How Akmal weaponised a mistake
S Thayaparan
Published: Mar 21, 2024
"It is clear that Umno’s racial rhetoric is sometimes taken to a level that affects ethnic relations and this, we must surely avoid.”
COMMENT | How does one approach a topic like this without getting angry? Then you realise that anger is the point of the forces playing up this issue.
They want people to get angry. They want people to slip up and make a mistake because your mistake would be used against you. They have the power, you do not.
An example of this power outsourced so to speak is those two non-Muslims who had to publicly apologise for not understanding the severity of this issue to Muslims and of course, insulting the religion of the state.
What does this demonstrate? It demonstrates that aggrieved citizens can take matters into their own hands and suffer no consequences for their actions.
Furthermore, it tars all Chinese with the same brush. What propagandists will do is use this example of how the whole Chinese community and the DAP are prone to insulting the religion of the state.
It also illustrates that non-Muslims whose religion and ethnicity are treated disrespectfully on social media do not resort to the same kind of behaviour mainly because they understand that they do not have the same kind of “protection” for their offended sensitivities.
During the cow-head protest, for instance, then-home minister Hishammuddin Hussein sat with the protesters and demanded we "understand" their grievances.
In other words, we as non-Muslims, should always be mindful of Muslim sensitivities, which also includes Muslims mocking, disparaging and condemning those concepts we hold as sacred.
Published: Mar 21, 2024
"It is clear that Umno’s racial rhetoric is sometimes taken to a level that affects ethnic relations and this, we must surely avoid.”
- Mukhriz Mahathir admitting in 2018 that
as an Umno man he played the race card
COMMENT | How does one approach a topic like this without getting angry? Then you realise that anger is the point of the forces playing up this issue.
They want people to get angry. They want people to slip up and make a mistake because your mistake would be used against you. They have the power, you do not.
An example of this power outsourced so to speak is those two non-Muslims who had to publicly apologise for not understanding the severity of this issue to Muslims and of course, insulting the religion of the state.
What does this demonstrate? It demonstrates that aggrieved citizens can take matters into their own hands and suffer no consequences for their actions.
Furthermore, it tars all Chinese with the same brush. What propagandists will do is use this example of how the whole Chinese community and the DAP are prone to insulting the religion of the state.
It also illustrates that non-Muslims whose religion and ethnicity are treated disrespectfully on social media do not resort to the same kind of behaviour mainly because they understand that they do not have the same kind of “protection” for their offended sensitivities.
During the cow-head protest, for instance, then-home minister Hishammuddin Hussein sat with the protesters and demanded we "understand" their grievances.
In other words, we as non-Muslims, should always be mindful of Muslim sensitivities, which also includes Muslims mocking, disparaging and condemning those concepts we hold as sacred.
Hishammuddin Hussein
Remember when no state action was taken against Al-Islam reporters who went undercover and spat out the holy sacrament (from reportage)? In a letter to the complainant, senior investigating officer Ananthan Rajoo stated that the Attorney-General's Chambers had decided not to press charges against them.
Yes, this happened some time ago, but what it demonstrates is a historical pattern of indifference towards the sensitivities of non-Muslims in this country because the ethos of any government in Malaysia is based on religious and racial supremacy and not on any kind of democratic principles.
Even though the trespasses against your sensitivities have been more egregious, this does not matter. Indeed, trespassing on non-Muslim sensitivities is mainstream politics in this country.
Apology won’t matter
People on the receiving end are angry but afraid. This is a potent form of political control.
It does not matter how much you apologise. It does not matter that the mistake was genuine without malice. It does not matter how much you prostrate yourself when making an apology it is not enough. Why? Because this is not about faith but power.
If Starbucks could be brought to its knees (this remains to be seen) what more a convenience store run by non-Muslims, who cater to the majority Malay community?
Kudos to Anthony Loke and the DAP for asking the question that needed to be asked because this is an important question. Would people with real power react the same way if a Muslim had made this mistake and the sensitivities of non-Muslims were hurt?
In the quote from an interview that opens this piece, Mukhriz said - "Looking at Umno, when there were big issues which we could not address, we would talk about DAP, Chinese chauvinism and how Lim Kit Siang becoming prime minister would destroy Malaysia, that the Malays would disappear, and the mosques can no longer air the azan.
"I admit that I too have said such things, in front of a 100 percent Malay audience. Thinking back, I feel guilty and a sense of regret.
Remember when no state action was taken against Al-Islam reporters who went undercover and spat out the holy sacrament (from reportage)? In a letter to the complainant, senior investigating officer Ananthan Rajoo stated that the Attorney-General's Chambers had decided not to press charges against them.
Yes, this happened some time ago, but what it demonstrates is a historical pattern of indifference towards the sensitivities of non-Muslims in this country because the ethos of any government in Malaysia is based on religious and racial supremacy and not on any kind of democratic principles.
Even though the trespasses against your sensitivities have been more egregious, this does not matter. Indeed, trespassing on non-Muslim sensitivities is mainstream politics in this country.
Apology won’t matter
People on the receiving end are angry but afraid. This is a potent form of political control.
It does not matter how much you apologise. It does not matter that the mistake was genuine without malice. It does not matter how much you prostrate yourself when making an apology it is not enough. Why? Because this is not about faith but power.
If Starbucks could be brought to its knees (this remains to be seen) what more a convenience store run by non-Muslims, who cater to the majority Malay community?
Kudos to Anthony Loke and the DAP for asking the question that needed to be asked because this is an important question. Would people with real power react the same way if a Muslim had made this mistake and the sensitivities of non-Muslims were hurt?
In the quote from an interview that opens this piece, Mukhriz said - "Looking at Umno, when there were big issues which we could not address, we would talk about DAP, Chinese chauvinism and how Lim Kit Siang becoming prime minister would destroy Malaysia, that the Malays would disappear, and the mosques can no longer air the azan.
"I admit that I too have said such things, in front of a 100 percent Malay audience. Thinking back, I feel guilty and a sense of regret.
Mukhriz Mahathir
So, we know why this has become an issue. Obviously, Umno cannot address certain issues and its Pakatan Harapan partners are struggling to connect with an uninterested majority community. So, people like Dr Muhamad Akmal Saleh reverted to the old playbook.
This was a perfect opportunity to weaponise a mistake for political mileage but more importantly, as a distraction from issues nobody wants to deal with or at least have trouble dealing with.
This country has got boycott fever and hence, this is the perfect time to gin up support for a cause which is close to the hearts of theocratic states all over the world, that of insulting the religion of the state.
What kind of stricter action needs to be taken by the authorities? Already people have been doxed, threats made and the state security apparatus is carrying out investigations with every reveal, making it clear that this was a mistake and an aberration and not routine.
Penang PKR state leadership council member Fahmi Zainol said this - “If Nga understands the need to respect the sanctity of each religion, he should not have interfered in this matter and made things worse.”
However, the more important question is can Fahmi point to an instance when the sensitivities of non-Muslims which have been bruised been met with the same responses by the people with power in this country?
Akmal said "I don't need DAP's approval to defend my religion from being insulted” which illustrates what this is really about. Akmal believes that an apology is not enough. An admission of ownership for an honest mistake is not enough.
Demonstrations of contriteness are not enough. This is about the defence of his religion and not about maintaining social and religious cohesion.
So, we know why this has become an issue. Obviously, Umno cannot address certain issues and its Pakatan Harapan partners are struggling to connect with an uninterested majority community. So, people like Dr Muhamad Akmal Saleh reverted to the old playbook.
This was a perfect opportunity to weaponise a mistake for political mileage but more importantly, as a distraction from issues nobody wants to deal with or at least have trouble dealing with.
This country has got boycott fever and hence, this is the perfect time to gin up support for a cause which is close to the hearts of theocratic states all over the world, that of insulting the religion of the state.
What kind of stricter action needs to be taken by the authorities? Already people have been doxed, threats made and the state security apparatus is carrying out investigations with every reveal, making it clear that this was a mistake and an aberration and not routine.
Penang PKR state leadership council member Fahmi Zainol said this - “If Nga understands the need to respect the sanctity of each religion, he should not have interfered in this matter and made things worse.”
However, the more important question is can Fahmi point to an instance when the sensitivities of non-Muslims which have been bruised been met with the same responses by the people with power in this country?
Akmal said "I don't need DAP's approval to defend my religion from being insulted” which illustrates what this is really about. Akmal believes that an apology is not enough. An admission of ownership for an honest mistake is not enough.
Demonstrations of contriteness are not enough. This is about the defence of his religion and not about maintaining social and religious cohesion.
Akmal gets away with this because he understands that nobody with any real power either racial or religious, will stand in his way.
In fact, he understands that his narrative would be enabled by various disparate interests in this country. He understands that he has shown the way, that by weaponising an honest mistake - religious, political and social control could be applied without the burden of the instruments of the state or rule of law.
Our mistakes are now weaponised against us.
S THAYAPARAN is Commander (Rtd) of the Royal Malaysian Navy. Fīat jūstitia ruat cælum - “Let justice be done though the heavens fall.”
No comments:
Post a Comment