Wednesday, October 22, 2008

I Wonder if malaysiakini Got This RIGHT about the "social contract"?

This malaysiakini article headed Muhyiddin: No one can question social contract suggests that the so-called "social contract" is a clearly defined article like the Federal Constitution that cannot be discussed or questioned.
As citizens who are quite capable of critical thinking, we should not be denied the right to discuss problems that exist in our quest for nation-building.
In the face of global competition, it is important that Malaysia can unite its people to work together for the common good in the spirit of "give and take" and in a peaceful environment where the rights of all its peoples are recognised and no one is left behind.
So the minister now suggests that university students be given a dose of instruction in the "social contract" as if it is a document cast in stone.
It seems that some people are caught in a time-warp and their clock reads "00:00hours 1957".
It is a major mistake to believe that circumstances 51 years after independence are the same as before. Malaya was granted independence by the British after the various races agreed to the Constitution of the F of M.
That defined the rights and duties of the various groups who had a vested interest in the new nation.
During the years since 1957, so many changes were made to the Constitution that it is almost unrecognisable today; largely as a result of the overwhelming majority of the ruling parties - first the Alliance and then the BN.
After the May13 incident, the NEP was introduced and that provided a major boost to the Bumis and created thousands of graduates in various fields. The NEP had a definite life-span as it required more sacrifices from the non-Bumis who paid most of the taxes but were deprived of equal opportunities in education, jobs and contracts.
Maybe this extra burden was accepted as a cost for peace and harmony in Malaysia. How dare anyone suggest Malaysians should not question the so-called social contract? We have seen billions wasted in unjustified mega-projects and the poor Bumis still struggle but the rich cronies wallow in their ill-gotten gains.
Because of the abuses that have created an extensive web of corruption, even UMNO cannot hold party elections without money politics.
Let us not be afraid to discuss this social contract if we want the truth to set us free. Only then will we be able to help Malaysia progress further. Let us not be like the detractors of Copernicus hundreds of years ago who were opposed to the idea that the earth is not the centre of the universe.

4 comments:

megat jittendran said...

I got it right sir because I asked Muhyiddin the question: "When there is a start there should be an ending. Social contract seems neverending."
His answer was "social contract is always there ... it was absorbed and enshrined in the Fed Const."
We should allow more space for people on the issue not for them to question it but to explain to them on the history of the contract.
It is is not subject to be disputed."

AV

H J Angus said...

megat
thanks for your comments.
I guess that makes two of you with the same opinion on the social contract.

megat jittendran said...

I am sorry that you got me wrong. I did not agree with Muhyiddin on social contract. A contract is something that can be accepted or rejected. Even if accepted, it should have a time frame. Now how the hell that I am going to tell to my grandchildren that Indians, Chinese and others will forever be under the Malay master race in their own country merely because some stupid forefathers agreed to a unfair and lopsided social contract. As far as I am concerned a contract must be fair and just to all parties, not to only one race.
Social contract is not something that cannot be questioned or disputed as Muhyiddin said. It should be challenged in the international court of law. That's the reason why Hindraf exiled chairman Waythamoorthy has filed a suit against the British government for drawing up such an unfair, unjust and imbalance contract.
How many more years that others would have to stay in this country to be treated equally as citizens?

AV

H J Angus said...

megat
thanks for the clarification.
The NEP was actually a good idea to help all the poor and marginalised.
However some people made use of it to enrich themselves.
Now everyone else is treated as second and third class citizens under the "ketuanan" concept.