Cina sudah kurang ajar! Dah lupa 13 Mei ke?

Cina sudah kurang ajar. Cina perlu diajar. Cina sudah lupa 13 Mei. Ini negara Melayu. Agama Malaysia ialah Islam. Sekiranya Cina tak boleh terima ini maka mereka boleh keluar dari Malaysia.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

"It appears like the opposition is not consistent with its stand regarding freedom of speech. When we say something they don’t like they whack us. They call us all sorts of foul names. They call us a traitor and turncoat. They call us a Trojan horse." -- RPK.

Whacking, calling foul name, and calling traitor/turncoat might be inflammatory, but they are still covered by freedom of expression under USA 1st Amendment and also re-affirmed by later ruling of US Supreme Court. Alas, we are not USA. Despite we are not USA, we should still appreciate how the freedom of expression can and have prevented monopoly of those in powerful position. How to prevent the over-concentration of power (i.e. the hallmark of dictator)? One of the answers is to protect the right of expression of every citizen; the right must include whacking, calling foul name, and other inflammatory remarks. The freedom of expression includes the right to say stupid things and being bias to "your team". It is that "pain" of freedom of expression that allows powerful counter-weight to those in power position. If we cannot take that "pain" or sacrifice, we can kiss goodbye to democracy. 

"I remember when Tunku Abdul Aziz Tunku Ibrahim expressed his personal view and he was whacked kau-kau for that. Does not Tunku Aziz also have a right to his personal view just like Ngeh?" -- RPK.

So is the right of those who whack Tunku Aziz kau-kau. We should stop confuse people about the right of freedom of expression. Whacking someone kau-kau might be bad manners and even politically stupid, but it has not violated the right of Tunku Aziz.

I think I can understand RPK whacking DAP and Pakatan Rakyat asking them to behave. But, confusing people on what is freedom of expression is a great "sin" -- as far as nurturing nascent democracy is concerned. (Comment by Shiou in my article ‘How the knife cuts both ways’).

*************************************************

That was what Shiou commented in my article ‘How the knife cuts both ways’. Basically, Shiou is of the opinion that freedom of expression means ‘no holds barred’, anything goes, there are no limits or boundaries to what one can say.

Let’s say I buy that. Let’s say I go along with what Shiou says -- that freedom of expression means ‘no holds barred’, anything goes, there are no limits or boundaries to what one can say.

But then, in the same breath, Shiou contradicts himself/herself and concludes that confusing people on what is freedom of expression is a great sin. If Shiou is a propagator of absolute freedom of expression with no limits or boundaries, then how can he/she infer that confusing people is a great sin? There are no sins under absolute freedom of expression, going by Shiou’s argument.

Would not whatever I say, even if it is my intention to confuse people, be my freedom of expression? How can Shiou regard a statement meant to confuse people as a great sin? There is no such thing as a sin as far as absolute freedom of expression goes. Everything is fair game -- even a lie, misinformation, disinformation, propaganda, distortions, innuendoes, and whatnot. All are kosher. They all come under freedom of expression if we use Shiou’s interpretation of no limit to freedom of expression.

Now look at this photograph.

And then read the heading of my article: Cina sudah kurang ajar! Dah lupa 13 Mei ke?

I am relating my heading to the photograph above. To Shiou, this Chinese chap is merely expressing himself under his right of freedom of expression by stepping on the photograph of the Prime Minister. I, too, am expressing myself under my right of freedom of expression by saying, “Cina sudah kurang ajar! Dah lupa 13 Mei ke?”

Am I making a racist statement? Am I instigating racial hatred? Is what I am doing dangerous considering that racism in Malaysia has reached a dangerous level never seen before since May 1969?

As far as I am concerned I am just applying Shiou’s standards and yardstick of freedom of expression. Under your right of freedom of expression there should be no limits or boundary. Anything goes. Everything is kosher. And I do not see that Chinese chap who is stepping on the Prime Minister’s photograph as him exercising his freedom of expression. I see it as Chinese arrogance and a challenge to the Malays (cabaran kepada Melayu). Hence I say: Cina sudah kurang ajar! Dah lupa 13 Mei ke?

Maybe what I am doing is dangerous. Maybe what I am doing may trigger racial discord. It may even expose Malaysia to the danger of racial conflict and violence. But that is not important. What is important is that I am expressing my view under my right of freedom of expression. What I am doing may result in deaths, maybe even hundreds or thousands of deaths. But can we allow that possibility to stand in the way of freedom of expression?

Cina sudah kurang ajar. Cina perlu diajar. Cina sudah lupa 13 Mei. Ini negara Melayu. Agama Malaysia ialah Islam. Sekiranya Cina tak boleh terima ini maka mereka boleh keluar dari Malaysia.

Yes, that statement, too, is covered under my right of absolute freedom of expression. So how can you say it is malicious, seditious, vicious and mischievous? Under freedom of expression, as Shiou says, there are no limits. There are no boundaries. Everything goes. All is kosher.