WanSaiful.com

Personal thoughts of Wan Saiful Wan Jan

September 17, 2011 • 8:31 pm 0

Temporary leave from blogging

I feel guilty for failing to update  this blog regularly. But, I  am also finding it rather impractical to continue updating this blog due to the following reasons:

So, let’s call a spade a spade. I might as well admit that it is unlikely I will update this blog until the above arrangements change. Until then, let’s stick to the above channels.

Filed under: Personal

July 3, 2011 • 11:34 pm 1

Forum Generasi Muda

I spoke and then chaired a session at Forum Generasi Muda organised by Ministry of Youths and Sports & ISIS yesterday, in Seremban. It was a very interactive crowd. Many stood up to speak their minds, and they didn’t mince their words.

Well done to the organisers.

Filed under: Malaysia, Personal

June 27, 2011 • 10:00 am 0

Sang Pencerah – a story of the founder of Muhammadiyah

In a phone conversation with Dr Asri Zainal Abidin yesterday afternoon, he suggested that I watch ‘Sang Pencerah”. I did so last night.

This turned out to be a beautiful movie about Kiyai Haji Dahlan, founder of the reformist movement Muhammadiyah, advocate of ijtihad and knowledge-based reasoning, campaigner against blind-following and blind-obedience of religious scholars.

Best quote: When a group of would-be students said that usually they learn merely by listening to what the teacher says, Ahmad Dahlan said: “Jadi yang pintar hanya guru ngajinya? Muridnya hanya mengikuti gurunya? Pengajian di sini, kalian yang menentukan. Dimulai dari bertanya”. (minute 20.05)

Filed under: Freedom & Liberty, Personal

April 30, 2011 • 1:01 pm 0

The Royal Wedding

Millions of people must have watched the royal wedding live on TV, and millions more would have seen in online too. The full YouTube video of the historic event can be accessed here.

The best part for me is from minute 47:00 to 49:25. Nothing beats a good singing of Jerusalem. And, on top of that, nothing beats the last paragraph of the hymn.

And did those feet in ancient time
Walk upon England’s mountains green?
And was the holy Lamb of God
On England’s pleasant pastures seen?

And did the Countenance Divine
Shine forth upon our clouded hills?
And was Jerusalem builded here
Among these dark Satanic Mills?

Bring me my bow of burning gold!
Bring me my arrows of desire!
Bring me my spear! O clouds, unfold!
Bring me my chariot of fire!

I will not cease from mental fight,
Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand,
Till we have built Jerusalem
In England’s green and pleasant land

Filed under: Britain, Personal

April 2, 2011 • 8:57 pm 4

Salah faham ahli Majlis Syura PAS Pusat

Entri kali ini ialah entri muqadimah kepada artikel lain yang insha-Allah akan saya cuba karangkan nanti. Saya hanya mahu merekodkan fakta sahaja kali ini, dan akan memberi hanya satu komentar pendek di penghujung. Untuk artikel yang penuh nanti saya telah berjanji dengan Ustaz Zaharudin bahawa saya akan emailkan kepada beliau dulu bahagian yang saya akan quote dari beliau.

Saya baru balik dari Konvensyen Profesional Muda Melayu Kebangsaan yang diadakan di Kolej Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Selangor. Saya menjadi panelis dalam forum yang diadakan sebelah petang tadi, bersama-sama Dr Hasan Mad (Majlis Permuafakatan Melayu), Dr Zuhdi Marzuki (Universiti Malaya) dan Ustaz Zaharudin Mohamad (Ahli Majlis Syura PAS Pusat).

Saya amat tertarik dengan pembentangan, dan seterusnya kesalahan, Ustaz Zaharudin yang merupakan ahli Majlis Syura PAS Pusat. Beliau menggunakan beberapa slaid Powerpoint untuk menunjukkan betapa pengaliran harta negara perlu diperbaiki. Satu slaid yang dihurai agak panjang oleh beliau menunjukkan pengaliran yang sebegini:

  • rakyat mempunyai harta
  • harta itu diambil oleh kerajaan melalui pelbagai cara (cth: cukai)
  • harta disalurkan kepada Khazanah Nasional Berhad
  • Khazanah menggunakan harta itu untuk menjadikan golongan peniaga kaya
  • golongan peniaga itu dilabelkan sebagai golongan “capitalist”

Tajuk yang terpampang di atas slaid itu mendakwa bahawa itulah sistem kapitalis.

Saya tidak berpeluang untuk bersuara selepas beliau menunjukkan slaid itu tetapi saya berbual dengan beliau semasa minum teh. Saya bertanya, “Apa yang Ustaz gunakan sebagai definisi kapitalisme dan apa bezanya dengan sosialisme?”.

Ini jawapan beliau:

  • kapitalisme dan sosialisme dua-dua mengambil dari rakyat dan kemudian mengagihkan harta itu.
  • bezanya ialah cara pengagihan
  • kapitalisme ialah satu sistem ekonomi bersifat “top-down”
  • maksiat ekonomi dalam kapitalisme ialah ia menghasilkan monopoli
  • kesalahan kapitalisme dalam kaca mata Islam ialah ia mengongkong rakyat

Sikap cuba menunjuk tahu sebeginilah yang menyebabkan sesetengah pemimpin PAS ditertawakan oleh masyarakat. Saya cuba memperbetulkan bahawa sistem yang beliau sebut itu sebenarnya bukan sistem kapitalisme yang berteraskan pasaran bebas, tetapi sebenarnya sosialisme berteraskan pengawalan pasaran. Tetapi nampaknya usaha saya untuk menyampaikan pembetulan beberapa ayat ditolak dengan pelbagai alasan. Saya cuma meminta satu perkara sahaja, iaitu, tukar semua perkataan “kapitalis” dalam slaid itu kepada perkatan “sosialis”. Kandungan slaid itu rasanya dah betul tetapi terma yang digunakan salah seratus peratus.

Sistem top-down ialah sosialis! Kapitalis mengamalkan sistem bottom up. Dan kapitalis mahukan agar kerajaan TIDAK mengambil dari rakyat. Hanya sosialis yang mahukan sedemikian.

Untuk huraian lebih terperinci, sila rujuk Econlib. Untuk huraian santai yang kurang terperinci, sila lawati http://capitalism.org/.

Dengan rendah hati saya mendoakan agar Ustaz Zaharudin terbuka hatinya untuk membetulkan pandangan beliau kerana beliau merupakan ahli Majlis Syura PAS Pusat. Jangan pula Majlis Syura PAS Pusat membuat keputusan yang salah kerana dipandu oleh pandangan yang amat jauh dari kebenaran.

Filed under: Malaysia, Personal, , , , ,

February 25, 2011 • 10:36 am 0

Lagi mengenai Harakah

Beberapa orang menghubungi saya untuk memberi pandangan mengenai tulisan saya yang lalu bertajuk “Di sebalik kena buang dari Harakah“. Nada komentar yang diberi berbeza berdasarkan siapa yang memberikan pandangan.

Kebanyakan yang menghubungi saya mengatakan bahawa mereka sudah lama tahu mengenai masalah cantas mencantas dalam PAS. Dan nama Idris Ahmad timbul banyak kali dalam isu “cantas” ini.

Satu lagi kumpulan membantah keras tindakan saya menulis mengenai hal ini. Alasan mereka memang boleh di agak – wala’, intima’, sirr, isu dalaman tanzim, adab berjemaah, adab bermesyuarat, dan lain-lain yang biasa di dengar. Sudah pasti mereka yang terpalit akan mengungkapkan kalimah-kalimah berbahasa Arab seperti itu untuk menghujahkan bahawa nama mereka mesti dikekalkan bersih agar orang menganggap mereka suci murni dan wajib dipatuhi tanpa rasa was was.

Saya dah pun menulis mengenai masalah ini seawal tahun 2007 lagi di sini “The tukang urut amongst us“.

Oh, satu lagi, saya mahu tegaskan juga bahawa Harakah mempunyai kuasa penuh untuk menamatkan kolum saya atau sesiapa sahaja. Sebagai tuan punya, itu hak pentadbiran Harakah dan menghormati sepenuhnya hak itu. Yang saya ceritakan ialah sebab kenapa ia berlaku. Seperti mana Harakah berhak menyiarkan berita mengenai orang lain dan orang atasan PAS berhak menceritakan mengenai orang lain, maka orang lain pun ada hak bercerita mengenai Harakah dan mengenai orang atasan PAS. Dan sudah pasti untuk membolehkan pembaca faham latar belakang sebenar di sebalik isu ini, sejarahnya  perlu dijelaskan dari awal.

Filed under: Personal

February 20, 2011 • 1:41 pm 16

Disebalik kena buang daripada Harakah

(Nota tambahan 2 jam selepas komen ini ditulis: Oleh kerana dalam masa tak sampai dua jam komen ini telah mendapat sekitar 600 hits, saya rasa wajar saya menambah sedikit komen kecil. Para pembaca perlu ingat bahawa komen saya di bawah mungkin berat sebelah dan memihak kepada saya sahaja, kerana saya yang menulisnya. Untuk berlaku adil, para pembaca perlu memeriksa dahulu pandangan daripada para penama yang saya sebutkan dalam komen ini. Bagaimanapun, perbualan saya dengan Lutfi yang saya nukilkan di bawah adalah berdasarkan catatan saya yang hampir secara verbatim)

 

Kolum pertama saya dalam Harakah diterbitkan pada 26 November 2010, selepas saya berbincang dengan Ahmad Lutfi Othman, Ketua Pengarang akhbar itu pada 11 November 2010 (Klik di sini untuk membaca artikel pertama saya dalam kolum “Cabaran Idea”)

Nampaknya penglibatan saya dengan Harakah merupakan antara perkhidmatan yang paling pendek yang pernah saya lakukan.

Pada jam 7pm 18 Februari 2011, saya menerima SMS daripada Lutfi berbunyi “kolum saudara di harakah – ada masalah timbul, elok jumpa utk jelaskan hal ini.”

Saya membalas mengatakan perbualan telefon pun sudah mencukupi. Dan, pada jam 10.15pm malam yang sama, saya secara rasminya dibuang daripada menjadi kolumnis akhbar tersebut. (Klik di sini untuk membaca artikel terakhir kolum “Cabaran Idea”)

Sebenarnya saya tidak menerima satu sen pun daripada akhbar tersebut. Jadi mungkin lebih tepat jika dikatakan saya dibuang daripada kerja sukarela untuk akhbar PAS itu. Niat asal mahu membantu setakat terdaya, tapi akhirnya kena tendang pula!

Lutfi menerima arahan daripada Idris Ahmad, Ketua Penerangan PAS Pusat untuk menamatkan kolum saya. Saya dimaklumkan ada beberapa orang tidak bersetuju saya diberikan kolum tetap.

Semasa perbualan saya dengan Lutfi, kelihatan seolah-olah artikel saya yang disiarkan pada 7 Februari merupakan salah satu masalah utama (klik di sini).

Artikel itu menceritakan mengenai satu seminar anjuran IDEAS di UKM pada 25 Januari 2011, yang dirasmikan oleh Dato’ Saifuddin Abdullah. Artikel itu juga menyentuh satu lagi majlis anjuran IDEAS pada 8 Februari untuk menyambut ulang tahun kelahiran Almarhum Tunku Abdul Rahman dan juga ulang tahun pertama penubuhan IDEAS. Ada beberapa orang yang tidak senang hati apabila ada penulisan dalam Harakah yang memberi promosi kepada “program UMNO”.

Saya tidak pasti pula program mana yang mereka maksudkan sebagai “program UMNO”. Semua yang saya tulis adalah mengenai program IDEAS.

Tetapi, yang paling ironis ialah komentar oleh panelis majlis IDEAS pada 8 Februari telah dijadikan bahan muka depan Harakah minggu itu. Nampaknya apabila kita mempromosi program itu, maka ianya salah. Tetapi bila program itu ada “mata” yang boleh mereka gunakan untuk politik murahan, terhegeh-hegeh pula letak di muka depan!

Saya perlu jelaskan di sini bahawa perbualan 15 minit saya dengan Lutfi sebenarnya tidak dapat mengenalpasti secara tepat artikel mana yang menjadi puncanya atau jika ada mana-mana satu kesilapan dalam penulisan saya yang menjadi sebab utama. Ini kerana sebelum artikel bertarikh 7 Februari itu disiarkan, telah dua kali Idris Ahmad memberi wahyu kepada Harakah mengenai kolum saya.

Oleh kerana itu, kedua-dua kami, iaitu saya dan Lutfi, beranggapan bahawa wahyu daripada Idris Ahmad itu sebenarnya bukanlah kerana mana-mana perenggan tertentu, tetapi lebih disebabkan isu personaliti dan sejarah.

Sejarah itu bermula dengan penyertaan saya dalam Parti Konservatif Britain pada tahun 2005, semasa masih memegang jawatan Mursyid Al-Hizbul Islami UK & Eire (HIZBI). Sebagai Mursyid, saya mempengerusikan Majlis Syura Pusat HIZBI.

Beberapa orang ahli Majlis Syura pada waktu itu membantah penyertaan saya dalam Parti Konservatif kerana bagi mereka ini menimbulkan persoalan mengenai ke mana wala’ saya. Bagi mereka yang biasa dengan sistem dalam PAS, isu wala’ merupakan senjata utama parti untuk memastikan semua ahlinya mengikut sepenuhnya arahan orang atasan. Jika berlaku sesuatu bantahan, maka yang bersalah ialah mereka yang tidak wala’, dan si pemimpin pula biasanya selamat.

Dua orang yang amat berkeras membantah ialah Aminulraasyid Yatiban dan Raja Ahmad Iskandar Raja Yaacob. Sejak awal lagi mereka berbincang bagaimana untuk menyegerakan rombakan Majlis Syura supaya saya tidak lagi menjadi Mursyid.

Hasrat itu tercapai dalam mesyuarat Majlis Syura Pusat pada 8 April 2006 di Bewley Hotel, Manchester. Mesyuarat itu berakhir dengan Aminulraasyid berjaya mengambil alih jawatan Mursyid dengan sokongan kuat daripada Raja Ahmad Iskandar.

Mesyuarat itu juga dimaklumkan bahawa rupanya kedua-dua mereka telah terlebih dahulu menghubungi beberapa orang pemimpin PAS di Malaysia untuk mendapatkan sokongan. Aminulraasyid telah menghubungi Haron Taib dan Raja Ahmad Iskandar telah menghubungi Ketua Dewan Pemuda Pas Pusat Salahudin Ayub. Pada waktu itu Idris Ahmad ialah Timbalan Ketua Dewan Pemuda PAS Pusat.

Sehingga hari ini saya berpegang dengan pendapat bahawa mereka yang berada di luar negara bebas menyertai mana-mana pertubuhan yang mereka mahu. PAS tidak relevan dalam membuat keputusan mengenai hal sebegitu.

Tetapi jelas sekali golongan yang berpegang dengan fikrah kolektivisme amat kuat dalam PAS sehingga sebarang tindakan yang berbentuk individu boleh dihalang terus atas alasan “tidak wala’ ”. Mereka memang tidak berpuas hati apabila saya membantah keputusan mereka.

Inilah punca asal masalah yang menyumbang kepada penamatan kolum saya dalam Harakah. Nampaknya dendam itu berterusan sehingga sekarang!

Saya memang telah memaklumkan kepada Lutfi mengenai kemungkinan dendam itu akan timbul kembali jika saya diberikan kolum tetap. Tetapi Lutfi sebagai seorang gentleman berkata bahawa kita patut cuba dahulu.

Sehingga saat ini saya terus menghormati Lutfi sebagai seorang editor yang berprinsip. Masalahnya ialah dia bekerja di bawah indvidu-individu yang mempunyai kepentingan politik, sehingga kebebasan beliau terkongkong. Saya juga tidak mahu menyusahkan beliau kerana kesihatan beliau yang sedang terganggu, maka sebab itulah apabila beliau memaklumkan wahyu Idris Ahmad itu, saya tidak membantah langsung.

Pada peringkat awalnya, beliau ada menasihatkan agar saya tidak menulis perkara yang sensitif bagi PAS. Tetapi saya bertegas bahawa mereka tersalah jika menyangka bahawa saya akan menulis mengenai kebaikan Pas dan keburukan UMNO setiap masa. PAS bukan malaikat dan UMNO bukan iblis. Kedua-duanya ada kebaikan dan keburukan. Maka setiap kebaikan perlu dipuji dan keburukan perlu diperbaiki.

Pemberhentian ini menunjukkan masih ada yang tidak senang apabila ada orang yang mengatakan bahawa PAS tidak maksum.

Serba sedikit saya gusar juga apa yang akan berlaku terhadap kebebasan akhbar dan kebebasan bersuara di Malaysia jika individu-individu seperti beberapa kerat pemimpin PAS ini mengambil alih tampuk pemerintahan negara. Adakah mereka akan memberi kebebasan hanya bagi kaki ampu sahaja tetapi membunuh sesiapa yang tidak bersetuju dengan mereka?

Saya sebelum ini pernah mempunyai kolum dalam Utusan Malaysia yang bernama “Wau Bebas”. Tetapi saya berhenti menulis untuk Utusan kerana saya tidak gembira dengan nada editorial yang mereka gunakan. Bezanya, di Utusan, mereka hanya mengedit perenggan-perenggan yang mereka tidak suka. Jika ada artikel saya yang terlalu sensitif, maka mereka tidak menerbitkannya. Tetapi mereka tidak pula menamatkan kolum saya. Saya yang berhenti sendiri.

Sebaliknya, dalam akhbar Harakah milik parti “Islam” pula, apabila mereka tidak bersetuju, maka mereka terus bunuh! Nampaknya perbezaan antara PAS dan UMNO kini menjadi semakin ketara.

Filed under: Freedom & Liberty, Malaysia, Personal,

October 8, 2010 • 2:11 pm 1

Economic Freedom Network Conference

I just checked into Sultan Hotel in Jakarta. The Economic Freedom Network conference started on Wednesday. I am chairing the last session at 4pm today.

The theme of this year’s conference is “Migration and the Wealth of Nations”. This is very different from most conferences I have attended in this region. I think not many free market think tanks around here actually study the issue of migration in depth. So I look forward to learning lots of new stuff here.

Filed under: Personal

September 10, 2010 • 10:38 am 0

Hack away – and smile while doing it, minister

Mark Littlewood of the IEA made a brilliant argument in this article originally published by The Sunday Times.

———-

05 September 2010

Mark Littlewood writes for The Sunday Times’ Think Tank column

As the silly season comes to an end and the party conferences approach, the coalition government will find it needs to go beyond its deficit-cutting rhetoric to flesh out a wider philosophical basis for its thinking.

So far the central idea has been David Cameron’s vision of a big society — but it has left most commentators bewildered, it being wholly unclear whether Cameron is merely applauding the efforts of the voluntary sector or if he really does have a firm view about how to recalibrate the relationship between the individual and the state. If it’s the latter, the prime minister should use some of his remaining paternity leave to read the works of Friedrich Hayek.

Although one of the most influential thinkers of the 20th century, Hayek has never been a household name. Remarkably, for a man who was born at the tail end of the 19th century, won the Nobel prize for economics in 1974 and died nearly 20 years ago, that may be about to change. Thanks to an extensive feature on the wildly popular Glenn Beck television programme in America, Hayek’s masterpiece The Road to Serfdom zoomed to the top of Amazon’s bestseller charts in June.

This is unusual enough for a philosophical tract, but is astonishing for a book originally published in 1944. The condensed version from the Institute of Economic Affairs has been downloaded from our website tens of thousands of times over the summer.

This year also marks the 50th anniversary of the publication of another great Hayek text, The Constitution of Liberty. Anyone searching for an intellectual basis for a genuinely Liberal-Conservative approach to government should read it.

Hayek argues for strict limits on state activity and intervention. But he offers a very different take on the nature of the individual from that often — if wrongly — associated with free-market capitalism. Hayek sees individuals as intrinsically social beings. His vision of a free society is not one where men and women are trampling over one another in pursuit of narrow, venal self-interest, each using their own freedom of action to exploit others. Hayek believed each individual would benefit as much from the exercise of others’ freedom as their own.

This optimistic view of human nature should be what guides the British government as it grapples with the shocking state of the nation’s public finances and attempts to provide some coherence to its big society agenda. Too often the message appears to be that the upcoming cuts and austerity measures are a practical but unpleasant necessity to prevent the economy falling off the edge of a cliff.

There is undoubtedly a lot of truth in this assertion, but it is hardly an inspiring, grand narrative about the future of our nation. We shouldn’t just be seeking to reduce government expenditure and intervention because we have to, but rather because we want to.

The extension of public sector tentacles into almost every part of our lives is not just wasteful, but has the effect of crowding out more innovative initiatives carried out by individuals, the voluntary sector and community groups. The more the government is providing to your neighbours, friends, work colleagues and relatives, the less obligation you feel to act yourself. We need to rediscover in ourselves a confidence as citizens that we can find the solutions to problems on our own doorsteps.

The government needs to share in this confidence by removing itself entirely from the field of play in a whole range of areas and conducting a full-scale assault on the obscene raft of regulations and red tape that acts as a barrier to an active citizenry.

Supporters of smaller government need to stop being caricatured as mean-spirited scrooges who revel in increasing the suffering of the unfortunate. The truth is that the big government, welfare dependency culture that has been allowed to develop in Britain has ghettoised the poor and failed to improve social mobility. The state doesn’t engender a sense of community, it displaces it.

Of course, Hayek was rightly credited with providing the intellectual basis for much of Margaret Thatcher’s political thinking. She once banged down a copy of The Constitution of Liberty on the table and insisted to her colleagues: “This is what we believe.” But Hayek was adamant he was not a Conservative.

He believed conservatism was too often the enemy of individual freedom. He described himself as a Whig, referring back to the broad-based party that had pressed for free trade and the abolition of slavery.

The coalition government brings together elements of both liberal and Tory thought, but it should also seek to rediscover the best elements of this Whig tradition. The Constitution of Liberty is as relevant today as when it was published 50 years ago and members of the coalition government should embrace its author as their intellectual guide.

Filed under: Personal

August 19, 2010 • 5:18 pm 1

Tatler August 2010

TRAVERSING INTO THE PAST (source: Tatler website)

Malaysia history tells the tale of THREE VISIONARY LEADERS who fought long and hard to seek freedom for our beloved nation. Lily Ong examines how the evergreen values upheld by these leaders resonate with the Post-Independence generation of today

 It was August 31, 1957. Dataran Merdeka reverberated with the echoes of joy and triumph, as the people of Malaya celebrated their independence. It was a moment the people of Malaya had waited for, culminated after approximately 446 years ever since the Portuguese colonised the Sultanate of Malacca. It was a moment that transcended race, gender or even religion. It was the turning point in our history, which paved the way to the nation we are today. The thrice resounding call of ‘Merdeka’ into the air led by a man who worked tirelessly for this success, followed by the jubilant cheers of the people, will forever be etched in the minds of those who were present in that historic moment. Ever since then, our country has developed by leaps and bounds into a modern one befitting the 21st century.

There is no stopping Malaysia as it continues to bulldoze its way into being a full-fledged developed country – whether it’s in the arena of economy, sports or even human capital. However, a question arises from this surge of development – is modern science and technology the only key to a golden future? What about the people of our country, who will be the driving force of our nation’s growth? What are the core traits or values that constitute a true citizen of Malaysia? To answer these questions, Malaysia Tatler looks back into the past to seek inspiration from the three national heroes who have shaped the foundation of our nation with their hard work and core values. Through the eyes of seven individuals from the post-Merdeka generation, we rediscover the meaning of being a true citizen of our nation.   

 TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN PUTRA AL-HAJ 
A hero, the people’s leader, the man who led Malaya to Indepen-dence, the first Prime Minister of the Federation of Malaya – these are the words we use to honour Tunku Abdul Rahman. Although it has been 53 years since the independence of our nation, the memories and images of Tunku are timelessly preserved in history books, read by school children and adults alike.  

However, despite all these efforts to honour Tunku, there is very little understanding of the ideological battles he encountered to advocate independence for the nation. The value of honouring Tunku’s memory today emphasises more on his achievements, but less on his beliefs, principles and vision of justice and fairness for the people of Malaysia. Three men with varying political beliefs aspire to bring the focus back to our founding father’s vision for our nation.   

Wan Saiful Wan Jan, Tunku Zain Al-‘Abidin Tuanku Muhriz, and Wan Mohd Firdaus are three friends who were working in London. “I had been having separate conversations with Tunku Abidin and Firdaus about the need for an independent think-tank promoting classical liberal and libertarian ideas since 2004. Things came together in 2006 when we first registered Malaysia Think Tank in London with the purpose of looking at libertarian ideas in the uk and localising those ideas for Malaysia,” says Wan Saiful Wan Jan, a smart and jovial gentleman with a sincere grin that will endear him to any who enter into a conversation with him.   

Fast forward to early 2010, the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (IDEAS) was successfully launched in the presence of three generations of Tunku Abdul Rahman’s family, including his daughter, Tunku Datuk Datin Paduka Khadijah, and great-granddaughter Sharyn Shufiyan who spoke at the event. ideas is Malaysia’s first independent cross-partisan free market think-tank – supported by notable personalities in the country such as historian Professor Emeritus Khoo Kay Kim and a cross-party advisory group comprising both Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat members. Tunku Abidin, who is the second son of Negeri Sembilan’s Yang DiPertuan Besar Tuanku Muhriz Tuanku Munawir, serves as Founding President, while Wan Saiful is the Founding Chief Executive and Wan Mohd Firdaus serves as the Founding Director for this non-profit organisation.   

Despite the differences in their political leanings and beliefs, the three men stand united under the powerful idea of democracy and freedom. IDEAS is inspired by the vision of Tunku Abdul Rahman, who stated in the 1957 Proclamation of Independence that Malaysia should “be forever a sovereign democratic and independent State founded upon the principles of liberty and justice and ever seeking the welfare and happiness of its people and the maintenance of a just peace among all nations.” Tunku, who was always pragmatic, believed in the importance of justice and liberty for his people and led his cabinet to empower the people of the nation. ”Tunku Abdul Rahman was the Winston Churchill, Margaret Thatcher and Boris Johnson of our nation all rolled into one – a statesman, a great reformer and a jovial gentleman,” says the tall, refined and bespectacled Tunku Abidin with a piercing gaze that speaks volumes about his high intelligence. “He was true to himself and did not hide his weaknesses – qualities rare in a leader these days.”  

Wan Mohd Firdaus, a polished young man with a penchant for economics and history, also believes that Tunku achieved independence for Malaya because the British understood and saw Tunku’s vision for an independent Malaya. “Tunku understood Malaya like no other. He might have been of royal descent, but he understood the poor and their needs. He was keen on helping the Malays, but he knew that good law-abiding non-Malay citizens would have an equal say in this new country,” he notes.  

The logo chosen by the founding members of ideas is in the shape of a wau bulan, a metaphor for the kite of freedom. “Malaysians are born free but there are many interventions in our liberty to live the way we choose. We need to bring back Tunku Abdul Rahman’s love of freedom to our country,” opines Wan Saiful.  

Wan Mohd Firdaus states that he believes one of Tunku Abdul Rahman’s enduring yet admirable traits was his empathy towards all races, religions, classes and political divides. “He was accepted by all his people. He achieved this because he understood that Malaysia belongs to all Malaysians and he believes that the Malaysian dream is attainable for all,” he says passionately.  

Today, IDEAS carries out research, holds lectures, has some publications and gives suggestions on promoting and educating the public about market-based solutions for public policy reforms and changes. The three founding members are optimistic about pioneering change in Malaysia and upholding Tunku Abdul Rahman’s strong vision for the nation. They involve themselves in the operations of IDEAS as much as they can, writing articles and giving speeches or lectures whenever necessary.   

As we strive to move forward as a nation towards the future, perhaps we should look back and explore the values upheld by the man who successfully procured independence for the country he loved. “Many people think that moving forward requires brand new philosophies, slogans or visions. But I think Tunku Abdul Rahman himself laid much of the groundwork for our nation. Most of our people, not the least some of our leaders, seem to have forgotten the hard work of their predecessors,” says Tunku Abidin. To learn more about ideas, log onto www.ideas.org.my.  

TUN TAN CHENG LOCK 
Tun Tan Cheng Lock learnt at a very young age the importance of hard work in order to achieve his dreams. Although his grandfather, Tan Choon Bock, was wealthy, he tied up his assets in a family trust that lasted 84 years after his death. As a young man, Tun Tan Cheng Lock failed to obtain a scholarship to study law and was forced to become a teacher at Raffles Institution in Singapore. Realising he was unsuited to teaching, his mother, Lee Seck Bin, suggested he try rubber planting. He took his mother’s advice and returned to Malacca to work in a rubber estate. He was successful as a planter and in April 1910, together with some business associates, Tun Tan Cheng Lock established the United Malacca Rubber Estate, which has just celebrated its 100th anniversary. However, it was not his admirable business acumen that made Tun Tan Cheng Lock famous. Although he had a cordial relationship with the British, he was deeply influenced by the Indian Congress Party’s fight for Independence in the 1940s. After the end of the Japanese Occupation in Malaya, Tun Tan left India and returned to Malaya and in February 1949, he founded the Malayan Chinese Association (MCA) and history was forever changed. He worked side by side with Tunku Abdul Rahman to ensure independence for the people of Malaya, and fought for the rights of the Malaysian Chinese community. Unity was a priority for Tun Tan and he worked hard to integrate the Chinese and Indian communities with Malay society.   

Ng Ming Shern and Phang Kin Hoong are two great-grandsons of Tun Tan Cheng Lock. Eloquent and charming, Ming Shern possesses a razor-sharp wit and a jovial sense of humour that reflects his easygoing personality. Kin Hoong is the older and more serious of the two, but once he lets his guard down, he will liven up the conversation with his quicksilver smile and cheerful laughter. Kin Hoong is an investment analyst while Ming Shern works as a management consultant for a global consulting company.  

Tun Tan Cheng Lock’s granddaughter Tan Siok Choo once revealed in an interview that her grandfather used to read books on Chinese literature, philosophy and poetry. Her nephew Ming Shern shares another story about the visionary founder of MCA: “He made his children memorise a Chinese poem that included the following verse: If wrong you do, If false you play, In summer among the flowers, You will atone, You will repay, In winter among the showers.”Kin Hoong and Ming Shern have never met their great-grandfather as Tun Tan Cheng Lock passed away before they were born. But these two young men have been regaled with tales about him and have developed much respect for the heroic figure who now lives on in history books. “I was told again and again how he was a natural leader. He was responsible, caring and believed in integrity and justice,” reflects Kin Hoong. His cousin, Ming Shern wholeheartedly agrees, “A common story that I heard about him is how he espoused the merits of hard work and integrity – he often said ‘Honest living, however menial the work, is not to be despised.’” His emphasis on integrity and his staunch belief in Confucius are two of his distinguishing traits that set him apart from the worldwide politicians of today who dominate the news headlines with allegations of their corruption and wayward policies.  

Although Kin Hoong lauds the government’s efforts to honour our nation’s founding fathers, he suggests that we look deeper into what they are recognised for: “I think it is good the heroes of old are recognised, not only for their contributions but what these heroes symbolise. When you think about it, our founding fathers were people of different races and backgrounds who came together with one mission – to achieve independence for our country.”  

Tun Tan Cheng Lock, like his close friend Tunku Abdul Rahman, envisioned Malaysia as a country united under the same patriotic spirit. “He had a multiracial outlook and he believed that we should accept each other, regardless of our race, culture and religion. That was why he fought so hard to ensure there is fairness for all,” says Kin Hoong.  

According to Heng Pek Koon’s book Chinese Politics in Malaysia – A History of the MCA, if Tun Tan Cheng Lock and his son Tun Tan Siew Sin did not fight for the legal principle of jus soli, over three-quarters of the Malaysian Chinese population would have been denied citizenship. “He fought against injustice in our nation, for all Malayans and not only for his own race. Prior to independence, he worked tirelessly and tried to improve the lives of the less fortunate like the “Mui Tsai” (slave girls), Indian chettiars and poor Malay fishermen,” adds Ming Shern. “His steadfast integrity, wisdom and dedication to the people are definitely traits that should be emulated by the new generation today, as we do.”   

TUN VT SAMBANTHAN 
Before Tun VT Sambanthan put his daughter, Deva Kunjari Sengamalam to bed, he would tell her stories based on a land ruled by a Lion King called ‘Veera Raja Singam’ or Heroic King Lion in English. “In his stories, peace always prevailed among humans and animals. He told me tales of how two little girls are welcomed in the jungle where this King ruled, and where a lamb and a tiger walked together side by side. He related the stories to economy, science and international peace – such as how the bees will cross-pollinate the crops for better yields, or how the King invited scientists to work on his land to develop a bomb neutraliser,” says Kunjari as she is better known among her family and friends. No doubt, these anecdotes aptly reflect the fifth elected president of the Malayan Indian Congress (MIC) during our independence period. Born and raised in Sungai Siput, Perak, Tun VT Sambanthan studied in India, where the Indian nationalistic movement sparked his political and social curiosity. This gentle leader firmly subscribed to the Gandhian philosophy of non-violence – a philosophy he embraced until his passing in 1979. When he returned to Malaya, not only did he take up the mantle at his father’s estate, he worked hard to improve the lives of the Indian community, his main interest being education, before his rise to the helm of MIC.  

Kunjari, who works as a partner in a legal firm, has the same warm eyes just like her father as well as his youthful disposition. She also inherited her mother, Toh Puan Umasundari Sambanthan’s smile – a smile that radiates compassion and sincerity with the curve of her lips. Like her parents, Kunjari is soft-spoken and articulate.   

When Tun VT Sambanthan became the President of MIC, he faced the difficult task of strengthening the party while consolidating its position in the UMNO-MCA-MIC Alliance. He worked tirelessly with Tunku Abdul Rahman to procure independence from the British. After independence was won, he served as the Minister of Labour, Minister of Health, Works, Posts and Telecommunications and finally as the Minister of National Unity. He also attended to his duties as President of MIC faithfully. “He came into politics as the leader of an impoverished minority at that point. The first major problem that confronted him was the issue of fragmentation – where estates were being cut up and being sold. There were no legislations in place to protect the estate workers,” says Kunjari.  

In 1960, he founded the National Land Finance Cooperative Society (NLFCS) as a means to enable the worker to acquire a share in the plantations at a cost of $100 per share, payable by monthly instalments of $10. “He managed to work closely with sympathetic bankers to mobilise estates in which they worked and thus, determine their own destiny. Through this, he managed to provide educational opportunities for the children of the members,” adds Kunjari about the contributions of Tun VT Sambanthan for his community. “He successfully mobilised the labourer community into a powerful economic force. He made a downtrodden group at the time believe in themselves when no one did.” Consistent with his belief in a multiracial nation, he opened the membership for the Co-op to non-Indians as well.Despite his preference for a dhoti as an attire of choice, Tun VT Sambanthan tirelessly worked to serve Malayans as dutifully as he did for his Indian community. “He loved our country and its people very dearly. He was not bigoted or narrow-minded. He held himself as a Malaysian first and foremost although he instilled in his community the pride of an Indian heritage, language, philosophy and culture,” says Kunjari passionately. If there is one trait Kunjari admired most about her father, it was his humility. She related how his personality and character remained unaffected by his position and status as a minister, leader and close friend of Tunku. “To quote Rudyard Kipling, my father had an ‘ability to walk with kings and not lose the common touch’. He was known to be comfortable with all levels of society – whether seated on the ground with an estate worker or in a palace setting. He could converse with people from different backgrounds due to being well-read and informed on different topics,” she shares proudly.  

 Kunjari also relates that her father was always hardworking in everything he did, which gained the respect of his fellow leaders. “Tunku Abdul Rahman respected my father’s commitment in getting things done – such as the Parliament House and the National Monument, which was carried out by my father. I suspect that after some time, the bond between Tunku, my father and the late Tun Tan Siew Sin was so strong that they related to the Alliance as being a party rather than a coalition of three,” she says with conviction.  

Kunjari considers her parents, especially her father, as her inspiration. “He taught me that I should not be narrow-minded or judgmental. I try at all times to be Malaysian, embrace everyone as they are, and I am aware it is important that we grow together collectively as Malaysians,” she reveals candidly. Just like her father, who believed that every problem has a solution, Kunjari tries her best to come up with solutions for whatever challenges that come her way or for those who seek her advice – legal or not.  

If she had one more day with her late father, she shares that she will sit at his feet – a position she loved when talking to him – and ask him about the reason why he chose to walk down the path he did: “I would like to know how he maintained good cheer even at the worst moments of political strife and during all forms of treachery that he went through.”

Filed under: Freedom & Liberty, Malaysia, Personal

Pages

Facebook

Wan Saiful Wan Jan

Twitter Updates

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.