Elections In England
havin sealed my ballot papers, i'm right about to set foot to my friendly post office to mail it along with the zeebay items i so cleverly flogged before i decided to put in this entry.
what the fuck is a foreign student doin in the electoral roll?
i'm no pundit in world politics. if you've read my previous take on how much of half a wolf's fart i give about the war, you'll see how very uninformed my opinions are if i ever made one on world politics. i wouldn't even know there was political unrest in israel unless it affected the world of football. oh and by the way, have you read that chechen side terek grozny has just won the russian cup final, qualifyin for the uefa cup. this means that top european teams might have to travel to that godforsaken place to play. it's crazy there apparently, and the local team can't even play in chechnya itself because of the civil wars! imagine liverpool (yes, i'm not fool enough to think liverpool will last long in the champs league qualifiers even) havin to bring their spice boys to chechnya to play. well if anyone's gonna die i hope that useless heskey would be it.
anyway, back to the theme. i don't know fuck all about world politics, but i do know that someone as under-informed as me shouldn't have been given postal ballots to cast a vote. i mean, it looks like a pop quiz to me, with all them logos and shit. what's there to stop me from votin a party with the coolest name? or one with the most artsy logo? i'm a fuckin foreign student! if not for curious readin up, i wouldn't have known that the british national party is a racist front masqueradin behind terms like patrioticism and asylum prevention. the brochure looks real cool though although they had to stress they're not racist, with pics of muslim extremists burnin the uk flag. it says 2million illegal immigrants and asylum seekers are pushin britain's services, benefits and NHS to burstin point.
i draw parallels between this and the situation in malaysia, my home country. i ask, "would i like it if all them immigrants are doin the same?" well, for one, malaysia ain't got a public service sector worth a wolf's fart. public transportation is as reliable as my ex-girlfriend's menstrual cycle. medical facilities? phua chu kang's command of english puts my psychiatrist's at the university hospital to shame. in short, i couldn't care less if more and bangladeshis get stuffed into that bus along with me anyway.
however, i'm concerned about violent crimes committed by immigrants. those who came without families ain't got none to lose and they have enrolled on the hitmen-for-hire payroll with local underworld syndicates. i'm purist when it comes to the underworld structure, and i think it's a very bad idea to get the foreigners involved in our own gangland affairs. it's hard to regulate employees with no loyalty nor a permanent address.
we can diss them all we want but we cannot take it away from them that they are hard workers. they may undercut our own local workforce, but every single burmese, indonesian and bangladeshi i've worked with and known, they bust their immigrant arses to send that RM1000 odd back to their home countries. probably the criminals do the same too, to some mistress or some illegitimate daughter. they work hard. just like the immigrants in england. dari kanta serigala (from the eyes of the wolf), this foreign student observes that the immigrants here work very hard to earn their keep. in lazy yorkshire, i find myself, a payin customer, turned away so many times because most people just don't give a howl about gettin business. local garages couldn't be bothered to fix my power steerin rack on my old vectra. too much work. that's bollocks in malaysia. people die for your business, not turn it away. even if they do have too much work, they'll devise a way to hold your business and get that ringgit from you.
here, the asian garages are the only ones who are game on anythin. they might be sly about it sometimes, hopin to make an extra tenner here and there, but they do a bang-on job and more importantly, they don't mess about.
they probably constitute a great slice of the economic pie, i don't know. does this justify their stronghold and continued residence here? i guess every country wants a united identity. i hear "a malaysian malaysia" and "a british britain" bandied about. are these euphemistic propaganda to get us to stem the inflow of immigrants in the name of patriotism? then a specific question i put myself to was, "do i want the local bangladeshi to have equal rights as me, and enjoy equal benefits as a citizen?"
regardless of what i think, the common cry amongst the people would surely be one of pessimism. malaysians are not well-known for sharin anythin. even among ourselves we're still disputin rights conferred ages ago. three main races are already causin enough chaos in the pack -what would happen if the bangladeshi population grew big enough and plan to establish a union for representation of their rights? should we ignore them, all our petrol kiosks for instance, would go bonkers and nationwide strikes would definitely destabilise the economy. with the latest shock on indonesian house servant torture in malaysia, who's to rule out a new trade union by them to rally for equality?
my point is just that things would get outta control. i hate upheavals of any sort. i'd prefer if we stayed in a stable dungeon than livin in a nice new house that might collapse. i don't even wanna risk it.
this then made me realise, i've got as much confidence in government and the rule of law as i do in liverpool winnin the european cup.
i've gotta care, right? but i don't. i'm old enough to vote in malaysia but i ain't even got the time to bother to get myself on the electoral roll. and here i am votin for my local mayor in england. perhaps the winds of change are blowin this way to rattle this wolf. is it time to shine some rays of urgency into my den of apathy?
i should stop smokin first before i think of savin the world.
ciao.
________________________________________________________
Word Of The Wolf today is crabwise \KRAB-wyz\,
adjective:
1. Sideways.
2. In a cautiously indirect manner.
"Don Demonio nervously moved crabwise as he progressed with the various questions posed by the court to incriminate him for organised crime."
semper crescis aut decrescis Unknown
6/05/2004 01:46:00 PM
3 Osservasioni:
Zee asked me to write something, so here goes...
This 'essay' will argue that exclusionary immigration practices are neither desirable nor healthy in the long run. Contrary to Zee's arguments of immigrants creating instability, I will argue that immigrants strengthen and enrich a country, noting the fact that only the Orang Asli can truly claim to be indigenous.
There's a very fine line between patriotism and xenophobia, yet the two are distinct. Many, like the BNP, might try to mask xenophobia as patriotism, as the latter is easier to justify. It’s nothing new: e.g. Oren Hatch or Pauline Hanson's election manifestos.
Patriotism is a sense of belonging, of loving your country. Xenophobia, on the other hand is a hate for all things foreign. The difference is a basic sense of love or hate. To love our country, must we hate everything foreign? What is 'foreign' anyway?
Intuitively, there are a few ways to define ‘foreign’; it can either be a strict origin-based definition, a place of birth definition, or a state-of-mind definition. None are conclusive.
An origin based analysis would exclude Indians, Chinese and even Malays from claiming nationality, only the Orang Asli would have a valid claim.
On the other hand, a place of birth analysis would not encompass all situations. Take for example, the British-born Pakistani who prefers to support Pakistan at cricket rather than England; prima facie he is British, and entitled to a passport, but is he truly British?
The state of mind analysis then comes to the fore, but not without its own problems. If one 'feels' Malaysian, or British, should he or she not be entitled to nationality? The problem here is the difficulty inherent in subjectivity; the authorities would prefer to utilise objective methods, e.g. how long have you been in residence, or blood-relations, or if it is your place of birth. Yet, these tests are not conclusive, as demonstrated by the previous example.
Perhaps then, to resolve this difficulty, we should ask ourselves, why doesn't the Pakistani cricket fan support England rather than Pakistan? It cannot simply be due to one team performing better than the other, there must be a corresponding state-of-mind, a sense of belonging, a link, which is absent. (Note the ICJ's discussion of these difficulties in the cases of Nottebohm, Merge, Flegenheimer, and more subtly in Eichmann).
This then ties in nicely with Zee's arguments. If one is not made to 'feel welcome' in a country, would we not exclude ourselves and prefer to associate ourselves with our country of origin? While the Malays in Malaysia tend to feel more secure, (despite us being settlers ourselves) the Chinese and Indians are in a state of limbo. They have no nation to realistically turn back to, yet they have been subjected to a constitution that 'compromises' their rights.
In that sense, it is probably the Malays who would have strongest feelings about Filipinos or Indonesians 'invading' the country. There is a sense of contentment in being 'indigenous', and newcomers tend to be more competitive and ambitious. Having come from a deprived background, there is a greater sense of urgency in seeking out a better life (or else why emigrate?). Yet, as Zee demonstrates, even the Chinese are starting to feel strongly about 'Bangladeshis controlling our petrol kiosks', but whether this is borne out of xenophobia, patriotism or fear of competition is unclear.
Contrary to some, I feel that having newcomers is a positive development, even for the locals. It brings in a 'weather or wither' scenario, challenging their sense of contentment. If an immigrant works harder, should he or she not be entitled to a greater reward? Equally, it enriches the country, with a more diverse myriad of cultures defining what 'British' or 'Malaysian' is, an effective cure against racism (perhaps stopped by parties such as the BNP and the Malaysian constitution, the May 13th Incident still relevant today).
While the rewards issue is more straightforward, the issue of rights is more difficult. Should they be accorded equal rights? In this situation, rights can be subdivided into basic human rights, and political rights.
What occurred to the Indonesian maid was a violation of a human right, not a political right. Human rights, few would dispute, ought to be extended to foreigners.
However, should they be given political rights? (Which is central to Zee's article). It may be, especially in an era of globalization, that foreign opinion should be present to balance local opinion if it is not in accordance with pre-emptory norms, or even reinforce local dissent over an issue. For instance, Iraq: Foreigners would have a chance to register their discontentment over the war, representing a wider pool of voters, reflecting the level of approval a government has both locally and domestically.
In that sense, if the Bangladeshis or Indonesians decide to form a political party, or workers union, why should they be stopped? Is that not the foundation of parties such as UMNO, MIC and MCA? Religious parties are represented in the guise of PAS, why shouldn't a Christian or Buddhist party emerge?
What I sense is Zee's point is that the emergence of too many sub-groups may destabilize the unity of the country. However, what he fails to note is the importance of representation. It is the foundation of democracy. Imbalance already exists in Parliament as Malaysia lacks a credible opposition party, which is a more serious problem. Without representation, one's political rights, and perhaps even human rights cannot be guaranteed. It is an avenue to air grievances, seek assistance, and be heard. Rarely is it about usurping the rights of others.
Yet, Malaysia is light years behind such a development. The government has a strong hold over such issues, and the Malays will always complain, but not compete. Sadly, the adversarial 'us vs. them' mentality only perpetuates further feelings of exclusion amongst the Chinese and Indians, which in turn makes them aggressively pursue other exclusionary practices. If they cannot have their share of political power, why not control the economy?
I hope this sways your opinion to a certain extent. Exclusionary immigration policies are a symptom of a deeper problem, that is, xenophobia. It's not patriotism, it is a simple fear of the unknown, and something you, Zee, are very guilty of: laziness. (cf the Talent v Hard-Work debate).
Talent, like nationality, is something we cannot help, which does not involve any additional effort to reinforce or maintain. Developing ourselves and competing, on the other hand, does. A talent-less sportsman or nation-less immigrant can fare better than others with sheer effort alone, and this drive is perhaps what we truly fear in comparison with our own deficiencies.
Time to sleep!
Best wishes,
Faisal
we can argue back and forth about this, but nothing will change if we don't try to start it. so, all those bloody lazy citizens out there, get off your fanny and register to vote. how else are we gonna change the world? by the way, what is your take on the meaning of life, wise wolf?
zhiang yang, check out www.sadangrybabies.cjb.net. nih website yang aku gembar-gemburkan hari tuh. hehehe. tujuh hari by karim daud (seven days - craig david). :)
Posta un commento
<< Den Proper