Galileo and Leuwenhoek on Article 153.

Sakmongkol wants to share with readers a contribution made by a frequent if not a daily visitor to his blog. This person’s name is Walla- a nom de plume of course. He is an astute and very perceptive observer of a whole range of issues confronting us nowadays. He is a chemistry graduate from University of Malaya, probably with a first class honours or a strong second upper. He has worked at Accenture and now is a consultant and businessman at large. The world is his oyster.

Sakmongkol has touched a little bit on article 153 discussing not at the article proper but our attitude( Malay) to the article. As to the article itself, we shall let the legal minds work on it.

The question which interests Sakmongkol is how do we confront the article? Do Malays want to define themselves in terms of article 153 and the non Malays in turn define themselves in terms of a conscientious objector to 153? Then we are both trapped by these legal devices and paralysed by it at the same time. This prevents all of us, Malays and non Malays from looking beyond article 153. we have conditioned our mind into thinking that this world is flat and that if we venture beyond the peripheries, we will fall into a bottomless abyss.

But let us indulge in Walla’s thesis.

Maybe the big divide is caused by using different tools to look at Art.153.

One half looks at it using a historical telescope. The other half looks at it using a modern-day microscope. The telescope says there was a 'pact' made as an exchange. The microscope says there is no difference between all so why the differentiation, especially when the rationale given to apply the policy also applies to quite a big number of those who apparently don't come under its purview. The Galileo then says what was, is. The Leeuwenhoek retorts ..but what is, is, isn't it?

Yet there is another way to look at it. We ALL go through it one time or other. It's like this. After finishing our education, we apply for our first jobs. But the employer says you must have experience before we can give you the job. That is indeed an odd requirement because if you don't give me a job, how can i get the experience to apply for it or the next one? Macam tu, i will be forever jobless, betul tak?

If one may say, where the NEP has been found wanting is what happens to our jobless friend above after coming out of the interview hall. What does he do then? To get out of the rut, he applies for a lower job - one which doesn't call for his qualification. The second employer would be silly not to give someone the job who is slightly more qualified for it - because that candidate may be able to use his education to improve the method for the next candidate before he leaves. That's how HR progress is made.

And leave he will, after collecting some experience. Now that bundle of experience may not be exactly suited for the job he really has in mind but any open-minded employer will see that this candidate before him wants to succeed in life - and has made a personal sacrifice by not demanding he be given upfront things just because he thinks he's born to it as a right. That's a good attitude because to build that attitude, the candidate has to climb out of himself first. And that's altitude. In the harsh real kucing-makan-kucing world out there, just and not just is just a chimera. What matter are attitude and altitude, attitude by willfully changing one's own mindset, altitude by riding in the cockpit of a eurocopter (kekeke).

Now, those who use the microscopes will be seeing all this quite closely. Closely because they use microscopes lah. They see everything and ask how come? We also go through the no-first experience grindmills of life. If we can do it, you also can. And the fact that many of you have actually done so on your own only add more doubt that the whole shebang has not been applied correctly. Something's wrong.

The other side however worries about such thoughts. Macam ni we will be swarmed before we can be ready to co-exist, furthermore on our own turf. It's a catch-22 situation. If we don't do it, then we will forever not be able to participate in everything. But if we do it, we will end up feeling there's an invisible divide between us all, and that's the final objective which was the original intent to be achieved by the policy in the first place.

The leeuwenhoeks retort. Hey, Galileos, the earth circumnavigates around the Sun, and not the other way around. You proved that. And you also proved the Sun perambulates around the universe. So all this talk about turfs and divide is quite meaningless because out there the real world is much bigger than the frog pond you seem to be looking at only. If we both continue like this, habislah semua.

It's like the postman at the KL Post Office. He's standing there sorting the letters. He sighs and says 'mana ada harapan?' You understand that immediately. But you're in a hurry because the world demands you to be in a hurry and so he will miss the chance to hear you say, hey bro jangan putus harapan tu nanti kena laparan; you sort letters, saya juga; after ni saujana saya kerja sorting letters for a wage much less than yours; during lunch time, to save money, tidak makan tapi baca buku. Step-by-step lah. Baca dulu buku macam Thirty Nine Steps by John Buchan to improve your english so that you can acquire more knowledge so that you can apply for better job, dan lain lain.


Everybody sighs and shakes punya kepala (or kelapa, if thirsty) - it's an impasse. So how to get out of the lockjam? When the lock is jammed, cut another key.

Make two parallel tracks. Look for best fit. Whoever, independent of race or background, fits most efficiently into one track, gets into it. Whoever, independent of race or background, fits most efficiently into the other track, gets into that too.

The Galileos will decry. This is elitism. It will divide.

The Leeuwenhoeks answer. But won't you rather the division be made upfront than it happening on its natural course because of human nature later where it really matters - in the places of production, investment, coexistence, nation-building, helping one another independent of artificial constructs?

After pondering this silently for a while, the Galileos say ah you make sense. We are family. It's like one bapa and his children at the dinner table. The Good One has supplied plentiful. Because this bapa has been somewhat productive, his children have different skin colours (cough). So they all partake the food. Ta'kan he gives one more than the other? All the same but some more than the others because they need the energy to toil the land more so that there be more food for the next dinner ..for everyone. But lately some of the children have seen how this bapa has started to, well, rove. He has been, how you say it, 'tarpauing(?)' some of the tastier morsels, and quietly at night when everyone is asleep, slipping out of the house to go and give to his, erh, other family. Like this, atap pun runtuh, betultak?

Anyway, one day because of this global thing lah, there is financial disaster in the country. The Leeuwenhoeks are just able to scrape through because they have saved for many years, and sacrificed a few generations for the future of later ones. The Galileos however because they had little when they started naturally enough didn't save that much, especially when the policy seemed to promise continued inflows. When the financial disaster strikes, the Galileos find that their assets vaporising by the minute. They are in a dilemma. What to do? They decide to firesell everything to the Leeuwenhoeks. We rather trust you than any others because we both played guli by the same frog pond. We know no one else. Take it, buy it from us even at impaired price.

So the Leeuwenhoeks buy the assets at impaired price. The Galileos say hey need to sign S&P agreement tak? The Leeuwenhoeks reply no need lah. After all brothers beat with one heart and if the heart is wrong how can the contract be right? So to cut the story short, after a few years of dire poverty by the Galileos, the Leeuwenhoeks one day appear. They smile and say brother we are back. Here're your assets plus hefty gains, interests, bonuses, dividends, what have you. We sell back to you. Now according to this invisible S&P agreement, you had sold to us at an impaired price. We now sell back to you at the same impaired price. In your kindness, you may want to add a small administrative fee. If not, also alright. But everything goes back to you.

The Galileos are shocked. But you suffer because of the policy and yet you can do this?

The Leeuwenhoeks reply. It's because you didn't constantly remind us that they weren't ours to have in the first place.

The most important things in life, after all, are honour and conscience, not some invisible agreement or, contract.

And the Good One looks down and Says 'Betul!'

31 October 2008 11:00

Sakmongkol hopes Walla’s exposition will stimulate further discussions of this subject.