Narrow-mindedness and generalisations incite fear and could invite trouble
Not to be outdone, the MCA, a senior partner in Barisan Nasional, has since taken a dig at the DAP for being partners with Pas and for all political intents and purposes, being in the same bed as Pas, known to be an Islamist party and almost entirely made up of Malays.
Syed Nadzri, NST
ONE party says a vote for DAP is a vote for Pas. The other replies that support for MCA means support for Perkasa.
Something’s not quite right here and it is this: the silly creation of a bogeyman of a racial and religious nature. And consciously or otherwise, this out-and-out scare tactic could perpetuate certain prejudices emerging in our society.
Given Malaysia’s current climate, I say this is wrong. There may be other motives behind it or some may claim that Pas and Perkasa deserve to be ostracised. But those behind the arm-twisting are actually out to spook people the wrong way.
Politicians can say the darndest thing but under the present circumstances, to simply build a spectre as well as to publicly declare and stimulate hatred towards another group, boils down to becoming a slur, especially if those charging the heat come from a particular ethnic group themselves.
The DAP, a mainly Chinese party, is making a monster out of Perkasa, a Malay rights group that has ignited so much controversy, the most recent being its distribution of Chinese New Year ang pows in the taboo white envelopes.
On the surface of it, the DAP’s political stance is not unexpected. But such approaches can have the tendency of landing you on thin ice. From one side of the fence, the DAP is now telling off rival MCA, another Chinese party, to stay completely away from Perkasa due to what it describes as the group’s extreme position on many issues.
Not to be outdone, the MCA, a senior partner in Barisan Nasional, has since taken a dig at the DAP for being partners with Pas and for all political intents and purposes, being in the same bed as Pas, known to be an Islamist party and almost entirely made up of Malays.
The MCA’s salvo: if DAP is really opposed to the implementation of hudud law, then it should formally sever all relations with Pas, it should also refuse to campaign for Pas candidates during elections, and more importantly protest the implementation of hudud law and the establishment of an Islamic state by Pas, instead of merely trying to play around with words to confuse the people.
True, Perkasa and Pas do not measure up in many ways. Not that they do not deserve the harshest of criticisms at every turn in politics.
But to incite fear and create a bogeyman out of them in such a manner, especially if the signal were to come from a non-Malay, non-Muslim side, could unwittingly result in a backlash and invite trouble.
It could result in blind stereotyping and perpetuate the deepening prejudice around us which not many realise exists. Again it is the big picture theory here.
The current controversy over last week’s scuffle at a KFC restaurant in Shah Alam is, I reckon, one of the dreaded results of this prejudice.
It has been established that the incident did happen, the customer Chinese and the restaurant staff involved Malays.
Before we knew it and before anybody could even get into the merits of the case, politicians from the DAP are organising blistering press conferences on behalf of the customer “victim” and the Internet is filled with comments castigating the KFC workers.
This is what I mean by prejudices. You can read the tone and the underlying messages all over the blogs and news portals.
Many are going to the extent of calling for a boycott of KFC, just as they have been calling for a boycott of a certain brand of bread also as a result of jaundiced belief. It is not hard to notice why.
We have come across this kind of narrow-mindedness and generalisation many times of late — the constant dislike and preconceived notion held against the police for instance, or the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, or the civil service at large.
