The Star, by unfairly criticized PERKASA in its 4 July’s editorial, had intentionally or unintentionally confirmed its naked Chinese chauvinism and unmasked its strong anti Malay stance.

If the Star is truly convinced that “championing one’s own community interests need not diminish another community’s interests is blatantly hollow in the Perkasa “model””, and I do share the same, then did the Paper similarly criticized the unconstitutional demands made by the various Chinese groups and political parties? A classical example was demanding Chinese language to be treated at par as the Malay language which is ultra vires Article 152?

Indeed almost all the requests made by the Chinese and Indian Communities (CIC) are at the expanse of the Malay rights, for example, more places in the IPTAs, more scholarships, more jobs in the public sector which are enshrined in Article 153. Hence, the CIC must appreciate that the Malays feel threatened because of these perceived unreasonable demands; especially there is no reciprocity from the CIC such as more opening in the private sector, more places in UTAR and AIMST.

Similarly, did the Star condemn Wee Ka Siong for his unbecoming remark that the Malays are primitive just because they rightly vocalized their constitutional rights at the right forum and at the right time?

These unfair and threatening demands (real and perceived) as well as such unbecoming remarks had triggered Newton’s Third Law of Motion (The third law states that for every force there is an equal and opposite force. For example, if you push on a wall, it will push back on you as hard as you are pushing on it) and “some of its adherents” had put the country “in the mess (we) are in now.”

If PERKASA is construed as anti-social, what about Dong Zong, Siqui, Hindraf, etc? Is it because the Star is chauvinist that these big and powerful organizations escaped its attention and beyond its comprehension?

Hence, can one rightly label the Star as pretentious, double standard, hypocrite, Chinese chauvinist and anti-Malay, like the vernacular Chinese papers?

However let all of us appreciate that racial tension and bickering is approaching a dangerous level. Hence, the government, especially Tan Sri Koh, politicians and community leaders must quickly sit down and collectively solve the volcanic problem to avoid an impending catastrophe.

For a peaceful, safe and prosperous 1Malaysia, let us try to reengineer the kind of relationship Tunku – Siew Sin – Sanvanthan used to harmoniously forge.

Sunday July 4, 2010
No way for any true Malaysian to act or talk

FOR many, the plight of Suara Perkasa newsletter over its demand that MCA Youth chief Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong be held under the ISA is voluntary and deserved.

The editor concerned had reportedly met Home Ministry officials on Friday to try to explain away his decision to publish the commentary. He is scheduled to report to the ministry again tomorrow for more explanations.

It does not matter who the Perkasa NGO or any of its derivations happens to target at any particular time. What does matter, however, is the inflammatory manner in which they choose to pursue their particular agenda.

In a modern multi-racial, multi-cultural Malaysia, their chauvinistic style cannot be accepted or condoned. To make this clear to all, as well as to deter other wanton attempts at undermining the 1Malaysia concept, a firm official response is warranted.

It is all too evident that their typically callous and contentious approach to Malaysia’s nation-building project amounts to rejecting, opposing and attacking it. In the process, such champions of impudence seem oblivious to the harm they invariably foist upon our nation.

The very nature of the Malaysian nation depends, sometimes precariously, on a sensitive and advised approach to treating issues of inter-community relations. Using ill will to accuse others of bad intent is to set a sorry example for all decent, well-meaning Malaysians.

The claim that championing one’s own community interests need not diminish another community’s interests is blatantly hollow in the Perkasa “model”. If only that were true, some of its adherents would not be in the mess they are in now.

The essential subtleties and implications of harmony and unity in diversity may escape the comprehension of chauvinists. But what is inescapable is the fact that theirs is an anti-social attitude that is particularly dangerous in our society.

Is it too much to expect Perkasa and its ilk to be more mature and considerate? Their words and actions will tell us.
In the past, the authorities have used the very instrument at issue, the ISA, to clamp down on these incendiary provocations. As before, it is for the authorities to decide how they should handle this matter today.

  1. #1 by Wake UP! on July 8, 2010 - 5:13 pm

    Dah mereka pun menunjukkan belang kekomunisan mereka, maka ISA lah yang terbaik untuk mereka.


  2. #2 by AcHoo! on July 8, 2010 - 6:51 pm

    What humhugs!!

    Just ban all organisations promoting policies or special treatments based on race, religions and instead tackle issues so as to eradicate poverty and discriminations.

    After 50 years cannot even realise that we are in “one team” and we are in competition with other countries not each other. You just have to make all communities equally strong, well educated and skilled and have correct attitude and remembering we are all one team!


  3. #3 by Average Joe on July 8, 2010 - 7:01 pm

    Ya, tapi apa yg Menteri Amaran, Datuk Shimah buat? Nothing!


  4. #4 by sputjam on July 15, 2010 - 12:23 am

    you state that
    “Indeed almost all the requests made by the Chinese and Indian Communities (CIC) are at the expanse of the Malay rights, for example, more places in the IPTAs, more scholarships, more jobs in the public sector which are enshrined in Article 153”

    When you should ask, why after 50 years, this country is not able to fulfil the right to higher education for those that wish to pursue it.Education is a basic right. If the govenrment cannot perform this basic task, then it can only be described a inept.

    Tell me, sir,

    after 50 years, malays who dominate the paddy field, how many have become rich? The govenrment says that farmers are given subsidies. But why not the govenrment just buy the rice at a higher price, and sell to the rakyat at a lower subsidised price? This is standard practice in america, europe and japan and their farmers are millionaires.

    Our present subsidy scheme benefit the fertiliser manufacturers and bernas. Who owns these businesses? Why the malay bosses of course. Melayu “Glocal”. Some are not even malay, but somehow, managed to be one, due to definiton in the constitution and not by genetic makeup.

    But the basis of any country’s development, is how it handles education and agriculture(food). But instead, our govenrment has gone overboard and created monsters like khazanah, which is now going around the world wasting precious money invest in dubious hospitals and hotels overseas, when our rakyat are dying beacause they cannot afford hefty healthcare bills.


    • #5 by Ridica on July 16, 2010 - 5:06 am

      Sputjam sputjam..

      The rice industry in Malaysia is dominated by the private millers who are 100% chinese.

      Beras Jati, Jasmine etc are all manufactured by chinese owned companies.

      Bernas only own a percentage of the shares in each of the rice companies.

      The ones that are oppressing the whole malay farmer community is the chinese intermediaries.

      That is why Bernas was created to break the vicious cycle set by the chinese millers since 80 years ago.

      Do your homework first lah.

      If government buy higher and sell lower, isn’t that is called subsidy? Almost everyone here in Malaysia want to remove subsidy. So how la?


  5. #6 by CommonerNinetyNine on July 15, 2010 - 2:38 am

    there is a conflict of interests between bn and perkasa.

    if perkasa get established, umno will be neutralised and thus bn component parties will be affected.

    how? since march 2008, umno is being nose pulled all the way by bn component parties and pr has been enjoying this show for sometimes already.

    but if perkasa grows big and get umno neutralised, then bn component parties will have no more bargain left to negotiate because perkasa is not succumb to them.

    so, to me, it doesn’t matter if perkasa is doing something genuinely good for the malays or the overall good for the country or not, perkasa is in odd with bn, so the demise of perkasa is very much wanted by bn now.

    day-dreaming? i don’t think so. at least i have this prove:


    • #7 by YUL71 on July 16, 2010 - 11:09 am



      by the way, a paradox here – if you say that perkasa is doing good for the malays and the overall good for the country, that means BN is not doing right. Then wouldn’t BN BE AT ODD WITH PERKASA AND WITH THE WHOLE COUNTRY ITSELF?

      SO should we vote for PERKASA instead?


  6. #8 by Mayday on July 19, 2010 - 9:31 am

    Response to YUL71,

    We are no considering of voting PERKASA. But we need PERKASA to champion The Malay interest and Malay right after of late Pemuda UMNO has fail to perform. After Pemuda UMNO has become too week.

    On the other hand if PERKASA can do better as political party and by joining BN, the Malay should not hesitate to give full support.

    I really encourage all Malay no matter which political party you are from to support PERKASA.



  7. #9 by taikocing on July 21, 2010 - 12:54 pm

  8. #10 by tentanghidup on August 5, 2010 - 1:57 pm

    sangat menarik,,, menunggu kelanjutan cerita


  2. MCA Parti Komunis Dan Self Centred? « Hidup Tuah!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: