Below is my response to the Malay Mail piece entitled ‘Daulat Tuanku! What it means’ (Oct 12, 2009) by Rusdi Mustapha which contains unwarranted allegations that the Centre for Policy Initiatives is anti-monarchy.
In it, the columnist alludes to an English translation of my blog post, ‘Menyeru seruan Daulat Tuanku’, carried in the CPI website, and makes these key claims:
Claim 1:
Rusdi writes: “I consider some of the CPI postings in its website to be very anti-Malay monarchy sentiments??? and, “via its postings [is] trying to direct the people not to respect the royalty.???
Claim 2:
Rusdi also writes: “Malays who discard the essence of being Malay in this country, such as [sic] questioning the nature of the Malay monarchy system, are to me just ‘Malays-ready-to-be-dominated-people-again’ in the making.???
My comments on these are as follows.
On Claim 1:
The view that my article in question published in CPI on Oct 3 contains anti-Malay monarchy sentiments is incorrect.
The article’s spirit is rather this: All monarchies in democracies, if they act in a questionable manner where it involves public interest or monies, may be questioned by the very party funding these constitutional monarchies.
They should rightly be questioned by those who are affected by their actions — namely the public — either directly or through parliamentary or state representatives.
Note that even the wise Khalifahs of old have exhorted the people to question the actions of kings and queens. Their subjects may point out their errors and correct them when they err. There is no reason why modern monarchs should be treated differently.
It follows that monarchs who act reasonably and responsibly with respect to their constitutional privileges and powers shall receive public approval and support, and those who do not shall lose public favour.
This cannot be helped. The unwritten rule on respect applies: Respect is to be earned. Blind or institutionalised allegiance is a dangerous thing to foster as history has repeatedly borne testimony. This is the essential message of the article in question. My article does not, and cannot, “direct the people??? to disrespect royal institutions.
I merely posed food for thought. I should like to think Malaysians have minds of their own as to whether the kings keep their respect.
On Claim 2:
Here the Malay Mail columnist succumbs to the fallacy of questionable cause — he takes an absurd leap of imagination to connect “questioning the nature of the Malay monarchy system??? to “discarding the essence of being Malay in this country???.
It cannot be that someone who questions the actions of the monarchs or the way monarchies function will lose his Malay-ness. After all, there is the Federal Constitution’s definition of what it is to be considered Malay, i.e. Article 160, as a yardstick.
Moreover, questioning a monarch or a monarchical system is certainly not tantamount to repudiating one’s custom or culture. After all, Indonesians who are of the same stock as Malays live in a republic.
Similarly Indians in India, the world’s largest democracy, may not have their ancient lines of maharajahs anymore but their culture and customs have withstood the winds of change and remain as varied as they are rich.
It is a stretch for Rusdi to assert that Malays who question “the nature of the Malay monarchy??? are at risk of being subjugated by other races.
Those who question an institution and seek to correct it so that it properly serves the interests of the nation and her people are acting rationally. They are in fact reinforcing their position as a free and independent citizenry, and bulwarking themselves against tyranny and domination by the feudalistic elements of their own society.
A people should draw their strength from their own abilities and construct their own wisdom. There is no reason for thinking that monarchies are conduits or substitutes for these.
The Malays, or any people for that matter, can set themselves to succeed and shine if they swear allegiance not to symbols but to their own will to think boldly and labour diligently.
As for monarchies, they are beautiful things to have when they function within the prescribed bounds, are accountable, and do not place undue strain on or conflict with the interest and future of the land and her people.
Disc
laimer: The views expressed above, and in my original blog article as well as in its English translation at english.cpiasia.net are my own.
________________________
Dr Lim Teck Ghee’s reply appeared yesterday in our website titled ‘Response to Malay Mail article calling CPI ‘communist’’ and in the Malay Mail today under the headline ‘CPI is not “communist???.’