Wednesday 29 January 2014

"Why Anwar?" 3 Missing Points from Rafizi's Explanation

[1]    Pandan MP Rafizi Ramli, the self-declared mastermind behind the ongoing Kajang-Selangor-Menteri Besar-PKR fiasco, has decided to ‘come clean’ with the thinking and reasoning behind PKR’s moves. Read his blog post here.

[2]    By spelling out PKR’s objectives and the need to ‘address UMNO dynamics’, Rafizi hopes that the Rakyat would understand and accept PKR’s moves. He even says ‘Punish us if you must!’ (Dramatization mine). Boy oh boy.

[3]    The blog post has been artfully written but is ultimately fraught with unsubstantiated reasoning, contradictions and deflections.

[4]    There is also a glaring omission: He hasn’t justified “Why Anwar?”

[5]    I’ll be asking “Why Anwar?” over what I’d like to call the 3 missing points:

a.    Making Selangor “better” *Why Anwar*
b.    Selangor’s current ADUNs *Why Anwar*
c.    Fortification and UMNO *Why Anwar*

Sunday 26 January 2014

Kangkung-gate Part 2: Bitterness, The Sensibles and New News

In Part 2 of this series, I'll be taking a look at the aftermath of the Kangkung issue, which I think proves among others, the point on information fatigue, and what has made the news since.

I waited about 8 days to see how things panned out. And sure enough, we've got new play-things (issues) now. 


Saturday 18 January 2014

Kangkung-gate Part 1: Information Fatigue and A Discerning Electorate

On 12 January 2014, Malaysia PM Najib Razak commented that the price of kangkung or water spinach in the market had dropped. He said that when prices dropped, no one praised the Government but when prices rise, everyone condemned the Government. The usage of kangkung was as an example, but his emphasis of it has sparked much frenzy in Malaysia.

In Part1 of this 2-part special write-up on an issue close to heart (and plates) of most Malaysians, I’ll be looking at how the Kangkung phenomena is actually a sign of a society where information fatigue is setting in.

Introduction

[1]    There is more information in a week's worth of the New York Times than a person was likely to come across in their entire lifetime in the 18th century. So says this YouTube video.  

[2]    Now, take this fact and relate it to your personal informational exposure. Add the fact that smartphones are ubiquitous and give us 24/7 access to the internet. What you now have is a complete, limitless and verifiable source of knowledge at your fingertips, ready to be accessed at any time.

[3]     Despite this, everyone has been so damn obsessed with the Kangkung.

[4]     While I don’t have anything against Kangkung, til' today I still don’t know what the PM’s speech was about. For many it does not matter. The Kangkung is symbolic, they say, of society’s grouses against leaders who are disconnected from reality. This is sensible. Possibly true. But so is the converse: The speech possibly had redeeming features. The problem is that despite complete and verifiable knowledge at our fingertips, many of us were happy to stop at Kangkung.

[5]    I think this indicative of a bigger symptom: Information fatigue.

Thursday 9 January 2014

Lim Kit Siang’s Conciliation Offer: A Lost Opportunity Due to Semantics and Politicking

Intro


[1]    I feel that Lim Kit Siang’s offer to hold reconciliatory talks between BN and PR leaders was insincere or badly managed. As someone who wants to see positive political growth, maturity on both sides and national unity, this proposal was a beacon of hope, only to be put out like Luke Skywalkers dreams to be reunited with his dad.

Tuesday 7 January 2014

The Amman Message dan Penyelesaian Bagi Meredakan Ketegangan Agama di Malaysia

A blog picked up my article on the Amman Message and translated it to Bahasa Melayu. Thanks. Am happy to spread it to as many readers as possible.

http://www.isketambolapress.blogspot.com/2014/01/2-perkara-amman-message-dan.html

Artikel ini adalah terjemahan daripada artikel asal dari Sam Sensible di laman ini:- 

Sunday 5 January 2014

2 Points: The Amman Message & The Solution to Malaysia's Religious Tensions



Introduction
[1]    I recently came across something known as the Amman Message and the Three Points (here), and was pleasantly surprised by it.

[2]    The Amman Message was endorsed by Tun Abdullah Badawi when he was the PM. It was also signed by current Opposition Leader, Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim, and other prominent leaders, including one Khayri Jamal Al-Din, Deputy Chairman, UMNO youth (yes, I believe that would be KJ, his name fancily spelt).



[3]    Upon reading the Amman Message, it made me wonder why isn’t its beautiful message, reminder, principles, and commands being utilised in Malaysia?

[4]    In this article, I’ll be looking at the Amman Message and the current crisis engulfing Malaysia and how the reminders of the Amman Message are vital. It’s also a ‘corrective position’ concerning a controversial article I wrote about Shias not too long ago (link here).

Wednesday 1 January 2014

A Response to "Reject the Stadium Solution"

A.   Introduction

[1]    This is an article in response to Ong Kar Jin’s blog post in his duriandemocracy blog titled “Reject the Stadium Solution” (Link Here) which was cheekily (albeit slightly distastefully) labelled as the “SS”.

[2]    The article was well written and I enjoyed writing this response. Briefly put, I don’t fully agree with his position, and believe that this response will justify why.

B. Stadiums are limiting Factors.

“More Space = More People = Better” is flawed logic

[3]    The author says that stadiums limit the number of people who can attend the rallies, and that these people are the “lifeblood of protests”. He then says that people stuck outside cannot hear the speeches, participate in “collective action” and that not being able to enter the stadium is akin to attending a buffet but being able to only have one plate.

[4]    Firstly, the logic is flawed. If the protests took place in open areas, such as the streets, there would still be a problem of people who could listen to the speeches or the ability of people to participate in ‘collective actions’ especially so considering the spread out and sporadic nature of such protests – essentially, only those able to get to a focal point, such as Dataran Merdeka would reap any of the benefits – and this is similar to that of being able to enter the stadium. But within stadiums, sound systems can be put in place, and screens or sound systems can be placed in the immediate vicinity of the stadiums. The same cannot be done for open spaces, simple because logistically it’s impossible.

“The author has in no way justified why one  (duty not to inconvenience residents staying near stadiums) should supersede the rights of other (legitimate businesses and members of the public in the city).”

[5]    Secondly, the author himself highlights a concern but doesn’t provide an answer to it. He concedes that ‘you never know for sure how many people are going to turn up’. His suggestion is that open spaces enable more people power. However, within such concession beckons the question of ‘so how do organisers ensure the safety of the protesters?’ The reality is that in most liberal democracies, open protests are limited to a finite number of people. Authorities set limits of how many people can attend, and are empowered to turn people away if the numbers swell, because there is a potential and real danger to over-crowding. The author blindly suggests that people power is vital, to which I agree, but turns away from addressing security concerns.

[6]    Thirdly, I would like to ask the author, what if a field or open space is allocated as an alternative (like the area between the Lincoln memorial and World War II memorial in Washington DC)? Would he accept it?


Happy New Year 2014

I would like to take this opportunity to wish everybody a Happy New Year 2014!

This Sensibly Sounding Malaysian hopes that 2014 will see:


1. A happier Malaysia

2. A smarter Malaysia
3. A more hardworking Malaysia
4. A cheaper Malaysia (essential goods)
5. A more tolerant, understanding, and accepting Malaysia.

Here's to resolutions. May God bless us all. 

In the News: The Aftermath of the 31.12.2013 Protests

The much publicised New Year’s Eve protests at Dataran Merdeka has come and gone. Largely peaceful in nature, all sides of the equation should be lauded for ensuring that no untoward incident had happened.

Protesters largely behaved.

The protesters were generally well-behaved (save for a lack of tact from some of them when they booed and shouted ‘bodoh’ – stupid - when the KL mayor greeted them with ‘Salam 1Malaysia’)[1]. The police and City Hall came across looking good due to their restraint.

Booed the KL Mayor.
Reports in the news, as usual, differed on a number of points.

In this article, we shall take a look at how the event was reported in the various news reports today (1st January 2013).

Media Organisation
Title of Related Article(s)
Observation of rally
Quick Facts
Sensible Malaysian’s Observations
The Malaysian Insider
Rally a success, says Turun[2]
TMI’s report was from Turun’s perspective.

Turun claims that it was a success, that participants had displayed patriotism, and that no one had plans to topple the government.
No of Protesters:
50,000

Police/ DBKL:
Good

Success or Failure?
Success
Largely opinion based.

Perhaps gave Turun organisations too much credit or credibility.

Opposing views of rally missing.