Posted on

The A, B and C of God

The A, B and C of God

By Farish A. Noor

It has been a month now since Malaysia has been gripped in one of the most obscure and arcane of controversies over the use of the word ‘Allah’ by Muslims and non-Muslims alike. This must seem odd to foreigners for elsewhere in the world Muslims (such as the Muslims of Egypt) have no problem with their Coptic friends and neighbours using the word ‘Allah’ to refer to God. Why, even during the Coptic Christmas on 7th January the
Coptic Pope delivered his Christmas sermon with phrases like ‘Bismillah’ time and again. So why are the Muslims of Malaysia so obsessed with the idea of claiming a singular word for themselves?

For those who have studied the fundamentals of rational metaphysics in Islam, one of the first themes that is covered is often that of semantics and semiotics. Odd that many courses on rational metaphysics begins with the most fundamental of subjects itself: meaning and the relationship between the Signifier and the Signified, but then again as any scholar will alert
you, one cannot even begin to embark on the social production of knowledge without the ground rules of meaning and signification established in the first place.

The startling thing that the student learns soon enough may seem commonsensical, but crucial nonetheless: That signification is a socially determined, historically conditioned, relative and subjective phenomenon. Words mean what they do simply because the rules of signification have come to be settled by convention over time. There is no essential reason why the
idea of a tree has to be referred to with the word or symbol ‘tree’; but once that association is made then the rule for that sign is set (not necessarily in stone perhaps) and we stick to it. Otherwise even the most basic of conversations beginning with the word ‘Hello’ would not get off the ground, and we wouldn’t get very far would we?

The real difficulties arise, however, when we embark on discussions on loftier, more abstract matters like virtue, aesthetics, divinity and of course God. Here is where rational metaphysics gets sticky to a point.

For hundreds of years the Muslim world has witnessed the on-going polemic and contestation between the verificationists-positivists and the nominalists: In plain English, this refers to the dispute over how one reads scripture and how the mortal human mind interprets divine revealed knowledge. On the one hand there are the positivists who insist on empirical referents to everything that is said or signified, and who hence argue that
complex concepts like virtue and beauty are, literally, meaningless. Then on the other hand there are the nominalists who take the view that words mean what they do as we intend them to, and while empirical referents are not necessarily close at hand, the words nonetheless have meaning because they
are understood in a determined social context.

The Sufis or Muslim mystical philosophers who belong to the age-old tradition of Muslim metaphysics honed this principle to a high art, and in the lyrical ruminations and speculations of Maulana Rumi and his peers, we find the concept of divinity interrogated, explored, laid bare, adorned, embellished, dissected – all for the sake of trying to get to the Truth of the matter which the human mind, with its limited faculties, cannot encompass in its entirely. That is why, as the Sufis will remind you, there are so many names of God: From ‘Allah’, to ‘Gamal’, ‘Rahim’, ‘Rahman’ and so
forth, each of which point to a singular attribute of a divinity that is infinite. Perhaps one of the most enigmatic names of God is ‘Hu’; which during the dzikrs (recitations) of some Sufi mystics such as the followers of the Naqshabandiyya order, is pronounced ‘Who’. The Naqshabandis do not merely pronounce the word Hu, they even exhale and empty their lungs completely in a rhythmic sequence, again and again, to signify that even
speaking the name of God entails totally emptying – thus negating – your human self in the process; as if to suggest that God is all and the human is nothing.

With such a rich and complex history that points to an obvious understanding that the word ‘Allah’ is merely a symbol or sign and not the thing itself, why is it that the Muslims of Malaysia still demonstrate an understanding of normative Islam that is not only shallow, but also parochial and exclusive? To suggest that the word ‘Allah’ can only be used by Muslims as some of Malaysia’s leaders have done would suggest that God requires a copyright,
and that God would not be understood if you cannot get its name right.

Yet Islam, if it is to be the universal religion that it is, does not need an official language or uniform. Nor does it need to claim copyright to universal signifiers that are, after all, part of the common currency of public language. Once again, despite claims to being a ‘moderate’ Islamic state, the Malaysian government (or rather some of its leaders) have demonstrated a third-rate understanding of the subjects they are wont to prattle about. That this doesn’t say much about their understanding of Islam, linguistics and philosophy is bad enough; but worse still is how this reflects on Malaysia’s vainglorious ambition to present itself as a model Muslim state for others to follow. Perhaps the leaders of the country should get back to the basics, and focus more on the A, B, Cs of Islam once again…

Posted on

Do Malaysian Muslims understand what ‘Allah’ means?

The Other Malaysia
by Farish A. Noor
25 December 2007

At the time of writing this, I am in Cairo in the company of my Egyptian friends who are Muslims, Catholics and Copts. Eid has passed and I attended several dinners and celebrations where Muslims and Copts celebrated together, visiting each others’ homes and ate til we could not eat any further. What is worse, Christmas is upon us and so once again Muslims, Catholics and Copts will be heading for the communal table for the communal feast and there will be much licking of chops, munching of bread, gobbling of sweet deserts and drinking for everyone. It is all simply too pleasant to belive, yet it is real and this is what life is like for many in Cairo, the ‘Mother of civilisation’ and home to more than twenty million Egyptians from all walks of life.

What is most striking to the outside observer like me – though rather banal for the Egyptians themselves – is the fact that in all these celebrations ranging from Eid for the Muslims to Christmas for the Catholics and Copts the word ‘Allah’ is used to denote that supreme and singular divinity, God. Catholics and Copts alike exclaim ‘Masha-allah’, ‘Wallahi’, ‘ya-Rabbi’, ‘Wallah-u allam’, and of course ‘Allahuakbar’ day in, day out, everywhere they go. The coptic taxi driver blares out ‘By Allah, cant you see where you are parking??” as he dodges the obstable ahead. The Catholic shopkeeper bemoans “Ya Allah, ya Allah! You can only offer me two pounds for the scarf? Wallahi, my mother would die if she heard that! Ya-Rabbi, ya-Rabbi!”

Yet in Malaysia at the moment yet another non-issue has been brewed to a scandal for no reason: The Malaysian Catholic Herald, a publication by and for Catholics in the country, has been told that it can no longer publish its Malaysian language edition if it continues to use the word “Allah” to mean God. Worse still, the country’s Deputy Internal Security Minister Johari Baharum recently stated that “Only Muslims can use the word Allah” ostensibly on the grounds that “Allah” is a Muslim word. The mind boggles at the confounding logic of such a non-argument, which speaks volumes about the individual’s own ignorance of Muslim culture, history and the fundamental tenets of Islam itself. Continue reading “Do Malaysian Muslims understand what ‘Allah’ means?”

Posted on

Its hard to listen to the people while you gas them in the face.

By Farish A. Noor

Once in a blue moon, in the developing world there appears that rare sort of politician who claims that he wants to listen to the people and take them into account. Of course the sighting of these rare characters is greeted with some degree of elation and relief, a bit like witnessing a lunar eclipse or winning a small lottery: For the developing world is replete with arm-wielding, thug-hugging, testosterone-driven macho-types who often preach their gospel of governance with a club in one hand and the other poised on the trigger.

We have seen this sort of nasty governance in many a developing country: The riot police in South Korea used to have a smiley face on their riot shields, just to add insult to injury when they shot off their tear gas cannisters at point blank range. Indonesian security forces during the time of Suharto used to chat pleasantly with the locals over a cup of tea before they sent in bulldozers to flatten entire villages. Why, even the death squads of Saddam Hussein used to send a bill and invoice to the families of those whose members had been kidnapped and murdered at night.

But there is also that other type of soft authoritarian despot that many of us in the developing world are familiar with by now: These are the more media-savvy types who can at least tie a tie around their necks, feel comfortable in a suit, quote from a novel offhand, and smile at you. Then
they do things like place their citizens under detention without trial, have them arrested at dawn while they are asleep in their homes, manipulate the media and control every branch of the government from the legislature to the judiciary.

Looking at the developments in Malaysia of late, one might come to the conclusion that that is precisely the sort of soft authoritarianism that has come to roost. Over the past month the capital of Kuala Lumpur witnessed at least two mammoth demonstrations in a country where the national pastime seems to be shopping: The first was a march organised by the coalition of NGOs called ‘BERSIH’, that called for free and fair elections. The second was a large march organised by the Malaysian Hindu Action Rights Force (HINDRAF) that highlighted the plight of the millions of Malaysian Hindus who remain at the bottom of the socio-economic ladder in the country. Continue reading “Its hard to listen to the people while you gas them in the face.”

Posted on

Hindraf, Communitarianism and the Made-In-Malaysia Dilemma

By Farish A.Noor

Well, well, well… . Now it appears as if the proverbial chickens have come home to roost. Following the less-than-welcomed but to-be-expected reaction from some Indian politicians and political parties in neighbouring India in the wake of the recent demonstration in Kuala Lumpur organised by the Malaysian Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf), it would appear as if some of those who walk the corridors of power in Malaysia have gotten a little flustered and hot behind the ears. But are we really surprised by the global reaction that has come in the wake of the Hindraf rally, and should we be surprised if this spins into a regional, if not international issue that brings into the fray representative groups of the Indian global diaspora?

That the reaction of Hindu groups based in India was so fast should not be seen as novel by anyone. After all, similar reactions were seen when the Chinese minority were singled out in the bloody racial pogroms of Indonesia in 1998, when hundreds of Chinese homes and shops in cities like Jakarta were put to the torch by hordes of racist right wing Indonesians looking for a scapegoat to blame for the economic crisis on 1997-98. (The cause of which, we should remember, was the economic mismanagement and corruption of the Suharto regime between 1970 to 1998.) Then, as now, the minority that was persecuted and victimised turned to the global diaspora for help, and surely it came: Millions of Chinese from China to the United States join in a global campaign to defend the Chinese of Indonesia. Though what this did was offer only temporary respite for the victims of the race attacks then. What it really did was divide Indonesian society even further, pitting the Chinese against the indigenous Indonesians, and worse of all underlining the fiction that the Chinese were somehow a community distinct and apart that were ‘alien’ and ‘foreign’ to the norm. Sadly, what the reaction did was to add to the erasure of the long-term presence of the Chinese in the Indonesian archipelago, many of whom had been there for at least five generations and who were as Indonesian as the next person on the street…

Now to turn to what happened in Kuala Lumpur last weekend, we see some disturbing parallels at work: Continue reading “Hindraf, Communitarianism and the Made-In-Malaysia Dilemma”

Posted on

Another Local Demonstration Gone Global

By Farish A. Noor

Let there be no mistake about it: We live in a globalised world. But then again, what’s new about that? Only someone totally ignorant of the history of greater Asia would be surprised to learn that our neatly-compartmentalised nation-states are, after all, bound together by a common shared history that overlaps across so many levels and interfaces. Long before the European ships arrived on our shores, Asians have been travelling all across the great land mass, making tracks from the furthest end of China, across Southeast Asia and the land of the mighty Indus, all the way to the scorching deserts of Arabia and the Gulf and down the West coast of Africa. What colonialism did, however, was to interrupt this movement of peoples, cultures and ideas in two distinct ways: Firstly by dividing the nations of Asia into distinct nation-states with fixed (and artificial) borders; and secondly by attempting to control the movement of people by commodifying human beings into human capital instead.

The net result has been the creation of the world map as we know it today, with intrusive lines rudely and crudely drawn between areas that once overlapped and communities that were once closer united to each other. The Indian Ocean, for instance, was once the corridor between South and Southeast Asia, and that is why so much of Southeast Asia (till today) bears the cultural imprint of India. It was from India that the religions, philosophies, aesthetics and norms of society and governance of Southeast
Asia were derived; and it was no mere coincidence that the Malay archipelago was once referred to as ‘Greater India’, testimony to how close the two regions were — both geographically and culturally.

Sadly today the division of Asia into neat compartments has managed to sever these long-established bonds, leaving the residents of both regions confused as to why they seem so similar yet different. Many a conservative nationalist in Southeast Asia is still loathe to admit that his or her culture shares so much in common with that of India’s, while many South Asians fail to realise that much of what they regard as familiar there is also present in Southeast Asia next door. Continue reading “Another Local Demonstration Gone Global”

Posted on

Rehabilitation for whom?

By Farish A. Noor

He’s trying to make me go to rehab;
I said no, no, no.
I ain’t got the time
And if my daddy thinks Im fine…
He’s trying to make me go to rehab;
I said no, no,no.

– Amy Winehouse, ‘Rehab’ (2007)

So now its ‘political rehabilitation’, is it? As a corrective measure for kids who go to demonstrations and who have been ‘bad’ in the eyes of the government? That Malaysia’s leaders can even suggest such a thing speaks volumes about the extent to which the space of alienation between the state and the nation has grown over the years, and points to the lack of contact, communication and understanding between the powers-that-be and the real Malaysian nation made up of the rest of us. (1)

But are we surprised? After all this is the same country whose geography is now cluttered with a smattering of ‘faith rehabilitation centres’ that have been set up under the auspices of an Islamist project said to promote some skewered vision of a modern, pluralist, democratic Islam that is benevolent and accommodative: So accommodative in fact that it can accommodate dozens, if not hundreds, of Malaysian citizens deemed ‘immoral’, ‘deviant’, ‘apostate’ and out of the ordinary according to the norms set by an invisible and unaccountable cabal of Islamic experts in the pay of the state. We already have rehabilitation centres whose job it is to ‘turn over’ these alleged deviants and misfits and force them to conform to the normative praxis of Islam that is deemed correct by the state, so should we be surprised if the leaders of UMNO and the government can go one step further and call for the rehabilitation of children as well?

From the viewpoint of an academic who studies the development of modern postcolonial states, Malaysia seems to be a textbook example of postcolonial development turned awry. What began as a country with so much promise — its plural racial and ethnic composition, blessed with plentiful resources that was also strategically located at the cross-roads between East and West –has been squandered for the sake of one ruling party that seems to cater primarily to the needs and demands of one specific ethnic-religious constituency. Continue reading “Rehabilitation for whom?”

Posted on

A Wake-Up Call for the Government: Malaysians Want Their Country Back

By Farish A. Noor

That elections should be free, fair and transparent is perhaps one of the most basic requirements of any working democracy, and to demand that elections should be free, fair and transparent is perhaps one of the most fundamental rights of any society. When citizens demand such things it can and should be seen as an act of civic responsibility and they should commended for it. Indeed, it ought to be seen as a test of civic participation and citizenship that all citizens should demand that their state works and functions properly and accountably, to serve the interest of the nation as a whole and not a select coterie of landed elites and entrenched class interests.

That was exactly what happened in the streets of Kuala Lumpur on 10th November and for that reason alone Malaysians should be proud to say that they are in the process of reclaiming the state and demanding their country back. As in the cases of Pakistan and Burma — as well as the pro-democracy movements that swept across Southeast Asia in the 1980s and 1990s which led to the fall of dictators like Ferdinand Marcos and General Suharto — what happened in Malaysia was, in many ways, a landmark moment in the country’s postcolonial history.

Yet ironically elements in the Malaysian government — the very same elements that ostensibly supported the recent pro-democracy campaign in Burma — were at the forefront of demonising their fellow citizens and doing their utmost to prevent the demonstration in Kuala Lumpur from taking place. Leaders of the ruling UMNO party issues a continuous stream of warnings to the general public, warning them not to take to the streets. UMNO leaders and members who were willing to join in the rallies calling for democratic reform in Burma were suddenly taking the opposite side when the very same demands were being articulated in Malaysia by their fellow Malaysians. Malaysians were told that they would be arrested if they attended the rally; that the demonstrators were a nuisance and a security threat; that the demonstration would deter foreign investment into Malaysia. Yet the mind boggles at the logic of such arguments, when it should be clear that what is deterring investment into the country is not public demonstrations but rather mismanagement of the economy, allegations of corruption and abuse of power by the elite instead.

For a nation that has always been cast in a passive light as docile and apathetic, Malaysians defied their own stereotype by coming out in huge numbers and braving the rain from above and the tear gas and batons on the ground. Contrary to the scare-mongering campaign of the government, the rally proved to be ordered and peaceful. What does this say about Malaysia today and where the country is heading? Continue reading “A Wake-Up Call for the Government: Malaysians Want Their Country Back”

Posted on

Malaysia: Normalising the Unacceptable

By Farish A. Noor

The dangerous thing about sectarian politics is how it becomes normalised so easily and quickly. Taking a leaf from the book of Speer and Goebels, the old Fascist maxim proves itself true time and again: Once the public is made to realise that they are impotent and unable to affect change, the ruling elite can hoist almost anything upon them. One affront leads to another, and the common tactic is to follow-up a public outrage with yet another that is even more outrageous. Hence when politicians issue their sexist slurs and the the media reacts to them, the tactic often favoured by some is to reply with a racist slur even more unpalatable to most right-minded adults.

We have seen this strategy employed so often by now: The rise of the extreme Hindu right in India was a case of leap-frogging from one insulting comment against Muslims, Christians and other minorities to the next. Likewise the shift to the right that is seen in Europe today was occasioned by extreme right-wing politicians vying for media attention and out-doing themselves by playing to the gallery.

Malaysia of course is no exception to the rule and during the last five decades the tone and tenor of Malaysian politics has been set by the standards of racialised communitarian politics that is divisive to the country. Again and again we have seen Malaysian politicians come to power by playing the race – and now increasingly religion – card above all else, pandering to their own communities at the expense of the rest. And over the past three years in particular the country has witnessed the rising of its political temperature thanks to the amateurish pyrotechnics of loud politicians standing on the soapbox to play to the communitarians in their midst. The precedent was set three years ago when the leader of the Youth Wing of the ruling UMNO party – Hishamuddin Hussein – brandished a keris – the traditional Malay dagger – in a symbolic act of defiance that many regarded as frothy bravado and little else. In the context of multi-racial Malaysia where racial sensitivities run deep, such gestures can have the effect of antagonising the non-Malay and non-Muslim communities further and deepening the racial divide that already splits the country in many ways. Continue reading “Malaysia: Normalising the Unacceptable”

Posted on

Malaysia: The People Are Fed Up

By Farish A. Noor

At a recent Law Conference held in Kuala Lumpur, the Prime Minister of Malaysia, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, bluntly told the country’s lawyers that demonstrations and protests about the apparent mismanagement of the country will do little to change things but will only give the ‘wrong impression’ that ‘something is wrong in the country’, and that this will scare aware foreign investors. The Malaysian leader was alluding to a recent protest march organised by the country’s lawyers which saw more than two thousand lawyers march up to the Prime Minister’s office in the capital of Putrajaya demanding reform of the judicial process and serious enquiries into the conduct and election of judges in Malaysia. Perhaps the Prime Minister was also alluding to the planned march on 10th November organised by NGOs like BERSIH which have called for free and fair elections in the country, supported by opposition parties like the Peoples Justice Party (PKR), the Malaysian Islamic party (PAS) and the Democratic Action Party (DAP) of Malaysia as well.

What began as a relatively small event has now grown into what may become a landmark moment in Malaysian history: The march’s organisers aim to gather 100,000 citizens at the Merdeka (Independence) Square of the city and then march on to the national palace to present their petition to the King (Agong) himself, calling for the Monarch to intervene and look into their complaints about the poor governance of the country on issues ranging from corruption to abuse of power by the leaders of the ruling UMNO party and the government. As Latheefa Koya of the People’s Justice Party notes: “BERSIH’s march marks a crucial point in Malaysian history where people from all walks of life, and not just political parties, demand free and fair elections in Malaysia. By doing so they are in fact calling for greater participation in the democratic process”. The King has already signalled that he is prepared to receive the petition, while other rulers such as Sultan Azlan Shah of the state of Perak have publicly bemoaned the state of the judiciary in Malaysia.

While it is true that Malaysia is not Burma, it is striking to note how intolerant the state is when it comes to popular expressions of the people’s will in the country. Predictably the Malaysian government has reacted to the proposed march on 10th November with the usual round of threats: Those who attend the demonstration will be regarded as trouble makers and due action will be taken, the government-controlled news agencies have already warned. Continue reading “Malaysia: The People Are Fed Up”

Posted on

Burma’s Monks: Ethics is not confined to Books and Temples

By Farish A Noor
The Other Malaysia

By now the international community is fully aware of the recent developments in Burma, a country that has been under military rule and isolated from the rest of the globe since 1963. The images of Burmese Buddhist monks taking to the streets and defying the armed might of the Burmese junta and its security apparatus reminds us of familiar scenes dating back to the 1980s, and echo the democratic revolutions we have seen elsewhere in Asia, including China, since then.

While the fate of Burma and her people hang in the balance, the protest of the monks — many of whom happen to come from ordinary Burmese families with scant political protection themselves — teaches us a vital lesson and is a model for many progressive theologians and religious activists to follow. It is sometimes said that in the post-Enlightenment age we live in there is little concern for religion and that religion has no place in society. Worst still, the political instrumentalisation of religion for clearly divisive and sectarian ends has further added scepticism for many who believe that religion is best kept out of politics and the public domain, where it has often been abused. (A view that many would concur with). Unfortunately today any talk of religious ethics is often met with images of Bible-thumping evangelists talking of holy wars and moral crusades, angry bearded fanatics burning books and nosey neighbours spying on what the people next door are doing. Are religion and ethics destined to remain forever trapped in the nonsensical and pointless debate over who is holier and who wears his or her religion on the sleeves? Has religion nothing to say on pressing issues of the day such as fundamental political rights and liberties, democracy and rule of law? Continue reading “Burma’s Monks: Ethics is not confined to Books and Temples”

Posted on

Malaysia’s Muslim Union? Malaysia Does Not Need Another Sectarian Organisation!

By Farish A. Noor

Sectarianism, be it on the grounds of race, culture, language or religion, can only be divisive in the long run. The sad litany of human history shows that religion can and has been used as a dividing factor that has torn many a society apart, and this is true of all religions and belief systems worldwide. One only needs to look at the process of Balkanisation that took place in Eastern Europe to see how Religion has been instrumentalised and manipulated by sectarian politicians to amplify the centrifugal forces of a
plural society like Bosnia’s, and how that eventually led to all-out civil conflict along religion and cultural lines.

Politicians of course are fully aware of the divisive potential of sectarian politics, so why do they constantly fall back on such parochial and primordial sentiments such as racial, cultural and religious loyalty to serve their own limited ends? Weighing the costs of such moves may point us to the simple conclusion that sectarian politicians seldom care about the unity and well-being of the nation as a whole, particularly when that nation happens to be a complex and plural one in the first place. More often than
not, the demagogues and chauvinists among us would be more inclined to keep to their own narrow corners and seek solace and support from their own respective communities.

These observations should hardly come as news to Malaysia-watchers in particular, for we all know by now that Malaysia’s convoluted 50-year history has been one dominated and almost entirely determined by the logic of racial compartmentalism and communitarianism. Every single leader who has climbed up the greasy pole of power in the country has done so by playing the race — and now increasingly, religion — card close to his chest. It should therefore come as even less of a surprise that there is now talk of forming a Malaysian Muslim Workers’ Union (PPIM) in the country, as if Malaysian society was not divided enough already. Continue reading “Malaysia’s Muslim Union? Malaysia Does Not Need Another Sectarian Organisation!”

Posted on

Can there be a discussion of Islam thats not STUPID???

By Farish A Noor

It is interesting to reflect on the asinine times we live in, particularly if like me, you are involved in that nebulous thing called ‘Inter-cultural dialogue’. Over the past four weeks I have been engaged in numerous rounds of dialogues between Western Europeans and Muslim migrant communities in Amsterdam, Paris and Berlin, and in every single one of these encounters I came across stereotypes of Muslims and Islam that were so shallow and puerile that I am almost embarrassed to recount them here. Worst still these pedestrian musings on Islam and Muslims were not the offerings of everyday punters, but those who claimed to be well-known and admired scholars and historians.

In one of these exchanges I was told the following: that ‘Islam is a fascist, woman-hating, Christian-killing, gay-bashing macho male ideology of hatred that was built on fourteen centuries of conquest and bloodshed, murder and rape. That is why there cannot be integration of Muslims into Europe, because the Muslims that we have here are the savages of the Arab world who are barbaric, violent and brutal. They do not believe in reason and the Enlightenment and Islamic civilisation has not produced anything scientific, rational or humane.’ Try substituting the word ‘Muslim’ for ‘blacks’ and one would see how far-fetched and racist such claims really are.

Now why is it that whenever we speak of Islam and Muslims today some of us think they have the licence to drop their IQ level by a hundred points or so? Is talk on Islam a licence to say anything dumb, offensive, provocative, just for the sake of riling up the masses and grabbing a few headlines? A politician in Holland has even stated that there should be a ban on any reading of the Qur’an, on the grounds that it can be compared to Hitler’s Mein Kampf. Others claim that all Muslims are determined primarily by their religion which happens to be irrational, unscientific and anti-Enlightenment. Continue reading “Can there be a discussion of Islam thats not STUPID???”

Posted on

Rakyat Itu Raja!

By Farish A. Noor

It has, for reasons best known to some, become rather trendy to talk about the restoration of power to the King these days. Looking around the troubled landscape of Malaysia at the moment one does understand how and why the frustration of many could have led them to the conclusion that some higher form of intervention is badly needed at the moment. After all, four years on after the victory of the BN parties at the last polls it would appear as if none of the reform measures promised by the current administration have borne fruit: None of the major corruption cases have been resolved in court; reported incidents of abuse by the police have only increased; there is still talk of racial and religious communitarianism in our midst and the fanciful ego-trips of some politicians have compelled them to reach for the keris again and again in public.

By all accounts, it would appear as if the country has regressed over the years and we seem even closer towards sliding into the deeper morass of religious and racial sectarian politics. As if the divide-and-rule rhetoric of the race-based BN parties was not enough, now we are told that there will be a Muslim workers movement to rival the MTUC, which can only serve to divide the workers of Malaysia along religious sectarian lines even further. This can only add to the weakening of the workers movement in Malaysia, to the benefit of the established powers-that-be whose own divisive sectarian politics have brought us to where we are today.

So indeed, some kind of intervention is timely and badly needed, but from where, and who should be the actors and agents of change here? Continue reading “Rakyat Itu Raja!”

Posted on

Belgium in Tatters: Call the UN, quick!

By Farish A. Noor

It seems that the state of Belgium has been without a government for more than a hundred days now; as the Belgians seem unable to decide on their future and settle upon a collective identity that can be shared by all. Divided between the more prosperous Flemish north and the less well-to-do French-speaking Walloon south, the country seems almost a textbook case of communitarianism run rampant and sectarian divisions tearing apart the nation-state. On both sides of the ethnic-cultural-linguistic fence right-wing ethno-nationalist politicians take to the soapbox to bemoan the ills of the country and to lay the blame at the feet of their neighbours next door.

As an aside, the minorities of Belgium must be relieved that for once the stereotype of the evil nefarious foreigner is not being brought to the fore as the root of all that is wrong in the country. No, here the problem does not seem to be the dreaded Turk, Arab or Asian around the corner, but rather those familiar but different Walloons and Flemish down the road!

Now if Belgium was located elsewhere on the map, we would probably have heard calls for UN intervention by this point. For as we all know by now sectarian divisions anywhere else — be it in Africa, Asia or Latin America often enough warrants some form of international military intervention, ostensibly to save the natives from themselves. But after all, is this not a case of a nation-building programme falling to pieces before our very eyes,
with communal sentiments and parochial loyalties to race and culture being fanned in the public domain? Yet perhaps one of the most ironic twists to the story of Belgium today is the fact that the divisive politics we see in the country at the moment was also a rather noxious export that was taken as far as Africa by the Belgium government in the past.

Divisive politics should not be something alien to the Belgians by now, for Belgium’s colonial policies abroad have always been predicated on the logic of divide and rule anyway. The most noteworthy example here is the case of Rwanda and Burundi, of course: Two African nations that were first annexed by Germany and then taken over by Belgium in 1916. Continue reading “Belgium in Tatters: Call the UN, quick!”

Posted on

The Pathologisation of Muslims in Europe

By Farish A. Noor

‘No we are not racist. It is just that we need to preserve and protect our German identity and culture, and our Judeo-Christian heritage. The more Turkish Muslims come here, the less we know who and what we are. We cannot allow our identity and culture to be confused like that…’

How many times have I been fed such pedestrian drivel, and how long have I been trying to play the role of bridge-builder between communities, only to find my efforts reduced to naught thanks to the asinine and facile platitidues that spill forth time and again? The gem quoted above was the comment made by a rather ordinary German at a public debate on Islam and the Rule of Law in Berlin; and just one week after an equally gruelling series of public talks in Amsterdam I could not help but feel as if Europe’s slide to the right is accelerating faster than ever.

That a public forum on Islam and the rule of law could degenerate into a senseless round of Turk-bashing speaks volumes about the shallowness of public debate in some parts of Europe these days. That the debate took place in Berlin, the much-hyped cosmopolitan capital of Germany was itself a less than startling revelation: Judging by some of the comments uttered it might as well have been a local talk in some village tavern in the deepest recesses of the Black Forest. The only things that were missing were the leather shorts and bust of the Kaiser on the mantlepiece… for those present had reduced themselves to caricatural stereotypes of the worst order.

What was most alarming, however, was the manner in which a host of complex issues and dilemmas were reduced and pathologised to a single problem: The Muslims and their non-Western culture and belief system. That some of the commentators were right-wing politicians was bad enough, worse still was the evident lack of self-critique, irony and objective distance to the things that were meant to be discussed in the first place. Continue reading “The Pathologisation of Muslims in Europe”

Posted on

A Dialogue in Hell

by Farish A. Noor

We are in hell by now. No, we are not going to hell, but we are already there it seems.

Let me explain what I mean by this: I happen to teach comparative religion and one of the things I’ve noticed while giving my lectures is how in every major religious system of the world there seems to be consensus over what hell is meant to look like. In the religious iconography of Jews, Christians, Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists we see the same pictorial depiction that infernal place. In many of them the image of hell is that of a place of universal torment, with individuals suffering for eternity. What is interesting to note in these images is the fact that the torment of each individual seems to be a very private suffering that is not shared by the others, for each is suffering on his or her own.

Seen metaphorically, hell marks the breakdown of communication; the impossibility of reaching out to the other beside you, to communicate one’s own pain and anguish. Hell is where all sense of collectivism is lost, where society breaks down, where any form of mutual co-operation is rendered null and void by the individual suffering that is the lot of each of us. Continue reading “A Dialogue in Hell”

Posted on

Malaysia and the Dilemma of Assimilation (part II)

By Farish A. Noor

And so it would appear that Malaysia is, after all, an Islamic state.

This was the conclusion that many Malaysians have had to accept after the recent pronouncement on the part of the Prime Minister that the country has apparently been run and governed on Islamic lines all along; a startling revelation to say the least for most of us who were unaware of the fact that the arrests under the ISA, the crackdowns during Operation Lalang, Operation Kenari, the numerous declarations of Emergency, et al. were all done under the auspices of Muslim governance. And are we right to conclude that the innumerable corruption scandals, the weakening of the judiciary, the instances of blatant double-standards in the enforcement of the law, et al. were likewise exemplary moments of Islamic governance in action?

The Prime Minister’s recent announcement must surely have come as a blow to those of us who have been calling for a return to the secular democratic foundations of the Malaysian Federation. But now it seems as if even the history of this country has been appropriated by the government, and written and re-written at whim to suit the agendas and interests of the powers that be. After half a century of existence and five decades of nation-building programmes that have taken us nowhere fast, the goalposts have been moved once again. How can there be any significant, meaningful long-term development in the country when the very rules of the political game change again and again? And if the very foundational terms of political engagement in the country are being changed all the time, we need to ask why and for whose sake? Continue reading “Malaysia and the Dilemma of Assimilation (part II)”

Posted on

Good Intentions Perhaps, But What Were They Thinking?

By Farish A. Noor

There are blunders and there are blunders. There are blunders that are done
out of ignorance and are, upon hindsight, pardonable. But there are also
blunders that tell us more about the blunderers themselves and are at best
laughable and at worse deplorable.

The recent fiasco to come out of the deserts of Iraq falls in the latter
category and tells us a lot about the thinking going on among the real
powers-that-be in Iraq today; namely the Americans. When American soldiers
dropped footballs to Iraqi children from their attack helicopters, few of
them realised what the repercussions might be. Little did they realise that
not every Iraqi — football crazy some of them might be — would be all that
happy to receive free footballs with the flags of the world on them, when
one of those flags happen to be that of Saudi Arabia with the Kalimah, or
Muslim declaration of faith, on it.

Needless to say, some of the less tolerant Iraqi clerics were not about to
take the matter lightly as they pointed out that the footballs would have
been kicked around, and at some point or another an Iraqi child was more
than likely to kick the Saudi flag and thus the Kalimah as well. Tempers
flared, the footballs were confiscated by irate Muslims and the Americans
have once again had to flee the scene with egg on their face. Continue reading “Good Intentions Perhaps, But What Were They Thinking?”

Posted on

Malaysia and the Myth of ‘Tanah Melayu’

By Farish A. Noor

We are sustained by myths only as long as they are empowering, inspiring, instrumental and serve our interests; yet when those very same myths provide us with little else than the false comfort of an unreconstructed nostalgia for a past that never existed, then they turn into cages that imprison us for life. The myth of a unique European ‘civilisational genius’ has only helped to parochialise Europe even more; the staid discourse of ‘Asian values’ merely denies the fact that Asian civilisations would not have
developed as they did without contact with the outside world; and the myth of a pure and uninterrupted development of Indo-Aryan culture has only opened the way for the rise of right-wing Hindutva Fascists in the Indian subcontinent. Notwithstanding their claims to standing proud and tall, the demagogues who utter such pedestrian nonsense remain stunted, as their logic, on the stage of global history: testimony to the claim that those whose confidence is founded in stilts can only remain handicapped for life…

A nation that is grown up is one that is mature enough to realise that it can dispense with such myths, particularly when the honeyed nectar of mythology reveals itself as nothing more than poison. Yet poison has become our draught, and this nation of ours is ailing to the core by now.

The symptoms of the malady are all around us these days and we see them readily enough: As the asinine debate over a rap rendition of the national anthem turns bilious and takes on an increasingly racialised mien, forcing all sides to retreat to the hallowed sanctuary of communal and racial identity, the nation’s attention has been diverted from truly pressing issues concerning the economy and the spate of potentially explosive legal cases currently being fought out in the courts of the land.

The vernacular press assumes the role of champions of each respective community, and racial overtones are clearly seen and felt in the language of national politics. Yet nobody points to the real issue at stake, even if we need to discuss the rap video rendered by the young Wee Meng Chee, which surely should be this: If a young Malaysian has seen fit to deliver his
tirade against all that he sees wrong in the country in terms that are racially-determined, is this not a reflection of the racialised and divisive politics that already reigns in Malaysia, courtesy of the ruling National Front coalition led by UMNO in the first place? The racialised logic that rests in Meng Chee’s rap is only a mirror reflection of the racialised politics already at work in Malaysia already. So are we Malaysians so ashamed of ourselves that we can no longer look at ourselves squarely in the face and accept the monstrosity that stands before us today?

Yet the editorials in the vernacular press are baying for blood and Meng Chee, they insist, must be brought to book. Amidst this furore of chest-thumping theatrics and protestations of communal insult and outrage, we hear the communitarians among us blare out again and again: ‘Jangan tunduk’, ‘Defend our pride’, ‘kurang ajar’ and so forth. No, reason and rational debate are no longer welcomed in Malaysia that is ‘truly Asia’, and this homeland for some will demand its pound of flesh from others. Meng Chee is not the first and certainly will not be the last to suffer from the slighted sensitivities of those whose comfort zones and essentialised identities are sacrosanct and inviolable. Previously others have also been brought to the village tribunal of the mob for allegedly insulting race and religion as well. (Here I write from bitter experience myself.) Continue reading “Malaysia and the Myth of ‘Tanah Melayu’”

Posted on

Caliphate Anyone?

By Farish A Noor

Communities have their own ways of dealing with crises of all kinds: structural, institutional, functional or cultural. But what is even more interesting is to see how each community, or sections within each community, deals with such crises and the antidotes that are offered as the panacea for all that is wrong in the world.

In such a depoliticised world bereft of ideologies that are taken seriously and political vocabularies that work, the trend seems to be to offer culturalist solutions to problems that are fundamentally structural-economical. Hence the return to the politics of authenticity and nostalgia that we see all around us lately: As the ravaging effects of globalisation make themselves felt and seen around us, so many communities seem to have retreated to the protective blanket of cultural essentialism, falling back on unreconstructed myths of the past or equally vacuous notions of collective purpose that often deny the contingencies of individualism and personal agency.

In the Indian subcontinent the reaction of the Hindu right was to show two fingers to globalisation via recourse to a politics of nostalgia couched in terms of a politicised myth of Indian greatness and uniqueness. In the Far East the discourse of ‘Asian values’ was the foil used to fend off calls for democratisation, transparency and reform. Why, even in the West the fall-back position of claiming a singularly unique Western civilisational origin seemed the immediate refuge for those who could not cope with the
provincialisation of Europe in an increasingly plural and cosmopolitan world where movement of capital and ideas was becoming commonplace.

What of Islam and the Muslim world? Well the answer to that was given a week ago in Indonesia where a massive rally was held in the stadium of Jakarta, organised by none other than the Hizb’ut Tahrir (HT) movement of Indonesia who had invited their fellow HT activists from all over the planet, to re-affirm their determination to overturn the dominant paradigm of the modern nation state, wage war against the evils of Secularism and democracy, and to restore the fabled Caliphate as the sole and primary political agent on the Muslim landscape. Continue reading “Caliphate Anyone?”