time: 9:13am
music: will you fall for me - delta goodrem
mood: disgusted.
judging by how regular i've been updating this blog, it's rather obvious that i am still semi employed. oh well. we all knew it would come to this. positive side? i have loadsa time. negative side? no money, constant bugging from certain older people and that 120K degree to operationalise. not so awwezzome. darwin's infamous "survival of the fittest" seem to apply more, just about here; at THIS point in my life, and im beginning to feel the pinch in this search for "real" life. it ain't about part time employment and future potentiality no more baybehh... the future is HERE, and now, its all about showing that you're genuinely intelligent, and that the past 3 yrs of undergraduate studies made u a better person - able to offer something to the organisations in return for wages to pay bills and put bread on the table. (i am lucky i still have my parents to support me). many times this past mth, i wish i hadnt rushed thru my assignments, instead, i wish i had thought them over more immaculately. i wish i'd went to all my spss classes and operationalised my skills, instead of 'borrowing' alice's or kate's copy everytime, thinking it was a cunningly smart way to cheat. i wish i'd practised my spss, instead of letting them go all rusty even before i have had the chance to show them off. i wish i had my own textbook - the one my life depends on now, instead, i have to probably hijack the library n' steal off a a guide to spss usage. tell me, how do i get past it? maybe i'm just still immature and i rant, so its just all-talk. this time around the doctor was nicer, less judgmental and less cocky. i cannot be certain to be employed by the end of the week, but i have been told, in sight of the recent economic dysfunctions, for a fresh graduate from a non-local uni, i have had response offers.. ok, not offers per se, but "call-backs", which doesnt happen much with many newbies. so syukur alhamdulillah and hopefully my pintu rezeki akan terbuka soon. =) on the comical high though, an anoynymous police officer noticed me enough to inquire about me, setting us on an sms convo for a good 2hrs. arh.. my bills. my bills. but heck. i thought it was flattering n' so urhmm.. sweet in an UNoriginal way how he inquired and got my number. amused. so very amused ...
***
there is a need for racism. and before bombarding me w' democratic rants, hear me out. who isn't bothered by the likes(or dislikes)of racism? well, yes, if you're not a member of the oppressed party, then maybe you wont bother your pretty head with these issues. but generally, anyone human enough, would at least realise and admit the existence of disparities between two(or more ?) sets of human races, ONLY separated by a(n) ethnic/ religious/ cultural circumstance they are born into, hence not giving them any power whatsoever? yes?
two nights ago, oprah primetime premiered an exclusive issue on the subordination of women and children (most affected by) the civil wars that are happening in conga, africa; largely ignored by the whole world. when africa is in discussion, it is not just something of a region, a fundamental issue not just to the people of Africa, RATHER, to the history of the human race. africa has been a continent of enormous upheaval; wars, disease, poverty, genocide, on a horrific scale have been commonplace in many parts of the country. from the colonial period on, despots of all sorts have carved up the continent and exploited the people through a recurring series of experiments in collectivism and statism. africa has literally been a cruel cosmos for every form of socialist, fascist, and other central government planned experiment imaginable. each of these experiments, obviously has been a disaster.
sadly, yet most unsurprising enough, such ideas did not originate in Africa; rather, were imported from the major universities of the West, whose departments of development economics were all consumed with the idea of central planning. Yes, oprah had featured an episode on the congan. however, in light of the recent premier of "hotel rwanda", this is me in history class, preaching on rwanda.. with some references to the oprah episode on the congans (on the types of brutalities practiced by the rebels).
today, a civil war is raging between the two main races in rwanda, in pre-colonial times, the watutsi (or 'tutsi') reign; characterised by the absolute rule of a mwami (king) who, with a lot of religious ceremony and formal conqueror's pomp, oversaw the extraction of labour from the 'hutus' and determined which of them got land and how much. all was peaceful in Rwanda until a couple of greedy land-grabbing european powers, namely britain and germany, decided to divvy up large swathes of east africa in the late 19th century. the germans set their greedy paws on rwanda. and in their act of colonialism, introduced urban development and christian prosyletisation. but, by the end of WWI, at germany's defeat, rwanda was taken off germany and passed to belgian adminstration as a means of reparation for its suffering during the war, though no such compassion was ever known to be demonstrated to the rwandans.
it wasnt clear cut said out loud, but colonisation had somehow provided the hutus, the realisation that, being predominantly larger in population, they cld be as, or more powerful than their counterparts, the tutsis. this is where i come in and voice out in my very tiny, probably insignificant voice and say: suppression of one over the other, brutally referred to as "racism" is needed for smooth governing. one set of race has to be more powerful than the others in other to avoid civil wars and rebels. and rwanda provides us with a powerful example.
the belgians had found it administratively convenient to increase tutsi admininstrative and military power over the large Hutu population; while subtly insinuating "bad" blood between the two races. in the late 1950s, because they were larger in population, the hutus started demanding an improvement in their living conditions and an easing of their ethnic suppression. the response from a powerful Tutsi clan in 1959 was a mass murder of Hutu leadership, leading to a Hutu uprising in which an estimated 100,000 Tutsis were massacred. rwanda's eventual independence in 1962 was followed by the country's first officially recognised Hutu government; and subsequent years, until today, of tug and war bloody games between the two races.
on the types of brutalities practiced, as reported by oprah's journalist who actually went on site: women there, their eyes are glazed, no emotions, no reaction, as if numbed from all the sufferings they'd underwent throughout their lives. an illustration was provided as one woman, was interviewed and on her account reported that her village was attacked in the middle of the night. her family including herself had hid themselves. when discovered, the soldiers peed one them! she was then striped naked and legs forced open tied to two parallel tree trunks. her 12 yr old son was asked to rape her and when he did not comply, he was shot several times, and died; instead, 10 over men raped her themselves. afterwards, her limbs were broken, and with no medical aid, it remained broken and healed in their broken state. her husband subsequently left her after the ordeal; his excuse being: the rapist (the rebels), were usually infected with STDs and so, he cld no longer be with his wife. (how selfish). i, however deem this a convenient excuse; being atypical man, his EGO was probably butchered, and burried all at one go, amidst his audience to his wife and children's sufferings, helpless. his inability to protect his family drove him to leave his family at their worst. how ircorrigible. u reckon?
these brutalities are still happening. much as i hate to practice the habit of blame, i place some on colonisation. somehow, amidst the "labelling" (which the westerners are so good at), the hutu and tutsis were ea made to realise their "potentials" and equity. their fight for power has selfishly resulted in millions and millions of deaths.
what do u make of this?
who d'ya reckon is to blame?
in relation to sg, inspite my massive believe that melayu-progression has been pinned down to a minimum snail-slowness, i think the diff rates of progression subtly insinuated by the singaporean society/ government, for the diff races, (sadly an expected slowness from the melayus), is possibly why sg is such a blardy peaceful country. we know where we're placed. as frustrating as it may be for some. it is only human nature for stereotyping to happen. so as long as dysfunctions and delinquencies remain at the sky-high for the melayu society, we shall always, not out loud of course, but we shall always be "expected" and "regarded-till-proven" to not be .. as good? instead of incessantly complaining at the injustice, i urge for realisation; to make better of ourselves.
whaddaya reckon?
