The Western Hypocrisy Concerning Free Speech

1. What Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad said two days ago is true. The West attacks Mahathir for exercising his right to freedom of speech but at the same time, they defend cartoons insulting Prophet Muhammad as their right to freedom of speech. Why must the West demand the entire world live by their standards and definition of free speech, while totally ignoring the sensitivities of others?

2. The Western hypocrisy and double standards are appalling. This appears to be how the West operates. They attack other countries without any regards for the suffering of the citizens of those countries, using “the war on terror” as an excuse. If the same is done to them, they will call it terrorism. Basically the West uses terrorism to fight terrorism.

3. Mahathir is known as someone who speaks his mind. He even organised a conference to get the so-called war on terror, such as the one in Iraq, declared as a criminal act. Since then many Iraqis have suffered, and many more are still suffering until today. The toll has been very high, not only those who have been killed during the war but the millions who are now refugees and are dying from disease and hunger on a daily basis.

4. The West only speaks up when it suits their agenda and keeps silent when it does not. The objection against Mahathir is because he is not “one of them”. If Mahathir were, then what he said would be considered as merely him exercising his right to free speech. That is how the West plays the freedom of speech card.

One Comment

  • IT Scheiss

    Well said, Tuan Syed.

    Western-style, multi-party, representative democracy is not the only model of democracy in the world and moreover, the western-style democratic culture and tradition, won in the west through hard struggle by western people, is not a culture or tradition which is deeply rooted amongst the people of other parts of the world, especially of Asia, the Middle East and Africa, as well as of Latin America, which were mostly feudal when they were colonised by the “democratic” liberal western powers.

    The colonised people fought primarily for independence from their colonial masters and when they won independence, some practiced a form of western-style democracy, whilst others practiced a form of socialism as in China, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia.

    Many people in these post-colonial, western-style, multi-party democracies are what I would call “dyed-in-the-wool” democrats – i.e. where the culture and traditions of western-style democratic culture and traditions are not deeply rooted but are superficial.

    Instead, most people in Asia place a higher priority on their livelihood and economic wellbeing, rather than ideals of western-style democracy, and there is nothing wrong with that.

    For example, most Singaporeans are quite happy with their not-so democratic PAP government and most don’t want to change their system.

    Likewise, people in China who are enjoying rising prosperity and quality of life, despite the inequalities which still persist between the coastal urban and inner-rural parts of China, which the China government is trying to resolve.

    Look at he mess our “more democratic and free” “New Malaysia” is in today, where our imports and exports are falling, graduate unemployment is high, the government is re-considering reversion to the GST, where prices and cost of living are still high, racial and religious tensions are rising, whilst leaders and politicians at the top are jostling for power like Neros fiddling whilst Rome burns – and sorry, but that also includes feuding factions within PKR.

    “Malaysia Baru” is a dysfunctional democracy, similar to Weimar Germany and we all know what came after Weimar Germany.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *