The confident claim made last week at Umno’s general assembly by Youth information chief Reezal Merican Naina Merican that his political party was handpicked by God to represent Malays as God’s chosen people, did not occupy any column inches in Sarawak’s domestic English or Malay newspapers.
It appears state ministers, moonlighting as virtual editors-in-chief of local dailies, have tried to black out Reezal’s rhetoric, meant for the consumption of Umno’s rural voters.
Umno does not have a foothold in Sarawak. Malays make up barely 25 percent of the state’s population. Islam is not the official religion of the state, although it is the official religion of the Malaysian federation.
Sarawak’s ‘18-point agreement’, created at the formation of Malaysia in 1963, stipulates that Sarawakians need not establish Islam as the state religion. Sarawak is alone in this. In 1973, the BN’s Usno shrugged off this part of Sabah’s own ‘20 points’, and declared Islam the official religion of Sabah.
Half of all Sarawakians profess themselves as Christians. Church services are packed to the naves with Bidayuh, Iban, Orang Ulu and Chinese worshippers, and also migrant workers from the Philippines and the Indonesian Spice Islands of Ambon and Flores. Evangelism among the young is growing.
Umno’s contest with PAS to appear more Islamic, a holier-than-thou ‘Alim’s Race’ over the past three decades, has alienated large portions of Sarawak’s Christian community.
Sarawakian Christians have traditionally been a politically apathetic, introspective and conservative group. The top echelons of the clergy in the Catholic and Anglican churches enjoy close ties to the Barisan Nasional (BN) establishment, and enjoy ‘Datuk’ titles and official prestige.
Sarawakian Christians’ concerns
But many Christians, especially younger ones with access to the Internet and social media, have been expressing discontent, in particular with successive Umno home ministers’ ban on the use of the word ‘Allah’ in Christian worship.
They are also incensed by firebomb attacks on churches. They are offended by unthinking references by a Christian BN politician to opposition voters as“Judases”.
They are worried by an influx of Islamic proselytisation in government schools, and reports of teachers punishing innocent non-Muslim schoolchildren for ‘un-Islamic’ behaviour.
They are bemused by strident, though unsubstantiated condemnations in the Umno-dominated press of the DAP seeking to establish a ‘Christian’ state in Malaysia - an obvious impossibility.
Reezal’s polemic implies Sarawak is Godless, because Umno is not championing Malay interests there. It is a common argument among Umno supporters that Umno has remained on power because all human affairs follow God’s will. By this same logic, God must have chosen opposition parties to govern five states in 2008, though Reezal did well to omit this from his speech to the Umno general assembly.
These religious affronts are likely to turn Sarawakian non-Muslim voters - and some Muslim voters - against the BN, in a tight general election expected next year.
The divine hand in politics
Reezal’s claims for divine intervention in politics are well established in peninsular Malaysian political debate, but are completely foreign to Sarawakian society. In Sarawak, all ethnic groups and religious beliefs exist in a minority, and all are widely respected.
As Salbiah Ahmad and Sim Kwang Yang have observed in Malaysiakini, religious beliefs certainly influence moral decisions, and therefore political behaviour.
The crucial question is not whether religion is to be separated from politics. They can never be made distinct, even in supposedly secular societies like France, Turkey and China.
The burning question remains how we are to manage the role of religious arguments in political debate. Political debate regarding religion must be conducted in “good faith”, with arguments advanced in full consideration of the validity and diversity of the myriad religious beliefs and worldviews of all other participants in the debate.
Sim quotes the fundamental recommendation by legal theorist John Rawls, that all moral decisions be made behind a “veil of ignorance”. This ethical doctrine requires that we assume we do not know in advance how any moral decision would affect our own self-interest. This principle protects us all from self-centred decisions made in bad faith.
Unfortunately, arguments for divine support in politics remain all too common in Malaysia, on both sides of the political divide, and are certainly not in “good faith”.
If any politician truly had a direct line to God, he would certainly not need your vote.
It appears state ministers, moonlighting as virtual editors-in-chief of local dailies, have tried to black out Reezal’s rhetoric, meant for the consumption of Umno’s rural voters.
Umno does not have a foothold in Sarawak. Malays make up barely 25 percent of the state’s population. Islam is not the official religion of the state, although it is the official religion of the Malaysian federation.
Sarawak’s ‘18-point agreement’, created at the formation of Malaysia in 1963, stipulates that Sarawakians need not establish Islam as the state religion. Sarawak is alone in this. In 1973, the BN’s Usno shrugged off this part of Sabah’s own ‘20 points’, and declared Islam the official religion of Sabah.
Half of all Sarawakians profess themselves as Christians. Church services are packed to the naves with Bidayuh, Iban, Orang Ulu and Chinese worshippers, and also migrant workers from the Philippines and the Indonesian Spice Islands of Ambon and Flores. Evangelism among the young is growing.Umno’s contest with PAS to appear more Islamic, a holier-than-thou ‘Alim’s Race’ over the past three decades, has alienated large portions of Sarawak’s Christian community.
Sarawakian Christians have traditionally been a politically apathetic, introspective and conservative group. The top echelons of the clergy in the Catholic and Anglican churches enjoy close ties to the Barisan Nasional (BN) establishment, and enjoy ‘Datuk’ titles and official prestige.
Sarawakian Christians’ concerns
But many Christians, especially younger ones with access to the Internet and social media, have been expressing discontent, in particular with successive Umno home ministers’ ban on the use of the word ‘Allah’ in Christian worship.
They are also incensed by firebomb attacks on churches. They are offended by unthinking references by a Christian BN politician to opposition voters as“Judases”. They are worried by an influx of Islamic proselytisation in government schools, and reports of teachers punishing innocent non-Muslim schoolchildren for ‘un-Islamic’ behaviour.
They are bemused by strident, though unsubstantiated condemnations in the Umno-dominated press of the DAP seeking to establish a ‘Christian’ state in Malaysia - an obvious impossibility.
Reezal’s polemic implies Sarawak is Godless, because Umno is not championing Malay interests there. It is a common argument among Umno supporters that Umno has remained on power because all human affairs follow God’s will. By this same logic, God must have chosen opposition parties to govern five states in 2008, though Reezal did well to omit this from his speech to the Umno general assembly.
These religious affronts are likely to turn Sarawakian non-Muslim voters - and some Muslim voters - against the BN, in a tight general election expected next year.
The divine hand in politics
Reezal’s claims for divine intervention in politics are well established in peninsular Malaysian political debate, but are completely foreign to Sarawakian society. In Sarawak, all ethnic groups and religious beliefs exist in a minority, and all are widely respected.
As Salbiah Ahmad and Sim Kwang Yang have observed in Malaysiakini, religious beliefs certainly influence moral decisions, and therefore political behaviour.
The crucial question is not whether religion is to be separated from politics. They can never be made distinct, even in supposedly secular societies like France, Turkey and China.
The burning question remains how we are to manage the role of religious arguments in political debate. Political debate regarding religion must be conducted in “good faith”, with arguments advanced in full consideration of the validity and diversity of the myriad religious beliefs and worldviews of all other participants in the debate.Sim quotes the fundamental recommendation by legal theorist John Rawls, that all moral decisions be made behind a “veil of ignorance”. This ethical doctrine requires that we assume we do not know in advance how any moral decision would affect our own self-interest. This principle protects us all from self-centred decisions made in bad faith.
Unfortunately, arguments for divine support in politics remain all too common in Malaysia, on both sides of the political divide, and are certainly not in “good faith”.
If any politician truly had a direct line to God, he would certainly not need your vote.
KERUAH USIT is a human rights activist - ‘anak Sarawak, bangsa Malaysia’. This weekly column is an effort to provide a voice for marginalised Malaysians. Keruah Usit can be contacted atkeruah_usit@yahoo.com
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.