Mono vs Multi-ethnic - in the Malaysian context
Transcript:- The name's Fatboy, Tommy Fatboy. The writer, in his better
judgment, asked me to read this commentary. Hopefully, he has terminated the
services of the ugly brown voodoo character who rambled some of his notes
recently.
The wing-nut, is an embarrassment. I know this character quite well. He is a loafer and a drunk, pretending to sound like an aristocrat. Now, would you trust a free-loader who walks around with a pitchfork on his back, or would you trust me?
The commentary compares the effectiveness of mono and multi-ethnic groups in a particular situation. You face a group with an agenda to replace the secular constitution with its religious doctrine and says it has divine sanction to do so. Which of two groups you reckon would be effective against the agenda. One who is distinctly mono-ethnic speaking the unpopular ‘race and culture’ linguistic or the group with the multi-ethnic, one human race vernacular, infused with elements of the group within.
The one human race construct is the highest linguistic any culture or religion based on common ethical foundations, speaks with pride in the public domain. One register lower you meet a distinct ‘race and culture’ linguistic. This register is the essence of multiculturalism. This register is embraced, without contention, as long as harmony with other races and cultures prevail. This register is attractive as long as members are able to boast individual freedom to embrace any culture or religion of their choice.
The insidious rub lies at the bottom register where you meet the religious linguistic nestled in a group that aspires to place its dogma in the public domain. It is one thing when it bear-traps members in their individual capacities from crossing over to other cultures, it is another when it consistently pronounces its wish to install its doctrine in the public domain.
The question in the Malaysian context is which of two groups would be effective against the theological cloak, slowly but surely enveloping the nation? The Malaysian Chinese Association who is distinctly mono-ethnic, speaking the unpopular race and culture linguistic, or the Democratic Action Party, that speaks the multi-ethnic one human race vernacular, but has elements of the very group with the agenda infused within.
The rhetorical question is asked from the other angle. You are an Islamist with an agenda to set-aside the secular constitution for the Islamic legal code. Which of two groups would you find an obstacle to your plans? One who is distinctly mono-ethnic such as the Malaysian Chinese Association that speaks the unpopular ‘race and culture’ linguistic,or the Democratic Action Party, the group with the popular multi-ethnic one human race vernacular infused with elements of the very Islamist, within.
The answer is found in history. Cast your minds back centuries ago, when a mono-ethnic religious order, stemmed the Moghul steamroller in its tracks. It is said that India would be Muslim if Sikhism hadn’t weakened the Moghul grip for the British to end their reign. The Moghuls found the multi-cultural fabric of India easy to alter, but mono-ethnic Sikhism and its later accretion, the Khalsa, was the bone of its contention that precipitated its downfall.
Cast your minds further, when King Cyrus ruled Greater Persia, that happened to encompass a good chunk of India, Africa and the whole of the Middle East. The irony is, the region is generally oblivious of their previous Persian masters because Cyrus himself allowed individual religions and cultures to thrive autonomously under his reign. Cyrus, not only recognized the value and effect of mono-ethic groups, he, promoted them. Ask an Egyptian, Syrian, Jordanian or a Saudi. They would never fathom that Persians, once ruled over their land. Perhaps, only a Jew would recognize Persian historiography in this regard, because a Jewish prophet documented their reign.
Allow me to digress. It appears Cyrus, not only freed them from Babylonian captivity, he sponsored by decree the first Zionist movement towards rebuilding their temple in Jerusalem.
Coming back to the essence of the narrative, mono-ethnic groups, needless to say, serve to preserve their ethnicity, but more importantly, history tells us that ethnicity in itself, serves as a bulwark against any ethnic or religious group, with an agenda to install its doctrine in the public domain.
This narrative was first published early 2011 by Tommy Peters.
Thank you for listening.
The wing-nut, is an embarrassment. I know this character quite well. He is a loafer and a drunk, pretending to sound like an aristocrat. Now, would you trust a free-loader who walks around with a pitchfork on his back, or would you trust me?
The commentary compares the effectiveness of mono and multi-ethnic groups in a particular situation. You face a group with an agenda to replace the secular constitution with its religious doctrine and says it has divine sanction to do so. Which of two groups you reckon would be effective against the agenda. One who is distinctly mono-ethnic speaking the unpopular ‘race and culture’ linguistic or the group with the multi-ethnic, one human race vernacular, infused with elements of the group within.
The one human race construct is the highest linguistic any culture or religion based on common ethical foundations, speaks with pride in the public domain. One register lower you meet a distinct ‘race and culture’ linguistic. This register is the essence of multiculturalism. This register is embraced, without contention, as long as harmony with other races and cultures prevail. This register is attractive as long as members are able to boast individual freedom to embrace any culture or religion of their choice.
The insidious rub lies at the bottom register where you meet the religious linguistic nestled in a group that aspires to place its dogma in the public domain. It is one thing when it bear-traps members in their individual capacities from crossing over to other cultures, it is another when it consistently pronounces its wish to install its doctrine in the public domain.
The question in the Malaysian context is which of two groups would be effective against the theological cloak, slowly but surely enveloping the nation? The Malaysian Chinese Association who is distinctly mono-ethnic, speaking the unpopular race and culture linguistic, or the Democratic Action Party, that speaks the multi-ethnic one human race vernacular, but has elements of the very group with the agenda infused within.
The rhetorical question is asked from the other angle. You are an Islamist with an agenda to set-aside the secular constitution for the Islamic legal code. Which of two groups would you find an obstacle to your plans? One who is distinctly mono-ethnic such as the Malaysian Chinese Association that speaks the unpopular ‘race and culture’ linguistic,or the Democratic Action Party, the group with the popular multi-ethnic one human race vernacular infused with elements of the very Islamist, within.
The answer is found in history. Cast your minds back centuries ago, when a mono-ethnic religious order, stemmed the Moghul steamroller in its tracks. It is said that India would be Muslim if Sikhism hadn’t weakened the Moghul grip for the British to end their reign. The Moghuls found the multi-cultural fabric of India easy to alter, but mono-ethnic Sikhism and its later accretion, the Khalsa, was the bone of its contention that precipitated its downfall.
Cast your minds further, when King Cyrus ruled Greater Persia, that happened to encompass a good chunk of India, Africa and the whole of the Middle East. The irony is, the region is generally oblivious of their previous Persian masters because Cyrus himself allowed individual religions and cultures to thrive autonomously under his reign. Cyrus, not only recognized the value and effect of mono-ethic groups, he, promoted them. Ask an Egyptian, Syrian, Jordanian or a Saudi. They would never fathom that Persians, once ruled over their land. Perhaps, only a Jew would recognize Persian historiography in this regard, because a Jewish prophet documented their reign.
Allow me to digress. It appears Cyrus, not only freed them from Babylonian captivity, he sponsored by decree the first Zionist movement towards rebuilding their temple in Jerusalem.
Coming back to the essence of the narrative, mono-ethnic groups, needless to say, serve to preserve their ethnicity, but more importantly, history tells us that ethnicity in itself, serves as a bulwark against any ethnic or religious group, with an agenda to install its doctrine in the public domain.
This narrative was first published early 2011 by Tommy Peters.
Thank you for listening.
Words, Videography - Tommy Peters
(The animation was rendered in Xtranormal)
Comments
Post a Comment