This is what the prime minister said when he met with the family of Beng Hock: “I have heard the grievances and several requests from the family. I have been closely following this case for a long time and deeply understand the sorrow and suffering of the family who have long been fighting for justice for the deceased.

“I affirm the government’s position that it agrees for the police to reopen the investigation into the death of the late Beng Hock.”

You have to wonder, why the police had trouble finding witnesses when the key question posed by the Court of Appeal verdict and articulated by Teoh Beng Hock Association for Democratic Advancement (TBH-ADA) chairperson Ng Yap Hwa was, “They want the police to shift their attention to the MACC officers who were present at the Selangor office on the night Beng Hock died, as these individuals are the most suspicious.”

This is not a high-tech case. Indeed, this is not even a complicated case. Successive governments have created this narrative that any investigation into the death of Beng Hock is a complex, arduous process.

In fact, why was the state security apparatus even harassing Beng Hock’s family about his state of mind when the court had already ruled that the death was caused by a person or persons unknown?

Indeed, if the police followed the ruling, all they would have to do is investigate those individuals who were there the night Beng Hock was murdered. But here is the thing. Politicians are hoping that the passage of time dulls the feelings of outrage. They want the rakyat to forget or, worse, believe that this is a communal issue.

Lee Lan lamented that we seem to be trapped in a BN-era rule and said, “The same MACC remains unaccountable. The same police force refuses to investigate the MACC. The same opaque conclusions are drawn, and the same murderers walk free.”

This, of course, is an indictment of this unity government, the brief Harapan regime, the brief Perikatan Nasional regime, but more importantly, the same political players who continue to enable the people who are responsible for Beng Hock’s death.

Death of a DAP comrade

TBH-ADA said it “believes that DAP leaders should not hide behind the excuse of cabinet collective responsibility without taking action”.

Two minor DAP MPs have made noise, but the big guns in the party are silent on the death of their comrade. Former party secretary-general Lim Guan Eng, who used Beng Hock’s death as a political talking point for years, is too busy squabbling with the current chief minister of Penang. Meanwhile, the DAP’s big cheese would most probably remind everyone that cool heads prevail or some such nonsense.

And this is the most shocking part. All those MPs who in the past made use of the death of Beng Hock have not said a word. Can you imagine the message this sends to cretins like Umno Youth chief Dr Akmal Saleh and the rabid, far-right, theocratic state-in-waiting?

In fact, they would say, unlike them, the DAP does not even care about the death of their comrade, much less someone from their community. Online trolls rejoice in the fact that the non-Malays will continue supporting DAP even though their political leaders do nothing.

Gerakan is on point when it reminds everyone that DAP used this issue for years, but they are part of a virulent Malay uber alles coalition, which, in terms of outcome, amounts to the same as this coalition government.

But what is shocking and unnerving is when a sister of a slain citizen said, “Under Anwar’s ‘Madani Malaysia’ slogan, will the government stand with the officials who killed a civilian, or with the victim’s family seeking truth and justice? The people are watching closely.”

But are the people watching closely? It certainly does not seem that way. Here is a family who believes that officials within the government murdered their son, and this was confirmed by the courts. They commiserate with the prime minister of this country, and what they get is no further action.

Imagine if this were your brother, father, or loved one. Could you move on?

Of course this is about accountability and it is a two way street. We cannot really blame political parties for not holding the state accountable because we the rakyat do not hold political parties accountable.

And this is how they get away with murder.

Perhaps if Rafizi had support, we would not have all these opportunists infecting the party. Honestly, all those reformasi stalwarts who were claiming that Anwar had changed were correct, but unfortunately, they were shouted down.

Rafizi said, “Over the years, Anwar has been given the power as the party president to allow any new party member to contest in an election despite not meeting the one-year minimum requirement, and Rafizi has publicly said he wants to end this power.

The question is, how much sway do these opportunists have over the party and over the prime minister?

What is PKR fighting for?

What is PKR really fighting for? PKR is now in the position to offer the bounties of government to the flotsam and jetsam of the Malay political establishment. People are essentially fighting over positions in a moribund political party, which may very well be wiped out in the next general election.

Sure, they may cling on to power in various states, but the reality is that if by now PKR has not got a grip on what it is and what it hopes to achieve, this may very well be the death knell of the party.

And haven’t we all heard this before? Anwar and his second-in-command sniping behind the scenes before it becomes public?

PKR supporters and their proxies in the media have to take sides, while the situation in the country gets worse.

This, in turn, creates the optics that, as the “Malay” vote-getter in Harapan, PKR is failing miserably, which then allows detractors to wallow in the kind of racism, especially on social media, which feeds into the narratives of the Malay uber alles parties.

Maybe Rafizi has defined what PKR is or has become, three years ago when he said this - “This whole idea that you bring someone to the top that he becomes a messiah, we have seen this for decades, and that is the reason we are in trouble now.”

By his speeches, Rafizi has defined this fight as one between himself and Anwar, with Nurul Izzah as a proxy for the latter. It remains to be seen even if Rafizi wins, what kind of PKR he would be leading.

He wondered why it took so many years for these “red flags” to be detected. “These charges are frivolous,” he said.

Charles Santiago, a loyal DAP soldier, reminded the peanut gallery, “The allegations levelled against Ramasamy were nothing new and had been brought to MACC’s attention previously.”

This should make any rational Malaysian wonder how much DAP is complicit in this alleged political persecution. Ramasamy, as reported in the press, pointed out that PHEB’s decisions were made collectively by the board. “Every payment had the board’s approval. I’m not the only signatory,” he said.

All of this is made worse by the fact that MACC is probably one of the most untrusted public institutions in this country. Even PKR vice-president Nurul Izzah Anwar, daughter of the current prime minister and a step away from power, said the contract extension of MACC head honcho Azam Baki was unwelcome.

“The party (PKR) needs to stand for reforms - and we require the support of the rakyat and our members to do this. We ask brave and courageous civil servants and personalities to rise to the occasion,” she said.

There is really no genuine reason to believe that either Nurul Izzah or this government wants to reform the MACC. It has come to a point where nobody is even pretending anymore. This is all about who holds on to power, and the non-Malays are merely the vote bank of a coalition which knows it is imploding.

Going after Ramasamy merely gives him a louder platform and the relevancy he needs to keep stoking agitations in the Indian, but more importantly, the non-Malay community. However, I doubt that the non-Malay community, which is the base of Harapan, is going to abandon the coalition.

Ramasamy, meanwhile, is taking this opportunity to grab the spotlight on what he considers a reckoning of the system he served for decades, but as an opportunity to gather more to his banner.

Speaking to reporters after his first day in court, he said, “Charging me (in court) is actually a blessing because I think Urimai is going to be more popular.”

This remains to be seen.

Former MACC chief Dzulkifli Ahmad claimed publicly that - "The sequence of events in Ling's case, if accurate, calls into question the procedural integrity and legality of the investigation process.”

Now, forget about what we know of the former MACC chief but focus on what he said about the procedure and legality of the MACC on what it did in this case.

Only in the Madani era would the cabinet not be briefed on the disappearance of a woman being investigated by the MACC, who was taken on her way to the MACC.

Indeed, as former deputy law minister Hanipa Maidin wrote – “The fact also demonstrates that just two days before the disappearance, Ling had filed a judicial review application in the High Court of Malaya challenging the actions of the graft busters.”

In any functional democracy, when the lawyers of a kidnapped person accuse the state security apparatus of malfeasance, political operatives would be exploiting the issues and demanding that the relevant agencies be investigated.

The victims’ families would be surrounded by a gaggle of political operatives hoping the spotlight not only shines on them, but also that any investigation into government institutions not only demonstrates the integrity of the institutions but the political process as well.

What is happening here? Absolutely nothing. PSM had to wonder why this kidnapping only saw the light of day after a month and the family’s lawyers rightly pointed out that they were hoping that the state security apparatus would inform them of any developments or that they did not want to impede the investigation in any way.

Tragically, because of the way she was kidnapped, this may have given more time to the abductors.

Already, the narrative of “rogue cops” is being tested. Remember in the cases of Koh and Amri Che Mat, Zamri Yahya, a member of the Home Ministry's Special Task Force (STF) claimed (in his personal opinion, of course) - “(The STF) Found that the incident behind Amri and Koh may have been caused by the actions directly or indirectly of irresponsible rogue police officers who acted on their own individually or in a group

“They acted on their own accord, together with outside religious groups. However, this is only my view.”

Spinning narratives

Kuala Lumpur police chief Rusdi Isa said that new leads were discovered by the police but here is the thing, this press conference was only being held because this news is public.

What were the police doing for a whole month? Again, all these narratives are being spun. That there were eight kidnappers, that only two wore police vests and that there were five cars etc.

Mind you, the police have not shown the public any evidence to support these statements because they claim they do not want to jeopardise their investigations.

If you look at press conferences in other functional democracies, they want the public to know as much as possible without jeopardising the investigations.

In a case where the state security apparatus' credibility is in question, the police forces in functional democracies are even more transparent.

Keep in mind Rusdi even entertained the idea that the victim could have staged the kidnapping. Remember in Koh’s case, how the state security apparatus attempted to imply that Koh had links to underworld crime elements?

We can easily dismiss that these were rogue cops working on their own in Ling’s disappearance because what would have been their purpose for kidnapping her?

Operatives from the state security apparatus do not simply go around kidnapping citizens, and there are always reasons, either legal or extrajudicial, for their actions.

No ransom demand

Indeed, the family has received no ransom demands. No proof of life. And this is how it starts. It started like this with the Koh’s case. It started like this with the Amri’s case.

It started like this with Ruth Sipue’s case. In all these cases, the state security apparatus has come under scrutiny and decried that they are being demonised.

Imagine if the family had gone public immediately instead of trusting institutions meant to protect and serve them?

You have to ask yourself if criminals are going around masquerading as cops, and this is not the first time this has happened, why is the state so blasé about it?

Why is the state not hunting down these perpetrators? They would view these people as a threat to national security. Why doesn’t the state view them as a threat to national security?

A threat to national security is something that cannot be controlled, right?

So, was it a coincidence that a week later, intense lobbying started for Nurul Izzah to vie for the deputy president’s post in PKR?

PKR vice-president Shamsul Iskandar Akin, who is also PKR Hang Tuah Jaya chief, and other Malacca division chiefs openly declared their support for Nurul Izzah to challenge Rafizi.

Shamsul hailed his boss’ daughter as someone who is “capable of advancing reformist values, driving change, and translating the people’s aspirations more effectively”.

Really? Didn't her electorate reject her in Permatang Pauh? What are her notable achievements besides spearheading the movement to free her father from prison?

What has she done to advance women’s causes? What has she done to stimulate change? What has she done to ban child marriages or polygamy, or urge the education minister to introduce sex education in schools, or to help single mothers who have been abandoned by their polygamous former husbands?

With Nurul Izzah gaining increasing support for the deputy presidency, Communications Minister Fahmi Fadzil denied the charge of nepotism.

He, like others in PKR, was confident of her capabilities, her integrity as a future leader of PKR, and her “high diplomacy to unite party members”.

The PKR Women deputy chief, Faizah Ariffin, voiced support for Nurul Izzah because “no woman has occupied the position before”. Is that it?

Pasar Gudang MP Hasan Abdul Karim claimed that he opposed nepotism, but said that Nurul Izzah was an ideal candidate for the post as she has been involved in PKR’s struggle since she was 18. Seriously?

Slippery slope of nepotism

None of these people appear to listen to the rakyat, who understand that with nepotism, the seeds of mistrust will be sown among the rakyat.

Nepotism goes against democratic principles and diminishes equal opportunities. Nepotism discourages highly qualified and more experienced contenders from participating.

Posts that are filled with people with blood ties instead of merit will eventually lead to inefficiency, potential conflict of interest, possible abuse of power, probable misuse of funds, and discrimination.

We’ve seen firsthand with Malaysian political dynasties that family members occupy important positions, and family businesses (and cronies) often “win” lucrative contracts.

Anwar has been a huge disappointment for Malaysians who supported change. PKR is no longer seen as a party which champions justice and equal rights. PKR behaves more like Parti Keluarga Rakyat. Mother, father, daughter.

The weakest link in the Madani administration is PKR, with its never-ending internal conflicts, personality clashes, power struggles, and the sidelining of potential young leaders.

Malaysians are fed up with playing family charades.

Perhaps, Nurul Izzah is being groomed to be the prime minister. Her qualification? Being Anwar's daughter.

Perhaps Rafizi should challenge Anwar for the top post.

Our beloved “Bapa Kemerdekaan”, Tunku Abdul Rahman, proclaimed in 1957: “This is a country for all of us… not just for one race.” The granting of citizenship to non-Malays was part of a historic inter-ethnic bargain, built upon mutual respect, shared sacrifice, and national unity – not ethnic supremacy.

To now claim that only Malays “own” Peninsular Malaysia is to betray the Merdeka spirit, distort our Constitution, and ignore the contributions and sacrifices of generations of non-Malay citizens. Malaya was established as a multi-ethnic nation in which all citizens have an equal stake and shared sense of belonging. That is the true soul of our independence – and the path we must continue to defend.

The argument that Malays are the sole indigenous people of the peninsula – and thus the exclusive inheritors of the land – is historically problematic. The term ‘Malay’ is not an ancient ethnic identity but a socio-political construct that evolved over centuries. It broadly refers to Muslim communities in the Malay Archipelago who share common linguistic, cultural, and religious traits, particularly after the spread of Islam.

Moreover, the demographic composition of Peninsular Malaysia has always been diverse. Even during the Malacca Sultanate in the 15th century, the region was a melting pot of Orang Asli, Arab merchants, Indian-Muslim traders, Chinese settlers, and migrants from across the Nusantara. The presence and contributions of these groups are part of the region’s long and inclusive history.

It is also an undeniable historical fact that the earliest inhabitants of Peninsular Malaysia are the Orang Asli, a truth candidly acknowledged by Dato’ Abdul Rahman, then Secretary to Sultan Abu Bakar of Johor: “The aborigines were the possessors of the soil before we [the Malays] came to the peninsula.”

The 1931 Census Report similarly states: “The Malays are, in fact, merely immigrants of generally longer standing than the other migrant races represented in the peninsula…”

Deep roots

Moreover, the 1947 Census revealed that approximately 26 percent of Malays in Peninsular Malaysia were immigrants from what is today Indonesia. By contrast, in that same year, 63.5 percent of the Chinese and 51.6 percent of the Indians in Peninsular Malaysia were local-born – born and raised on this land they now call home.

These facts are not meant to deny anyone’s identity or heritage but to remind us of our shared history – one that is far more intertwined than divisive narratives suggest.

Contrary to the misconception that non-Malays are recent arrivals, several non-Malay communities have roots in the peninsula dating back centuries. Among them are the Baba-Nyonya (Peranakan Chinese), Malacca Chettis, and Portuguese Eurasians – distinctive communities whose integration into local society challenges any narrative of exclusivity.

The Baba-Nyonya, for instance, trace their origins to the 15th century, when Chinese traders settled in Malacca and married local Malay, Javanese, Batak or Balinese women. Over time, they developed a rich hybrid culture, blending Chinese and Malay traditions. They spoke Malay at home, practised Malay customs, and were deeply loyal to their homeland. Many played key roles in colonial administration and local commerce.

During both the Dutch and British colonial periods, the Peranakan Chinese were recognized as indigenous inhabitants. This status was reflected in the granting of land deeds similar to those awarded to the Malays – a historical precedent that underscores their longstanding presence and integration.

Likewise, the Malacca Chettis descended from South Indian traders who settled in the region during the same period. Through intermarriage and assimilation, they adopted many aspects of Malay culture while maintaining their Hindu faith and Tamil linguistic roots. Their contributions to local trade, religious life, and cultural heritage span over 500 years.

The Portuguese Eurasians, another long-standing community, emerged from intermarriages following the Portuguese conquest of Malacca in 1511. Speaking Kristang, a Portuguese-based creole, and practising Roman Catholicism, this community has preserved its identity while contributing significantly to the socio-economic life of the region.

These communities, along with others such as the Tamils, Malayalees, Telugus, Gujaratis, and Sikhs, are deeply rooted in Malaysian soil. Many settled here long before large numbers of Malays themselves migrated to the peninsula. Historical records reveal that hundreds of thousands of Malays from Sumatra, Java, and Sulawesi migrated to Peninsular Malaysia only in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, spurred by colonial labour demand and economic opportunity.

For instance, Minangkabau settlers formed significant populations in Negeri Sembilan, while Javanese migrants settled in Johor and Selangor. Yet these migrants were absorbed into the Malay identity due to their shared religion and language. It is thus inconsistent – and unjust – to claim indigeneity as the basis for exclusive ownership when many Malays themselves are descendants of relatively recent immigrants.

Non-Malays have not only resided in Malaya for generations but have also played an indispensable role in building the country. Economically, the Chinese community transformed Malaya into a global hub of tin mining and commerce. Entrepreneurs, bankers, and small traders helped create a thriving business ecosystem.

The Indian community, brought in under British rule, toiled in rubber plantations, built railways and roads, and served in key roles within the colonial civil service. Indian professionals – teachers, doctors, engineers – were essential to public infrastructure and education. The contributions of these communities were not peripheral; they were foundational to the economic success of the country.

As noted by Kernial Singh Sandhu, a renowned academician, Chinese and Indian capital, enterprise and labour contributed significantly towards the creation of modern Peninsular Malaysia. In a similar vein, Charles Vlieland, who compiled the 1931 Census Report, highlighted the fact that the “phenomenal development” of Peninsular Malaysia has been due largely to the “industry, enterprise, and commercial genius” of the Chinese.

Urban centres such as Kuala Lumpur, Ipoh, George Town, and Seremban flourished through the combined effort of all ethnic groups. The tin boom of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, driven largely by Chinese enterprise and labour, helped turn Ipoh into the “City of Millionaires”. Kuala Lumpur’s emergence as the capital was underpinned by the labour of Indian and Chinese workers, who built its railways, drainage systems, and buildings.

Moreover, non-Malay philanthropists and leaders established schools, temples, churches, hospitals, and social institutions that served both their own communities and the nation at large. Institutions like Chung Ling High School, the Vivekananda Ashrama, and St. John’s Institution exemplify the civic spirit of non-Malay Malayans.

Strength in unity

These contributions are not limited to economic development. Non-Malays also played crucial roles in securing Malaya’s independence. The multi-ethnic Alliance Party – comprising Umno, MCA, and MIC – negotiated independence on the basis of interethnic cooperation and mutual respect.

Tunku Abdul Rahman, Malaya’s first Prime Minister, repeatedly stressed that independence was achieved through the unity and partnership of all races. He envisioned a Malaya for all Malayans – not an exclusive homeland for any single ethnic group.

To assert that Peninsular Malaysia belongs exclusively to the Malays is to erase this shared legacy and marginalise generations of loyal citizens. It is a dangerous narrative that fractures our unity, undermines social cohesion, and betrays the inclusive vision on which our nation was founded.

Such rhetoric also damages our nation’s global image. In a world that prizes inclusivity, pluralism, and human rights, the idea of a mono-ethnic nation is outdated and contrary to democratic values. It tarnishes our reputation as a progressive, harmonious society.

To conclude, the strength of our nation lies not in the dominance of one race, but in the unity of all its people. Let us rise above toxic rhetoric and embrace our diversity as a source of strength. Let us think and act as fellow citizens, committed to building a truly united, just, and progressive nation – for all.

"Looking at Umno, when there were big issues which we could not address, we would talk about DAP, Chinese chauvinism and how Lim becoming prime minister would destroy Malaysia, that the Malays would disappear, and the mosques could no longer air the azan.

"I admit that I, too, have said such things in front of a 100 percent Malay audience. Thinking back, I feel guilty and a sense of regret,” he admitted in 2018.

PAS is no better. In 2013, according to Hadi, Pakatan Rakyat states and political leaders were free from corruption. He said this during the opening of a Chinese New Year festival in Kedah.

So basically, when PAS was with DAP, they managed to run states with zero corrupt leaders, and it was Umno who was the big bad wolf.

Having been injected into the mainstream of Malaysian politics on the wings of DAP, they now continue racial and religious narratives that they know are a lie, but which are perfectly acceptable to the kind of religion they preach.

DAP is merely dispensing the kool aid, with its Malaysian Malaysia agenda.

It’s gaslighting the base into thinking that the secular/egalitarian agenda is on the table, when the reality is that coalitions that DAP have been involved in have strengthened the theocratic apparatus of this country.

Far from being a moderating or civilising force for religious extremism, which is what secularism is, DAP has colluded with and enabled various Malay power brokers in an attempt to sustain power.

‘Malaysia is all of us’

I talked about Lim’s rather misguided attempt to find something good about Islamisation. I much prefer his nuanced take on the debate on whether Malaysia is an Islamic or secular state, which demonstrates that Lim, at his best, is a politician with a fearsome intellect.

In a comment piece, Lim wrote: “Malaysia cannot claim that it is a secular nation simply because there are clear indications of religion playing a pivotal role in the governance of the country, such as Islamic schools, Islamic courts and Islamic finance.

“However, Malaysia can neither claim to be Islamic because the spirit and letter of the Federal Constitution go against several core tenets of the Islamic belief system, chief of it is the supremacy of the Constitution and not the Quran.

“Is Malaysia secular or Islamic? Malaysia is neither. Malaysia is both. Malaysia is all of us.”

Isn’t that something?

“Malaysia is all of us” is not something DAP has pursued. Instead, its leaders and cadres have gaslighted urban polities into believing that appeasement will secure non-Malays a place under the Malaysian sun.

Take this flag fiasco. Umno Veterans’ Club secretary Mustapha Yaakub said Tajuddin’s statement was unpatriotic and talked about the king’s displeasure.

Really? PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang has openly declared that he will defy the Terengganu sultan when it comes to political sermons in mosques. The PAS ulama wing ignored the Selangor sultan when it came to the Bon Odori festival. Former prime minister and former Umno kingpin Dr Mahathir Mohamad has had run-ins with the royalty and even curtailed their power.

So, when it comes to royalty and their dikats, are these groups and personalities unpatriotic? Isn’t it shameful to profess an ideal and not have any fidelity to it, as the Umno Veterans’ Club demonstrates? But you see, these people have no shame.

A land that rewards the shameless

Lawyers for Liberty director Zaid Malek, when commenting on the temple issue, noted that most of the hostility is coming from “one ethnic group”, calling it a disturbing and concerning trend. And you have to ask yourself, are these people ashamed of their actions? No, they are not. They are coddled by the state, enabled by their religion, and supported by the political class.

They will claim there is a religion of peace, and in the words of a Perkaksa goon, “Today, Malaysians - especially Malays - have been too tolerant with various issues such as KK Mart, and have now reached a tipping point when the national flag has been desecrated by those who purposely want to enrage the Malays. How can Malays be called ‘vindictive’ for wanting to defend the nation’s dignity?”

Now, a person with any sense of decency or morality reading that statement would feel ashamed to have anything to do with these kinds of people and ideology. They would feel that such behaviour goes against national dogma like the Rukun Negara. And the irony is that these people would be considered unpatriotic for feeling ashamed of such behaviour that truly warrants shame.

A soldier from a foreign land long ago told me, you can tell a lot about a people by what they find shameful about their government. I replied that it says even more about what they support in their government.

“There were many instances when words like ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ (were uttered and it) is ridiculous. So I want them to tell me where did I go wrong in not supporting the revamping of the BTN syllabus. Tell me where I went wrong?

Remember in 2018 when the G25 got into trouble because they suggested that Islamic Development Department (Jakim) and Institute of Islamic Understanding Malaysia (Ikim) were unconstitutional? As reported in the press, “As we are not sure what they are doing, but maligning other Muslims as apostates and liberals.”

Real patriotism

Forget about UiTM’s KKK drag show. Let us talk about the Jalur Gemilang. I despise all this faux reverence for the national flag from the political class, and of course, thoroughly spooked non-Malays on social media platforms.

I spent a good part of my life serving this country. The men and women I served with came mostly from underprivileged backgrounds.

Let me tell you something. Most of them did not know the significance of the colours or symbols on the national flag. Some of them did not even know the words to the national anthem. What they did learn was genuine patriotism.

They learnt that patriotism meant that we were all in the same boat together because we all bleed red. They learnt that loving your country meant loving the person beside you, regardless of race or religion.

That is patriotism, not something these politicians and pencil-pushers tell us we should feel aggrieved about the desecration of the national flag. But that is part of the social contract.

Minorities have to genuflect because we are apparently not patriotic enough. Mistakes are weaponised. Apologies are never enough, and there should always be retribution. But when we are maligned, insulted, demeaned, and vilified, we should - what did MIC deputy president M Saravanan beg us to do? - just ignore it.

You know what ketuanism (supremacy) really does and which is reflected in the action of these UiTM students and the mainstream political class? It encourages its adherents to see the mote in another’s eyes but ignore the beam in theirs.

Umno is of course hoping that the non-Malay community will view PAS as the bigger threat even though both are the same kind of threat.

Umno Youth leader Dr Akmal Saleh is as virulent or more so than most PAS leaders and has demonstrated that he thinks the non-Malay coalition partners in the unity government should be seen but not heard.

And keep in mind that Malays who do reject Umno, are in fact also rejecting Madani so there is a protest vote that could happen, just not the kind that would strengthen the crumbling democratic infrastructures of this country.

So not only is the question can PSM attract the disaffected non-Malay vote but can it peel off Malay votes from those people dissatisfied with what mainstream politics is offering?

This is a steep hill. Non-Malay participation in elections is traditionally low and PSM has never been the choice of the non-Malay supposedly progressive community.

People often talk of how this country is going down the theocratic and kleptocratic rabbit hole.

But there have always been options to slow or stall this dissent. They were just never considered for tribal reasons.

PSM may very well lose this election. However, what Bawani and PSM are demonstrating and will continue to demonstrate is true grit.

Developers with powerful political friends appear to be able to purchase prime land with ease, often under cover of secrecy.

When a scandal erupts, these politicians often use the religious factor, Islam, to seize ownership of the land on which these buildings are sited.

What ‘strength’?

At the groundbreaking ceremony of Masjid Madani, Anwar said that he wanted to "showcase Islam’s strength".

Is this "strength" connected to the rising fundamentalism in Malaysia? An increasingly conservative Muslim society does not bode well for a multi-cultural Malaysia.

The following examples are probably "small" issues for Anwar. He may recall that last Ramadhan, an old Malay man slapped a non-Malay for eating in a shopping mall.

Was the mental and physical assault of the non-Muslim, this Malay's version of "showcasing Islam's strength"?

On April 8, we learnt that the state government of Perlis, the Perlis Islamic Religious and Malay Customs Council, the State Registrar of Converts and the mufti Asri Zainul Abidin were denied their chance to exercise their religious might over the rights of the individual, the single mother Loh Swee Hong.

Loh's three children, all Hindus, were unlawfully converted by her former abusive husband. The Perlis authorities demanded Loh bring the children up as Muslims. Which politician dared show support for Loh?

Losing sight of important matters

Will our MPs initiate a debate in Parliament about banning child marriages? Some Muslims consider it their religious right to marry an underage girl, just like their religious right to have four wives.

When Bernama reported a rise in incest and statutory rape cases in Kelantan, the most conservative state, only Bentong MP Young Syefura Othman expressed disgust.

The other MPs, including the prime minister, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Islamic Affairs) Naim Mokhtar, and PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang said nothing.

Large-scale corruption, slapping, hate speech, destroying/relocating temples, child marriages, incest, underage sex, and sexual abuse of tahfiz pupils and children in Global Ikhwan Services and Business Holdings (GISBH) are all perpetrated by Malays.

Despite the increased religious education, their moral values appear to have diminished.

No Malay MP has shown the courage to undo the decades-long religious brainwashing at home, in school and in the mosque.

So, would solving these "small issues” interest the PM?

The emotional justifications for these kinds of acts using social media as an alternate reality to justify socially destructive behaviour have been perfected by US President Donald Trump supporters here in Malaysia and in the US.

This kind of groupthink is the ultimate endgame for fascist governments/political parties.

As Andrew Sewer wrote in his percipient, Atlantic article: “…Trump supporters, whose community is built by rejoicing in the anguish of those they see as unlike them, who have found in their shared cruelty an answer to the loneliness and atomisation of modern life.”

While Madani claims it wants social cohesion, the ultimate goal or “victory” as the prime minister so casually announced, is a polity not only beholden to the state but which thinks it is powerful in its own right. They are not.

The Russians have a perfect term to describe such people, “useful idiots”.

Arrogant PMX

Whilst we are distracted by the turf wars over this temple, the irregularities about Jakel's purchase of the land will probably be swept under the carpet.

Anwar then had the cheek to urge Malaysians to live in harmony. After all the angst, anger and breakdown in communication of the previous weeks, the prime minister failed to appreciate that his presence at the mosque's groundbreaking ceremony on March 27 was highly provocative.

Displaying his usual arrogance, Anwar then claimed “victory”, all in the name of Islam and a two-tiered system of justice.

Here is another thing about patriotism. It is about people and not allegiances to totems. And in this country, mired in the toxic politics of race and religion, can the Education Ministry define patriotism that would make sense to children who are living in a polarised world?

Here is a great example of how patriotism is about people. In fact, this letter is a blueprint as to what defines patriotism and how the state has trampled on egalitarian sentiments that used to define patriotism in the military and, yes, in this country.

Close to a decade ago, Persatuan Patriot Kebangsaan (PPK), under the aegis of Arshad Raji released a statement on the enrolment of non-Malays in the military.

Here are five important parts:

(1) For such fighting men of valour to function, there has to be genuine love and care between the commanders and personnel. Everyone has to feel needed and important. The accomplishment of the mission is the ultimatum.

(2) The government’s affirmative policies of the 1980s had seeped into the military administration. Strange sayings like “orang kita” (our people) have crept into the minds of military commanders. Slowly and surely, the commanders saw some of those under their command as half-brothers or stepsons, unlike the “all are equal” mindset of previous years.

(3) Yearning for a merit-based promotion system, the non-Malays would not mind if their Malay subordinates were promoted if they were really deserving. Perceived as incapable by many non-Malay officers, there had been a haphazard promotion of officers very much undeserving of their roles and ranks.

(4) Needless to say, a mediocre officer given promotion and command would breed mediocrity and substandard results. Further, numerous deserving Malay officers of merit were also adversely affected. Malay officers who were promoted based on their merits earned an endearment of loyalty and respect from the non-Malays.

(5) Starting from the late 1980s, the military had become increasingly religious-centric, and non-Malays felt ever more alienated. The officers’ mess life and the lives of soldiers became very much dictated by religious sensitivity. This eventually affected esprit de corps and comradeship negatively in multi-racial military units.

So what can we learn from this letter? Patriotism is about one’s empathy for his or her brethren regardless of race and religion. Equality encourages such sentiments. Politics, race, and religion nullify such sentiments and create a toxic environment.

Does anyone really think that a flag on a badge is going to create a sense of simpatico amongst kids?

Well, as the prime minister says, it is free, so just wear it. That is how much Madani thinks the Jalur Gemilang is worth.