It is an irony and certainly an injustice that those who publicly defend their vernacular educational system or fight for the legitimate right of their own racial groups are accused of not being patriotic.
And those who advocate open liberal policies and opposed protectionism are said to be treasonous
Now, even traders who made a principled stand against the implementation of what they perceived as an unfair and unjust ruling are labelled as traitors and betrayers of the nation.
However, those who have leaked national secrets, collaborated with foreign countries to undermine the country's reputation, sold their MyKads to foreigners or stole a RMAF fighter jet engines and sold it to foreigners, etc are not considered anti-national traitorous elements.
In Malaysia, the definition for “betrayer” or “unpatriotic” apparently depends on who is being referred to.
And the same goes for “national hero”, too.
Take for example, the recent Thomas Cup tournament. When the first single and first double of the Malaysian team earned two points for the country, they were not considered “heroes”. But, when the third single earned the third point that permitted the team to play in the semi-final, I heard a television host shouting excitingly: "Hero! He is the true hero of our country!"
Many people were worried about Malaysian volunteers, who were on board a humanitarian aid ship attacked by Israel while on its way to blockaded Gaza. The incidents were being extensively reported by the local media.
The hostages were finally released and, when they reurned home, they were personally greeted by the country's leaders. Also, they were called the "true heroes".
The country had spent a great amount of money to send our "astronaut" into space but eventually, he terminated the contract with the government and did not fulfil his obligation. But he was also called a national hero.
The popular definitions of national betrayer and national hero are actually quite reckless and unreasonable.
The traders, who decided not to sell sugar to safeguard the industry's interests and dignity after failing to ask for the cancellation of the unfavourable measures, were inexplicably labelled as "national betrayers".
It is simply mind-boggling to understand how an ordinary co-operative action by the small-time traders to stop selling sugar could be considered as “treason”!
The local groceries are hardly able to compete with powerful mega hypermarkets. The rulings requiring the traders to have a special licence to sell price-controlled items, and to limit the amount of sugar they are allowed to stock have caused them much inconvenience.
The government is only scratching the surface of the problem when it attempts to cut sugar subsidy indirectly by controlling the sales of it. But no matter how hard the traders try to explain to the government, their legitimate plea was unceremoniously dismissed.
Even though the government has claimed that it is practising the principles of upholding business interests and cultivating people friendliness, the discourteous way the Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Ministry rejected the traders’ request to review the matter is shocking, to say the least.
Moreover, the ministry’s decision to issue licences to petrol stations to trade in the price-controlled items is surely contemptuous of the significant economic role that the traders and groceries have been playing in the country for a long, long time.
The small-time traders and grocers could not and should not compromise on this matter. The only way for them to defend their dignity is to stand firm together and stop selling sugar, until the status quo is restored.
This is not treasonous or unpatriotic! The traders are simply exercising their right to have a level playing field, with just rules and a fair deal to make an honest living.
And those who advocate open liberal policies and opposed protectionism are said to be treasonous
Now, even traders who made a principled stand against the implementation of what they perceived as an unfair and unjust ruling are labelled as traitors and betrayers of the nation.
However, those who have leaked national secrets, collaborated with foreign countries to undermine the country's reputation, sold their MyKads to foreigners or stole a RMAF fighter jet engines and sold it to foreigners, etc are not considered anti-national traitorous elements.
In Malaysia, the definition for “betrayer” or “unpatriotic” apparently depends on who is being referred to.
And the same goes for “national hero”, too.
Take for example, the recent Thomas Cup tournament. When the first single and first double of the Malaysian team earned two points for the country, they were not considered “heroes”. But, when the third single earned the third point that permitted the team to play in the semi-final, I heard a television host shouting excitingly: "Hero! He is the true hero of our country!"
Many people were worried about Malaysian volunteers, who were on board a humanitarian aid ship attacked by Israel while on its way to blockaded Gaza. The incidents were being extensively reported by the local media.
The hostages were finally released and, when they reurned home, they were personally greeted by the country's leaders. Also, they were called the "true heroes".
The country had spent a great amount of money to send our "astronaut" into space but eventually, he terminated the contract with the government and did not fulfil his obligation. But he was also called a national hero.
The popular definitions of national betrayer and national hero are actually quite reckless and unreasonable.
The traders, who decided not to sell sugar to safeguard the industry's interests and dignity after failing to ask for the cancellation of the unfavourable measures, were inexplicably labelled as "national betrayers".
It is simply mind-boggling to understand how an ordinary co-operative action by the small-time traders to stop selling sugar could be considered as “treason”!
The local groceries are hardly able to compete with powerful mega hypermarkets. The rulings requiring the traders to have a special licence to sell price-controlled items, and to limit the amount of sugar they are allowed to stock have caused them much inconvenience.
The government is only scratching the surface of the problem when it attempts to cut sugar subsidy indirectly by controlling the sales of it. But no matter how hard the traders try to explain to the government, their legitimate plea was unceremoniously dismissed.
Even though the government has claimed that it is practising the principles of upholding business interests and cultivating people friendliness, the discourteous way the Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Ministry rejected the traders’ request to review the matter is shocking, to say the least.
Moreover, the ministry’s decision to issue licences to petrol stations to trade in the price-controlled items is surely contemptuous of the significant economic role that the traders and groceries have been playing in the country for a long, long time.
The small-time traders and grocers could not and should not compromise on this matter. The only way for them to defend their dignity is to stand firm together and stop selling sugar, until the status quo is restored.
This is not treasonous or unpatriotic! The traders are simply exercising their right to have a level playing field, with just rules and a fair deal to make an honest living.
No comments:
Post a Comment