Friday, December 31, 2010

纳吉不应将今天列为公假

对于我国足球队赢得铃木杯东南亚足球锦标赛冠军,我表示恭贺。但同时,我对纳吉列12月31日为公假来庆祝我国足球队赢得冠军的做法不表认同。

12月31日是2010年的最后一天,也是许多公司的财政年的最后一天。 许多公司都会在这天做公司的结帐及安排发薪水花红等。 纳吉突然心血来潮的公布12月31日为公假,造成许多公司,包括它们的员工的不便。

我们固然为我国足球队赢得铃木杯东南亚足球锦标赛而感到高兴和骄傲。但是,我们不应该因为一场球赛的胜利而造成全国工商界的不便。如果纳吉真的认为这场球赛的胜利,值得以公假方式庆祝,

我认为,把2011年1月3日列为公假会比列2010年12月31日为公假,更为适合。

纳吉这次的宣布公假,显示他根本不了解工商界的操作及,同时也对工商界的运作不敏感。自我在1996年开始工作,从来就没有一次政府宣布公假,会引起如此巨大的埋怨声。主要原因就是因为它是如此突发性,而且是在一年的最后一天,商家们一年的结业和结帐日。

再者,我也质疑政府是否有必要因为这场球赛的胜利而公布公共假期。虽然这场胜利得来不易,但对于任何运动员而言,没有一次比赛的胜利是轻易得来的。 每一场球赛或运动项目的胜利,都是经过千锤百炼的训练和卓越的临场发挥,才能赢得的。

赢得东南亚足球锦标赛冠军,足球队的成员固然必须获得奖励,甚至奖金,这是无可厚非的。 但,毕竟这只是一场东南亚区的赛事,而非全球性的国际赛事。相比其他运动员在其他运动项目的胜利。比如,我国壁球公主妮歌这几年所赢得的全球性国际壁球大赛,今年她更赢得壁球的大满贯,缔造壁球史上的记录;李宗伟在全球性国际羽球赛不断赢得国际大奖及国际大赛事。

妮歌和李宗伟在他们各别的运动项目中,都赢得全球一姐和一哥的地位,而他们所赢的项目则是全球性公开赛的项目,并非一个区域性的项目。 若赢得一个东南亚区域的足球赛事就要列为公假,那他们每赢一个全球性的国际项目岂非更应该宣布公假?那马来西亚肯定会成为公假最多的国家。

纳吉宣布12月31日为公假,其实是在哗众取宠,籍此捞取一些选票。 因此,我希望政府能够给予较适当和实际的奖励予国家足球队的成员以鼓励他们更努力锻炼,为国争光。政府不应该以一些不实际且劳民伤财的政治宣传,挂名奖励实则暗带政治目的。

Sunday, December 26, 2010

Half of the Form 4 History Text is on Islam Civilisation and no mention of other religion's civilisation in the Text

A history textbook should contain a fair and accurate account of events as they actually happened in the past. It ought to be written objectively. This is the least to be exected when the book in question is a major textbook prescribed by our Education Ministry for our students nationwide, especially so that the subject is going to be a compulsary subject for all students sitting for their SPM.

I am shocked at what the syllabus writers have managed to quietly incorporate into our school syllabus just a few years ago, unnoticed by most people, even parents of affected students.

This is not a typical history textbook as we expect history textbook to be. Simply because the syllabus writers have not confined its content to history. Instead they have extended its boundaries seemingly to push a certain agenda. One point to note, all 4 writers of the textbook comes from only one race and religion, without representation from other faiths and races.

1. Disproportionate emphasis on one religion to the exclusion of all other religious civilization

Out of 10 chapters, 5 chapters are devoted to Islamic history and civilization, which constitutes at least half a year’s study. The other religious civilization is almost non-existent in the text.

We do not mind our children understanding more about Islamic civilization. But it has to be presented fairly and accurately with a balanced perspective. Reading the textbook, it seems that there is only one important civilization in the entire history of the human race and the rest are insignificant? Are the other major civilizations not worth studying in equal depth?

Giving our children a correct and broad worldview can only benefit our nation in the context of a globalized world. Otherwise, our nation will be producing people with an extremely narrow worldview and an incomplete and distorted view of world history and civilization.

2.Some of the content of the text is more proper to be taught in a religious class rather than history subject

Secondly, this history textbook seems to seek to influence the young minds of our children who come from various faiths, to follow the prophet of one particular religion. There is a detailed study of the life of the prophet Muhammad (pg 102 – 107). He is repeatedly praised throughout the chapters. Students are then repeatedly exhorted throughout the book, to emulate him as a ROLE MODEL in life (pg 106, 111, 124, 133, 137, 138).

The history textbook itself dwells on the teachings of the religion. Whilst students have to study Islamic concepts (pg 185), no space is given to a balanced comparison with the teachings of other religions. Our youth are therefore taught the virtues of one religion to the exclusion of others.

Why not have a balanced approach and allow our children to learn the basic tenets of all major world religions? Allow them to engage in comparative studies. This will only promote better understanding among different races and religions.

We respect the Muslim belief in the greatness of their prophet. However, we have to respectfully suggest (with no offense intended whatsoever to the prophet) that teachings that encourage students to follow any prophet would more properly belong to a religious class meant for students who already subscribed to that particular faith. Such teaching ought not be taught in a major history textbook for students of other faiths.

In a plural society like ours, the religious sensitivities of other faiths must surely be respected.

3.The writer of the Text seems to have imparted their religiously biased view in the text rather than an objective narration of historical facts.

Throughout the pages of the textbook, history seems to have been written from a religiously biased viewpoint. Other religions seems to be cast in an unfavourable light. Consider some statements found in the textbook:-

(1) Islam is described as a religion easily acceptable and not confined to any race, nation or geography (pg 185).

(2) Islam can be accepted by many people because of the purity of its teaching (pg 110).

(3) The uniqueness of Islam resulted in many people embracing the religion (pg162, 163, 185).

(4) The conversion of some Arab leaders to Islam in 629 AD is described as “an act done after rational investigation into the truth of Islam” (pg 133).

(5) Islamic social policies are described as so attractive that European Christians converted to Islam during the Byzantize era (pg 163).

(6) Islam requires rational thinking and therefore is accepted by all levels of society. (pg 185).

4.The textbook seems to promote Syariah Law as suitable and practical for our Country

The textbook also promotes Syariah law as suitable and practical for a multi racial nation. It cites the example of the success of the multi racial community in Madinah governed by the Madinah Charter. The formation of an Islamic government in Madinah is stated to thus prove that Islam can be practiced in a wholesome daily living and should be emulated by the Malaysian society.

Syariah law is hailed as just, complete and perfect, and can be followed by all communities (pg 128). There is mention of social justice under Islam (pg 128); equal treatment to all people under Islam (pg 110, 128); purity of the struggles of Islam (pg 112); fairness, integrity, consideration and generosity of Islamic economic principles (pg 128).

Why is our school history syllabus written in a way that seems to condition the minds of our youth to accept Syariah laws as the basis of our legal system in the future? Is there a deliberate political and/or religious agenda at play?

Our Education Minister owes us an explanation. We want to know:

1. Why our school curriculum has been allowed to be written from such a religious slant by a group of writers of only one religious background.

2. Why our children are compelled to disproportionately focus and digest so much on one religion without a balanced perspective of others?

We urge for an immediate and urgent revamp and re-writing of the entire history curriculum for our schools and universities. There should be a panel of qualified historians from all races and faiths working reviewing the syllabus. We must insist that politics and religious indoctrination be strictly kept out of our textbooks.