Related external post: PAS Wants To Apply Strict Syaria Law, Including Amputations And Stonings! (via The Malaysian)
Every time a high profile case of violent crime gets media attention, two things generally happen. The first is that the question once again arises as to why the rate of violent crime has gone up. Second, champions of stricter Islamic laws, and its unilateral application, start to voice out their calls for religious statedom - and hudud being the answer to crime eradication, they say.
In the span of one week, a state assemblyman was gunned down, and another pre-teen abduction. So, what gives? And what is our Royal Malaysian Police doing about the seemingly incredible increase in violent crimes? More substandard (and sometimes faulty) CCTV systems?
Walski's not calling for a police state like environment, with road-blocks around every other corner, incidentally. It's funny, but any time there is a challenge to the incumbent BN government via peaceful protests, all kinds of police crawl out of the woodworks to ensure that civil voices are quelled efficiently. So, it can't be that there's not enough police manpower.
With the Police's outright recalcitrance against the IPCMC, the somewhat sustained levels of graft, and the rising crime rate, it's no wonder the confidence level of the public towards the effectiveness of our police is at an all-time low - despite what you might have read/heard in the state-controlled media.
And then there's other thing Walski mentioned: continued calls for instituting an Islamic state, and the implementation of hudud - corporal punishment, 10th century style. It's no surprise, therefore, when dogma-driven Islamists like MENJ blame the current crime rate on our secular system, and stating that it's the one thing Pak Lah has given Malaysia as a legacy. You got empirical evidence to back your claims, dude?
If that's not enough, take a gander at what Reuters reported yesterday.
In the first place, Walski predicts that if, God forbid, PAS should come into power nationwide and hudud is implemented, you'd actually see a rise in "crime" initially. Hopefully, Walski won't be around to ever witness this travesty.
(making Malaysia even more unlivable, and more, in the full post)
Why? Well, for one thing, Walski predicts that a lot of things, which are considered mundane today, would be criminalized, on the pretext of going against "morality". Like holding hands between male and female. Same-sex holding hands is okay though.
Interestingly, as the Reuters report goes on to state, what Nik Aziz said was in context of trying to make PAS more acceptable to non-Muslims.
"Thieves steal from the rich and the Chinese are more well-off than the Malays. If a thief's hand is amputated and he goes to the football field or he goes to the market, people can see that he is a thief," he said.
"Everyone will be afraid and won't steal."
Rather simplistic, if you ask Walski. A little too simplistic. It also shows that being religious doesn't necessarily make one more intelligent, nor does it save one from the diesease of stereotyping. Walski reckons that, like other lame-brained political ploys (and not necessarily only by PAS), politicians go for the perceived quick-fix, and not the root cause of problems. Which is why, to Walski at least, PAS is a political party first and foremost, with Islam being their primary political tool.
Don't know about you folks, but with this kind of political rhetoric, what Nik Aziz has effectively done is essentially making PAS even more un-appealing to non-Muslims (and probably to a lot of silent-majority type Muslims as well). Inadvertently, by trying to reassure us that non-Muslims will not be subjected to hudud, is Nik Aziz implying that the problems with crime we're having now is entirely the fault of the Muslims?
And please - don't even try to tell Walski that the real root cause of our crime problem is because there's not enough Islam (or any religion for that matter) in the public sphere. That's like saying motor vehicles are the main cause of road accidents - it's just nonsensical.
If indeed Malaysia's crime rate escallation is because there's no hudud, how does one explain Singapore? The violent crime rate there is definitely lower, drivers actually stop at padestrian crossings, and no hudud to "scare" the populace into behaving like human beings. In short, a very secular state - but a state whose citizens definitely feel more secure from crime.
The reason why Malaysia is not worse off than we are today is because of our secular system, not despite it. And with continuing erosion of Malaysia being a secular nation with every succeeding generation, the further down the pits of depravity we seem to be finding ourselves in. Goodbye first world wannabe, Hello Pakistan...
Sad though, for those who'd have no choice but to vote for PAS against BN in the coming elections. This kind of simplistic reasoning seems to be endemic in both these parties. Maybe it's a typical Malay mentality thing.
Not that Walski wants or likes to stereotype, but if Mastika is largest circulated periodical in the country - and who else reads that sordid publication if not the Malays (many actually swallow what's written lock, stock 'n barrel) - it's gotta be a reflection of sorts on what goes on in the Malay mind.
And that, folks, is simply criminal... the real root cause of our problems today.