This is a very good article on multiculturalism. At first I thought…why is this guy giving examples from the non-muslims history : …then after further reading…I realise that he is comparing to Islam. oh:
The ending is nicely touched…so you all should read it. Bare in mind that I have taken my lunch time just to type this article ….SO YOU BETTER READ IT :rant: TILL THE END OF THE ARTICLE. IT MAYBE LONG…BUT ITS WORTH IT. I GUARANTEE THAT.
Please post your opinion. What do you think? :sunny:
_____________________________________
Having a multicultural society does not mean that every Malaysian must subscribe to an ideology referred to as multiculturalism.
With reference to Malaysia, having a multicultural society is a fact, but to subscribe to multiculturalism is to interpret that fact in a certain way.
Multiculturalism is an alien ideology which come into being out of a particular historical, religious, and cultural setting.
In order to understand multiculturalism one has to keep in mind the long history of religious intolerance in Europe, followed by the Reformation movement, the rise of liberalism, and secularization. It is a history that is full of horrible tales of persecution and intolerance in the name of religion (read Christianity).
Religious pluralism is the outcome of an attempt to provide a basis in Christian theology for tolerance of non-Christian religions; as such, it is an element in a kind of religious modernism or liberalism.
Liberalism in religion and in politics is historically and theoretically related to one another. Liberalism as a political ideology that emerged in the same period and locale alongside liberal Protestantism. Both took place in the aftermath of Reformation.
Among the political and religious liberals the attitudes toward moral, social, and political issues are often the same. They emphasise the importance of tolerance, individual rights and freedoms to safeguard a pluralism of life styles.
At the foundation of political liberalism is tolerance of different opinions about religion. Then came religious pluralism which seeks to provide a theological basis for this tolerance.
Being an outgrowth of liberal Protestantism, religious pluralism rejects orthodox interpretation of Christian scripture and dogma to make salvation attainable via routes other than Christianity.
It is sceptical towards rational arguments in favour of the superiority of Christian beliefs. It appeals to the modem moral principles of tolerance and rejection of prejudice.
Because of its emphasis on the elements common to personal religious faith, ritual and theological doctrine are considered to be a secondary importance or a personal matter.
The liberal separation of religion from social order is founded on the assumption that this separation is consistent with the tenet of all religions and sects, whereas it is in direct conflict with the very nature of the worldview of Islam.
In the first place, Islam has never been structured upon some kind of church-state relation like that of medieval Christianity. Secondly, Islam is not a culture that evolves and develops in the way Christianity does.
Multiculturalism, as understood and propagated by its proponents in this country is not based on diversity, but rather it strives to debunk Islam as a socio-political order.
The ideological components of Malaysian multiculturalism can be summarised as a cultural relativism which funds the prominence of Islam in this country intolerable.
It rests on the attitude that religion should not be allowed to ‘interfere’ in our social and political life. Hence, it is important that every Malaysian, especially the Muslims, be made to accept “the fact” that Malaysia is a “secular country”.
The Malaysian multiculturalism’s hostility towards Islam and its repudiation of an identifiable Malaysian culture based upon Islam is augmented by a radically new definition of community, one that deviates from the traditional, religious emphasis on family, neighbourhood, house of worship and school, towards an emphasis on race, gender, occupation and sexual preference.
Can multiculturalism be a viable principle for our national unity?
Ideological multiculturalists are radical-left inhabitants of a political dreamland. These ideological divisions within our society threaten to render the nation into hostile factions.
The multiculturalists assert that Malaysia is an idea rather than a nation possessing a distinctive but encompassing identity. Hence, after almost 50 years of independence we still hear people talking about the search of “Malaysian identity”.
It means Malaysia, as far as they are concerned, has no identity, and if are to have one, Islam should not be part of that identity.
Current manifestation of multiculturalism extend far beyond the kind of pluralism that seeks a richer common culture to multicultural particularism which denies that a common culture is possible or desirable.
In an attempt to validate the multiculturalists’ emphasis on particularism and its concomitant subversion of cultural commonality, knowledge and facts in their discourse are consistently subordinated to the socalled “critical thinking approach.”
The dismal truth is that critical thinking in practice means subjective questioning and unsubstantiated, unreasoned, personal opinion.
Contrary to the assertions of proponents of multiculturalism that limitless pluralism enriches our understanding, the de-emphsising of specific factual knowledge in their discourse resulted in what it inevitably must have – a plague of ignorance.
Multiculturalism’s subordination of facts and knowledge to unguided “critical thinking” demonstrates its intellectual bankruptcy, since any critical opinion worthy of consideration must evolve out of knowledge and be grounded in objective facts.
Malaysia is not a no man’s land, and everybody knows that, and the fact that Islam is the religion of the Federation is also common knowledge.
Further contemplation would be enough for one to realise another fact: namely, that Islamic ethical and socio-political order is ultimately the expression of certain ideas about life and existence as a whole.
To Muslims, those ideas are the integrating principles that place all systems of meaning and standards of life and values in coherent order.
To those who live on the assumption that Malaysia is a secular country, it is the secular world view that is supposed to be the prism through which we understand wo we are and how to go about living our lives.
Of course they can believe in whatever they want to believe. But we would like to ask a very simple question: Who says the secular world views is our common worldview?
That is surely not acceptable to Muslims, who are aware that secularism is antithetical not only to Islam but to all religious worldviews.
Learning the ignorant and confused Muslim aside, there is no way to make conscious Muslims accept a secular interpretation of life and existence as espoused by Western culture and civilisation.
The followers of other religions should recognise the fact that their religions have many things in common with Islam, particularly when it comes to ethics and morality.
Is it through Malaysia, as an Islamic state, that other religions would thrive, and that we have better chance of fostering national unity based on common religious worldview.
A secular Malaysia would be an enemy not only to islam but a common enemy to all religions.
We must realise that the fact that secularisation can be considered a natural phenomenon only in the case of the West, considering what they have experienced in their history.
To apply their solution to our problem is to admit that we are now experiencing the same problem they used to have; which is historically baseless and logically absurd.
Written by Md Asham Ahmad, Fellow,
Centre for Syariah, Law and Political Science,
Institute of Islamic Understanding Malaysia.
Taken from The Star Pg38 Tuesday 22nd August 2006.
Good article. I would agree with you. Islamic doctrine does not accept the equality of different religions within a state. Any country with a Muslim majority is expected to be ruled Islamically, which by definition means non-Islamic doctrines are inferior and non-Islamic cultures should be subordinate to Islam.
Mind you, as a strategy for social stability I can hardly blame them. Multiculturalism is a somewhat dangerous dream. History has abundantly shown that multicultural societies are much more prone to civil strife and even war, especially if they are inhabited by mutually exclusive and competing political doctrines. Obviously it becomes even worse if one or more of these competing doctrines don't accept as the author says a "liberal separation of religion from social order".
Multiculturalism is a somewhat dangerous dream. History has abundantly shown that multicultural societies are much more prone to civil strife and even war, especially if they are inhabited by mutually exclusive and competing political doctrines. Obviously it becomes even worse if one or more of these competing doctrines don't accept as the author says a "liberal separation of religion from social order".
Can u give examples of countries that promote multiculturalism and got problems with it?
Can u give examples of countries that promote multiculturalism and got problems with it?
I'm for Multicultural societies, but its odd how:
The US is the most culturally, ethnically and religiously diverse nation on Earth, but has the highest gun violence statistics in the world...
And out of its 50 diverse states, California and New York have the most diversity and both have the leading gun violence statistics.
And hate crime is just as rife.
Meanwhile, in TOTALLY Homogeneous Japan, the opposite occurs.
....I wonder why...
KAder has a very good point, although I wish it weren't true.
"This world is a blank price tag, and whatever value you put on it, is what its worth to you. I have made this world priceless and worthless, so therefore I have placed my value in the afterlife."
The US is the most culturally, ethnically and religiously diverse nation on Earth, but has the highest gun violence statistics in the world...
And out of its 50 diverse states, California and New York have the most diversity and both have the leading gun violence statistics.
And hate crime is just as rife.
Meanwhile, in TOTALLY Homogeneous Japan, the opposite occurs.
....I wonder why...
KAder has a very good point, although I wish it weren't true.
- There's no shops selling guns, rifles, bullets in Malaysia.
- 99% of Malaysians never touch a gun (the real one, not toys)
- If you possess live ammos, you can get LIFE SENTENCE or HANG TO DEATH.
Japan also has the tradition of dishonor. The dishonor and shame involved with committing a crime has its impact on that too.
Yes, but that's the exclusive privilege that homogenous societies have, and that's what you told of; TRADITION!! But in heterogenous societies, there is no such thing as a SHARED tradition or culture or taboo.
"This world is a blank price tag, and whatever value you put on it, is what its worth to you. I have made this world priceless and worthless, so therefore I have placed my value in the afterlife."
Yes, but that's the exclusive privilege that homogenous societies have, and that's what you told of; TRADITION!! But in heterogenous societies, there is no such thing as a SHARED tradition or culture or taboo.
I find it particularly odd how all the homogenous societies are in far East Asia - unfriendly culture or lack of tolerance...
EVERY other region on Earth has at least 2 different major cultures, not particularly races, but cultures in its shores.
Most countries are like Malaysia; 70% this, 20% that, 10% there.
Japan is 99.999999999999% Japanese, and .000000000001% Korean.
"This world is a blank price tag, and whatever value you put on it, is what its worth to you. I have made this world priceless and worthless, so therefore I have placed my value in the afterlife."
Actually Japan has lots of foreigners than South Korea.... Wait...we got North Korea...hmmmm.....Albania seems homogenous too...
Malaysia - only 48% are Malays.... but since all Muslims are considered Malays ... it'll be 60%.
Japan has many foreign TOURISTS, but nothing more. Statistics show that Japan is 99% Japanese and 1% Korean, it has been since its early days as a nation; that's several thousand years back.
Malaysia, from what you've said; seems like a nightmare nation, no offense. I mean, race plays such a huge part in society, my goodness; you can't be a national until you're Muslim; its a theocratic society where almost half of the nation are not even Muslim.
"This world is a blank price tag, and whatever value you put on it, is what its worth to you. I have made this world priceless and worthless, so therefore I have placed my value in the afterlife."
In the European countries we have Switzerland. I do not know the exact percentage, but virtualy every person is Nordic Alpine and there is just one culture.
In the Western Hemisphere I can not think of a single homogeneous culture.
Japan has many foreign TOURISTS, but nothing more. Statistics show that Japan is 99% Japanese and 1% Korean, it has been since its early days as a nation; that's several thousand years back.
Malaysia, from what you've said; seems like a nightmare nation, no offense. I mean, race plays such a huge part in society, my goodness; you can't be a national until you're Muslim; its a theocratic society where almost half of the nation are not even Muslim.
Actually 40% of Malaysian nationals are non-Muslim.... ethnically 48% are Malays ... but in order to make 'Malays' as majority....all Malaysian citizens who are Muslims are considered as Malays. So we can put the % higher ... as high as 60.4%.
Malaysian and Malay are two different things.
Benefits of being a "Malay"
- you'll got lots of subsidiary from government.
- easier to get place in public universities
- discount when buying lands, houses or shares.
- ONLY Malays are allowed to live in Malay reserved lands.
- traditionally, only Malays can be Prime Minister.
- traditionally, 90% of civil servants are Malays. Which means if you're a Malay, you'll have higher chance if you apply for government occupations.
In the European countries we have Switzerland. I do not know the exact percentage, but virtualy every person is Nordic Alpine and there is just one culture.
In the Western Hemisphere I can not think of a single homogeneous culture.
Which means that Mullato makes about 20-30% of Haiti!! Ha!Ha!
Which means it is Multicultural. It is so poor because the power-holders, White, suppress the Black/Mulatto majority...hmmm, could be true.
Like India, there's a skin-based caste system, power through suppression, suppression through chaos.
Think about that!
"This world is a blank price tag, and whatever value you put on it, is what its worth to you. I have made this world priceless and worthless, so therefore I have placed my value in the afterlife."
I've read somewhere that the ONLY "Whites" in Haiti are Arabs and Jews.
ARABS...in Haiti? No. The Whites there are solely French.
"This world is a blank price tag, and whatever value you put on it, is what its worth to you. I have made this world priceless and worthless, so therefore I have placed my value in the afterlife."
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Debunking Multiculturalism
:
…then after further reading…I realise that he is comparing to Islam.
oh:
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks