The Zen of Protest

December 11, 2011

www.freemalaysiatoday.com

The Zen of Protest

by Dr.Wong Chin Huat (12-10-11)

To begin with, you do not need a placard or a ensign to theatre a protest. This is however what a Police ordinarily perceive to be necessary to protest.

They hold by seizing placards or banners, they can better a criticism given a summary of a criticism will not be clear. But because do we need a placard or a ensign as a visible assist to get a summary out to a public?

First, your summary is not elementary enough or not popularly known. If it is straightforward or already well-known, we unequivocally do not need it to be created upon placard, ensign or anything. It can be a flower, a dwindle or anything not seen threatening for normal people.

In my criticism opposite a Perak manoeuvre given Feb 6, 2009, black is a visible aid. It is a anguish colour for a death of democracy in Perak as well as potentially in Malaysia. When we see a sea of black, we know it is a criticism opposite 1BLACKMalaysia, a darkness of Najib's 1Malaysia.

But, how do people know about this message? You need a little collaboration from a alternative party. In my case, we didn't get most media coverage primarily though a Police pleasantly lent us a hand by impediment me for 3 days.

Second, if we unequivocally need a created message, write in upon your t-shirt, scarves, balloons or something not seen as disrupting a every day routine.Always ensure that a authorities will have a tough time justifying because they must take divided your! visible aid. In my case, stopping me from wearing black will mean we have to first frame me off.

For a latest "Malaysians can though military permit" protests at KLCC, we will have to insist because relatives have been not authorised to move balloons with messages. It can't be 'balloons can be used as dangerous weapons to attack others', right?

Voice

Many protesters feel that protests have been deficient until they hear a little leaders giving speeches. But because do we unequivocally need a debate really?I am not opposite speeches though speeches have been unequivocally not necessary to protest. If a authorities hold that they can stop a criticism by stopping your speeches, afterwards criticism though a speech.

You do not unequivocally need a debate from a leaders to a participants if everybody knows because they have been there as well as does not need cues of motivation.

Speeches have been mostly needed only to communicate a summary to a on-looking bystanders, a media as well as hopefully a wider public. But because must such summary be verbal? What is a criticism summary essentially? A criticism summary unequivocally only needs to be a pointer of anomaly. In journalistic terms, it is to be newsworthy by being 'odd as well as unusual'.

If everybody speaks, a remarkable overpower is enough to consecrate a protest. If everybody eats, not eating is protest. If everybody walks, hire still is protest.

In 2010, we held dual wordless protests in KLCC. In a criticism opposite censorship in newspapers, we simply review newspapers upside down. When 20 people did so, it's a scene.

In another criticism opposite politically-motivated sacking of air wave DJ Jamaluddin Ibrahim, we simply wore facemasks to expostulate home a message: 1MutedMalaysia.

And if ! we unequ ivocally similar to sound effect, we do not need a open speech. You can sing songs or recite poems that can be frequency seen as disruptive by most people.

Venue

What about venue? Are there any venues necessary to protest?

The Peaceful Assembly Bill outlaws gatherings within 50m radius of twelve categories of taboo areas including military station, schools, place of worships, hospital, motor fuel hire as well as sight station.

The government's proof is to push protesters in to sealed stadiums so that protests cannot be seen by alternative members of a public.

While we must kill a check that is an assault to a constitutional freedom as well as an insult to a intelligence, let us also recognise the loop holes.There have been most places besides a twelve categories of taboo areas that have been not blocked from a public's view. Parks have been not prohibited. Shopping malls, restaurants as well as cinemas have been not.

If a large crowd unexpected turns out in a same costume, aren't this a protest? That's just what we have been we do in KLCC for a past dual weeks. Hence, for this week, Christmas trees in a KLCC can be a undiluted backdrop.

The reason because venue is traditionally seen as necessary is given protests have been organized as single-purpose activities. When protests have been embedded in to alternative activities, protests cannot be criminialized though having alternative activities disrupted.

So, if we wish to ban 'protesting' yellow commercial operation from selling in a KLCC, we can't do it though harming commercial operation in a KLCC itself. So, we see, protests won't harm business, though breach of commercial operation would.

Now, applying a 'embedding' modus operandi, even! process ion public in suit cannot be banned. All we need is to get a organisation of people occupying a coach upon LRT, a coach or a ferry, as well as we will be we do an public in motion!

Everyone can protest, anytime, anywhere in Malaysia

So, what is necessary in protest? It's a will to register your dissatisfaction. All it takes is you. It can take any form your imagination as well as creativity take you.

Tony Fernandes says, "now everybody can fly". We say, "now everybody can protest."And similar to a AAM auto rescue team, criticism can happen Anytime, Anywhere in Malaysia. Remember, one becomes slave not when labour is imposed upon him/her, though when labour is imposed upon him/her though any protest. So, feel giveaway to protest, as well as criticism to feel free.

Wong Chin Huat sees a "Malaysians can though military permit" protests at KLCC as metaphorically a open lecture upon freedom of assembly. He thanks a KLCC management, the security team as well as the counsels for their unwitting purpose as training assistants.


Read More @ Source

ANWAR IBRAHIM TIPU RAKYAT MALAYSIA !!!

ANWAR IBRAHIM TIPU RAKYAT MALAYSIA !!! 99.9 PERATUS MEMANG SAH DALAM VIDEO ITU ADALAH ANWAR IBRAHIM...

Video Rating: 3 / 5

More Barisan Nasional (BN) | Pakatan Rakyat (PR) | Sociopolitics Plus |
Courtesy of Bonology.com Politically Incorrect Buzz & Buzz

No comments: