaigning like mad to woo the voters. Obviously, Anwar won. Even our former premier, Dr. M thought so. During the whole campaigning frenzy, a local UMNO assemblyman got a little too excited and made a bad boo-boo.
Source: The Star (3 Sept 08)
You know, a lot would have been resolved if he had just said sorry there and then, instead of 'allegedly' going for a sepak takraw match (I bet he spent those days cooking up a good reason for saying what he did). But NO, he had to drag it on and on, trampling on whatever rapport the nation has built among the races. Honestly, I can't help but feel a little hurt by what he said. It's not only insensitive, it's especially idiotic considering his arguments are somewhat weak. It's not too hard to see that he's just beating round the bush, trying feebly to turn the tide back on the Chinese people (who've just been snubbed pretty badly, mind you) by playing the oldest trick in the book, the 'Ketuanan Melayu' issue.
I'm a bit pissed to be thinking coherently now, so I realize my arguments aren't really going wherer they should be. But ARGH! I can't help but feel that whether Ketuanan Melayu or not, what he did was absolutely intolerable (non-sequitur, my reasoning today, sorry that).
What infuriated me more was an article I read on Malaysiakini today:
Dude, it's not like the Jews were there FIGHTING and DYING for the independence YOU now share. GAH, the idiocy really irks me! And then:
For those who don't follow the happenings, I'll quickly bring you up to speed.
Recently, during the Permatang Pauh by-elections, both BN and PKR were campaigning like mad to woo the voters. Obviously, Anwar won. Even our former premier, Dr. M thought so. During the whole campaigning frenzy, a local UMNO assemblyman got a little too excited and made a bad boo-boo.
"Bukit Bendera Umno division chief Datuk Ahmad Ismail had called the Chinese pendatang (immigrants) at a ceramah prior to the Permatang Pauh by-election."
Source: The Star (3 Sept 08)
- Soon after, the Chinese based parties (Gerakan, MCA, etc) start complaining about his 'alleged' remark.
- Najib apologizes on behalf of UMNO.
- Chinese leaders don't buy it.
- Ahmad Ismail pulls a disappearing act, so not even the PM can find him. Then he remains elusive for some few more days.
- He returns and says something stupid that totally screws everything up.
You know, a lot would have been resolved if he had just said sorry there and then, instead of 'allegedly' going for a sepak takraw match (I bet he spent those days cooking up a good reason for saying what he did). But NO, he had to drag it on and on, trampling on whatever rapport the nation has built among the races. Honestly, I can't help but feel a little hurt by what he said. It's not only insensitive, it's especially idiotic considering his arguments are somewhat weak. It's not too hard to see that he's just beating round the bush, trying feebly to turn the tide back on the Chinese people (who've just been snubbed pretty badly, mind you) by playing the oldest trick in the book, the 'Ketuanan Melayu' issue.
I'm a bit pissed to be thinking coherently now, so I realize my arguments aren't really going wherer they should be. But ARGH! I can't help but feel that whether Ketuanan Melayu or not, what he did was absolutely intolerable (non-sequitur, my reasoning today, sorry that).
What infuriated me more was an article I read on Malaysiakini today:
"Penang Umno leader Ahmad Ismail, the man at the centre of the ‘racial slur' controversy, warned Chinese Malaysians not to mimic American Jews who not only seek to control the country's economy but also its political power."
Dude, it's not like the Jews were there FIGHTING and DYING for the independence YOU now share. GAH, the idiocy really irks me! And then:
"Earlier, Ahmad told the minority Chinese not to go overboard in hurting the feelings of the Malays and Muslims. "I want them to know, I want them to take this as a warning from the Malays. Malays and Muslims have been provoked many times. We have been patient because we want to maintain stability in the country," he said. "Remember! The patience of Malays and Muslims has its limits. Do not push us to the wall, where we will be forced to reject the Chinese for the sake of our survival."
Oh sure, he's the one making idiot comments, and he's warning the Chinese not to hurt the feelings of the Malays and Muslims.
Really, words almost fail me here. I was just furious that anyone could even be this dense. Any semblance of peace we had between races doesn't seem to get into that head of his. Why does he think every other Chinese person wants to usurp the rights of the Malays, or that we want to take over Malaysia and turn it into Singapore? Obviously, the Chinese don't wish to get along peacefully with their fellow countrymen, and they obviously don't want the best for the country that they and their families live in. After all, they're only SQUATTERS (and ONLY since the pre-independence era).
How can you tell someone who has known only life in Malaysia that he is a 'pendatang'? In fact, the Chinese (and Indians, at that) have been shorter-term 'pendatang's than the Malays, who are in fact 'pendatang' to this land themselves! But let's not go there. The point is, after all these years of 'Independence', it's so frustrating that so many are still not 'Independent' of their own thick-headed bigotry. After 51 years, after generations of Born and Bred in Malaysia Malaysians, we still have bigots calling other people names.
These are the issues 'true' racists harp on all the time, and yet he has the nerve to brand himself as a not-racist.
In the same press conference from which I quoted previously, the Malay leaders went really gung-ho about snubbing the Chinese.
"The press conference, which was held at the Penang Umno headquarters this afternoon, ended with shouts of ‘Hidup Melayu' from about 50 local party leaders who were there.Soon after the event, former Penang Umno committee member Zainol Abidin Hashim, with the help from his colleagues pulled down the photo of Gerakan acting president Dr Koh Tsu Koon which adorned one of the walls in the party headquarters.Koh's picture frame, which sat next to the photos of the Penang governor and his wife, was subsequently smashed.As the glass broke into pieces, Zainol removed Koh's photo from the frame and tore it into half.Koh, who is former Penang chief minister, has been trading barbs with Ahmad, the Bukit Bendera Umno division chief, over the issue."
They were even kind enough to include photos of the peaceful gathering.
Hidup Melayu, bangkit kebodohan?
But really, I don't make any sense, and you can totally discount whatever I've said (or tried, at least). I'm only a kid of the kid of the kid of a 'pendatang', so technically my arguments are already inferior to that of a 'lesser-pendatang', for what it's worth.
I'm sorry if I offend anyone, I'm just really, really angry. I can't think of another word for it.
Thursday, August 7, 2008
The Making of a Sciencey Person
I have a friend who is an artist, and he sometimes takes a view which I don't agree with. He'll hold up a flower and say, "Look how beatiful it is," and I'll agree. But then he'll say, "I, as an artist, can see how beautiful a flower is. But you, as a scientist, takes it all apart and it becomes dull." I think he's kind of nutty.
First of all, the beauty that he sees is available to other people-and to me, too, I believe. Although I might not be quite as refined aesthetically as he is, I can appreciate the beauty of a flower. But at the same time, I see much more in the flower than he sees. I can imagine the cells inside, which also have a beauty. There's beauty not just at the dimension of one centimeter; there's also beauty at a smaller dimension.
There are the complicated actions of the cells, and other processes. The fact that the colours in the flowers have evolved in order to attract insects to pollinate it is interesting; that means insects can see all the colours. That adds a question: does this aesthetic sense we have also esxist in lower forms of life? There are all sorts of interesting questions that come from a knowledge of science, which only adds to the excitement and mystery and awe of a flower.
It only adds. I don't understand how it subtracts.
-Excerpt from 'What do YOU care what people think?' by Richard P. Feynman
The short excerpt was taken from the a book compiled from the memoirs and interviews with Richard Feynman. He is sort of a hero to me, representing everything I've wanted and still hope to be.
The main reason I felt like sharing the extract was because a lot of people, I'm sure have a certain preset notion about the 'Sciencey' breed of people in the world. We're supposed to be boring, dull people who spend the rest of their days cooped up in some lab somewhere. We take everything apart, so there's really nothing left to appreciate. So it really struck a chord with me when he says, "It only adds (beauty). I don't understand how it subtracts".
A good friend of mine once told me that as a kid, he would gawk in awe at the rainbows in the sky. They has an ethereal, magical property to them. Then progressing up the ranks of study, science broke down the beautiful rainbows into nothing more than the refraction of light through water particles acting as lenses. In that sense, it removed the mystery, the wonder of something you didn't understand.
But then again, after the rain has fallen, I still look up to the sky, hoping to catch a glimpse of the multi-hued arches in the sky. I understand how a rainbow is formed. I understand it on a deeper level than the average passerby. It's almost like an exclusive secret I can keep to myself. It is still magical, it is still beautiful.
It only adds. I don't understand how it subtracts.
First of all, the beauty that he sees is available to other people-and to me, too, I believe. Although I might not be quite as refined aesthetically as he is, I can appreciate the beauty of a flower. But at the same time, I see much more in the flower than he sees. I can imagine the cells inside, which also have a beauty. There's beauty not just at the dimension of one centimeter; there's also beauty at a smaller dimension.
There are the complicated actions of the cells, and other processes. The fact that the colours in the flowers have evolved in order to attract insects to pollinate it is interesting; that means insects can see all the colours. That adds a question: does this aesthetic sense we have also esxist in lower forms of life? There are all sorts of interesting questions that come from a knowledge of science, which only adds to the excitement and mystery and awe of a flower.
It only adds. I don't understand how it subtracts.
-Excerpt from 'What do YOU care what people think?' by Richard P. Feynman
The short excerpt was taken from the a book compiled from the memoirs and interviews with Richard Feynman. He is sort of a hero to me, representing everything I've wanted and still hope to be.
The main reason I felt like sharing the extract was because a lot of people, I'm sure have a certain preset notion about the 'Sciencey' breed of people in the world. We're supposed to be boring, dull people who spend the rest of their days cooped up in some lab somewhere. We take everything apart, so there's really nothing left to appreciate. So it really struck a chord with me when he says, "It only adds (beauty). I don't understand how it subtracts".
A good friend of mine once told me that as a kid, he would gawk in awe at the rainbows in the sky. They has an ethereal, magical property to them. Then progressing up the ranks of study, science broke down the beautiful rainbows into nothing more than the refraction of light through water particles acting as lenses. In that sense, it removed the mystery, the wonder of something you didn't understand.
But then again, after the rain has fallen, I still look up to the sky, hoping to catch a glimpse of the multi-hued arches in the sky. I understand how a rainbow is formed. I understand it on a deeper level than the average passerby. It's almost like an exclusive secret I can keep to myself. It is still magical, it is still beautiful.
It only adds. I don't understand how it subtracts.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
A Small Death
My mouse died on a Sunday night. It was so strange, so sudden. Walking down the stairs to get my dinner, I stopped, stopped and noticed that one of my two mice was missing. It couldn't have escaped, I told myself. Rummaging through the heaps of bedding, a small head peeked out.
It's eyes were closed. It's mouth was agape.
It was dead.
I didn't quite know what to do then. I held it gingerly in my palm, and it was stiff and devoid of warmth. 'I suppose I must bury it', I then told myself. In the garden I shoveled a shallow pit for my mouse. It was dark, and I couldn't see. I couldn't even see when I had to pat down the earth around the small, frail frame. But it was probably better that way. I couldn't bear the sight of the carcass bloated, a mere shell of what used to be.
Later that night, as I poked at my dinner with disinterest, I would remember. Remember how my mouse used to scamper around, warm, lively, alive. I would approach their little nest, and even when they slept, their little ears pricked up when I was around. Then they would run rings around each other, and sniff longingly at the air. But that was mostly gone now. I continued eating, but it was cold. It was quiet now.
There used to be two of them, but only one remains now. There used to be two, and I'd see them play with each other. And in that small way, I suppose they did make me happy.
Was I a bad owner? Didn't I feed them enough or clean their cage often enough? Didn't I take note of the signs of ailment? I can't quite say.
As I ate my dinner, and I wondered. Why do people really bother keeping pets if they're just going to die someday? I have friends who wept buckets upon the death of a pet. I wonder if it's really worth the anguish.
I wasn't exactly lachrymose about a dead mouse, but it did leave a hollow ring in my ears when I told myself that she was gone. Really, is it worth it?
We just have to resign ourselves to the fact that life goes on, no?
Jonathan.
It's eyes were closed. It's mouth was agape.
It was dead.
I didn't quite know what to do then. I held it gingerly in my palm, and it was stiff and devoid of warmth. 'I suppose I must bury it', I then told myself. In the garden I shoveled a shallow pit for my mouse. It was dark, and I couldn't see. I couldn't even see when I had to pat down the earth around the small, frail frame. But it was probably better that way. I couldn't bear the sight of the carcass bloated, a mere shell of what used to be.
Later that night, as I poked at my dinner with disinterest, I would remember. Remember how my mouse used to scamper around, warm, lively, alive. I would approach their little nest, and even when they slept, their little ears pricked up when I was around. Then they would run rings around each other, and sniff longingly at the air. But that was mostly gone now. I continued eating, but it was cold. It was quiet now.
There used to be two of them, but only one remains now. There used to be two, and I'd see them play with each other. And in that small way, I suppose they did make me happy.
Was I a bad owner? Didn't I feed them enough or clean their cage often enough? Didn't I take note of the signs of ailment? I can't quite say.
As I ate my dinner, and I wondered. Why do people really bother keeping pets if they're just going to die someday? I have friends who wept buckets upon the death of a pet. I wonder if it's really worth the anguish.
I wasn't exactly lachrymose about a dead mouse, but it did leave a hollow ring in my ears when I told myself that she was gone. Really, is it worth it?
We just have to resign ourselves to the fact that life goes on, no?
Jonathan.
Sunday, July 6, 2008
My Gay Thoughts
No you didn't read that wrong. I'm here to expound a little on thoughts I was entertaining as I read news on the whole political hullabaloo that has been playing out in our Malaysian circus. You know, the whole Anwar being accused of sodomy kind of thing. But, like most other bloggers, I'm quite resigned to blogging about the political viewpoint of the matters; it's just so darn confusing at this stage.
And no, I don't literally mean 'gay thoughts', but rather a few thoughts about the homosexual movement as a whole.
It just struck me as I was reading some opinions about the allegations against Anwar. Some of the more eloquent and thought-provoking writers offered their opinions on the matter, and it pretty much went like, 'Hey, we're really not interested in whether or not Anwar did sodomize the poor chap. Considering that he was a 23 year old lad, probably at the peak of his youth and vitality, and that Anwar was 60+ and had a bad back, it must have been an act of mutual consent, and we're not at all interested in what two consenting adults choose to do in the privacy of wherever. We're only interested if it involves embezzlement of the public funds, and etc etc...'.
Or even things like, 'Malaysia is homophobic for the reason that sodomy (a homosexual act) is criminalized'. Or something to that effect.
Now, note the two main criterion most people offer for an action to be justifiable morally. One, they're adults, and thus fully able to comprehend their decisions and the ramifications of their decisions.
Two, it involves two consenting adults, and from a post-modernist point of view, that would equate to 'We're just doing our thing, and it's not hurting anyone, so just let us be!'.
Well, alright. It seems to be the perception of most people that if its done by two consenting adults, just about anything is fine.
Well, then, I was just thinking to myself about what these very same people would say to a case of incest. Yes, incest, some totally whacked sexual relationship between two people in a family. After all, it does involve two very consenting adults. So if we're really all that keen on allowing people to run around being gay, I really have to ask, why not let a father marry his own daughter? Or better still, let a grandma marry her grandson, or great great grandson, or whatever you fancy?
And doesn't incest just strike you as wrong? Why then, do you ask yourself, is incest so wrong? What, it's not natural? But oh, I never really thought homosexuality was natural either. I might be wrong and my view on things might be totally distorted because I'm a closed-minded person and a Christian of all things (oh no, it's another one!); but after all, it's just my personal take on things.
You know, the thing is, I believe this whole being 'open-minded' is a farce when it comes to homosexuality. There is no real open-mindedness. Everyone is just plain selfish (I'm not absolving myself either). I think most (I'm not saying all, mind you) proponents of homosexuality are themselves closed-minded because they refuse to acknowledge that the grounds on which they justify their claims for validity are the very same grounds that can be used for a lot of other things, which would probably tickle their moral conscience as well. So really, when you refuse to acknowledge that, then it's a mockery in itself of this 'open-mindedness' that we should have.
Of course, if you could still say, 'oh yeah, sure, incest is totally fine with me', then my argument would totally fall and I'd really have nothing else to say. I'd just go home, brood over it and seriously think that our moral state of affairs is in VERY, VERY deep peanut butter (it's the best substitute I could think of to represent something brown and mushy).
And oh, don't even go to there. Where? The, 'Oh, you're another closed-minded Christian and so your arguments are so 1940. We live in the modern age! Your old school rules are no longer relevant!'.
Seriously, -.-''
One, by calling someone closed-minded, you're already refusing to accept whatever views the other has to share, regardless of its validity and rationale.
Two, how do you really know if we're 'closed-minded'? Don't you think that in this age of thinking, we (the C-dudes) would have examined and re-examined our values and asked ourselves if this is really what we believe in?
Honestly, I fall waaaaaaaaay away from the standard of what I dare to call a 'good' Christian, but even I have my core values, which I've asked myself if they were worth protecting, and come to a resounding 'yes'. And of course we've all thought about homosexuality and whether or not it was right or wrong based on both divine standards as well as on modern standards. Well, there are some people who couldn't be bothered about forming a personal opinion, but I think they're just dumb and so they don't come into the equation here.
And look, you know that highly-touted value of being able to speak up for what you believe in? A great majority of people think its great that gays and gay-like people are able to brave ridicule and sum up the courage to tell everyone they're really gay, or stuff. They think its absolutely great that they have the courage to speak up for what they believe in and all that. Well, well, newsflash, that's EXACTLY what I'm trying to do. I'm speaking up for what I believe in, whether it irks people or not.
I could probably think of a few more things to say, but I think this post is controversial enough as it is. I'm expecting backlash from some human rights group in Amsterdam or somewhere, but it's alright. I really hope this prompts everyone to actually think. If you have a nit to pick with me, then fine, but go take some time to think about it, then type it out in a readable manner. Then, we'll sit down for tea and chat.
Lastly, peace out, yo.
:) Jonathan
And no, I don't literally mean 'gay thoughts', but rather a few thoughts about the homosexual movement as a whole.
It just struck me as I was reading some opinions about the allegations against Anwar. Some of the more eloquent and thought-provoking writers offered their opinions on the matter, and it pretty much went like, 'Hey, we're really not interested in whether or not Anwar did sodomize the poor chap. Considering that he was a 23 year old lad, probably at the peak of his youth and vitality, and that Anwar was 60+ and had a bad back, it must have been an act of mutual consent, and we're not at all interested in what two consenting adults choose to do in the privacy of wherever. We're only interested if it involves embezzlement of the public funds, and etc etc...'.
Or even things like, 'Malaysia is homophobic for the reason that sodomy (a homosexual act) is criminalized'. Or something to that effect.
Now, note the two main criterion most people offer for an action to be justifiable morally. One, they're adults, and thus fully able to comprehend their decisions and the ramifications of their decisions.
Two, it involves two consenting adults, and from a post-modernist point of view, that would equate to 'We're just doing our thing, and it's not hurting anyone, so just let us be!'.
Well, alright. It seems to be the perception of most people that if its done by two consenting adults, just about anything is fine.
Well, then, I was just thinking to myself about what these very same people would say to a case of incest. Yes, incest, some totally whacked sexual relationship between two people in a family. After all, it does involve two very consenting adults. So if we're really all that keen on allowing people to run around being gay, I really have to ask, why not let a father marry his own daughter? Or better still, let a grandma marry her grandson, or great great grandson, or whatever you fancy?
And doesn't incest just strike you as wrong? Why then, do you ask yourself, is incest so wrong? What, it's not natural? But oh, I never really thought homosexuality was natural either. I might be wrong and my view on things might be totally distorted because I'm a closed-minded person and a Christian of all things (oh no, it's another one!); but after all, it's just my personal take on things.
You know, the thing is, I believe this whole being 'open-minded' is a farce when it comes to homosexuality. There is no real open-mindedness. Everyone is just plain selfish (I'm not absolving myself either). I think most (I'm not saying all, mind you) proponents of homosexuality are themselves closed-minded because they refuse to acknowledge that the grounds on which they justify their claims for validity are the very same grounds that can be used for a lot of other things, which would probably tickle their moral conscience as well. So really, when you refuse to acknowledge that, then it's a mockery in itself of this 'open-mindedness' that we should have.
Of course, if you could still say, 'oh yeah, sure, incest is totally fine with me', then my argument would totally fall and I'd really have nothing else to say. I'd just go home, brood over it and seriously think that our moral state of affairs is in VERY, VERY deep peanut butter (it's the best substitute I could think of to represent something brown and mushy).
And oh, don't even go to there. Where? The, 'Oh, you're another closed-minded Christian and so your arguments are so 1940. We live in the modern age! Your old school rules are no longer relevant!'.
Seriously, -.-''
One, by calling someone closed-minded, you're already refusing to accept whatever views the other has to share, regardless of its validity and rationale.
Two, how do you really know if we're 'closed-minded'? Don't you think that in this age of thinking, we (the C-dudes) would have examined and re-examined our values and asked ourselves if this is really what we believe in?
Honestly, I fall waaaaaaaaay away from the standard of what I dare to call a 'good' Christian, but even I have my core values, which I've asked myself if they were worth protecting, and come to a resounding 'yes'. And of course we've all thought about homosexuality and whether or not it was right or wrong based on both divine standards as well as on modern standards. Well, there are some people who couldn't be bothered about forming a personal opinion, but I think they're just dumb and so they don't come into the equation here.
And look, you know that highly-touted value of being able to speak up for what you believe in? A great majority of people think its great that gays and gay-like people are able to brave ridicule and sum up the courage to tell everyone they're really gay, or stuff. They think its absolutely great that they have the courage to speak up for what they believe in and all that. Well, well, newsflash, that's EXACTLY what I'm trying to do. I'm speaking up for what I believe in, whether it irks people or not.
I could probably think of a few more things to say, but I think this post is controversial enough as it is. I'm expecting backlash from some human rights group in Amsterdam or somewhere, but it's alright. I really hope this prompts everyone to actually think. If you have a nit to pick with me, then fine, but go take some time to think about it, then type it out in a readable manner. Then, we'll sit down for tea and chat.
Lastly, peace out, yo.
:) Jonathan
Saturday, June 28, 2008
Urban Politics
I came across an interesting display on a wall somewhere in KL as Winson and I were walking back from the MACEE US fair.
Roughly translates to 'Give us ashes, but not UMNO'.
I thought it was a pretty interesting show of the urban mindset of certain things, their views on the happenings in our political landscape, etc etc. I'm assuming here, but I do honestly think that it was probably a bunch of Malay youths who wrote the words. For one, it's written in BM, and secondly, older guys won't resort to such 'uncouth' methods. They'd probably print posters and stick em' on walls cause they're less rowdy and more civilized. :)
Anyway, the point was that youths are beginning to show their interest in politics as well, especially with all the buzz and excitement generated from the previous General Elections. This isn't at all bad or anything, and I think that it is one of the key ingredients in a healthy democratic system. Can you imagine a a place where the young fellas couldn't give a damn about whats happening in their own country?
The only thing is, from the pre-election period till about now, that anti-establishment sentiment has been running hot in the veins of a great number of voters and the young demographic of to-be-voters. Honestly, they have every reason to be, seeing how things have been handled in our country in recent and past years.
However, you can't help but wonder if this zeal is bordering on the fringes of fanaticism and blind-faith in the Opposition?
Recently, during the fuel price hike there were emails floating around questioning the apparent inability of Petronas and the Government in cushioning the impact of the increase for the good of the people. Some people, angry with the governing body, blindly accept the allegations and are quick to jump up and condemn. Whether or not such allegations are true is a whole other matter, but judging by such outbursts from our community of Malaysians, we see that the problem with us is that we always need someone to blame.
And I suppose this is the case for our bunch of Malay youths. For whatever reason they harbor resentment against the Government, they need to put the blame on someone, and so they throw objectivity out the window and shut it tight. What else should we call this but close-mindedness?
We're the urban youths. We're supposed to be the elite ones in terms of thinking and making decisions. Where are we going wrong? Perhaps its time for us to sit back and reevaluate our mindsets on things.
:) Jonathan.
Roughly translates to 'Give us ashes, but not UMNO'.
I thought it was a pretty interesting show of the urban mindset of certain things, their views on the happenings in our political landscape, etc etc. I'm assuming here, but I do honestly think that it was probably a bunch of Malay youths who wrote the words. For one, it's written in BM, and secondly, older guys won't resort to such 'uncouth' methods. They'd probably print posters and stick em' on walls cause they're less rowdy and more civilized. :)
Anyway, the point was that youths are beginning to show their interest in politics as well, especially with all the buzz and excitement generated from the previous General Elections. This isn't at all bad or anything, and I think that it is one of the key ingredients in a healthy democratic system. Can you imagine a a place where the young fellas couldn't give a damn about whats happening in their own country?
The only thing is, from the pre-election period till about now, that anti-establishment sentiment has been running hot in the veins of a great number of voters and the young demographic of to-be-voters. Honestly, they have every reason to be, seeing how things have been handled in our country in recent and past years.
However, you can't help but wonder if this zeal is bordering on the fringes of fanaticism and blind-faith in the Opposition?
Recently, during the fuel price hike there were emails floating around questioning the apparent inability of Petronas and the Government in cushioning the impact of the increase for the good of the people. Some people, angry with the governing body, blindly accept the allegations and are quick to jump up and condemn. Whether or not such allegations are true is a whole other matter, but judging by such outbursts from our community of Malaysians, we see that the problem with us is that we always need someone to blame.
And I suppose this is the case for our bunch of Malay youths. For whatever reason they harbor resentment against the Government, they need to put the blame on someone, and so they throw objectivity out the window and shut it tight. What else should we call this but close-mindedness?
We're the urban youths. We're supposed to be the elite ones in terms of thinking and making decisions. Where are we going wrong? Perhaps its time for us to sit back and reevaluate our mindsets on things.
:) Jonathan.
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Some never learn
A lot has been said and done about the release of 'Fitna' in the recent days. I was flipping through the newspapers today when a particular article caught by attention.
The headline read 'Dutch embassy in Indonesia attacked'.
Now, lets not jump to hasty conclusions here. I don't condone the movie, neither do I support its viewpoints. That's not the point.
First, let's follow this simple thought process.
What? Of course it's a peaceful demonstration where we wave around posters connoting that Geert Wilders (the producer of the film) should be shot!
It's not the nicest thing to do, is it? Burning the flags of other countries and all that.
Honestly, some people never learn. By inciting more violence with your rallies and passionate speeches, your shooting yourself in the foot. At the very least, I'm sure Geert Wilders would have expected protests denouncing his film, maybe even a few people being bashed up along the way. You're not denouncing the film through those actions, you're proving him right. Actions speak louder than words, after all.
I sound a little angry here. Alright, put it this way.
Extremism = bad
Instead of wasting precious time and energy being angry at the Dutch for something that ONE person did, shouldn't Muslims unite to instead curb extremism within their own ranks? After all, at the very root of the problem, its the extremists who are giving Muslims around the world a bad name.
Just my two cents, but have your say as well;
It's good for the brain.
The headline read 'Dutch embassy in Indonesia attacked'.
Now, lets not jump to hasty conclusions here. I don't condone the movie, neither do I support its viewpoints. That's not the point.
First, let's follow this simple thought process.
- Movie that equates Islam with violence is released.
- Muslims get angry, because its a mockery of what they believe in.
- Therefore, we conclude that Muslims should be peaceful, since they are protesting against violence.
- Indonesian students in Indonesia (duh) angry too, because they're students, and students are naturally more emo.
- They rally, burn flags and tires and tear down the gates over at the Dutch embassy.
- Proved their point that Islam does not equate to violence.
What? Of course it's a peaceful demonstration where we wave around posters connoting that Geert Wilders (the producer of the film) should be shot!
It's not the nicest thing to do, is it? Burning the flags of other countries and all that.
Honestly, some people never learn. By inciting more violence with your rallies and passionate speeches, your shooting yourself in the foot. At the very least, I'm sure Geert Wilders would have expected protests denouncing his film, maybe even a few people being bashed up along the way. You're not denouncing the film through those actions, you're proving him right. Actions speak louder than words, after all.
I sound a little angry here. Alright, put it this way.
Extremism = bad
Instead of wasting precious time and energy being angry at the Dutch for something that ONE person did, shouldn't Muslims unite to instead curb extremism within their own ranks? After all, at the very root of the problem, its the extremists who are giving Muslims around the world a bad name.
Just my two cents, but have your say as well;
It's good for the brain.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Quasi-political ramblings
The infamous good friend of mine, Khairul Syahir, has authored yet another post (man, I love this guy, I really do). Instead of disagreeing though, I very much agree with what he has to say.
If you actually have the time, go read this excellent article up on Malaysiakini.com - here.
What the writer has to say is that if the voters had earlier known that as many as five states would fall into Opposition hands, they wouldn't have voiced their protest through the ballots boxes as loudly as they did. It's simple, really. Regardless of however much voters were against the ruling coalition, it's a fact that the Opposition has no experience whatsoever in ruling a state. So we're all worried now for the state of our states in the coming future.
We've given them their mandate to rule, but the question on everyone's mind is whether or not they can do so efficiently? Most are worrying about dissent among the Parliamentary leaders, seeing that they come from different parties. Some are worrying that with a weakened majority, the National Front (BN) coalition will be quite crippled and thus rendered quite useless (more than they already are, at any rate).
But there is hope yet.
I've been quite an avid reader of Malaysia Today, an news site, independent of any one political party, since about a year ago. Raja Petra, the site's owner and author recently write an article titled 'The Aftermath of the Bloodbath'. Don't let the title faze you. It's been what I've been wanting to hear ever since the elections took place.
Quote: 'Malaysia Today, which is already a nightmare for the ruling party, is going to now also be the nightmare of the five opposition-led state governments. And we are going to monitor these five states even closer than we watch the federal government.
So remember who put you where you are today. Remember who gave you your job. The rakyat can hire and the rakyat can fire. We, the rakyat, made you and we, the rakyat, can break you. Just remember that and with God as our witness we shall not fail to do that if you fail to do what you promised to do.'
The rakyat have spoken, and they will again if the Opposition fails to deliver.
Another point that I feel gives us a little more security is the fact that our elected MPs (here is Selangor, at any rate) are actually accessible and contactable people. I'm sure the young generation of voters and to-be voters (like yours truly) will have familiarized themselves with the political web scene, which have seen the uprising of political figures like Jeff Ooi.
If the people doesn't like what he's doing, do you think we'll let him have it off that easily? No, we'll voice our dissatisfaction, we'll spam his site till it crashes (okla, we don't have to be so mean).
And it's not just him. We have bright, young figures like Tony Pua, Hannah Yeoh, Teresa Kok and Fong Po Kuan, to name a few. All of whom have their own blogs, all who can at any time can be found by the people, and not only when the elections swing around.
Like Raja Petra said, 'We, the rakyat, can make you, and we, the rakyat, can break you'.
We'll be watching them.
----------------------------
Alright, that sums up my political ramblings. Be prepared for more mindless posting about pointless things in the days to come. :) I'll be off to Guangzhou, China tomorrow, so no updates for 5 days (heh, not like I actually update that often). Tata, humans!
If you actually have the time, go read this excellent article up on Malaysiakini.com - here.
What the writer has to say is that if the voters had earlier known that as many as five states would fall into Opposition hands, they wouldn't have voiced their protest through the ballots boxes as loudly as they did. It's simple, really. Regardless of however much voters were against the ruling coalition, it's a fact that the Opposition has no experience whatsoever in ruling a state. So we're all worried now for the state of our states in the coming future.
We've given them their mandate to rule, but the question on everyone's mind is whether or not they can do so efficiently? Most are worrying about dissent among the Parliamentary leaders, seeing that they come from different parties. Some are worrying that with a weakened majority, the National Front (BN) coalition will be quite crippled and thus rendered quite useless (more than they already are, at any rate).
But there is hope yet.
I've been quite an avid reader of Malaysia Today, an news site, independent of any one political party, since about a year ago. Raja Petra, the site's owner and author recently write an article titled 'The Aftermath of the Bloodbath'. Don't let the title faze you. It's been what I've been wanting to hear ever since the elections took place.
Quote: 'Malaysia Today, which is already a nightmare for the ruling party, is going to now also be the nightmare of the five opposition-led state governments. And we are going to monitor these five states even closer than we watch the federal government.
So remember who put you where you are today. Remember who gave you your job. The rakyat can hire and the rakyat can fire. We, the rakyat, made you and we, the rakyat, can break you. Just remember that and with God as our witness we shall not fail to do that if you fail to do what you promised to do.'
The rakyat have spoken, and they will again if the Opposition fails to deliver.
Another point that I feel gives us a little more security is the fact that our elected MPs (here is Selangor, at any rate) are actually accessible and contactable people. I'm sure the young generation of voters and to-be voters (like yours truly) will have familiarized themselves with the political web scene, which have seen the uprising of political figures like Jeff Ooi.
If the people doesn't like what he's doing, do you think we'll let him have it off that easily? No, we'll voice our dissatisfaction, we'll spam his site till it crashes (okla, we don't have to be so mean).
And it's not just him. We have bright, young figures like Tony Pua, Hannah Yeoh, Teresa Kok and Fong Po Kuan, to name a few. All of whom have their own blogs, all who can at any time can be found by the people, and not only when the elections swing around.
Like Raja Petra said, 'We, the rakyat, can make you, and we, the rakyat, can break you'.
We'll be watching them.
----------------------------
Alright, that sums up my political ramblings. Be prepared for more mindless posting about pointless things in the days to come. :) I'll be off to Guangzhou, China tomorrow, so no updates for 5 days (heh, not like I actually update that often). Tata, humans!
Monday, March 10, 2008
Let's talk politics
If you've noticed, I've kept politics out of my posts since I started, but I've been compelled to reply to this. Recently, my good friend Khairul Syahir authored a post, titled 'Don't talk about politics with me'. He cites three main reasons for his stand:
Anyway, the past week has been fraught with these 'political discussions', and just about everyone, from the canteen lady to a particular Business teacher we have has been heatedly discussing the political happenings around us. But the have every right to, seeing that they're eligible voters.
How about us then? People like me, who can't do pretty much anything but talk, talk and talk about the elections?
Quote: 'No matter how hard we believe in any party (or team) , we are not eligible yet to vote (we can't do anything about it). So I might as well save my energy and time doing something else like doing my EE or writing my Maths IA or reading up on Special Theory of Relativity that would actually benefits me as a 19-year-old instead of indulging in politics that I cannot do anything about (watching football which I cannot do anything about).'
Why then do 19 year olds everywhere continue watching football, or even talking politics?
Look, I'm pretty darn sure that on the 9th of March, a day after the elections you picked up the newspapers and read about how everyone fared this elections. Why so?
It's simply because we have an interest in the outcome. Like the football fan, he can go die happy if his team Y wins the whatever cup. Likewise, as Malaysians, we are all stakeholders in the governing body. Whatever happens to them will inevitably affect us in some way or another. So we talk politics, to keep ourselves abreast with the news. Don't get us wrong Khairul, it's not all about bashing certain Son-in-Laws or other politicians. It's also healthy discourse, and this leads to more critical thinking. Maybe we've come across as BN bashers and Opposition worshipers, but really, we point out flaws in both, give merits where we can. It's really idiotic of us if we were to delude ourselves into thinking that any one party is perfect. We're not that stupid.
And heck, talking politics is pretty darn fun.
Admittedly, I understand where you're coming from, when you consider all those bandwagon jumpers, who only stop to gossip about politics when the elections swing by. Your points would be validly justified on those people. But some of us aren't that fickle. We have a real interest in what goes on in the country.
3. When we base our judgments solely on biased sources, it is only right that our judgments are biased too.
We've been studying fallacies in TOK (Theory of Knowledge) for a year now. Do you think I would subject myself to such non-objectivity? And don't you think that through discourse we are able to apply, first hand, all we've learned in our TOK lessons, like identifying fallacies in certain ideas or thought? Like I said, there's probably nothing dumber you can do than do delude yourself by only reading one-sided views. Personally, I do try to get my news from as many sources as possible. Unfortunately though, not everyone tries.
Quote : 'When we support one view, we tend to look for everything that goes in support of it. If we support PAS for example, we read Harakah and accept all while dismissing all in the national newspaper.'
Maybe you're referring to the anti-establishment sentiments that have been running hot in the veins of young urbanites like some of our classmates. It's partly true that we can't do anything about it, but at the very least, as rational thinkers, by engaging in a discussion you might bring them to the 'light', so to speak.
There's probably a lot more we can say about this, but I'll stop here. You've chosen not to talk about politics, fine and well, I respect your choice. I, however, will beg to differ.
I will talk politics, and if not with you, with another.
- We're 19.
- We don't know much about politics
- When we base our judgments solely on biased sources, it is only right that our judgments are biased too.
Anyway, the past week has been fraught with these 'political discussions', and just about everyone, from the canteen lady to a particular Business teacher we have has been heatedly discussing the political happenings around us. But the have every right to, seeing that they're eligible voters.
How about us then? People like me, who can't do pretty much anything but talk, talk and talk about the elections?
- We're 19
Quote: 'No matter how hard we believe in any party (or team) , we are not eligible yet to vote (we can't do anything about it). So I might as well save my energy and time doing something else like doing my EE or writing my Maths IA or reading up on Special Theory of Relativity that would actually benefits me as a 19-year-old instead of indulging in politics that I cannot do anything about (watching football which I cannot do anything about).'
Why then do 19 year olds everywhere continue watching football, or even talking politics?
Look, I'm pretty darn sure that on the 9th of March, a day after the elections you picked up the newspapers and read about how everyone fared this elections. Why so?
It's simply because we have an interest in the outcome. Like the football fan, he can go die happy if his team Y wins the whatever cup. Likewise, as Malaysians, we are all stakeholders in the governing body. Whatever happens to them will inevitably affect us in some way or another. So we talk politics, to keep ourselves abreast with the news. Don't get us wrong Khairul, it's not all about bashing certain Son-in-Laws or other politicians. It's also healthy discourse, and this leads to more critical thinking. Maybe we've come across as BN bashers and Opposition worshipers, but really, we point out flaws in both, give merits where we can. It's really idiotic of us if we were to delude ourselves into thinking that any one party is perfect. We're not that stupid.
And heck, talking politics is pretty darn fun.
- .
- We don't know much about politics
Admittedly, I understand where you're coming from, when you consider all those bandwagon jumpers, who only stop to gossip about politics when the elections swing by. Your points would be validly justified on those people. But some of us aren't that fickle. We have a real interest in what goes on in the country.
3. When we base our judgments solely on biased sources, it is only right that our judgments are biased too.
We've been studying fallacies in TOK (Theory of Knowledge) for a year now. Do you think I would subject myself to such non-objectivity? And don't you think that through discourse we are able to apply, first hand, all we've learned in our TOK lessons, like identifying fallacies in certain ideas or thought? Like I said, there's probably nothing dumber you can do than do delude yourself by only reading one-sided views. Personally, I do try to get my news from as many sources as possible. Unfortunately though, not everyone tries.
Quote : 'When we support one view, we tend to look for everything that goes in support of it. If we support PAS for example, we read Harakah and accept all while dismissing all in the national newspaper.'
Maybe you're referring to the anti-establishment sentiments that have been running hot in the veins of young urbanites like some of our classmates. It's partly true that we can't do anything about it, but at the very least, as rational thinkers, by engaging in a discussion you might bring them to the 'light', so to speak.
There's probably a lot more we can say about this, but I'll stop here. You've chosen not to talk about politics, fine and well, I respect your choice. I, however, will beg to differ.
I will talk politics, and if not with you, with another.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
