Dr. Mahathir ‘s Priorities are all Wrong!

by Dr. Toh Kin Woon

I refer to the latest posting in Dr. Mahathir’s blog, in which he criticized the non-Malays for asking for more concessions from state policies.

In response to these demands, the current Prime Minister has liberalized rules pertaining to equity ownership in some services’ sub-sectors and promised to set up a scholarship based purely on merit, beginning from next year.

Dr. Mahathir has found all these to be unacceptable, as they are tantamount to the government helping the relatively better off non-Malays taking even more from the relatively poorer Malays.

To substantiate his point, he went on to assert that non-Malays now own around 50% of the share capital while Malays own only 20%, far from the target set in the New Economic Policy of 30%.

I find Dr. Mahathir’s arguments to be objectionable on 3 grounds.

Firstly, quite apart from the accuracy of his statistics on share ownership according to ethnic group, his focus on this particular issue is a case of wrong priority.

We all know, and I am sure Dr. Mahathir himself, too that shares and even properties of high value in urban areas are owned only by a small proportion of the total population.

This is true of all communities, not just in Malaysia, but in countries all over the world, including the USA and Japan. For the bulk of the population, share ownership is far removed and irrelevant to their lives. Their concern is with obtaining a just return to their efforts and labor, i.e. with egalitarianism.

Instead of focusing his concern on how wealth and income can be redistributed from the upper strata of all communities to the lower strata of all ethnic groups, Dr. Mahathir chose instead to concentrate on redistributing wealth from one socio-economic elite group to another.

Precisely because of this misplaced priority, the pattern of wealth and income distribution for the country as a whole, and for the Malays in particular, has gotten worse over the years.

The wholesale adoption of neo-liberal policies, such as the privatization of massive infrastructural projects to cronies; the increasing reliance on indirect taxes, which are regressive, as a source of governmental revenue; and shrinking the role of the state sector as a provider of public goods, has led in part to this rising inequality.

What is worse, and this is my second objection, Dr. Mahathir’s resort to using very strong ethnic underpinnings in his argument may well lead to further ethnic division and contradictions.

I would have thought that as a former Prime Minister of 22 years, he would have made it his utmost priority to promote the core values of socio-economic egalitarianism, inter-ethnic co-operation and communitarian togetherness. It would seem that this is not the case, which is indeed most disappointing.

Finally, Dr. Mahathir, like many others who take the racial approach, has taken the simplistic and unscientific assumption that all communities are monolithic and homogenous in socio-economic terms, when in fact they are far from so.

All the ethnic communities in Malaysia are class stratified. The Malays, as much as the Chinese and the Indians, are all stratified into different income groups, with the rich making up only a small percentage of the total. The bulk of the Chinese, like the bulk of the Malays and the Indians, are relatively poor.

Over the years, these laboring Malaysians have found monetary returns to their labor unable to catch up with the rising cost of living. In real terms, all of them have suffered.

Dr. Mahathir’s thoughts and efforts should be on how governmental policies can be better designed to alleviate their economic sufferings and not resort to pursuing racist arguments in support of one group of the rich elite.

Reorienting his priorities will go a long way towards helping the nation attain equality, social justice and inter-ethnic harmony.

Statement issued by Dr. Toh Kin Woon,
Research Fellow at the Center for Southeast asian Studies,
University of Kyoto and former State Executive Councillor, Penang

  1. #1 by boh-liao on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 6:31 pm

    The mother of talk cork had spoken, his big fat lies.
    Chinese, the real masters of this country. Sheet, that bugger can really lie through his teeth, just like when he said someone self-knocked himself senseless and ended up with a big fat blue-black eye.
    Chinese and other non-Malays cannot even get enrolled into UiTM. Real masters?
    Many Chinese and non-Malays died in custody. Real masters?
    Just see who own all the big companies in Malaysia – from water, highways, electricity, car parks, banks, petroleum, commodities, sewage, newspapers, education, APs, to whatever you can think of.
    Many hard-working Malays are struggling because the greedy self-enriching Umnoputras and their cronies grabbed all and blocked their opportunities to betterment and empowerment.
    Look at Toyol (obviously not Chinese) – within a generation coming from Indonesia, Toyol managed to exploit fullest the Malay opportunities and become a multibillionaire, able to build his own royal palace to remind him of his home sweet home, Bali.
    Sabahans n Sarawakians who support BN are digging their own mass graves.

  2. #2 by boh-liao on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 6:36 pm

    MMK, as usual, has to stir up tribal racist instint to preserve ketuanan Melayu and to enable him, a pseudoM, and his children and cronies to continue to exploit and self-enrich. He should be charged for stirring up racial hatred and disunity in Malaysia.

  3. #3 by All For The Road on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 6:37 pm

    The talk of racism is back!

  4. #4 by yhsiew on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 7:02 pm

    MMK plays the racial card again!

    Now we know why he staunchly opposed Najib’s 1Malaysia. If he agrees with Najib’s 1Malaysia, he will not be able to play the racial card so freely.

  5. #5 by democrate on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 7:03 pm

    Looks like this perverted old Mamak is going to write the second book on the Malay Dilema.The Malay should wake up and not influence by this old wolf who has been agitating the Malays and the non Malays for the last 22 years with his high handed administration. Makmak. He HAD DONE nothing to unify the Malaysian but keep on playing hide and run behind the Malays and the Chinese so ended up with He is a Fisherman enjoying catching a sea shell biting the beak of the king fisher. How dangerous this rascal and there r still many Umno Malays behave like him.

  6. #6 by yhsiew on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 7:32 pm

    MMK got it all wrong.

    Majority of the Malays including those from rural areas could not become rich because of BN’s patronage approach in awarding licenses, contracts, AP etc to only a selected group of elite.

    How could MMK put the blame on the Chinese and make them the scapegoat?

  7. #7 by Godfather on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 7:35 pm

    Mamakthir has an agenda – and that is to make sure his son continues his “vision” of what Bolehland should be. Mamakthir knows he doesn’t have a lot of time left, so he has to “engineer” some discord to take the country to the brink – and then allow his son to do something to save the day.

    The old fox is playing a dangerous game by fanning the flames of racial strife. He might just set the country alight with his desire to do something to benefit his own son.

  8. #8 by Justitia on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 7:50 pm

    I do not think nor do I believe that Mahathir has got his priorities all wrong. I believe he has more sinister motives in twisting the data to make one community the bogeyman and unite and re-direct Malay sentiments against the particular community. What he refuses to recognize is that poverty is race blind. And frankly, for the really poor, share ownership is completely meaningless when one is not sure where the next meal is going to come from. We should have more racial blind policies to really help the poor and needy. Income re-distribution should be from the top earners and we can start with Mahathir’s children and his cronies regardless of race.

  9. #9 by ekompute on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 7:52 pm

    I responded to that post at chedet.co.cc a few hours ago but my comment has either not yet been moderated or else rejected. In it, I said that the term, “Malay”, in Malaysia is an artificial construct, defined by the Constitution to meet some political objectives, i.e. the number of true Malays were far too small. According to the Constitution, therefore, any Malaysians, whether be he a Chinese, Indian, or Mat Salleh, can be a Malay if he complies with the few conditions of embracing Islam, speaking the Malay language habitually, practises the Malay customs (whatever it means, since Malays are beginning to ape the West), etc. The term, “Malays” in Malaysia is not based on biological grouping and there are “Malays” who are of Arab descent, as evident from the “Sheikh” and “Syed” in their names. A Malay who opt out of Islam is no longer a Malay, so what kind of race is that? Further, Parameswara was not a Malay when he first became the Sultan of Melaka because he was then not a Muslim. Notwithstanding, UMNO has not complied with the definition of Malays as defined by the Constitution, although many Malaysians meet those criteria. Just look at some of those PERKIM members. I don’t deny that many mamaks do not qualify as they habitually speak Tamil but what about those who do comply?

  10. #10 by Loh on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 7:58 pm

    ///To substantiate his point, he went on to assert that non-Malays now own around 50% of the share capital while Malays own only 20%, far from the target set in the New Economic Policy of 30%.///– Dr. Toh KW

    The number TDM quoted are no doubt lies. ASLI report of 2006 says it, and EPU has yet to prove ASLI wrong.

    TDM used the 30% as the quota for his cronies. But the very rich Malay tycoons including Daim Zainuddin park their money outside Malaysia, in Africa and around the world. These will not enter the EPU database. The statistics of Malays’ share in local KLSE do not reflect their economic situation like it would be 40 years ago. BN uses the excuse of concocted statistics to perpetuate the unfair regulations, and now TDM adds another dimension on the ancestries of the citizens. Ling Liong Sak would be right if he changed one word, TDM is the greatest liability God has given Malaysia

  11. #11 by ekompute on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 8:02 pm

    Dr Toh says: “To substantiate his point, he went on to assert that non-Malays now own around 50% of the share capital while Malays own only 20%, far from the target set in the New Economic Policy of 30%.”

    Well, well, well… the article, “Mahathir’s Black Eye”, at http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_6991/is_5_25/ai_n28818868/pg_7/ says: “Mahathir’s three sons Mukhriz, Mokhzani and Mirzan, better known in Kuala Lumpur’s corporate circles as ‘the boys’, and his two daughters, Marina and Melinda, are conservatively estimated to be worth at least three billion ringgit.”

    How many non-Malays possess even 1% of that? And with Malays owning only 20% of the share capital, does that also mean that most of the Malays are still not benefiting from the NEP as the bulk of those redistribution has ended up in the pocket of Mahathir’s families and those of his cronies as well as of UMNOputras… no, not bumiputras, but UMNOputras.

  12. #12 by limkamput on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 8:03 pm

    Giving out lots of fart, that is what an old ass would normally do.

  13. #13 by House Victim on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 8:03 pm

    When one is always conscious about Power sharing but not the Rights of the People and the Obligations of the Government, he should excuse himself of not talking before the People!

    Where are the position of States and People in the Constitution? The basic things for a Government is to seek how resources are to be allocated Fairly to meet the average and even improving the living standard of the People. Housing, Transportation, Education, Medical Health, Security and Judiciary, Employment are the basic topics. Did MHT done his jobs? Or, most of them run into the so called NEP that benefit not even the average Malay he had targeted but all the Cronies?

    How many State Properties being scoped into the Laws started by MHT? Toll, Water, Sewage, Road, etc..

    If a Person knows nothing about Shame over BIAS and breach of Duty, there is nothing worth to be called a Man!! Can 30% of Malaysian afford the price of his bakery as basic food?

    Jokes with Tears!!

  14. #14 by a2a on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 8:04 pm

    Here is Tanah Asli (orang asli), please remember that here is ‘TANAH ASLI’.

  15. #15 by alhafar on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 8:17 pm

    What utter rot. Is there anything that comes out of Dr M’s mouth that is not dung? I think no one is fooled these days about who is making the Malays poor, its BN and UMNO. They are making the whole of Malaysia poor. Shame on them. Where does he expect us to believe the billions from PKFZ went?

  16. #16 by jamalmalikslumdog on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 8:26 pm

    The silly old man is breaking wind in public – through his foul mouth.

    All these UMNO picking on the Chinese is making us Muslims looking bad day by day.
    Let me assure the many out there that majority of the Muslims would very much prefer to do away with the NEP.
    The reasons are simple –
    Firstly, the beneficiaries are the cronies. Not us. Secondly, it gives us law abiding Muslims, very low self esteem.
    I will not resort to name calling but he should immediately refrain from trying to discredit others when he was the architect of today’s institutionalised corruption.

  17. #17 by Woof on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 8:55 pm

    “Giving out lots of fart, that is what an old ass would normally do.” limkamput

    So what does that make you? A young fart??

  18. #18 by Onlooker Politics on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 9:12 pm

    Don’t take Dr Mahathir’s words too seriously! He just try to find a way to pour out all his frustrations for being played out by his Tamil Crony ( someone whose ancestors had 4,000 years’ civilization) in a 1,000-acre land cow farm business at Padang Hijau, Batu 13, Jalan Kluang-Mersing, Federal Highway No. 2, Johor. Dr Mahathir has been short-changed for 30% shares in this cow farm.

    The Chinese ancestors had 5,000 years’ civilization. Therefore Dr Mahathir did not target the Chinese Malaysians for the verbal attack when he mentioned the targetted group as the ethnic group which had 4,000 years’ civilization.

  19. #19 by ekompute on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 9:18 pm

    Justitia says: “Income re-distribution should be from the top earners and we can start with Mahathir’s children and his cronies regardless of race.”

    Yes, I agree with Justitia and this is far, far easier for Mahathir to do. Since the Malays have yet to achieve its 30% even though Mahathir had been ruling for 22 years (and NEP is supposed to be for only 20 years so he had even exceeded the time frame by 10%, never mind the time before his rule) and the economy is now in bad shape, how about redistributing the billions that he has accumulated during his 22 years of pubic service so that the average Malay in the streets can benefit instantly. Alternatively, set up a Mahathir Foundation to help the Malays who are in dire need of help, if he cannot see beyond skin color. Bring his family wealth in line with the average Malay in Malaysia… not way, way above! He is far, far richer than the bulk of the non-Malays whom he is condemning. By all means, go and attack the likes of Robert Kuok and Toon Ling Liong Sik whose then 29-year old son could afford to buy two public companies at one go for, was it, RM1.2 billion?

  20. #20 by limkamput on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 9:58 pm

    This old fart has forgotten that during the last 50 years, it was UMNO that was in power. May I ask who was PM, DPM, Ministers for Finance, Rural Development, Agriculture, MITI and Domestic Trade? Who was in control of all GLCs including Petronas. Where did all the money and all the bumi assistance policies and programmes go? How come after 50 years, the Malays remain poor as you claimed. Government programmes and policies must have benefited someone. So who were the recipients of all the largesse of the government? The Old far now acts racist and stupid.

  21. #21 by novice101 on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 - 10:21 pm

    This is one of Mahathir’s ploys. He has certainly a motive and it is to launch an attack on Najid. But he realises his influence and support in UMNO is not what it used to be. So, to win himself more support, to consolidate his position he has to whip up support first. What is the fastest , the easiest and the most handy means .. it is to use the Chinese as his ‘whipping boy’! He must first make himself out to be the ‘Champion’ of the Malays.

    In his eagerness he slaps himself in the face. He claims ‘”those who lived in high-end housing estates were mostly non-Malays, while “… a significant number of Malays lived in squatter houses.” He forgets he was the longest serving PM of Malaysia … serving a total of 22 years. Is he telling us this is the legacy he has left for the Malays?

  22. #22 by Woof on Wednesday, 22 July 2009 - 8:43 am

    “Precisely because of this misplaced priority, the pattern of wealth and income distribution for the country as a whole, and for the Malays in particular, has gotten worse over the years.”

    Absolute rubbish.

    Why are we frightened to say it out loud that generally the standard of living of working Malays has in fact benefited from policies such as the so-called New Economic Policy. In the first place there’s nothing new about the New Economic Policy. It was re-packaged and given a new name and a new feel to it. It was known then by its generic name ‘special Malay privileges’.

    Why are we afraid to admit the truth and say it like it is. For fear that non-Malays would be profiled as anti-Malay?

  23. #23 by Loh on Wednesday, 22 July 2009 - 10:51 am

    Mahathir tries hard to deny that he is a racist. He is Malayali, a race found mainly in Kerela, India; but he claims that he had 100% Malay blood running in his veins. He is seen to be fighting for Malays right, after severing his root from his ancestor. So, he has no love for Malayali, but said to love Malay. He is therefore worst than racist; he is an opportunist using race to benefit himself. He is an egomaniac scheming only for his egoism, to enrich his families. He got himself accepted as mercenary for Malays who have been happy to gain unfair advantage through him. What have been unbeknown to Malays were that Mahathir decided his own rewards while the Malay community have to bear the indignity of not gaining the pride sooner, as cherished by the late Tun Ismail.

    Malaysia is the only country in the world which gives different rights to different immigrants, the NEWMalays coming through Sabah on project M are bumiputras while those born in the country are said to be linked to the motherland still remain second class. Yet a person who was once PM of Malaysia for 22 years would declare his adherence to a policy which goes against the constitution which he is duty bound to uphold.

    Article 8 of the Federal constitution states:
    (1) All persons are equal before the law and entitled to equal protection of the law.
    (2) Except as expressly authorised by the constitution, there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the ground only of religion, race, descent, place of birth or gender….

    The authorised discrimination relates to quotas where reasonable proportion was to be reserved for Malays [like protecting the endangered species]. Mahathir chooses his interpretation to discriminate based on race and religion.

    He is a liability to the country. We only hope that Anwar would become PM, if only for Mahathir to emigrate from this country.

  24. #24 by donng55 on Wednesday, 22 July 2009 - 2:32 pm

    In the ruling zeitgeist of the Mahathir era, the Orwellian reductio ad Mahathirum of racial equal opportunity was the octopus of turning the Malays into rich Towkays’ drivers.

    He must be reminded that his race-based national policies were the world egg from which all the racial mistrusts and hatreds in the country were hatched, and the fons et origo, the source and origin, of abuses of executive power and corruptions at high places.

    “Because of the refusal of the descendants of migrants from China and India to be assimilated by the indigenous people we have to accept the retention of the identity of M’sian citizens of Chinese and Indian origin. The people of Indonesian origin chose to be assimilated by the indigenous people, so they don’t constitute a separate entity,” he said. (“Multi-racial Malaysia” by Mahathir, 3 June 2008.)

    His statement above is posited on the premise that once fully assimilated the non-Malays would not, like under the Mosaic code, be treated as the proselytes of the gate, and would be well received as the proselytes of Righteousness.

    Really? After having subjected the non-Malays to his fixed Procrustean method of race assimilation by way of NEP for decades?

    Forget it not that the record on which he judged and treated others is the record on which history will judge and treat him tomorrow.

  25. #25 by phat on Wednesday, 22 July 2009 - 3:12 pm

    Mamakthir shd be charged under ISA now for his racist game again. He shd return atleast 50% of his wealth to the govt. if he really cares for the Malays. He believes he can always cheat the Malay race and make them stupid by claiming he’s one of them. He’s failing in his games now…because many Malays have opened their eyes and freed themselves frm his magic spell dramas.

  26. #26 by Taxidriver on Wednesday, 22 July 2009 - 5:02 pm

    You all need to ignore this Indian-Malay. His old sickness is acting-up again. Someone must remind him to take his medication regularly.

  27. #27 by johnnypok on Thursday, 23 July 2009 - 6:21 pm

    “Makin tua makin bodoh, eh?” Tak lama akan jumpa Altantuya, Kugan dan Teo Beng Hock.

    His blood-group is “BATU API”

  28. #28 by Loh on Thursday, 23 July 2009 - 7:04 pm

    The 30% corporate share equity reserved for 60% of the population, or 15 million Malays would be owned by 15 families on behalf of Malays. These families have been chosen by Mahathir. That is why Mahathir fights for Malays when he is a mamak of Malayali descent, doubled up as NEWMalay allowed by article 160 of the constitution

  29. #29 by Loh on Friday, 24 July 2009 - 11:29 am

    The figure quoted by Mahathir has no statistical basis because the government department of statistics could not have conducted a study on the topic; it is not relevant to economic studies. Mahathir tried to divide the country by Malays and non-Malays, and he uses the term bumiputras versus non-bumiputras. The most expensive neighbourhood in Kuala Limpur is the Kenny Hill areas where Najib has his residence, and he is surrounded by very rich people, Malays or non-Malays. Poor non-Malays are also residing in rural areas as much as Malays. There is no way to value small orchard plantations owned by Malays, an eqivalent environment where very rich tycoons in Hong Kong might be able to afford there.

    The value of residence lies in its value to the residents, and its resale value. Certainly those who own dwellings on loan have the pay interest on them, the higher the value, the more it costs them to live in. We do not know the percentage of the owners of properties in the urban areas who have not fully paid up the loans; it would be high. We know that properties in urban areas are created on the former rural areas, and as with all new properties they are mortgaged. One wonders how much the net-equity, or sometimes negative equity remains held by owners of properties in urban areas. The prices of properties are what people are willing to pay. The recent subprime problem in USA is because property prices went down. That can happen easily if there is social unrest. Was it the intention of Mahathir to bring down prices in urban areas so that that ratio would look good?

    Even the ratio Mahathir said was true about the value of properties in urban rural divides, it cannot be true in racial divide. In Hong Kong where 95% of the population are Chinese, there are certainly difference between the rich and the not-so rich Chinese. Would Mahathir suggest that there should be fights in Hong Kong to have equitable distribution; so that all becomes poor? Would Mahathir say that it was not a problem because they belong to one race? Why then should it be a problem in Malaysia just because government classify the people into bumiputras and non-bumiputras, as though they no longer possess full human intelligence.

    For a person who talked about 2020 vision of Bangsa Malaysa to talk now about the value of houses, sum the value up by race, and to claim that Malays are marginalised because of the value on the property, he must have good reason. That reason is to cause trouble in the country so that he might make a political come back through his son.

    The government banned discussion of sensitive issue because it is easy to arouse emotion of those who choose not to reason with their head, and to blindly follow the leaders. The topic raised by Mahathir shows that on casual reading he seems to make sense, but on further thought regarding its relevance to people leading their life in a modern world under the rule of law, unlike in the past where collective brute forces are needed to ensure self defence, it amounts to senseless jealousy that hardly has an relevance on a personal basis. Yet it would be difficult to get the ordinary people to analyse rationally the issue before they are clouded with emotions. But unless the matter is discussed publicly the taboo remains, and the people would never be able to rise above the susceptibility to indoctrination; a racial one is worse since good ethic values are forgotten. It would be easy for public figure to garner support on nebulous issues for political gains. The following questions would help:

    What does it matter if the person who is exceedingly rich does not belong to one’s own race?

    Why does it matter whether the Prime Minister belongs to the same race, if he is fair to all races?

    What good if the Prime Minister belongs to one’s race if he is corrupt, and serves only his interest?

    What does it matter if the sum total of the equity shares added up for one race amounts to certain level when one does not benefit from such ownership?

    What relevance is the statistics summed up by race, when the race does not belong to something which one could feel real affiliation? For example, is the definition of race under Article 160 has any meaning when an Arab, Turks, Tunisian, Malayali from Kerela of India are called Malay when they practice Islamic religion?

    What does it matter to a person if one among his “race” is successful if he does not, even if success is considered important to himself?

    When 100 families among the Malays and NEWMalays owned 90% of the said to be short of 30% equity capital, what good is to the ordinary Malays if the same 100 families and their friends owned more, and be officially known to be equal to the official target of 30%?

  30. #30 by Loh on Friday, 24 July 2009 - 11:32 am

    The comments given in #29 above relates to the following paragraph in Kaki dalam Kasut by Mahathir

    ///8. Nilai harta milik bumiputra pula berjumlah 15% sedangkan yang baki dimiliki oleh bukan bumiputra disebabkan harta di bandar bernilai lebih tinggi dari di luar bandar.///– Mahathir

  31. #31 by Loh on Friday, 24 July 2009 - 2:16 pm

    ///9. Tokoh bukan Melayu yang cuba duduki tempat Melayu (in the shoes of the Malays) jika ikhlas, akan rasa kekecewaan Melayu melihat hampir semua perniagaan dan perusahaan serta kekayaan yang diperolehi darinya dimiliki oleh bukan Melayu. Segala estet rumah mewah juga diduduki oleh bukan Melayu. Sikit benar orang Melayu yang tinggal di estat mewah ini. Lebih ramai yang tinggal di kawasan setinggan.///– Mahathir

    The non-Malays believe in Karma; you sow what you harvest. They believe that people are free to set agenda for their life. If they would like to succeed in any endeavour, they work for it. They welcome good opportunities, but they do not gang up to bully others so that they gain advantage with the strength of numbers. Non-Malays believe do not unto others what you do not want others to do unto you. We have a mind which we cannot see the sufferings of others. We feel that those who are poor and downtrodden should be helped; in the modern political language, there should exist a social safety net. We believe that the government has a duty to help the poor satisfy their needs, but the government should not work to satisfy the unsatiable desires which had been made possible through NEP, by contining with the perverted programmes which deviated from the original objectives.

    When we possess the commiserating mind to help the hapeless, we would admire people who have achieved success, in spiritual or material sense. When we see rich Malays, we would like to follow their examples of becoming rich, bound by adherance to basic values of ethic and civility. We are motivated by examples of success, but not become jealous of their good tidings, and much less work to dismantle others’ good tidings out of jealousy.

    Iado said, in William Shakespeare Othello:

    “ Poor and content is rich, and rich enough
    But riches fineless is as poor as winter
    To him that ever fears he shall be poor.
    Good heaven, the souls of all my tribe defend
    From Jealousy”

    Mahathir, a prime minister of Malaysia for 22 years, promotes jealousy. And worse he promotes jealousy based on racial ground. He does it as a racial mercenary for gains, because he is ethnically based on blood flowing in his veins a Malayali originated from Kerela of India, and he is only trying to arouse the support of Malays for himself, and his son later to flesh out his dream of Malayali political dynasty in Malaysia.

  32. #32 by Loh on Friday, 24 July 2009 - 2:18 pm

    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    ///6. Kerana mereka rela berkongsi negara mereka dengan kaum lain, kaum yang berasal dari tamadun yang lebih tua (4,000 tahun) dan lebih berjaya, hari ini yang sedikit yang ada pada mereka pun hendak dipisah dari mereka./// -TDM

    TDM is using the modern Malayain government adminstration to project backwards as though there were Malay’s immigration control when non-Ornag Asli came to Malaysiam shores, to impute the sentiment of sharing of the nation by the natives and the immigrants. He is looking at the racial composition in Malaysia and wishes that it could have been completely a Malay country; how then would he as a Malayali belong? If he cared to go back to the pre-independence day when he was still listed as Mahathir s/o Kutty, Indian, in his student days, he would have noted that half the population in the country belongs to non-Malay residents, and they were all British subjects. Obviously whether the Malays liked it or not for immigrants to come into Malaya during british watch, there was nothing the Malays could do about it. It was not right to claim that the Malays had sacrificed for the incoming of immigrants, as though they did involved in the decision. TDM could blame the British for changing the face of Malaya, but then if not for the British, his grandfather would not be in Malaya, and we would be celebrating today. It should also be noted that the four northen states of Peninsular Malaysia were ceded by Siam to the British.

    When one talks about the past, one should chose the period which are relevant to the issue. The issue today should be after gaining independence from the British, has the government honour the promise made between the leaders of the community who together extracted agreement from the British for independence, and that they agree to live by the constitution of independent Malaya.

    It is simplistic to say that the Malays had to share the country with community which have longer history in civilization. It would not be correct to refer to the true natives, the Orang Asli, because one cannot claim that they belong to a new group of people who had recently evolved from apes. It would certainly be wrong to talk about the earlier migrants who could have evolved from around the south east Asian region, including those from Arab, and middle which had history dates back as long as any other civilisations in the world. It is a myth to say that the malays are native, who had just been evoled from apes recently, as TDM implied. It was worng to claim that the local residents were sharing what they have with the newer migrants, as if they were limited land mass for them to make their living. The later migrants came in and developed the place together, under the government of the British. They did not take away the land,

    It is ironical that for the person to claim a right to a place when his ancestor was not even here. TDM is trying to promote discussion which would contribute more to dividing the people rather than uniting them. He is a clear case of a descendent from a 4000 old civilization from Kerela, India. And he is trying to mislead those who he thought had recently evolved from the apes.

  33. #33 by Loh on Friday, 24 July 2009 - 2:19 pm

    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    ///7. Fikirkan hanya berkenaan Dasar Ekonomi Baru (DEB). Agihan kekayaan korporat dalam DEB ialah sebanyak 30% bagi bumiputra (walaupun mereka adalah 60% dari penduduk) dan 40% bagi kaum lain serta 30% bagi orang luar. Tetapi setelah diusahakan selama 39 tahun bahagian yang terdapat bagi mereka ialah 20%, sedangkan yang terdapat bagi kaum lain ialah hampir 50%, walaupun mereka hanya 26% dari jumlah penduduk.///– Mahathir

    It was never the objective of the NEP to nationalise wealth in the country and distribute them in the proportion as Mahathir tries to imply as if the Malays have been short-changed. The 30% was a target of Malays participation in the business sector. Particiaption in the business sector is nebulous concept , and there was no direct statitical indicator to quantify such participation; since it could be labour, management or capital. The EPU in the 1970s decided to use the share of corporate equity owned by Malays as a proxy for Malays’ participation in the business sector. It is now taken as a measure of wealth owned by Malays in Malaysia. Certainly mega land holdings such as FELDA which was run on a pure corporate basis should have been included in the EPU statistics as part of the 30% has not been included.

    Tun Razak’s government established government investment corporations to participate in business, and the government intended to hold them in trust for Malays, and the equity shares would be sold to Malays when they were able to own them. It was no yet a transfer of government funds directly into the pockets of Malays.

    Soon after Mahathir became PM in 1981, he declared that NEP would have been a success if he could make a Malay millionaire. Mahathir introduced the negotiated tender for governemnt projects and procurements in place of public tender which had been the norm since 1957. We know that Mahathirs had made many Malay billionaires, and his sons and daughters are among the wealthy “Malays”. Najib announced recently that RM 54 billion worth of equity share in the corporate sector had been allocated to Malays since NEP, and at a discount under the aegis of FIC, but only RM 2 billion worth of the share remains in Malay hands. RM 52 billion have been cashed out by Malays, and if they chose to invest their funds overseas or held them in other forms of assets, the non-Malays cannot be held responsible when the share of corportate equity held by Malays in the country fall below the 30% , which they had owned, had they kept them. No body can have the cake and eat it. The government chose not to insist that Malays hold on to their shares, and keep their money in the country, it cannot hold non-Malays responsibile to ensure that Malays have 30% to show.

    The NEP was promised by Tun Razak to be in operation for 20 years, at the whims and fancy of UMNO leaders, and now Mahathir said that despite having NEP run for 39 years, the objective had not been met. The truth was the 30% had been met in 1990, but Mahathir chose to rename it as NDP but continued with the discriminating policy. Even now, the share of corporate ownership held by Malays, despite the sell off, was more than 30% according to ASLI’s report issued in 2006. The government has not honoured its commitment to prove ASLI wrong, more than two years after it announced its intention to do so. Mahathir seems to blame non-Malays that NEP had to be implemented for 39 years instead of 20 years. When UMNO steps on your feet, you are blamed for having your feet at the wrong place. How arrogant is UMNO, and Mahathir is its worst example.

    At the time of independence in 1957, the proportion of non-Malays in Malaya was closed to 50%. Since NEP from 1970, two million non-Malays emigrated because of the discriminatory basis the policy was implemented. The non-violence ethnic cleansing was quite successful, especially with project M in sabah which have brought in more than a million Muslims who have since become bumiputras and bosses of Sabah. Yes, non-Malay population is decreasing.

    The original intention of NEP was to have Malays participate in the business sector. Mahathir consider NEP as a licence distribute wealth built by the efforts of others through government sanctioned robbery. Yet he complained that the non-Malays still owned more than their population share. Why did he not comment about the percentage of foreigners in local population against their percentage share? Only non-Malay Malaysians are susceptable to governement bully, not the foreigners who have strong governments behind them.

  34. #34 by Loh on Friday, 24 July 2009 - 2:46 pm

    ///10. Mungkin semua ini disebabkan kesalahan orang Melayu sendiri. Mereka tidak guna peluang yang disediakan bagi mereka. Ada yang salahguna peluang-peluang ini pun. Tetapi jika seorang pengayuh beca diberi sejuta Ringgit, apakah ia akan dapat berniaga dan berjaya dalam bidang ini./// — Mahathir

    If the Beca driver is given a million dollar, he should be very happy with the windfall. He could be able to purchase what he could not before because of lack of funds, and now, he would be able to satisfy his little desires, which might not be a need, else he was suffering from wanting. Interestingly it is the person who were able to manupulate state funds as his own to talk about giving money to persons as experiment.

    Why should a Beca driver choose an occupation which he was not familiar with? More importantly why should a Beca driver change his job just because he had the money? An artisan is able to perfect his skill because he loves his job. Man are brought to this world, and it is for him to choose how he wants to lead his life. It is bad to look down on jobs performed by others as ‘low class’. If there is no demand, the occupation would not exist. It is most unbecoming of any person to utilse the service of others and yet look down upon what others do. It is as though people who lead in those lowly occupations should not live. It is a disaster if the leader or once a leader of a country would declare that certain occupations are not dignified, like the example of Beca in this case.

  35. #35 by Loh on Friday, 24 July 2009 - 4:05 pm

    ///12. Lihat sahaja sejarah perjuangan Melayu. Pada Pilihanraya 1955, diwaktu mereka menguasai 82% dari kawasan-kawasan pilihanraya, mereka rela memberi sejumlah yang tidak kecil dari kawasan – kawasan mereka kepada kaum lain dan mengundi calon dari kaum-kaum ini sehingga menang melawan calon Melayu lain (PAS).

    13. Kemudian mereka anugerahkan satu juta kerakyatan tanpa syarat biasa kepada kaum lain sehingga peratusan rakyat Melayu jatuh dari 82% kepada 60%. Siapakah yang lain yang pernah lakukan yang sedemikian?///– Mahathir

    It is trite to say lies, damn lies and statistics; and what about those who use statistics to promote skewed views?

    The British government was clear that unless there was racial harmony in the country, Malaya would remain a British colony. Malaya without Singapore had a total population of around 7 million in 1955, and 50 percent of them was Malays. The figure of 82% could represent certain electoral constituencies with Malay majority, and when non-Malays were fielded in those constituencies and won presumably with Malay votes against any opponents, the seats stayed with Alliance in computing majority. The hatred Mahathir has for Anwar was not because he was Malay, but because he was his political opponents. The UMNO leaders had non-Malays fielded the constituencies so that they would win against PAS. It was political power that the Alliance government of the time was thinking. It was not the largesse given to the non-Malays as Mahathir tries hard to defame Tunku.

    The UMNO leaders of the days had to decide whether they wanted to pursue independence, or to remain the British subjects. The found the Chinese and Indian community leaders at the time agreeable to work towards independence, and agreeing to the provisions in the constitution of Malaya. Whatever they agreed to, they had the intention to honour them. It is irresponsible of the succeeding leaders of UMNO to decide not to honour the agreement in full, and to jerry-pick issues as though founding members and early leaders of UMNO, including the late father of Najib were selling out to non—Malays. It was as though the good fortune of Malays that a Malayali from Kerela of India, who by Satan’s will, descended upon Malaysia to help the Malays realise how weak their leaders were half a century ago.

    UMNO had by its population and by normal parliamentary democratic practices more power than it ought to have. There is a person who now finds it opportune to fan racist sentiment, and he chooses to justify why the people should be divided by race. Australian and Californian governments have recently expressed regret for racist policies they forefather imposed on migrants. Here in Malaysia where migrants had been associating freely as equal with the earlier migrants, and the Orang Asli, the natives of the land, until a decade after independence, we find five decades later, a person who had absolute power and who practised racial discrimination for 22 years, finds it proper to give justification why racial discrimination is in order. Political leaders around the world progress with time, UMNO leader of past prominence regresses.

    Everything under the sun is relative; longevity is good, until that is associated with a person who happens to be the greatest liability of the society.

  36. #36 by Loh on Friday, 24 July 2009 - 4:39 pm

    ///14. Pada ketika itu nama rasmi negara ialah Persekutuan Tanah Melayu. Apabila Semenanjung Tanah Melayu dicantum dengan Singapura, Sarawak dan Sabah, perkataan “Tanah Melayu” digugur dan cantuman negeri – negeri ini dinamakan Malaysia. Dengan itu hilanglah identiti Melayu dalam nama negara sendiri. Tidak pula mereka tuntut nama-nama lain digugur.///– Mahathir

    The UMNO leaders who decided to form Malaysia were wrong for choosing the name which dropped the word Tanah Melayu, by Mahathir’s argument. Interestingly when Mahathir declared his vision of Bangsa Malaysia, he did not declare Bangsa Tanah Melayu. Whatever Mahathir chooses to support his argument at the time, it was the right and only right thing to do. People in Sabah would be happy to drop any name just that there could have remained independence outside Malaysia. Malaya was known as Malaya in the world before Malaysia was formed; we were never known as Tanah Melayu outside the country. In fact Mahathir is free to call himself emperor in his home.

    ///15. Tidak seperti di negara-negara yang membenar hanya bahasa kebangsaan mereka sahaja untuk semua sekolah nasional, orang Melayu bersetuju bahasa Cina dan Tamil dijadikan bahasa pengantar di sekolah bantuan Kerajaan. Bahasa Kebangsaan (Bahasa Melayu) tidak menjadi bahasa kebangsaan seperti di negara-negara jiran dan di Eropah, Australia dan Amerika.///– Mahathir

    The declaration of Human rights in the 20th century by the United Nations Human Rights convention provides for the parents the right to choose for their children to study mother tongues. Malaysians’ forefathers of the different communities had the foresight which the United Nations found it proper to support. Malaysians should be proud that the education system since the British colonial days has capitalised its strength in diversity.

    Mahathir has recently defended the use of English. It seems a different logic works here when immigrants’ language are involved. He still respects his colonial master, the British. How low can a racial mercenary go, in terms of making seditious remarks?

    ///16. Dan banyaklah lagi korban yang dibuat oleh orang Melayu supaya kaum lain mendapat apa sahaja yang dituntut oleh mereka, demi keamanan dan perpaduan rakyat dan negara.///– Mahathir

    The education system has been the same during the British colonial days. The carry forward of those schools involved no sacrifice of individual Malays. There are 60,000 Malay children in Primary Chinese schools. The parents of these children obviously did not agree with the perception Mahathir has regarding Chinese schools. The Chinese ask only to be treated fairly. As religious persons Malays respect fair play and equality advocated by Islam. There can be no sacrifice to allow others to practice what are respected by the religion. Mahathir no doubts consider a limit to the areas one can bully as a form of sacrifice. That is only in his dictionary.

  37. #37 by Loh on Friday, 24 July 2009 - 5:32 pm

    ///17. Apakah gamaknya perasaan tokoh yang meletak diri di tempat orang Melayu, terhadap semua korban ini? Apakah dia masih fikir yang orang Melayu harus korban segala-gala yang dituntut daripada mereka?///– Mahathir

    The only persons who are sacrificed are the Orang Asli; even their land was known as Tanah Melayu. The ordinary Malays sacrificed their good name so that UMNOputras could enrich themselves, and the success they achieved through their efforts were not recognised by UMNO leaders as such, to them the Malays owed UMNO the gratitude for what they achieved. The earlier migrants to Malaya did not have conflicts with the later immigrants. For without the efforts put in by all residents of the country, the urbanisation might not have reached the stage, at the time of independence. The indiscriminate deforestation and building of concrete jungles were the results of corrupt practices presided over by UMNO-led government

    18. Dengan rencana ini saya tetap akan di cap sebagai racist oleh racist bukan Melayu. Tetapi kalau mereka sanggup menerima yang benar, mereka boleh banding korban orang Melayu pemilik asal negara ini dengan korban mereka untuk kepentingan negara ini.

    It would be singing praises to call Mahathir a racist. He would be a racist if he had cared about the pride of the Malay community, like the late Tun Ismail would. To repeat, Tun Ismail said that Malays would give up Article 153 on their own, when they no longer required them, out of pride. Mahathir was only a mercenary, using the issue of race to advance his political interests. If he was a true racist, he would care about Indians’ lives in this country, rather than Malays which he was allowed to be associated only after the 1957 constitution provided the loop hole in article 160. It might be closer to describe him a racial opportunist.

    ///19. Saya berpendapat jika negara ini hendak aman dan maju, agihan kekayaan dan kualiti hidup semua kaum hendaklah adil (fair) walaupun tidak sama (unequal). Janganlah hendaknya mana-mana pihak atau kaum tanggung beban kemiskinan yang keterlaluan, sementara kaum lain hidup mewah. Mengumpan sokongan dengan mengambil hak satu kaum untuk diberi kepada kaum lain bukanlah caranya – lebih-lebih lagi mengambil dari yang kurang berada untuk diberi kepada yang sudah lebih berada.///– Mahathir

    A commiserating government cares about the people, and they cannot bear to see the suffering of others. When leaders can bear to see the sufferings of one race and not the others, they were only doing it to win the support of those who benefited. That divides the people, and the process would ensure that the people themselves stay divided, and to take side to ensure that their interests are protected. That is why polarisation persisted in this country, and will continue to be so when unequal treatments of the population are legally allowed.

    The unequal treatment in early days after independence was to create level playing grounds. Mahathir makes the blatant attempt to justify it based on entitlement.

You must be logged in to post a comment.