Thursday, 22-Apr-2004 12:54 AM

Where free sex, not freedom of speech, is what counts

What’s the difference between Kelantan and Kedah, two predominantly ‘Muslim’ states, but one controlled by the ‘extreme’ Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS) and the other by the more liberal Barisan Nasional (BN) ruling coalition? One allows freedom of speech and the other free sex.

PAS nearly lost Kelantan in the recently concluded 11th General Election on 21 March 2004 -- while it lost Terengganu, another predominantly Muslim state, after only one term in office. Political analysts who have studied the voting trend according to the saluran (voting lanes or booths) admit that the saluran for the young or first-time voters showed that the younger generation opted for BN compared to the previous election where they were more ‘Reformasi-minded’ and voted opposition.

This shows that the young do not support the extreme policies of PAS, say critics of the Islamic party, and because the National Justice Party (keADILan) is seen as ‘together with PAS’ within the opposition coalition, Barisan Alternatif (BA), it too was rejected.

These critics argue that this is proven by the fact that keADILan did not see any increase in the votes it garnered (PAS saw a mere 0.8% increase) while BN saw an increase of 1.3 million votes over its 1999 total of 3.1 million.

Granted there was massive vote rigging and Gerrymandering, but this still does not explain how BN managed to see this massive increase. At best, BN could have seen maybe an 800,000 vote increase through fraud, but the balance 500,000 is a ‘real’ increase, nothing to do with rigging. This means, even without the rigging, the opposition would still not win the support of about 500,000 new voters.

And the reason the young or first-time voters rejected the opposition BA, sum up the analysts, is because PAS is seen as outdated and not in tune with the lifestyle of the young.

This analysis could actually be correct. If you were to ask the young what their priorities in life are, most would reply, “To have more money in the pocket and to have a good time.”

Recently, the Sin Chew Education Fund conducted an interview of about 100 seventeen- and eighteen-year-olds, who had to their credit bright academic results and impressive extracurricular activities testimonials. These were basically the crème de le crème of Chinese students and would all be voters in the next election in 2008 or 2009.

One of the key questions asked was, “What is your goal in life?”

One replied, “I want to complete my university education, become a qualified engineer and enjoy a comfortable life.”

Another said, “I want to be an accountant working in an international accounting firm, and set up my own accounting business within five years.”

A girl said, “I want a well-paid job so that my family can lead a better life.”

Another girl replied, “I want to earn plenty of money, retire at 30 and bring my mum to see the world.”

According to Sin Chew, which carried a report of the session, “The interviewers were disheartened having to listen to such answers. These young people with such outstanding capabilities should, by right, seek to broaden their scopes of life and create the infinite possibilities, even to make life a little better. However, money and material life were all these young people had in mind.”

The opposition is still puzzled why it saw a slide in support from these young, first-time voters and it still cannot understand how this could have happened. The opposition is, after all, fighting for justice, democracy, and freedom of speech, assembly and association. These are noble values that all young people should subscribe to.

This is what the opposition thought. Apparently, this is not what the young want. What they want is a good life, well-paying jobs, more money in the pocket, and plenty of leisure time, the type that only plenty of money can buy.

And this attitude is not confined to just the young and outstanding Chinese. Even the Malay youth, or more so the Malay youth, consider leisure and pleasure, with plenty of money to afford all this, as their main goal in life.

The government is facing a host of problems in the newly launched Nasional Service (NS) programme. It is actually at a loss as to what to do. Discipline is non-existent and the priorities of the NS trainees are not quite what the government expected or hoped for. And they just cannot figure out what to do.

Well, the government has to decide what it wants. Does it want a disciplined, young generation of future leaders who subscribe to Islamic values, or does it want a growing population that rejects PAS’ ‘extreme’ version of Islam in favour of the more ‘liberal’ and ‘modern’ BN? They cannot have it both ways.

PAS is propagating an Islamic way of life or Adeen. BN says this is outdated and the young seem to agree with it. Ask the NS trainees what they would rather do and where they would rather be and he or she would reply, “At home watching MTV.”

Yes, MTV, that music programme that show girls singing and dancing in their panties with songs that expound sex, sex and more sex -- and we are not talking about sex between legally married husbands and wives mind you.

On 17th and 18th April 2004, TV3, the UMNO-owned television station, organised a two-day music festival called ‘Karnival Sureheboh TV3’ at the Alor Star Stadium in Kedah, a state the opposition thought it could win but did not. When they cleaned up the stadium later, they discovered 540 used condoms, many with sperm still inside them.

Clearly the TV3 Carnival was not just a music festival but a sex festival as well. And this was a BN state government promoted affair.

The government is going all out to defeat the PAS ‘doctrine’ of introducing and reinforcing ‘Islamic values’ in the young. They even closed down the Sekolah Agama Rakyat (Citizens' Religious Schools) in an attempt to stem the Islamic tide. Islamising the young is considered dangerous to the future of BN. If the young choose Islam, then PAS would benefit. If they reject Islam, BN will be perpetually in power. It’s as simple as that.

It must be remembered that Malaysia is a ‘young’ country in that an estimated three-quarters of its population is under 40 while about half its population is below 21. This means, by the next election, these people would all be voters. The question would be: whom would they vote for? If they subscribe to PAS’ ‘outdated’ ideology of no free mingling between the sexes, separate swimming pools for girls in bikinis and boys ‘bulging’ in briefs, no sex before marriage, no adultery, and all those ‘old fashioned’ notions, then PAS would probably get their votes. However, if they reject PAS’ ideology and choose free sex over freedom of speech, then BN would win their votes.

To ensure the young do not grow up to become ‘extreme’ Muslims, the government has to portray PAS as ‘Taliban-like’ and that everything PAS stands for is ‘ketinggalan zalam’ (out of step with the times). The government also has to link PAS to Bin Ladin, Al Qaedah, JI, KMM and all forms of international Islamic terrorism.

The young have to be made to feel ashamed to be associated with PAS. PAS is not ‘cool’. It is not ‘with it’. It is a party for old people about to go their graves, not a party for the chic, young and yuppies. PAS is not compatible with MTV. UMNO is. And, to prove it, UMNO organises music festivals for the young, it does not ban free mingling of the sexes, and it does not implement a strict and modest dress code for the girls.

PAS women wear the tudung (head scarf) partly out of modesty and partly because Islam says you should. This is an attempt to ‘Arabise’ the Malays and threatens to ‘displace’ Malay culture says an UMNO Minister and should be rejected. Another says this is an attempt to ‘Talibanise’ the Malays.

“We somehow believe that Arab culture means Islam and this is the road to paradise. The way I look at it, this is the way to Talibanism,” said Johan Jaafar, the former editor-in-chief of Utusan Malaysia, an UMNO-owned Bahasa Malaysia newspaper.

“We don't have to wear robes to become Muslims. Mosques in China have minarets that look like pagodas. Religion is adaptable to local conditions,” said Associate Professor Mohamed Najib Dawa, Dean of the School of Arts, Universiti Sains Malaysia in Penang.

New Arts, Culture and Heritage Minister, Rais Yatim, in turn says that people must question things branded unIslamic, especially when they are old Malay art forms such as the Wayang Kulit, a shadow puppet play.

“We should not conclude that everything worn, done, said and practised that is spelt out as being Arabic is good for the culture,” he argued.

“The revivalism in those days wanted to cleanse Malay culture of unIslamic impurities, but it should not have been at the expense of leaving our Malay roots,” said Professor Yusoff Hashim, history adviser to the Melaka state government.

And to ensure that PAS’ push for more Islamic values is thwarted, Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has started the Islam Hadhari programme for civil servants, one area of concern for the government since nearly all the women civil servants wear the tudung and subscribe to ‘Islamic values’. If BN wishes to break PAS’ influence amongst the civil servants it will need to ‘unIslamise’ the mentality of the civil servants and introduce its own brand of moderate or modern Islam.

“Islam Hadhari is a progressive, contributive sort of Islam. It is midway and not extreme and thereby we enrich the culture by assimilating the positive parts,” explained Rais.

The Democratic Action Party (DAP), which saw its fortunes in the recent election improve over 1999, explains it quite well. The DAP launched its “No to 929” Campaign in response to previous Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s announcement on 29 September 2001 that “Malaysia is already an Islamic State”.

DAP wants to bring Malaysia back to the days of the first Prime Minister, Tunku Abdul Rahman, the days when Malaysia was a ‘practicing’ Secular State, the days when Malaysia and its leaders practiced Islam Hadhari, the days before the Iranian Revolution that also saw Malaysia take the Islamisation route.

Why have we never heard of Islam Hadhari before this? What is Islam Hadhari? The government wants us to believe that there are many versions of Islam, the modern or moderate version versus the outdated or extreme version. And Islam Hadhari is the modern or moderate version. This is actually a fallacy. There is only one version of Islam, the version that Prophet Muhammad introduced and as enshrined in the Koran. Anything outside this parameter is unIslamic.

What the government therefore must decide is whether they want Malays to be good or bad Muslims. These are the only two kinds of Muslims. Good Muslims subscribe to the Koran and Prophet Muhammad’s teachings. Bad Muslims reject it. It is as simple as that and is not as complicating as some try to make it appear.

Good Muslims propagate freedom of speech; freedom of association; the concept of justice for all; equality for all races; no discrimination of gender, race or religion; modesty for women and men, including decent dressing and no over-exposure of flesh; no sex before marriage; no adultery; no pork eating, gambling and liquor drinking; compliance to the Koran and the Prophet’s teachings to the letter; and so on. Anything outside these boundaries is not the mark of modern or moderate Muslim but that of a bad Muslim.

During the time of the Prophet they had another word for what today we call Hadhari Muslim, and that word is ‘Jahiliyah’. And that is where the Malay word, ‘jahil’, comes from, which means ‘ignorant’. Could we therefore say that the Hadhari Islam of BN and Abdullah Ahmad Badawi means Jahiliyah? If what DAP says is true, in that they want to bring Malaysia back to the days of Tunku Abdul Rahman, the days when moderate or Secular Islam was practiced, the days when free sex, gambling and liquor drinking were not frowned upon, then certainly Hadhari Islam would tantamount to ‘Jahiliyah’ times.

Anyway, after everything is said and done, all these arguments are purely academic, mere theory. Let us put to a test this Hadhari Islam and see whether it works. PAS does not want to allow free mingling of the sexes, PAS does not want to allow indiscriminate sex and adultery, PAS wants to ban liquor drinking and gambling, and so on and so forth. And, according to the BN government, PAS is extreme and its policies should be rejected.

Say I agree with the BN government. Say I too reject PAS’ policies as extreme. Say I now subscribe to Hadhari Islam. Will I be arrested if I check into a hotel room for sex with someone who is not my wife? Chances are I will. What then is the difference between UMNO’s Hadhari Islam and the so-called extreme version of PAS? I still do not understand in what way Hadhari Islam is different from the alleged ‘old fashioned’ version. And, until the government can explain this difference, I would have to regard Hadhari Islam as another deviational form of Islam, a departure from Prophet Muhammad’s and the Koran’s teachings.

Over to you, Pak Lah and Rais! Can you please enlighten us?

Check your voter registration here