At a crossroad of principles


I am at a crossroad of principles. I believe in principles and standing up for them. I don't believe in forcing my principles onto others, but I make sure I am heard. But at this point two of my principles are clashing. How does someone react to a gradual change in principles that he believes in? Does he react gradually? Or does he react instantly?

Hindraf
Since I first heard about Hindraf, I have supported them. I have supported their cause and efforts. I have supported their stand that Indians in this country should not be treated as second class citizens or worse still, as slaves. I have supported their efforts in standing up to the Neo-Nazi UMNO government. Hindraf believed in standing up for principles, which I share.

MIC
I hate MIC. Give me a reason why I won't. The main reason behind my hatred for MIC is that the whole of MIC, from the balding point of Samy all the way down to the grass-root members' toes, are made up of spineless hypocrites. Why hypocrites? Because they can't even stand up to their party's principles, which is to look after the welfare of the community.

My second reason why I hate MIC (along with UMNO and MCA) is that these bastards are racists to the core. They will only "look after your welfare" if you are the same skin-coloured as them. So what happens if you are of mixed-parentage? Whom do you beg to then?

These were my principles at the pinnacle of tsunami in this country, which roughly consists of BERSIH's march, Hindraf's Nov 25 rally, Tsunami of 03/08, and the three by-elections.

At crossroads
But my principles are now at a crossroad. Before you guys jump to conclusion, no, I have not switched over to MIC. That would be over my dead body. FIY, I hate MIC more than ever. But my beliefs of Hindraf are "evolving" to say the least.

Hindraf still fights for Indians only in this country. That, to put it bluntly, is what I perceive to be racist. One could argue that since Hindraf does not bring any disadvantages to other communities one can't really classify Hindraf as being racist. But what if, fighting for one's community is racist on its own accord? How different is Hindraf from MIC then, principle wise?

I do believe that Hindraf's sole aim has been achieved, that is to awaken the Indians in the is country from their slumber of 52 years. Yes, the aim has been achieved. Yes, Indians are still being mistreated in this country, but so are other communities. Why not fight for everyone?

I wished and wished that Hindraf would take a multicultural approach sometime after the last general elections. Fight for all the marginalised people in this country. Fight for all the constitutionally deprived in this country.

When I was standing with Hindraf, my emotions were first "Fight against UMNO for Indians in Malaysia" and only then "For a better Malaysia". See the difference?

But I have become less and less ethnocentric as I became more politically matured. Everytime I read RPK's piece on everything and everyone, and each time he chides Hindraf I do not feel disturbed the slightest; I guess he just nails the coffin so well.

Take Chai Suk Yee's case for example. I wish Hindraf would take up on this case, it will not be any different if an Indian is to do it.

I do give credit to Hindraf for Adi Anwar Mansor's case.

Farish A. Noor has a similar viewpoint here, and read here why Uncle Zorro decided to walk with Hindraf on Nov 25th 2007.

I still support Hindraf, but I do hope they become less ethnocentric and start fighting against injustice, regardless of skin colour.

P/S: Also read P Uthayakumar's piece on the 500th day under ISA. That guy really has mettle of steel.

Rate this post:

About this entry

You are currently reading "At a crossroad of principles".

Published:
at 8:55 PM on 26 April 2009
Category:
,
Comments:
7 comments.
Previous:
Older Post
Next:
Newer Post

7 comments:

  1. Wampyere April 26, 2009 11:06 PM

    At last... you are sharing some of my views... :)

     
  2. the truth April 27, 2009 3:40 AM

    "I do believe that Hindraf's sole aim has been achieved, that is to awaken the Indians in the is country from their slumber of 52 years. Yes, the aim has been achieved. Yes, Indians are still being mistreated in this country, but so are other communities. Why not fight for everyone? "

    " Also read P Uthayakumar's piece on the 500th day under ISA. That guy really has mettle of steel. "

    The true and genuine leader of Hindraf is still behind bars. If he is released, he'll definitely make "Makkal Sakti" a One Malaysia concept as what most of us wish for. That is the main reason why the crooks are still keeping him in there, and will continue to do so, fearing that his growing influence as the days go by will return to haunt them one fine day! Thats a foolish thought though, because no matter what justice will prevail.

     
  3. -naga- April 27, 2009 4:42 PM

    @Wamp!! Long time no see :P Well lets say it took time to get politically matured.. ;)

    @The truth - I agree with that. That guy is the heart and brains behind the movement, perhaps that's why they released the other two guys first. But I also wonder with the Makkal Sakthi movement (not Hindraf mind you), the coordinators could have at least addressed their speeches and demands to include the greater part of Malaysians. Well I guess its going to happen sooner or later.

     
  4. bongkersz April 27, 2009 5:01 PM

    I agree that Hindraf must take a multiracial route to be align with Pakatan Rakyat's objective and mission. Hindraf can remain a pressure group, and it's doing a good job at that, save for few blunders (the visit during Hari Raya open house was a big boo boo!), which I think is because Hindraf is still disfragmented, no real leader(s) is in charge, and no clear direction after the success of Hindraf march back then.

    Hindraf should reorganise, gather some good people to work for them and formulate its direction for the coming future. I have no doubt many will lend hand to the good cause.

     
  5. Shane Subramaniam April 27, 2009 8:13 PM

    I am currently listening to the audio book – A briefer history of time. I would want to quote a passage from that book, in which credited to one Karl Popper:

    ” Each time new experiments are observed to agree with the predictions the theory survives, and our confidence in it is increased; but if ever a new observation is found to disagree, we have to abandon or modify the theory.”

    While Karl Popper was talking about scientific theory, I believe his insight can be applied to principles.

    That is to say, it is commanded that one believe in principles and standing up for them every single time.

    However, one must also be willing to abandon and modify his or hers set of principle when they realise that the principle no longer tally with the their conscience, or worse still, giving them a sense of guilt over it.

    Taking you example, what is consciously correct for you (or me?) "Fight for the betterment of Indians Malaysian" or “the betterment Malaysian”? I must add here that Malaysian also include thousands who are members of the Barisan National.

    Again, I am not implying what is right or what is wrong. In your example, one can always argue it is a preference, and not prejudice. Afterall, the Hindus are perhaps the most marginalise people in Malaysia, and that is what Hindraf are fighting for.

    What I am saying it is commendable that you are going thru this dilemma. And that you are definitely maturing in your worldview: Not by choosing to represent a bigger pool of people or otherwise, but by realising that principles, just like any other things, will evolve.

    This is the precise insight that we Malaysia lack. The inability to see beyond a certain point (even after years) is so pandemic to Malaysia. UMNO, MCA and MIC started off as a communal party for the betterment of their own people. It was relevant back in 1940s. They started to work together 1950s, again it was relevant and that brought us independence.

    But by holding on to the same principle, or even worse, mutate back to the feudal days of chieftainship and patronage. We have end up were we are.

    I have abandon that an equal Malaysia means equality and equal opportunity for Malays, Chinese, Indians, Ibans, Kadazans , Orang Asli. For me, equal Malaysia means include equality and equal opportunity even for the Mak Nyahs, the Indonesia maids, the Bangladeshi workers, the Nepali guard, the Nigerian student and anyone and everyone that are part of our nation building.

    As for you, all I can say is my country need more countryman like you.

     
  6. -naga- April 29, 2009 5:53 PM

    @Bongkerz - Yes Hindraf MUST remain as a pressure group. It should never be allowed to become a political party coz then it will loose its relevance. There is no point of joining PR as a multicultural party coz there are already two in there (with the third one catching up pretty quick).

    P/S: What's the deal with Hindraf's Hari Raya open house visit? I thought the story was twisted by UMNO?

     
  7. -naga- April 29, 2009 5:59 PM

    @Shane - That theory pretty much nailed it home. As I find myself reading more and more of RPK's, Haris's, Zorro's and lot of others I noticed that a lot of them do not take an ethnocentric approach i.e. they address the issues to all affected - Malaysians in short.

    And like you said, observations coupled with evidence only convinces further the beliefs.

    Hence I have decided that if I am gonna bash up the government or one of its component parties, I shall not discriminate but bash the whole lot of them! ;)

     

Post a Comment