Freedom of speech and national stability

[WantChair]

i noticed that this topic sparked off quite a discussion in the forum about our 4th prime minister... so i thought it deserved its own forum...
personally, i feel that malaysians are not ready to practice total freedom of speech... a majority of the malaysians are a bit too conservative at the moment... as such, thay are too sensitive and easily provoked...
we have to remember that with freedom of speech, comes the responsibility not to misuse it...
what to you people think?

[USSDefiantNX74205]

we have to remember that with freedom of speech, comes the responsibility not to misuse it...

I agree that some restraint must be practiced when we are given freedom of speech, but I don't see the logic of being hauled off to Kamunting for criticizing an elected leader such as the PM. The main issue here would be the misuse of the ISA not to protect national security, but to systematically eliminate opposition to the BN govt.

[el_empty]

a government curtailing freedom of speech is simply feudalistic. i am not convinced that the government suppresses this right in the name of 'sensitivity to all races' but their actions read more as the systematic elimination of alternative opinions.

but to go back to the topic of are we ready for freedom of speech, i think that's a bs question altogether. the freedom of speech is a natural right; a privilege for being human. everybody's entitled to an opinion, and like what wantchair says, we have an obligation to not misuse this endowed right.

but what happens after that? does the government plan to relax its stranglehold on this simple human right? their actions dictate otherwise, with continuous abuse on the ISA and the misuse of the police force and media, government ownership of national tabloids, etc.

[The_Observer]

You have to understand that most of the dissent are usually created by...uh....minority races...thus it is most of the time muffled.

The majority race of course keeps quiet...not only because the have all to lose if they don't keep their mouth shut but also because...probably...they are not...ah...uh... prepared for such progress intellectually and mentally...

[gohweihan]

The only reason why total freedom of speech in Malaysia is seen as dangerous is because that there is an unjustified, albeit lawfully right inequality among the people, and that freedom will allow people to question that inequality.

The government is virtually running the country the way of the communists under the disguise of democracy.

[Kevinlim]

The government is virtually running the country the way of the communists under the disguise of democracy.

I like this comment here by gohweihan. :D Do u see a democratic country surpresses its people's rights to speak out their thoughts? Our country wants people to be more political minded and of course politically minded on their side. They are detaining people who voices out their dissent about the government. What does this shows?

[Randomphantom]

This shows - gahmen haven't set their eyes on recom yet :)

The other reason why freedom of speech is dangerous - that free speech i.e. civil discussion is usually the last thing on one's 'ULU' mind when resolving conflicts. Not only is freedom of speech dangerous for the country, consequences are hazardous even for those do not say it as well.

[qedx]

The government is virtually running the country the way of the communists under the disguise of democracy.
hmmm under communism everyone is equal. under democracy, only the interests of the majority are ensured. wonder which is better.

what you're thinking of is fascism. dont diss communism again :P

[SHuLy]

i share similar opnion with wantchair. i think that we have not reached the stage whereby we can practise the rights of freedom of speech (fos) without abusing it.

people might use this to go babbling about practically everything and anything, making mountains out of molehills, irrespective if they are important or not.

if we are to deliver an opinion, we should back it up and ensure that we are sensitive to other people. i would like to recognise the people who made comments and opinions with substance. however, there could also be comments made with a slip whereby there'll be instigations and criticism that some people just cannot accept and take it to the heart..etc.

indeed, i hope that we can have more fos in this country to a certain extend,but i don't believe in total freedom of speech.

also, i would like to bring up the articles by marina mahathir over 'Musings" in the Star. she is quite vocal.

[ElansarGelmir]

I agree with Wantchair... Albeit we can be considered as a developing nation, the mindset of our people can be still considered as 'jahil'. That's why we see many people fall into the misguided preachings of pas. The request to ban Bruce Almighty is a clear evident that the majority cannot tolerate nor open their mind to anything which goes against their beliefs.

However, if there is a will, there is a way. The govt. shouldn't 100% suppress our freedom of speech. They should instill the value of tolerance and accepting criticisms into the minds of Malaysians since young, and also encourage freedom of speech gradually from trivial matters to national affairs.

[el_empty]

i share similar opnion with wantchair. i think that we have not reached the stage whereby we can practise the rights of freedom of speech (fos) without abusing it.

but shuly, wantchair - anything can be abused! by your reasoning, we shouldn't have the internet because somebody will "abuse" it with porn and fraud etc. likewise, we shouldn't have fertilizers because somebody will "abuse" it to manufacture bombs.

this "abuse" is something the police can take care of, not the detractors of free speech. if they abuse it, they pay the price. besides, you mention "we have not reached the stage..." - when is this stage you are prophesizing? and who gets to decide when this stage is reached? the all benevolent government?

there could also be comments made with a slip whereby there'll be instigations and criticism that some people just cannot accept and take it to the heart

free speech is not confined to people making sensitive remarks like dissing someone else's religion. if this person is retarded enough to 'instigate' things then, as in above, he or she will have to pay the price.

people might use this to go babbling about practically everything and anything, making mountains out of molehills, irrespective if they are important or not.

aiyooo... you have such low opinion of other people. not everybody will have the time and energy to "babble" -and even so, with our draconian fos policy, amahs and aunties are "babbling about ... everything" at the markets and kopitiams. gosh....

Not only is freedom of speech dangerous for the country, consequences are hazardous even for those do not say it as well.

dangerous for the country.... or dangerous for the incumbent government? dangerous to whom? how so? and what are their respective consequences? - i believe if the person who wishes to exercise his or her right to freedom of speech, i'm sure it will cross his/her mind that consequences vary, depending on what's said and how it is said. if it's a sensitive issue, exercise some caution! if that can't be done, then go learn to express it better,



look guys, if you want to progress, you need to let people speak their minds. self and imposed censorships will take you no where and people will continue to think like katak under tempurungs.

[el_empty]

mindset of our people can be still considered as 'jahil'

please elaborate who you're calling 'jahil.'

[ElansarGelmir]

mindset of our people can be still considered as 'jahil'

please elaborate who you're calling 'jahil.'

sorry, i mean the majority ler... u know, the PAS leaders who condemn the poor girl who was raped and murdered, the ridiculuos ppl who believe these ppl, and etc (i guess u should know more examples than i do, since your GK is superb)

[el_empty]

no la.. no need to sorry. but this is a spinoff from my earlier point. that you have to be careful about exercising your free speech, especially when making generalizations and assumptions.

and if pas made that condemnation, then they're going to pay a heavy political price, right?

[ElansarGelmir]

and if pas made that condemnation, then they're going to pay a heavy political price, right?

The prob is, many rural ppl agree with PAS. And they are the ones making up the majorities in the East Coast...

[ElansarGelmir]

that you have to be careful about exercising your free speech, especially when making generalizations and assumptions.

Hehe, got sick of typing MANY and MOST and SOME...

[Randomphantom]

Talking about accepting criticism and tolerance towards others - thats one thing the government cannot instill in young minds through example.

You say this 'jahil' mindset is to be blamed for not deserving FoS. But then again, this contained and conservative mindset is exactly what the government wants for us. Its so much easier to rule a nation when the people are fed a constant diet of propoganda, media bias, never allowed to think for themselves, never questioning the system. That is why we need to break out of this mentality. And we cannot depend on the government to do that- this is cliche but change can only start from ourselves.

Under freedom of speech, we are also free to judge and refute the opinions of others. Sort of like in this forum. Those without substance would naturally be discredited. Those that speak without sensitivity to others would be labelled a racist/whatever-ist thereby earning the ire of others. We could demonstrate our intolerance by slamming that person opinions-not resort to threats and death crys. Actions(violent) shouldn't be allowed to speak louder than words.

That Musings column in the star by Marina Mahathir is always good to read. Especially when she slams those ministers making irrational statements. But then again, free speech should be entitled to all - not select reps.

[ElansarGelmir]

Uh huh, and you actually believe that the govt wants ppl with the mindset that always bolsters their opposition?

Remember, not all ppl in Malaysia receive high education like us... This group of ppl are not exposed to other parts of the world... They are cloistered in their niche, and are dogmatic on what they believe in. The govt did not foster this environment, but they are too weak to change their minds.

I think there is freedom of speech in Malaysia, but only to a very small extent. Political, religious and racial issues are never allowed to be brought up. Riots and national security are always the main excuse for limiting FOS. If people can tolerate with what others have to say, then i believe the public have the power to request for full freedom of speech from the govt.

[kucingbiru]

we have to remember that with freedom of speech, comes the responsibility not to misuse it...
what to you people think?

not giving the people satisfactory freedom of speech is somewhat a misuse of power by the govt dont you think?

[USSDefiantNX74205]

I disagree with Shuly and WantChair here. The only way to ensure that freedom of speech isn't misused if you ask me is to let the people try it out themselves and learn from it. Teach the ethics of free speech in school or do whatever to ensure that people do not misuse it, but DO NOT suppress it. By disallowing it completely (unless this 'free speech is in favor of the govt), when will Malaysians ever be 'ready to practice total freedom of speech' or 'reach the stage whereby we can practise the rights of freedom of speech (fos) without abusing it' as said by WantChair and Shuly?

The main point here is that free speech will evoke racial sentiments and such, but think: why the misuse of laws and power to can out voices of the opposition completely then? For crying out loud, is criticizing the ruling party a 'sensitive issue'? The only reason I can think of for us not having free speech in Malaysia is because the ruling party (which has been in power in Malaysia since independence and hence tuned the the country in their favor) is afraid that it will erode their power. They just can't accept the fact that they have the potential to be defeated in the elections if they play on a level playing field, with unbiased media, no misuse of the ISA, etc.

You have to understand that free speech is a natural right of all human beings. They just have to choose whether or not to use it sensibly. If they make the choice not to use it sensibly, then by all means arrest them. Besides, like el_empty said, who decides when we reach the stage where we can practice fos? The govt? More to the point - the ruling party?

if we are to deliver an opinion, we should back it up and ensure that we are sensitive to other people. i would like to recognise the people who made comments and opinions with substance.

The problem here isn't about facts and substance if you ask me. The problem is with the ruling govt. Lets say if I present a good argument with proof, statistics and all the necessary stuff against the govt, do you think it will ever be published in the newspapers at all or get any coverage in the media? Heck, I'm sure you've all read about what happened to the two BN assemblymen who decided to abstain on making a decision on the PORR project sometime ago. What happened to them? They got suspended from the party just for doing what they were voted to do: to serve the people and be their voice. This shows how autocratic the govt really is - you don't dance to their tunes, they terrorize you into doing so, even if you may be right. The only reason Marina Mahathir's comments are published in the newspapers I feel is because she is DrM's daughter. Yes, she is vocal and sometimes I find myself enjoying her articles and agreeing with her, but imagine this: what if I wrote a similarly outspoken letter to The Star pointing out the flaws within the govt's system (or criticizing their administration). Do you honestly think it will be published?

By suppresing fos, what we are doing now isn't avoiding racial tension or any tension at all. We're just lighting a small fire over a huge cauldron that will eventually boil over. Suppresing fos doesn't stop people from criticizing the govt, discuss about racial issues and other 'sensitive issues'. What it does is sweep all these under the rug and assume Malaysia is a perfect, happy and harmonious country when we are not. Already we can see the seeds of discontent and misconception blowing up - Chinese assuming that the Malays are 'stupid' and lazy (thanks to bumi rights), Malays assuming that Chinese are cunning and manipulative and both races assuming that all Indians are drunkards and thieves. This is just one of many examples of what happens when you effectively outlaw fos - people are forced to talk about it underground and make their own conclusions, whether they are right it not. Is it really a sin then, to discuss all this in an open manner? It might actually clear up any issues that we may have between ourselves.

If we want to achieve true 'perpaduan' then we have to discuss all these issues openly. True, riots and discontent may erupt, but these will be temporary. Look what happened in the USA when the blacks demanded equal rights? That should be the way this nation should be. Wouldn't it be better that way than to suppress our rights to speak and risk a huge explosion when the cauldron boils over?

[kucingbiru]

i wonder, how would someone abuse the freedom of speech?

[Randomphantom]

And how exactly can freedom of speech be controlled 'to a smaller extent'? As in: we cannot speak anything insensitive of others? Who determines what is insensitive or not? Is criticising the ruling party being insensitive? But then, if the ruling party determine this as being 'insensitive' to their egos, what are we to say?

A free thinking mindset need not bolster opposition - rather, if the government listens to the people, and take steps to remedy the problem instead of pushing it aside, would there be any opposition at all?

[ElansarGelmir]

that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Malaysia's version of govt is the govt of the people, by the people, for the govt

A free thinking mindset need not bolster opposition - rather, if the government listens to the people, and take steps to remedy the problem instead of pushing it aside, would there be any opposition at all?

Opposition exists because the govt cannot fulfill all the wants of its people... Not everyone will agree with the govt, so no matter how the govt bend, flex, shape their policies, there will be unhappy people who wish to have a better govt which will benefit them more than the present one.

[kucingbiru]

yeah, and the opposition exist so that the world can see that we are 'democratic'. the same goes with the election. but, not everybody buy that crap. come on, indonesia under suharto and iraq under saddam did have elections too.

[el_empty]

Opposition exists because the govt cannot fulfill all the wants of its people... Not everyone will agree with the govt, so no matter how the govt bend, flex, shape their policies, there will be unhappy people who wish to have a better govt which will benefit them more than the present one.


but that's the whole point, Elansar. everybody wants something that's good for themselves. and if it's important enough to them, they will fight for it. that's just a natural human instinct. if you're hungry, you will look for food. what the government has succeeded in doing today, is to teach people to supress their hunger for the good of the nation.

but you're wrong when you said the opposition exists because "the govt cannot fulfill all the wants of the people." the opposition is a check and balance mechanism that allows for debate in parliament. no matter how good a government is, there must always be an opposition to counterbalance the discretion of a government. what our government does today is to silence the opposition. what's left then?

[ElansarGelmir]

what our government does today is to silence the opposition.

Yeah... i agree with u... that's why our FOS is suppressed.

[The_Observer]

and the Government calls ppl like us 'detractors', 'unpatriotic', 'ungrateful' etc etc......

wa piang leh.... <shakes head in frustration>

[gohweihan]

A free thinking mindset need not bolster opposition - rather, if the government listens to the people, and take steps to remedy the problem instead of pushing it aside, would there be any opposition at all?

Have to agree with that. However, the situation now is such that the government is not listening to the people. The ruling party has 90 percent of the seats in the Parliament, and instead of acting like the peoples' representative, they are portraying the idea that they deserve to be up there, that they are one step above the rest, and that their decisions are always for the better of the people - yet not realizing that no human is perfect. We the normal people are not allowed to question, as questioning their proposals would mean questioning their intelligence.

These representatives had forgotten that they are accountable to the people, and that the people have the rights to ask them about what they are doing, and to suggest measures that can be taken. If we are indeed not allowed to ask any questions regarding the nation, and to speak freely about matters concerning the nation, then why have elections in the first place?

[tunsrilanang]

herm, sometimes, certain ppl who melaung-laungkan abt freedom of speech are the ones who are so damn sensitive that they cannot tolerate any criticsm.

certain ppl too, want freedom of speech but when ppl criticize their family members or themselves they terasa and bengang.

[__earth]

herm, sometimes, certain ppl who melaung-laungkan abt freedom of speech are the ones who are so damn sensitive that they cannot tolerate any criticsm.

certain ppl too, want freedom of speech but when ppl criticize their family members or themselves they terasa and bengang.

I believe it is quite the contrary. It's people that can't accept criticism are the ones that try to suppress free speech. By suppressing free speech, criticism is muted.

On the other hand, people that fight for free speech know that with free speech, they themselves could be criticized. If they can't accept criticism, then they are simply not advocates of free speech. Voltaire decribed an advocate of free speech in a better way:

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

but then, everybody has a sensitive spot, liberal and conservative-minded (in msian's pov) alike. your statement certainly doesnt apply only to the advocate of free speech.

and from the way i see it, its the government that can't accept criticism.

[Diesel]

AS A RESPECT TO OUR MODERATORS AND THE FORUM, I HEREBY EDIT MY MESSAGE,


herm, sometimes, certain ppl who melaung-laungkan abt freedom of speech are the ones who are so damn sensitive that they cannot tolerate any criticsm.

certain ppl too, want freedom of speech but when ppl criticize their family members or themselves they terasa and bengang.


of course with freedom of speech people will get pissed dina. i didn't say that with freedom of speech everybody will be happy. i didnt say that people who are eligible to "melaung-laungkan" freedom of speech are the people who is not sensitive at all.
people who advocate fos are the people who have feelings too, and what they advocate might hurt them someday too. and they know it. maybe you expect the dead to advocate fos, so that they wont get hurt by their action. :P

this is one example:
TOOOOOT!!
[/example only, probably fictional]

My apologies for the inconvenience caused. and i will try my very best to avoid such a thing from happening again. i will try my very best to ignore, or even take what that person says after this as a joke, and do nothing more than keeping it to myself or laughing.

[naturesimple]

for those who never study kenegaraan malaysia , i'm sorry for u.
our country actually does not fully practise the system of democracy. that y our country not considered as democratic country . the ideology of malaysia is actually system campur- aduk.
freedom of speech??? wait till all malaysian get westernise.

malaysian cant accept critism just like our unversities' lecturers. u will be branded as rude when u really say sumthing real but hurt in front of them.

[el_empty]

freedom of speech??? wait till all malaysian get westernise.

what do you mean by that?

i heard the kenegaraan malaysia (did you mean pendidikan malaysian studies) was just a farce? a giant fiasco? and what do you mean by a campur-aduk system? do you mean it's socialist democratic?

[tunsrilanang]

if the person who melaungkan laungkan freedom of speech tu nak cepat jadi sensitif dan mudah terasa, might as well tak payah nak laungkan apa apa faizal. asal bagi pendapat cukup.
kalau reti kutuk keluarga orang, reti juga terima kalau keluarga sendiri dicaci.

lebih baik kurangkan ironi dari menambahkan ironi.

wondering,
does freedom of speech include lying?
what is the point of having freedom of speech if one of the main consequence from that is probably fighting ?

well, i think limited freedom of speech is better.

[tunsrilanang]

i believe ppl should not talk too much and melaung laungkan things too much. coz in the end, those who melaung laungkan those things i.e freedom of speech, freedom of choice etc are the ones yang tak leh terima if anything backfired , either way, orang yg melaung laungkan tu lah yg tak buat ape ape.

[qedx]

errr... wow

[USSDefiantNX74205]

er...what was that all about?

i believe ppl should not talk too much and melaung laungkan things too much. coz in the end, those who melaung laungkan those things i.e freedom of speech, freedom of choice etc are the ones yang tak leh terima if anything backfired , either way, orang yg melaung laungkan tu lah yg tak buat ape ape.

Some who 'melaung-laungkan' fos maybe as sensitive as you say, but to generalize that all advocates of fos are like that isn't right either. Besides, how are these 'melaung-laungkan' people supposed to do anything if the govt has laws like the ISA holding them back?

[Randomphantom]

I guess using much expletives covered with asterixes accompanied by personal attacks is a sign of rational thoughtful speech

Freedom of speech doesn't guarantee quality of speech :P

[qedx]

that's exactly why we love free speech. :D

[kucingbiru]

oh my god, what is going on here? i am totally lost. what is it between diesel and tunsrilanang? 8O :?:

[ElansarGelmir]

i believe ppl should not talk too much and melaung laungkan things too much. coz in the end, those who melaung laungkan those things i.e freedom of speech, freedom of choice etc are the ones yang tak leh terima if anything backfired , either way, orang yg melaung laungkan tu lah yg tak buat ape ape.

wah... like you know 110% of ppl who calls for FOS but they are sensitive themselves... Amazing, dude!

you sound sensitive, but you don't really advocate FOS... or at least you are angry with ppl who advocates it... Luckily this doesn't really prove your theory above...

[chenchow]

It is good to see that everyone is debating over here, and we encourage that, but we would like to remind everyone to be polite when posting.

So, hopefully you would not use vulgar words, even with **** or whatsoever. I think what matters is the convincing arguments and not those unleashing of aggressiveness, right?

Everyone here is matured, so you can do your own self-censoring when posting ok?

[tunsrilanang]

just to make things clear, the first message i post on this thread is so general, however, someone terasa.

mengada ngada nak pms.

[__earth]

i'd say, if some of you guys have personal issue, please deal it among yourself. There's no need to bring about those issue to any public forum.

though this might sound ironic since this particular thread is about free speech and I on the other hand, am suggesting something that seems to violate free speech, I believe in order to practice free speech, ethics need to be followed.

Else, the right will be abused.

[kucingbiru]

guys, take it easy, at least for the sake of this forum. no body wants to tell me what's going on between you guys, so I still don't know what this is all about.
whatever it is, Diesel, you're quite a veteran here, you should quit using such words. I think you should show a good example, especially to newcomers like myself.
tunsrilanang, your first message was general, but I think Diesel's response was somewhat general too. i think he gave an example, in fact closing the example tag.
well, maybe your general message and diesel's example are provocative to you guys.
so I support __earth here. maybe it is better if you guys deal it among yourselves. Good luck to you both.

[qedx]

lol kucing, you're not the only one in the dark here heh, i think most of us are.

[gohweihan]

i believe ppl should not talk too much and melaung laungkan things too much. coz in the end, those who melaung laungkan those things i.e freedom of speech, freedom of choice etc are the ones yang tak leh terima if anything backfired , either way, orang yg melaung laungkan tu lah yg tak buat ape ape.

First, like ElansarGelmir pointed out, what proof have you got that the people who advocate freedom of speech are like what you said?

Secondly, I believe that it is in the direct opposite of what you are saying that is true. The reason why one suppresses freedom of speech is because he or she does not want anyone to question his or her intelligence, knowledge or ideas (no matter how good or bad they are).

Thirdly, the people advocating freedom of speech are actually doing just that - advocating freedom of speech. They are not doing nothing like what you claimed.

Finally, the people are not asking for too much when they ask for freedom of speech. They are just asking for their basic rights to voice out their opinion. It is those who suppress the freedom of speech that unjustly claim that these people are asking for, and advocating for too much.

[naturesimple]

malaysia is practising an ideology which combined socialism , islamic, capitalist, n democratic.

[__earth]

malaysia is practising an ideology which combined socialism , islamic, capitalist, n democratic.

even if malaysia is practicing a hydrid system, of which I agree with you about the campur aduk thing (at least in reality, that's it), it doesn't affect free speech because the constitution has guaranteed freedom in the first place.

Article number: 10

10.

(1) Subject to Clauses (2), (3) and (4) -

o (a) every citizen has the right to freedom of speech and expression;

o (b) all citizens have the right to assemble peaceably and without arms;

o (c) all citizens have the right to form associations.

* (2) Parliament may by law impose -

o (a) on the rights conferred by paragraph (a) of Clause (1),such restrictions as it deems necessary or expedient in the interest of the security of the Federation or any part thereof, friendly relations with other countries, public order or morality and restrictions designed to protect the privileges of Parliament or of any Legislative Assembly or to provide against contempt of court, defamation, or incitement to any offence;

o (b) on the right conferred by paragraph (b) of Clause (1), such restrictions as it deems necessary or expedient in the interest of the security of the Federation or any part thereof, or public order;

o (c) on the right conferred by paragraph (c) of Clause (1), such restrictions as it deems necessary or expedient in the interest of the security of the Federation or any part thereof, public order or morality.

* (3) Restrictions on the right to form associations conferred by paragraph (c) of Clause (1) may also be imposed by any law relating to labour or education.

* (4) In imposing restrictions in the interest of the security of the Federation or any part thereof or public order under Clause (2) (a), Parliament may pass law prohibiting the questioning of any matter, right, status, position, privilege, sovereignty or prerogative established or protected by the provisions of Part III, article 152, 153 or 181 otherwise than in relation to the implementation thereof as may be specified in such law.

And somehow, I think the course "kenegaraan malaysia" didn't mention that as a matter of convenience. I could be wrong because I didn't take such course.

and before anyone starts it, security of the federation means security of the state, not of the ruling party.

[el_empty]

our country actually does not fully practise the system of democracy. that y our country not considered as democratic country . the ideology of malaysia is actually system campur- aduk.

and

malaysia is practising an ideology which combined socialism , islamic, capitalist, n democratic.

if the campur-aduk system is the grounds for the suppression of free speech, thus not allowing the democracy to be a full-fledged one, then how do the other components in this rojak system do that? does islam say no to fos? does capitalism? socialism? i think not.

the component you forgot to add into your combo list is totalinarianism, fascism, and elitsm. can we infer that that's the claim one can make of the government? that we're not a total democracy (despite the perlembagaan saying so) because of the elements of those '-ism's above?

think about it..

[aquila]

It would be interesting to look at this from the POV of the govt. Supposedly, our freedom of speech is controlled so that another racial riot is not in the making. (~snigger if you will. Everything always points to racial riots)

However, do you know that countries like Germany have laws controlling the FOS so that racial hatred and violence are not inflamed? I'm just wondering what you all think about this.

[gohweihan]

It would be interesting to look at this from the POV of the govt. Supposedly, our freedom of speech is controlled so that another racial riot is not in the making. (~snigger if you will. Everything always points to racial riots)

The problem is, this government is always harping on the past to subdue the public of their rights to speak freely. They always point back to May 13, and claiming that freedom of speech would bring nothing but the things that happened during those dark days.

As a matter of fact, that incident has been overused by the ruling party. Not only they use it to suppress freedom of speech, but they use it for many other things as well, among them justifying bumiputera rights, and to win votes during the elections. It is common to hear during election times that the non-bumiputeras on the streets (especially those who've experienced May 13) would say that they'll vote for Barisan just to avoid another bloodshed.

May 13 has, and will continue to be used as a tool to strike fear in Malaysians as long as the ruling party is in power. And as long as the people are governed by fear of the past, there would be little(or no) progress in the quest for freedom and equality.

[Randomphantom]

Technically Malaysia is a parliamentary monarchy. Even the monarchy part is laughable. Democracy, capitalism, totalitarianism, fascism, islamic - these are just selectively practised by the ruling party, whichever suits their best interests (namely, money). The nation is only an afterthought.

A search on google about 'malaysia democracy' quite about demonstrates malaysia's stand on democracy in the world...

I believe controlling the FoS like in Germany so that racial hatred and violence is not inflamed is a noble intention in itself. After all there is still potential that racial remarks would develop into riots.
But then again, controlling FoS so that you systematically eliminate any voices of dissent against the ruling party itself? And what does dissent endanger anyway besides the party in question. From the POV of the govt...Hmm, how many of govt remarks have put friendly relations with other countries in jeopardy?

[Randomphantom]

It is common to hear during election times that the non-bumiputeras on the streets (especially those who've experienced May 13) would say that they'll vote for Barisan just to avoid another bloodshed.

Heard that from my friends as well. BN ensures stability and harmony. Another example of using 'racial riots' as an excuse this time for votes. Harping on racial disunity now thats something really devious.

[ElansarGelmir]

Well, if Malaysia still dwells on the past, how can we bury our hatchets and form a new united nation? If the govt always insists that May 13 will happen again if FOS is not controlled, doesn't this prove that the govt has somehow fail to develope Malaysia and instill tolerance and unity in our nation just like what they claim? Does this mean that we are still the same as we were in 1963, that we actually haven't mentally step into the new millenium?

[gohweihan]

Well, if Malaysia still dwells on the past, how can we bury our hatchets and form a new united nation? If the govt always insists that May 13 will happen again if FOS is not controlled, doesn't this prove that the govt has somehow fail to develope Malaysia and instill tolerance and unity in our nation just like what they claim? Does this mean that we are still the same as we were in 1963, that we actually haven't mentally step into the new millenium?

We don't. The government's agenda is not to form a more united Malaysia, but to maintain power, while at the same time suppressing the people so that their power remains intact.

The government had managed to instill tolerance within the people and only that. To them, tolerance, and not acceptance, would be a good way of maintaining power because as we know, the ruling party is actually a coalition of component parties with each one (mostly) representing a specific race. Therefore, if we can accept each other regardless of race and not merely tolerate, then the whole concept of the current ruling party would become irrelevant.

Freedom of speech threatens that whole concept of maintaining power through tolerance and not acceptance. When people are allowed to speak freely, one thing that they can criticise is this current system which practises tolerance and not acceptance. And when people start to see the big picture, it would be dangerous to these leaders up there.

We are today living in a false sense of unity promoted by the government. The unity we live in is more of each individual (or race) not getting into the way of another, albeit knowing that some individuals or race have rights that they shouldn't have. In order to make sure that this unity is never threatened, the freedom of speech is suppressed so that we cannot talk about anything that is of that system of inequality.

[qedx]

correct me if i'm wrong but wasnt the whole may 13 thingy sparked off and made worse by lack of free speech and information? even to this day when you ask different people you'll get dramatically different accounts of the events leading to may 13 (depending on their race usually)

[gohweihan]

correct me if i'm wrong but wasnt the whole may 13 thingy sparked off and made worse by lack of free speech and information? even to this day when you ask different people you'll get dramatically different accounts of the events leading to may 13 (depending on their race usually)

Well, since the official report on the events leading to May 13 is not very accessible to the public, speculation would always arise on what is the situation at that time.

However, under all accounts from most people (of various races) and sources (including some history books), the situation and events that lead to May 13 is not due to the lack of freedom of speech, but as a matter of fact, the availability of it.

[qedx]

we need to learn to differentiate between free speech and mass murder it seems. i exaggerate but :P

[ElansarGelmir]

Hmm... i dun think that i have the full detailed account on the May 13th riot. Anyone have the link to this event? I've tried searching it under google, but most articles report it superficially.

[Randomphantom]

Diffrentiate freedom of speech with DEMOCRACY and the people's freedom to vote.

[el_empty]

here's an example of the foolish things the government and authorities tend to spew out of their tiny heads

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/07/nyregion/07subway.html?ex=1402027200&en=7132cf3730aa9463&ei=5007&partner=USERLAND

(you may need to register, but heck nytimes is a wonderful paper, and it's free anyway)

and here's the people's reaction: an example of the power of free speech, the (note..) *peaceful* solidarity shown by a group of concerned people against unilateral actions by the self-righteous government.

http://www.forgotten-ny.com/protest/flashmob.html

i just love new york city...

[Randomphantom]

Shows that US does know how to make a stand with flash, shock and awe...

Most of them are photobloggers aren't they? But I haven't heard much flash mobs going around Malaysia. Maybe scared of being ISA'd.

[el_empty]

yeap - my point being that they can actually do that. can you imagine someone initiaing a flash mob? some idiot politician's first going to lament about the destitute youth under the influence of the infidel west, and then the police will come in to arrest somebody - while elsewhere, robbers and rapists getaway.