Updated (7 Oct 2014): MCA has made a police report against Umno PJ Utara deputy chairman Mohamad Azli – Sinar Harian.
Dong Zong states that 96 percent of Chinese parents send their children to Chinese vernacular schools.
This overwhelming choice of the Chinese community notwithstanding, there is nowhere in the Federal Constitution that says Sekolah Rendah Jenis Kebangsaan Cina SRJK(C) is an enshrined right ataupun satu “hak” masyarakat Cina di Malaysia.
Anak Bangsa Malaysia tapi tolak sekolah kebangsaan
Article 152 of the FedCon says (I’m paraphrasing for the purpose of this discussion topic):
(1) Our national language is Malay
(a) The federal government will not stop or ban any [Chinese] from learning [Mandarin] or teaching the language
(b) State governments can allow [Chinese Malaysians] to study [Mandarin] and to use [Mandarin]
You can read the wording of Article 152 @ http://www.agc.gov.my
DAP’s Malaysian First says “no Indians and zero Chinese”
but still demand Chinese school
The following distinction must be made: Allowing the DAP “Anak Bangsa Malaysia“ to learn/study their mother tongue (sebut bahasa CINA pulak nih) and to teach Mandarin is not the same as guaranteeing a separate and parallel national education stream with Mandarin as the medium of instruction.
And one which caters mainly for 1race, the so called “second class citizens”.
Bottomline – Please show me where in the FedCon it says that SRJK(C) is a constitutional right.
Education Act 1996
Let’s look at the instances where the word ‘Chinese’ is mentioned in the Education Act 1996.
This Act defines what is SRJK(C),
i.e. ‘national-type school’ means a government or government-aided primary school using the Chinese language as the main medium of instruction
• “Chinese language” means the form of the Chinese language commonly known as Mandarin
• the Chinese language shall be made available to be taught in national primary school (Sek. Kebangsaan) if the parents of at least 15 pupils so request
• facilities for the teaching of the Chinese language shall be made available in national secondary school (SMK) if the parents of at least 15 pupils so request
Najib: “Malaysia is the only country outside China that recognizes Chinese education as part of the national education system” … (claps claps claps!)
NOTE:
The Education Act 1996 states the core subjects in the national curriculum at the primary level as:
(a) Bahasa Melayu the national language
(b) the English language
(c) Mandarin the Chinese language for pupils in SRJK(C)
(d) Tamil for pupils in SRJK(T)
(e) Mathematics
(f) Science
(g) etc, etc
Mandarin comes at the third mention, after BM and English, in our syllabus priority.
Makruh, tidak dikira berdosa jika dilakukannya
Section 28 of the Education Act 1996 states:
“Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Minister may establish national schools and national-type schools and shall maintain such schools.”
The Education Minister may establish and maintain SRJK(C). In other words, Chinese vernacular schools are allowed by the government to be built.
However the practice since the DEB has been that no new (or very, very few) national-type Chinese schools have been built over the last few decades.
SRJK(C) are makruh.
These Chinese schools are not haram. They are mubah but not sunat or wajib.
Najib strengthened position of Chinese school as Education Minister
Najib buang kuasa Menteri Pelajaran
Previously under the Education Act 1961, there was Section 21(2) of which read:
“Where at any time the Minister is satisfied that a National-type primary school may suitably be converted into a National primary school, he may be order direct that the school shall become a National primary school.”
When Najib Razak was the education minister, he had the above section abrogated.
So really, the Chinese community must be grateful to Najib for safeguarding Chinese schools by removing the power of the education minister to convert SRJK(C) into sekolah kebangsaan at the minister’s discretion.
Learn Iban, learn Kristang, learn Tamil, learn Mandarin … nobody’s stopping
We now come to the latest controversy which is a press statement yesterday by MCA religious harmony bureau chairman Ti Lian Ker.
Datuk Ti (pix, below) declares that the “rights of all races to teach and learn their mother-tongue language cannot be denied, and national-type primary schools are a part and parcel of our nation’s mainstream education and cannot be denied”.
What he says about the right of [the Chinese] to learn their native language is correct. Nobody’s stopping the Chinese from learning Mandarin or Cantonese or Hokkien or Teochew or whatever.
Even the Sekolah Kebangsaan provide POL (pupil’s own language) class that teaches Mandarin as a subject.
And what Ti says about SRJK(C)s being part and parcel of our mainstream education is indeed – as he asserts – something that cannot be denied. Likewise the private colleges that proliferate to cater for Form 5 school leavers are also a part of our educational landscape.
Malaysia has kolej swasta, institut latihan vokasional/teknikal, sekolah asrama penuh, sekolah agama rakyat/sekolah pondok, sekolah Cina.
But Ti insists that “abolishment of Chinese primary schools … contravenes the Federal Constitution”.
The core issue we should debate is, where in our FedCon is it written any guarantee for SRJK(C)?
The Mark Koding case
Ti Lian Ker reminds us that “in October 1978, a Sabah Umno MP, Mark Koding was charged for sedition for advocating the call to abolish SJKC and SJKT”.
Ti’s statement requires firstly a technical clarification: Umno only entered Sabah in 1991 while Koding defected to Umno in 1999. In October 1978, Koding was a BN Parliamentarian and not a Sabah Umno MP.
Koding (pix, right) was found guilty of sedition as Ti has highlighted but nonetheless it is necessary to be aware of the details of his conviction.
He was deemed by the Federal Court to be seditious when he proposed that Article 152 be amended. It was not because he called for Chinese schools to be abolished.
Bhag Singh explains the verdict:
“In Public Prosecutor vs Mark Koding, the court held that statements in Parliament which pose a question whether the Government should allow the continuation of Chinese and Tamil schools, and the use of Chinese and Tamil on road signs, were considered to NOT have a seditious tendency.
“However, Mark Koding was found guilty on sedition not because he had raised the question but he had gone on to say that if the Federal Constitution allowed such use, then the relevant provisions should be amended to restrict such enthusiasm.” – see the Malaysian Bar website
Delivering his judgment, Lord President Tun Mohamed Suffian said:
“Malaysians take pride in the fact that our country is a parliamentary democracy and we have since independence held free general elections every five years as enjoined in the Constitution. Malaysians with short memories and people living in mature and homogeneous democracies may wonder why in a democracy discussion of any issue and in Parliament of all places, should be suppressed. Surely it might be said that it is better that grievances and problems about language, etc should be openly debated, rather than that they be swept under the carpet and allowed to fester. But Malaysians who remember what happened during 13 May 1969 and subsequent days are sadly aware that racial feelings are only too easily stirred up by constant harping on sensitive issue like language; and it is to minimize racial explosions that the amendments were made” [to the Federal Constitution in 1971].
“Racist, racist, racist!”
Hannah Yeoh says that race-based political parties like Umno and MCA are “racist” but vernacular school championing the mother tongue of the Chinese race is not racist to her.
She says that there are “no Indians and zero Chinese”. All are Bangsa Malaysia. If this is so, then whom do the Chinese schools exist to serve?
DAP, the Malaysian First party, should rightly champion the Malaysian, i.e. national language, school.
It is MCA that should leave BN
Datuk Ti wants Umno Petaling Jaya Utara deputy chairman Mohamed Azli Mohemed Saad (pix, below) to be probed for sedition. He claims that Azli’s call for a review of the Chinese primary schools “contravenes the Federal Constitution”.
Our learned judges did not think that learning/studying a language [say, Mandarin] – as it is allowed in the Constitution – is to be confused or interpreted as it conferring an undisputed right to teach “in” that language as the sole or major medium of instruction.
Please read the judgment of the Federal Court delivered in 1982 by Tun Suffian, Raja Azlan Shah, Tun Salleh Abas and Tun Abdul Hamid on the appeal by Dong Jiao Zong with regard to the proposed Chinese language Merdeka University.
MCA’s Ti Lian Ker now complains that any suggestion of doing away with Chinese primary schools is against the “BN’s spirit of inclusiveness”.
He is only partially right. True, the BN has been inclusive. However on 5 May 2013, the Chinese through their tsunami had torn up the “Social Contract”.
How can MCA demand “BN inclusiveness” when 90 percent of the Chinese voters have rejected the BN? The Chinese are no longer a part of the BN family.
And rather than calling for Mohd Azli to leave the BN, it should be the backstabbing MCA that does so. The sooner the better.
GUNTING DALAM LIPATAN
(1,501 words)
Helen Ang 
Helen,
All along I have maintained that there is no such thing as vernacular school guaranteed by our Perlembagaan.
You are right. Perlembagaan guarantees the right to learn, use, practise mother tongues. BUT NOWHERE it says about Chinese schools.
Say that to DAP or MCA or Gerakan, and they will go berserk. They insist on separate school and yet they lament why must there be race column on official documents.
They chide UMNO for being “too Malays” . Yet they behave exactly like “pendatang” who refuse to accept reality that Malaysia is not China.
I have enough problems with these “communists” who dream that they finally outmanouvre Malays and wrest control of the land THROUGH RELENTLESS slandering.
As for MCA, it has been rejected by chinese community. AND BY MCA members too. I want to ask President of MCA how many vote from MCA members that went to Ghani Othman in Gelang Patah? MCA said it has 19000 members in that seat. How come almost entirely Chinese vote there did not go to Ghani Othman.
MCA is betraying BN here. It is better MCA is wiped out.
re: “Say that to DAP or MCA or Gerakan, and they will go berserk.”
I am so very sick of the behaviour of the YYs who go ape shit at every little jentik they’re given, even when their own position on the issues is indefensible.
re: “wrest control of the land THROUGH RELENTLESS slandering”
Agree with you wholeheartedly. That’s all they do. And the fitnah they are capable of fabricating.
What kind of people are they and who is MCA calling extremist?
The Constitution notwithstanding, the level of English in Malaysia leaves much to be desired.
It’s amazing about how we fixate on Malay as being the be all and end all, when the private sector and the high tech industries are calling for fluency in English.
Being fluent in Malay will not get you a job in Apple, Google, Facebook or Microsoft. Not in Malaysia, not in the US, not anywhere.
Well, there’s Alibaba – but jobs there require fluency in English first and Mandarin second.
Not in Malay.
So, who are we kidding here, with a pandering “feel good” syndrome that if vernacular schools are abolished in Malaysia, everything will be fine and dandy and Malaysia will automatically soar up the competitiveness rankings as MNCs fight to set up their most valued operations here.
Boy, is there the mother of reality checks coming to upend all these language nationalists!
re: “Boy, is there the mother of reality checks coming to upend all these language nationalists!”
Every country has its language. Take our neighbours. They speak Thai, Vietnamese, Laotian, etc.
Even the First World countries that usually top the ‘Well-being’ indexes use their own language – Swedish, Finnish, Danish, etc. As do the advanced Asian countries – Korean, Japanese.
None of these languages can match English, esp. in science and technology and trends.
But nonetheless the Swedes, Finns, Danes, Thai, Viet and Lao peoples, the Japanese, the Koreans all do not mock the language of their land. In Malaysia, one segment of the population does.
If even these basic elements like national language, national anthem, national flag, national symbols (the YDP Agong) they are unable to respect, how do they expect to be treated by the majority?
This troubling yet most important issue revolves around the negotiation between “TOTAL-Vernacular” schools and “INTEGRATED-Vernacular” schools. Mr. Ti’s vehement protest for “Total-Chinese vernacular” schooling is not enshrined in the Constitution; he clearly upholds the SKJC from a political perspective.
But why are the Malaysian Chinese leaders not addressing the sociological and pedagogical factors with regards to the schooling of growing children in Malaysian society, in terms of national solidarity and cultural cohesion? Why is it not viable for an “INTEGRATED-Chinese Vernacular” Sekolah Kebangsaan to be supervised by a combined management of Chinese educators and Ministry of Education specialists – teaching a core national curriculum integrated with several Chinese subjects?
And if the English language was also emphasized in such schools, wouldn’t we soon have Malaysian students proficient in Malay, Chinese and English?
For those who are uninformed, the “Sekolah Kebangsaan Menengah Agama” teaches a core national curriculum integrated with several Islamic subjects, and my friends tell me they generally produce good students.
IN SOMENE WROTE THIS
http://educationmalaysia.blogspot.com/2005/06/national-vs-chinese-school-i.html
PLESE GO TO THE SITE AND READ
Better idea, let’s abolish all schools.
There are advantages to home schooling.
Salam Cik Helen,
Untuk maakluman Cik Helen, saya bukannya peguam dan perlukan penjelasan tentang undang2.
Dalam Artikel tu sebut ‘language’ atau bahasa dan bukannya dialek. Kita tahu bahasa melayu adalah bahasa di Malaysia dan bukannya salah satu dialek. Saya kurang arif tentang bahasa cina. Jika kantonis dianggap sebagai dialek, bagaimana pula dengan Mandarin.
Adakah artikel ini masih diboleh guna pakai untuk menaakrifkan Mandarin sebagai bahasa dan bukannya dialek?
Akta Pendidikan menakrif Mandarin sebagai “bahasa Cina”.
Dari takrifan 10sen saya, dari segi perlembagaan, Mandarin bukannya satu bahasa kerana tidak disebut di dalamnya. Ada kemungkinan 50 atau 100 tahun dari sekarang, Mandarin akan digantikan dengan Kantonis di dalam Akta Pendidikan?
Mandarin tidak diiktiraf sebagai bahasa kebangsaan negara ini meskipun rombongan-rombongan Cina telah cuba memujuk pihak British (ketika perbincangan kemerdekaan diadakan) untuk meletakkannya setaraf dengan BM.
Cantonese has 60 million speakers, same as Italian, yet still considered only a dialect… sigh.. we are descendent from Southern Han, we should have kept using either Yue or Min Nan (or both). Not Mandarin.. but nasi sudah jadi bubur, so what to do?
Mandarin is also a dialect. When we say Chinese, we are actually referring to the written script, the Han written script.
Hahaha.. As usual, Helen with the right argument. If I am Ti, I will hide my face somewhere..
Helen tired and taking a sabbatical.
Need to disengage from the madding crowd.
Ms Helen and dear readers,
It is too late now to discuss a single schooling system for Malaysia. But there is am urgent need to make the SK and SMK schooling system the main and most important for the new generations of Malaysians.
This can be achieved by bringing English back into SK and SMK not only as a main language to be learnt, but more importantly as a language for learning vital subjects such as Maths and Science.
If English is used as the medium of instruction, even only for the vital subjects e.g. maths and science, we can expect over time, more and more parents would enroll their children in SK and SMK, because the quality of education in our SK and SMK would improve drastically.
Over several decades to come, if this can be done, then the SK and SMK school system would be able to play its reinforcing role as a unifying force to create the ‘Malaysian race’.
Tun Mahathir had done just that with the PPSMI (teaching and learning of maths and science in English) project. PPSMI not only should have been continued, but it should have been expanded to include other critical subjects such as economics, accounting, commerce, and perhaps also geography.
Does it surprise anyone that the PPSMI was strongly opposed by the Dong Zong, the DAP, even the MCA and Gerakan?
What surprised us was that the spineless acts of the bodowi government and its then education minister – kerismudin – to bow to this pressure and decided to stop the PPSMI project.
Dong Zong can cling on to the vernacular schools, but if the SK and SMK deploys English as the medium of instruction alongside BM, the parents would know what is good for their children.
Of course parents who are language, political and racial chauvinists would not see this logic or would refuse to accept it. They would not be bothered to consider the benefits of the SK and SMK based national schooling system to foster national unity. They would sacrifice their own children’s future by continuing to send then to Dong Zong schools.
It is hoped that the next PM would bring back the PPSMI and then expand the use of English for the teaching and learning of technology and applied and social science subjects in our schools.
TQ
It is evident that proficiency in the English language is a major factor in the DAP’s politics and which reinforces its leading role in the opposition Pakatan viz a viz The Star.
Ideally speaking lah, I would like Malaysia to have just one type of school – where all subjects are taught in Malay, agama/moral study time down to a quarter of what it is today, for which the remaining three quarters is devoted to compulsory vernacular language education for ALL students. Vernacular languages are defined as all Malaysian languages other than English and Malay.
Ideally, all vernacular languages should be made available to students but realistically, the offering would be subject to availability. Presumably a Tamil heavy school of this type will have Tamil, an Iban heavy school Iban, etc.
DAP’s Malaysian First says “no Indians and zero Chinese”
You misintepret.
It mean ‘NO indians in Malaysia ie no more indians in Malaysia while Chiness =0 means there are still chinese otherwise that captions will be either ‘No indians and Chinese or No chinese and Indians or Zero Chinese and Indians or Zero Indian and Chinese’
unfortunately she forgot there are still MALAYS otherwise it will be No Chinese, Indian or Malays or Zero Chinese, Indians or Malays.
This prove DAP is cauvanist and a truly a Chinese party whitout Malaysian. Other races who join them are second and third class citizen of ‘orang suruhan’ sahaja. Unless Malays and Indian join DAP in masses and become majority than DAP will change forever. Will that happen when Lim Kit Siang still holding the helm?
Not many know of Article 152. For most people it is just a number. And A 152 made it explicitly clear that vernacular schools are not enshrined in the Fed Con.
But try explaining Article 152 and you will get a lashing, emotional lashing by the Chinese. You can try as you may but they are not going to listen to you.
There is a solution though. The Chinese can have vernacular schools and the government can explain to Malays why the Chinese have their own schools.
Convert the vernacular schools into totally private schools. This will entail the government withdrawing all funding to these schools. In other words, if the Chinese want these schools to continue to exist, they will have to fund these schools themselves.
As of now, the government fund these schools, pay the teachers’ salary, responsible for sending teachers to these schools and so on. Under a privatized structure, the Chinese will fund the schools, not the government.
Then again, the Chinese will not agree to this type of arrangement. This is because funding such a system requires an enormous amount of money, unless Chinese corporates and the wealthy among the community chip in with the money then forget about it.
re: “But try explaining Article 152 and you will get a lashing, emotional lashing by the Chinese. You can try as you may but they are not going to listen to you.’
I know. Their typical reflex action – they go ape shit … biasalah tu.
How to explain Article 152 or watikah pemashyuran kemerdekaan or perjanjian persekutuan Tanah Melayu or nusantara to them? The gulf is unbridgeable.
The question is not How. The question is, do they even want to hear what you want to say.
re: “The question is, do they even want to hear”
Impossible to get through to people in denial who – additionally – are perpetually hysterical, delusional and go ballistic every now and then.
Have a look at this Helen. You believe anything he says? [YouTube]
One thing I want to say is this. With people like him around, you can forget about the one school system and national unity.
Mother tongue literacy is constitutionally guaranteed.
Education in mother tongue is a constitutional derivation and codified into the Education Act.
As hindsight is 20 20, the best way would probably have been to teach multiple language capabilities at a very early age. So the mother tongue basic literacy is provided and then let every child go through a single curriculum – which language is immaterial (conceptually) if the children are well versed in the core 3 :BM, English and mother tongue or elective (eg Arabic or whichever the parents want).
After all, children pick up languages very easily at preschool stage, why not have a paradigm shift and focus our resources on early education?
What you’ve proposed does not carry currency with the Chinese. Their position, right from the very beginning and up till now and into the future, is to have their own system of education. They will not agree to such a proposal.
That’s why I said it’s a paradigm shift. Since there is so much hue and cry for “Ubah” then ubah to this system ;)
Nothing is permanent.
On an aside, are there any clear reasons given as to why the UEC is not recognised? Or could there be supplementary papers that need to be taken to be certified? It’s like a persistent bugbear but neither party seems to have a logical answer to this issue apart from pointing fingers at each other and calling names.
Their Ubah is essentially about everyone else Ubah but themselves. You tell them to Ubah and they will tell you to fucked off. If you know what they are saying all over social media, not just English language social media but also the Mandarin social media you will know how belligerent they have become, the language they employ is that of the barbarian variety.
Speaking of UEC, nobody knows the content of their so called discussions. Nothing has been revealed to the public other than the standard answer of ‘we are discussing’. What are they discussing really ? Just reveal the stuff you are discussing ! Yet until today we still have no idea what they are discussing.
re: “Mother tongue literacy is constitutionally guaranteed”
I agree.
re: “Education in mother tongue is a constitutional derivation”
I agree on this too, and draw a parallel.
The Malay ‘special position’ is stated in the FedCon as Article 153 and the “bumiputera” quotas are derived from this. Or in other words, 153 is the enabling mechanism that reserves scholarships, permits, etc for Malays.
However the FedCon in itself does not guarantee a 7% discount on houses for Malay buyers. And the non-Malays want this privilege of housing discount to be abolished.
Similarly, the FedCon in itself does not guarantee SRJK(C) as a specific although as you rightly pointed out, mother tongue literacy is constitutionally guaranteed.
The PJ Utara Umno deputy chairman and some other Malay want SRJK(C) abolished just like some non-Malays want the housing quota and discount abolished.
What we see is the “social contract” being renegotiated. The Chinese want to take away some of the privileges that the Malays enjoy (like housing discount) and the Malays, post-tsunami 2013, want to take away some of the privileges that the Chinese enjoy (like vernacular school).
PKR and Pas are conspicuously silent on the issue of Chinese education :)
The social contract is rightly as you say being renegotiated and the negotiation is being done without the input of the Chinese community. As for Malays the position is very clear as articulated by Umno factions and other Malay NGOs.
The “social contract” bargain was obtained through the good offices of the MCA in pow-wow between Tan Cheng Lock and Tunku.
Chinese voters have spat on MCA as “prostitutes” and “running dogs”, and the breach between MCA and Umno is irrevocable.
I hope the Chinese will one day realise that whatever they’re losing today – including vernacular education – is due to the DAP and their bullshit like saying “there are no Indians and zero Chinese, all are Anak Bangsa Malaysia”.
Re I hope the Chinese will one day realise that whatever they’re losing today – including vernacular education – is due to the DAP and their bullshit like saying “there are no Indians and zero Chinese, all are Anak Bangsa Malaysia”
Mana mungkin they blame the DAP? Sampai bila bila pun they will blame Umno and MCA. No hope lah these people. DAP has planted in them the warped premise that ‘we are always right others always wrong’.
We know them that betray the intentions of their ancestors and who hoodwink their fellowmen with sophistry.
They have already discarded their ancestral gods and Chinese religious traditions.
They’ve new gods (trinitarian godhead) and adopted Western religious traditions.
Now as the next step, they’re trying to win the ‘Allah’ name through the courts.
Helen,
I am not so sure about “social contract” that people assumed established between Tunku and MCA leaders. I am aware that as at 1957, vast majority of chinese were not yet citizens. Hence, they were not in position to enter into a contract.
What I realise is that MCA leaders of that era were more polished in term of mannerism. They did not go around slandering Malays, Malay rulers, Islam, UMNO. As such, UMNO at that time did not find Chinese politicians repulsive. Things are different now. Most of DAP politicians behave as if they have no ‘mak bapa”. They are simply rude.
Actually Malays are aware that vernacular schools really make Chinese “separated” from Malays. But due to Malay generosity, they are willing to accept vernacular schools. When a Deputy UMNO Chief of PJ said that government should abolish vernacular schools, he was just reminding the Chinese that Malays too can react to DAP never ending slandering.
What the Chinese seem to forget is that their support to DAP that everybody knows thrives through creating imaginery enemy in Chinese mind, WILL INVITE BACKLASH.
Last election made Malays realise that UMNO can rule without Chinese support. As such, UMNO leaders (except several morons) are becoming more vocal. So, the remark by that UMNO Deputy Chief is expected.
re: “What I realise is that MCA leaders of that era were more polished in term of mannerism.”
Tan Cheng Lock was a Malacca Baba, Omar Ong Yoke Lin was a Muslim and H.S. Lee was descended from a rich family of scholars.
Today the DAP leaders are carpetbaggers who think that their new religion, their newly acquired big houses (wealth gotten AFTER they became politicians), their big cars and their Prada handbags give them class.
And that’s why they feel superior enough to go around labelling their opponents “low class”.
re: “Most of DAP politicians behave as if they have no ‘mak bapa”. They are simply rude.”
Most of DAP politicians today are evangelistas.
re: “DAP never ending slandering”
The Dapsters are convinced that their party leaders speak the truth and nothing but the truth. If we’re unable to see that, then they will say that we must be “hate-spewing, divisive, race-obsessed ignoramuses”.
Their media will publish editorials to shame us as bigots.
re: “WILL INVITE BACKLASH”
They will never grasp that it is their own action which has invited an equal and opposite reaction. They will say that the backlash is because Umno is a “scumno” party and that “Umnoputras” are the most racist people in the world.
re: “Last election made Malays realise that UMNO can rule without Chinese support.”
The Malays may have realised but not the Chinese. Look at the Selangor MB crisis. The DAP leaders and their followers believe that without Chinese support, PAS will be wiped out in Selangor and return to become a kampung party in the East Coast.
re: “Tan Cheng Lock was a Malacca Baba, Omar Ong Yoke Lin was a Muslim and H.S. Lee was descended from a rich family of scholars. Today the DAP leaders are carpetbaggers who think that their new religion, their newly acquired big houses (wealth gotten AFTER they became politicians), their big cars and their Prada handbags give them class. And that’s why they feel superior enough to go around labelling their opponents “low class”.”
It’s underpinned by that Maoist vilification of all things scholarly that emerged from Confucian ethics and Buddhist Metaphysics. As such, the residual Chinese “culture” has come down to the pursuit of mercantilism and the indulgence of worldly pleasures.
Wouldn’t refined Malaysian gentlemen such as those mentioned above be startled, even repulsed by the outlook and behaviour of the nouveau Chinese rapture evangelists who make a trade of radical social deconstruction?
But where has post-modernism led humanity except down the slippery slope of relativist rationalizations and subjective realpolitik – witness our local socio-political landscape. Even Islamism is grown from a deviant deconstruction of the Islamic ethos. Hahaha, how the idol of “post-modernism” manipulates ideas east and west through its seductive and egotistic sophistry.
Appealing to Dong Zong ideologues to seriously examine the Malaysian integrated vernacular school . . .
Peking University’s Confucian Scholar: Tu Wei Ming [YouTube]
Helen,
The goodwill is almost dead. From my observation, most Malays already give up any genuine partnership with Chinese. In fact I come across many Malays who lament why on earth Malay Rulers agreed to citizenship to Chinese back in 1957.
This is the sign of time. the fact that BN lost in Alor Setar is the manifestrtion that Malays in Malay majority no longer willing to vote BN if the contestant is Chinese.
I notice Chinese still do not believe UMNO has Malay votes.
Then the Malays have to tell Umno to take back the Malay-majority seats that are being given to MCA to contest.
And the Umno members have to make it crystal clear that they will refuse to vote BN in the Malay-majority areas if MCA is allowed stand in the constituency.
MCA can go slug it out with DAP in all the Chinese-majority areas. Kalau boleh menang, barulah boleh sebut meritokrasi.
The 7% discount, I must admit, used to irk me when I was much younger – it seemed so unfair.
But over time, one realises that the measure has the right intention to help the Malays increase their property ownership.
However, it has come to pass that this mechanism is fraught with loopholes exploited by developers and wealthier Malays.
In the end, lower income Malays are still being locked out of owning decent units or being offered only undesirable lots by virtue of their location and whatnot.
So do review the mechanism to make it work according to the original intention – it may be a discount, a cash pay-out or a tax rebate; doesn’t matter but just make sure it does what it intends to do with proper controls and oversight.
Likewise that Umno fella believes that SRJK(C) – the vehicle delivering mother tongue literacy – should be reviewed also vis-a-vis its original intention within the framework of nation-building and national integration.
But he has been greeted with a pile of police reports for making the suggestion.
Well, if he really believes that this is the solution, then proceed to push for such a review despite the police reports.
Else, it will be just a statement playing to the gallery and thus has no value to the betterment of this nation.
re: “despite the police reports”
He’ll probably move the motion.
Ball in the court of the Umno chair as to whether to allow for debate.
Good.
Should we revert to two streams – Aliran Melayu and Aliran Bahasa Inggeris?
Those Bahasa Melayu nationalists can send their kids to ‘Aliran Melayu’ classes, and those who want their kids to have better exposure to Bahasa Inggeris can send their kids to ‘Aliran Bahasa Inggeris’ classes. They can still study in one school and in classes where Bahasa Melayu are the medium of instruction like BM, Agama Islam, Moral Studies, etc.
90 % anak CINA tak pandai cakap Bahasa Malaysia.
Orang Bangla, orang Nepal fasih berbahasa Malaysia DALAM 2 minggu selepas masuk Malaysia.
APA KOMEN MCA DAP DONG ZONG.
it’s a big shame a big disgrace, yet mengaku RAKYAT Malaysia.
Yang PANDAI berbahasa Malaysia SAHAJA duduk DI Malaysia !
Cadangan:
Beri peluang sekolah Cina yang lemah dalam BM untuk memperbaiki BM dalam masa 3 tahun.
Kalau pun pembaikan tak jadi, tukarlah menjadi Sekolah Kebangsaan atau serahkan sekolah untuk dikelolakan oleh Dong Zong.
Kalau ada syarat macam ini barulah Cina2 ini akan lebih mengambil berat akan mutu BM.
Bercakap tak guna, membazir duit pembayar cukai.
re: “Kalau pun pembaikan tak jadi, tukarlah menjadi Sekolah Kebangsaan”
Can’t.
When Najib was Education Minister, he amended the Education Act to remove the power of the Minister to convert Sekolah Cina to Sekolah Kebangsaan.
Patutlah sejak dulu dah bagi peluang Apek Dong Zong panjat bahu. Lepas panjat bahu, panjat kepala.
Bila kera dah panjat keluar rumah jangan harap nak tangkap. Nak cium kera pun tak mahu.
Wahai Ah Jib kor.
Mungkin ada orang baru yang boleh ubah balik. Dah ada desas desus di kalangan UMNO supaya jangan beri muka lagi. Three strikes you are out, pepatah orang AS.
Ada juga yang masih fikir panjang…
[Facebook]
Yup, Xynal.
Like I’ve said, DAP is sending the Chinese to hell in a handbasket.
the Reid Commission Report
Concepts
Although enshrining concepts such as federalism and a constitutional monarchy, the proposed Malayan constitution by the Reid Commission also contained provisions protecting special position for the Malays, such as quotas in admission to higher education and the civil service, and making Islam the official religion of the federation. It also made Malay the official language of the nation, although the right to vernacular education in Chinese and Tamil would be protected.
Ish, ish, ish … quoting Wikipedia?
You also can edit Wiki entries if you want.
Please lah, cite a more authorative source. How about you refer to the Federal Constitution for the actual wording?
The Constitution says the right to “sustain the use and study of the language” shall not be prejudiced. This does not equate your interpretation that “the right to VERNACULAR EDUCATION in Chinese and Tamil would be protected”.
Before you say that I memandai-mandai to interpret, please refer to the court judgment by Lord President Tun Mohamed Suffian, Raja Azlan Shah, Tun Salleh Abas and Tun Abdul Hamid.
The learned judges had interpreted that no such undisputed right is conferred by the Constitution for the teaching “in” Mandarin as the sole or major medium of instruction.
The Constitution says you can “study” [say Chinese and Indian] community languages if you want. The government is not going to stop you. You can also “use” languages other than bahasa Melayu.
But this is not a GUARANTEE that the government must provide for the vernacular EDUCATION STREAM where the medium of instruction is Chinese-Mandarin or Tamil.