Malaysians are always an ‘exception’?

Tweet

We are always an ‘exception’

Musings By Marina Mahathir

Malaysian policies often state that we are different and therefore cannot be compared with others. Yet those who join peaceful marches are likened to British rioters. Suddenly we are the same?

ARE we getting progressively schizophrenic? Judging by current responses to events around the world, it would be easy to conclude that we are.

Schizophrenia is a mental disorder that makes it difficult to tell the difference between real and unreal experiences, to think logically, to have normal emotional responses and to behave normally in social situations.

If you read up on Malaysian policies and statements on various issues, the one striking factor is our insistence on exceptionalism. That is, we are different and therefore cannot be compared with any other country.

Fiery aftermath: The violent riots in London left many properties in ruin. — AFP

In the early years of the AIDS pandemic, we thought we were protected because we were different. If non-Muslims in other Muslim countries use the word “Allah” for God with no fuss, ours can’t because we are different. We are apparently unique and incomparable to anyone else in the world.

Which is why it puzzles me that all of a sudden our citizens, or at least the ones who want to voice their opinions with peaceful assemblies and marches, are being compared to British rioters and looters.
If we are always different, how come suddenly we are the same?

Going by the statements of our leaders, basically we are nothing more than savages who would rob, rape, loot and pillage given half the chance. Therefore, we need all sorts of laws to keep us in check and not venture in groups of more than five outside our homes.

Now, this is why that schizophrenic inability to think logically comes into play. Despite evidence that none of the 30,000 or so peaceful marchers last July robbed, raped, looted or pillaged, our leaders insist that we would have. They must be looking at mirrors.

Just a few days ago the fellow who demonstrated how inconvenient a protest is by inconveniencing everyone in Penang declared that he would burn down two online news portals whose reports he disagreed with. Now if that’s not London rioter behaviour, I don’t know what is.



More disturbingly, after already having insulted all the good citizens who exercised their right to peaceful assembly, our leaders go on to insult them some more.

Instead of being proud that we did not have the type of violence that the UK experienced, instead of talking about how so much more civilised our people are, our leaders liken us to rioters who have vandalised, stolen and killed.

Talk about the inability to distinguish between reality and fantasy.

A certain amount of hypocrisy also rears its ugly head. What if Mark Duggan, the man who was shot by police in London and whose family’s peaceful protest became the original rallying cry for the rioters, was Mohamad Duggan?

Between 1987 and 1993 and 2000 and 2005, the Palestinian people went through two uprisings against the Israeli government, known as the First and Second Intifadas, respectively. Both Intifadas involved demonstrations, protests and, yes, a certain amount of violent rioting.

They were met with an even more violent response from the Israelis that resulted in many deaths and the eventual blockade of Gaza, still in force today.

Our government supported the Intifadas then. Does that mean that our government supports the right of Palestinians to demonstrate, protest and riot, but refuses its own people’s right to do much less, that is to just march peacefully?

Or is the logic that when governments are democratically elected, its people then lose the right to protest against them?

Conveniently ignored, too, is the fact that in the UK, protests and demonstrations are held all the time without the type of violence we saw recently.

One of the biggest was in 2003 when hundreds of thousands of people marched against the Iraq war. At the time we looked benignly at this because we had the same stand. Did we tell the Brits and others round the world that they should not demonstrate against the war?

So what is the message here? We may be trusted to peacefully protest as long as the subject of our protest is in sync with the Government’s. Otherwise, if we should protest for free and fair elections, against corruption or anything else that the Constitution gives us the right to, we are labelled as unpatriotic thugs out to disturb the peace and destroy the economy and image of our country.

Looking at the UK riots, are we even talking about the same thing? What cause was the UK rioters espousing?

Some wide reading instead of political posturing might be more beneficial here. The UK rioters did not loot bookshops, and some have suggested it’s because they don’t like to read.

Perhaps they are not unlike some of our politicians.

British Society is Broken: Cameron's gang war 'long overdue'

Tweet

Cameron's gang war 'long overdue'

Source: AFP

For the communities and youth workers facing the daily horror of gang violence on England's streets, Prime Minister David Cameron's vow to tackle the problem following last week's riots is long overdue.

Cameron has declared "all-out war" on gangs, which he blamed for fuelling four nights of frenzied looting and said they were "a major criminal disease that has infected streets and estates across our country".

He has hired US "supercop" Bill Bratton to advise on tackling street gangs and has rolled out the use of court injunctions to stop gangs wearing colours of allegiance, congregating in certain places and using dangerous dogs as weapons.

Cameron also admitted that "social problems that have been festering for decades have exploded in our faces", and vowed to redouble efforts to tackle broken families, welfare dependence and educational failure.

But to those living and working with the problem, many question why it has taken so long for the government to notice -- during which time gangs are getting more and more violent, and their members younger and younger.

Sheldon Thomas, an ex-gang member who runs a mentoring programme in London, supports Cameron's assertion that British society is "broken".



"People like me have been saying this for decades," he said, adding: "People are angry, people are frustrated. There are no jobs, there is no aspiration."

He also accused Cameron of only acting on gangs now because shocking images of youths rampaging through relatively wealthy areas of London last week caused a national outcry, when successive governments failed to respond in the same way to up to 800 gang-related murders in the past decade.

"Are we now a nation that values materialism -- businesses and shops --more than the life of a 14-year-old kid who was chased down a road by several gang members who stabbed him 17 times for his BlackBerry?" he asked angrily.

Youth worker Patrick Regan, who has been advising Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg on the recent violence, agrees that the government has failed to address the issue, although he is more hopeful that ministers can help.



"People have been warning for years that something like this could happen. I'm hoping there will be a long-term view of things, that we won't paper over the cracks," he told AFP.

Regan, the chief executive of youth charity XLP, cautioned however against any simplistic definition of gangs, and also warned that it was unlikely that organised criminal groups were entirely responsible for last week's riots.

"It wasn't all young people, and some were just purely opportunistic. Young people who just got wrapped up in it, crowd dynamics took over," he said.

He said he had spoken to his local authority who reported that known gang members had actually stayed home during the riots, "because they knew if they went out they'd get targeted by police".

One of the main pieces of research on British gangs, a 2009 report by the respected Centre for Social Justice thinktank, found that 170 gangs operated in London, although Thomas puts the number at 260, with 15,000 individual members.

Another 170 operate in the Scottish city of Glasgow, where police and local authorities claim to have cut violent offending among gang members by almost 50 percent in two years through a targeted community initiative.

Community workers are calling for more resources for proven mentoring and intervention schemes, and the US supercop, Bratton, warned this weekend that a police crackdown alone would not solve Britain's gang problems.

"You can’t just arrest your way out of the problem. It’s going to require a lot of intervention and prevention strategies and techniques," he said.

Although in the past gangs used to be defined by ethnicity, most are now about territory -- the Pembury Boys take their name from the Pembury housing estate in Hackney, east London, for example -- and they often control drugs within that.

Although they range from criminal organisations to groups of disaffected teenagers, a recent government report found that people join them for protection, a sense of belonging and status as well as a way of making money.

Gavin McKenna, 21, was in a gang in Newham in east London before he turned his life around. Although he carried a knife and robbed people, he told AFP that he and his friends weren't an organised group, "we were just trying to survive".

He grew up with an abusive father who left when he was young, had little money and his gang represented both a way of earning cash and a substitute family -- a story that is played out over and over among Britain's gang members.

McKenna says he has little faith in the government's new drive against gangs.

"I think they're going to patch it over, like they always do," he said, adding: "They don't care about us."

-Sapa-AFP

Related posts:

UK Riots: Lessons to be learned; Role for US crime guru?

UK riots: resembles more of the Third World, bring up questions about society, moral decay! Anger still burns

Anarchy in the UK - London Riots Sparked by Police Beating, Poverty, Ethnic differences...

Anarchy in UK - London Riots: Malaysian student mugged...

Three Ways to Think Big and Start Small

Tweet

From katerha via flickr

Taking the plunge into entrepreneurship is simultaneously exhilarating and paralyzing. If you’re like most entrepreneurs you’ve been living and breathing your business idea for what feels like forever, growing its potential in your head with each passing moment. And despite the anticipation and excitement, when the time comes for action, you feel stuck. Where do you even begin? How do you go about building an empire, changing an industry, or creating a legendary business?

The key to success for most entrepreneurs is learning to toggle back and forth between thinking big and moving things forward, which often requires taking small manageable steps. Here are three ways to make some progress.

1. Get in the Right Frame of Mind Entrepreneurship is a marathon not a sprint. It’s easy to succumb to the feeling of urgency to do everything now. But burnout and entrepreneurial fatigue can mean sabotage for your business as well as your personal life. Prioritize longevity and keep one eye on the horizon. Think about what pace you need to set now to maintain your stamina and enthusiasm for years to come.
   
   Establishing good habits and resisting bad ones go a long way to preventing burnout. I have several strategies for staying refreshed: setting and sticking to my work/life boundaries; making space for creative thinking time; and taking vacations. When I don’t practice these habits, I feel compromised and overwhelmed. When I do, I am optimistic, creative and energized.
   
   


2. Don’t Be Afraid to Experiment Think about the big questions that drive your business. What challenges are you trying to solve? What changes are you going to make to your industry? How will you know when you’ve succeeded? While these questions can help to keep the big picture in mind and your mission in focus, they don’t exactly inspire a neat step-by-process. And the truth is that there may be multiple, viable alternatives instead of one clear “right” answer.
   
   Instead of pre-determining a hypothetical outcome, get clarity by experimenting with various strategies. Experimentation will help you get more information, test the market, and build momentum for the big master plan. It will also help you get products into the marketplace faster and help you resist the inclination to be a perfectionist. For example you can test retail concepts with a pop-up store, improve products with focus groups, and test services with pilot participants. Consider the biggest question facing your business and what experiments might yield the necessary data.
   
   


3. Brush Up on Your History Lessons What businesses or entrepreneurs to you look to for inspiration. Its important to identify businesses you want to be like when you grow up. But remember, these entrepreneurial superheros had beginnings too. Do some research to find out their early days were like. Learn from their lessons and take note of their milestones and decisions points. Seeing their journey helps to demystify the process and makes your business heroes human. It’s helpful to know that all business heroes had doubts and doubters of their own.
   
   It’s also important to dismantle your own myths of the overnight success. For example, few people realize that Hanky Panky, the famed lingerie company, had already been in business for 27 years before they scored the front-page Wall Street Journal article that made them a household name. Instead of focusing on their impressive brand recognition or their significant market share, see what insight you can glean from Hanky Panky’s recent decision to build a robust e-commerce site after being exclusively wholesale or their recent introduction of several new product lines. What can your business learn from this example and the examples of the giants in your industry?

Keeping your focus on building long term momentum, establishing good habits and taking small steps can help build momentum that will take you closer to your business goals.

Courtesy of Y.E.C. 

Adelaide Lancaster is co-founder of In Good Company, a collaborative workspace for women business owners in NYC. In addition, she consults to small business owners helping them to create and grow businesses that meet their needs and goals. Adelaide regularly teaches, speaks, and writes on topics relating to women and entrepreneurshi

via Y.E.C.

Co-Founded by Natalie MacNeil and Scott Gerber, Y.E.C. Women is an initiative of the Young Entrepreneur Council (Y.E.C.), an invite-only nonprofit organization comprised of the country’s most promising young entrepreneurs. The Y.E.C promotes entrepreneurship as a solution to youth unemployment and underemployment and provides its members with access to tools, mentorship, and resources that support each stage of a business’s development and growth.

Related Posts:

• Can Posco Cross the India Barrier?


• How to Get a Job Without Leaving the House

Newscribe : get free news in real time