Thank you. Sorry
As the number of the Profile Views of this blog has broken the 3,000 mark just now, allow me to say terima kasih for your interest. I wish also to minta maaf (from including Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad) if you feel offended by any ideas, words or pictures I have put up in this blog although I have also taken care to strike a balance betwen individual freedom and social responsibility. My idea for setting up this blog is for us Malaysians bersembang-sembang and bertukar-tukar fikiran with a bit of teori-teori moden atau pasca-moden kaki lima, cerita-cerita tok-tok dan nenek-nenek, buah-buah fikiran ilmiah separuh masak, sindiran-sindiran ala-budak kedai kopi, or cucuk-cucuk without malice. Ambillah apa yang jernih, buangkan apa yang keruh.
posted by James Wong Wing-On at 4:35 PM
5 Comments:
Congratulations, you should probably put a counter in your blog. I found that http://www.statcounter.com/ is a useful tool. You can know how many visitors to your blog and also from which country.
I place one of this in the bottom of my blog http://honwai_wong.blogspot.com
Dear Hon Wai,
Thank you for your kind suggestion. I will think about it and find the right knowledge to handle it. I only worry after installing the counter, I am addicted to watching it every minute like politicos watching opinion polls or stock brokers watching KLSE's board diverting my attention from proper works. Anyway, thank you again. Keep in touch.
personally as an avid reader of this blog, I give my fullest respect to James Wong and I regard him as one of the learned person and an example for us to follow.
Please continue to inpsire the younger generation, including myself.
want to take this opportunity to ask James an 'silly' question. If James do not mind kindly tell me(us) is there any difference, philosophically, between Lee Kuan Yew's Malaysian Malaysia and Tun Mahathir's call for a united Malaysian(Bangsa Malaysia) nation with a sense of common and shared destiny as in Wawasan 2020. If there is not, why would Tun Mahathir's idea easily accepted as the nation's mission to be accomplished while in contrast, Lee's speaking is trashed and long forgotten by us?
Dear chiakc,
Thank you for your compliment.
Your question is not silly at all. On the contrary, it can be made a topic for political science doctoral dissectation. Because of the limit of space here, let me just outline some personal thoughts.
I think ultimately, both Tun and MM are talking about the building of a modern Malaysian nation based on the equality of citizenship. However, Tun and MM seem to differ in their practical approach in 1960s: while MM wanted it to be realised in a shorter time frame in a legalistic manner, Tun at that time also considered the historical and psychological aspects of the reality that not all people could accept the idea of equal citizenship at that time due to some disparities. Also, in the 1960s, other factors, such as the East-West Cold War and spread of anti-colonial nationalisms intervened to make the debate more complicated and heated. Of course, with due respect to both Tun and MM, I think their strong personalities and political style in managing public discourses in questions like race, religion and languages lacked EQ and did not help.
Of course, time has also changed as the East-West Cold War is no more and the early stage of crude anti-colonial nationalisms have subsided. Globalisation has also opened up new opportunities for more dialogues among younger generations of Malays, Chinese, Indians, Orang Aslis, Eurasians and other in both Malaysia and Singapore. Our generation is, I think, less burdened psychologically because we have, among other factors, benefited from some lessons of history and the ease of mass communication.
Of course, in politics, exclusively labelled 'boxed'ideas such as 'Malaysian Malaysia', 'Bangsa Malaysia' etc always cause debate and fear of being defeated or dominated by people who hold the idea of the other side.
Of course, this little piece of thought is not very in-depth or comprehensive. It should only serve as a point of depature for further discussion. Cheers.
Sorry, I have unconsciously used 'of course' too frequently.
Post a Comment
<< Home