Social relationships may glitter like diamonds, but not all will last forever. And we need to accept that relationships that promise high benefits will also carry high costs.
IN our brief lives, we always look out for good company. Like butterflies, we constantly flutter in the air, gazing at flowers, and sometimes landing on a petal which gives us a good feeling like we’ve never had before.
Although rarely do we linger for long, deep inside we all secretly hope to find that perfect petal to rest upon forever till the end of our brief lives.
Sometimes, people want much more than a social contract.
They yearn for a closer social relationship, with greater social commitments.
They are willing to invest all their efforts and emotions on a single relationship.
It can revolve around family, friendship, work or even a political, religious or social organisation. Wel- come to the Social Company.
Finding the right petal is very much like starting the right business company. A company is formed by business people of similar business interests.
They become shareholders and partners, and they have rights and responsibilities against each other. Whilst a contract is used for a one-off transaction, a company is used to get down to serious business for the long haul.
When a company is riding the high tide of success, its members have every reason to grow in confidence of greater things to come.
Why fear for the future? When the party is rocking, everybody’s singing and dancing, and nobody cares too much about who’s cleaning up the pool and picking up the broken shards later on.
But sometimes it’s good to turn on the lights, and check that everything’s alright. When the party’s over, and it will be over, there’s a heavy hangover waiting the morning after.
Likewise, when a company collapses, and no company is too big to fail, its shareholders, creditors and employees are bound to suffer heavy losses. Think of Enron, Lehman Brothers and Kodak.
That’s the difference between a mere social contract, and a social company. In a breach of contract, only the parties involved will be busy squabbling with each other.
However, in a breakdown of a company, there’s collateral damage to various third parties.
Thus, as much as it’s important and cool to live the moment, it’s also important (though less cool) to occasionally stop to think, have a sobering reality check, and account for what’s been said and done.
Under the law, it is mandatory for a company to perform annual audits on their financial affairs.
Likewise, people should constantly review their deep social relationships, to make sure that their company doesn’t turn from good to bad.
A simple example of a social company is marriage. It’s about two people exchanging vows to stick together through good times and bad times.
Sadly, nowadays, many people fail to follow through such vows. Divorces may be hard on the innocent spouse, but it’s definitely devastating to the innocent children.
They are robbed from enjoying a normal childhood filled with love and affection, and sometimes, deprived from sufficient maintenance and educational support.
So before entering into a marriage, think hard about the serious commitments that come with it, and the catastrophic consequences that follow if the marriage falls apart.
Think about your future children. Think about your relatives who will be forced to take sides, and spilt into irreconcilable clans.
Problems may also arise during the courtship stage, prior to marriage. Many of us are guilty of being consumed by love, or at least what we perceive as love.
After all, two’s a company, three’s a crowd. It’s easy to manage a company of two, whilst letting the rest of our family and friends fall by the wayside.
We ignore their calls and advice. We tell them to mind their own business and get the hell out of our lives.
But the easy thing to do is not always the best. Someday, you will long for their company.
Being married to our career can also be taxing on our social lives.
We burn all our days and nights for the sake of levelling up our corporate status.
We console ourselves that it’s only momentarily, until comes harvest time when we can reap the fruits of our labour.
But there is truly no end to the cycle. By the time we eventually find the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, chances are we are too old, too weak and too late to share our riches with our loved ones.
These are mere examples of the larger problem, which is putting one’s entire mind, heart and soul into a single social company.
The key is to be aware that every deep social relationship takes a toll on our other relationships.
Social relationships may glitter like diamonds, but not all will last forever.
And we need to accept that relationships that promise high benefits will also carry high costs.
Hence, we need to think deeply before we leap into any social company. If we cannot bear the high cost, then don’t.
But if we do, we need to be bold enough to back out from a social company once the cost spirals beyond what we can bear.
In our brief lives, someday our wings will turn brittle and our favourite flowers will wilt away.
Until that day comes, we should cherish the freedom of the skies.
Sometimes, we may flutter too closely to a pretty petal in a thicket of thorns, and get our wings clipped.
But even then, we should never fear to flutter away. For there will always be a bed of flowers below to catch our fall.
Putik Lada By Raphael Kok
> The writer is a young lawyer. Putik Lada, or pepper buds in Malay, captures the spirit and intention of this column – a platform for young lawyers to articulate their views and aspirations about the law, justice and a civil society. For more information about the young lawyers, visit www.malaysianbar.org.my
Share This
Thursday, 4 October 2012
Wednesday, 3 October 2012
Freedom & hate speech hypocrisy
Freedom per se has no value. It is what freedom is for. It is the use to which it is put. It is the sense of responsibility and restraint with which it is exercised.
THE crude and disgusting video by some American citizens mocking Prophet Muhammad has caused great anguish to Muslims around the world. Blasphemous provocations by some media mavericks in France are adding insult to injury.
Even before the sacrilege perpetrated by the video Innocence of Muslims, the deeply-wounded Muslim community was living in humiliation and helplessness.
The 65-year-old American-aided genocide in Palestine continues to rage unabated.
In Syria, Western mercenaries are leading the civil war with overt and covert help from the Western alliance. Iran is under daily threat of annihilation. In blatant violation of international law, American drone attacks continue mercilessly to murder innocent civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan.
There is in most Muslim minds a perception that Islam is under attack; that Muslims are under siege; that behind the beguiling rhetoric of democracy, human rights and the war against terrorism, there is a cunning plan to re-colonise Muslim lands and seize their wealth for the insatiable appetite of Western economies.
It is in this background that the exploding Muslim rage against blasphemy must be understood.
However, understanding something does not mean justifying it. Human life is sacred and no idea and no theory can excuse the murder of innocents.
It is with sadness and shame that I note the violence and deaths resulting from the airing of the obnoxious video. Equally painful is the mindless damage to Buddhist religious places in Bangladesh because of Facebook insults to Islam.
Having said that I must state that we all have a duty to show respect to others and to not denigrate what they hold as sacred.
We have a duty to censor ourselves when we speak to others about what lies close to their hearts and souls.
Blasphemy violates the sacred; it trespasses boundaries that must exist in every civilised society; it causes pain to millions.
God and all His prophets must not be defiled. Blasphemy should be a punishable criminal offence in much the same way sedition and treason are.
Unlike free-speech advocates who place this freedom at the heart of their new abode of the sacred, I think that freedom per se has no value.
It is what freedom is for. It is the use to which it is put. It is the sense of responsibility and restraint with which it is exercised.
Blasphemy is a form of hate speech. Andrew March admits that “many in the West today use speech about Muhammad and Islam as cover for expressing hatred towards Muslims”.
Geert Wilders and makers of Innocence of Muslims are hate mongers, not human rights pioneers.
Behind hate speech is the ideology of racial or religious superiority. Hate speech amounts to discrimination.
It promotes denigratory stereotypes. It attacks basic premises of the human rights system, premises as deep as equal human dignity, respect for others and equal protection.
It must be asserted that Islamophobia is a new form of racism.
Further, the claims by Western leaders, including President Barrack Obama and Secretary of State Hilary Clinton that the constitutional principle of free speech permits no state interference is an overstatement.
In the US, the First Amendment of the Constitution has since the beginning been interpreted to mean that “prior restraints” on freedom of expression are not allowed.
But this does not exclude the legal possibility of post-event prosecutions and sanctions. For example, defamation is actionable. Contempt of Court is punishable.
For much of its history the USA has had a Sedition Act. Supreme Court decisions over the decades have vacillated between various criteria for determining the justification for invasion of free speech.
But there has always been the possibility of post-event restrictions to avoid danger to society. There is freedom of speech but sometimes no freedom after speech!
An Espionage Act exists. Whistleblowers are prosecuted. Under the Obama administration, six prosecutions under this Act were all directed against journalists exposing government wrongdoing.
At the Food and Drug Administration, they spy on their own employees’ email. At the Department of Defence any soldier who speaks about government lies in Afghanistan or Iraq is jailed. Twenty-seven laws exist to monitor social media content.
The State Department blocks Wikileaks with its firewall. The founder of Wikileaks is being hounded.
European record is even more reflective of double standards. Public order laws are used regularly in Britain and Germany to criminalise “politically incorrect” expressions or pro-Nazi ideas and to punish any comment, research or analysis that departs from the officially sanctioned version of the holocaust.
In February 2006, Austria jailed British historian David Irving for three years for denying the holocaust.
Overt and covert censorship is very much part of Western societies. Only that it is more refined; it is non-governmental; it is de-centralised. Its perpetrators are publishing houses, financiers, advertisers, interest groups, editors, publishers and other controllers of the means of communication.
Obviously free speech in the USA and Europe is not absolute save when it demonises, dehumanises and denigrates Islam and Muslims. Then it is part of the new abode of the sacred.
Related:
THE crude and disgusting video by some American citizens mocking Prophet Muhammad has caused great anguish to Muslims around the world. Blasphemous provocations by some media mavericks in France are adding insult to injury.
Even before the sacrilege perpetrated by the video Innocence of Muslims, the deeply-wounded Muslim community was living in humiliation and helplessness.
The 65-year-old American-aided genocide in Palestine continues to rage unabated.
In Syria, Western mercenaries are leading the civil war with overt and covert help from the Western alliance. Iran is under daily threat of annihilation. In blatant violation of international law, American drone attacks continue mercilessly to murder innocent civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan.
There is in most Muslim minds a perception that Islam is under attack; that Muslims are under siege; that behind the beguiling rhetoric of democracy, human rights and the war against terrorism, there is a cunning plan to re-colonise Muslim lands and seize their wealth for the insatiable appetite of Western economies.
It is in this background that the exploding Muslim rage against blasphemy must be understood.
However, understanding something does not mean justifying it. Human life is sacred and no idea and no theory can excuse the murder of innocents.
It is with sadness and shame that I note the violence and deaths resulting from the airing of the obnoxious video. Equally painful is the mindless damage to Buddhist religious places in Bangladesh because of Facebook insults to Islam.
Having said that I must state that we all have a duty to show respect to others and to not denigrate what they hold as sacred.
We have a duty to censor ourselves when we speak to others about what lies close to their hearts and souls.
Blasphemy violates the sacred; it trespasses boundaries that must exist in every civilised society; it causes pain to millions.
God and all His prophets must not be defiled. Blasphemy should be a punishable criminal offence in much the same way sedition and treason are.
Unlike free-speech advocates who place this freedom at the heart of their new abode of the sacred, I think that freedom per se has no value.
It is what freedom is for. It is the use to which it is put. It is the sense of responsibility and restraint with which it is exercised.
Blasphemy is a form of hate speech. Andrew March admits that “many in the West today use speech about Muhammad and Islam as cover for expressing hatred towards Muslims”.
Geert Wilders and makers of Innocence of Muslims are hate mongers, not human rights pioneers.
Behind hate speech is the ideology of racial or religious superiority. Hate speech amounts to discrimination.
It promotes denigratory stereotypes. It attacks basic premises of the human rights system, premises as deep as equal human dignity, respect for others and equal protection.
It must be asserted that Islamophobia is a new form of racism.
Further, the claims by Western leaders, including President Barrack Obama and Secretary of State Hilary Clinton that the constitutional principle of free speech permits no state interference is an overstatement.
In the US, the First Amendment of the Constitution has since the beginning been interpreted to mean that “prior restraints” on freedom of expression are not allowed.
But this does not exclude the legal possibility of post-event prosecutions and sanctions. For example, defamation is actionable. Contempt of Court is punishable.
For much of its history the USA has had a Sedition Act. Supreme Court decisions over the decades have vacillated between various criteria for determining the justification for invasion of free speech.
But there has always been the possibility of post-event restrictions to avoid danger to society. There is freedom of speech but sometimes no freedom after speech!
An Espionage Act exists. Whistleblowers are prosecuted. Under the Obama administration, six prosecutions under this Act were all directed against journalists exposing government wrongdoing.
At the Food and Drug Administration, they spy on their own employees’ email. At the Department of Defence any soldier who speaks about government lies in Afghanistan or Iraq is jailed. Twenty-seven laws exist to monitor social media content.
The State Department blocks Wikileaks with its firewall. The founder of Wikileaks is being hounded.
European record is even more reflective of double standards. Public order laws are used regularly in Britain and Germany to criminalise “politically incorrect” expressions or pro-Nazi ideas and to punish any comment, research or analysis that departs from the officially sanctioned version of the holocaust.
In February 2006, Austria jailed British historian David Irving for three years for denying the holocaust.
Overt and covert censorship is very much part of Western societies. Only that it is more refined; it is non-governmental; it is de-centralised. Its perpetrators are publishing houses, financiers, advertisers, interest groups, editors, publishers and other controllers of the means of communication.
Obviously free speech in the USA and Europe is not absolute save when it demonises, dehumanises and denigrates Islam and Muslims. Then it is part of the new abode of the sacred.
COMMENT
By PROF SHAD SALEEM FARUQI
Shad Saleem Faruqi is Emeritus Professor of Law at UiTM By PROF SHAD SALEEM FARUQI
Related:
Samsung Galaxy Note 2 review
HardFacts
Samsung Galaxy Note 2 review
The most complete digital communications device known to man?95% Big screen, quad-core Android handset with pressure sensitive stylus that does more than scribble.
I’ve no idea what the Korean is for “let’s stuff everything we can into a phone and ram it up Apple’s jacksie” but it’s a fair bet the phrase was used at the inception of the Galaxy Note 2. This Android handset is the feature-packed successor to the surprisingly successful Galaxy Note that I was quite taken with late last year.
Second draft: Samsung's Galaxy Note 2 Android smartphone
Just as the first Note followed the design language of the Galaxy S2, so the Note 2 follows the S3. I’m no fan of the S3’s looks but, writ large, the aesthetics come together far more successfully. The S3 looks like a too big phone but the new Note looks like a beautifully proportioned small tablet.
Size and weight are close to the original, so the new device will still fit in the back pocket of my jeans without issue. The smooth and rounded chassis goes some way towards mitigating the size and bulk, and I like the low profile volume and power controls.
Marginally bigger screen and higher capacity battery too
There have been a few notable physical changes not least a bigger 720p screen which is now 5.55in rather than 5.3in corner-to-corner and a larger battery that's 3100mAh, up from 2500mAh. The cameras have been improved too, although the basic specs – 8Mp back and 1.9Mp front – are much as before.
The larger screen means the front of the Note 2 is almost entirely taken up by the Super AMOLED panel – perhaps this why it looks a more resolved design than the S3? Made of Gorilla Glass 2 and avoiding any Pentile matrix silliness, the Note 2’s 267dpi display is quite simply a thing of beauty. Bright, vivid, sharp as a tack and colourful – I can make no criticisms.
AnTuTu and SunSpider results
With a 1.6GHz Exynos 4412 quad-core processor, 2GB of RAM, support for 4G LTE and Android 4.1 Jelly Bean, the Note 2 is as up to date and powerful as you could possibly want. In short, it goes like blazes and has a superbly sweet and fluid UI. The AnTuTu and Sunspider numbers speak for themselves.
Bonus points
Being a Samsung device Android is here overlaid with TouchWiz but I’m prepared to forgive it this foible even if it’s a bit like painting a moustache on Rossetti’s Beata Beatrix. Yet, with all the extra functionality built into the Note 2, there is at least a solid reason for messing around with Google’s mobile OS beyond the simply aesthetic or bloody minded. Memo options: handwriting recognition and note taking
Make no mistake, Samsung has added a truly bewildering – perhaps even excessive – amount of extra functionality the Note 2. Gesture commands, floating video screens and context-aware home pages. There's also a funky auto-rotate feature that uses the webcam to judge the angle of a line between your eyes relative to the device, which is handy if you are using the Note while lying down. The list just goes on.
Lest we forget the S Pen which is the Galaxy Note 2’s party trick. With this stylus, you can write, sketch, doodle and grab the screen in all manner of useful ways. Damn shame though that screen video record function seems to have bitten the dust between Samsung’s video guide and the Note 2 hitting the shelves.
The new Pen has an oblong rather than round profile making it easier to hold and easier to slot into its bay the right way. There's no lanyard to connect S Pen to Note but if it detects you walking away without replacing the stylus it will start beeping which is useful.
The Note’s screen can sense the pen before it touches down, thanks to a feature called Air View. Hover over a gallery, video or e-mail with the stylus and a preview of the file opens. I have to admit this is not a feature I've been crying out for on a mobile phone but it is pretty cool. Handwriting recognition is also much improved over the original Note.
Under pressure
The new S Pen is also more sensitive compared to the original and can now distinguish between 1024 different levels of pressure. You can feel and see the difference this makes and you now get extremely fine control over line thickness.Superb video player
How does it work as a phone? Superbly, thanks to a size that puts speaker and microphone closer to ear and mouth than smaller devices can manage and very good active noise cancellation. Also, that huge and removable battery proved capable of more than eight hours of HD video playback, and an easy 60 hours of call and data intensive general use.
To conclude on some peripheral features the loudspeaker is powerful and composed and put my Nexus 7 to shame when it came to listening to music or video sans headphones. The MicroUSB port supports HDMI-out and USB OTG and you get a very nice pair of earphones. To cap it all, the Note 2 also comes with 48GB of Dropbox storage free for two years.
Winning combination: the Note 2's mix of handset and tablet works out well despite being a large form factor
Verdict
For a pound less than a 16GB iPhone 5 with its piddly 4in screen, terrible maps app, dodgy Wi-Fi reception and scratch-prone body, the Galaxy Note 2 is something of a bargain if you are after the ultimate mobile phone. It has the physical presence of an A380, the power of Concorde and the stamina of a U-2, and is packed with more features than a Swiss army knife.Newscribe : get free news in real time
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)