I was somewhat proud when Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) was chosen to be in the Accelerated Program for Excellence (APEX). Looking back on the many months since then, I see myself as naive to think that it'd benefit everyone. Since what I heard and perceive aren't substantiated, I'd just leave it out.
Then today, it was reported in the paper that students were manhandled because they were distributing leaflets (without getting prior approval) to invite students to witness the handing over of a memorandum calling for a free and fair university student council elections. As much as I loathe the sight of these security personnels who enforce a certain rule and shutting their eys to others, they're just following orders. What piqued my interest in posting about this matter is the kind of campus election we have here in Malaysia; modeled after the real elections in the real world.
Yes, we vote in secret and ballots are crossed. What I meant by modeled after the real world is that there are two factions: The Pro-University and the Pro-Mahasiswa (loosely translated as Pro-Student) who'd fight it out. The former and latter could be seen as parallels to the government and the opposition. What happens when you have two poles such as these? The usual indoctrination in which the "opposition" is the bad guy, and a destabilizing force - an anarchist kind of group deemed dangerous and doesn't deserve the students' votes.
What a big pile of crap. I'm not taking sides here but I sincerely feel that one running for office should contest under his own banner and not as a collective - be it the "government" or the "opposition". Why model after such a thing? Something interesting I observed is that these leaders from the pro-varsity side will speak the same thing as politicians in the radio, papers, and TV: vote for us and we'll make sure everyone is treated equally and that we'll achieve better things. Craps.
We're not after monetary perks but seeking one who'd voice out our needs without having to go through a board meeting or having to go through dilutions to make it more presentable to the higher ups. We have definitely heard elsewhere in the country, during campus elections, or reports regarding threats, intimidation, and confrontations between two groups. What the hell for?
So, what has 50 years of stable and strong governing taught the young; the so-called leaders of tomorrow? Is it "hold on to your seats and grow deeply entrenched roots"? Is it "tell the less-informed that only the governing body can guarantee progress"? One thing's for sure, we've successfully teach these leaders to follow blindly without any convictions. It's always a collective and there's no such a thing as a single and sincere vision.
Thus, we see today that we no longer have people who cared deeply about issues involving the students. If any, they'd just keep silent and follow the herd. The collective; where victory is almost always guaranteed. Anyone not with them is against them, against the establishment, the university. Crap.
I don't see the need for these government and opposition modelling and labelling. I see the need for one to speak up for truth and having no fear for it or for the repercussions thereafter. I see the need for students, myself included, to break out from these shell and have a leash around our necks all the time. When the time comes, we're free again but we've lost all we need for survival. End result? Lousy products.
A friend from South Korea spoke of secondary school students taking part in a conference called Model United Nations (MUN) organized by universities. For what MUN is all about, click here. I've never heard of it; imagine a 23 year old graduate hearing something alien from a 16 year old.
So, excellence doesn't wholly mean publishing lots and lots of papers. If not, the program would be called A3P (Accelerated Program for Paper Publications). It's about the students. It's about creating a person and not a robot. It's about producing bright/average graduates having his/her own convictions and views without having to get them from another person. Buck up and wake up if you're still resting on your laurels. From all the funding, by all means upgrade and build but don't neglect the unseen. It's high time students such as myself feel so unsure of things due to the leash and commands all these years. Stop having the notion that all elections and appointment to the student council need two groups of people fighting it out. It should be individual. Each with his or her aim. It's time one group be endorsed and painted as the "good guy". The University (notice the capitalized "U", I won't interfere in other varsities) should appoint to office victorious candidates and make clear it's neutrality towards the elections. I believe they call it non-partisan?
The university has some very bright staff and some excellent lecturers. Myself am fortunate to learn from and work with a few people whom I can speak to freely. One who gives me space to grow to whatever size I can grow. For all these plus points can be seen as a masterpiece but like all masterpieces, one flaw is magnified and frowned upon. Have we seen imperfect paintings? That of Mona Lisa or those frescoed by Rennaisance artists in the Sistine Chapel? Long as it may take to complete but the goals were set and people toiled to finish it.
Hence, model after the Rennaisance. After the UN; or if the UN is seen as powerless, after the Arab League. After all, these are bodies with a proven track record. Why model after a nation whose leaders and system has sown discord and caused conflict among its people? What more, a proven record of corruption (Transparency International, 2007).
Then today, it was reported in the paper that students were manhandled because they were distributing leaflets (without getting prior approval) to invite students to witness the handing over of a memorandum calling for a free and fair university student council elections. As much as I loathe the sight of these security personnels who enforce a certain rule and shutting their eys to others, they're just following orders. What piqued my interest in posting about this matter is the kind of campus election we have here in Malaysia; modeled after the real elections in the real world.
Yes, we vote in secret and ballots are crossed. What I meant by modeled after the real world is that there are two factions: The Pro-University and the Pro-Mahasiswa (loosely translated as Pro-Student) who'd fight it out. The former and latter could be seen as parallels to the government and the opposition. What happens when you have two poles such as these? The usual indoctrination in which the "opposition" is the bad guy, and a destabilizing force - an anarchist kind of group deemed dangerous and doesn't deserve the students' votes.
What a big pile of crap. I'm not taking sides here but I sincerely feel that one running for office should contest under his own banner and not as a collective - be it the "government" or the "opposition". Why model after such a thing? Something interesting I observed is that these leaders from the pro-varsity side will speak the same thing as politicians in the radio, papers, and TV: vote for us and we'll make sure everyone is treated equally and that we'll achieve better things. Craps.
We're not after monetary perks but seeking one who'd voice out our needs without having to go through a board meeting or having to go through dilutions to make it more presentable to the higher ups. We have definitely heard elsewhere in the country, during campus elections, or reports regarding threats, intimidation, and confrontations between two groups. What the hell for?
So, what has 50 years of stable and strong governing taught the young; the so-called leaders of tomorrow? Is it "hold on to your seats and grow deeply entrenched roots"? Is it "tell the less-informed that only the governing body can guarantee progress"? One thing's for sure, we've successfully teach these leaders to follow blindly without any convictions. It's always a collective and there's no such a thing as a single and sincere vision.
Thus, we see today that we no longer have people who cared deeply about issues involving the students. If any, they'd just keep silent and follow the herd. The collective; where victory is almost always guaranteed. Anyone not with them is against them, against the establishment, the university. Crap.
I don't see the need for these government and opposition modelling and labelling. I see the need for one to speak up for truth and having no fear for it or for the repercussions thereafter. I see the need for students, myself included, to break out from these shell and have a leash around our necks all the time. When the time comes, we're free again but we've lost all we need for survival. End result? Lousy products.
A friend from South Korea spoke of secondary school students taking part in a conference called Model United Nations (MUN) organized by universities. For what MUN is all about, click here. I've never heard of it; imagine a 23 year old graduate hearing something alien from a 16 year old.
So, excellence doesn't wholly mean publishing lots and lots of papers. If not, the program would be called A3P (Accelerated Program for Paper Publications). It's about the students. It's about creating a person and not a robot. It's about producing bright/average graduates having his/her own convictions and views without having to get them from another person. Buck up and wake up if you're still resting on your laurels. From all the funding, by all means upgrade and build but don't neglect the unseen. It's high time students such as myself feel so unsure of things due to the leash and commands all these years. Stop having the notion that all elections and appointment to the student council need two groups of people fighting it out. It should be individual. Each with his or her aim. It's time one group be endorsed and painted as the "good guy". The University (notice the capitalized "U", I won't interfere in other varsities) should appoint to office victorious candidates and make clear it's neutrality towards the elections. I believe they call it non-partisan?
The university has some very bright staff and some excellent lecturers. Myself am fortunate to learn from and work with a few people whom I can speak to freely. One who gives me space to grow to whatever size I can grow. For all these plus points can be seen as a masterpiece but like all masterpieces, one flaw is magnified and frowned upon. Have we seen imperfect paintings? That of Mona Lisa or those frescoed by Rennaisance artists in the Sistine Chapel? Long as it may take to complete but the goals were set and people toiled to finish it.
Hence, model after the Rennaisance. After the UN; or if the UN is seen as powerless, after the Arab League. After all, these are bodies with a proven track record. Why model after a nation whose leaders and system has sown discord and caused conflict among its people? What more, a proven record of corruption (Transparency International, 2007).
No comments:
Post a Comment
Fire away! I'd like to know what's on your mind.