Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Political Humour: If Shakespeare were alive today - Bolehsia

   
   
       
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13,391

    Political Humour: If Shakespeare were alive today - Bolehsia

    If Shakespeare were alive today
    NO HOLDS BARRED

    Tuesday, 30 March 2010 Super Admin

    The New Economic Model should not be Version 3 of the National Economic Policy, which in turn is Version 2 of the New Economic Policy. We should scrap the NEP foundation altogether and come out with Version 1 of an entirely new operating system. Bugs can never be totally eliminated with upgrades to a problematic operating system.

    NO HOLDS BARRED

    Raja Petra Kamarudin


    What’s in a NEM….

    So, as the mainstream news would have it, an entire nation waits with bated breath as their Numero Uno deliberated and chiselled away at his purported ‘New Economic Model’. For months, his grand plans already peppered the air -- pandered, powdered and puffed by gushing financial writers who snap to heel at his bidding.

    So there we have it. A nebulous mouthing of contradictions such as promises of new affirmative actions with fairness to all and such.

    Across the border, while democracy played out in crippling demonstrations, neighbouring Thailand saw a soaring stock market in a show of confidence, without nary a notch on its internal rumblings.

    Our NEM indeed made an effort to rename one of its development schemes (for scheme it is) Malaysian Investment Development Authority from its previous moniker Malaysian Industrial Development Authority.

    Any difference would be the scramble for a new re-branding exercise where precious funds be set aside for re-design of logo, logotype, stationery, signage, business cards and hey, you never know, refurbishment of the already flashy offices.

    What’s in a NEM? We’d like to know more for the news was rosily perky, vague and non-eventful. -- Malgal

    *************************************************

    A rose by another name: is that what the NEM is all about? Malgal, my favourite Queen of Prose, summed it up most eloquently in her piece above. Are we seeing old wine in a new bottle? Or is this an entirely new blend altogether, guaranteed to tickle your taste buds and elicit murmurs of ‘hmmm…nice’ from the connoisseurs of social re-engineering?

    And that is what it is really all about, social re-engineering -- or what it should be about.

    But how does one restructure society when the parameters and formulas are wrong? Is the NEM about addressing the economic imbalance in society? Or is it about addressing a political need? Economics and politics make strange bedfellows, as history has time and again proven.

    Japan had an economic need. It needed a source of supply of raw material plus markets for its finished products, both which the doors had been closed by the Western colonialists who owned Empires so vast that the sun never sets.

    But how does one address an economic need without resorting to a political solution?

    Hence, Japan decided to free colonised Asia. But Asia never became free in the true sense of the word. It just switched one colonial master for another. Would this not be a case of out of the frying pan and into the fire? And what would be a better choice; getting fried or getting charbroiled? Both result in one getting toasted anyway. So does it matter if the Tuan is white or off-white? A Tuan by any other colour is still the Tuan.

    The New Economic Policy has transformed into the National Economic Policy and now the National Economic Model. It is certainly a change of clothes. But is the wearer of the clothes the same? If so then it would be old wine in a new bottle.

    Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak needs social scientists, not image consultants, to guide him. You can fool some of the people all the time, all the people some of the time, but not all the people all the time. Sooner or later one innocent child will scream that the Emperor is wearing no clothes and the multitude would suddenly realise that the truth has finally been spoken.

    A formula is best addressed by throwing the ingredients into the pot and see what emerges. If the end result is predetermined, and then one works backward to arrive at the formula, then it is the tail that is wagging the dog.

    If we have already decided that the end-result must be 30%, we would have to work from the bottom up and massage the formula so that the answer will definitely be 30%. 30% is the predetermined bottom-line. The formula must then be massaged to ensure that this 30% is achieved. The formula, therefore, would merely be an exercise of justification.

    If, however, the required ingredients are thrown into the pot and delicately blended so that the right elixir emerges, then we may or may not see 30%. If the 30% target is not carved in stone then this would not matter. What matters is that the right blend has been mixed and the end-result is the product of this perfect blend.

    An army is trained to obey orders. And when the order is to take that hill at all costs then that hill can be taken. That is the requirement, to take that hill. If taking that hill is the only thing that matters, rest assured the mission will succeed.

    But if the order is to take that hill but at the same time ensure that no lives are lost, then the hill will not be taken. The mission of taking that hill, coupled with the added objective of ensuring that everyone comes home, are not compatible. To ensure that no lives are lost would mean having to remain at a safe distance and not attempt to storm the hill.

    Social re-engineering calls for a delicate formula. It involves many permutations and calculations. And we must be brave enough to focus on getting the formula right whatever the end-result will be. It is a top-down exercise. A bottom-up exercise is an exercise in futility.

    How could you not cut your coat according to your cloth? To do otherwise would mean you have to patch bits and pieces from cloths elsewhere. It is a tall order when you expect something beyond your resources. You would have to steal resources from elsewhere to make up for your resource limitations.

    You ask me to bake a cake and I will bake it. I will look in the larder to see what I have. I have no nuts. I have no raisins. And I have flour enough for a one kg cake. If, however, you demand that I bake a 5 kg fruit-and-nut cake, and that my life depends on it, then I would have to beg, borrow and steal to fulfil this order lest my head gets separated from my shoulders.

    A badly designed house is a badly designed house. No amount of renovations can turn a badly designed house into a dream house. The only solution is to tear it down and start all over again. Is, maybe, the 1970 design for social re-engineering a badly designed house? Would it therefore need to be torn down so that we can start again from scratch?

    The New Economic Model should not be Version 3 of the National Economic Policy, which in turn is Version 2 of the New Economic Policy. We should scrap the NEP foundation altogether and come out with Version 1 of an entirely new operating system. Bugs can never be totally eliminated with upgrades to a problematic operating system.

    And this is what I fear the NEM is all about, a masking of a pungent smell that never really went away.

    And I will leave you with the piece below. Someone e-mailed it to me but he does not know the source or the writer. Nevertheless, my thanks to the unknown author.

    *************************************************

    The perils of Bolehsia

    MARCH 22 - President Obama and Hilary Clinton, his secretary of state, were in the Oval Office discussing steps that needed to be taken to enhance the bilateral ties between the US and Bolehsia.

    "Well, what do you think, Mr President?" asked Hilary.

    "Well Bolehsia needs our help in trade, investment and technology transfer. Perhaps we should send a special envoy to help facilitate this. The question, Hilary, is who do we send? We have to take into account Bolehsia's special circumstances and its unique value system," said the President.

    "Well Mr President as you know, Bolehsia ranks in the bottom quartile in terms of gender equality when compared to the rest of the world although two thirds of its college graduates are female. Also they have strict laws governing sex outside of marriage where Muslim women can be sentenced to syariah caning if caught. So I don't think we can send a woman", said Hilary.

    "Hmm, that's a shame," said the President. "That rules out half of the possible potential candidates for the job. So it's a man then. What sort of man should we send to Bolehsia?"

    "Well sir, we have to be mindful of their race and religious issues. They have an affirmative action policy that gives preference to the majority race in all aspects of society. So we need a man who understands, and to a certain extent, accepts racism", said Hilary.

    "So what are you suggesting, Hilary, someone from the Ku Klux Klan?" said the agitated President.

    "Well, sir, that may not be enough. The man should preferably also not be a Christian because Bolehsia has a major issue on the translation of the word God. They have a word for it that only they and other Muslims can use, according to them. Oh and also the guy better not be Jewish, they don't like Jews", said Hilary.

    "Well can we send an atheist or an agnostic then?" asked the President.

    "That's not clear Mr. President. Bolehsia's constitution allows one to practise one's religion but it does not say that if one can have no religion. In fact in recent court cases, a Muslim cannot effectively renounce his or her religion, though there is no express provision in their constitution to prohibit such a thing. What is clear though, Mr President, is that Bolehsia is homophobic and they have strict laws against sodomy and homosexuality. In fact, they have recently been raiding establishments where this apparently goes on," said Hilary.

    "But how do they prove it, Hilary? I mean unless there are video tapes or they send some undercover officers in to participate, where is the evidence to convict these guys?" asked the President.

    "Well Mr. President, although Bolehsia is a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it has done little to implement it in its constitution. Although the principle 'beyond a reasonable doubt' is supposed to be the standard to convict an accused in Bolehsia, the public persecutors, oh sorry I meant to say prosecutors, will prosecute regardless, especially if it is a high profile case. You see, they believe that the judges will be partial to them irrespective of the actual evidence," said Hilary.

    "So it looks like we have to send someone who is male, gender biased, homophobic, a member of the Klan who is not too Christian and who does not believe in human rights. Is that what you are telling me Hilary? With all those prerequisites I would be surprised if our guy had any brains at all!" exclaimed the President.

    "Oh don't worry about that Mr President, you see, Bolehsia is a fairly corrupt country. All our guy needs to be good at is greasing palms, which works wonders out there. Anyway we can always find out what they are doing from the internet as they are useless at keeping secrets. Lately they exposed to the world that their aircraft engines went missing and that their new submarine can't dive," said Hilary laughing heartily.

    "Also, sir", Hilary added "if our guy happens to be a paedophile, he might get away with it in Bolehsia. Apparently it is possible to legally marry a child below the age of sixteen if you are a Muslim over there".

    "Honest to God, Hilary, I can't think of anyone who can fit all the requirements you have outlined above. I can't even think of someone who can meet a major part of it" said the President.

    "George W. Bush," replied Hilary spontaneously. -- Writer and source unknown Malaysiatoday....
    py

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13,391

    Re: Political Humour: Forum on New Economic Model by CPPS and SEDAR

    I attended a Forum on the 1st Stage of the New Economic Model, programme attached. It was organised by CPPS and SEDAR Institute, both Gerakan outfits, although CPPS will vehemently deny any such connection. Hey! I see nothing wrong in the association. In life, everyone of us have an agenda. In this case, the only difference is whether the agenda is to do good for society or do rob society.

    My sense of the overall picture:

    1. UMNO/BN knows that they have lost the trust of the people.
    2. Their priority is to retain power by winning the next general elections - GE 13.
    3. The strategy is to keep the fence-sitters neutral so that they can work on them through a massive propaganda exercise during the GE.
    4. Meanwhile offer hope that things will get better. Give the current regime a chance to reform.
    5. They claim that Merdeka Centre's survey shows that 68% of the Malays support PERKASA's stand and that GERAKAN/CPPS/SEDAR should continue to engage with them to bring them to the more enlightened side.
    6. At the forum, less than 10% were Malays. Mainly, it was Chinese, Indians and some foreigners. The engagement of the Malays obviously was not happening. What was obvious was the attempt to lull the non-Malays to be patient, give UMNO/BN another chance and allow them to continue robbing the country.

    In simple military terms, this is known as a "controlled retreat". We need to turn this into a rout.

    Conclusion: 52 years is enough. In the face of evil, we cannot remain neutral. UMNO/BN must go!
    py

Visitors found this page by searching for:

if shakespeare was alive today what wpould people accuse him of

SEO Blog

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •