Reformasi vs Madani: Approach to Governance and Law

God-fearing Society: Laws and policies in a god-fearing society are often derived from religious texts or are heavily influenced by religious authorities. The goal is to create a society that reflects divine will, with laws that enforce moral and religious behavior. Legal systems may include religious courts, and civil liberties might be restricted based on religious morality.
Outcome: Governance may be rigid, with limited tolerance for diversity in thought or belief. Laws may be enforced in a way that prioritizes religious conformity over personal freedom, often leading to reduced innovation, human rights, and inclusivity. Examples include countries where blasphemy, apostasy, or non-religious practices are criminalized, affecting freedom of expression and individual rights.

Mature Society: In a mature society, laws are created through a democratic or consultative process, reflecting the needs of a diverse population. Legal frameworks emphasize individual rights, fairness, and justice, with secular laws that apply equally to all citizens, regardless of religion.
Outcome: Such societies tend to be more inclusive, adaptable, and focused on social progress. Laws are shaped by public discourse, evidence-based policymaking, and respect for personal freedoms. This approach fosters innovation, equality, and a system that encourages people to take responsibility for their actions within a fair legal framework.

Freedom of Thought and Expression

God-fearing Society: In a society centered around the fear of God, freedom of thought and expression is limited, especially when it comes to questioning or challenging religious doctrines. Religious authorities hold significant influence over what is acceptable speech or thought, and dissent would met with punishment or ostracism.
Outcome: Intellectual growth may be stifled, as individuals are discouraged from critically examining religious or societal norms. Creativity, scientific inquiry, and innovation may suffer if they conflict with religious interpretations. Education systems might focus more on religious instruction than on fostering critical thinking.

Mature Society: A mature society encourages open discourse, debate, and critical thinking. Individuals are free to question authority, whether it’s religious, governmental, or cultural. Education systems are designed to foster independent thought, creativity, and problem-solving skills.
Outcome: A mature society tends to produce more innovative thinkers, entrepreneurs, and problem-solvers. This freedom of expression and thought can lead to advancements in science, technology, and the arts, as well as the development of more humane and inclusive policies.

reedom of Thought and Expression

God-fearing Society: In a society centered around the fear of God, freedom of thought and expression is limited, especially when it comes to questioning or challenging religious doctrines. Religious authorities hold significant influence over what is acceptable speech or thought, and dissent would met with punishment or ostracism.
Outcome: Intellectual growth may be stifled, as individuals are discouraged from critically examining religious or societal norms. Creativity, scientific inquiry, and innovation may suffer if they conflict with religious interpretations. Education systems might focus more on religious instruction than on fostering critical thinking.

Mature Society: A mature society encourages open discourse, debate, and critical thinking. Individuals are free to question authority, whether it’s religious, governmental, or cultural. Education systems are designed to foster independent thought, creativity, and problem-solving skills.
Outcome: A mature society tends to produce more innovative thinkers, entrepreneurs, and problem-solvers. This freedom of expression and thought can lead to advancements in science, technology, and the arts, as well as the development of more humane and inclusive policies.

Role of Fear vs. Personal Responsibility

God-fearing Society: In a god-fearing society, fear of divine retribution is a central motivator for good behavior. This fear may extend to fear of punishment from religious or legal authorities for violating religious laws. The emphasis is on avoiding wrongdoing because of external consequences, rather than an internal sense of responsibility.
Outcome: While this approach can create a compliant society, it may not cultivate genuine responsibility or ethical maturity. People might follow rules to avoid punishment, but not necessarily because they understand or agree with the moral reasoning behind them.

Mature Society: A mature society operates on the principle that individuals are capable of making their own moral decisions and are responsible for the consequences of their actions. People are encouraged to think critically about their behavior, to understand the impact of their choices on others, and to act out of empathy and reason rather than fear.
Outcome: This approach fosters a deeper sense of personal accountability. People learn to self-regulate their behavior, contribute positively to society, and take ownership of their mistakes. It encourages moral development and ethical decision-making based on understanding, not fear.

Adaptability and Progress

God-fearing Society: A society based on religious fear may be less adaptable to change, as religious laws and traditions are often seen as immutable. Resistance to modernity, social progress, or changes in cultural practices can be strong, especially if they are perceived as contradicting religious teachings.
Outcome: This can lead to stagnation in social, scientific, and technological development. The focus on maintaining traditional religious norms may hinder progress in areas like gender equality, human rights, or innovation.

Mature Society: A mature society is more adaptable and open to change, as it relies on evidence, critical thinking, and open debate to shape its policies and practices. This allows it to respond more effectively to new challenges, such as technological advancements, environmental issues, or evolving social norms.
Outcome: Mature societies tend to be more dynamic and forward-thinking. They are better equipped to handle modern challenges and are more likely to invest in innovation, equality, and sustainability.

A god-fearing society is often grounded in religious obedience, fear of divine punishment, and a rigid moral framework based on religious texts. While this may provide social cohesion and a shared moral code, it can limit personal freedom, stifle critical thinking, and hinder adaptability.

In contrast, a mature society encourages personal responsibility, ethical reasoning, and critical thinking. It promotes individual rights, social progress, and inclusivity. People in a mature society are motivated not by fear, but by an understanding of their role in contributing to the common good, leading to a more progressive, adaptable, and innovative environment.

Muslim eateries with halal cert shouldn't sell to Non-Muslims

The idea that these rules come straight from the big boss upstairs pretty much makes any opposing opinions about as useful as a chocolate teapot. In this case, it’s all about sticking to the heavenly script, no shortcuts or modern-day workarounds. If anyone tries to wiggle in some flexible interpretation, it's basically just humans looking for a divine loophole to bend the rules!

Divine law as unwavering: From this viewpoint, the presence of even the smallest trace of a forbidden substance is enough to render a product impermissible, as religious law is seen as unwavering and not subject to human rationalization. Thus, while technology can help identify these substances more accurately, the fundamental issue is not technological capability but the underlying religious mandate to avoid what is forbidden.

Divine law as unwavering: From this viewpoint, the presence of even the smallest trace of a forbidden substance is enough to render a product impermissible, as religious law is seen as unwavering and not subject to human rationalization. Thus, while technology can help identify these substances more accurately, the fundamental issue is not technological capability but the underlying religious mandate to avoid what is forbidden.

Any attempt to allow conflicting rulings or flexibility in interpretation is just an excuse by humans to circumvent or dilute divine mandates.

The idea that these rules come straight from the big boss upstairs pretty much makes any opposing opinions about as useful as a chocolate teapot. In this case, it’s all about sticking to the heavenly script, no shortcuts or modern-day workarounds. If anyone tries to wiggle in some flexible interpretation, it's basically just humans looking for a divine loophole to bend the rules!

These prohibitions are divinely ordained, with no room for human interpretation or compromise. In this view, whether it’s high-tech DNA testing to detect traces of pork in chocolate or using simple methods to check for alcohol in fermented food like tempoyak, the presence of these substances is inherently sinful or forbidden.

How?..............By playing their related issues down or up?

Whether hi-tech testing for pig dna in chocolate or simple test tube testing for alcohol in tempoyak- the presence of either one is strictly prohibited by heaven, no? Anything else- conflicting rulings are man-made human's excuse, no?

Whether hi-tech testing for pig dna in chocolate or simple test tube testing for alcohol in tempoyak- the presence of either one is strictly prohibited by heaven, no? What u say are man-made human's excuse, no?

For Malsia, the lessons are clear: without decisive reforms to remove parasitic middlemen, inefficient agencies, and entrenched interests, the nation risks economic stagnation, social discontent, and a loss of competitiveness in the global economy. Ancient civilizations serve as a stark reminder that ignoring these issues can lead to unsalvageable decline.

For Malsia, the lessons are clear: without decisive reforms to remove parasitic middlemen, inefficient agencies, and entrenched interests, the nation risks economic stagnation, social discontent, and a loss of competitiveness in the global economy. Ancient civilizations serve as a stark reminder that ignoring these issues can lead to unsalvageable decline.

Mesopotamia’s failure to reform its parasitic bureaucracy weakened its economic base, leaving it vulnerable to external conquests by the Assyrians and Persians. The parallel lesson for Malsia is that unchecked bureaucratic inefficiency and corruption can undermine economic productivity and lead to societal collapse if reforms are not enacted.

Like "Little Napoleons" in modern systems, local officials in Mesopotamia used their positions for personal enrichment, rather than facilitating trade or providing public services. The wealth of the state was drained by this parasitic class of officials, leading to food shortages, reduced productivity, and social unrest.

In ancient Mesopotamia, particularly under the Babylonian Empire, the complexity of the bureaucracy grew as the empire expanded. The state relied heavily on a bloated and inefficient system of officials who controlled trade, taxation, and land distribution (including rompak tanah musang king rakyat). As bureaucratic inefficiencies mounted, the agricultural sector, which was the backbone of the economy, became strained.

Ancient Egypt is another example where bureaucratic inefficiency and excessive centralization led to its downfall. As Egypt’s rulers became more focused on white elephant projects to glorify their own reigns, they overtaxed the population to finance these projects. This created a massive drain on resources that weakened the economy and led to public discontent.

The bureaucratic elite, especially the priesthood, wielded enormous power and controlled vast amounts of wealth. Over time, these elites became more self-serving, prioritizing their own wealth and status over the welfare of the population. This led to social division, famine, and unrest.

While some Pharaohs attempted reforms, they were largely cosmetic. The core problems of wealth concentration, corruption, and inefficient governance persisted, which weakened Egypt’s ability to respond to external threats like the invasions of the Hyksos and later the Persians.

The failure to address bureaucratic excess and corruption, combined with a lack of meaningful reform, led to Egypt’s decline as a dominant power. Modern parallels can be drawn to Malsia’s challenges, where entrenched interests and inefficient governance can weaken the country’s economy and social fabric.

Throughout history, the accumulation of power by bureaucrats, inefficiencies in governance, and the neglect of economic, social, and technological needs led to the collapse of once-thriving societies.

The failure to reform inefficient and parasitic bureaucratic structures has repeatedly led to the downfall of powerful civilizations. Ancient Egypt, Ancient Mesopotamian, Rome, The Ottoman Empire, , The Mughal Empire, the Han Dynasty, and others serve as cautionary tales for modern societies, showing that without reforms aimed at curbing corruption, inefficiency, and the undue influence of bureaucrats, the foundation of the state itself can crumble

A fast sinking and irremediable spiraling down debt-laden cum poverty-stricken country like malsia could only make a u-turn by removing all the middle & meddling agencies like the hundred billion parasitic jkim & its gang

The removal or reform of inefficient and parasitic agencies such as JKIM & gang could be a timely move for Malsia. It would address public concerns about the cost of governance, enhance the country's economic competitiveness, and ensure a more efficient use of resources to support long-term growth and stability.

With regional neighbors like Indonesia and Vietnam becoming more attractive to foreign investors, Malsia must act to ensure it remains competitive by creating a more business-friendly environment. Removing unnecessary middlemen is a crucial step toward that goal.

Government of the people, by the people, for the people- Public Sentiment: There is growing dissatisfaction with the government's performance in managing the economy, corruption, and inefficiency. The public may view the removal of parasitic agencies as a sign of the government’s commitment to reform and accountability.

Fiscal Crisis: Malsia is facing increasing fiscal pressures and unbearble foreign debt, and the government is searching for ways to reduce the deficit without imposing excessive taxes on citizens. Cutting out wasteful spending and inefficiencies in the public sector is a logical step.

Religious Bureaucracy as an Economic Drain: While the religious bodies play a significant role in cultural and spiritual matters, the allocation of public funds to these agencies is often questioned, especially in times of economic stress. Some argue that focusing on providing basic needs like education, healthcare, housing, and infrastructure would have a more direct and measurable impact on national prosperity than maintaining extensive religious bureaucracies.

In an increasingly globalized world, Malsia must compete with other nations that are reducing bureaucratic red tape and streamlining their administrative systems. Countries like Singapore, which emphasize a lean, efficient government structure, serve as examples of how cutting down on unnecessary agencies can improve competitiveness, attract foreign investment, and spur economic growth.

Only by removing these agencies, the government can curb inefficiencies, reduce corruption, and eliminate "power trips" that hinder economic progress.

Eliminating unnecessary layers of bureaucracy could reduce the cost of doing business and lower consumer prices, ultimately easing the financial burden on the rakyat.

Malsia's current socio-economic landscape, marked by rising costs, stagnating wages, and a fast-declining economy, necessitates a focus on efficiency, transparency, and accountability in governance and administration.

The bureaucratic layers JKIM adds is perceived as inefficiencies or additional costs passed on to businesses and consumers. For example, the halal certification process involves stringent rules and fees that businesses must adhere to, making JKIM's role akin to a gatekeeper of commerce, rather than a direct service provider to the public or cost-saving facilitator to business people.

Malsia should streamline its regulatory functions, allowing for more direct business operations without the need for religious bodies like JKIM to have such a prominent role in commercial and certification processes. This could lead to a less politicized, more economically progressive environment that favors transparency and direct governance.

A sinking and spiraling down country like malsia could only make a u-turn by removing all the middle & meddling agencies like the hundred billion parasitic jkim & its gang

With the commoners in her heart, Nyonya Teresa can be a better pm than AI

Nothing nore unislamic than this kind of dishonesty

Sudah salah pilih geng - total disrespectful of the lost msian lives in 9/11 attacks

That means, today, there are advanced scientific methods available to detect even trace amounts of alcohol in foods.

And yes, because these are man-made and arbitary - should change with time and technology

Yes, democracy (government by the ppl, of the ppl for the ppl) means every single rakyat must stand up against injustice, cruelty and kezaliman. Let the business ppl decide for themselves.

Posted by cemertugus > 7 hours ago | Report Abuse

i agreed with @EngineeringProfit, "Those that see value in obtaining halal certification—due to consumer preferences or market positioning" maybe can go for Halal Cert. they can voluntarily apply for Halal Cert. If their market for Non-Muslim, no required to have Halal Cert.

Comparing to Contemporary Halal Certification Standards: Modern halal certification bodies take a stringent approach to the inclusion of alcohol in food products. For a food to be certified halal, it must not contain any alcohol.

Stick to The Principle of Caution (Ihtiyat): In Islamic law, there is a strong principle of avoiding doubtful matters (shubuhat). If there is any uncertainty about the alcohol content in these traditional foods, Muslims are encouraged to avoid them to maintain their adherence to halal dietary laws.

Forget about human-made ruling. Islam clearly prohibits the consumption of intoxicants, particularly alcohol, regardless of the amount. Even if the alcohol content is minimal, the mere presence of alcohol in these foods contradicts halal principles. Hence, shouldn't any level of alcohol that results from fermentation, even if it doesn’t intoxicate, still invalidates the food’s halal status?

And depend on use of technology like the case of Cadbury chocolate in 2016. And soon advanced testing for presence of alcohol - abusing technology is never cheap for the general people to pay. Hard time now . Many B40. Just need food. Affordable price- not inflated one