Goals, Humility & Respect

Reposting here what was originally a two-part note on my facebook timeline on 9 and 10 September 2013.

After reading my facebook update last Friday, a few of my fb friends asked, ‘what was it about the khutbah (sermon) that brought me to tears?’ Did the khatib mention something that reminded me of my late wife Aishah?’ No, that was not the case, but let me explain.  

First-of-all, I have to admit, I didn’t really know who the khatib, Ustadh Nouman Ali Khan, was before last week. I did view one of his talks on youtube some time ago. That talk was ok but it didn’t impress me that much for me to search for more. Last Friday however, at the IIUM masjid, he gave a khutbah I honestly believe to be one of the best I’ve ever heard.

The khutbah was essentially a call to reflect, ‘why am I a Muslim?’ A rather common topic really but the questions he posed and the analogies he gave really struck a chord with me for they are exactly the issues I have been grappling with lately.

Ustadh Nouman began by asking ‘what is your ideal?’ For some, it’s about having a nice house and a nice car. For others, it’s about respect and recognition, while for some others, it could well be all about fame, money and glory.

My ideal or goal in life has always been to help and to serve. Ideally, I would want to do something where I am able to personally and directly help others. During my brief stint at UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees), I started as programme assistant. I worked mainly in the office perusing documents and drafting project proposals; something that bored the life out of me.

Later, as a TP (temporary protection) screener, I was asked to interview people applying for refugee status. I had to talk to them and listen to their personal stories. I was a TP screener for only two months, but those two months remain among the best and most satisfying times in my entire working life.  

Someone asked me recently, what would I want my son to be when he grows up? “A nurse”, that was the answer that came instantly to my mind. This was around the time when my late neighbour was first hospitalised. At first, he was at the main ward but when his condition worsened, he was transferred to intensive care.
 
All the nurses I saw at the hospital were women. I know that is not something to be surprised about. What surprised me though is a sudden realisation that there is a serious need for every hospital to have male nurses; for several reasons.

For instance, I observed at both the ward and ICU, there were more male patients than there were females. Some of these patients were really ill. They needed help for almost everything. Some of them however, physically were quite big and tall, whereas the female nurses were physically smaller and of shorter height.

Don’t get me wrong, those nurses I saw, despite their physical disadvantage, were indeed very skilful and professional but I just wondered whether being cared for by a male nurse would perhaps make those male patients feel more comfortable?

Being a nurse is not easy. The job requires one to be patient, compassionate and firmly grounded; qualities commonly stereotyped with women. A man however, have those qualities too, hence, should not have a problem performing the role of a nurse.

I certainly will not be pressuring my son to become a nurse. That itself is not my goal. My goal is to raise him in such a way that he shall never consider the idea of becoming a nurse something repugnant. Indeed I would love it for him to consider it desirable for the unique opportunities it will give him to personally serve and help others.

And this was essentially the point Ustadh Nouman tried to put across. The ideal or goal for every Muslim is not cars, fame and money. The goal is to serve Allah and to serve others in this world. There is nothing wrong about wanting to be rich and famous. But to be rich by itself is not the goal. It is a means to attain a higher goal.

Ustadh Nouman said many great things last Friday, but there was one I find particularly mind-boggling. He said, “the ultimate reminder to those who would serve Allah's din (is), don't think highly of yourself; (and) don't think you are better than the people you are trying to serve."

I grew-up during the time when self-improvement books were extremely popular. Early in my youth, I read numerous books by various motivation ‘gurus’ like Anthony Robbins, Stephen Covey, Zig Ziglair and Dale Carnegie. Indeed there is a lot to be gained from their books and it would be stupid of me to deny the positive effects they’ve had in the lives of many.

I have this feeling however, that reading too much into them may lead to a few unintended negative consequences. These consequences include an exaggerated sense of self-worth, delusions of grandeur, arrogance, and a lack of respect for the abilities of others.

While conventional approaches to motivation are driven by self-centred concepts like self-worth and self-esteem, motivation in Islam, as indicated by Ustadh Nouman; embraces a rather different philosophy. It starts from a clear understanding on the purpose of our creation and the responsibility it entails; and the need to carry out those responsibilities with sincerity and humility.

Sincerity and humility however, are values that are difficult to define and impossible to measure. We may claim that we are sincere and humble but how do we know really that we have those attributes?

I am blessed by Allah with great memory; episodic memory especially. I observe more, and talk and mingle less. Throughout my life, I have seen how people change. I have seen how a two-letter-prefix can change a person’s attitude and personality. I have seen too how a piece of metal on a ribbon can heighten a person’s sense of importance and sense of entitlement.

It’s hard however, to be too critical of all this because they are part of the reality of today’s society; a society where you need to promote and push yourself to the limelight in order to succeed. The challenge then is to know how to remain, on one hand, sincere and humble, and on the other, ambitious and determined.

Continuous self-reflection is what we all need. We need to do something too that helps keep our feet firmly on the ground, and ensure our children are nurtured to do so as well. However, as much as I try now as a parent to mould my children’s character and instil certain values into them, there will be a point in their lives where my influence on them will weaken and disappear. From thereon, they will have to make their own choices. The only thing I can do is to ensure they have the necessary spiritual and analytical tools to make the right choices.

Hence, Ustadh Nouman’s advice to not think highly of ourselves is most apt. It correlates with another of his advice that as Muslims, we should not be easily satisfied. That Malaysia is a country currently blessed with economic success and a peaceful society is not an excuse for us to rest on our laurels. We should always think about what we can do more.

We have responsibilities both to ourselves and to the society. As Ustadh Nouman explains, if you are aware of injustices, corruption and other wrongdoings in the society, it is your duty as a Muslim to speak-up and do something about it. It is not enough to say ‘somebody will do it’. Instead, ask yourself, ‘why is that somebody not you?’

Ustadh Nouman closes his khutbah with a beautiful reminder on the importance of respect; another issue I've been struggling with. I’ve been trying to teach my children never to use words like Keling, Bangla, Indon, Awang Hitam and other derogatory terms when referring to others; a monumental task really in the face of overwhelming usage and indifference in the society. But I will keep on trying.

Ustadh Nouman explains that a Muslim should show respect and never assume he is better than a non-Muslim. If indeed you think you are better than your non-Muslim friend, think about what would happen if tomorrow that friend embraces Islam. He will have his slate wiped clean and would instantly be, in the eyes of Allah, a better person than you.

I believe the key towards genuine respect is a genuine sense of humility. Humility is the shield that protects us from spiritual diseases of ujub (vanity) and kibr (sense of superiority). A person who is conscious of his humble existence would be mindful about not wanting to hurt the feelings of others. And he will show respect to all regardless of gender, status, race, creed and nationality.

Allahu’alam.

Muslim first...(Part II): Islamization and '1Malaysia'

The Malaysian society I grew up in was certainly different from what it is today. I started primary school in 1984 at the time when the effects of the Islamization wave, which began in the 1970's was yet to be seen. I went to a primary school in Kelana Jaya, a then young housing area in the fringes of Petaling Jaya. The local society was truly multiracial and this was reflected by the multiracial composition of my classmates in school.

Looking back at my class photos, I can see that when I was in Standard 1 (Tahun 1 Limau, 1984, Sekolah Rendah Kebangsaan Taman Seaport), out of 45 students in that class, only twelve of them were Malays. I had 20 Chinese classmates, eight Indians while the rest were Kadazan-Dusun, Ceylonese and Eurasians. And my Standard 2 class (Tahun 2 Durian, 1985) was the same. There were 44 students in the class, 15 of them Malays, 21 Chinese and five Indians.

Those numbers sum-up quite nicely my childhood environment. My friends and I, we were truly '1Malaysia'. In fact, my best mate in primary school was a Chinese boy named Oliver, and in my first three years of secondary school in Kelana Jaya, my closest friend was my Indian buddy, Thanaraj.

I was conscious about my race and religion, and I'm sure all my friends in school were conscious of theirs too. That, however, did not stop us from playing together. We knew we had different cultural-religious beliefs and practices. We talked about them at times and from these conversations we learned to respect one another.

Occasionally, there were misunderstandings. I can recall one specific occasion when we were all tired and thirsty after playing football, a Chinese friend refused to drink water from the same bottle with me, not because he thought my bottle was dirty or anything but because; as what he said "aku makan babi" (I eat pork)". He was genuinely concerned that if his lips touched the bottle, the bottle would instantly become haram (forbidden) for me to drink from. 

I can see from those old class photos too that back then, all of us Malay boys wore shorts to school while the Malay girls all wore pinafores. One or two Malay girls started wearing baju kurung in Standard 4 while the boys started wearing long pants in Standard 5. Even in Standard 6, there were still more Malay girls in pinafores and skirts (prefect attire). Now, all Malay boys in primary schools right from Standard 1, wear long pants to school, and all the Malay girls wear baju kurung with tudung or headscarves as well.

The Malay-Muslim society in Malaysia has certainly become more Islamic over the last three decades. The influx of Islamic television programmes in recent years is a stark reminder of that too. Back in the early 1980's, the only regular religious programme was Muqaddam, a basic Quran reading programme hosted by Ustaz Hassan Azhari, aired on RTM1 every afternoon. Friday sermons were not even shown live on national television. There were recorded and aired after the evening news at 8.30 pm on Fridays. I remember this because what came immediately after was Tayangan Minggu Ini, a programme which aired old Malay movies of P. Ramlee and his contemporaries.  

The ‘Islamic Malaysia’ that we live in today is a country were 'Islamic' content penetrates into all spheres of life; in education, entertainment, medicine, finance, fashion and others. A Muslim, like me, certainly has no problems with this for Islam is my religion. But for non-Muslims?

I can understand their concerns. More so if I imagine myself in a reversed situation, i.e. a Muslim minority living in a non-Muslim majority society. If, for example that I live in the UK, and the British people suddenly became more religious that all public schools suddenly revert to routines and practices of mission schools in the past; with prayers read and hymns sang in student assemblies, the BBC begin to air more religious programmes; live coverage of mass on Sundays, Christian talent shows etc, and the British Prime Minister announcing a national policy of insertion of Christian values in public service, as a Muslim living in the UK, I would definitely be very concerned.      

Coming back to the reality here in Malaysia, I disagree with the popular assumption that the person chiefly responsible for the Islamization of the society was former Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir. Yes, he was indeed the man who introduced a national policy of insertion of Islamic values (dasar penerapan nilai-nilai Islam) in the 1980's, and the Islamization wave that hit the country coincides nicely with his premiership. But really, that was pretty much what it was, a coincidence. Anyone who became prime minister at that time would have introduced some form of Islamization, one way or another.

Not to say that Dr. Mahathir was insincere. He was indeed the country's first practicing Muslim prime minister. And I do believe he is genuinely religious in his own way. But more than anything, Dr. Mahathir was a cunning observer of political trends. He recognised and understood the Islamization wave that hit, not only the Muslims here but Muslims all over the world. He knew that if UMNO did not try to 'Islamize' itself, it might lose its position to PAS as the major political vehicle for the Malays. So he went on executing a deliberate political strategy’ to Islamize’ the government and his party. And getting the then ABIM president, Anwar Ibrahim, to join UMNO was undoubtedly part of that strategy.     

As far as winning the hearts and minds of the Muslims is concern, that strategy worked. Except for his last general election in 1999, UMNO and Barisan Nasional garnered the majority of Malay votes in every general election held during Dr. Mahathir’s tenure. But when it comes to race relations and national integration, that strategy has certainly caused great consternation.

Many non-Malays now refer to national schools as 'Malay schools' precisely because almost all the students there are Malays. There are hardly any non-Malays. The situation is particularly acute in urban areas. I live in the outskirts of Kuala Lumpur and the local national primary school here has not had a single Chinese student enrolled for more than ten years.          

Non-Muslim parents, especially Chinese, have overwhelmingly refused to send their children to national primary schools. This has been going on for almost two decades now, hence, as a result, we have an entire generation of Malaysians growing up in a more-or-less homogeneous environment; growing up interacting only with those of the same race with very little interaction with others.

When you don’t interact with others, what would be the most likely effect? Tolerance and acceptance, or prejudice and discrimination? You don't need a PhD in social psychology or sociology to know the answer.

The situation today certainly does not look good. The dream for a ‘Bangsa Malaysia’ and ‘1Malaysia’ looks increasingly more like a pipe dream. But I believe there are still ways to salvage that dream. It requires commitment and sacrifices from all; Muslims and non-Muslims, Malays and non-Malays. For the sake of genuine peace and harmony, each of us needs to accept some changes and let go some of our long-held opinions.

For example...

Muslim first...

In the two weeks that my three children and I recently stayed in Lanzhou (hometown of my late Chinese wife), my four-year-old daughter took bath only twice - on the day we arrived, and on the morning before we left. That, for most people in China, is quite normal. Not so for people here in Malaysia. We take a bath at least twice a day. Hence, to not do so for more than a week is quite unthinkable.

I've been to 12 foreign countries so far in my life. Not that many really, but in most of these visits, I stayed together with the locals; stayed in their homes, ate their food and followed their routines. Two weeks in Islamabad, I wore salwar kameez and ate chapati almost everyday. 15 months in Finland, I ate boiled potatoes every day and ate rice only once or twice a week. Wherever I was, as much as possible, I've tried to follow the culture of my host.

I can't say however that I was successful all the time. When I visited Lanzhou the first time, a week after Aishah and I were married, my late father-in-law (may Allah bless his soul) asked me what I would like to eat. I told him I will eat whatever he eats. Having noodles and green tea everyday was not a problem, but try as I did, there were a few things my stomach just could not take.

For example, what my father-in-law often had for breakfast was a bowl of tea, a special kind of tea which when added with milk, it turns pink. He would then add some salt and put small pieces of bread into it. The pink tea therefore is like a soup and he would drink the whole bowl clean. I tried doing the same a few times but was never able to finish the whole bowl.

Beyond food, certain things can be quite challenging, I certainly needed some getting-used-to using toilet paper in many countries, and till today I only use public toilets in China if I really, really have to.

But when it comes to observing my duties as a Muslim, performing my daily prayers and all, I've learned and managed to adjust. For example, it's not easy to find a surau or a musolla in many Western countries. But as the Prophet (peace be upon him) said, the whole earth is a masjid. A prayer or solat can be performed anywhere where the ground is clean. And I have done so, in secluded corners of airports and train stations, in lecture halls, libraries and supermarkets, and once, in a guest room in a church.  

When it comes to adjusting to variances in the practices among Muslims from different mazahib, I've managed that rather well too. For, if I had insisted being a Shafi'i while praying in a Hanafi congregation like in a Turkish masjid in Berlin or in masajid all over China, I would be causing others some unnecessary discomfort. Just imagine for example, if I insisted following the Shafi'i way reciting 'ameen' loudly; when others don't, right after the imam recited Surat Al-Fatihah ? I will only be disturbing others in their prayers.

Not everyone agrees though with such adjustments. To some, you should remain loyal to your cultural practices no matter where you are, and whether you do so or not depends on how you deal with your own social identity complexities.

Each one of us has multiple social identities. There are based on among others our religious, ethnic and national affiliations. In that order, I am for example a Muslim, a Malay, and a Malaysian. Each of these identities is important in different circumstances. But overall, when it comes to general principles in life, the guide is provided by a specific social identity that a person considers dearest and most important.

And to that, my thoughts are clear. I am, have been and will always be a Muslim first. Because of that, I've had no problem eating anything as long as it is halal. Because of that too, I have never compelled my wife (Allahyarham) and daughters to wear a telekung when they perform solat. I have never too, ingrained in the minds of my children that Malay food or Malay culture is superior to others.

I love Malay food, of course. I still believe gulai tempoyak ikan patin is the best dish in the world but as I once told an aunt in Lanzhou who asked me "which food is better, Chinese food or Malay food?"; I said, "in China, Chinese food is better, in Malaysia, Malay food is better." :)

A decade ago, when I received the scholarship offer to study in Joensuu, Finland, the first thing I inquired was whether there was a Muslim community in the town. It never crossed my mind to ask whether there were any Malaysians there. As it turned out, there weren't any Malaysians living there but I wasn't perturbed. The Muslim community of Joensuu, which comprised of about only 200 people, became my friends, and the 20 or so brothers who were regular attendees to the small local masjid became my family members.

Obviously, the common understanding amongst many Malay Muslims in Malaysia is that since a Malay is defined by the country's constitution as a Muslim, whether a person defines himself either a Malay or a Muslim first does not really matter. That, I respectfully disagree.

How we define ourselves has its implications not only on the way we conduct our personal lives, but also on our views and attitudes on cross-cultural relations and politics. And that is a thesis that I wish to discuss and explore more in my book insha Allah. :)   

Farewell Tribute to a 'Friend'

I went to Subang Jaya last week and went to Subang Parade, a place I frequented a lot during my teenage years. Back in those days, this was the biggest and coolest shopping mall in the Klang Valley. That remained for about a decade or so before other more gigantic malls like Sunway Pyramid and Megamall were opened. My last visit to Subang Parade was a couple of years back and at the time, the place looked run down. But now, after some extensive interior renovation work, the place is glowing and packed again with visitors.

I certainly have some fondness for Subang Parade but the place that I am more attached to is the building next to it. It is splashed in orange these days (the corporate colour of its new owners) but as recently as two months ago, it was all-white except for the iconic double arrow symbol of red, white and blue. This was Carrefour Subang Jaya, the first Carrefour store and hypermarket in Malaysia.

I have always enjoyed shopping for groceries. As a young boy, I often accompanied my mother to the local pasar malam and pasar tani. Then, when the first Giant Supermarket opened in Kelana Jaya, we went for our groceries quite often there too.

But shopping at Carrefour Subang Jaya was something else. The store in Subang Jaya was just a single-storey building when it opened in 1994 but it was bright and looked so spacious. The items on display were of such great variety, and the way they organised and arranged them was just splendid and that really matters for an OCD borderline case like me.

All these years, even after other and bigger hypermarkets has sprung all over, Carrefour remained the place I would go to if time permits. My late wife was fond of Carrefour too. So fond of it she was, it was the first place she wanted to go to immediately after her confinement when our twins were born nine years ago. When we moved to Taman Melati, the Carrefour store in Wangsa Maju became our favourite shopping place even though the Giant Hypermarket in Batu Caves is perhaps nearer to where we live.

Our fondness for Carrefour is not entirely sentimental. It is also due to a few of its practical qualities, which for me, other hypermarkets; try as they might, they simply do not have.

The first is the systematic and practical arrangement of items. In some Giant stores, the bread section is located next to the poultry and fish section, which I personally find rather disconcerting because when I'm buying bread, especially fresh bread, I want to smell the aroma of freshly baked bread. At Carrefour, the bread section is normally at one end. Next to it are the cakes and cookies section, then the cooked/packed food, and then the fruits and vegetables, and finally the poultry and fish section at the other end.

And speaking of bread, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that Carrefour had the best bread in town. Just take the potato bread as an example. Other hypermarkets make them too but potato bread from Carrefour was just a class above. Others tend to overcook it or make it too soft and too fluffy. Carrefour however had it all just nice. It had the perfect tender.

Another aspect I believe Carrefour triumphed over all its rivals is its spacious aisles. Others tend to crowd the aisles with promotional and discounted items. As a result, customers face great difficulty to move their shopping carts especially during busy shopping hours. Carrefour stores however, had most of the time kept the main aisles empty. Hence, it's easier and more convenient for customers to move around with their baskets and carts.

I do concede though when it comes to pricing, Carrefour is not the best especially when compared to Tesco. You can certainly buy many things cheaper at Tesco, perhaps even at Giant. But both my late wife and I agreed that although many things are cheaper in Tesco, we still prefer to shop at Carrefour because every time we shop at Tesco, we end up buying more and at times unnecessary things. The cheap pricing is very seductive but potentially detrimental especially when you end up buying things too large in quantity and things that you don't actually need.  

So, as far as my shopping experience is concern, the time I've spent at Carrefour will forever have a special place in my heart. It pains me to witness the current 'orange invasion' in all its previous premises. But I do understand that sometimes in life, we have to make tough and painful decisions. Farewell my 'friend' and thank you for the services you had rendered us throughout the years. Au revoir!  

Satu hari di taman permainan...

(Berikut adalah artikel saya yang diterbitkan di laman web Centre for Policy Initiatives pada 19 January 2013 di bawah tajuk 'Budak diherdik dengan panggilan 'keling bodoh')

Beberapa minggu yang lalu, saya telah membawa anak-anak ke taman permainan berhampiran tempat tinggal kami. Taman permainan itu agak luas. Di satu sudut, terdapat alatan permainan kanak-kanak – gelungsur, buaian, jongkang-jongket dan sebagainya – manakala di satu sudut lain terdapat tanah lapang yang walaupun tidak begitu luas, cukup untuk kanak-kanak lelaki bermain bolasepak.

Saya memang minat bolasepak dan suka melihat telatah kanak-kanak cuba mempamerkan skil masing-masing. Tatkala asyik memerhatikan mereka, saya baru sedar dalam kumpulan budak-budak lelaki sekitar 20 orang itu, terdapat seorang budak lelaki berbangsa India. Yang lain semuanya budak-budak Melayu.

Situasi sebegitu bukanlah ganjil sebenarnya. Memang kawasan perumahan itu majoriti penduduknya orang-orang Melayu. Yang ganjil dan amat memeranjatkan saya adalah sikap budak-budak Melayu terhadap budak India tunggal itu. Hampir kesemua mereka memanggilnya “budak keling”. Bila dia tersilap tendang, diherdik pula dengan panggilan “keling bodoh”. Budak India itu walau bagaimanapun, tetap bersemangat mahu terus bermain. Malangnya dia dipinggirkan. Tidak ada yang mahu menghantar bola kepadanya. Dia cuba juga mengejar sedaya-upaya namun terus dibuli budak-budak yang lain. Tidak cukup dengan itu, tidak putus-putus dia diherdik dengan kata-kata kesat dan menghina.

Budak-budak lelaki yang saya perhatikan hari itu semuanya masih kecil. Pada amatan saya, semuanya berumur bawah 15 tahun. Kerana itulah saya terperanjat dengan sikap mereka terutamanya kata-kata kesat yang keluar daripada mulut mereka. Persoalannya, bagaimana mereka mampu bersikap sedemikian?

Dalam bidang sosiologi, setiap kelakuan manusia dikaji berdasarkan rangkaian interaksi antara agensi-agensi masyarakat daripada yang paling kecil hingga yang paling besar. Individu itu sendiri adalah agensi yang paling kecil, diikuti dengan ibubapanya, adik-beradik, sanak-saudara, jiran-jiran, guru-guru, tokoh-tokoh dan idola masyarakat, dan akhirnya sesebuah masyarakat itu sendiri secara am.

Sukar untuk kita tentukan adakah budak-budak Melayu yang saya ceritakan di atas, sikap dan kelakuan menghina yang mereka tunjukkan itu adalah hasil pengaruh ibubapa atau ahli-ahli keluarga terdekat. Itu hanya boleh ditentukan melalui kajian mikro psikologi personaliti dan psikologi sosial. Namun kita boleh melihat kepada beberapa contoh kelakuan dan sikap di kalangan tokoh-tokoh masyarakat yang jikapun tidak banyak, pasti ada memberi pengaruh dan kesan.

Pada tahun 2007, ketika menghadiri sebuah program bersama pelajar-pelajar Malaysia di California, Amerika Syarikat, seorang menteri kabinet berbangsa Melayu telah dilaporkan mengeluarkan beberapa ungkapan yang dianggap menghina seorang pelajar berbangsa India. Dalam ucapannya, beliau menerangkan bagaimana pihak penjajah British membawa buruh India ke Tanah Melayu. Seraya berkata demikian, beliau memandang tepat ke arah seorang pelajar India di dalam dewan tersebut lalu berkata “that’s how we got Indians in Malaysia” (“kerana itulah di Malaysia ada orang-orang India”).

Kemudian, pada tahun 2010, timbul pula laporan bagaimana seorang pengetua sekolah menengah kebangsaan di Johor, ketika berucap dalam perhimpunan khas sempena perayaan Hari Kemerdekaan, dengan lantang berkata pelajar-pelajar Cina tidak diperlukan di sekolah itu. Dicanang beliau agar pelajar-pelajar Cina berpindah ke sekolah Cina atau pulang sahaja ke negara Cina. Kepada pelajar-pelajar India beragama Hindu pula beliau berkata, tali sembahyang yang dipakai di lengan dan di leher mereka umpama tali yang dipakai seekor anjing!

Dua contoh di atas adalah contoh kelakuan dan manifesti sikap yang ditonjolkan secara terbuka di khalayak ramai. Bayangkan apakah kata-kata yang mereka hemburkan dalam percakapan harian bersama ahli-ahli keluarga dan rakan-rakan? Pengetua sekolah menengah itu misalnya, kalau begitulah sikap beliau ketika berucap dalam perhimpunan, bayangkan sikap beliau ketika berbual bersama guru-guru (yang majoritinya berbangsa Melayu) atau ketika memarahi pelajar-pelajar berbangsa Cina dan India di pejabatnya? Bayangkan juga bagaimana sikap beliau ini boleh mempengaruhi guru-guru lain yang masih muda dan pelajar-pelajar Melayu di sekolah berkenaan?

Merujuk kembali kepada kerangka sosiologi yang diterangkan tadi, tidak adil sebenarnya untuk kita menyalahkan individu-individu seperti pengetua sekolah ini semata-mata. Sikap dan kelakuan mereka juga dipengaruhi suasana atau individu-individu yang lebih besar kedudukannya dalam masyarakat. Dalam konteks negara kita, mereka yang paling berpengaruh dan yang paling besar hebahan kata-kata mereka adalah pemimpin-pemimpin politik kerajaan.

Polemik bangsa dan agama memang sudah sebati dengan politik di Malaysia. Agak menyedihkan namun tidak dapat dielakkan. Setiap parti dan pertubuhan-pertubuhan yang mewakili bangsa-bangsa tertentu semuanya mahu tampil garang mempertahankan hak masing-masing. UMNO dan PERKASA misalnya, tidak putus-putus berteriak memberi amaran agar jangan ada yang berani mempertikaikan hak-hak orang Melayu. Diiringi pula dengan liputan meluas media arus perdana dan akhbar-akhbar tempatan.

Selalunya pihak yang diberi amaran itu memang tidak disebut dengan jelas. Namun, siapa lagi ianya ditujukan jika tidak kepada orang-orang bukan Melayu di negara kita. Teringat saya bagaimana beberapa kenalan berbangsa Cina mengeluh apabila anak-anak mereka yang bersekolah di sekolah kebangsaan takut untuk ke sekolah setelah terdengar ucapan-ucapan yang disampaikan dalam Perhimpunan Agung UMNO yang disiarkan secara langsung di televisyen.

Mungkin pemimpin-pemimpin politik ini tidak sedar kesan perbuatan dan kata-kata mereka. Mereka menakut-nakutkan orang-orang bukan Melayu, dan kesannya lahirlah perasaan marah yang menyebabkan mereka tidak mahu lagi mengundi mana-mana parti dan individu yang bersama dengan UMNO dan Barisan Nasional.

Dari sudut yang lain pula, kesan kata-kata keras ini menyebabkan ramai orang-orang Melayu daripada segenap lapisan masyarakat menjadi sombong dan hilang rasa hormat terhadap bangsa-bangsa yang lain. Apa sahaja yang dilakukan pemimpin-pemimpin akan dijadikan teladan. Maka, ramai tidak lagi berasa segan menghina dan melemparkan kata-kata keras terhadap bangsa-bangsa lain kerana rasionalnya, “kalau pemimpin politik boleh, mengapa kita tidak boleh?”

Budak-budak lelaki Melayu yang saya perhatikan di taman permainan beberapa minggu yang lalu itu adalah salah satu hasil daripada rantaian interaksi pemimpin dan masyarakat ini. Adakah ini sikap bangsa Melayu yang ingin dipupuk pemimpin-pemimpin UMNO, PERKASA dan pertubuhan-pertubuhan Melayu yang lain?

Bukanlah tujuan artikel ini untuk menghentam orang-orang Melayu semata-mata. Sifat prejudis ada pada semua bangsa. Sebagai seorang yang berkemahiran sedikit berbahasa Cina, saya tahu bagaimana sebahagian orang-orang Cina menghina dan mempersendakan orang-orang Melayu. Namun, dalam konteks negara kita, orang-orang Melayu sebagai kumpulan majoriti lebih bertanggungjawab menunjukkan teladan yang baik. Tambahan pula, kita orang-orang Melayu beragama Islam dan ajaran Islam itu mengajar kita saling hormat-menghormati, bukan menabur dan menyemai perasaan benci.

Beyond "What If?"

British wartime Prime Minister Winston Churchill is often revered as one of the most important figures in World War II. His inspiring speeches galvanised the battered spirits of the British people, and his strong leadership inspired the British army and their allies towards victory. Any man of lesser resolve and determination would have caved in and surrendered to the then mighty Nazi Germans.

That is what everyone knows. What very few people know is the fact that Churchill nearly died about 10 years before World War II. No, he didn't nearly die in some battlefield somewhere in the then vast British Empire. He nearly died after he was knocked down by a taxi in New York City! Churchill had an American mother so he was probably there for a social visit. He did not die but the injuries sustained were serious enough he had to be hospitalised for an entire week.

"What if?" is a question many would ask while imagining alternative eventualities in life. What if Churchill had died? Would the Germans successfully conquered Great Britain and gained absolute control of Western Europe? If that had happened, perhaps most of us today would be reading and writing in German rather than in English, and perhaps most football fans in the world would be following the Bundesliga rather than the English Premier League.

One may ask "what if?" for any issues, from the most profound to the most trivial. What if Hussein Onn had persevered and appointed Ghazali Shafie (instead of Mahathir Mohamad) as Malaysia's Deputy Prime Minister in 1976? Mahathir probably would never become prime minister, ousted most likely from the government by Ghazali and forced to return to his Maha Clinic in Alor Star. No Mahathir, no Proton Saga, no Penang Bridge, no KLCC, and no KLIA. How backwards Malaysia would still be ;)

What if Eric Cantona had joined Liverpool, and not Leeds United and eventually Manchester United in the early 1990's? In 1992, Liverpool manager Graeme Souness was asked by Michel Platini (then manager of the French national team) to bring the talented yet temperamental young striker to England. Souness refused the offer so Cantona went to Leeds United instead. Leeds won the league that season. He was sold to Manchester United the next season and the club immediately won the league for the first time in more than two decades and went on to win more league titles over the years, enough to even surpassed Liverpool's proud long-standing record of 18 English league titles. Liverpool of course depressingly has not won the league since 1990.

Pondering with "what if" may also be an act of regret for not doing something that perhaps could have prevented a tragedy from happening. Former Wales manager and football player Gary Speed died tragically a few months ago. Most likely, he had committed suicide but expert testimony given during the coroner's inquest suggests that it might have been purely accidental. Whichever, it will not take the pain away from Gary Speed's wife who confessed that she and Gary had an exchange of words about "something or nothing" the last time she saw him alive. She went out for a ride to clear her mind but soon returned home only to find she had accidentally locked herself out. She spent the night in the car and in the morning found her husband's body hanged in the garage.

Imagine how it feels like that your very last conversation with your late spouse was an unpleasant one. Imagine the "what if" that goes through Mrs. Speed's mind. "What if I did not leave the house?"; "What if I had brought my house keys with me?"; "What if I did not make such a big deal about the 'something or nothing' we had argued about?" Imagine that... Well, I certainly can. The circumstances surrounding my wife's death were certainly different. She certainly did not take her own life but we did have our own incident over 'something or nothing' on that fateful day. And because of that, I have continued to ask myself "what if" I had done this or that, and "what if" I had said something that night.

It's not easy to move beyond these "what if's'". One cannot choose to have selective amnesia. I cannot simply extract specific data from my brain and delete it from my memory. It stays with me and continues to haunt me. Deal with it one must and as a Muslim, I've learned to accept all that has happened as God's will, the wisdom of which I shall learn to understand for the rest of my life.

Fate is to be accepted, not questioned. To sometimes ask 'what if?' is instinctive, to be burdened by it however is maladaptive and un-Islamic. "I am enslaved to fate, of all else say no more; With a sweet tongue speak, else I plea say no more; Speak not of troubles, of treasures tell me more; And if of this you know not, be not troubled, say no more." (Rumi 149, Divan-e Shams)

For the first time in almost a year, I feel strong enough to move on, to finish all that I've started and to begin the search for a new mother for my three young children. Regaining some level of optimism is essential. Optimistic I am of many things, including for Liverpool to finally win their 19th league title next year (or sometime before the end of time:)) and for Roger Federer to finally beat Rafael Nadal at Rolland Garros. Churchill, Cantona AND Mahathir are best left to history.

The Vegetable Challenge

One of the most difficult challenges I've faced as a single-parent is to get my children to eat green vegetables. I can get them to prepare themselves to school, buckle-up in the car, clean-up their rooms (somewhat), and even switch-off the television with little resistant but to get them to eat green vegetables is almost impossible. Somehow, they just cannot bring themselves to swallow those green leaves and they look genuinely distressed when forced to do so. I am indeed at a lost on how to change this.

Once upon a time, Popeye The Sailor Man was a popular cartoon among kids. The fact that Popeye eats spinach to get his strength to beat-up his foe helped a lot of parents then to get their kids to eat vegetables. But Popeye unfortunately isn't popular among kids anymore. And as far as I know, they aren't any contemporary cartoon characters whose main persona revolves around him/her eating vegetables.

I had troubles with vegetables too during my own childhood. Popeye was a motivator but what crucially pushed me to start eating lots of vegetables was something I learned when I was 10, in Standard 4 in a class that existed back then called Alam & Manusia. We were learning about the different vitamins and the various benefits they each provide. Way down the list was Vitamin K and one of its main benefits is to prevent infertility (mencegah kemandulan).

I didn't actually know what infertility means. All I knew was it meant a person wouldn't be able to have kids. And since I was already imagining having lots of kids of my own, the word infertility (mandul) so terrified me, it got me started eating lots and lots of vegetables. It worked wonders I guess as I had three kids within seven years of marriage. To have more however would be a bit difficult now since my wife passed away nine months ago.

My late wife was indeed more successful in persuading the kids to eat vegetables. Whenever she cooked, at least one veggie dish will be prepared and she would always ask the kids to take some. And the kids somehow were able to eat them. It seems like they only eat vegetables cooked by their mother, not by anyone else.

I'm struggling quite a bit since my wife died. I'm not ashamed to admit that. Looking after the kids and dealing with the various chores around the house aren't what I'm struggling with. The emotional and spiritual issues are those that continue to affect me. My late wife would've celebrated her birthday yesterday (9 January), and as I remember back the circumstances that preceded her death, my heart still aches with a tinge of sadness.

At some point however, we have to move on. As much as I think I can raise our three children on my own, there will always be a few things that I won't be able to do on my own. My eldest daughter is fast approaching the stage where there will be a few 'female issues' to deal with. And I could certainly use some help to get the kids to eat green vegetables again.

How Can You Not Know People Hate You?

From a psychological perspective, the on-going mass uprising in Egypt raises one puzzling question: how can President Hosni Mubarak not know Egyptians hate him? Surely, for a man who has been in power for 30 years, he must have at least some indication how Egyptians view him. Common sense should tell us that but apparently dictators past and present are unable to understand common sense.

I have for long seen and understood how some people have incredibly mind-boggling ways to justify their lofty positions and self-serving behaviour. Deep down they know they are unfairly privileged, and they know many others are suffering or not doing so well. They know it's not nice to be in power for too long, to enjoy all the comfort and riches, yet they'll say to themselves, "why not?" "I've been coming to office every day, I've brought at least some development, I've brought some positive changes, so why not I enjoy and gain some things for myself? And why should I step down? Everywhere I go people smile and greet me. That means they all love me and want me to stay as long as I want."

I'm sure Sigmund Freud would've been proud to see how true his defense mechanism theory has turned out to be. Hosni Mubarak indeed is only one out of many other world leaders who are severely out-of-touch with reality. Ben Ali of Tunisia was another, while current leaders in countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia and Jordan are other notable examples.

Here in Malaysia, we are not short of case examples either. The recently retired MIC leader is one outstanding example. Here is a person who was the leader of his community for 30 years, who along the process became so rich he could afford to have a collection of tailor-made Italian suits and spent millions for his children's wedding ceremony. Yet the majority of Indians here remain poor, a substantial percentage in fact are living below the poverty level.

But perhaps the most interesting case is a certain chief minister in East Malaysia. Again, here's a man who has been in his position for 30 years, has become rich beyond all imaginations, and has enriched his family members too along the way. And, again it's the same story. He is rich while his people have remained poor. People don't like him but he doesn't seem to care nor realise that fact. After all, he is seeking yet another term in power.

A certain iconic figure of the opposition would fit as an example too. He seems to be so engrossed with his ultimate ambition to be the next prime minister he does not realise many in his own party and previously ardent supporters are beginning to really hate him. He talks about justice and proclaims war against nepotism and croniyism, yet he keeps his wife as president of his party, allowed his daughter to be elected vice-president while he himself remains the de facto leader (whatever that means).

How can you not know people hate you? Apparently some people are just incapable of knowing.

Disillusioned

I am a city lad. I grew up in Petaling Jaya and now live in Kuala Lumpur. I've never lived in a kampung and I've never known how it's like really to be poor. Yet I often lose sleep whenever I see and read about the struggles of others. Why?

I met a few associates at a mamak joint a few weeks back. I expressed my bewilderment on what goes through the minds of politicians. Do they not lose sleep thinking about the poor? When they walk around and meet people, do they not realise how difficult life is for many others?

“You are assuming they have a conscience”, said the eldest among us. Apparently they don't. All politicians by nature are self-serving and think always about themselves before others. “People first, performance now”, what exactly those words mean I would never know I guess.

A friend once described to me how astonished he was when he met a person who lives in the outskirts of Kuala Lumpur who earns only 350 ringgit per month. He was so astonished that he thought the person was only joking. That was until the man showed him his most recent payslip.

If you can't trust politicians, whom should you trust to make life better for yourself and others? Academicians? Some academicians are so enchanted by theories and models they don't even know what's happening in the real world.

I am an academician myself (or at least that's what I'm supposed to be), but I often get utterly disillusioned reading ‘scientific’ academic papers. I've never been impressed with numbers, and have never been really interested in conceptual models and theoretical framework. I do concede theorising is necessary but there must be a limit to how much one should pursue it.

Why exactly do we encourage people to pursue postgraduate studies? Often this is due to opportunities to earn a higher pay and to improve the prospect for promotion. But what exactly about postgraduate qualification that elevates a person's career prospects higher than others?

Obviously it's the level of expertise the person developed for the topic he worked on for his postgraduate research. Other than that, and more importantly in my humble opinion, is the supposed sophistication of thinking and ideas. Not to say that they should be embroiled always with ground-breaking ideas but enough to know that conclusions and understanding of any issues and problems are never that simple.

A cabinet minister with a PhD recently made a statement in parliament that the Chinese and Indians in Malaysia are not patriotic enough. That is why, according to him, they refuse to join the military. That statement, was it based on any scientific findings or merely an assumption? If the minister really does have a PhD, I'm sure he could have come up with a more analytical statement.

“The more you know, the more you know you don't know”. Maybe I have taken this advice far too seriously that the more I read the more I am confused and disillusioned with everything and anything. I wish life can be more simple or maybe it's just me who is making it difficult.

Related article: 'am I an academic?'

Kepentingan Kajian Sains Sosial

(Berikut adalah artikel saya yang diterbitkan di laman web Centre for Policy Initiatives pada 12 Ogos 2010 di bawah tajuk 'Masalah kurang kajian dan pribumi pulang ke Bakun')

Sejak beberapa dekad yang lalu, kita ghairah menggalak pelajar-pelajar mengambil jurusan sains tulen. Hasrat kerajaan ialah untuk melahirkan jurutera-jurutera dan saintis-saintis tempatan untuk memacu pertumbuhan industri berat dan teknologi tinggi di dalam negara.

Bilamana tumpuan lebih diberikan pada bidang kejuruteraan, sains komputer, fizik dan pelbagai bidang sains tulen yang lain, jurusan sains sosial kurang diberi perhatian, walhal peranannya dalam perancangan dasar dan pelan pembangunan seharusnya tidak diabaikan.

Mengkaji kesan pembangunan kepada masyarakat adalah tugas dan bidang ahli-ahli sains sosial. Seorang ahli sosiologi misalnya akan mengkaji perihal kesan pembangunan kepada institusi keluarga, masalah sosial, kesejahteraan penduduk, taraf pendidikan dan kesihatan masyarakat.

Kajian-kajian yang dilakukan penting bagi merangka polisi kerajaan yang menjurus ke arah pembangunan yang lebih seimbang. Memang menjadi hasrat ahli-ahli sains sosial agar hasil kajian saintifik dijadikan asas pertimbangan bilamana sesuatu dasar yang baru dan projek pembangunan ingin dilaksanakan.

Maka sebagai seorang ahli seumur hidup Persatuan Sains Sosial Malaysia, saya menyambut baik kenyataan Ketua Menteri Sarawak Abdul Taib Mahmud baru-baru ini yang mengiktiraf peranan sains sosial dalam merancang pembangunan.

Ketika berucap pada satu majlis pertemuan dengan pelajar-pelajar dari Sarawak di London pada 26 Julai yang lalu, Abdul Taib Mahmud dilaporkan telah menyebut bahawa adalah penting bagi kerajaan negeri mencapai persefahaman dengan masyarakat Penan dan kaum-kaum asal yang lain tentang penempatan baru bagi mereka yang terpaksa dipindahkan kerana pembinaan projek hydro di negeri tersebut. Di sinilah, menurut beliau, sumbangan dan kemahiran ahli-ahli sains sosial amat diperlukan.

Pakar-pakar dalam bidang sains sosial memang boleh banyak menyumbang. Sebaik-baiknya, setiap kali sebelum suatu dasar atau projek pembangunan itu diluluskan, perlu dijalankan kajian impak sosial polisi dan projek berkenaan. Perlu ditekankan di sini, kajian-kajian sepatutnya dijalankan sebelum, bukan sahaja, selepas perlaksanaan.

Inilah yang sering menjadi masalah. Kajian-kajian sosial yang neutral dan saintifik tidak dijadikan asas pertimbangan. Yang lebih diutamakan adalah pendapat dan pendirian peribadi perdana menteri, ketua menteri atau menteri yang bertanggungjawab.

Lihat saja pada kronologi bagaimana dasar Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran Sains dan Matematik dalam Bahasa Inggeris (PPSMI) diperkenalkan. Idea asal dasar ini datang dari perdana menteri ketika itu, Dr Mahathir Mohamad. Seterusnya dibawa ke persidangan Pemuda Umno untuk didebatkan. Tidak lama selepas itu dibawa ke mesyuarat kabinet dan kemudiannya terus diluluskan.

Tidak diketahui samada ada kajian dijalankan untuk meramal kesan jangka pendek dan jangka panjang dasar berkenaan. Tidak diketahui juga samada kajian terperinci telah dijalankan untuk mengukur samada guru-guru yang sedia-ada sudah cukup terlatih untuk melaksanakan PPSMI.

Nyata sekali kajian-kajian seperti ini tidak dianggap penting. Yang penting ialah pendapat dan keputusan perdana menteri dan mesyuarat kabinet. Selain daripadanya dianggap butiran yang boleh ditangani kemudian.

Proses yang sama kini sudah kelihatan dalam perbincangan usul Kementerian Pelajaran untuk menghapuskan peperiksaan UPSR dan PMR. Idea asal datang dari Muhyiddin Yassin selaku Menteri Pelajaran. Memang ada beberapa perbincangan meja-bulat diadakan. Namun, sepertimana yang berlaku sebelum dasar PPSMI dilaksanakan, kerajaan nampaknya sudah jelas menjurus ke arah penghapusan kedua-dua peperiksaan berkenaan.

Badan-badan dan pertubuhan yang mewakili guru-guru dan ibubapa sudah menyuarakan bantahan, namun ini nampaknya tidak begitu diendahkan. Ramai pihak menuntut agar apa jua keputusan yang diambil perlu dibuat berdasarkan hasil kajian saintifik yang telus dan mendalam. Sekali lagi, tuntutan ini tidak dianggap penting dan tidak dilayan.

Agak aneh juga memikirkan adakah Abdul Taib Mahmud, setelah hampir tiga dekad menjadi ketua menteri di Sarawak, baru sekarang sedar kepentingan kajian sains sosial dalam perlaksanaan pelan pembangunan? Apatah lagi bagi projek yang begitu besar seperti projek empangan Bakun, apakah selama ini kajian impak sosial langsung tidak dititikberatkan?

Untuk membina empangan ini, lebih 10,000 orang penduduk asal terpaksa dipindahkan. Mereka dijanjikan penempatan baru yang lebih baik yang lengkap dengan kemudahan-kemudahan asas dan dijamin peluang pekerjaan.

Pihak bertanggungjawab secara amnya merasakan mereka lebih tahu apa yang terbaik untuk penduduk-penduduk ini. Maka mereka dengan sendirinya memutuskan di mana penduduk-penduduk ini dipindahkan. Tidak banyak usaha dilakukan untuk menyelami kegusaran yang timbul di kalangan penduduk-penduduk asal ini dan adakah penempatan baru ini sesuai dengan cara hidup mereka sebelumnya.

Cuma sekarang baru terdetik di fikiran pihak bertanggungjawab untuk mengkaji kembali pelan penempatan semula. Hal ini diakui sendiri oleh penasihat alam sekitar kerajaan negeri Sarawak, Dr. James Dawos Mamit. Beliau mengakui sudah ada sebilangan penduduk asal yang mengambil keputusan pulang ke penempatan asal mereka kerana tidak mampu menyesuaikan diri di penempatan baru yang disediakan. Mereka sanggup pulang walaupun menyedari mustahil untuk mereka tinggal di sana bila empangan Bakun dibuka nanti.

Masalah-masalah seperti ini timbul kerana kurangnya perhatian yang diberikan pada kajian sosio-ekonomi dan sosiologi yang objektif dan mendalam. Tidak mengapalah, mungkin Abdul Taib Mahmud dan kerajaan pimpinannya sudah sedar akan kesilapan mereka dan kini mahu memperbetulkannya. Atau mungkin ‘kesedaran’ ini hanya bersifat sementara menjelang berlangsungnya pilihanraya negeri tidak lama lagi?

Mengapa Malaysia Tidak Pernah Layak Ke Piala Dunia?

(Berikut ialah artikel saya yang diterbitkan di laman web Centre for Policy Initiatives pada 9 July 2010. Dipaparkan juga di bawah komen yang diberikan oleh 'Peminat Bolasepak' yang saya rasakan sangat bernas dan wajar diberikan perhatian yang serius)

Pertandingan Piala Dunia Bolasepak 2010 di Afrika Selatan sudah hampir ke penghujungnya. Sudah hampir sebulan peminat bolasepak di Malaysia bersorak menyaksikan pertarungan antara negara-negara selain daripada negara tanahair mereka sendiri. Dalam keghairahan bersorak pasti ramai yang tertanya, "bilalah agaknya pasukan kebangsaan Malaysia akan beraksi di pusingan akhir Piala Dunia?"

Melihat pada prestasi pasukan kebangsaan sepanjang beberapa tahun yang lalu, agak mustahil Malaysia dapat beraksi di pentas Piala Dunia. Senarai ranking mutakhir Persekutuan Bolasepak Antarabangsa (FIFA) meletakkan Malaysia di tangga 146, setaraf dengan 'gergasi' bolasepak yang lain seperti Turkmenistan, Burundi dan Madagascar.

Walhal, kurang 30 tahun yang lalu pasukan bolasepak kebangsaan duduk setaraf dengan Jepun dan Korea Selatan yang sudah berturut kali layak ke pusingan akhir Piala Dunia. Saya sempat menyaksikan pertarungan antara Malaysia dan Jepun sebanyak dua kali di Stadium Merdeka pada tahun 1980-an. Pertamanya di peringkat separuh akhir Pestabola Merdeka 1986: Malaysia menang 2-1 dalam masa tambahan. Perlawanan kedua ialah di pusingan kelayakan Piala Asia 1988: Malaysia tewas 0-1.

Sekarang, sekiranya Malaysia berjaya menewaskan Jepun ataupun tewas tipis di tangan mereka, pasti dianggap kejayaan yang sangat besar. Walaupun tewas 0-1 pada tahun 1988, hakikatnya Malaysia pada perlawanan tersebut menguasai pasukan Jepun sepanjang tempoh perlawanan. Kekalahan tipis ketika itu dianggap cukup mendukacitakan.

Kemerosotan pasukan bolasepak kebangsaan boleh dilihat daripada pelbagai sudut. Yang pasti, kemerosotan ini banyak mencerminkan beberapa perkara 'pelik' yang berlaku di dalam negara.

Pertama, jika dilihat pada barisan pemain kebangsaan sekarang, sudah tidak ada lain pemain berbangsa Cina yang menyarung jersi kebangsaan. Malah, hanya S. Kunalan, pemain dari Negeri Sembilan yang merupakan pemain bukan Melayu tunggal yang sering turun dalam kesebelasan utama pasukan kebangsaan.

Sudah pasti kemerosotan prestasi pasukan bolasepak kebangsaan bukan kerana tiadanya pemain berbangsa Cina. Cuma, apa yang berlaku ialah menularnya polarasi kaum dalam arena sukan negara. Bolasepak kini boleh dianggap sukan untuk kaum Melayu sahaja, manakala kaum Cina lebih tertumpu pada acara sukan lain seperti bolakeranjang dan bolatampar.

Dalam bersukan pun sudah kurang integrasi antara kaum! Bukankah ini sesuatu yang amat menyedihkan?

Saya percaya kepelbagain kaum dalam sebuah pasukan bolasepak ada manfaatnya. Lihat saja pada pasukan Jerman dalam kejohanan Piala Dunia kali ini. Dalam kesebelasan utama pasukannya yang membenam England dan Argentina, ada permain yang berbangsa Turki, ada yang berasal dari Ghana dan Tunisia, dan di bangku simpanan ada pemain-pemain yang berasal dari Sepanyol dan Brazil.

Pemain-pemain ini membawa pembaharuan dalam corak permainan pasukan Jerman. Jika sebelum ini mereka dianggap hanya bergantung kepada disiplin dan organisasi permainan yang tinggi, pasukan Jerman kali ini dilihat mempamerkan aksi menyerang yang baik dan kreatif.

Pasukan kebangsaan Malaysia dahulunya punya kelebihan ini. Pemain-pemain Melayu dan India lebih ekspresif mempamerkan skil permainan manakala pemain-pemain berbangsa Cina dan Sikh punya daya tumpuan dan disiplin yang tinggi. Maka, tidak hairan jika dilihat pada senarai pemain kebangsaan pada tahun 1970-an dan awal 1980-an, tonggak pertahanan negara dibarisi pemain-pemain seperti Soh Chin Aun, Santokh Singh, Lee Kin Hong dan Serbegeth Singh; dan tonggak serangan dibarisi pemain seperti Mokhtar Dahari, Shukor Salleh, Hassan Sani dan Zainal Abidin Hassan. Budaya yang berbeza membawa gaya permainan yang berbeza, dan ini membawa manfaat bila diadun dengan sempurna.

Seperkara lagi yang menyedihkan dalam bolasepak negara ialah penglibatan ahli-ahli politik. Memang benar, daripada sudut kewangan penglibatan ahli-ahli politik itu membawa manfaat. Mereka mampu menarik dana yang diperlukan untuk mengurus persatuan bolasepak tempatan. Selain daripada itu, penglibatan mereka sebenarnya tidak perlu.

Saya tidak faham misalnya mengapa jawatan presiden persatuan-persatuan bolasepak negeri sering dipegang menteri-menteri besar. Tidak cukupkah kerja di pejabat menteri besar sehingga perlu mencari kerja tambahan mengurus persatuan bolasepak? Mengapa tidak dibiarkan sahaja pentadbir profesional mentadbir dan membuat keputusan? Saya percaya ramai menganggap penglibatan ahli-ahli politik ini tidak lebih daripada usaha mencara publisiti murahan.

Kita tidak mahu ahli-ahli politik masuk campur kerana tidak mahu 'penyakit politik' meresap dalam bolasepak. 'Penyakit' yang paling ketara ialah kurangnya fokus pada rancangan jangka panjang. Banyak dana dan tenaga lebih tertumpu pada kejayaan serta merta. Siapa di kalangan ahli-ahli politik yang mahu membuang masa merancang pelan jangka panjang seperti 'Malaysia ke Piala Dunia 2018'? Tahun 2018 itu sangat jauh dan jangka hayat politik mereka mungkin tamat sebelum itu.

Sekiranya perancangan rapi dibuat, saya percaya pasukan bolasepak kebangsaan mampu bersaing di peringkat antarabangsa. Saiz dan tubuh pemain yang kecil tidak lagi boleh dijadikan alasan. Pemain-pemain Jepun dan Korea Selatan sudah membuktikan ia bukanlah penghalang untuk mengecap kejayaan. Kejayaan pasukan kebangsaan merangkul pingat emas Sukan SEA tahun lalu perlu dijadikan asas kejayaan yang lebih besar pada masa hadapan.

Bersorak untuk pasukan Brazil, Sepanyol dan Argentina dalam pusingan akhir Piala Dunia banyak membawa kepuasan. Namun, bagi setiap peminat bolasepak di tanahair, tidak ada yang lebih memuaskan dan membanggakan daripada bersorak untuk pasukan Malaysia dan mendengar lagu Negaraku berkumandang di Piala Dunia. Bilalah agaknya impian ini akan menjadi kenyataan?

Komen ‘Peminat Bolasepak’:

Point 1 : Polarasi kaum

Saya rasakan kurang adil jika kita jatuhkan hukuman polarasi kaum kepada kualiti bolasepak kita. Hakikatnya, memang itu sahajalah yg kita ada. Saya berpendapat jika ada kaum bukan melayu yg mahu bermain pun, tak akan berubah kualitinya. Germany memilih Khedira, Ozil dan Klose bukanlah kerana mahukan integrasi kaum, tetapi kerana itulah yg terbaik mereka ada. Saya yakin bahawa jikalau 23 pemain terbaik German adalah yang memang dilahirkan di German, mereka itulah yg akan dipilih.

Sepanyol pernah mencuba kaedah yg lebih kurang serupa pada piala dunia 1984 dengan seberapa boleh menyenaraikan pemain-pemain dari kesemua regional, contohnya Basque, Catalonia, Madrid, Valencia dan Andalusia. Ternyata, ia langsung tidak menjadi, dan persembahan Sepanyol pada piala dunia itu adalah tersangat mengecewakan.

Kesemuanya adalah bergantung sepenuhnya kepada perkembangan pemain-pemain kita. Kita selalu melihat kepada bolasepk Inggeris. Corak latihan, akademi bolasepak, kesemuanya adalah merujuk kepada pasukan-pasukan dari Inggeris, padahal, sebenarnya England tidak langsung menyerlah di peringkat antarabangsa. Corak permainan Inggeris yg pantas, laju dan fizikal sebenarnya tidak sesuai dengan keadaan fizikal kita yg sekarang lebih kecil dari Jepun. Bagaimana jika kita menitik beratkan kepada skil teknikal individu? Cara memegang bola, 'close-control', 'dribbling', 'possession', semua ini kurang ada pada bolasepak Inggeris. Kalau kita melihat kepada pemain-pemain dunia yg mempunyai skil seperti yg saya sebut di atas, kesemuanya bertubuh kecil! (Messi, Xavi, Pedro, Iniesta) Jika kita boleh menitik beratkan aspek ini pada permainan kita, tak mustahil kita boleh mempunyai Messi kita sendiri.

Point 2 : Politik

Saya setuju 100%. Tahukah kita bahawa bolasepak Jepun boleh berada di tempat mereka sekarang dengan pelan 20 tahun mereka yg bermula pertengahan 80-an? Dan kita dapat menyaksikan sekarang mereka boleh bersaing di pentas dunia. Dimana pelan kita? Sedangkan format liga malaysia pun seringkali ditukar 1-2 tahun sekali, apatah pula dengan 'blueprint'?

Bebaskan Mahasiswa Daripada Cengkaman AUKU

(The following is my article for Centre for Policy Initiatives published on its website on 17th June 2010)

Gara-gara turun padang meninjau perjalanan kempen pilihanraya kecil di Hulu Selangor April lepas, empat orang mahasiswa Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) kini berhadapan tindakan tatatertib. Mereka adalah 'mangsa' terbaru Akta Universti dan Kolej Universiti (AUKU) yang menghalang mahasiswa dan ahli akademik daripada terlibat dalam sebarang kegiatan politik.

AUKU yang diwarisi hari ini adalah salah satu 'harta peninggalan' bekas perdana menteri Dr Mahathir Mohamad. Pindaan ke atas AUKU pada tahun 1975 dibentangkan Dr Mahathir selaku Menteri Pelajaran ketika itu selepas berlakunya demonstrasi besar-besar anjuran gerakan mahasiswa pada tahun 1974. Demonstrasi tersebut dianjurkan bagi membela nasib petani-petani miskin di Baling, Kedah.

AUKU diperkenalkan atas alasan perlunya mahasiswa menumpukan masa dan tenaga pada pelajaran dan tidak membuang masa terlibat dalam kegiatan politik. Politik itu dianggap melalaikan. Mereka yang terlibat dalam politik dianggap sudah terpesong daripada landasan yang benar. Hasrat kerajaan ialah membendung kemungkinan mahasiswa gagal dalam pelajaran kerana keterlibatan mereka dalam kegiatan politik.

Tidak diketahui berapa ramai mahasiswa di universiti-universiti tempatan yang gagal dalam pelajaran kerana sibuk berpolitik. Mungkin benar ianya salah satu penyebab kegagalan namun pastinya ada penyebab-penyebab yang lain. Antaranya mungkin kerana sibuk bersukan, sibuk bekerja sambilan dan mungkin juga sibuk dilamun percintaan.

Sekiranya berpolitik, sebagai salah satu penyebab kegagalan, dibanteras sepenuhnya melalui AUKU, mengapa tidak AUKU diperluaskan bagi membanteras penyebab-penyebab kegagalan yang lain? Mengapa tidak diharamkan saja mahasiswa daripada bersukan, bercinta dan bekerja sambilan? Haramkan saja kesemuanya kerana kita mahu mahasiswa menumpukan hanya pada pelajaran.

Sebagai salah seorang tenaga pendidik di institusi pengajian awam, saya kurang mengerti mengapa berpolitik itu dianggap sesuatu yang begitu hina dan membahayakan. Memang benar, ada mahasiswa yang ponteng kelas dan gagal dalam peperiksaan kerana sibuk ke hulu dan ke hilir menghadiri ceramah-ceramah politik. Tetapi tidak semuanya begitu. Ada yang sibuk berpolitik tapi masih mampu mentadbir masa melaksanakan segala tugasan akademik dengan cemerlang.

Persoalannya, apakah sebenarnya golongan mahasiswa yang mahu dilahirkan melalui sistem pendidikan tinggi tempatan? Apakah kita mahu melahirkan mahasiswa yang hanya berminat membaca dan menghafal, atau adakah kita mahu mahasiswa yang mampu menghubungkan teori dengan kenyataan?

Saya pernah beberapa kali semasa kuliah cuba menilai sejauh mana pengetahuan am pelajar-pelajar saya di kelas. Saya bertanyakan soalan-soalan mudah seperti, 'apakah nama penuh Menteri Pelajaran?' dan 'apakah nama penuh parti PAS?' Agak menyedihkan bagi soalan-soalan mudah seperti ini, tidak sampai 25 peratus pun pelajar yang dapat menjawabnya dengan betul.

Yang menarik berkenaan kes empat mahasiswa UKM ini, kesemua mereka adalah pelajar program sains politik yang ketika pilihanraya kecil Hulu Selangor berlangsung, sedang menduduki kursus 'Analisa Pilihanraya' di Jabatan Sains Politik, UKM.

Tujuan mereka turun padang di Hulu Selangor adalah untuk meninjau realiti bagaimana kempen pilihanraya di negara ini dijalankan. Malangnya, apa yang sepatutnya dipuji sebagai inisiatif yang baik dijadikan jerat untuk memerangkap mahasiswa-mahasiswa ini.

Kesatuan kakitangan akademik tempatan sudah sekian lama menyeru kerajaan menghapuskan AUKU. Bukanlah tujuan saranan ini dibuat untuk mendesak mahasiswa terlibat dalam politik. Saranan ini dibuat atas kesedaran mahasiswa perlu diberi kebebasan menyelami pelbagai ideologi dan pemahaman. Bila lagi kalau bukan ketika menuntut di kolej dan universiti golongan muda berpeluang mengembang minda dan pemikiran?

Bukankah politik itu menganjur perdebatan dan merangsang pemikiran kritis di kalangan orang muda? Atau, adakah kita lebih selesa sekiranya golongan muda terpesona dengan muzik, wayang dan lain-lain hiburan?

Sebagai seorang pensyarah, saya pastinya lebih senang mendengar pelajar-pelajar saya menghadiri ceramah politik daripada menghadiri acara-acara hiburan. Saya juga pasti lebih gembira jika melihat pelajar-pelajar membaca Harakah dan Aliran Monthly daripada membaca Mastika dan Media Hiburan.

Perlu diingat, tidak semua mahasiswa yang terlibat dalam politik akan terpengaruh menyertai parti-parti pembangkang. Di kemuncak gerakan Reformasi pada akhir tahun 1990-an, berpuluh ribu mahasiswa seluruh negara turun menyertai demonstrasi anti-kerajaan.

Daripada puluhan ribu ini, tidak semua yang hingga sekarang masih setia menyokong parti-parti pembangkang. Ramai juga yang dulunya kuat melaung "Reformasi" dan menjunjung poster Anwar Ibrahim ke sana sini kini menyertai Umno dan parti-parti komponen Barisan Nasional yang lain.

Fahaman dan dokongan politik itu boleh berubah. Maka, janganlah disekat mahasiswa daripada mencuba dan mendekati pendekatan politik yang berbeza-beza.

Jika ya pun kerajaan bertegas tidak mahu menghapuskan AUKU, paling tidak laksanakanlah ia dengan adil. Empat orang mahasiswa UKM ini dilaporkan telah membantu berkempen untuk calon PKR dalam pilihanraya kecil di Hulu Selangor. Ramai yang pasti tertanya, sekiranya mereka turun membantu berkempen untuk calon Barisan Nasional, adakah tindakan tatatertib akan diambil ke atas mereka juga? Barisan Nasional ialah sebuah gabungan parti-parti politik.

Kalau salah berkempen untuk PKR, pasti salah juga berkempen untuk BN!

Atau mungkin berkempen untuk BN itu tidak salah kerana BN itu kerajaan, maka berkempen untuk BN itu sebenarnya sekadar memberi khidmat pada kerajaan. Jika itulah rasionalnya, empat mahasiswa UKM ini tidak boleh dianggap salah juga. Sebabnya, kerajaan negeri di Selangor itu diterajui PKR, maka berkempen untuk PKR juga boleh dianggap memberi khidmat pada kerajaan negeri.

Saya percaya beberapa pemimpin muda Umno seperti Saifuddin Abdullah dan Mohd Puad Zarkashi mahu ruang yang bebas diberikan kepada mahasiswa untuk terlibat dalam kegiatan politik. Mereka sedar jika ruang yang bebas ini diberikan, bukan parti-parti pembangkang sahaja yang boleh menerima manfaat. Umno juga boleh secara terbuka mengembangkan pengaruhnya di kampus-kampus melalui sayap Putera dan Puteri-nya.

Empat mahasiswa UKM ini kini telah membawa kes ini ke mahkamah. Agak sukar membayangkan mahkamah akan memihak kepada mereka, namun sekurang-kurangnya kes mereka ini akan menarik perhatian ramai akan perlunya AUKU itu dihapuskan.

FIFA World Cup: The Moral Equivalent of War

It was William James who first called for a moral equivalent of war. In his article published in 1910, James wrote:

"I spoke of the "moral equivalent" of war. So far, war has been the only force that can discipline a whole community, and until an equivalent discipline is organized, I believe that war must have its way. But I have no serious doubt that the ordinary prides and shames of social man, once developed to a certain intensity, are capable of organizing such a moral equivalent as I have sketched, or some other just as effective for preserving manliness of type. It is but a question of time, of skilful propogandism, and of opinion-making men seizing historic opportunities."

Football (or soccer) was probably the last thing in James' mind when he wrote this classic piece. In fact, what he suggested then was, we should all go to work at coal and iron mines, and spend our energies for dish-washing, clothes-washing, window-washing, road-building and tunnel-making! He also did not mention anything about the Olympic Games, which at the time was beginning to grow as a major international sporting event.

James himself was rather clueless about what the moral equivalent of war is, but there is no doubt today that sports is the closest to James' vision. While many would argue that the Olympic Games is the biggest sporting event of all, I have no doubt that as far as the moral equivalent of war is concern, the FIFA World Cup is the better candidate.

There are too many different games in the Olympics which means only a few big nations can realistically become the overall champion. In the World Cup however, all the 32 teams competing in the finals have the same number of players and play the same number of matches in the opening round. That puts all the teams more-or-less on equal footing.

Moreover, football as a game embodies a lot of our psychological nature. Psychologists have for long believe that human beings have an innate desire to compete. And in addition, with reference to the Freudian perspective, have the need for catharsis; to release some of the overabundance psychic energy.

People in the past went to war because that was probably the only social event which gives them the opportunity to compete and collectively release some psychic energy. Understandably, war is filled with aggressive and destructive behaviours that are simply the manifestations of the energy released.

Football provides the same opportunity. In this game, players need to be aggressive to win. Similar to a battle in a war, a football game cannot be won by strength and skills alone. It must be supported by clever tactics and strategies. And most importantly, football is a team game where teamwork is of paramount importance although the heroics of individuals can prove to be crucial; again very similar to what happens in war battles.

We no longer live in times where envy, pride and jealousy would propel someone to physically destroy the enemy (at least not most of the time). These 'sins' still exist between and against people of different nations. But rather than going to war against the enemy, the battle can be fought on the football field. Players representing each nation are the soldiers who battle to preserve the honour of the country, while the spectators are the common citizens who watch with pride the valiancy of their 'warriors' fighting on their behalf. And the best thing of all about football is, there is minimal chance of civilian casualties.

The 2010 FIFA World Cup in South Africa offers the prospect of some tantalising encounters. As early as the second round, either England or the United States may battle against Germany. Of course, none of the players of these countries were around during the First and Second World Wars, but the memories of both would surely spice-up the build-up to such an encounter.

Meanwhile, at the quarter-final stage; if both teams advance as expected, England and Argentina will do battle, a match that would surely bring up memories of the bitter Falklands War fought by the two nations. Argentinian football legend and current national head coach Diego Maradona has repeatedly said that beating England in the 1986 World Cup was the sweetest moment in his football career. No doubt this was largely because of the bitterness carried over from the Falklands War. If the two nations do meet again this year, the reciprocal animosity between players and fans from both countries will again be the focus of attention.

If England advances to the semi-final stage, their likely opponent is Holland, which is another juicy encounter. After more than a century where people from both countries fought a long and bitter war in South Africa (the Second Boer War), they may do battle again on the very same soil, this time for the honour and pride of advancing to a world cup final match.

Football may well be a silly old game where 22 grown-ups run like crazy chasing after a white ball. But football today is more than just a game. The FIFA World Cup, football's biggest tournament is the moral equivalent of war where people of different nations battle for their nations' pride and glory. There is no need to bludgeon your opponents to win this 'war'. All you need is the right tactics and strategies and to fight on the field in the name your country. And the satisfaction of winning would be just as sweet.

Isu 'Allah': Salahkah Orang Melayu Beremosi?

(The following is my article for Centre for Policy Initiatives, published on its website on 27th May 2010)

"Salahkah orang Melayu beremosi?" Begitulah keluhan yang dilontar saudara Akramsyah Sanusi ketika berucap di pentas Bloggers Universe Malaysia (BUM 2010) hujung minggu yang lalu. Konteks keluhan ini adalah isu kalimah 'Allah' yang masih belum bertemu jalan penyelesaian. Saudara Akramsyah seterusnya menambah, sekiranya ramai di kalangan puak majoriti (orang Melayu di Malaysia) hatinya terguris kerana isu ini, puak minoriti perlu bertolak ansur demi memelihara kesejahteraan dan keamanan negara.

Ada benarnya apa yang diluahkan saudara Akramsyah. Untuk memelihara keharmonian antara rakyat pelbagai kaum dan agama, emosi masing-masing perlu dihormati dan dijaga. Jika orang Cina atau Melayu mengadakan majlis keramaian dan diundang pula tetamu yang beragama Hindu, janganlah dibiarkan segala hidangan yang disediakan mengandungi daging lembu. Nanti terguris hati tetamu beragama Hindu yang hadir. Emosi mereka pasti terganggu.

Emosi orang Cina juga boleh terganggu sekiranya adat dan budaya mereka tidak dihormati. Contohnya, sekiranya kita ingin memberi hadiah harijadi kepada seorang rakan berbangsa Cina, janganlah diberikan hadiah sebuah jam dinding atau jam perhiasan. Emosi dan perasaan rakan berbangsa Cina itu pasti akan terganggu juga. Manakan tidak! Dalam budaya masyarakat Cina, menghadiahkan seseorang sebuah jam seumpama mengucapkan selamat tinggal kepada orang yang ajalnya hampir tiba.

Emosi mempengaruhi kelakuan dan motivasi seseorang. Ini telah dibuktikan dalam banyak kajian dalam bidang psikologi. Namun, bertindak kerana emosi bukanlah suatu kaedah yang efektif. Emosi kita adakalanya tidak rasional yang mungkin berpunca daripada salah faham atau kepercayaan pada fakta yang salah.

Contohnya, pada penghujung tahun 1990'an, emosi dan perasaan masyarakat Melayu tercalar hebat akibat laporan kes murtad seorang wanita beragama Islam. Ada pihak yang mendakwa jumlah kes murtad ini mencecah ratusan ribu di seluruh negara. Namun, bila dibandingkan dengan fakta yang ada, sepertimana yang dilaporkan dalam kajian pensyarah Universiti Teknologi Mara, Dr. Mohamad Azam Mohamed Adil, angka yang sangat besar itu jelas tidak munasabah. Memang kes murtad itu ada namun jumlahnya jauh lebih kecil daripada apa yang digembar-gemburkan.

Emosi yang berkobar-kobar ternyata tidak semestinya berlandaskan fakta dan kebenaran. Maka agak malang sekiranya saudara Akramsyah terus berkeras menggunakan alasan emosi sebagai panduan ke arah jalan penyelesaian. Isu kalimah 'Allah' memang banyak mempengaruhi emosi, namun tidakkah terlintas di benak fikiran Akramsyah dan lain-lain pihak yang membantah keputusan mahkamah tinggi dalam kes ini bahawa emosi mereka itu mungkin tidak rasional dan tidak berasas?

Di pentas yang sama, saudara Akramsyah turut mendakwa dengan lantang bahawa tidak ada satu pihak pun setakat ini yang telah memberikan cadangan jalan penyelesaian. Dakwaan yang sangat menghairankan kerana pelbagai cadangan sebenarnya telah dilemparkan.

Contoh terbaik ialah analisa dan cadangan yang diberikan pensyarah Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Malaysia, Ustaz Zaharuddin Abdul Rahman. Dalam artikelnya yang bertajuk 'Nama Allah: Hukum Asal, Dakwah dan Siasah' yang siarkan di blognya, Ustaz Zaharuddin menjelaskan dengan terperinci bahawa dari segi hukum, penggunaan kalimah 'Allah' oleh orang-orang bukan Islam itu sebenarnya diharuskan. Yang dibimbangi adalah dari sudut dakwah dan siasah, yaitu sekiranya penggunaan ini disalahgunakan untuk kegiatan dakwah agama lain kepada orang-orang Islam. Walaupun Ustaz Zaharuddin secara peribadi bersetuju dengan pendirian melarang orang-orang bukan Islam daripada menggunakan kalimah Allah, di penghujung artikelnya beliau mencadangkan:

"Jikalau keputusan mahkamah (selepas rayuan) tetap mengizinkan penerbit Kristian menterjemah kalimah 'God' kepada Allah dalam penerbitan mereka, saya bersetuju dengan pandangan pelbagai pihak yang mencadangkan agar Kerajaan mengadakan segera muzakarah dan dialog di antara ulama, pakar undang-undang dan pihak Kristian bagi memastikan kebenaran itu tidak digunakan untuk mengelirukan umat Islam dan segala penulisan dihadkan kepada penganut Kristian semata-mata. Tatkala itu syarat-syarat dan perjanjian perlu dibuat bagi menjaga kehamonian masyarakat dalam Negara."

Nah, tidak cukupkah cadangan seperti ini yang diberikan, atau mungkin pada tanggapan saudara Akramsyah, hanya pandangan dan cadangan yang selari dengan pendirian Umno sahaja yang wajar dipertimbangkan. Cadangan Ustaz Zaharuddin ini ternyata tidak jauh berbeza dengan pendirian PAS dan PKR dalam isu ini, dan selari juga dengan undang-undang yang sedia ada yang melarang segala usaha dakwah agama lain kepada penganut agama Islam.

Emosi sebilangan orang Melayu yang panas akibat isu ini banyak diapi-apikan media pro-kerajaan dan tindakan kurang bijak yang diambil agensi-agensi agama dalam kerajaan. Mimbar Jumaat di seluruh negara misalnya telah digunakan untuk mempengaruhi orang-orang Islam agar membantah sekeras-kerasnya keputusan mahkamah yang membenarkan kalimah Allah digunakan orang-orang bukan Islam.

Persoalannya, mengapa tidak mimbar yang sama digunakan untuk menerangkan mengapa dari segi hukum, tidak ada dalil kukuh yang menghalang orang bukan Islam daripada menggunakan kalimah Allah? Mengapa tidak dijemput Tokoh Ma'al Hijrah 2009, Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradhawi menyampaikan syarahan perdana bagi menghurai isu ini dengan mendalam yang disiarkan secara langsung ke seluruh negara?

Bukankah kaedah seperti ini akan dapat meredakan emosi yang panas dan membalut hati-hati orang Islam yang terguris? Bukankah cara ini lebih positif dan bermanfaat dalam usaha memupuk persefahaman antara rakyat pelbagai kaum dan agama? Atau, adakah saudara Akramsyah dan yang lain-lain yang sealiran dengannya sebenarnya tidak mahu emosi yang panas ini disejukkan?

Di akhir sessi perbincangan isu ini di BUM 2010, saudara Akramsyah bijak menyebut bahawa isu ini sebenarnya memberikan peluang keemasan bagi sesetengah pihak untuk tampil sebagai 'hero' yang menyelesaikan masalah. Saya amat bersetuju dengan pendapat ini, namun kurang bersetuju dengan 'hero' yang dicadangkan saudara Akramsyah. Beliau berpendapat, orang Kristianlah yang patut menjadi 'hero' dengan mematuhi perintah larangan yang diputuskan kerajaan, lantas menampilkan ciri manusia yang berhati mulia sepertimana yang dituntut dalam ajaran agama Kristian.

Saya berpendapat, orang yang paling berpeluang tampil sebagai 'hero' ialah Perdana Menteri Najib Abdul Razak. Bayangkan sekiranya beliau dengan tegas mengambil langkah-langkah menganjurkan muzakarah antara pemimpin-pemimpin agama, dan mengadakan sessi-sessi penerangan yang disampaikan ulamak-ulamak tersohor seperti yang disarankan di atas? Populariti dan kredibiliti Najib akan melonjak tinggi sebagai 'Bapa 1Malaysia' yang sejati yang ikhlas memperjuangkan perpaduan dan keharmonian antara kaum dan agama di Malaysia. Sungguh malang, peluang keemasan ini nampaknya sudah dilepaskan.