The neverending story of the Never Ending Policy (or as some still call it, the New Economic Policy). This time, John Malott, has gotten in trouble for speaking some basic truths about racism and economic policy.
Malott is basically speaking the truth. Once things have gotten to the point where firms refuse to do business with non-Bumiputra owned companies, it's really apartheid — and mind you, Malott touched on the racial aspect because it is causing a great deal of politic turmoil and also on the unfair protectionism of these policies which are no longer predicated on equality, but inequality.
Naturally, the establishment roared in anger. Nazri accused Malott of making comments which could be "construed as trying to interfere in the internal administration of the country" (a rather equivocal condemnation, if you ask me, since it implies there are other possible interpretations of Malott's remarks).
Nazri went as far as to call Malott's statement "arrogant and extreme". I guess the truth hurts, doesn't it?
For the life of me, I cannot see what is wrong with what Malott said. How are Malaysia's trade policies solely confined to "internal administration of the country"? These are a crucial part of our foreign policy!
The US-Malaysia FTA has already been delayed by our protectionist economic policies, and the same looks to be happening with the potential for talks of a European FTA.
That our racial economic policies are protectionist and discourage foreign investment has already been recognized by our government, which acted to dismantle such barriers in Malaysia. Why should we criticize Malott if we ourselves have admitted he is right?
There was no reason at all to jump over Malott for his statement when we have already admitted that his contention is true. We have to face the reality of our unequal policies, and strive for true equality of opportunity.
Malott is basically speaking the truth. Once things have gotten to the point where firms refuse to do business with non-Bumiputra owned companies, it's really apartheid — and mind you, Malott touched on the racial aspect because it is causing a great deal of politic turmoil and also on the unfair protectionism of these policies which are no longer predicated on equality, but inequality.
Naturally, the establishment roared in anger. Nazri accused Malott of making comments which could be "construed as trying to interfere in the internal administration of the country" (a rather equivocal condemnation, if you ask me, since it implies there are other possible interpretations of Malott's remarks).
Nazri went as far as to call Malott's statement "arrogant and extreme". I guess the truth hurts, doesn't it?
For the life of me, I cannot see what is wrong with what Malott said. How are Malaysia's trade policies solely confined to "internal administration of the country"? These are a crucial part of our foreign policy!
The US-Malaysia FTA has already been delayed by our protectionist economic policies, and the same looks to be happening with the potential for talks of a European FTA.
That our racial economic policies are protectionist and discourage foreign investment has already been recognized by our government, which acted to dismantle such barriers in Malaysia. Why should we criticize Malott if we ourselves have admitted he is right?
There was no reason at all to jump over Malott for his statement when we have already admitted that his contention is true. We have to face the reality of our unequal policies, and strive for true equality of opportunity.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment