Category: Sosial

  • Almakhazin: Removing Malay Political Strength – The Ethnic Quota Policy

    Almakhazin: Removing Malay Political Strength – The Ethnic Quota Policy

    One of the ways the PAP has removed the political strength of the Malay community is through the implementation of the ethnic quota policy.

    This policy was supposedly enacted to stop the development of ethnic “enclaves” in Singapura.

    According to PAP Minister Masagos Zulkifli, the ethnic quota policy is one of the successes of the PAP.

    However, he admitted that the quota has caused difficulties to some but justified it by saying it helps promote racial harmony. He further claimed that harmony in Singapura is not natural.

    His justification that the ethnic quota policy was created to help develop racial harmony is mistaken at best. An analysis of the policy reveal that its main purpose is to weaken the Malay community’s political power.

    Even though quotas were set for the different races, this policy was directed at the Malay community. As discussed by Chih Hoong Sin,

    “Attention must be given to the general political discourse in Singapore. The identification of Bedok new town as a `Malay enclave’ has to be set in the context of the wider political discourse surrounding the `Malay problem’. While the Chinese and the Indians are certainly over represented in certain new towns (The Straits Times, 19 February 1989), it has been the Malays who have borne a disproportionate amount of government and media attention.”

    Chih quoted former PAP Minister Dhanabalan’s comments about Bedok New Town to illustrate how the PAP’s focus was actually on the Malays and not the other races. Dhanabalan had in 1989, referred to a “Malay problem” in Bedok. He stated “that if present trends continue, the Malay population in Bedok will reach 30% in 1991 and 40% in 10 years”.

    But why is 30% or 40% a problem? We do not refer to any constituency with 40% Chinese as indicative of a “Chinese problem”.

    But for the PAP, a constituency with 30% Malays makes it a problem.

    Malays do not support PAP

    Contrary to popular claim, Chih argued that the Malays do not support the PAP. In fact, Lee Kuan Yew admitted that most Malays do not support his party.

    Chih quoted Kuan Yew as saying, “If we were less skillful, (a Malay opposition party) would have emerged…I know we did not win more than fifty percent of the Malay votes; we never did…”

    PAP support in constituencies with large Malay population tend to be much lower than the national average.

    The PAP has seen how the Malays have continuously rejected them. In fact, from the 1960s onwards where they almost lost several constituencies( if not for internal problems in SMNO) until the 90s where they almost lost Eunos GRC (currently Aljunied), they know the Malays do not support them.

    As Chih argued, “Malay disenchantment with the ruling party has been well-publicized, and the PAP has certainly blamed its narrow wins in certain constituencies in recent elections on the Malay vote…

    The call for dispersal has certainly been interpreted as an attempt to undercut the perceived growth and consolidation of Malay anti-PAP votes in existing Malay ‘enclaves’, and to prevent the emergence of new centres of Malay resistance.”

    Kuan Yew’s Press Secretary, James Fu admitted “in a letter to the Straits Times Forum page…: `Today with resettlement, every constituency is racially integrated. PKMS can no longer win anywhere in Singapore’ (The Straits Times, 4 March 1988).

    The policy was ultimately designed to disperse the Malays so that they will never have the numbers to be politically significant.

    Because as Chih noted, “The PAP quickly realized that as long as Malay strongholds persist, their electoral victory in such seats can never be assumed.”

    Sin, C. H. (2003). The politics of ethnic integration in Singapore: Malay ‘regrouping’as an ideological construct. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27(3), 527-544.

     

    Source: Almakhazin SG

  • Mufti Perak: Menulis, Membaca Al-Quran Dalam Bahasa Selain Arab Dilarang

    Mufti Perak: Menulis, Membaca Al-Quran Dalam Bahasa Selain Arab Dilarang

    PUTRAJAYA: Menulis dan membaca al-Quran dalam bahasa selain bahasa Arab adalah dilarang, demikian tegas Lembaga Pengawalan dan Pelesenan Pencetakan al-Quran (LPPPQ).

    Dalam kenyataan hari ini (3 Mac), Pengerusinya Tan Sri Harussani Zakaria berkata ini kerana penulisan al-Quran dalam bahasa lain tanpa adanya teks bahasa Arab tidak boleh dianggap sebagai al-Quran.

    Perbuatan itu juga boleh diambil tindakan undang-undang di bawah Akta Pencetakan Teks al-Quran (APTQ) 1986 dan Akta Mesin Cetak (AMCP) 1984, katanya.

    Beliau yang juga Mufti Perak mengulas mengenai kempen “Let’s Read The Quran” bagi menulis dan membaca al-Quran dalam bahasa lain selain bahasa Arab.

    Harussani berkata sebagai pihak bertanggungjawab dalam mengawal selia pencetakan, penerbitan dan pengimportan teks al-Quran di bawah Akta Pencetakan Teks al-Quran (APTQ) 1986, LPPPQ memandang serius kempen berkenaan.

    Untuk itu, katanya, LPPPQ bersama-sama dengan pihak berkuasa agama Islam di setiap negeri akan mengambil tindakan tegas bagi menyekat gerakan dan kempen berkenaan.

    Dalam pada itu, Harussani berkata al-Quran yang diterjemahkan dalam pelbagai bahasa bagi memudahkan mereka yang tidak memahami bahasa Arab memahami kitab suci berkenaan, tidak boleh dianggap sebagai naskah al-Quran tetapi merupakan ‘terjemahan al-Quran’ atau ‘tafsir al-Quran’.

    Terjemahan al-Quran tanpa disertakan dengan teks asal dalam bahasa Arab adalah dilarang kerana takut disalah fahami dan membacanya tidak mendapat pahala, katanya.

     

    Source: http://berita.mediacorp.sg

  • Open Letter From A Grieving Mother To Her Deceased Son

    Open Letter From A Grieving Mother To Her Deceased Son

    My dearest Dom, my heart continues to bleed for you. It has been 3years and 10months since you were taken from me and still, I haven’t been able to get any closure.

    Today, Honourable Judicial Commissioner Kannan Remesh ruled that I have no case against those responsible for your death – the SAF and the 2 officers who did not follow the training exercise SOP. He also ruled that I have to pay for their legal costs. Dom, how can I possibly pay them for taking away your life? Where is the justice? It seems, the price I paid has not been enough. Your death has not been high enough a price for SAF and the 2 officers, and now, not enough for Honourable Remesh, it seems.

    They must be right, of course – the judge, the ministers, the SAF and their officers. They are experts in their fields. Individuals who studied and trained for years to be in their current positions. What do I know? I’m only a mother to two sons. I only know to love my sons, to nurture them to become young men who will do right by others, to live with dignity, decency and human compassion. What do I know? They are the experts in their fields. They must know best. They do no wrong.

    Dom, in these past 3+ years, I have been worn-down, beaten and defeated by the very government I taught you to trust; worn-down, beaten and defeated by the very system I counseled you to have faith in; worn-down, beaten and defeated by the very people I advised you to respect and honor.

    Dom, forgive me. I taught you wrong.

     

    Source: In memory of Dominique Sarron Lee

  • NSF Death: High Court Strikes Out Lawsuit Against SAF, Two Officers

    NSF Death: High Court Strikes Out Lawsuit Against SAF, Two Officers

    The High Court has thrown out a suit against the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) brought by the family of a full-time national serviceman who died in 2012 from an allergic reaction to smoke grenades during a military exercise.

    Private Dominique Sarron Lee, 21, collapsed with breathing difficulties during the training exercise on April 17, 2012, and his family sued for negligence on the part of the SAF, his platoon commander and the chief safety officer of the exercise. The defendants argued that they are indemnified from suits for negligence if the deaths or injuries occurred during service, citing a provision under Section 14 of the Government Proceedings Act.

    In a closed-door hearing yesterday, Judicial Commissioner Kannan Ramesh agreed that the incident fell within the provision and dismissed the suit.

    The incident started during an urban obstacle training exercise involving hand grenades at Murai Urban Training Facility at Lim Chu Kang. Lee lost consciousness and was first taken to Sungei Gedong Medical Centre, and then to the National University Hospital, where he was pronounced dead.

    In 2013, the State Corner ruled that Lee died from an acute allergic reaction from inhaling zinc chloride fumes, which came from the smoke grenades.

    Mr Irving Choh, who represented Lee’s family, argued that there is a contract between Lee and the SAF. In his submissions, Mr Choh said this issue was “a novel point of law that has never been canvassed before the court and should be given an opportunity to be ventilated”. But JC Kannan disagreed that Lee’s family was entitled to sue for negligence.

    Lawyer R S Bajwa represented platoon commander Captain Najib Hanuk Muhamad Jalal, while safety officer Captain Chia Thye Siong was represented by lawyer Laurence Goh.

    Lee’s mother declined to comment when contacted, but pointed TODAY to her post on a Facebook page dedicated to her son’s memory.

    She wrote: “It has been three years and 10 months since you were taken from me and, still, I haven’t been able to get any closure.” She added that the family has to bear the legal costs for the lawsuit.

    Mr Choh said there is a likelihood that the family is considering to appeal against the High Court’s decision.

     

    Source: www.todayonline.com

     

  • Ease Stress Of Day-To-Day Survival So Poor Can Plan A Better Future

    Ease Stress Of Day-To-Day Survival So Poor Can Plan A Better Future

    When people think about poverty, it is often viewed in the context of money. How much does he earn? Is it enough for the family? But in the course of speaking to people from low-income households last week for a Sunday Times report (“The faces behind the aid figures“; Feb 28), I was struck by something more than their shortage of money: a tendency to shy away from planning for the future, because they are so stressed and concerned about immediate financial worries. This sometimes led them to make decisions that the better-off find hard to understand.

    For example, it is baffling why a couple struggling with finances would want to have seven children, and why the single mother would commit to the big purchase of a new four-room flat despite mounting debt. Or why the elderly karung guni man would spend over half of his $450 monthly government handout on cigarettes and beer when he has no savings.

    Researchers have found that very poor families throughout the world spend more of their income on alcohol than on educating their children – or even on food. Studies have also shown that they do not plan for the future compared to better-off folk, and some have less self-control and are quicker to turn to instant gratification. While some may take a deterministic view, thinking that people become poor because they have such innate traits, recent research suggests otherwise: that it is the state of poverty, and the stress that comes with it, that pushes very poor people to make bad decisions.

    Harvard economist Sendhil Mullainathan and Princeton psychologist Eldar Shafir, in their 2013 book Scarcity, found that economic stress robs people of cognitive bandwidth – the portion of mental capacity used to make decisions. Rushing around worrying about bills, food or other immediate problems leaves people with less cognitive capacity to make good decisions, think ahead or practise self-discipline.Urgent demands of the moment override planning for the future.

    That is perhaps why a food-stall assistant featured in The Sunday Times would rather take on extra part-time jobs in the weekends to get fast cash than go for a skills upgrading course to get a better- paying job. And why the single mother is reluctant to take a little time off work to renew her application for government grants, or meet her debtors to negotiate better repayment plans.

    Under overwhelming circumstances, people living in extreme poverty lack the time and mental will to assess their situation or think of alternatives. They may not even realise they have choices.

    This creates a vicious circle because people end up making decisions that leave them worse off, such as taking out high-interest loans or buying on instalment. In settling today’s problems, they create debts for tomorrow.

    The question then is: How can the poor be relieved of their cognitive stress of day-to-day survival so they are able to plan for a better future?

    If extreme poverty exacts a mental toll, the most direct way to help them would be to help them cancel their debts. Methodist Welfare Services (MWS) started a programme in 2014 for low-income families that matches debt repayment dollar-for-dollar up to $100 a month.

    It found that the 34 families given such help reduced their debt from a total of $256,000 to $175,000 over a year. In comparison, another 34 families not given the funds saw their collective debt increase by $18,000 over the same period.

    MWS assistant director Cindy Ng said: “Chronic debt is one of the major factors that perpetuates their poverty and if they are always fighting fires and thinking about putting food on the table, their ability to deal with longer-term issues is limited. For instance, they are less likely to seek skills upgrading which may help them break out of the poverty circle.”

    Another practical way would be to make it easier for the needy to access help. The poor often work long hours and can apply for aid only after work. Yet most of the 24 social service offices are open only during office hours and are closed at weekends.

    A third solution is to make it easy for those in dire straits to opt for good decisions. For example, they can be automatically enrolled in a savings scheme, with part of their pay or government grants channelled into a rainy-day fund.

    Last, improving their living environment can reduce mental stress. The poor, such as the featured family of eight who squeeze into a one-room rental flat the size of three parking spaces, often have to deal with living in small, crowded spaces. Neuroscientists at Princeton University found that a cluttered environment reduces one’s ability to focus and process information.

    Mr Cayden Woo of Chen Su Lan Methodist Children’s Home, which runs home improvement projects for low-income families, said: “Adults often bring their stress back home from work and when they see the physical mess at home, their frustration escalates. But after helping them declutter and reorganise the space, they become more positive when communicating or parenting.”

    Poverty has a clear link to bad choices. Rather than blame the poor for making such choices, it is more constructive to understand that the mental stress of coping with day-to-day needs drives them to make bad choices – and then work to reduce that daily stress. Helping struggling families cope better in the present will help them reach a brighter future in which their children will not be propelled towards bad choices.

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com