Am I a maverick?

By MT Webmaster On Nov 12, 2013

In that sense, the religionists and politicians are all the same. They expect you to agree with them and if you do not then you are the enemy. If you are a Catholic you must agree with Rome. If you are a Malay-Muslim you must agree with Sunni Islam. And if you are a reformist you must agree with Pakatan Rakyat. There are no two ways about it. Either you are with me or you are against me, and hence an enemy.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

A maverick is a rebel, radical, dissenter, individualist, protester, eccentric, heretic, nonconformist, iconoclast, etc.

A maverick is a person who refuses to abide by the dictates of or resists adherence to a group.

A maverick is a person independent in thought and action or exhibiting such independence.

A maverick is a person of unorthodox, irregular, or unconventional views.

A maverick is a person who refuses to conform to established standards of conduct or a person not conforming to accepted rules or standards.

**********************************************

“In 2009, maverick blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin, himself of royal lineage, ruffled feathers by claiming Datukships can be purchased for RM250,000, adding that recipients ‘can always make back more than this’,” said AFP today. (READ HERE).

This is not the first time that the media has referred to me as a maverick so I thought today we would talk about that word and the implications of being a maverick.

Maverick was an American Western television series that ran from 1957 to 1962 starring James Garner regarding a skilful card shark. Understandably, that was one of my favourite TV programs, alongside Gunsmoke, The High Chaparral, Bat Masterson, The Restless Gun, Rawhide, Tales of the Texas Rangers, The Wild Wild West, The Big Valley, Sheriff of Cochise, The Texan, Bonanza, Have Gun – Will Travel, Kung Fu, and so on.

In fact, there were about 200 Western TV series of that era — which we could also buy in comic form, and which was where most of these TV series all came from in the first place. Those of you who were already around in the 1960s would probably remember all these Western TV series, which were aired at around the time that television first came to Malaysia in 1963 — which was initially in black-and-white until 15 years later in 1978 when it came out in colour.

Anyway, what does one mean when he or she says maverick? I suppose the definition of maverick is very clear if you read the top section of this article. It is basically someone who does not follow the herd but breaks away from what many would consider ‘the norm’. And this would also mean, in a nutshell, that a maverick is not a normal person, since you ‘break from norm’.

Those who have been following my views on religion in general and the Abrahamic faiths in particular would probably already have come to a conclusion a long time ago that I am a maverick when it comes to theology. Those who have been following my political views would probably also have come to that same conclusion.

And not many can accept that there is someone who refuses to comply with norm and who breaks away from norm. They feel that anyone who breaks away from norm — that is, a maverick — is a person who gives problems to others.

An Anglican Christian is expected to agree with the Church of England. A Catholic is expected to agree with the Vatican in Rome. A Malay-Muslim is expected to agree with Sunni Islam and accept the Hadith without question. And, of course, a supporter for political reforms and change is expected to agree with Pakatan Rakyat. To do otherwise makes you a maverick, a rebel, a radical, a dissenter, an individualist, a nonconformist, an unorthodox, or a heretic.

And that is the key word here: heretic.

A heretic (a word of Christian invention derived from the Greek word meaning ‘choice’) is a person who holds controversial opinions, especially one who publicly dissents from the officially accepted dogma of the Roman Catholic Church or a person who maintains beliefs contrary to the established teachings of the Church.

The implication of being called a heretic is that you are a disbeliever, religious outcast, separatist, sectarian, renegade, revisionist, or pariah. Hence a religious maverick is a negative or dirty word. It is not nice to be called a religious maverick because that makes you a deviant.

Of course, not only Christianity but Judaism and Islam as well think the same way. If you are a maverick then you are a deviant. And the punishment for this is death — although Judaism and Christianity no longer do what the Bible says they must do (that is, kill deviants) while it now happens only occasionally in Islam compared to the old days, say 100 years ago, when it was still quite rampant.

In politics they still ‘kill’ you — metaphorically speaking, of course — if you are a maverick (and hence a deviant). Just like in religion, people expect you to toe the party line in politics if you happen to share the same political ideals — such as the ideals of reforms or change.

It is actually quite ironical plus hypocritical. Many people will scream that there should be freedom of religion, freedom of religious opinions, freedom of Muslims to leave Islam, freedom of Christians to use the Allah word, and so on. However, these same people who scream about all these freedoms will not tolerate your freedom to be a political maverick.

Aren’t Malaysians a weird lot? They hold on to views that cannot be proven and are based purely on myths. But then when you hold a view that can be proven they call you a pariah.

I suppose we may one day be able to change the government but we will never be able to change the bigoted views of Malaysians. And these people have the cheek to talk about change when they themselves cannot change.

Ironical plus hypocritical, is it not?