Malaysian First Revisited &
the Sordid Pro Hominem Media Culture
When you’re … born in a place where you don’t know the history, and no one tells you the history, and the history, in fact, doesn’t exist, or in fact exists only in documents—when you are born like that, you have to learn about where you came from. It takes a lot of time. … If you are French or English…, you are born to a great knowledge of your origins and your culture. When you are born like me, in an agricultural colony far away, you have to learn everything. – V.S. Naipaul from an interview, Paris Review, 1994.
Did I just beheaded someone ?
After reading KTemoc’s two letters (#1, #2) to Malaysiakini, you go away with a sense of emptiness. About 4,000 words in total and you remember nothing. There is only hollowness; what was the man’s point, if any? Then it strikes you – they lack argument. Nothing; none at all. So much gas – farting – and if you were looking to reply him there is nothing to grip at. Those are letters full of words with nothing to say because KTemoc wanted just to fix Helen Ang, to beat her to the ground and do things to her. Small wonder he is proud to be Malaysian; beating up people is a defining quality in the Malaysian thuggish Penang ‘Hokkein’ culture and KTemoc exemplifies it best, safe among the kangaroos from people tougher than he. He acts in ways like the police beating up a poor sod in a cell, taking on defenceless people. Like Zhao Mingfu hounded, then dead.
In Helen Ang’s opening lines (here), there is an extraordinarily, quasi literate teenage quality about her political position, similar to the way KTemoc tells about his excepting for one difference; Temoc is utterly incompetent even to make the most basic point. Helen:
“I was only watching, you know, a bystander? What-ah? Shuzheng and KTemoc fight after school, what’s it got to do with me? Cannot watch, ah? Everybody also watch wh’at; why you pick on me?” (Sob, sob; here’s a hanky.)
In her actual words:
Rather than for me to be caught in the middle between two guys flexing their blog muscles, you can read their views for yourself: I wish to remain a M’sian – KTemoc replies Kadir Jasin, and Shuzheng’s Kadir has a Chinese problem, K Temoc pontificates, both articles appearing last March.
She talks of ‘blog muscles’ (you know, metaphor for boys fighting?) but directs her readers to one blog only and not KTemoc’s where it is full of profanity and invective against shuzheng (here it is; enjoy.) She omits to say that the content in the same shuzheng pagelink had been reproduced in its entirety at the Centre for Policy Initiatives (CPI) website at her instigation and behest. This is to say she has been, and remains, an active participant in the ‘feuding history’ (Helen’s words). And then there is this giveaway word ‘us’ towards the end of her letter: “Until and unless Malaysian First-ers can enlighten us….“
To preface her bystander innocence she took extra effort to create two antagonistic classes (so gweilo), she belonging to none, and addresses KTemoc as cheerleader in one, the other the anti-Firster camp with shuzheng as ‘ideologue’ head. By definition, an ideologue advocates a certain ideology. What ideology would that be? The anti-ideology ideology? Contradiction there. As to the “camp’s” location, try visiting CPI online; it has the full address with direction map to headoffice.
Helen pussyfooting with evidences, omissions and with definitions, hence the truth, has to happen not just to push herself out of harm’s way from under the two ‘blog muscles’. It also illustrates the sad state of affairs in Malaysian media culture: it’s always about me.
Hence, KTemoc (like Joshie of Malaysiakini) is full of pro hominem standards (the inverse of ad hominem and, like it, logically fallacious). When Helen reads KTemoc’s letter as ‘twisted’, she was right of course because, in the KTemoc’s standards, the primary purpose is not to critically defend one’s position against a countervailing idea. KTemoc: Kit Siang is very experienced, he paid his dues, how dare you say Kit Siang is wrong. KTemoc had intended his letter to be precisely that, to be ‘mischievous and malicious’, to hurt where it hurts most.
To critically examine, requires a good head on a good heart. To be mischievous and malicious does not even require a clever head. And because KTemoc has none in either case, Helen’s finds it a breeze (no help from shuzheng there) to take him apart in pieces (now wait for Kit Siang to put KTemoc back together). So, why bother? But then Helen has made ‘influencing public opinion’ the darling of her lifestyle.
Imagine then, CPI, supposedly an intellectual centre, is stuffed full with characters like KTemoc? Or, to extrapolate this sordid pro hominem media culture to politics, it is plainly evident why PKR (poor Zaid), Umno/BN, DAP are heavy on people, endlessly contriving, jockeying and plotting: what’s in it for me? No, no, wait a minute… count in my uncles. Public service? Bullshit. Influencing public opinion? On what? More bullshit? It is not difficult, therefore, to see why Malaysian society and politics, intellectual life in general, are the way they are; recall Badawi’s “first world infrastructure, third world mentality”. He would have meant third rate not third world, so that the principle becomes applicable even to those residing in the first world, to wit, KTemoc in Australia.
There are more side effects than can be counted as a result. Herself busy dodging barbs, a hail of it in recent weeks (or is it months?), Helen Ang misses entirely the genesis, the germinating seed, into how Malaysian First came to be discovered as fundamentally flawed. And it had begun at a rather innocuous little essay from a man named Abdul Kadir Jasin. Paradoxically, Helen had referenced the matter to Kadir, but missed the entire significance in the shuzheng and CPI pagelinks.
On that, Kadir and Malaysian First, it shall be for another time….
After Sharifuddin Abdul Latiff’s Nobody Can Stop Perkasa Now was published in Malaysiakini, it elicited this comment from a certain person with a kiddy name, urkidding: “This article carries poor analysis. Very superficial and shallow argument.“
Amazingly, though not surprisingly, urkidding stops there, like a kid bawling then halting abruptly without explanation. How is it an analysis? What is so poor about it? Or, shallow or very superficial, both of which mean the same thing, only different words. But is that an ad hominem?
Malaysiakini editors routinely let in this sort of abuse-responses, disguised as opinions or viewpoints, into its articles and its pages in the delusion they do a great service to humankind: freedom of expression. Can’t argue with that, can you? The freedom principle beats the welfare of a man. If freedom of expression is so sacrosanct, what then of Shar’s freedom from oral invective? Invoking freedom Malaysiakini need not act responsibly. It doesn’t need to act at all; just open up a page and even kidders would be entitled to some abuse-space inside it.
This same irresponsibility – freedom being greater than the person – permeates the rest of media culture, western and Malaysian. At the CPI where comments are un-moderated, it has led to this remarkably defeatist position: “Btw, could this Dan Dan now please response (sic) to points raised by Helen, Shuzheng and U-En Ng, I think we had enough of his ad hominem attack.”
Had enough? It’s as though Dan Dan is the name to a new dog specie that happened to stumble onto their website and now was time to neuter the damn animal.
CPI deliberately opened up to let in creatures like Dan Dan into their world, and then complains about ad hominem. If comments like Dan Dan were to be scissored out, would CPI be left with next to nothing to show for all the work put in? It would seem like nobody ever visits – poor thing, CPI – although moderating a page would still be necessary, not just to engender civility but also to establish a certain quality in content, style and tone.
That last sentence is, of course, presumptuous. It assumes editors at CPI or Malaysiakini have the calibre or the intellectual integrity to distinguish between profound work and banality. KTemoc is yet one more evidence into the incompetence that’s rife in media culture, starting in Malaysiakini, ending in CPI. In his case, abuse is disguised in a letter form.
At his own website, KTemoc Konsiders (or is it KTemoc Konvolute?), the man has extolled it as, “a meeting place to exchange views, no matter how different or diverse these may be. Keeping these civil and courteous would be appreciated…”
All that sounds remarkably noble, but click on another page.
There, KTemoc goes berserk in the Ibrahim Ali fashion (‘shit, shit, shit’): Fuck Shuzheng, he writes.
KTemoc’s version of ad hominem is his (k)onvoluted idea of civility and courtesy, applicable to everybody else except himself. This is the same man who claims all Jews are fascists (inversely, all Muslims are righteous) so that in such an insanely stupid statement (and this isn’t an ad hominem), KTemoc cannot be expected to have any intelligence or civility or courtesy – at all. CPI knows that, or ought to know it.
As in Malaysiakini and Malaysia Today, CPI harbours cerebral gangsters who will twist your arm or break your nose if you cross them. In their intellectual thuggery an “excellent” write-up happens only when it agrees with theirs. But, expose their racial and political prejudices, KTemoc throws up a fit. There is no reasoned counter argument, so that the only thing left to punch with is the ad hominem – the ultimate expression of a cerebral hoodlum such as KTemoc. The ad hominem is the equivalent of the sticks, knives and knuckledusters thugs wield.
In this KTemoc was attempting to rebut the Malaysian First Requires Doing a Ridhuan Tee by saying “I am proud of my ethnicity”. What ethnicity would that be? The Malaysian First super race? He doesn’t say it – at all. To avoid the word ‘Chinese’, he substitute it with the nefarious term ‘my ethnicity’. A Chinese ashamed of calling himself straight out as Chinese is proud to be Chinese? The contradiction stares straight out from under KTemoc’s name.
Not long ago, in replying to Kadir Jasin, he declared himself a proud Malaysian. Now, his pride is in his ethnicity (whatever that is). So many prides, so many allegiances, so many make beliefs: indeed, how could an Anglophile be ever proud of being Chinese?
Other, similar (k)ontradictions pour out all over KTemoc’s reply; poor man as (k)onvoluted as when he started off down the road as Malaysian First, as if it is an accomplishment and not a given fact of citizenship.
At the risk of being repetitive, below are the fundamental points raised in the Malaysian First article published in Malaysiakini:
- Lim Kit Siang is vague about what the Malaysian First encapsulates but is clear into what it rejects.
- Malaysian First is a negation on a negation (here, read U-En Ng’s exposition on that notion; clever fellow).
- Malaysian First creates two classes of citizenship and identity (here, with interpretation by Naragan of Hindraf).
- Ridhuan Tee is a prototype, even ideal, Malaysian First that Kit Siang’s ideology cannot match nor does he dare to take it up (expounded in detail here).
- Malaysian First is Kit Siang politics played out only among the Chinese (and Indians).
- Malaysian First is DAP politics intended to bring Malays into its constituency, to wit PAS members.
- Malaysian First renders the Chinese (and Indians) as lesser beings. It exchanges the Chinese (and Indian) identity for DAP’s Putrajaya crown – a new social contract deal offer which the Malays are not accepting. Neither PKR nor PAS leaders have much to say in support, if anything.
- Malaysian First is an appeasement to Umno tyranny and PAS supremacist religiosity and bigotry.
- Malaysian First is an Anglophile moral farce, and deceitful because DAP evangelical legislators have no need to renounce their Christianity as second.
- Malaysian First does nothing to resolve outstanding Malaysian social, economic and political problems, and only exacerbates them. It recognizes no collective or group interest. For example, there are no vernacular schools to protect or preserve because, under Malaysian First, the Chinese are second. Or, they don’t exist; there are only Malaysians. Estate Indians are subjugated not because they are Indians but because they are poor, individually. Malaysian First tells why Lim Guan Eng is bigoted towards Hindraf people and it tills the ground for doing away with Chinese schools eventually because, pushed to its logical conclusion, Malaysian First is one bangsa, one school, one system. This is the same call from Perkasa.
KTemoc has no answer to those core issues. With neither the capability nor the grade to deal with them, he has just chanting to show (here), churning out platitudes, ‘beyond race politics’, ‘I am proud of my ethnicity’, invoking Obama (after which Helen in rebuttal easily puts away the American aside), and then all the other yada, yada into how a good Malaysian boy he is or has been. KTemoc’s faith in or allegiance to Malaysian First is never in question (he is even entitled to believe apes descended from his father). Yet all he can offer in rebuttal are the same, insipid banality – I am proud of this, proud of that – which he has before used (here). It is full of his egotism.
KTemoc is the half-literate Anglophile version of a Macalister Road Hokkein gangster whose weapon of choice happens to be English, but writes in Manglish (what’s “insecure creativity”? A KTemoc university course in philosophy?) and relies on fuzzy triteness (what’s “transcending”? A new Kit Siang religion?) to pad up an abusive letter.
Kadir Jasin, above: you, am sorry to announce, started it all. Next time, Datuk, you’ve an existential question, can you please, please add this: Anglophile KTemoc Konvolute of Australia need not reply.
There is a preface to KTemoc’s narcissism, this preoccupation with his ego. At KTemoc Konvolute he exists there primarily as a pro hominem, the prism with which KTemoc, the man, views the rest of the world. When Kadir posed the existential dilemma, what’s a Malaysian – a fair question, KTemoc goes off into a song and dance about the wonders of his past and, perversely, about his uncles. When it is about Malaysian First, he reads it as if Ah Pek Lim’s own squalid life is under seige, a mirror of himself.
But is it at all any surprise? A man without a good head has only his wriggly tongue left for a substitute. The PAS ustaz (see clip below), the ulamas, the Ridhuan Tees, and the DAP Christian preachers churned out from the ‘Assembly of God’ churches, full of orang putih theology and little else (think Thomas Lee), bear the exact same characteristic. They are either Anglophiles or make pretend Malays, the bogus Arab towelheads, none of who could be true to themselves as Malay or Chinese or Hindu Indians.
Kit Siang gave them all a new ethnic name – Malaysian First, and KTemoc, the man with many glorious uncles, is a member.
Ad hominem is always easy against a person such as CPI’s Helen Ang (now fallen into his disfavour), but KTemoc would hesitate to go after, say, Hisham or the IGP. This is inevitable. KTemoc is never, after all, a first-rate mind, not even third, but he is a DAP thug. And thugs tend to visit the defenceless.
He accuses the Malaysian First article of “poor scholarship”. How does the article pretend to be scholarly in the first place? KTemoc doesn’t say, which then affirms the supposition that he has probably never seen a scholarly paper much less authored any – an Anglophile, cerebral goon, safely parked in Australia away from Hisham’s policemen, and with only a list of dead uncles to show for his patriotism.
This pretext-argument on poor scholarship is nearly the same to that employed by urkidding. Both their replies, on the surface about intellectual vigor, carry with them an underlying message instead. You touch Ah Pek Lim, I’ll beat you up; KTemoc will fix you, and he has many influential uncles to do the job.In the latest letter to Malaysiakini, he fawns over Kit Siang: a ‘giant’, he says (wow!), then ‘visionary’ (double wow!) and puts him next to Martin Luther King Jr (triple wow!).
So, is urkidding’s ‘this article carries poor analysis. Very superficial and shallow argument’ an ad hominem? Probably not in the category of KTemoc’s Fuck (with so many uncles, he should consider trying that out on all his nieces). Their difference is only in the wording but not their shared motives.
Ad hominem, as opposed to say, ad rem, requires no evidential prop or argument since all verbiage is directed purely at a person. Even there, many, including Helen Ang (of CPI) in her defence of shuzheng, get presumptuous: there exists an individual person to attack or to defend. They presumed shuzheng is a person singular (like Helen, KTemoc spells it with a capital S) and is male.
When urkidding says ‘this article carries poor analysis’, you can tell right off urkidding wasn’t interested in offering a rebuttal. This is because any rejoinder is itself at risk, to scrutiny in particular. Like KTemoc’s obsessive thought-use of his old, shrinking penis, urkidding had intended the comment to demoralize and to denigrate another person on the basis of ejaculated aggression by insult, that is, emotion not reason. This says KTemoc and urkidding share the same motive to undermine another person without the need to dwell properly on the subject at stake.
Urkidding was, therefore, being ad hominem in the way KTemoc was, inversely, pro hominem when he repeatedly called Helen Ang “sweetie”. Helen flagged as sweetie (when she was half-way to his disfavour) absolves KTemoc’s need to state his point; in his Malaysiakini letters, he invokes ‘giants’ (his word), those dead and on the way. In KTemoc’s (k)onvoluted pro hominem reasoning, if Helen is a sweetie, then all things that flow from her (KTemoc thinks bocor?) is therefore ‘sweet’. If Martin Luther King Jr is a giant, then all things that flow from the giant Kit Siang nose, mucus and all, must be clean of virus poison. Hence, no need to make much ado about all those criticisms or answer them.
This not only explains the astonishing hollowness in KTemoc’s letters. Rather, it goes to show how the pro hominem fallacy is so central to KTemoc that it spills out and froths in buckets each time he opens up. And Malaysiakini (and CPI) editors, squatting right under him, lick it from the corners of his mouth. Freedom of speech, you see.
There is yet another point. It also says urkidding and KTemoc and the semen-leaking Bung Mokhtar Radin of Kinabatangan have things in common: vulgar and narcissistic, the dominant properties of Malaysia’s political class. All three are interested primarily to score with insults, never to intellectually engage an opposite standpoint. The difference in the three being, KTemoc and Bung are identical in their sexually-oriented abusiveness whereas urkidding is … well, a bawling kid.
An invariable effect into this you-jab-me, I-jab-you cycle of discourse is, while Helen drones on endlessly about petty minds (think Ridhuan Tee) and, over this, runs hither-dither for a rebuttal (swallow it, girl), KTemoc is masturbating in his thoughts about sweet 13-year-old Dimpled Cheeks. He said so himself: Fuck Shuzheng. Forget ‘him’, he suggests, Dimpled Cheeks is more worthy of his thoughts. (KTemoc seems preoccupied with sex, fuck, erectile bananas, sweetie Helen, 13-year-olds, Dimpled Cheeks….)
But this mental switching around is useless, even with the actual masturbation that came after. With his Malaysian First ego still bruised, he then writes a series of letters to Malaysiakini editors, crying like a cry baby. At his age, and with so many uncles (whom he lists here) who might have his nieces, and with his proclivity for bananas, in the market for fucks and for children he sounds, positively, a potential pedophile. Dirty old man: small wonder he is ensconced in white man country. After Dimpled Cheeks, he’ll be oogling at 13-year-old white girls.
KTemoc has an armoury of ad hominem. And since he has threatened with thuggery, in his words, to fuck shuzheng, here’s to meet KTemoc on his profanity (think namewee, poor child of Malaysian First): after KTemoc is done masturbating over Dimpled Cheeks, he might want to fuck all his nieces, and then move on next to his mother right where she is buried dead. That is, fuck your mother.
One ad hominem deserves another ad hominem.
Farther evidence into the anti-Chinese (or anti-Indian, anti-Malay) nature of Malaysian First.
There is no fundamental difference between the two men (below), the Anglophile Rony Tan and the Arab Muslim Ann Wan Seng. Not contend with their conversions, they then denounced their native culture, Chinese in both cases. Rony calls Buddhism a “conjurer of tricks”. Ann Wan calls it “agama Kong Kali Kong”. They have the exact same principle embodied in Malaysian First: convert to a new race and spit on the old.
Rony Tan, Singaporean First, above; Ann Wan Seng, Malaysian First, below.
Across the causeway, Singaporean First Rony would be like Kit Siang’s Malaysian First KTemoc. Here, on the other hand, Ann Wan, Chinese, ustaz to boot, is likely to own a PAS membership card (the person who posted this video shouts allahuakhbar, and Umno is unlikely to admit him), the same kind of Malaysian First Lim Guan Eng wants to cultivate in Penang so as to secure his father’s place in Putrajaya.
Ann Wan, to be sure, is also a proud Chinese. “We must have a Chinese mosque to convert those voodoo Kong Kali Kong Buddhists,” is the message he shouts from the same kind of pulpit that Rony uses to spit at Chinese who can’t speak his little English or accept his water-walking conjurer named Jesus Christ. Hallelujah, allahuakhbar.