Lecture by Anwar Ibrahim at the Australian National University, Canberra, Monday, 15th November 2010
I would like to take a moment to express our joy on the release of Aung San Su Kyi. As we all know, her right to political office was denied through the most repressive of means. But driven by her conviction for freedom and democracy, Aung San Suu Kyi soldiered on from strength to strength against all odds. This long overdue freedom will nevertheless give renewed hope for the people of Burma and she will continue to inspire freedom fighters and champions of democracy and justice throughout the world.
Speaking of democracy and justice, I see a clear nexus with the topic at hand. Here in Canberra, no doubt a shining symbol of democracy in Asia, it is apt that I begin my talk on social justice with a clear statement of what democracy entails. Apart from the fundamental requirements of freedom and the rule of law, democracy is also presumed to be defined by the conditions of a free market. And this is where the founding fathers of the French Revolution with their clarion call for liberty, equality and fraternity missed their mark.
This is because a free market is based on competition, and competition, being a zero-sum game has no truck with equality. On the contrary, free market engenders inequality so much so that even the bastions of capitalism such as America and Britain no longer ask whether states ought to intervene in order to reduce these inequities.
The question is to what extent? The invisible hand has remained invisible so often that governments in the free world have not only intervened but have in some cases staked out their territory in areas which were once considered totally off-limits.
Various explanations have been given. The most defensible at least in theory is social justice. According to one view, state intervention is advocated by a “soft-hearted majority” while a “hard-boiled minority” would willingly accept or even rejoice in the inequality.1 This seems to suggest that at least for a certain segment of society, inequality is not seen to be unjust. Defenders of the French Revolution claim that equality has less to do with wealth than with equal treatment before the law. But we all know that deprived of the basic necessities of living, the law is a luxury that the poor man cannot afford. Hence, the need for social justice.
But this begs the question: is there an objective standard of social justice? Philosophers have locked horns on this and I don’t intend to reinvent the wheel here. Nevertheless, to put the issue in proper perspective, from John Locke we are told that “every man has by nature the right to possess property as his own.” We may therefore reasonably deduce that social justice is not in the equation here. John Rawls talks about ‘justice as fairness’ and advocates the notion of distributive justice. Libertarians such as Robert Nozick contend that justice can only be attained through a minimalist state. In other words, there is no room for distributive justice let alone social justice.
In Christianity, particularly under Catholic social teaching, life and dignity of the human person is predicated on the belief that the state must play a moral role to ensure social justice. This is not far from the essence of Mencius’s teachings in advocating that actions are to be judged by their moral correctness, not mere economic benefit. And Islam enjoins that while society may pursue commerce to its fullest, justice and fairness in dealings must remain the chief criterion. Social justice is enjoined in order to establish a humane economy. The point is that advocates of social justice today are in good company and need not feel that they have to be unshaven Bohemian leftists or disgruntled anti-globalization activists to show that they are genuine.
However, you can’t be calling for social justice without expecting political change. Inequalities of wealth, power and status are certainly not the privilege of nations practicing free markets though it is true that in theory socialist states have more egalitarian policies. That’s only the theory because reality bites hard and we know the enormous price that people under socialist regimes have had to pay for the so-called egalitarian lifestyle. To be equally poor is of no consolation. As Martin Luther Jr. once said: “The curse of poverty has no justification.”
Political change is therefore a condition precedent to attaining social justice if it is shown that a society is heading down the road to greater social perdition under its present government. There must be political will to change its socio-economic policies. In this regard, the Economic Transformation Program that was recently unveiled by the Najib administration bears analysis. The numbers are impressive, if not altogether mindboggling. All told, we are looking at more than RM1 trillion in so-called expansionary development and projects calculated at transforming a middle-income economy to a high-income economy.
On closer analysis, however, we are unable to connect the dots to see that critical mass in poverty reduction programs that would be needed to narrow the current gap between the rich and the poor. To seriously address the growing GINI coefficient, general and vague expressions of targeting for higher per capita income simply won’t do. We don’t see concrete plans to address the housing problems of the poor and a blue print for universal free education. We don’t see any comprehensive health care for those who can’t afford private medication and hospitals.
What we see is a frenzied conviction to outdo the megalomaniacal visions of the Mahathir era. We see grandiose designs, humongous structures, buildings taller than the KLCC Twin Towers and other mega projects that are destined to make crony companies outperform others in the share market and the rich and powerful, richer and more powerful. On balance, we see monumental wastage at the expense of the people and the environment. We see the future of our children and the generations to come being sacrificed on the altar of greed and the illegitimate amassing of wealth.
The rent-seeking culture will continue with the manner in which multi-million ringgit contracts are doled out. The issues of governance, transparency and accountability are not addressed even as the indices on transparency and corruption continue to drive investors away. Transforming an economy cannot be done through mere theory –the litmus test is implementation. The condition precedent to passing this test is to put an end to the culture of corruption, rent-seeking, and power abuse.
Now, at this juncture one may well accuse me of being a socialist advocating a welfare state. The answer to that is simple: I make no apology for calling for a more equitable distribution of wealth in as much as I make no apology for maintaining that the safeguarding of fundamental liberties is also one of the main ends of political and social justice. These liberties are of paramount importance but as Amartya Sen has argued, other considerations including that of economic needs are just as vital.
To my mind, he has posed a stunningly simple but compelling question: “Why should the status of intense economic needs, which can be matters of life and death, be lower than that of personal liberties?”2
In my humble view, some basic formulations for the attainment of social justice may be advanced. Governments must be committed to the principle that a more equitable distribution of income is a fundamental precept for the realization of social justice. It is on this platform that I urge my government to undertake integrated plans for poverty reduction in the long run while ensuring a comprehensive support system for the poor and economically marginalized. Economic power must be checked by the principles of governance and accountability. Are we supposed to sit idly by as politicians in public office continue to renege on their promises of social justice while scandalizing the institutions of power with abuse and corrupt practices?
Finally, the discourse on social justice and political change in the context of Malaysia must also be seen in the light of our multi-cultural make up where communal tensions run the risk of being exploited by “sectarian demagoguery”.3 We must therefore reject ideological rigidity and the politics of hate and exclusiveness in all its forms. Politics of this kind engenders divisive barriers whether they are founded on ethnicity, language or religion.
When communal violence erupts and innocent lives are lost, a nation is jolted into the realization that peace and harmony among the people is always a transient phenomenon. One day, it’s there and the next day, it may just come tumbling down under the weight of sectarian strife, or religious conflict or class wars arising from social inequities and economic deprivation.
It is often only after the fact, when events of a cataclysmic nature unfold, that the policy makers and social pundits get jolted to the reality that freedom could be meaningless without food on the table or that the rule of law may still discriminate on grounds of caste, wealth and status.
This is the caveat, the mental construct we should bear in mind when we talk about social justice and political change in Malaysia. It is a stark reminder that peace in our time must be more important than just material progress. In a multi-cultural society like Malaysia’s it is therefore incumbent on leaders to shoulder the responsibility as protectors of this fragility.
In this regard we must condemn in the strongest terms the racist chanting of modern day demagogues. Playing to the gallery is well and good if all we’re looking for is just a good round of applause. But when you have at your disposal the organs of state power and the entire state controlled electronic and print media, the propagation of supremacist doctrines backed by the threat of violence is not only immoral and utterly irresponsible but blatantly criminal.
At the very least, we would expect such leaders to urge for inclusiveness and greater understanding and respect among the communities and not to stoke the fire of racial discord.
To paraphrase Macbeth, they should against the murderer shut the door, not bear the knife themselves.
Thank you.
An excellent speech by an excellent leader. Vote Anuar Ibrahim for the PM.
Reply
asdsdasdsasd Reply:
November 17th, 2010 at 3:01 pm
Vote ZAID as next PM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply
Dear mr. Anwar,
I would really appreciate if you could do Malaysia a favor by just going on a lecture tour and never come back to my beloved country Malaysia. The world appreciates a speaker like you and you should by all means go on a world tour.
Please don’t bother coming back. You’ll be doing this country a huge favour, please consider.
Thank you.
P.s, I don’t think you would dare to publish this huh!
Reply
conrad Reply:
November 17th, 2010 at 3:40 pm
a comment like this can only come from a low-class insect whose next sojourn in the transmigration of souls will see it drowning in a cess-pool of putrefied puke.
Reply
Alman zain Reply:
November 20th, 2010 at 10:15 am
Wow u just describe Anwar perfectly. Thanks a billion Conrad, u should write more often hahahaha. I never thought anyone could have describe Anwar in such a detail. Conrad u r the man…
Reply
adi/// Reply:
November 17th, 2010 at 4:39 pm
lawan ttp lawan….
Reply
ron Reply:
November 19th, 2010 at 11:00 pm
This country is not exclusively yours – it is our nation as well. so never tell another Malaysian to go.
There is a big misconception about nationhood. A Govt and A Nation is two different things. That is very basic – only less educated people couldn’t understand this.
Concept of Nationhood:
Chief of the Nation – Supreme Ruler (YdPA)
Chief of the Govt – Prime Minister
It is indeed two different entities, isn’t it? The blatant lies & disregards by the ruling regime to potray the critics of Govt as traitor of the Nation is unfounded, immoral and a point not sustainable.
So the very next time one critises and condemns the Govt, he or she has never meant to insult his/her own nation.
I love my country but hate the ruling regime.
Condemning the Govt (on merits and facts, certainly) does not make me less Malaysian.
What make you think you are more Malaysian than I am?
Reply
Alman zain Reply:
November 20th, 2010 at 5:17 pm
Because unlike u, I do not support the person who causes riot and disturbance in this country, plus spare the lecture only to
Anwar, just like u, he needs that as well..I pity u guys who support this loser and liar. I guest same kind of birds flocks together hehehe
Reply
Such well argued speeches are never published in Malaysia as our journalists do not understand such well written speeches. Their lack of understanding represent the state of progress in Malaysia , run by an oppressive regime . Malaysia is now famous for financial scandals n corruption from immigration officers ( apparently had millions) to Politicians (PKFZ) n now a big fiasco in SIME DARBY. THE BIG WORD IS FORENSIC AUDIT n now to sue someone who got away with billions. Have a good laugh as laughter is the best tonic
Reply
Alman, what is your point actually?.Mr Anwar went for a lecture on invitations, not by his on will.Outside world really appreciate him as great Muslim leader, not like u, people inside the ‘tempurung’ and never come out to see the world.For me, what u have said is pure bullshit.i repeat, PURE BULLSHIT!
Reply
Alman, people of the cave!.Anwar is a true Muslim and democrats leader, Alman, plz come out of the cave and see the world lah.Dont talk bullshit here!I repeat, BULLSHIT!
Reply
Perak Pakatan ready for snap polls, says Ngeh
By Clara ChooiNovember 17, 2010AYER TAWAR, Nov 17 — Perak Pakatan Rakyat (PR) has finally recovered from its bruising fall from government last year, declaring itself ready to take on the Barisan Nasional (BN) should snap polls be called soon.
Unlike in other states, the PR pact in Perak is said to be the most cohesive of the lot, bound together by the year-long constitutional impasse that rocked the state following BN’s infamous power grab in February 2009.
In an exclusive interview with The Malaysian Insider, newly re-apppointed Perak DAP chairman Datuk Ngeh Koo Ham said that since the power grab, all state PR leaders and members have been working themselves to the bone to ensure another victory in the next general election.
“Our PR brothers are very close here in Perak, not just because of the crisis but because we have very good, sound, matured and very capable leaders.
“And yes we are [ready to face elections]. In fact, we have been on election-mode since the power grab. And now that the election can be called anytime, we are ready.
“I believe our general election machinery is still in tact,” he said, when met at his office here yesterday.
Ngeh admitted however that due to the series of events during the constitutional crisis in Perak after the power grab, the PR machinery now desperately needed to raise more funds and quickly.
“When our machinery is enriched, then we can move smoothly. We have spent a fair bit on our expenses, especially when paying costs to BN during the court cases,” he explained.
The Perak PR has been engaged in a mountain of legal suits against the BN since February last year, during its many attempts to declare BN’s rule in the state as unconstitutional.
Despite this however, Ngeh, who was formerly a senior state executive councillor in the Perak PR government, claimed that PR has been making inroads with the more rural population in the state, where it had lost greatly to BN during Elections 2008.
In the March 2008 political tsunami, the traditionally BN-helmed state of Perak fell to the hands of the opposition with a narrow three-seat margin.
DAP had swept up all 18 state seats it had contested, primarily in the urban Kinta Valley area, while PKR had managed to win in seven seats and PAS, in six.
BN had managed to score 28 seats, thanks to Umno’s popularity in the more rural Malay-dominated areas in the silver state. MCA only won in one state seat while MIC failed to secure any.
In the early hours of March 9, 2008, the three opposition parties of DAP, PAS and PKR came together in a hasty meeting and made an agreement within an hour that it would form a tripartite government in Perak.
Due to the defections of three PR assemblymen however, the government fell back to the BN in February 2009 and the state was plunged into turmoil for over a year.
Today, after exhausting all avenues to seek legal redress over the power grab, PR has now set its sights on recapturing Perak from BN in the coming general election, said to be held early next year.
This Saturday, the BN supreme council will meet to chart campaign plans for a possible snap polls widely speculated for the first half of 2011.
In Perak, PR’s greatest hurdle is the Malay vote, particularly in the semi-urban and rural areas contested by Umno in Elections 2008.
But Ngeh remains confident that coupled with the injustice of BN’spower grab and PR’s 10-month performance in Perak, PR’s influence with the Malay voters has now greatly improved.
“We believe and hope that we already now have at least 40 per cent of support from the Malays in the rural areas.
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/perak-pakatan-ready-for-snap-polls-says-ngeh/
ZIK: If PAKATAN SABAH WERE THE SAME AS PAKATAN PERAK!!EM ..WISHFUL THINGKING!!!
Reply
….how therr..u say like that Mr Al-Z???…Malaysia is his country and Permatang Pauh is his Home Town….
Reply
askm dn salam sejahtera…
tiada apa2 yg hendak saya katakan…d:-(.cumaa
selamat hari raya aidiladha…
joe_27…
Reply
Dear Anwar,
Nobody would accuse you to be a socialist as you had been in the Malaysian Government before and it’s in the hearts of the governement eversince May 13th to properly address the issues of social balance and poverty eradication. We have gained a lot of ground although at high costs and a pace that should have been faster. Access to health, medication and education is not an issue at all.
But you can be accused to be a traitor for campaigning hatred upon your own country abroad, exactly what a true statesman never does. In a competitive world economy, you will get foreign support because other countries would like to see us slide away and in so doing, they can gain further competitive edge.
But if you want to be PM, then everything and anything goes. In the name of social justice, human rights and liberty, you may even legalise sodomy when the time comes. So, never give up.
Reply
Jika kita melihat kepada kebijaksanaan serta kelebihan yang ada pada DSAI amat didahagakan oleh masyarakat luar. Idea-idea beliau mengenai isu-isu berkaitan dengan ekonomi, politik, sosial, agama, isu semasa serta pendidikan didengar serta diperhalusi oleh masyarakat dunia. DSAI dibayar dengan nilai yang sangat tinggi.
Malangnya media massa di negara kita sentiasa cuba menyekat harta intelektual yang ada pada DSAI daripada tersebar dipemikiran rakyat. Tidak pernah mahu digunakan sebagai sesuatu yang bernas untuk kemajuan pemikiran rakyat Malaysia. Apa yang diwar-warkan adalah keburukan DSAI. Apa yang digunakan ialah khidmat pakar-pakar pemikir luar.
Manakala rakyat sukar untuk berfikir matang disebabkan oleh kongkongan oleh pemerintah serta ketidakseimbangan media dalam menonjolkan kewibawaan pemikir dunia seperti DSAI.
Isu terbaru mengenai Zaid Ibrahim seolah-olah seperti telah dirancang begitu teliti. Tiba-tiba sahaja Dato Zaid Ibrahim ingin mengundurkan diri dari PKR sedangkan kepimpinan PKR ada membuat siasatan mengenai isu pengundian untuk pemilihan pucuk kepimpinan. Beliau terus membuat sidang akhbar memburukkan PKR serta DSAI. Serangan bertubi-tubi terhadap PR dengan pelbagai isu menunjukkan bahawa PRU ke 13 sudah hampir dengan propaganda media yang bertali arus.
Saya sebagai rakyat biasa memohon rakan-rakan serta semua rakyat yang menyedari akan kepentingan keseimbangan politik di negara ini agar memberikan ruang kepada PR untuk berjaya dalam pilihanraya umum ke 13 ini. Empat buah negeri yang diperintah oleh PR menunjukkan perkembangan pemerintahan yang tulus. Walaupun pelbagai halangan dari persekutuan namun pemerintahan negeri berjaya membawa pembangunan yang membanggakan.
Keburukan pemerintahan PR hanya digembar gemburkan oleh media UMNO/BN. Mana yang baik disembunyikan manakala sebesar kuman keburukkan dibesrkan seperti gempabumi yang telah melanda. Inilah dia kerajaan BN yang rakyat pilih. Sedangkan keburukkan pemerintahan mereka dengan nilaian wang yang lesap berjumlah berbillion ringgit pada setiap tahun didiamkan sahaja oleh media-media serta pihak berkuasa. Inilah yang rakyat sokong sebenarnya.
Reply
UMNO/BN BERFIKIRAN SEPERTI TUAN DAN RAKYAT BERTARAF HAMBA YANG SELAMANYA MESTI TUNDUK DAN AKUR APA SAJA YANG DISAMPAIKAN. BAGI MEREKA DSAI ADLAH SEPERTI DURI DAGING YANG PERLU DICABUT DIMUSNAHKA. AKIBATNYA SEPERTI LEBAI MALANG NEGARA INI AKAN TERGADAI KEPADA KUASA ASING. APAKAH IANYA SEDANG DAN SUDAH BERLAKU ATAU SSUDAH DALAM GENGGAMAN MEREKA (APCO/ZIONIST?)DEMI NDAK KUASA DAN TAKUT TERSUNGKUR MUFLIS, MEREKA SANGGUP GADAI APA SAJA WALAU HARGA DIRI MEREKA SENDIRI. AMT JIJIKNYA PERBUATAN MEREKA!!!!!
Reply
Shabas dina. Saya amat hargai pandangan ikhlas anda.Ayuh kita tarunkan BN/UMNO dari terus merosakkan masa depan negara ini.
Reply