There is a simplistic worldview which assumes that the world is either white or black. Therefore, within such a worldview there is no grey area within any such continuum from white to black.

Consequently the now famous George W Bush argument, “one is either with me or against me”; the very argument used to start the last war in the Middle East with the weapons of mass destruction (WMD) storyline.

It can also be known as the “my way or highway” worldview and mindset. Maybe that is why people say that Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s favourite song is ‘My Way?’

The above worldview was what was taught to the first generation of Malayans by the colonials of the so-called Great Britain which is now only known as the United Kingdom. But, maybe, just maybe, as with English language and her pronunciation, there is really never any principle or consistency about English language and culture of the West; when it comes to worldviews.

Let me take one simple example I heard recently to make my point. Try teaching a non-native English language speaker how to pronounce words with endings of “ue”. Take these three words and identify the rule or principle embedded therein: vague, tongue, and argue. I hope you get the point.

Malaysia, like much the rest of the world, is not alone in this quagmire with the, ‘either my way or the highway’ worldview. Let us take the case of our prime minister who recently sold out the 1Malaysia agenda for his political agenda of popularity within Umno, and therefore propounded another contradictory agenda lacking very much in the substance related to real issues and concerns for Malaysian development.

\"\"

In fact, his dad would say that agenda is past its date of validity.

My question to him: “Were the millions paid to (communications consultant) Apco only to convince Malaysians that he was really a prime minister of all Malaysians only for show business?” His agenda of 1Malaysia was only a con job for the sake of the general election.

Immediately after his 1Malaysia agenda was fully realised with 53 percent of voters choosing an alternative agenda; his pet theology collapsed and then it became only the ‘1Chinese tsunami’? Was he double-minded or living in two contradictory worldviews?  

What happened to 1Malaysia? Did it not matter, or did the PM stop believing that now? Or, is modern life only just that – to live a dichotomous life which lacks both integrity and credibility?

False hierarchy of truth-seeking and speaking

There has always been such a dinosaur worldview which believed and taught that there was only one rule in life: “The boss is always right! When the boss is wrong; please refer to Rule 1.” That worldview motivates much of Malaysian hierarchy and thought systems. What do I mean?

\"\"

Why else would the same PM “who removed the Internal Security Act (ISA) for reasons of human rights violations”, before the GE, allow and condone a new home affairs minister to reinstate it through the back door but through the medium of deception and misinformation?

Why would the police who believe in “detention without trial” as their primary modicum for authority, power and control”, be now allowed to reduce all of Malaysian culture into a system of unthinking force and coercion, just because they have ‘Force’ written on their sleeves? Do they not know they are also the ‘Royal’ one? Is not our institution of the Conference of Rulers then one of wisdom and enlightenment?  

Immediately after the GE the same police ‘force’ began a media campaign with willing and colluding mainstream media partners, to communicate a full-fledged lie that “the more than 2,000 detainees who were released would be a danger to society concerned without any reason or logic”.

Why then were they all released without any forethought or requisite thinking? Did the PM direct this? Or, was it his cousin, the former home affairs minister? And even if so, were they not released some time before the GE. But why do all of these issues appear to have been highlighted as if to make the public believe that they are suddenly a serious danger to the national security and safety?

Would a ‘police without force’ mean we did not need brains to get rid of communism; the very developmental anti-thesis for why Malaysia moved towards comprehensive progress era?  Was that not the Templer argument when Abdul Razak Hussein carried out his RED (Rural Economic Development) Book programme?

Was that not why the ICDAU (forerunner of Mampu) of the Prime Minister’s Department became the most important agency for planning the development and change agenda; and not just the Economic Planning Unit (EPU) under the Abdul Razak era of the 1970s?

\"\"

But, was it also not the Mahathir era when corruption and nepotism of ‘business with public policy’ became abused under our so-called capitalism of the Thatcher’s Privatisation Copy? Does our business sector really know better than the public sector how to build roads, drains and bridges which last 50 and 100 years?

Was it not the Public Works Department (JKR) of the older order that created standards and due processes that built the foundations which still stand tall today; while consistently modern buildings lose their roofs?

Needed – a hierarchy of truth values

In the National IT Agenda which appears almost totally defunct, we envisioned a three-phase development agenda for Malaysia’s migration towards a values-based knowledge economy and society.

Phase one was the achievement of an information society; one driven and informed by knowledge available at one’s fingertips to support and drive all decision-making. With 80 percent Internet penetration, except in rural areas, we appear to almost be there, but maybe only for those literate in the English language.

\"\"

The next phase is a knowledge economy and society. A knowledge society is more than an ‘informated society’. It is more than a society wherein we have 100 percent Internet penetration but also one wherein any member of the community of citizens and casual visitors or businesses, can make coherent decisions for their life choices, by accessing relevant information to guide such decision-making.

For example, if I decide to take a trip to Gerik in Perak and want to make choices about where to stay and what to visit, and where to eat; all these alternative choice-making information is not only available and accessible, but also available in my language of choice, and I can make all those decisions with the click of a button. We have quite some ways to go to get into such spaces and places.

Finally, we envisioned a values-based knowledgeable society. This means good values drive each and every decision or choice-making within the community of citizens; both corporate and individuals.

It does not mean that there will be a green tinge in our God-breathed air, but rather that we are all civic-conscious individuals who make choices which is always considerate of others; and never only with a self-centred worldview of/for selfish ambition. Ugly capitalism will be qualified.

It required remembering that the Almighty is our guide and benchmark for how we treat others and that we never treat others different from the way we ourselves want to be treated. That is why this has been regarded as the Golden Rule worldwide and simply needs to be nurtured and grown as household values for all.

Therefore also: my question for the home affairs minister; can I be allowed to arrest you for “treason and espionage” without a trial or evidence adduced to make my case, ever? May God bless Malaysia to become more civilised.