Posted by EngineeringProfit > 1 month ago | Report Abuse

The concerns expressed here reflect frustrations over the prioritization of resources and aid for foreign nationals, specifically Palestinians from Gaza, over the welfare of Malaysians. The metaphor "bagai kera di hutan diberi susu, anak di rumah mati kelaparan" suggests a situation where outsiders are prioritized while local citizens suffer, likening it to feeding monkeys in the forest while one's own children starve at home. This perspective criticizes Malaysian politicians for extending medical treatment and hospitality to Palestinians, potentially neglecting pressing local needs. Additionally, the reference to Singapore's refusal to accept refugees is used as an example of a policy that focuses on internal prosperity by not spending on non-citizens. Singapore's financial discipline, infrastructure, and refusal to take on the burden of refugees are credited for its economic success. This comparison is drawn to highlight perceived inefficiencies in Malaysia’s spending, which is described as having a "first-class budget" but a "third-class mentality." This critique touches on several key issues: 1. **Resource Allocation**: The core argument is that Malaysia should prioritize its own citizens, particularly in light of high national debt and economic challenges. The criticism suggests that by aiding Palestinians, Malaysia is neglecting its own people who may be struggling with healthcare, poverty, or unemployment. 2. **Political Leadership and Governance**: The notion of "first-class smartly self-serving korek korek leaders & frogliticians" alludes to political corruption and opportunistic behavior. It implies that Malaysia’s leadership is more focused on personal gain than addressing the needs of the population. "Frogliticians" refers to politicians who switch allegiances for personal or political advantage. 3. **Comparison to Singapore**: By citing Singapore, the argument suggests that Malaysia should emulate a more pragmatic approach, prioritizing economic growth and internal development over humanitarian efforts for non-citizens. The comparison underscores the belief that spending on foreign refugees diverts funds from domestic issues. These viewpoints are part of a broader debate about national priorities, refugee policies, and political integrity. The sentiments reflect concerns that humanitarian aid might come at the expense of addressing critical issues within Malaysia itself, particularly in times of economic strain.