Sad, sad, sad…

Former MCA President and MP for Kulai Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting made one of his rare appearances in Parliament today.

For what?

Not to speak on anyone of the many great issues currently disturbing thinking Malaysians.

But to complain at the 2008 Supplementary Estimates Committee stage debate on the Education Ministry at the breach of the promise made by the Education Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein when he was MCA President that the new SJKC(2) Kulai in his parliamentary constituency would be built with 30 classrooms.

He said that months have passed since his intervention, but the issue of the new SJKC(2) Kulai being built with only 24 classrooms instead of 30 classrooms as originally promised remains unresolved.

How the mighty had fallen when the former MCA President has to come to Parliament to complain about the disappearance of six classrooms despite the public pledge jointly made by him as MCA President and Hishammuddin as Education Minister only last year!

Sad, sad, sad!

  1. #1 by yhsiew on Thursday, 19 March 2009 - 8:17 pm

    At the time when the public pledge was made, Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting was the MCA President and UMNO gave him ‘face’. When he is no longer the President, why must UMNO bother?

  2. #2 by distantmalay on Thursday, 19 March 2009 - 8:27 pm

    if the budget was for 30 classrooms, where the money for the 6 missing classrooms go to ? also went missing, like the classrooms.

  3. #3 by dawsheng on Thursday, 19 March 2009 - 8:32 pm

    Very sad indeed.

  4. #4 by ALLAN THAM on Thursday, 19 March 2009 - 8:56 pm

    All know MCA could not do anything except pleading, kow tow to Tai Kor and just holding the eggs

  5. #5 by AhPek on Thursday, 19 March 2009 - 9:11 pm

    Ong Ka Ting,
    Since when does an UMNOPUTRA take instruction from an MCA President,tell me? It’s about time you jokers should be buried!

  6. #6 by monsterball on Thursday, 19 March 2009 - 9:28 pm

    This UMNO puppet…now talk so much to please Malaysian Chinese?
    I will not give a second thought to anything K.T.Ong will be saying..or doing.
    MCA is a dead party……without Malay votes…and UMNO is so weak…cannot even help himself.
    Truths will prevail…under the mighty Malaysian voters.

  7. #7 by Godfather on Thursday, 19 March 2009 - 10:21 pm

    Aiya, Ong Ka Ting should know of all people that the leakage for government contracts is at least 20 pct, so if you contract for 30 classrooms, all you will get is 24 classrooms.

    Don’t cry over spilt milk. Just do the following:

    1. Make sure the floors are truly level, and not lopsided or bumpy.

    2. Make sure the electricals work, and not have the fans fall down on the students.

    3. Make sure that the angles are all at 90 degrees and not 80 degrees or 100 degrees.

    4. Check if the windows can close properly.

    5. Can the doors close ?

    6. Have the paintwork started to peel off ?

    7. If there are toilets, does the plumbing work ? If there are no toilets, look for them under the 10th Malaysia Plan.

  8. #8 by nkeng11 on Thursday, 19 March 2009 - 10:38 pm

    Kah Ting…Kah Ting… Your are nothing but a hound dog now that you are no more MCA President.

  9. #9 by aiD_kamikuP on Thursday, 19 March 2009 - 10:38 pm

    Ongatingting went to Parliament
    Wanted to show off his new big figment
    He said, Wee Little Willie is my name
    Six more classrooms is why I came
    But Kerisman roared back in return
    U know, my friends call me Hugh Jorgan
    What you have u better be happy
    Last year’s promise ‘hangus’ already
    Crying Little Willie ran home to MCA
    Thereafter they have NO more to say

  10. #10 by sheriff singh on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 12:05 am

    Ong who?

    And didn’t he monitor and complain when the school was being constructed? Its too late now. Cost savings, you know, with the current poor economic climate.

  11. #11 by wanderer on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 1:13 am

    What a blooming joke! When approval was given, did’nt he take the trouble to read the plans or he is too stupid not to know a plan for a 24 classrooms construction and a 30 classrooms?
    Apa kuna bising sekaran…just to remind us he is still alive!

  12. #12 by Onlooker Politics on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 1:14 am

    Ong Ka Ting should have lost his political legitimacy and the privilege to question Hishammuddin Hussein on the suspected corruption case of short change in the Chinese Primary School Construction Project by the Education Ministry since the time when Ong chose to keep quiet in order to cover the wrongdoing of Hishammuddin Hussein in the delivery of inferior construction work of a Chinese primary school at Muar which happened few years’ ago.

    In the Muar Chinese primary school incident, Hishammuddin tried to explain himself off by telling a big lie that he did not personally know the contractor of the school construction project. However, as a matter of fact, the contractor himself was the crony of Hishammuddin himself. If MCA’s lower rank leaders could have the relevant information about the connection between Hishammuddin and the contractor, there was no good reason for Ong to keep quiet about this and pretended that Hishammuddin had already given a satisfactory explanation on the happening of the Muar Chinese primary school incident.

    Hishammuddin is just another Umnoputra who is corrupt to the core. Just get an external auditor to do a thorough audit on the company account in Sarawak with a word Naim in its name, I think it will be highly possible for the auditor to detect some questionable hanky panky expenses in the company account which is related to the political funding in favour of Hishammuddin.

    Ironically, Dr. Mahathir is still harping hope on Najib-Hishammuddin camp to cleanse up the new leadership of Umno. Are both Najib and Hishammuddin going to quit Umno top position and quit politics permanently in order to return a clean image to Umno?

    Umno will never be able to present a clean and holy posture to the public if it continues to accept Najib and Hishammuddin to sit at the helm of power in the party.

  13. #13 by Onlooker Politics on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 1:40 am

    If Ong Ka Ting really has the sincere intent to show his concern about the problem of constant short change or constant short supply in the delivery of a Chinese primary school construction project, then he should give advice to PM Abdullah and should cause the later to make a request to Yang Dipertuan Agong in order to seek approval for announcing a dissolution of Parliament.

    Since Umno is not able to perform in relation to delivery of anti-corruption promises, it is the best time now for Umno to return the power to the people in order to put Najib-Hishammudin camp on test by way of democratic voting that is to be carried out by the people!

  14. #14 by daryl on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 2:30 am

    Remember that if you are not UMNO Malay or their cronies you are not first class citizen. Your status is the same as those illegal immigrant but with IC. So, 26 is close enough to 30 according to our Master in UMNO. 26 is close to 30 so shut up and go back to your dog house.

  15. #15 by boh-liao on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 3:26 am

    30 becomes 24, 20% loss.
    ai-say-man, MCA should know the SOP in the BN government contract. Already very lucky, can see the final product.

    In many cases, only partial structures built and contractor has gone AWOL with money in the pockets. Just look at the former Experimental Theatre behind DTC in Universiti Malaya – left there as a reminder for so many years for all to see. Still there.

    MACC proabably declared – semua OK, no sign of corruption.

  16. #16 by wvee on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 4:04 am

    Being bullied by the UMNO celaka?! Padan muka.

  17. #17 by sightseeing on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 4:16 am

    When come to doing the dirty work for UMNO, MCA will give 100%. Just look at the super efficient Dr. Mah Hang Soon, the deputy youth leader of MCA and Exco member of the illegal government of Perak. As the Exco responsible for Local Government, Mah has directed the Ipoh City Council to clean up the site of the Democracy Monument under the historic raintree. The Democracy Tree plaque was erased without trace in a few minutes and this was carried out at 7.30 in the morning

  18. #18 by sotong on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 6:58 am

    The contractor could only count to 24……with bigger classrooms, it’s near enough….semua OK!

  19. #19 by ringthetill on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 7:16 am

    What, ‘on one of his rare appearances …’? Just a b****y waste of space. Really good for nothing representative, causing the nation to go downhill in every aspects of life.

  20. #20 by kcb on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 8:11 am

    Ha ha ha
    Former MCA President has to come to Parliament to complain?
    Is it because Ong Takut is too scared to bring up the matter or is it because it does not concern him (never mind about the Chinese MCA claims to represent)?

  21. #21 by chengho on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 8:15 am

    Old men story ,that why the old men of Pakatan will never retire ,Hadi , Nik aziz , Karpal and Kit your turn man, let the younger group take over…

  22. #22 by Jeffrey on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 8:35 am

    Sad, Sad Sad How the mighty had fallen ….? (YB Kit)
    Yes it is sad, but when was he ever mighty, even as MCA President, much more after resigning?

    OKT was also not a natural leader. He was anointed to leadership by Tun Ling Liong Sik. People anoint you when they think you are puppet to serve their ends after they leave power. It does not happen only in MCA. It happens even in UMNO. Respect is earned. Here he was seen as subservient to UMNO when he was MCA president. Only when leaving after 308 mulling by Chinese electorate he accused UMNO of being bully. Where is the consistency? Pak Lah gave a good rebuttal: if UMNO were, why you guys remained in the coalition? Good rebuttal but it does not of course mean UMNO is not bully.

    Yet how can one bully unless the other submit? Yet there’s no evidence that a born Chinese leader would not submit to bullying. The last one, LKY was kicked out of the Malaysian political firmament in 1965. The present one LKS remains in the Opposition!

    Those amongst Chinese leaders who submit to hegemony are rewarded with crumbs of patronage. We say they are opportunistic and unprincipled: they sell out their constituency whose interest they are supposed to defend. But there are opportunistic and unprincipled people amongst all races. It is not a peculiar trait of Chinese alone : so it does not explain the predicament of sad sad sad predicament of the MCA president – and by extension predicament of the Malaysian Chinese community as a whole!

    It would take another day to explore the reasons of this predicament. Suffuice to say it is rooted in history. The battle was lost from day one. The British rebuffed Tan Cheng Lock when he presented the General Demands of the Chinese Community to the British. He was barred from attending the final round of talks in London. The MCA was represented Tun H.S. Lee and Tahir Tan Tong Hai. They put economic interests above political rights.

    Because then the forefathers were immigrants looking for economic opportunities in tin and later rubber! The merchant business class occupied the lowest rank in political authority in Confucian values of the place they came from. They didn’t mind playing second fiddle as long as playing second fiddle they could effect an “economic by-pass”. They could not figure out in their mind how they were entitled to equal political power sharing. To them a Confucian leader lorded over all. Which is/was practical in Singapore as practiced by LKY in Chinese majority but hardly so North of Causeway. So if one could not be No. I the thinking (then) went that one be content with subservient no. 2 or even 3 as long as there were compensations from the indirect by pass to power based on exchange of economic interest/cultural identity from preserving Chinese schools for political power to the other side.

    Later generations of Chinese born and bred here have not immigrant/economic mentality of this exchange forged by their forefathers and therefore viewed MCA as icon of betrayal.

    Hence support immediately was fragmented and went to Gerakan and DAP. The rejection by Chinese of MCA and fragmentation of Chinese between 3 parties – MCA, Gerakan and DAP – of course meant division, no unity and greater marginalisation because MCA could speak with even softer voice.

    Sad, sad and sad – if you say it is OKT, then OKT is a sad symbol of the collective Chinese predicament here due to a combination of factors, principally historical, and the other part a basic confusion about confucian notion of political authority!

  23. #23 by Godfather on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 8:40 am

    chengho, do you know what a eunuch is ? Or maybe your UMNO masters never taught you properly….

  24. #24 by Bigjoe on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 8:50 am

    Well, put it another way, if/when Mukhriz or Khir Toyo takes over the Ministry of Education, you think you get even 1 classroom and any promises fufilled? Dream on!!!!

  25. #25 by taiking on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 9:06 am

    Next time hoh if you want hoh 30 classrooms hoh you better ask 40. If they discount hoh then you can still on target maa. Like dat orso dont know ah?

    I stupid but not so stupid.

  26. #26 by Toyol on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 9:09 am

    BN component party power sharing formula is nonsense. We all know that MCA, MIC and the rest are just stooges to UMNO. MCA professes to champion the for Chinese rights when in fact they are actually begging for Chinese rights…same as MIC. Its consistent with UMNO racial rhetoric and racists chants. Only the inner circle gets the flesh…the rests have to settle for bones..if any!

    Fact is under BN, all other races are marginalised.

  27. #27 by DAP man on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 9:18 am

    MCA leaders are what I call, BN eunuchs. There is no better way to describe them.
    MCA IS the government, yet it has to plead with the government for favours.
    The party is completely impotent.

  28. #28 by k1980 on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 9:24 am

    si kin nah Ka Ting, just donate a couple of million ringgit from your kitty to build the 6 classrooms. Chicken feed for you only. So easy also dunno to do. Gong kau kau eh lang.

  29. #29 by MyPeoplePower on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 9:30 am

    This garbarge still around kah?

    Sad for the Chinese!

  30. #30 by pakualakurau on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 9:56 am

    Ex-MCA prsident got no balls lah. The present MCA president only know how to talk. Hishamuddin completed 24 classes in kulai srjkc2 is consider given face to ex-mca. He should not has ask more. There is no future for MCA. I would propose Ong KT to talk to PR to build more srjkc/srjct/sra.

  31. #31 by wanderer on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 11:25 am


    Hey Eunuch, go and teach your ex-president how to count from 1 to 30. Don’t waste your time here. Now piss off!

  32. #32 by Godfather on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 12:28 pm

    The eunuch is most likely an UNMOputra trying very hard to masquerade as a Chinese. His attempts to divert our attention to Singapore and his constant harping of nepotism amongst the PR parties suggest that he has deep paranoia of the successes of the Chinese. Besides, his English is so poor that it is quite likely he doesn’t understand what’s been written here.

  33. #33 by wanderer on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 1:21 pm

    Godfather, this eunuch is suffering from inferiority complex lah.
    Don’t depend on handouts how to survive. PR comes in, this immoral beggar have to emigrate with the UMNO scums as shoe shine boy.

  34. #34 by alikim on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 1:22 pm

    What else can MCA do as a component party?

    In Practice, they “Beg and Pick up whatever is given”. That’s all they can do.

  35. #35 by ShiokGuy on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 3:46 pm

    When you are “Walk Dog”, why should the master feed you once you are useless?

    Shiok Guy

  36. #36 by frankyapp on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 4:24 pm

    You guys should know that umno is dirty to the core,no one or new dirt cleaner in the world let alone in malaysia can help clean it up. All these talks by the big boys or top boys to tidy up umno is just rhetoric and useless. Umno is liken to an iron rod which is dip in a sh*t tank for ages,even if you can take it out of the tank,it will just loose and drop like a sand dome. The only cleaner to rid umno into thin air is the rakyat.

  37. #37 by winc on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 6:33 pm

    chengho Says:

    Today at 08: 15.03 (10 hours ago)
    Old men story ,that why the old men of Pakatan will never retire ,Hadi , Nik aziz , Karpal and Kit your turn man, let the younger group take over…


    wonder why you are still around listening to “old story”, complaining and still listening… what a boy…

  38. #38 by boh-liao on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 6:37 pm

    In the animal kingdom, there is male dominance hierarchy. We can easily see the behavior of weaker male primates towards a dominant male primate in a tribe or pack. Sometimes, for survival, the weaker male primates will behave like females and offer their backside to the dominant male to enjoy and copulate. Animal ethology is a fascinating field of study, more so in 2009 as we celebrate the bicentennial of the birth of Charles Darwin (1809–1882).

    We don’t have to go to the jungles to observe male dominance hierarchy. Just look at how BN politicians behave and we will get the idea of how dominant males treat their weaker male creatures.

  39. #39 by ktteokt on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 6:48 pm

    Ong Ka Ting crying over spilt milk? What is the point? He couldn’t even do anything during his term as MCA President, who is he now? Not even made a NUT (sorry spelt backwards, TUN)!

  40. #40 by Jong on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 6:58 pm

    LOL !!! Ong Kah Ting need not have to come all the way to Parliament. Could it be that his phone calls to that Krisman had gone unanswered?

    Hahaha! why should Krishammuddin bother for him anymore, he has outlived his shelf-life and the community he claimed to have representated have rejected him and his MCA!

  41. #41 by ALtPJK on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 8:39 pm

    YB Lim KS

    It can only be attributed to your many years of experience in Parliament that you were able to remain stoically detached in the midst of the OngKaTing debacle in Parliament, save your matter-of-factly ‘SAD, Sad, sad’ title to this thread when this farce just cannot escape from being the butt of many a ridicule.

    How can KaTing’s courage and determination ever be compared to that of their pioneering fathers (even at the latter’s expense of being barred from talks with the British)? While the latter were willing to present the needs of their community squarely on the discussion table, one would be hard-pressed to suggest parity for the former.

    MCA presidents have come and gone but none as glaringly doltish as the current ones. At best, we can describe them as mere pebbles in Hishammuddin’s shoes.

  42. #42 by katdog on Friday, 20 March 2009 - 10:43 pm

    “Later generations of Chinese born and bred here have not immigrant/economic mentality of this exchange forged by their forefathers and therefore viewed MCA as icon of betrayal” – Jeffrey.

    i would offer a different view political rights were never sacrificed for economic rights. Instead what happened was, economic concessions in education and business and public services were offered in return for equal rights. It was only later in the late 60’s and 70’s that certain individuals started suggesting that there were no equal rights when in truth, what was offered was limited special priviledges in return for equal rights.

    Over the years the proponents of ‘The Social Contract’ like the immigrant, Dr. M has rewritten history.

    No, the image you paint of the independence negotiations is only what the UMNOputra’s want you to believe: That UMNO was the leader and the one spearheading and fighting for independant Malaya and that MCA ‘joined’ UMNO’s struggles in order to wrangle out concessions for the chinese community.

    Fact is, leaders like Tan Cheng Lock had long pressed for independence even before UMNO was formed due to growing chinese nationalism (similar to what we could see happening at the same period in Singapore). But unlike Singapore, independance could only be achieved by working with the Malays. Thus negotiations were held for the purpose of securing EQUAL rights.

    Consider these:
    The British themselves were pushing for equal rights for all. Do you think they would have allowed Malaya to have independence without equal rights?

    Secondly, non-Malay’s formed 45% of the population of Malaya then. If the non Malay’s had refused to participate, do you think Malaya could have gotten Independence?

  43. #43 by Jeffrey on Saturday, 21 March 2009 - 1:58 am

    It is apparent that Katdog (posting yesterday at 22: 43.17)
    and I have a different reading of our early history.

    I agree that Chinese population then was substantial, forming 45% or maybe even more. I also agree that majority of them, even then, wanted equality if they could have it. However UMNO leaders then would not allow it.

    And substantial Chinese population then was not translatable to substantial political leverage because (1) they were represented by their community leaders (like Tan Cheng Lock, Tan Siew Sin and HS Lee) within MCA drawn from the pro Kuomintang merchant Chinese educated faction, the English speaking Baba faction known as Straits Chinese British Association and Chinese educationist Dong Jiao Zong who were inclined to accommodate UMNO leaders for so long their commercial interest and chinese education agenda were accommodated and (2) not all 45% were entitled to citizenship or voting rights, in fact only a small proportion thereof (3) British slant to support UMNO’s demands.

    Of the so called British slant in (3) it may be explained: British were afraid that the Chinese community – if given equal rights/political power then – would have Sino Centric outlook with loyalties leaning towards China, then in the early days of take over of China by Communists led by Mao.

    British then supported UMNO demands for first amongst equal status on 3 issues: position of Malay rulers, Islam as official religion of the Federation and Article 153 on Malay Special Privileges. This is the Ketuanan so called embedded in early Social Contract.

    MCA conceded to this Ketuanan for as long as (i) citizenship, though restricted, would at least be granted on Jus Soli basis (determined by birth in malayan soil) (ii) right to promote Chinese education and (iii) Special Privileges did not curtail Chinese rights to trade and commerce.

    There was a Chinese faction that unlike MCA wanted more equality. It was called Council of Registered Chinese Guilds and Association led by one Chinese educated merchant by the name of Lau Pak Khuan. It sought equal citizenship and Mandarin having equal status as also the other Official language of Federation.

    UMNO would not have anything to do with it; equally the case of the British who wanted the Chinese to be politically a notch weaker (in fear of competition of loyalties leaning towards the Malayan Communist party here & Chinese Communist in China). Both UMNO & British favoured MCA precisely because MCA was accomodative towards UMNO’s demands of “Ketuanan” in the sense above and shunned leanings towards the “motherland”.

    Katdog & I however are congruent in our common perception that Tun Dr Mahathir subsequently gave a more radical interpretation to the so called “Social Contract” when he was in power.

  44. #44 by grace on Saturday, 21 March 2009 - 8:29 am

    Aiya, anything that MCA or Gerakan do are pure Sandiwara!
    Look at how MCA question the charges against Karpal! Do you think they were sincere aa? Before GE they would not be bothered to make any comments. Now OKT came to parliament to make some ‘noise’ so that the public would perceive that he is championing Chinese Edn.
    Don’t be taken in by them

  45. #45 by sotong on Saturday, 21 March 2009 - 9:40 am

    I would not be too concern about ” Ketuanan ” or ” special rights ” constantly used by irresponsible leader/s with narrow, outdated, divisive and damaging political objectives.

    Going forward…increasing political awareness of non Malays is important to protect their interests and their motherland.

  46. #46 by ktteokt on Saturday, 21 March 2009 - 10:07 am

    Not having been conferred a TUN (an inverted NUT) like Ling Liong Sik, OKT is destined to remain as a DATUK (Gong-gong, meaning EUNUCH)!

  47. #47 by shamshul anuar on Saturday, 21 March 2009 - 12:34 pm

    Dear Jefrey,

    Do not forget the sort of bargaining between leaders before independence. Non Malays were granted citizenship. In return, basic structures of old Malaya are recognised. It means Bahasa Melayu becomes the official language.

    It is a fair trade-off. If you ( or some politicians from Jurassic age who are bancrupt of ideas ) want to change that, then be prepared that your rights also be questionned. There is nothing racial here. Million of Chinese are American citizens but Mandarin is not the official language.

    Some concession can be given but only idiots will agree to that suggestion makinh Mandarin as official language. Accept reality of the situation.

    Remember the word “Malay’ is mentioned 54 times in Constitution . But no word “Chinese or Indian” were mentioned in the Constitution. Why? Not because British loves Malays. It is because they recognises that when they came here, the land already has recognised structures in the form of systematic governments.

    Every race, be Chinese or Malay or Indians have rights here. Protect your right but do not question malay rights or else your right will also be questioned.

  48. #48 by lopez on Saturday, 21 March 2009 - 8:54 pm

    giving audience to blind persons is not neccessary

    thousands of years history taught many things …..and tells there is no start and no end…vice versa

    repaying responsibility to tung pao is seriously choking many ham see hair crooks and it takes more then getting return of a few classrooms.

    btw can we have of a look of the consensus records that says your club represent who you were told to represent.

  49. #49 by shamshul anuar on Sunday, 22 March 2009 - 12:15 am

    DEar Toyol,

    The power sharing in BN is real with UMNO as the leading party. It is the dominant party and accorded respect as the dominant partner. It does not cry out loud wanting to be dominant. It earns its dominance through election. You know election, I am pretty sure about that.

    If it wants to take all, many of MCA leaders will be wiped out. Sound arrogant but that is the truth. Problem affecting Chinese community is that they tolerate rubbish from DAP that poisons their mind by saying any alliance with Malay party, namely UMNO, will threaten the interests of the Chinese.

    UMNO protects the interests of the Malays but also respect the wishes of the Chinese. If it follows PAS ideology, almost all pig farms would be closed. After all, it has its valid reason to close. Even singapore does not have any pig farm. And the majority of Singaporean is Chinese.

    There is no need to embarass in protecting the interest of your race. It is not racism. As for Constitution, it guarantees the right of every races. Independence change status of Chinese from being immigrants to citizens, courtesy of Malay Rulers and of course UMNO. In return, considering that this country is originally Malay land, recognition is accorded to Bahasa Melayu as official language.

    Exactly what right of Chinese that is not “taken care” of currently.

  50. #50 by Jeffrey on Sunday, 22 March 2009 - 7:36 am

    Dear shamshul anuar,

    You’re talking of a different thing here. As I understand you here you’re talking about the “Social Contract” forged during independence between the different communities, and how that contract should be binding on latter generations and why that contract ought not be changed without consequences of the communities beginning to question each’s rights.

    Now many here and I too would have an opinion on the “Social Contract” that may not be congruent with your take but that is not the matter under discussion or argument here.

    What is discussed – and argued – here so far is not so much of what is the Social Contract but something condition precedent: before forging any contract between communities, there must be those community leaders who purport to represent and speak on behalf of their community in negotitation of the contract.

    Here we’re talking about the various community leaders purportedly representing their community interests in the pre-independence negotiations and talks.

    We are discussing whether there is legitimacy in the then MCA holding the claim that they really truely represented the broad interests of the constitutency that they said they represented.

    We’re discussing whether they (the community leaders then) were justified or wise to concentrate only on imperatives like citizenship, granted on Jus Soli basis and right to preserve cultural identity via promotion of Chinese education and freedom to engage in commerce in trade off against other political imperatives insisted upon by UMNO. We speculated that the Chinese community then were not really on all fours with what their community leaders prioritised in negotiations of the “Social Contract” and why that perhaps explained the reason for MCA not being able to garner for itself exclusive Chinese support until present day, even after half a century.

    We also discussed by oblique reference of how the community leaders within MCA then (Tan Cheng Lock, Tan Siew Sin and HS Lee) might not represent fully their community interests in the pre-independence negotiations and talks by reason of contraints arising from the position taken by the colonial masters, the British, as affected by international geopolitical developments in China. Likewise we compare present day MCA leaders like ex president OKT as not very different from MCA leaders then in being perceived as not being entirely legitimate in their claim to be representative of their constitutents’ interests….

    In short, we discussed the merits/demerits of credentials of those who held out that they represented their communities when negotiating the “Social Contract” during pre-independence time rather than the merits or demerits of the Social Contract itself – then as well as present in the light of changing realities – that you introduced as a subject in your last post. When I say “we”, it is a reference to the exchange between Katdog and I.

  51. #51 by sotong on Sunday, 22 March 2009 - 8:04 am

    As every race fights for their own rights, irrespective of how their rights are interpreted in the Constitution, our country is in such a mess.

    The spirit of independent is more than what is being said in the Constitution – to solely rely on a piece of paper to run a multi racial and religious country is absurd!

  52. #52 by shamshul anuar on Wednesday, 25 March 2009 - 11:14 pm

    Dear Jeffrey,

    Thanks for the reply. I understand your point. You are pondering on whether MCA then had authority to represent the Chinese.

    Constitution was drafted, redrafted, refines after receiving various inputs from political parties, prominent personalities, community leaders, Malay Rulers, etc.

    It was a heavy task, balancing aspirations and wishes of different communities. British recognises the various aspects and it also acknowledged that when it came to Malay states, these states were then sovereign states complete with administrative system.

    My point is that history makes Malaysia as it is. Any intention to manipulate the situation like what commonly did by DAP will only invite response from the Malays.

    It means if Malays perceive DAP as trying to deny history, they will also question the right of the Chinese. Meaning if DAP is so upset about Malay political supremacy( which what Malay perceive as logical as UMNO wins the election) , then do not be surprise if they question the citizenship of Chinese.

    It is that simple. Perhaps you are not aware that due to tireless campaign by PAS, many Malays already said they will vote Muslim first. Result? Palanivel , Tan Chai Hoe, Fu Ah Kiow, Dr Vasan lost.

    So do enlighten Uncle Lim on his dangerous political game. It can backfire.

You must be logged in to post a comment.