Imperial Command of the Raccoon General

Thoughts and Memoirs of a Ring-tailed and Masked Dominator of the World

My Photo

General of the mighty Raccoon Army

Friday, May 07, 2010

A Clamour for Greed....err Equality.... I think...

I can say I have been busy and had no time to write. But I would be lying. I can say I was not in the mood to write, but that would be inaccurate as well. The truth is that I have every now and then felt the urge to write; its just that I do not feel so when I can actually do it. Free time on my own house PC means the greater allure of games, and let's face it, with EVE Online, I am practically married to gaming.

So it comes to no surprise that I can now write because we have wrapped up a lot of work at the office and I'm quite free for now, in a place with a PC but no games. So I figured I shall write now, and how could I not after what I have read recently?

There are articles and discussions relating to the validity in the existence of a race called 'Malays'. Is there such a race in existence?

In a nutshell, the article it is mentioned the origins of the malay race as 'truly Asia' in that it encompasses genes from chinese people, indians, aborigines (which is also said to be of african descendent) and middle eastern, and quite probably to include Macedonian (Ancient Greeks are fussy about who they say are Greeks, or rather Hellenes, and I know more on western history in that era of time than my own region, so I am trying to be... precise) as there is sources saying part of our ancenstry is from Alexander the Great when he married a west Indian princess. So putting it in short, we are a rojak race, if indeed a race is what Malay actually is, or so the artile argues.

Frankly I am not concerned about that, as I accepted the fact as a Malay, the race is a new one created by mixing an assorted list of sources, put under the umbrella of either region, religion, language or whichever. But a race nonetheless. Because the fact of the matter is many current races, or sub races if one prefers the term instead, are made in such a way, through natural social intercourse and progress over a period of time. People mix all the time, is what I am saying. I don't care if we malays are part chinese or greek middle eastern, such peoples have purrdy [pretty] chicks anyhow and we can benefit as a race for having their genes. (I tend to go for fair ladies but I also would acknowledge typically the darker skinned races have greater percentage of women with more... curves). In fact if its true, its awesome to be linked to the Macedonian, the worlds' first known cosmopolitan empire; at least when Alexander was still alive.

What makes me tick however is the nature of why these arguments are made in the first place. And surprisingly (or not) it is really not anything new.

To disclaim the notion that a 'Malay' race exists or otherwise as a purely academic debate is fine by me, and I'd be tempted to pursue the facts of those opposing that 'Malay' exists. But to pursue this for reasons as frigging obvious as to further one's self over the sposed Malays in the country of Malaysia, my home country, just aggrevates me to stand in solid opposition against such people. Heck I'd be a damn Malay-ultranationalist if needs be.

I hate people abusing the notions of freedom and equality, to a point I'm starting to hate seeing those very words myself. Freedom... ugh... I feel like getting a jackhammer... Equality... someone get me a bazooka. The point is everyone clamouring for the dissolvement of 'Ketuanan Melayu', or referred to as Lordship of the Malays (though I feel in implementation, its more of special priviledge than Lordship, though if malays are given Lordship over others, I won't complain... *grins*) is absolutely convinced that it is the most fair and equal thing in the world is sorely mistaken. It is nowhere near fair. It is as fair as trying to fight a battleship in a sampan. It is about as fair as Palestineans fighting Israeli tanks with rocks.

The British administration of Malaya did more than simply 'oversimplify' in classifying what is "MALAY". It hampered the natural growth and progress of the indigenous people, no matter how effective or benevelont they may seem. Go on and lie to me and say the British had the local populations interest first and foremost at heart back then. Dare ya! The simple fact is it was a colonial endevour meant to benefit the mother country, as well as imparting some of the ideologies or elements of the British unto the locals. They were making the world England; not making us modern malays or Austronesians or whatever such amalgamation of multiple names. It mattered little who was a local, or otherwise. This is relevant because as a result, locals who could all ended up collectively labelled as malays whether your skin is yellow or brown, slanted eyes or not, have their natural growth and progression hampered. They did not progress as proper people of a nation does. They would continue in this handicapped state until the British leave. Secondly, the influx of immigrants cause by the British to handle their labour or such needs breeds a totally different kind of population group. I stress this: the Indians and Chinese who were brought en masse by the British into this country during the colonial times should be regarded as a different breed than those who came naturally from their own countries prior to the colonial times. Their aspirations, loyalties, ties and perceptions are different. Is it too hard to imagine I wonder the difference between choosing on your own accord to move or go elsewhere than it is to be relocated by someone else to a diffferent place? Maybe it is, some people after all lack imagination and foresight.

After Independence, the malays, or rather what counts as the bumiputeras, emerge slightly behind in the race of progress. All those Chinese and Indian immigrants may not have a charmed life under the Brits, but they certainly learnt a lot more in the 'business of things' in differing aspects than the sheltered "Malays" who just happed to be the local population. I dare say the word sheltered because as far as foreign occupation goes, the British are the more benevelont ones; other occupying westerners can be a lot more harsh on the locals. However the point is we started late. We started further back. We Malays. If most others had to run a 100 metre race, the way we started as a race, we are like running 150 metres... at least.

So the Special rights of the Malays were made. It's like a crutch, you see. It lets you walk with other people even though you got shot in one of your legs. It's not perfect, but it helps. It is better, on my opinion, than being left to crawl about helplessly. In time, maybe we can get rid of the crutch. But of course the non malays or whatever opposition of it don't see it that way. They would prefer to think of it as an abuse of their rights, that is is some way of making them lower castes. They think that Malays abuse such things to exploit them. It almost sounds as if we make them second class citizens, and they would prefer to abolish it as that would seem to them to make everyone equal. Forget the fact of course that despite their 'handicapped by the notion of not being a malay', the chinese for example are in general the wealthier of the races here. For some of the more apologists and softer of the group, they would argue that this policy coddles the malay and keeps them from being competitive.

For the former, in a perfect world, probably we should all have the same standards and support. And even if it is not so, in a perfect world we could always be content in that other people would be willing to selflessly lend a helping hand to us Malays. But it's not a perfect world is it? Unless supported by some form or another, the handicapped will be entirely downtrodded upon by the rest, many of whom would be more than happy to exploit the misfortune. Given that sort of circumstance, the call for so called equality is like giving in to the greedy bullies the opportunity to step on their victims freely.

For the latter, should we assume people as a more kinder than the bullies type, the fact is without such help or assistance, the group, such as the Malays in this case, would fall into utter ruin and extreme hardship, probably for a long time before it can start to grasp what it needs to catch up. I know some races of the world experience this sort of thing. And I know some who know this for a fact would say it is all the better for us, in the long run. But I know that most people would not wish of that if it was they who are suffering and not simply looking on from the outside. It is after all simple to say these things from the comfort of your well established positions. Easier said than done in other words. And I do think it takes a benevelont state of mind to perceive a solution that does as best as it could to avoid as much suffering for the people.

But of course, who cares? You're OK! You're living well enough compared to some really poor folks. Here's an idea! Let's stop all form of aid to any groups of unfortunate people. I mean if I don't receive aid, why should anyone else? That way everyone could freely exploit anyone else as they please. That's equality. And Freedom.

Oh by the way, its an equal fight if I have a billion bucks and the other guy barely have enough to get himself food for a day, right? If nobody helps either of us, I mean?

Additionally, Americans (some) should be shot for putting up this hype that their brand of freedom, equality, democracy is the only way to go. It's breeding a whole list of people too stupid to figure out things are never a one-size-fits-all situation.


Blogger Hanie said...

I agree with you on the American hype. And ESPECIALLY on the one-size-fits-all situation. Somehow the idea of FAIR which also means applying aid where needed, not merely as crude as giving everyone equal shares when some need it more than other, and some need it not at all - just don't appeal to some people T_T

12:29:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home