Republic of virtue 5/09

On Chin Peng's book cover PDF Print
Posted by admin
Monday, 04 May 2009 10:44

After 48 years of Independence, we still cannot tell the difference between communism, Marxism, socialism or anarchism. We are well versed in the foundations of crypto-corporate-cybernetic-crony capitalism, of the inner workings of the capital market, and on how to get cheap labour and squeeze profits out of modern-day indentured slaves from countries impoverished by the policies of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

A REPUBLIC OF VIRTUE
Dr. Azly Rahman
http://azlyrahman-illuminations.blogspot.com/

Some time ago, when there was controversy on the mutilation of the book cover on the revolutionary leader Chin Peng, I wrote the following piece, relevant to the need for our universities to respect contending ideas and teach them to our students.
...

We are now arguing over images on a book cover; the one that has the picture of Chin Peng and leaders of Malaysian opposition parties. Some see it as propagandic statement. I see it as a pedagogic possibility.

I see it as a lesson plan for a nation in need of a Socratic dialogue. I see it as a ‘teachable moment’ in our series of unit plans on progressive social change. This episode is another one in the series of unfriendly dialogue over the issue of the fatherhood of Malaysian Independence. I have written previously about the need to approach history differently.

We need skills to read visual images and next skills to explore what's actually inside the book. In the controversy, an important dimension of learning is being killed. The producers of the visual image failed to grasp the intellectual possibilities of the issues; possibilities that can be turned into an entire university course in understanding political ideologies.

The authors of the ideologically-modified Chin Peng book cover will benefit from my suggestions to explore the educational value of the issue. If we continue to modify/mutilate book covers for political purposes, without reading the book itself, we will be guilty of disrespecting frontieering and humanising knowledge. The worst thing that can happen to a society is when its young political leaders do not read well and do not explore the possibilities of ideologies. Their paradigm will be coloured by their love for arrogant bodies of knowledge; ones that will create classes of humanity, to be ruled and mentally chained, easily.

"Act of aggression"

We will not create, borrowing Plato, philosopher-rulers but instead create political demagogues who will manipulate signs and symbols to be presented to the masses who themselves have been made afraid of exploring newer and better ideologies. Borrowing Marshall McLuhan, that the medium is the message, I would say that the act of superimposing the images of opposition leaders represents a message that mutilation is the preferred act of disseminating knowledge for contending debates. It is an act of aggravation meant to appeal to the members of society who are increasingly becoming visual with the advent of digital multimedia technologies.

The definition of literacy has been dominated by visuality instead or orality and print. People are consuming and processing fewer words in print and more of still or moving images. The Chin Peng image thus becomes a powerful tool of propaganda to initiate a debate on which political leader can be made to look guilty-by-association; an issue created in a series of more that is being created before the next general election.

"Some interpretations"

After 48 years of Independence, we still cannot tell the difference between communism, Marxism, socialism or anarchism. We are well versed in the foundations of crypto-corporate-cybernetic-
crony capitalism, of the inner workings of the capital market, and on how to get cheap labour and squeeze profits out of modern-day indentured slaves from countries impoverished by the policies of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

We are good at talking about ‘global economics’ and the ‘glocalisation’ of Wall Street and Silicon Valley industries. What we think profitable at the global market we import into our local economies, and what we see profitable in our country, we force our farmers and labourers to produce for the global economies.

We then complain about the evils of globalisation without realising that the big capitalists amongst us are the new globalisers of our own labour. At a time when we are exploring the possibilities of becoming a ‘bio-technologised nation’ (whatever that means to the padi planter/farmer in Changlung, Kedah or Tambun Tulang in Perlis), we still have not explored the meaning of ideas we ‘fear’. We still equate communism with armed struggle - just like some Western media conglomerate's tendency of equating Islam with terrorism, and many other concept/word associations that are not accurate and dangerously misleading.

We need to explore the story behind the armed struggle to understand the ideology behind the movement. We might denounce the atrocities of the communist insurgents/Malayan co-freedom fighters, but we must also recognise the intellectual value and power of the Marxist critiques of society as a legitimate, systematic, liberating, humanising and praxical (the translation of theory to practice) body of knowledge that has evolved into an organic discipline itself.

One must engage in a systematic study of Marxism in order to be well-equipped with the understanding of what ‘national development’ means. Without this knowledge, we will forever colonise ourselves by importing more and more members of international advisory panel of any national project we blindly embark upon. Looking at the modified/mutilated book cover, I see the superimposed images not as something to be used as a Nazi-Germany type interpretive text, but as something I could use as a picture prompt/visual stimulus to teach the idea of the synthesis of ideologies.

"Analysis of images"

Let us do a brief semiotic reading of the book cover - analysing its signs, symbols, significations and representations. Because the picture of a serene and smiling Chin Peng is the largest of the images and placed hovering above the others, I see the creator of the modified/mutilated book cover acknowledging the superiority of a leader of the Communist Party of Malaya. It automatically brings different perspectives to viewers.

I see the images of the leaders of the opposition parties as those that base their struggle with some strands of the idea of a critique of the Malaysian capitalist system. Because the book cover is located on the website of Umno Youth, we read it as the semiotics of agitation that actually can also be interpreted as the recognition that indeed the idea of Marxist critique of society is beginning to be threatening to the dominant ideas of corporate capitalism embodied by the dominant party in the ruling coalition Barisan Nasional (BN).

I see this aspect of the mutilated image as not working against the opposition parties but actually put them in a more humanistic light. It can be a interpreted as a counter-hegemonic statement (to the benefit of the opposing party) that is turning the issue inside-out, in the tradition of Hegelian dialectics.

I also read the cover page as the image of a synthesis and a transcultural flow of ideas that are borrowed from one another and not necessarily oppositional to one another.

I see the following themes, emerging from the composite image that warrants further explorations:

- Had the Communists won in Malaya, what kind of sharing of power would there have been?

- How might the character of neo-colonialism have turned out had Malaysian political-economic arrangement been based on non-communalism?

- Would there be conspicuously rich and and - at the other end of the spectrum - silenced under-class poor Malaysians?

- Would there be a BN? - What would have been the fate of the monarchy? - What would have been the nature of the distribution of wealth in society and what might the ‘digital divide’ mean?

- How might the reformasi movement learn from the theoretical foundations of Marxism, as a radical critique and restructuring tool of society?

- What themes in Islam does Marxism share in the areas of social justice and the social control of greed?

- How might ancient Chinese philosophy be a powerful and non-oppositional force to Marxism?

- How might the concept of Marxist-metaphysicalism emerge from the synthesis of foundational tenets of the Western and Eastern societies? These and many more might help us explore the possibilities of emergent ideas and make our graduate/Masters/Ph.D students smarter and our politicians more learned.

Imagine the quality of dissertation topics we will have in the archives of our public universities? These topics should generate interest in looking at the possibilities of newer and better arrangement of base and superstructure of Malaysian society as we develop newer commanding heights, and as we continue to profess our status as an independent nation that is slowly suffocating in the haze of globalisation.

"Marxism and other ‘isms’"

I have a few suggestion to put a halt to this argument over a book cover:

I suggest we have our undergraduate students read the variety of ‘isms’ and have them construct their own understanding of what this ‘nebulous of ideas’ means. We must give our students the message that these ‘truths’ must be explored and not be shied away from.

We cannot ban books anymore. We must even have courses on Marxism, socialism, capitalism and anarchism and encourage our teaching faculty to teach their favourite thinkers such as Karl Marx, Ibnu Sina, Al Farabi, Ali Shariati, Che Guevara, Socrates, Krishnamurthi, Radhakrishna, the French Existentialists, Einstein, Malcolm X, Plato, Habermas, Bourdieu, Foucault, Syed Hussein Al-Aattas, Sukarno, Raden Adjeng Kartini, Jose Rizal, Lee Kuan Yew (left), Gandhi, Kung Fu Tze, Lao Tzi, and Mao Ze Dong. One could even develop a course around the life and times of the American poet-musician Bob Dylan.

I believe, we will create better thinkers amongst our students and lecturers. Campus authorities will not need to use scare tactics during student elections nor university lecturers need not be fired by vice-chancellors and by extension, the higher education ministry, who are bankrupt of intelligent arguments.

“The simplest questions are the most profound,” said Socrates.

And, sometimes you can judge the character of the person by the book cover that he or she has modified/mutilated.

OUR USUAL REMINDER, FOLKS:
While the opinion in the article is mine,
the comments are yours;
present them rationally and ethically.
AND -- SET ALL I.S.A. DETAINEES FREE]



Comments (16)Add Comment
...
written by Awaken64, May 04, 2009 11:23:40
Malayan History is well preserved in Betong Thailand!!!

Not to worry.. The caves, artifacts and even tours are quite popular among the Chinese
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 19
..., Lowly rated comment [Show]
..., Lowly rated comment [Show]
..., Lowly rated comment [Show]
...
written by Ulan Benson, May 04, 2009 12:26:42
written by sydput, May 04, 2009 11:50:01
- Had the Communists won in Malaya, what kind of sharing of power would there have been?
There is no power sharing in communism. Winner takes all.
.....Mosque and sultans will probably be abolished....
-----------------------------------------------------------

Aiya, Sultans may be removed under Communism (anyway, do you think it is necessary to keep feeding/maintaining these people with big cars, mansions, and robbing other people daughter from Indonesia...like Piyot?...and meddling in the Perak Constitutions)

But Muslim can still be Muslim. Look at China, the world largest Muslim population and you will be amazed at the mosques all over China.

I am not saying Communism is good for us but it is better than the BNs government anytime. Or you can give me Hudud laws, anything and anytime...just get rid of the BNs smilies/grin.gif
report abuse
disagree 4
agree 59
...
written by Richfyf, May 04, 2009 12:29:01
Enough said about the sultan sugery in california. If its his own money, hey he can bring anyone he like and have his surgery anywhere he likes too. But if he uses the rakyat money.. then we should be questioning the person who give him the money. That person is responsible. But the this is malaysia.. the power to be will not take any action. Just like some ex MB who goes to Disneyland with his family and indon maid(maybe some distance relatives of him from his kampung) during the school holidays and spends millions.. So what action is going to be taken and who si going to take the action

I guess if we are not happy will all this abuse of Rakyat money then we should use our democratic right and vote the people or party that we can trust.
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 29
...
written by wongnoball, May 04, 2009 12:55:34
Aiyah Stop using assumption what Communist would do or not do to Sultan. At that time it was right to oppose Communist. Don't forget Murders in China and Russia. Today 2009, all different ideology. In fact UMNO is practising Communism.....some UMNO malay Bumi Pigs are more different Bumi Pigs (ANIMAL FARM)

Besides its about Who has done the Greatest Damage to Malaysia after Merdeka. Look no further than the Regim Racist kejam UMNO. All Readers must Ponder how is it that it is legal for Malaysia to remove Singapore From Malaysia if it is not because of Racist Agenda of UMNO....Technically done by an Illegal Sultan/Agong. So If now Pakatan states start Showing Defiance to UMNO, a Crony UMNO Agong can remove that state from Malaysia.....well then we need to push it that way and Create Malaysia Baru...Trengganu,Kelantan, Perak, Selangor, Penang. Surely we can do better than the current UMNO-BN Rubbish. Now Allah have Blessed Singapore with no Natural Resources and Curse Malaysia with all the Natural Resources.

So Chin Peng Hero - UMNO-Zero!! Jom to IPOH and Stop meeting to Create HISTORY!! This is Destiny Time!! Rakyat wear Black and Surge to IPOH from 6th May, Lawyers will be waiting to bail you out from Police station....don't be intimidated. Resistance is DUTY!!
report abuse
disagree 1
agree 27
...
written by renoir, May 04, 2009 16:41:42
A deeper study of history will show that no "ism" has enslaved and murdered more people than capitalism, partly because inherent in this ideology is the endless quest for all kinds of resources, natural and human. Thus millions of impoverished Englishmen, mostly those driven out of their farms because of the "Enclosure system," either perished during their trans-Atlantic journeys to the "New World" or during the course of their harsh, indentured labor in the Americas. This white slavery ended only around the late 1700s, when millions of Africans were hunted down and sent over to the Americas to live lives of wrenching slavery moderated by occasional floggings and lynchings. Meantime, civilizations were wiped out in many parts of the Americas, and some nearly made exinct in Australia and the Pacific islands. Aggression did not end with WW2, when the US invaded Latin and South America over 40 times, killing millions in the process. The Iraqi/Afghanistan invasions are merely the latest manifestations of a capitalism pushed by what Thomas Friedman called "the iron fist - the US armed forces."

What might've happened had the Communist Party won in this country? Let me first give an answer that might please the right and shock the left - it probably won't work. This is because we're a small country and we cannot escape the machinations of the big powers, especially those of the capitalist/imperialist West. In fact, we cannot escape the clutches of the West even if we adopt wholesale the Western capitalist system, what more if we were to deviate from that model. During the 50s and early 60s, the Laotians generally preferred a mildly capitalistic system and supported the neutralist forces of Prince Souvanna Phouma. Now Laos was right next to China's underbelly, and the CIA thought it would be great to have a Western bastion there. So when the time came for general elections, they rigged the ballot boxes to favor the West's favorite - Prince Boum Oum. Problem was, the fix was so obvious because Boum Oum's votes were greater than the entire population of Laotian voters. So Souvana Phouma joined forces with "red" Prince Souphanavong, leader of the Communist Pathet Lao, and despite American help the Communist Party won a smashing military victory. But Laos was so weak that American military activity continued as if that wasn't an independent country - the CIA, for example, often flew over that country to ferry drugs from Burma to Vietnam and the West to finance American spying and other related activities. Hill tribespeople such as the Hmongs were recruited to harass not only the Laotian authorities, but also served in a number of ways the American occupation of Vietnam. Naturally, such destabilizations don't contribute to nation building.

To be continued:
report abuse
disagree 1
agree 7
...
written by renoir, May 04, 2009 16:42:14
Continued

Then we have neutralist Cambobodia which also followed a mildly capitalist system. Its leader Prince Norodom Sihanouk wouldn't join the Western-financed SEATO alliance, and worse, often criticized US foreign policies. So Nixon undertook a massive bombing of that country's villages, killing possibly hundreds of thousands of civilians and destroying their infrastructure and traditional way of life. All this gave the then insignificant Khmer Rouge the opportunity to pose as champions of the people by undertaking grisly revenge killings that "shocked" the Western world. Even so, perhaps some development might've been possible had it not been for the Vietnamese invasion and subsequent attacks by anti-Khmer Rouge forces. Whatever the case, we can see that for small countries, outside interferences often play significant roles and in the process change their future.

Two countries which became communist because of their native leadership turned out to be pretty independent, despite the fact that they share a common border with China. They were North Korea and Vietnam. This is partly because of the Chinese belief - not only Maoist - in the equality of small nations, and partly because communist parties all over the world are generally intensely nationalistic (this nationalism eventually caused the schism between the Soviet Union and China, and the subsequent breakup of the Communist bloc).

So if the MCP takes over here, there's little doubt that, despite British and UMNO propaganda, we would've a very nationalistic government (whether good or bad - it's bad in my opinion). Further, because of its majority, Malays will continue to have a big say in government, but minorities would be better protected. An advantage is that the divisions of race and religion would minimized, and people would be taught to see local and world affairs in terms of class struggles. A communist Malaya would influence the progress of other SEAsian countries as well. We might very well have avoided Confrontasi with Sukarno, and joined that country as well as the Phillipines to achieve a worker-dominated Southeast Asia (MAPHILINDO). That in turn might influence Thailand as the Malays in the south might march to the drums of Communist Malaya. The Vietnam War probably wouldn't happen, as Western interests would focus on our new and stronger group of three nations.

But with a China that was still reeling from two centuries of semi-colonial status, and a Soviet Union that was miles behind in industrial development, a more likely consequence would be Western aid to different ethnic groups in our country, in order to fragment it and ultimately colonize it. That, at any rate, is what happened to multi-ethnic Yugoslavia, despite its independence of the Soviet Union and its status as the most modernized nation in former Ottoman-ruled Europe. Yugoslavia was the darling of the West until the Soviet Union collapsed and the country was of no further use to the West's ideological and military struggles.

LChuah
report abuse
disagree 1
agree 8
...
written by V4Vigilante, May 04, 2009 19:15:57
**** BN! I did not get my AL approved...but I will wear BLACK shirt and underwear socks....on 7 MAY 2009. Let's finish off BN.
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 7
...
written by V4Vigilante, May 04, 2009 19:20:56
KA-NI-LAU-BOH! CHAU-CI-BAI! POO-KEE-MAK! NAH-KA-SAI-AH-NEH! LOO-EH-CHOW-CI-BAI LAN-CHIOW! I did not get my AL approved...but I will wear BLACK shirt and underwear socks, TOO....on 7 MAY 2009. Let's finish off BN...JOM KE IPOH
report abuse
disagree 2
agree 6
...
written by Pakyeh, May 05, 2009 08:08:24
There are virtues in Communism even religions cannot deliver.Karl Marx says Religion is the opium of the people. The way religion is subdued by politics, what Karl Marx say is true evev today and in our own backyard.
In fact Capitalism is truely the devil in disguise.
Talking about Bob Dylan, I spoofed his song "Knocking on heavens door".
Read more "Knock,knock,knock on UMNOs head" at..

http://warongpakyeh.********.com
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 5
...
written by renoir, May 05, 2009 14:58:51
>Karl Marx says Religion is the opium of the people]]

I'd mentioned a number of times in M-T that Marx was largely reflecting the worldview of his time - people such as Bentham (the utilitarian) had said much the same thing before. Further, Marx wasn't dwelling so much on the intrinsic qualities of religion than on how people used religion as some psychological shield from the harsh realities of life. And writing during those times, the kind of life Marx was referring to was life under dog-eat-dog capitalism.
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 4
...
written by amoker, May 06, 2009 05:27:08
UMNO practices fascism, not communism le..

I salute dr azly for coming out with such arguments.. socratic moments. Years ago, his ideas would degenerate to ISAism.
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 2
...
written by Pakyeh, May 06, 2009 19:38:52
Mr renoir.
By that you mean that Karl Marx did not say religion was the opium of the people but rather religion was made an opium of the people by the Clerics, such as Rusputin and nowadays the government wage earning Ulamas ??? Yes ???
Was religion realy banned under Communism ???
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 0
...
written by renoir, May 07, 2009 02:50:39
No,Pakyeh, Marx did say that and he didn't mention in that statement about the clerics at all. Here's a fuller version of what he said: "Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of an unspiritual situation. It is the opiate of the people."

And just before that Marx said: "Religious distress is at the same time the expression of real distress and the protest against real distress."

Here the young Marx is revealing his dialectical prowess: he recognized that the poor was using religion like a drug, to hide or forget their difficulties and sorrows of life. AT THE SAME TIME he saw the possibilities of religion becoming a vehicle for protest ("against real distress"). So unlike most Enlightenment thinkers, Marx didn't simply dismiss religion. Modern Western capitalist/imperialist propaganda has made it out that ONLY Marx thought that "religion is an opiate of the people," when in reality it was a common view during those times. Philosophers such as Kant, Feuerbach, Herder, Heinrich Heine and others had said somewhat the same thing before Marx. Heine talks about religion that "pours into the bitter chalice of the suffering human species some sweet, soporific drops of spiritual opium”. Bentham wrote of a religion that needs "a perpetual fever for opiates."

But you're right (clever of you!) to guess that later on, Marx (and Engels) did touch on the role of clerics who of course used religion for the benefit of the powerful and the privileged. Remember, though, that even the clerics were divided into classes: the privileged Vatican types taught religion largely in terms of paradise in the afterlife, whereas the masses - most of them peasants or the new working class poor - were more interested in achieving social justice ON EARTH, during their lifetime. So there're some similarities with what's happening here too, huh?

Was religion banned? No, but most Communists didn't like religion because they saw only the negative (opiate) side of it. That was, of course, before Liberation Theology arose in Latin America (something that scared the capitalist West as well as the Pope).

LChuah
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 2

Write comment
This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.
You must be logged in to a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.