| Blue Ocean Strategy vs. Our Blood-Red Sea |  |  |  |
| Posted by admin | |
| Saturday, 22 November 2008 04:00 | |
| "... Because blue and red oceans have always coexisted however, practical reality demands that companies succeed in both oceans and master the strategies for both. But because companies already understand how to compete in red oceans, what they need to learn is how to make the competition irrelevant." - Kim and Mauborgne, Blue Ocean Strategy, pg. 190 You must be the change you wish to see in the world. - Mahathma Gandhi Azly Rahman Leaders are fond of discussing management concepts and theories of social change and next, apply them to political paradigms. They do this within the framework of Structural-Functionalism in which society is seen as a stable entity such as in the case of 'power transfers' and the 'transitions of hegemony'. Oftentimes political leaders and their opinion leaders, technocrats, intelligentsia, speech-writers, perception managers, and other members of the regime will embrace new ideas to help fine-tune the political economic structure of the old regime and help sustain the base and superstructure of the power arrangements. These days, a popular concept of change in Malaysia and Asia perhaps is the blue ocean strategy in which the idea of cooperation takes over competition, and that novel opportunities are to be created to contribute to an environment in a future that promises more peaceful coexistence between producers and consumers, and providers and clients. This idea is taken from the work of W. Chan Kim and Renee Mauborgne, Blue Ocean Strategy: How to Create Uncontested Market Space and Make the Competition Irrelevant, published in 2006 by The Harvard Business School Press. In a yet to be charted territory of the blue ocean, competition is said to be irrelevant. Innovative companies thrive without having to compete for saturated markets. 'Red oceans' of chaos and competition is abandoned for 'blue oceans' of conflict resolution and collaboration, as this new idea goes. Again, limited findings from the study of a few business entities is used as a model to be applied to public service. Is Malaysia a blue ocean? To answer this one must consider what state she is currently in. Malaysia is wading through the (dark and dismal) River Styx in which her McCarthyism is keeping dissenting voices in jail, hunting down students and faculty, arresting peaceful protesters, battling with new media, making its politics of race and religion is evolve into a Balkan and a Bosnia. The postmodern condition of this open sky neo-capitalistic country is debilitating and its citizen are in utter confusion of where the national leaders are bringing them to, at time when the central and ethnic-based leadership is rotting to its core, creating a hideous form of a human being infected with a Human Papilliomavirus. Especially at the time of the December party elections the level of corruption within the ruling parties is at a critical stage that even those vying for top leadership have admitted that one needs many millions of ringgit to get elected. This is happening at a time when the poor of all races are struggling to survive by the day, maintaining a roof over their head, and making sure that their children have food on the table. Malaysians are in a bipolar condition in a unipolar form of governance in which there is the belief that only race-based politics is the one best system. Dissenting views are to be crushed and destroyed by any means necessary, and the hegemony of the previous regime need to be maintained either through force or false consciousness inflicted upon the masses. The red ocean of Malaysian politics Malaysians are charting into an unknown territory brought about by the yellow wave of the recent March 8 revolution and the red Makkal Sakthi cries of repression, anger, and frustration. There is also the ever 'green' ideology of Islamic-based parties and the light blue radical multiculturalism of PKR adding to the Kandinsky and Jackson-Pollock type-of political landscape painting of this country's future. There is chaos and complexity in the pattern of political scenario, unlike the 'blue ocean' strategy feel-good ideology embraced by Barisan Nasional leaders who probably have not done an internal and external reading an critical analysis of what actually blue ocean strategy means in which the country is now trying to choose between depression and the deep blue sea. In short, Malaysia is in a bloody red ocean that has been plagued with cut-throat shark-eat-shark world of racial politics. In all these, Malaysians are in need of a leader that will not only embrace all these colors of change and turn them into a 'rainbow coalition'. Use that as a symbol to navigate through the blue ocean to arrive at a destiny that will promise a land of opportunities for all, less annoyance of race and religious politics, and onwards to march of participatory democracy and further on towards the reconstruction of a republic of virtue grounded in ethics of philosophical, economic, and political sustainability. Replace paradigm and people The theme in the book Blue Ocean Strategy, is hope for the creation of a future of peace and prosperity. In Malaysia, who has the licence to give that hope? Who has the ability to be the captain of new consciousness and steer away from a Vision 2020 that has become a Myopia of 2012 as Malaysia's await the next General Election? Is the present government, ailing with social cancer that started from the head and now heading to the soul, able to help create a blue ocean? Can it do so with the happenings in the Judiciary, Executive, and Legislative? This is a question Malaysians have to answer fast, while "hitting the ground running" as an American saying goes. Paradigms and people need to be replaced. Democrats in America cannot rehire 'Bush-men of Texas' to navigate through the American Kalahari desert of Casino Capitalism in order to enter a new world of the unknown. Can Malaysians do that too -- continue en masse supporting a regime that has betrayed its people? Can Malaysians afford another 50 years of race-based politics albeit fine-tuned? Making incremental changes are like fixing a machine that has interchangeable parts whereas that machine need to be reassembled or disposed in a junkyard of history together with its operators and owner of the means of economic and ideological production. New games need brand new players. In a game of strategies played in the deep blue sea, we need a clear blue sky above us with a rainbow right above so that we may learn to think elegantly like dolphins - rather than think brutishly like piranhas that will turn the ocean bloodier. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ [OUR USUAL REMINDER, FOLKS: While the opinion in the article is mine, the comments are yours; present them rationally and ethically. AND -- FREE ALL I.S.A. DETAINEES] ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments (27)  ... written by KotaDamansara73, November 22, 2008 06:09:37 Mahathir, I would like to tell you what went wrong with your ideas and thinking. You can build up the economy by building pyramids and glorious monuments. But at the end of the day, the economy does not multiply because there is no productivity value int those pyramids and glorious monuments. At the end of the day, the Muslim society will have to pay for the price of those unproductive monuments. Mahathir, By building glorious structure of Mosque throughout the country, the Malays and muslims does not benefit, because their mindset and their skills are still so immature and undeveloped. You have failed to build strong character and strong thinking skills into UMNO leadership. And therefore, UMNO will fail. UMNO will sink like a titanic right before your eyes. Therefore the Malay communities who followed UMNO blindly will fail too. The globalization has caught up and the Malays are feeling more naked than ever that they do not possess the necessary skills to compete with the world. Mahathir, by building monuments and glorious symbols of structures throughout Malaysia is not helping the Malay communities. Mahathir, You have to respect the law of nature. The law of nature is not writing by anyone. The law of nature says that you can’t consume more than you produce. And UMNO is doing precisely that. You can’t go on thinking that you can print money to run the economy. At the end of the day, the ringgit will be worthless and comparatively, our wealth will be less compare to the world. IF you don’t intend to compare yourself to the world, then by all means, build more mosque and symbolic structure of Islam. But I guarantee you that, nothing productive comes out of those structures. For example, If you hired a thousand people to build a pyramid dedicated to yourself, it would all go into the economy. Every dime. And a lot of forms of giving and spending are just a form of that. It's crazy, and it's probably somehwat morally wrong too. But there are people who would think it's great that you're giving employment to the people who are tugging the slabs for the pyramid. And they're making a mistake. It isn't productive. They're thinking in terms of imput, not output. "If you want to build pyramids to yourself, and take a lot of resources out of society, you ought to pay like hell for it. You ought to pay a perfectly appropriate tax. So you should force to give back a huge chunk to society, so that hospitals get built and kids get educated too." report abuse disagree 0 agree 11 ... written by KotaDamansara73, November 22, 2008 06:16:04 Mahathir, You must remember. Egypt today didn't contribute anything to the world in terms of technology. They have no brain power. They have no skills. They have to buy everything from the western country. After the pharoahs build so many pyramids, Egypt today is nothing but a tourist destination. Mahathir, You have succeeded in creating a Malay race that contributes nothing to the world but continue shouting !Hidup !Melayu !Hidup !Islam. Malays will never be a race to be remembered. But Malaysia will still be a better tourist destination than Singapore. For that, Mahathir, I give you the credit. Mahathir, I will also give you the credit that you have created leaders in UMNO like Abdullah and Najib. Leaders who have no idea how to propel the economy growth and increase the skillsets of the Malays. Mahathir, The non-malays progress are drag down by the majority race. Because the majority race are still not strong in producing and in R&D. The whole of Malaysia is drag down by a huge non-progressive community. report abuse disagree 0 agree 16 ... written by educationist, November 22, 2008 08:46:03 "New games need brand new players" ..I believe Dr Azly has avery valid point here. The sad fact is that the March 8th tsunami was not powerful enough to bring a new federal government into power. Yes, many of the PR leaders are dinosaurs of our political scene but they have promised a new agenda of change. So, as matters stand now, it is the "..'blue ocean' strategy feel-good ideology embraced by Barisan Nasional leaders " that is in ascendence. report abuse disagree 0 agree 1 ... written by batsman, November 22, 2008 09:18:55 Have you guys never heard of SINGLE-MINDEDNESS? Long ago I conducted a debate with a group of Cinakui here on MT. I wrote that the Cinakui are a bunch of egoistic, quarrelsome, narrow-minded, petty bunch of goons who can never rule themselves and must depend on others to rule them (they’d just descend into a morass of quarrelling clans and individuals if they tried). Well, well! What do you know? They do not disappoint even now. Instead of working single-mindedly towards the goal of reform of the Malaysian political system and thence to get rid of the worst cases of abuse of power and corruption, they now pick on every conceivable petty quarrel you can think of including quarreling over TDM phobia, doggie rights, road signs, loud prayers, the genetics of bosses of GLCs, even the genetics of our PM. Not content with these quarrels, they activate their own version of provocation by swaggering around and broadcasting loudly their new-found braggadacio - examples of these can be easily observed if you care to notice these things. All these petty quarrels will sap the strength of the struggle and distract from the main objective. In the end, there will be just the stump of a glorious “would-be” movement with people like DSAI and RPK holding the lifeless baby. Even in business, the gurus teach us to set objectives and to SINGLE-MINDEDLY follow them through. The most successful entrepreneurs are known for their single-mindedness. Yet the people who pride themselves most on their business skills are actually sapping the energy of the reform movement by picking on every conceivable quarrel there is. What a bunch of dumb asses! If they were smart, they would refuse all provocations and refuse to quarrel except on those that threaten the reform movement. This way they can earn respect as a disciplined and intelligent corps of fighters. Instead they earn the horror and disgust of the people for their obsession to fight every petty issue and their willingness to descend into the depths of every race-related cesspool there is. Such people don’t deserve to win. They deserved only to be ruled by superior and more intelligent opponents. report abuse disagree 6 agree 3 ... written by onnetline, November 22, 2008 09:30:02 When the British took a sympathetic view on the backwardness of the Malays, some UMNNO leaders interpreted that it meant they were sanctioned as ' LORDS ' of all other races and country. And till today, the non-Malays are suppressed or forced to work harder for survival and to contribute to the well being of these " crippled or retarded " lot. Since they claimed to be Muslims, can someone enlighten me if these are actually principles of Islamic beliefs and practice ? report abuse disagree 1 agree 4 ... written by skc, November 22, 2008 10:39:41 Hey batsman, Didn't know you are also a bigot. Try to see beyond race or all of us will just replace current racist with a different form of racist but racist still. report abuse disagree 3 agree 4 ... written by renoir, November 22, 2008 13:30:53 Batsman, you're in your element!  And of course while you did oversimplify, there's a kernel of truth in what you're saying. The problem facing some of those Chinese you speak about is this: should they focus on the war but lose every small battle on the way? What if the battle is decided by a series of small wars? Another way of summarizing your advice is to set aside small, immediate gains and think what might be achieved in the long run. But then, as Keynes noted, in the long run we'd all be dead.Dr. Azly, I'd wanted to analyze in your last article the continuity of merchantile capitalism, how its values dictated the direction our nation is taking, and how everything, including race and religion, had been managed and manipulated in order to fit within the new world order. Yet here and there in M-T I'd commented on some of these issues, which sometimes makes me feel that my writings could become superfluous. Thus my delay, and delay, and procrastination .... Yet your present article has in fact hinted at what I'd wanted to say, that by replacing the present capitalist competition with a socialistic, cooperative mode of development, we might be able to blunt that anger and envy that come with a "shark-eat-shark" and begger-my-neighbor world. A society that emphasizes emulation in virtues rather than competition for material gains would naturally bond itself. It would attract togetherness rather than invite separation, as all individuals and communities strive to perfect a common weal. In short, we really need to requestion the meaning and purpose of development, the goals we need as a people and as a nation - our very future in a chaotic and dangerous world. LChuah report abuse disagree 1 agree 5 ... written by batsman, November 22, 2008 17:47:30 Dear Renoir – TQ for yr comments. Allow me please to analyse this further by using extremes. On the one extreme we have the individual – selfish, undisciplined, uncaring. To make matters easy, let us take the case of the dog lover. He wants to protect dogs. To do so, he wants the support of others – as many as possible. However, when he gets what he wants, he no longer cares. He distances himself from all other issues which he has no interest in. Take the other extreme of the movement – also selfish, but trying to instill discipline and also trying to protect its supporters. Such a movement must have an objective beyond loving dogs. But in fact , dog lovers are also welcome except that they do not distract too much with their dog living penchant. In the extreme, such a movement may actually suppress the private interests of its supporters. Its supporters become like ants serving and sacrificing to the “noble” cause. Somewhere in the middle must be a good compromise (the Bhuddists must love this!). Too much discipline, the movement becomes fanatical and oppressive. Too much selfish individualism and lack of discipline and the movement breaks up. I suppose the compromise waxes and wanes according to the times. My contention is that the times require more discipline than less as the pendulum looks to be swinging back towards tolerance of corruption and turning a blind eye to abuse of power owing to fear of the new and the unknown. I suppose the ideal is a dog lover who saw a dog cruelly tortured and killed, but realizes that the system is at fault and not just individual dog haters. He knows that even if he gets justice for his poor dog, there will be other dog haters out there doing their dirty stuff since the system allows it and will continue to breed more dog haters than dog lovers. So such a dog lover will be more disciplined and target his anger more at the system than at individual dog haters – that once the system is reformed, there is a real chance for real justice for all tortured dogs (whether by their owners or by city council) everywhere. I believe if this happens, Malaysia will be truly mature. (BTW – I have seen mentally disturbed owners who inevitably transfer their psychosis to their dogs. Not all dogs have good owners – anyone doing anything about this instead of just targeting city council?) report abuse disagree 4 agree 4 ... written by batsman, November 22, 2008 17:52:14 Hi skc - of course I am not a bigot. If I were to be a bigot, I would not have ended by comment thus .... "Such people don’t deserve to win. They deserved only to be ruled by superior and more intelligent opponents." If I were a bigot, i would have ended my comment with much more, for eg... "Such people don’t deserve to win. They deserved only to be ruled by superior and more intelligent opponents. In fact their women should be taken from them and made to produce babies for a superior culture" But since I am not a bigot, I have ended my comment the way I did. Of course the example above is to show you what the difference is between a comment that is bigotted and one that is not. Kapish? report abuse disagree 3 agree 1 ... written by batsman, November 22, 2008 17:56:57 Dear Dr Azly - Sorry for the distraction. To comment on your article proper, I think the difference between blue ocean and read seas is between those who favour globalization and those who are intent on keeping the situation messy between independent states or businesses. This may also translate between those who favour monopoly and those who cling on to the mess of early capitalism. Am I wrong? report abuse disagree 3 agree 1 ... written by Loh, November 22, 2008 19:13:38 ///Can Malaysians afford another 50 years of race-based politics albeit fine-tuned? ///-- Azly Rahman. Malaysia is bleeding everyday with its racist politics brought about by race-based political structure. 38 years after racist policies have been blatantly implemented in the name of NEP, the country has almost depleted its human resources not only of the non-Malays who succumbed to the push factors, but Malays too who consider the NEP stigma a huge price to pay to remain. But that structure has worked well for those who are in power at the expense of the nation. ///Malaysians are in a bipolar condition in a unipolar form of governance in which there is the belief that only race-based politics is the one best system.///-- Azly Rahman. It may be important to examine what make them think so. Is it because race-based politics is the way for the country to proceed, or is it because race-based politics is the way for the politicians to continue? The way the political party forming the government is organized has a direct consequence on how the government administers the country. When the political party chooses to convince the voters and their supporters that they are there to fulfill their wishes, they carry out the duties as expected in a democracy. But when the policies serve only to cater to the interest of the voters which divide the society into classifications such as race and religions, they are effectively making the party a gang, and their supporters the captive voters. UMNO has perfected it as a classic example. To convince that the captive voters were right in their choice, the government moulds the mindset of the supporters that they are weak and vulnerable, and that they only survive under the protective cover of the party. To sweeten the deal the government implements policies that are obviously for the advantage of their supporters, and as emphasis, these policies are seen to be at the disadvantage of the other communities. A division of the society into the term bumi and non-bumi is now complete. The indoctrination that they are vulnerable makes the beneficiaries become ever so sensitive to suspect any discussion bordering on their advantages as a challenge to their status quo. The past three decades have elevated the term NEP, Islam, corruption within UMNO, ISA, Malays’ privilege as sensitive words. report abuse disagree 2 agree 3 ... written by Loh, November 22, 2008 19:17:14 Continued- The government ensured that the aggrieved party would not be able to complain against the unfair and unjust practices by enforcing the sedition act, the printing license regulation and ISA. The control was handled in the name of national security. Social unrest s said to threaten national security; and a group of people gathering to demonstrate their unhappiness against any statements or actions is proof of that unrest, but the interpretation which party causes the unrest is left to the government. The interpretation is based on who has the support of the racist government. For example, immediately after the 308 election, demonstration organized by UMNO against the new PR state government of Penang was considered proper and so the state government was the cause of the demonstration. However, when the supporters of Hindraf joined the open house hosted by the PM in the manner not to his liking, some of them were taken into custody. So, the government through its political party makes sure that the aggrieved parties among the citizens had no recourses to seek government redress of the unfair policies. ISA and sedition acts have been seen to be used for political advantage rather than for national security, however biased it has been utilized. Consequently, ISA and sedition act keep the same set of political opportunists in power, and with the fail-proof structure, people in power were free to treat national coffer as their piggy banks. The printing Act keeps the people in the dark on the actual state of the country, and in particular, alternative to the present corruption infested government could have improved their standard of living many fold. Further if the government ceases to practice racist politics but allows the people to excel based on their aptitude the people would not have to serve the agenda of UMNO to attend universities when they can be more economically active in trades and occupations; the 60 000 unemployable graduates is the result of NEP. That frees the Malays to pursue what they please and at the same time allows other non-Malays to develop their potential. More importantly, just and fair government policies would stop brain drains that have been going on for the past 38 years since the advent of NEP. report abuse disagree 1 agree 2 ... written by Loh, November 22, 2008 19:22:23 Continued- Race-base politics in the country allow the party with numerical superiority to exercise winner takes all, and the others are like minority shareholders serving at most decorative purposes. The incumbents would not be willing to forgo the proven advantage. Because of the structure, aspiring politicians have chosen to out poll their competitors by demonstrating their flair as racists and masquerade as saviors of the race. The brand stays and it is a path of no return, even till the dying days. So party position in race-based political parties are monopolized by those who are willing to be seen as racist, and subscribe to the racist policies. Those who believe in the good sense of justice and fair play will not present themselves to serve, and that is why money politics is said to be rampant in the coming UMNO party election. Tengku Razaleigh revealed that he was asked to pay 2 million ringgit to get nomination from one division. Candidates without the resources cannot hope to go far in UMNO. It is because with race-based political structure, a position in UMNO has a good chance of landing an important position to recoup the expenses. The risks would be much higher in other political setup. The people in the country can live in peace without being affected by the color of their neighbors or co-workers. Bakri Musa claims that he was proud to accept wholeheartedly his classmates whose parents were of different races as Malays. The only common identification is the religion. When Malays can accept others as Malays without looking at their colors and lineage, there is no difficulty in accepting Malaysians as Bangsa Malaysia without looking at the color. So, as long as the government does not insist religion as the point of departure for Malaysians Malays in Musa’s mind would be happy to treat all Malaysians as equal. The term Bangsa Malaysia has been suggested as an extension of the definition of Malays minus the religion; for culture issue is never a sticking point. But politicians are quick to deny that concept. The only reason was that this deprives them of the expertise which they would exploit within the party and in administering the country. TDM is still pursuing his ‘ethnic cleansing’ albeit non violence approach to assimilate non-Malays, after he has paid the ultimate price of calling himself Malay, and severing his ties with his ancestors in Kerela, India. That is the price he expects to exact from non-Malays and other Indians. His writing on this is appended. ///Truly Malaysian politics have not been decoupled from racial sentiments and loyalties. And it is going to remain so for as long as the different races prefer to be separated and divided, prefer to strongly uphold their languages, cultures and their historical origins and links. All that is said about reforms and liberalism is mere lip service.///--TDM. From CheDet at http://test.chedet.com/che_det....html#more report abuse disagree 3 agree 4 ... written by renoir, November 23, 2008 13:33:31 Batsman, I guess at least some of those who voted for PR in the last elections did so to change the political system. The idea, oftentimes discussed in blogs, was to institute a two-party government so as to provide better checks and balances. In the process, like good doglovers, those voters had managed to suppress their differences with specific Pakatan parties (e.g. DAP supporters unsure of PAS nevertheless voted for the latter party, and PAS supporters returned the favor regarding the DAP). It appears, then, that the rakyat was generally ahead of most politicians in adopting such a stance. What you're saying, of course, is that this commendable attitude is now missing or in retreat among the general public. I think what we're seeing are teething problems, both for the Opposition parties and the rakyat. The unexpected tsunami has dazed many people, and they're still trying to find their steps towards an unknown political future. Things will coalesce again, I think, when the next GE approaches. This is likely largely because the current slate of UMNO leaders are still in a state of denial, still insisting that what they did in the past was correct and are relevant for the future. Because the Mahathir dictatorship had eliminated most thinkers from that party, those that survived tend to be unintelligent, unable to shake off the senile mutterings of their former PM. Thus they're still sticking with the "politik lama" amply discussed in Loh's postings above. LChuah report abuse disagree 1 agree 3 ... written by batsman, November 24, 2008 08:44:37 Dear Renoir - Assessment of what the real situation is can be difficult to say the least. My worry is that after the good feelings, reaching out to each other and smiles immediately after the 12th GE, a different mood seems to be prevailing. If I am not wrong, each race now seems to be trying to assert itself - "this is my right, this is what I deserve etc". under normal circumstances, this is not wrong, but we do not have normal circumstances. The situation is still flux and unpredictable. Rather than concentrate on "this is my right" people should be trying to reach out to each other. For eg, after the initial good feelings for PAS, it seems to be ignored and forgotten now. After all, PAS have said they will put their bodies in danger to defend their Chinese and Indian friends. Why not continue the good relations and make way for PAS to play a bigger role. It can still use its skill in ceramahs and oratory to defend the rights of non-Malays if properly encouraged. Instead I see Chinese and Indians individually rushing to the fore to defend their "rights" at the expense of a common approach. report abuse disagree 3 agree 1 ... written by batsman, November 24, 2008 08:47:54 BTW, I hope I am not sabotaging Dr Azly's article. I hope that this is still a blue oceans and red seas debate. My contention is that rather than individually rushing to the fore to defend their rights, people should collaborate and cooperate to come up with a common approach to provocation and abuse. report abuse disagree 2 agree 2 ... written by batsman, November 24, 2008 08:56:18 I suggest regular Pakatan meetings between middle level members. Or at least a website (by invitation only) where problems can be discussed and common approach arrived at. report abuse disagree 1 agree 1 ... written by renoir, November 25, 2008 03:40:58 batsman: I don't think we're far from Dr Azly's theme - discussion on small battles made by various PR parties at the risk of forgetting the overall goal reflects his statement about "incremental changes" oveshadowing the "need (of that hegemonic machine) to be reassembled or disposed in a junkyard of history together with its operators and owner of the means of economic and ideological production." Of course, your worry is that each PR component is striving only after its own interests. This suggests a dichotomy between individual party interests and overall PR interests. I would like to think that such is not the case. For example, while it's true that all three parties have their own reasons for battling the ISA, not least because they all had members who'd tasted bitterness under this totalitarian Act, the most important motivation could be their shared principles and philosophy. For DAP, which has ties with many democratic socialist governments of the West, such violation of human rights is inexcusable. The same holds for PKR with its many Western-trained leaders and an advisor whose political inspiration is imbued with Jeffersonian principles. PAS, of course, comes from a different direction: the essentially democratic nature of Islamic governance that, during its best periods, often derived its rules from the Ummah. Even struggles that seem to be sectarian are usually not so when seen in the larger interests of Malaysians. For example, the multicultural street names of Penang merely reflect the diversity of that state, just as hispanic names are common in Western United States because of the large numbers of hispanics living there. This respect for diversity is not only enshrined in the UN Charter, but is basic to the teachings of Islam - in fact, a strong reason why Islam has spread from a small place in Arabia to all parts of Asia, and now in Europe and the world. If the matter of street names is basic to democracy and human rights, so much more are the rights of the Indian minority to essentials such as proper housing, education, and jobs that allow them to take care of themselves and their families. As Rawls noted, all society's primary goods such as liberty and opportunity, income and wealth, etc., should be distributed equally unless an unequal distribution of any or all of these goods is to the advantage of the least favored.* The least favored in our society would be the poor of all ethnic groups, and among the poorest are the Orang Aslis and the Indian community. Again, I feel that the struggle to help the poor, though at this juncture is focused on the Indian community, is also a very Islamic goal. Zakat wouldn't have existed if social justice is not paramount in Islam. Now as to your view that PAS seems to have been ignored and forgotten, I don't think that's the case as three of the five Pakatan states have PAS MBs. This is true even in Perak, where DAP has the majority. And I know many non-PAS PR supporters, like me, are extremely grateful to the party for standing with Teresa when the Toyol gangster and his minions tried to intimidate her. I think the feeling that PAS has been ignored or forgotten is due mostly to the mass media. Until last Sunday, when PJ city councilman Richard Yeoh revealed that many Malay kampongs - obviously PAS strongholds - had invited Teresa to their innumberable functions, I'd no idea how active AND collaborative both PAS and DAP have been. Perhaps it was this very camadarie that Toyol was afraid of, and why Wong Chun Wai had accused DAP of having signed a secret pact with PAS. So I think Dr Azly's "new players" have emerged, and that slowly but surely we're constructing "a clear blue sky above us with a rainbow right above." It might not be too long before more Malaysians "learn to think elegantly like dolphins." We do have to be patient, of course, to ensure that the blue sea is not turned into a red ocean. At the same time we should not worry too much or be blackmailed by that possibility. Good things will happen when, despite the brute force of the powers-that-be, we hit back not in kind, but with finesse. Just as Mohammed Ali crushed his powerful opponents by floating like a butterfly and stinging like a bee. LChuah report abuse disagree 1 agree 3 ... written by renoir, November 25, 2008 03:55:10 I used an asterisk but forgot to say something about the assertion below: >As Rawls noted, all society's primary goods such as liberty and opportunity, income and wealth, etc., should be distributed equally unless an unequal distribution of any or all of these goods is to the advantage of the least favored.*]] To those brainwashed by Reaganism, I would like to inform them that Rawls never meant "equal" in the sense that everyone should get - for instance - the same salary. But it does mean, briefly, 1)people getting paid roughly the same for the same kind of effort or work, 2)a narrower gap between the highest and lowest wages, and 3)the lowest wages should be livable wages, i.e., able to take care of the employee's needs. LChuah report abuse disagree 2 agree 1 ... written by batsman, November 25, 2008 12:37:55 Renoir - Perhaps things are happening between the Pakatan parties that I don't know of. It will be good to see them trying to forge links between their middle level members, at least. Things change - we may be facing a resurgence of Mahathirism. People have to get prepared. Not familiar with Rawls' work, but he does seem to be assuming full employment - the unemployed man will have nothing to sustain life. I have never been too keen on either Keynes or Hayek. As life shows - things have gone full circle AGAIN. Reagan and Thatcher destroyed state run/subsidised businesses and privatised them on the excuse that they were inefficient and needed unsustainable subsidies. These days private companies are begging for subsidies. Citigroup just got $300 billion. Was Keynes right or Hayek? Or are they both wrong? report abuse disagree 0 agree 2 ... written by renoir, November 25, 2008 19:16:59 Hi batsman, personal egos will confound Mahathir's attempt to influence UMNO, and I think any self-respecting leader will act somewhat in the style of AAB. The old man has lost the war before it's even waged. Rawls is a giant in socio-economic thought, and my posting on "equality" is my take of an aspect of his proposed society. Since his work covers issues of liberty and indeed emphasizes the moral (basically Kantian) aspect of governance (hence his famous work is called "A Theory of Justice"), the least favored - a category which would include the unemployed - would be taken care of in both material and psychological aspects (i.e. their dignity is preserved). Keynesian theory - which envisions an interventionist state - is an attempt to rationalize the irrational capitalist economy. Hayak's works, particularly the thing called "The Road to Serfdom," is a tunnel vision of the concept of a state. As you noted, it's the large corporations which are calling for government intervention and handouts. This, in a Bushian lasseiz faire state where any help to the needy is considered - shudder! shudder! - socialistic. Will try to comment more on this tonight or tomorrow. LChuah report abuse disagree 2 agree 3 ... written by sueteh, November 27, 2008 17:23:21 every single human being will have his/her own set of racism element, prejudices, preferences, discriminations. these can serve as good and bad as well. just maybe, majority of human beings DO NOT SEE the Real World (then, what is the real world??). it is because human being will see everything (the world, peoples, animals, philosophies, doctrines, life) through own Lens. Our own ideas, how we want it to be ideal/idealistic and our own understanding. Maybe the colour of the hair same (standard: black, brown, blond, white) but each one has different thoughts, ideas. life could be a concept. what kind of concept you want to apply and build your life upon? religion? free thinker (btw, is there such a thing as a free thinker??), atheist?? PKR,..DSAI..is going to be a fine balance. DSAI..i hope you jangan hangat hangat tahi ayam (NATO-no action talk only). DSAI were formerly from UMNO/BN i am quite sure he should know how that machinery works..because he was not some lowly UMNO member..he was deputy prime minister. report abuse disagree 0 agree 0 ... written by renoir, November 27, 2008 17:45:05 Sorry - forgot about promising to add some comments until I went over Matthias Chang's gloom and doom article. What's happening today, batsman, is in some way a blessing, as the present American economic debacle finally puts a stop to the Reaganesque propaganda anchored in large part by those from the Chicago School, of whom Hayek and Milton Friedman were its greatest proponents. Hayek's ideological brethren were from the Freiberg School (e.g. people such as Eucken, Ropke, Rustow, Franz Böhm, etc.) who, as opposed to the Frankfurt School, attributed the rise of Nazism not to the workings of capitalism, but to the tendency of a strand of liberalism that permits state intervention. This group, known to us today as neo-liberals, conceives the duty of a nation as nothing more than to put together conditions for a marketplace. This actually is far from what Adam Smith had envisioned - the spiritual father of capitalism had thought of the market as merely one institution among many others. Not so the neoliberals - to them, ultimately, EVERYTHING exists for the market. This extreme rightwing view, surprisingly, justifies the Marxist complaint about the commodification of everything, including the bodies of men and women. Gotta shut down because of lightning. LChuah report abuse disagree 1 agree 1 ... written by lovemalaysiarakyat, November 28, 2008 13:32:26 The article by Dr Azly has provoked such intense discussion - which is good for me as an avid reader of MT. Sometimes we get crappy comments which have no meaning but just giving vent to emotions. I sometimes feel like that too - too much crap in politics nowadays. You just %#@*** I enjoyed reading this. Thanks Dr Azly and the rest, Batsman, Renoir and Loh. New games need brand new players. In a game of strategies played in the deep blue sea, we need a clear blue sky above us with a rainbow right above so that we may learn to think elegantly like dolphins - rather than think brutishly like piranhas that will turn the ocean bloodier. Well, there are new players in PR and they are intelligent and believe they can change Malaysia - have met some of them and they have the heart and mind to make Malaysia a better nation. Some are old players, Datuk Seri Anwar and Tok Guru Nik Aziz - lets say not born just yesterday. But they have shown renewal and change and they are open to changes and those with them are indicative of such. Of course, there are always ones who are the wolves in sheep's clothing. They are piranhas in clown fish attire. The BN sea stinks like the Dead Sea and I wonder why it is still around. We wait and see - for rainbows and clear blue skies to happen but I wonder for how long? On the horizon are threatening dark clouds - so ominous for Malaysia. report abuse disagree 1 agree 1 ... written by batsman, November 29, 2008 08:09:53 Hi Renoir - Sorry I left the discussion for so long. I hv been thinking about Rawls. I still feel he did not consider full employment. If workers get subsistence wages when they have a job and some sort of subsistence sustenance when they are unemployed, then there is no reason to work is there? Unless workers enjoy their jobs. Hi lovemalaysiarakyat - good to hear from you. report abuse disagree 0 agree 1 ... written by renoir, November 30, 2008 01:37:48 Hi Batsman, You're right: Rawls didn't really reject capitalism, which sees unemployment as inherent to the system. The idea of subsistence levels operates only in worst case scenarios - a developed country normally pays workers above that level. Unless you believe that all humans are inherently lazy and without self-esteem - which is what most diehard capitalists believe - you would accept that there people who, whether they like it or not, work because of self-pride, because they want to be truly autonomous. And of course, there also those who, as you suggest, enjoy their jobs. LChuah report abuse disagree 1 agree 0 |
(2).jpg)
the only setback ... is those in the ruling government , state goverment and various other leaders will not be able to digest the true content of the strategy simply because the are incompetent and only able to play the racial cards.
what the country need is people that can think and understand the true concepts of their respective faith to know about love, but we have eaders who are only able to preach something thats not there... hatred, due to their incompetence to understand the deep message of love among mankind that underlines all faiths as one.
one can see in malaysia, when most can be together, one voice says i want to be different, a simple example will be as below : when most faith can have their prayers halls nearby, one request for theirs to be few kilometers away....Why..because i am born different and i am different and i am special, but by god's will all of them and us are made of flesh, red cells, white cells, and were introduced to the world by the same female body system, what and where is the difference.
we are only different in appearance and competence and this is where the blue ocean strategy should be applied to live together through greater understanding.