Malignant unrestrained power | Lee Yee
The Hong Kong police issued a statement the night before yesterday quoting the Guangdong Provincial Public Security Department’s response to the arrest of the 12 Hongkongers. The short communication was full of loopholes. If these 12 people are still under investigation, how can the authorities be sure that they will be approved by the procuratorate for arrest later? One of the 12 people was the skipper, is he a member of the smuggling organization? If he is indeed part of a smuggling group, why was he escaping to Taiwan? Why was there no mention of the arrest of the skipper? What happened to the speedboat? Did the 12 people buy the boat hence it was confiscated?
It has been more than a month and they still could not spin a better story. The power has become so domineering to the point where they say what they want without regard for whether it is believable or not anymore.
Chinese state media reported that, at the recent Third Central Symposium on Xinjiang Work held in Beijing, Xi Jinping emphasized the need to “uphold efforts to sinicize religion, sinicize Islam and forge the collective consciousness of a common Chinese identity.” Following Xi’s “sinicization of Tibetan Buddhism,” this is another one of his latest sinicization campaigns with requirements explicitly put forward.
Both Tibetan Buddhism and Xinjiang Islam are religions based on beliefs in God or divine inspirations, while in other parts of China, most religious believers just pray to gods and buddhas for blessings. Very few people truly believe in gods, reincarnation, or life after death. If “One China” means China under the dictatorship of the atheist Communist Party, then the “sinicization of religion” denotes a false and bogus religion. A leader who can come up with the idea of sinicization of religion under atheism is enough to show that there is nothing believable about this regime, including the woven tale for the 12 arrested Hongkongers.
In the era of ancient China’s absolute monarchy, although there was no real religious belief, ancient Chinese emperors at least paid respect to ancestors and held ceremonies to worship heaven. Dictatorship began from as early as the Qin dynasty to the Han Dynasty during which Dong Zhongshu proposed the rule to respect the emperor. However, he also proposed to restrict the emperor and respect heaven; the emperor would be called the son of heaven, meaning the heavenly father was watching over. The occurrence of a catastrophic natural disaster would be the wrath of heaven; the emperor would often issue a rescript for penitence, and reflect and review to improve governance.
The atheistic CCP not only does not believe in gods but also disbelieves in heaven. Mao Zedong claimed to be a “monk holding an umbrella,” meaning that he was above the law and above heaven. He also said, “Battling with heaven is endless joy.” Therefore, under the guidance of the idea of “Humans will triumph over the sky,” the Great Leap Forward brought about a situation of “endless suffering” for the Chinese people.
However, the CCP regime before Mao the second at least would not, on the one hand, claim to believe in Marxism-Leninism, and on the other hand, bludgeon itself with such absurd theories as the “sinicization of religion.” Perhaps Mao 2.0 now possesses absolute power such that no one dares to tell the truth, resulting in comments of all illogical nonsense.
Recently, the Chinese education department was so preposterous that it blatantly falsified the Bible. The story of Jesus and the Adulteress from the New Testament was cited in textbooks but the ending of the story was distorted. In the original passage of the Bible, Jesus said to the adulteress, “I, too, do not condemn you; Go and sin no more!” The Chinese textbook, however, presents the story as: “When the crowd disappeared, Jesus stoned the sinner to death saying, ‘I too am a sinner. But if the law could only be executed by men without blemish, the law would be dead.’” Forcing words to justify the Chinese leaders into the mouth of Jesus.
Of course, anyone who enforces the law in any society will not be a flawless person, but in a normal society, at least the law enforcers know that they are either guilty, or that regardless of religion or even non-religion, they believe that “there is a deity watching over them.” In addition to believing that “a deity is watching,” law enforcers are also restrictive in their power by the separation of powers with mutual checks and balances, as well as the supervision of the Fourth Estate. Nearly 300 years ago, the French Enlightenment thinker Montesquieu said, “Every man invested with power is apt to abuse it, and to carry his authority as far as it will go. Power is naturally expansive and has a tendency to turn malignant. As long as there are insufficient restraint and supervision, any power will give rise to corruption. To prevent this abuse, it is necessary from the very nature of things that power should be a check to power.”
The power we face and its extension in Hong Kong may be the most extreme power in human history. It has no restraints nor any checks and balances, and without the constraints of “heaven” from the dark ages of ancient China and the Western Middle Ages. Its “expansion and malignancy” can exceed all human imagination. Therefore, normal people can only completely and absolutely distrust this absolute power.
「why is the media called the fourth estate」的推薦目錄:
why is the media called the fourth estate 在 Daphne Iking Facebook 的最佳貼文
Please read. I agree with Jahabar completely in this!
Did The Star screw up with its Saturday front page? And is the outrage and official response enough, too little or too much? And is The Star doing enough, too little or too much by suspending two senior editors?
Let's get to the facts first. The Star lead story on Saturday was headlined Malaysian Terrorist Leader and below that with a thin divider was a photograph of a terawih prayer session that marks the Ramadan fasting month.
Two other newspapers, namely New Straits Times and Utusan Malaysia had similar layouts of similar themes on that day.
Remember, this is Saturday. Nothing happens, no reaction to the front pages of the three newspapers (let's leave their ownership or bias out of this, ok!)
Sunday, some people make noise about Saturday edition of The Star. In a nutshell, it would appear that combination of headline and picture would make Muslims appear to be terrorists.
Let's forget what happened in Mindanao, Jakarta and Bangkok or Manchester and other parts of the world. We live in our own microcosm and the rest of the world doesn't matter. No, really! 1MDB investigations around the world don't matter, do they?
The drama happens, politicians make noise, police reports are made, The Star is hauled up. Four editors turn up to see the Home Ministry people on Monday, and The Star then says 2 seniors will be suspended.
This is really no different from 2011 when The Star fouled up over a Ramadan supplement and added a pork dish to it. Insensitive? Clueless more like it.
Clueless is the word really, for those who don't know how to read newspapers anymore. There is a page, it has a headline, probably has a photograph too, and some advertisements.
No different from a digital page. The only difference is that it can be unrelated. And speaking of advertisement, some went further to castigate The Star for having a massage advertisement below the terawih picture.
So, did The Star screw up with the layout? I don't think so. This is pretty much its standard layout and it did clearly say FULL STORY IN PAGE 3.
Did it refer to the photograph in that article? NO!
Did the photograph refer to the article above it? NO!
Was it clear that the headline and article had nothing to do with the photograph on the front page? YES if you read newspapers regularly and don't think Muslims are generally terrorists. NO if you don't read newspapers and rely on a snapshot. And feel people think Muslims are generally terrorists.
See, it really is a matter of perception, and perhaps sensitivity. In this case, I think it is manufactured outrage. To emphasise, buttress the point on who is in charge of this country.
You don't think so? The NST and Utusan didn't get the same treatment as The Star.
And I don't think any of them should get that treatment. It is a matter of news sense, layout and picture of the day. The only failure to me is The Star did not choose a great picture.
Now the second and third questions. Did the authorities and The Star do the correct thing, under-react or over-react?
I'd say over-react. Why go hammer and tongs at the newspaper which apparently isn't being read by as many as before except by way of snapshots now?
If anything, put some sense into the editors about photograph selection. And maybe layout. Do we need to mention sedition?
What will happen, and perhaps that's the intention, is editors will now just do the bare minimum rather than push the envelope in Malaysian journalism. We will be left with propaganda (What am I saying? We are left with propaganda in print media.)
You know what I mean though.
We live at a time when the media is called an enemy in the US, or fake news. We live at a time when everyone can publish their own version of news in social media and blogs and it gets carried and believed.
We live at a time when journalists who go the extra mile get done in for going beyond ever-shrinking parameters set by those with vested interests and agenda.
The best journalists I know are jobless or have given up, and the few good ones try to do better in this business. Some keep quiet because they have jobs to keep, mouths to feed. Some dare and die for it.
I don't believe The Star senior editors deserve suspension. The Star screwed up on that. But I think I know why they did it. They want to avoid a suspension and keep jobs in an already difficult market.
If they get punished with a suspension, they will suffer what The Edge suffered two years ago. I know what that is like. The portal I worked at, The Malaysian Insider, suffered a block and was shut down within weeks of that block.
Malaysian journalists straddle a fine line of scooping, informing and being told to behave by all and sundry. Everyone just wants their version of news in their comfortable silos.
They don't want the truth, the facts, the reality. And when there is an opportunity to put down the media, they will do it. Not just the government, it's the rest of us.
It could be politics, it could be our own bias, it could be that we think print media is just a waste of time.
But you know, when you just see lifestyle news and anything that makes you spend money for no other reason than greed, you're basically picking up advertisements rather than news.
Journalism isn's the fourth estate any more here in Malaysia. It is the plaything of the rich and powerful; and the target of the sensitive and the outraged.
What The Star is going through this week is just another depth plumbed in Malaysia. How low can we go? Perhaps beyond bottom.
#journalism