MR PRIME MINISTER YOU HAVE A CHOICE PEOPLE WANT NAJIB RESIGN NOW!

Francis Fukuyama once hypothesized that the end of the Cold War signaled the end of history, describing the seminal moment as “the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.” Charles Kupchan flips this theory on its head in his new book, No One’s World: The West, the Rising Rest, and the Coming Global Turn, by arguing that the only thing coming to an end is post-Cold War unipolarity.

Kupchan, a former Clinton national security adviser, has written a book quite audacious in scope considering it covers over 500 years of world history and outlines a grand vision for the next century. The U.S., he posits, will be forced to make room on the world stage for a variety of governing models such as China’s state-capitalist autocracy and the Arab Spring nascent democracies – forms that do not strictly adhere to traditional Western concepts of modernity.

But it is critical to understand the unique circumstances behind the divergent paths taken by the West and “the rest.” Kupchan provocatively suggests that the West’s rise was a function of time and place, driven more by singular geopolitical conditions and happenstance than intrinsic superiority. In fact, for centuries the East considered Europe a backwater. However, between 1500 and 1800 the world’s center of gravity moved westward from Asia and the Mediterranean Basin.

The weakness of Western institutions was actually an asset given the diffusion of power led to a fragmented society amidst which the middle class was born and “horizontal alignments” were sustained, which proved to be an essential precursor of liberal democracy. The West also benefited from the dissipation of central power that accompanied the turbulent struggle between Church and monarch. Ultimately, the Reformation put Europe on the path to religious tolerance and pluralism, as dissent and socioeconomic ferment fostered political liberalization. The Reformation’s impact cannot be overstated, as Kupchan writes:

…the Reformation set the stage for the intellectual advances of the Enlightenment by exposing religion, and ultimately politics, to theological, moral and rationalist inquiry. The intellectual ferment that made possible Europe’s eclipse of other regions was, at least initially, unleashed by religious dissent.

In contrast, Ottoman rulers maintained strong central control and strict “vertical alignments” throughout the empire, “prohibiting the emergence of autonomous sites of wealth and power that were agents of change in Europe.” Plus, because the mosque and state were so intertwined there was never an “Islamic reformation.”

However, fast forward to present day and a distressing confluence of factors have gradually chipped away at Western dominion. Economic stagnation, due to military overreach and divisive domestic politics, has propelled the U.S. towards bankruptcy.

Meanwhile, globalization has had a counterintuitive impact on the West. In such a dynamically interconnected environment countries that embrace laissez faire economics seem to suffer from a loss of control while well-run autocracies prosper. The forces unleashed by this phenomenon have been unkind to pluralistic societies which value freedom and personal gain versus those that value solidarity, stability and communal welfare, like China.

China has flexed its muscle economically to become the best of the rest and is destined to surpass America. U.S. financial mismanagement has resulted in $14 trillion of debt – or 90% of GDP – and China owns $1.2 trillion of it. Economic vitality is critical because there seems to be a direct correlation between material primacy and ideological dominance, and despite America’s preeminent military status, its global influence has waned.

Point being, it would seem Western liberal democracy isn’t necessarily the alpha and omega or the “final form of human government.” The rest of the world doesn’t seem as willing to listen to our sermons on ideal governance, especially when it doesn’t fit their specific value systems and especially when the U.S. doesn’t have its own house in order.

Kupchan prescribes remedies focused on rebuilding the homeland, balancing commitments with means while restoring economic and political solvency. The U.S. needs to abandon its role as global Leviathan for it can no longer afford the resource drain and reputation stain. Surgical use of the military is paramount as opposed to occupation and nation-building. Humility, restraint and retrenchment are the watchwords that should carry the day. And, devolving responsibility to countries like India, Brazil and Turkey will have a positive twofold effect of freeing up resources while building strong alliances with these emerging powers.

Kupchan stresses that the U.S. will still be the strongest nation among equals and is best-positioned to lead the global turn. In the end, according to the author, the U.S. is left with two choices: (1) work together with these diverse regimes to define the new world order or (2) expect competitive anarchy. In short, if the inevitable seismic transition is not effectively managed, the U.S. risks finding itself not at the end of history – but on the wrong side of it.

Narendra Modi is one of the most loved and hated politicians of India. He is the Chief Minister (Equivalent of State Governor in the US) of Gujarat, touted as one of  the most industrialized states of India.  He is loved by those who prospered and became wealthy, and hated by those who cried out for help, but got none.

In the Gujarat Mayhem a decade ago, both the criminals and victims were ethnic Guajarati. A majority of them did not like the death and destruction of fellow Gujaratis. Nearly a thousand of them were killed and several thousand were displaced and still living in the refugee camps.
No decent Gujarati should be offended with the reporting on rampage, it is not about them; it is about the criminals among them, regardless of the religious label they wear. Religion does not permit one to murder others. It is an embarrassment and a dark part of their history.

During the communal riots in Jabalpur in the early sixties, both Muslims and Hindus were killed in the mayhem. I wish every father in India, teaches the following lesson to his kids, as my father taught me. He told us that the “individuals” are responsible for the bloodshed and not the religions; he was very clear. He said, you cannot blame the nebulous understanding of religion and expect justice. The individuals responsible for disturbing the peace should be punished under the law, and a resolution to the conflict must result by serving justice. He said you cannot annihilate, kill, hang or beat a religion, then why bark at it?  It is not the religion, it is the individual bad guys that are the problem.

Crime is always committed by the individuals, and each individual must be brought to justice to restore faith in the society.  When you believe that your rights will be protected by your government, you feel safe and secure and that is how you build cohesive societies.

It is disappointing to see the depletion of humanness among a few vocal fellow Indians. They have no empathy for the pain and anguish of families who were massacred in broad day light in Gujarat.  It is a shame that a few of them even justify it, and a few others believe that the victims deserved it.  Indeed, it is an assault on the sense of morality of all religions.

The long term well being of the individual and the society hinges on the morality of the people and not the wealth and economic prosperity. No nation has ever lasted on the basis of economic prosperity alone, it is the collective morality and adherence to the justice for all that defines the idea of a civilized nation.

This piece is written in Indian context; hence, a self introspection for the Indians and Indian Americans may be necessary with the following five questions.

1.      Am I communal (sectarian) minded person?
2.     Am I capable of seeing another Indian as Indian without the religious lens?
3.     Do I blame others and not jettison my own share of responsibility?
4.     Do I feel bad, and not speak for fear of offending friends?
5.     Do I have a moral chip in me?

No society attains long term prosperity while oppressing a minority amongst them.

A “few” Hindus have rejoiced the massacre of fellow Gujarati Muslims, shame on their humanity and shame on them to call themselves Hindus. A few Muslims find it difficult to reconcile the situation, shame on them for not listening to their own religion. God declares in Quraan, that the dearest among you, is the one who forgives. It is not easy to do that.  A few Muslims rightfully want nothing but punishment, I wish they rather seek justice.

We have a choice to correct the situation, to begin with, at least in our own hearts.

An appeal to Chief Minister Modi

Dear Mr. Narendra Modi,

You have a moral responsibility to the well being of every citizen of Gujarat, whether they personally elected you or not, you still represent them.

Your fellow Gujaratis were massacred under your guardianship, and I hope your humanness is alive to feel their pain and anguish.

Mr. Modi, you have many choices; one among them is repentance, the praischit, and I urge you to seriously consider it. It is the Michami Dukadam of your life, that is seeking forgiveness and forgiving others for any grudge you may harbor against others. Right now, you have a choice to start your spiritual and political life with a clean slate.

This means making good with the people who have suffered under your leadership; it will bring Mukti (salvation) to you. The other choice is to resign and show the strength of your character.
Your moral character in the only sustainable legacy you can leave behind, and not the wealth you create for a few. Gujarat has been around and will always be there with or without you, and I hope you are humble enough to see it.

You may consider working on earning genuine respect from every Gujarati, particularly the downtrodden living in the refugee camps. Uplift their lives. You will be uplifting a huge moral burden of fellow Guajarati and fellow Indians. Your honesty and integrity will be transparent in how you handle the situation.

As a leader of one of the industrially advanced states, you have a duty to establish Gujarat as a state that respects law, where justice will be served to every Gujarati, whether they live in a Jhompdi (Huts) or the castle. Every Indian should feel safe, as the law would take care of the wrong doers. You need to express your courage to speak up and follow dharma, the right path.
You can begin by mustering the courage to apologize to the citizens of Gujarat and restore their lives and bring justice to them.  It will bring peace to every Gujarati and every Indian. It takes a man to do it, and I hope you are man enough to do it and turn things around for the 16000 men and women living in refugee camps.  Do them good, restore their life and earn their goodwill. Once they see the results of restoration of a genuine man, they will forgive you and support you and, they will stand up for you, if you stand up for them.

I am not sure if you are aspiring to run the national ship, or the ones who benefit from it want to prop you up, either way, you have the responsibility to fellow Gujaratis.

Your chamchas may not care if you did not get the visa to the United States, but you may want to remove the ugly stain from your character. The Hindus and Muslims are willing to help you, provided you are willing to do the praischit. The choice is yours.

WHEN BERSIH 3.0 supporters took to the streets on April 28, the number of Singaporeans paying attention was not insignificant. Among the most common threads of discussion was: “Will Singaporeans ever have the same freedom?”

Meanwhile, Singapore’s authorities behaved true to form, forbidding Malaysians living in Singapore from organising a solidarity BERSIH rally.Their caution probably had less to do with public safety than with the possibility that it could engender similar feelings among its people.

Singapore has been keeping a close eye on political happenings in Malaysiasince the 2008 general election here. Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s government has good reason to be worried, as his country’s political awakening has been influenced by events occurring here.

Mohamed Morsi, the Egyptian president-elect, took a symbolic oath of office during a rousing speech in Cairo, promising dignity and social justice to a crowd of tens of thousands gathered in Tahrir Square.…Read More →PEOPLE POWER TO NAJIB “NO INSTITUTION IS ABOVE THE PEOPLE” IF YOU DONT CALL THE ELECTION WILL STILL TAKE OVER

Najib was put into the False Democracy category, together with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika, Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi and Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen.
The ‘ex-members’ of the club are former Yugoslavia president Slobodan Milosevic and former Egypt president Hosni Mubarak.

An award-winning journalist Mark Mackinnon, currently Beijing bureau chief of The Globe and Mail has interviewed some of the world’s most controversial and prominent political leaders wrote that these leaders “hold elections but have no intention of giving up power” and their “serious political rivals are jailed and their parties are outlawed on legal technicalities”. HERE
An officer with the Malaysian Foreign Affairs Ministry wrote a letter to the newspaper in response to the article, which was published today. Does it look like Najib has given up on image-building APCO and has to now rely on an FOC source. In the letter, Information and Public Diplomacy Department undersecretary Ahmad Rozian Abdul Ghani furnishes a list of reforms initiated by Najib in just three years, which he described as “an impressive track record by anyone’s standards”. (IMPRESSIVE example of DOUBLE STANDARDS!) Parenthesis mine.
These are the abolition of Internal Security Act, ending of a 60-year state of emergency; (45 ARE STILL DETAINED, TORTURED AND 9 ARE CURRENTLY ON HUNGER STRIKE IN KAMUNTING); measures to increase media freedom (WITH THE NEW EVIDENCE ACT?); amendment to the Universities and University Colleges Act (YET ARREST A UNDERGRAD FOR WEARING A YELLOW BERSIH TSHIRT?); the enactment of the Peaceful Assembly Act (909 TEAR-SMOKE SHELLS WERE FIRED WITH TEAR GAS LAUNCHERS AND 58 TEAR-SMOKE GRENADES WHICH ARE HAND THROWN WERE USED AGAINST BERSIH3.0 PARTICIPANTS – THREE TIMES MORE THAN USED AT BERSIH2.0); announcement to review the Sedition Act, repeal of the Banishment Act and the Restricted Residences Act, as well as the implementation of electoral reforms (BY AN UMNO INFESTED ELECTION COMMISSION?).
Ahmad Rozian also dismissed the claim that Najib holds elections but has no intention of giving up power ( YAH, HE WAS JOKING ABOUT CRUSHED BODIES TO DEFEND PUTRAJAYA).
“Next time round, Malaysians will again be free to choose who they want to lead their country – and while the prime minister takes nothing for granted, he hopes he will be given a mandate to continue Malaysia’s transformation,” the letter states.(SWEET DREAMS AHMAD ROZIAN….)

As a disconcerted but currently concerned citizen I am recommending this book by blogger-buddydonplaypuks : “TIGER ISLE – A Government of Thieves.” as compulsory reading for the Barisan Nasional members and its parasites in general and in particular to Rais Yatim and the Information and Public Diplomacy Department of the heavily-pregnant PM Department HERE
Singapore’s wake-up call came during its May elections last year. The ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) learned not to take voters for granted when it had to contest 84 out of 87 seats, unheard of in Singapore’s electoral history.

Traditionally, PAP has always come to power on nomination day, but in the elections last year, it faced a stiff fight from Opposition parties that fielded young, well-educated and highly-qualified candidates. Although PAP eventually won 81 seats, Lee admitted that it was time for the party to do some soul-searching, as younger Singaporeans were showing a marked shift away from PAP’s rigid rule.

Malaysia’s own political “black swan” — an unexpected event that has a major impact — was far more dramatic, with a huge swing towards the opposition in the 2008 general election. Fuelled by an electorate that is becoming increasingly aware of its democratic rights and an active online media, the political discourse in Malaysia has become louder and more strident in the last four years.

Opposition parties are behaving less like the underdog and more like lawmakers. At the same time, the BN government, like PAP, has come to realise that business-as-usual is not going to work any more.

Singapore is watching how the BN government is handling a completely new political landscape. Not only does the ruling coalition now have to work with the Opposition, but it has to transform itself to appeal to a voter base that has different values from generations before. Among the reforms instituted by our prime minister in a bid to transform the country, the repeal of the Internal Security Act, was most closely-watched by Singapore.

The abolition of the ISA, seen as a victory for civil liberties in Malaysia, clearly struck fear in the Singapore government, which immediately issued a statement to distance its ISA from that of Malaysia’s.

“The ISA in Singapore has evolved and is now different from that in Malaysia. The ISA continues to be relevant and crucial as a measure of last resort for the preservation of our national security,” stated excerpts from the press release by the Home Affairs Ministry.

The Singapore government has always been perceived as using censorship and intimidation to maintain tight control on its people, who live with the unspoken knowledge that dissent can bring unpleasant reprisals.

Although the repeal of Malaysia’s ISA does not directly affect Singapore, it is the symbolism that will hurt Singapore the most.

As the race towards Malaysia’s 13th general election heats up, Singapore is ever vigilant in observing our developments, particularly in Johor, where DAP is working hard to break BN’s stronghold.

DAP’s efforts in Johor are actually doing a disservice to the PAP government, as many Singaporeans nearby get caught up in the anti-establishment sentiment and start asking for more freedom in their own country.

It is ironic that DAP and PAP now represent opposing sides of the divide, as DAP was originally the Malaysian branch of PAP before Singapore left Malaysia in 1965.

In fact, it leads one to wonder: if DAP ever has the opportunity to be in the Federal Government, will it start to behave like PAP? This is a question DAP supporters might want to ask themselves