I am convinced that room for talk and dialogue must be expanded for civil society communication.
This is crucial if we mean to give people the opportunity to discuss issues that affect their lives and that of their community.
A mature democracy is obliged to give citizens their democratically and constitutionally-endowed freedoms, which include the freedom of speech, and create the space for them to express themselves.
Some may choose to manifest their concerns by joining peaceful street protests and demonstrations.
Others may want to speak at forums or write to publications.
Instead of being heavy-handed and threatening, government departments entrusted with public engagement should do just that, that is, engage people by listening to their pleas and requests.
The people, on the other hand, should exercise their rights in ethically and legally acceptable ways.
Instead of being armchair analysts and critics huddled together, Malaysians should be prepared to come out in the open, not only to give vent to their unhappiness, but more importantly, to offer suggestions and solutions to societal problems.
This was what Dialog Rakyat 2 inspired among 80 participants at their roundtable discussions last week.
That the group was not large was secondary as they were there by invitation to discuss issues threatening national cohesion and unity.
Their brief was to offer “actionable practices” to address these issues. Dialog Rakyat 2 augmented Dialog Rakyat 1 held last December.
It was encouraging to see the earnestness and enthusiasm with which some of the nation’s most senior thinkers as well as youth leaders handled the deliberations during the two sessions: Session One was on key issues and Session Two was on programmes and activities.
At the end of each session, representatives presented their findings and conclusions.
Yes, the consensus is that there are issues, some more pronounced as a result of educational, religious and political developments in the country.
Malaysians are being driven apart by what should unite them, namely, a wholesome and nurturing education system.
If the education philosophy has promised the most desirable outcomes for the nation, the way national schools have developed over the last few decades leaves much to be desired.
Polarisation, not integration, as was envisaged, is the order of the day.
Of course, there was the usual cry for a single-school system, which I think will not and cannot happen without encountering a battle cry that might tear down society.
A more feasible proposal is to incorporate the teaching of Rukun Negara and the Federal Constitution into the school curriculum.
Through the teaching-learning of the nation’s philosophy and its governing and governance structure in national and national-type schools, children will be exposed to the very foundation of Malaysian value and ethical systems.
At university level, students should be involved in unity through diversity platforms, programmes and activities.
Apart from the teaching and learning of the Constitution at a higher level, its spirit and that of Rukun Negara must be shown to be directly manifested in a Malaysian value system where respect, understanding, accommodation and harmony are key to national cohesion and unity.
I joined the discussion on race and religion and was impressed by stories of what are being done by youth groups and residents associations (RAs) .
The most recent one reported in the media was a Chinese New Year gathering of more than 400 residents organised by an RA in collaboration with a mosque.
What was intriguing was that the mosque committee allowed Chinese songs and music to be played on its loudspeakers while people ate on the mosque grounds.
It was agreed that food is a great rallying factor and novel parties over a food theme at picnics and sports gatherings will bring people together. And so will cultural events such as costume parties with traditional dance and music.
At the official level, religious and community leaders are meeting to consolidate research findings to formulate interracial and inter-religious policies, which in the long run can feed into law reform.
What they should urge for is an Anti-Racism Act.
A retreat should be initiated by the committee where bigger discussion groups can interact in a more congenial setting.
I am convinced this will be break down barriers.
With more and more groups joining forces to formulate action plans and codes of ethical conduct for events, there will grow a citizen movement focused on building national cohesion and unity.
This will be a constructive development to counter naysayers and to provide a platform for people to show their love for the country they call home.
DATUK HALIMAH MOHD SAID ,
President, Association of Voices of Peace, Conscience and Reason (PCORE)