Principles of Organisational Behaviour

Principles of Organisational Behaviour 2nd editionAn Irish Text
Description
It examines individual, group and organisational processes in an attempt to understand human behaviour in the workplace.

New chapters on Emotion, Stress and Psychological Well-being, Individual Learning, Organisational Learning, Managing Diversity, Women in Organisations and Intercultural Adjustment and Working Abroad.Each chapter of this new edition features:—

Learning objectives stated at the outset. Presents introductory material along with some more advanced concepts— A summary of key propositions — Discussion questions and a set of multiple choice questions— Five Key Readings that the students may want to consult for more detail on the topic being discussedSuitable for third level students taking courses in Organisational Behaviour or courses of which Organisational Behaviour is a component.Accompanied by a lecturers’ website containing PowerPoint slides and web links (www.gillmacmillan.ie).

Contents
SECTION 1: INTRODUCING ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR1 Introducing Organisational Behaviour

SECTION 2: THE NATURE OF THE INDIVIDUAL2 Personality3 Perception and Cognition4 Learning and the Individual5 Emotion, Stress and Psychological Wellbeing6 Motivation

SECTION 3: THE DYNAMICS OF ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXT7 The Dynamics of Communication8 The Dynamics of Groups and Teams9 The Dynamics of Organisation Structure and Culture10 The Dynamics of Organisational Learning11 The Dynamics of Work Systems and Technology12 The Dynamics of Organisational Leadership13 The Dynamics of Conflict14 The Dynamics of Power, Politics and Ethics15 The Dynamics of Effective Strategies16 The Dynamics of Organisational Change and Development

SECTION 4: CONTEMPORARY DEBATES IN ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR17 Managing Diversity18 Women in Organisations19 Intercultural Adjustment and Working Abroad

ENGLISH AND RACISM IN OUR PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES

English and Racism in our public universities

Posted by admin
Sunday, 29 March 2009 20:21
After 13 years Malaysian public education, I have come to realise that the majority of our students will never be able to stand on their own later in a life. Since primary one till form five, we were not really guided to become good thinkers, leave alone great ones. We were spoon fed entirely.
After achieving excellent results in my STPM, I managed to get into the top university in Malaysia that is University Malaya. Being at the top of the world, my perspectives of the medical faculty has really taken a turn. It is not about the academic staff which is no doubt excellent. The worrying issue here is the students of the faculty in particular the medical students. The standard of our students are no where compared to any top University in the region. We are so called the top achievers in pre-university exams, which by the way is split between STPM and matriculation even though the quality and standards are a world of different.
Leaving the difference in pre-u exams alone, we have at least one common exam, which is MUET (Malaysian University English Test). I was told that in order to get into course such as medicine, one will need to obtain band 5 and above with 6 being the maximum. However that was not the case when I arrived here where there are students pursuing medicine with a band 3. Band 3 represents a modest user of the English language on the score sheet. That is the capability our so called top students. I question why have the double standards? Why push a form six students to get a minimum of a band 5 and matriculation students get in with 3, or is this result not considered during the admission process? Lately, the standard of our English is deteriorating and vital resources have to be spent on English classes for medical students. English classes are important in order to improve the student’s proficiency; however it is definitely avoidable if they were to meet certain requirements before being accepted into the university.
In the light of the Science and Mathematics in English controversy, I would like all those people who are pushing so hard for the policy to be abolished to look at the standard of our English. These individuals whom have absurdly nothing better to do than criticize the policy rather than help meet its objectives. Besides the NGOs which have been opposing the policy , yet the biggest surprise to me was when there was circular by PIMUM(society in UM) in which our recently elected head of student council called it a ‘jenayah’(crime) for this policy to be implemented. First of all, I doubt he can read and write in English satisfactorily but is all out to prevent his younger brothers and sisters the chance of proficiency in the language. His statement by all does not represent the students in University Malaya and is definitely not why the people elected him. I guess he better buck up and stay with his responsibility of upholding the student affairs and needs.Besides the English scenario, the medical faculty has an extremely racist orientation where everyone is segregated into their racial backgrounds. This is due to the fact of fear of failure and the overdependence of the undergraduates who cannot fend for themselves. The tradition of this racist orientation has been long ongoing and slowly being spread to other faculties and universities. The racism is so bad that even during eating hours you see the people sitting according to race. Books, elusive past-years, information are only shared between a particular race. After class stay backs for the Malays, meeting outside lecture for the Chinese and many more. I did not mention the Indians as their numbers are too small that a sms will do. Pre-exam prep for the Malays or Chinese or Indians only. They are also against briefing a person from another race and threats to scare those who want to. Mind you that these people are going to be future doctors, and what stops them from being the same when treating patients as they are brought up in this manner.
There is much more stuff to be mentioned but I think if those issues mentioned do not get any attention, what is stopping us seeing separate lecture halls for the different racial backgrounds in the years to come. Those in medical faculty can deny all you want to but that is the truth and to be honest doctors we should start a change to see through all these menace. - SSC

The Economics of Cooperation

Saturday, 28 March 2009
The Economics of Cooperation
What then are the progressive features of Capitalism as it currently exists, and how can those features be advanced. How can the reactionary features of modern Capitalism be negated?The following features can be listed as generally progressive and leading to a raising of productive potential.1. Large scale production of mature commodities. Contrary to orthodox economic theory, which posits the onset of diminishing returns beyond a certain level of output, there is in reality no indication for most mature products of such a phenomenon. On the contrary all empirical evidence indicates that for such products alongside greater and greater levels of production goes lower level of costs through the economies of scale. Rationally, such production should be encouraged as an efficient use of man’s resources with the proviso that consideration of transportation costs to markets, including the external costs in terms of environmental damage, be taken into consideration in locating such large plants around the globe. However, such large-scale production necessarily implies a degree of monopoly or oligopoly, which might have a reactionary consequence in terms of the willingness to innovate, to restrict consumer welfare etc. As previous experience has demonstrated addressing such monopoly power through the replacement of a private with a public monopoly does not constitute a progressive solution.The State as a Capitalist State can only carry on its activities including the provision of goods and services according to the norms of Capitalist production, including all of the limitations that entails – in particular the idea of production for profit rather than for need. Capital in the form of State owned Capital continues to confront the worker as Capital rather than as means of production. In fact, as Kautsky argued it can because of the power of the State confront the worker in a more awesome manner than does private Capital. The worker continues to suffer alienation, and all of the attributes that limit large-scale production by private Capital are reproduced. The alienated worker has no connection with their product or with the final consumer of that product. They have no incentive to work efficiently, in fact, the general bureaucratism that always accompanies the activity of the Capitalist State is likely to ensure that they work if anything less efficiently than under a private capitalist regime, and consequently the products and services produced are often shoddy, and costly. Its clear that only by transferring such production into the hands of the workers can such problems be overcome. But, although such a transformation is a necessary condition it is far from a sufficient condition. A Monopoly simply in the hands of workers need not be any more progressive than a monopoly in the hands of the Capitalist State, or in the hands of private capitalists. Indeed, on its own such an enterprise could make its workers little more than such private capitalists. Such a venture can only be progressive if it acts in such a way as to utilise the advantages of large scale production to ensure both a reduction in costs, and a mobilisation of its resources to meet the needs of consumers now and in the future, that is that the problem of alienation is overcome in practice by fusing the interests of the workers in the enterprise with the interests of their fellow workers in the community at large. In other words it means that the enterprise must be organically linked to the working class, which acts to feed into it, ideas, needs and so on, whilst actual control of the means of production reside with the enterprises’ workers themselves.Only in so far as these workers directly associate their own individual and collective interests with those of the working class as a whole can this be achieved. In short it implies, a qualitative shift in class-consciousness, and in working class democracy; the establishment of whole new structures of participation and discussion. Only on that basis could workers in these enterprises be persuaded to invest the necessary resources into Research and Development to ensure the creation of new products and designs to meet consumers needs, or to invest in Quality Control measures to ensure an ever improving quality of products and services provided to consumers and so on rather than simply sitting on their laurels and enjoying the benefits of being a monopoly supplier. Yet, it is in these areas that the real benefits of Co-operative production should be greatest. It is in the eradication of alienation as workers make contact with those for whom they expend their Labour that the worker can begin to transform “work” into a normal human activity, through which the worker expresses themselves, and thereby raises the productivity of labour to levels that Capitalist production cannot match. It is through the desire to produce as effectively as possible, and to produce new exciting products that the worker desires for themselves as a member of the community at large that the drive can come to innovate in products and techniques.2. Technology Sharing. Given the huge costs of developing new products like engines the sharing of technology makes enormous sense. One area where competition continues perhaps to make sense is competition amongst workers to innovate, not necessarily for any financial gain, though there is no reason why under the rules of the Capitalist game that have to be observed at present workers should not gain financially from such innovation, but, for personal pride and satisfaction, and for the results of that innovation to be shared. At the present time such innovation under Capitalism is restricted. The large monopolies technology share with each other for their mutual benefit, but only amongst themselves. Although, some specialised workers engaged in R&D Departments may be well-paid to engage in such activity, the huge reservoir of talent that resides within the workforce in general is not utilised, and even the R&D workers remain just workers with no immediate incentive to innovate. More generally, monopoly capitalism is marked not by such technology sharing, but by the opposite, by commercial secrecy, by the protection of innovation by patents, etc. In some of the most important areas of life such restrictions are immediately harmful to the public well-being e.g. in the development of pharmaceuticals.Although, a Worker Co-operative would have no reason to share its technology and innovations with private Capitalist enterprises, Co-operative enterprises operating as part of a broader Co-operative holding Company would have such an incentive, because with profits going to the holding company all workers in the Co-operative sector would directly benefit from the increased profits that would accrue from the rapid take-up across the sector of such new products, techniques and so on. Further arrangements to directly benefit the innovating enterprise by some kind of licensing arrangement or other financial inducement could also be considered.3. Planned Production. The introduction of enterprise planning techniques, many of which have been learned from the experience in the USSR, represent a progressive development within Capitalism. However, it has to be remembered that although these techniques are similar to those that would have to be utilised in a socialist society the content and intent is completely different. A socialist society would use planning techniques such as Market Research and so on to determine the needs of society in order to allocate resources so as to best meet those needs. Capitalist enterprises utilise such techniques in order to maximise their own profits. A Workers Co-operative operating within a continued Capitalist environment would have to walk a line between both. A socialist society can allocate resources to fulfil a need for certain social goals irrespective of whether the enterprise/s producing those use values do so at a profit or not, because society as a whole decides to do that, and finances it by diverting surpluses created elsewhere in the economy. A Workers Co-op within a Capitalist environment cannot do that for the obvious reason that any resultant losses will not be financed.However, the opposite is not true. Whereas, an individual capitalist enterprise produces to maximise profits in the long term, the worker co-operative has no such imperative. It may not even have to produce profits at all on an individual basis. Very large Capitalist enterprises may well operate on a basis in which certain parts of their business produce no profit, for a number of reasons. One Department might produce inputs for another department, and the losses of one are the gain of the other. Production may continue at a loss in one Department if that production makes a contribution to the enterprises overall fixed costs. In other words, if that production ceased the firms fixed costs then had to be borne by the remaining Departments who as a result produce a lower overall amount of profit than was previously the case. But, enterprises have to make a profit overall – at least in the long-term. But, the worker Co-operative might have other goals than simple profit maximisation. It may engage in some form of market research in order to determine consumer needs, and then plan its production not to maximise profits, but to maximise the long-term employment stability of its workers. As part of a C-operative holding Company it might produce at a loss, in order that its products can be used by other Co-operatives profitably giving them a competitive advantage over their private competitors and so on.Planning by Capitalist enterprises is also restricted in the obvious sense that each enterprise seeking to maximise its profits works with closed books and commercial secrecy. Its planned decisions are not shared with competitor firms, and so the underlying planning assumptions of each firm may well turn out to be false. Each enterprise might think it knows what capacity its competitors has and its ability to expand that capacity, it may expend resources on employing industrial espionage to uncover those secrets and plans, but it can never really know what they are going to do. Experience in the realm of microprocessors over the last couple of decades has shown competing firms spending large amounts of money on new capacity only to find that their competitors have done the same creating a resultant glut. Economic theory describes such behaviour in terms of the cobweb theorem which shows the way such production decisions rather than leading to conditions of equilibrium, rather lead to ever wider disparity between demand and supply.But, a worker’s Co-operative as part of a Co-operative Federation would work with open books in relation to other Co-operative enterprises. Not only would each Co-operative enterprise in a particular industry have an incentive to share its plans with its fellow co-operatives, because in doing so it would avoid making costly investment decision mistakes, but it would have an incentive to share such information both with its suppliers to ensure that they could gear their own production plans to its needs for inputs, thereby avoiding dislocation and costly hold-ups, but would have an incentive to share those decision with those which it supplied for similar reasons, particularly in the case of co-operative retail outlets, which could be an important secondary source of consumer information and feedback.4. GlobalisationOne of the reasons that Capitalism has revolutionised production has been its ability to take the division of labour to new heights. Its pinnacle is the globalisation of production. The latest Nobel Laureate for Economics Paul Krugman won for his work on analysing trade patterns. He asked the question why was it that trade cannot be theorised in the terms of Ricardian Comparative advantage, why is it that some countries produce essentially the same products, but trade these similar products between them? His answer was simple – economies of scale. It does not make sense to produce at a single car plant small batches of 5 different models. It makes sense to produce a large number of one model. It then makes sense to produce the other 4 models at 4 other plants, and these can just as easily be in say Canada as in the US, resulting in trade between the two.Although, there has been a lot of opposition to globalisation in recent years focussing on the exploitative nature of such investment in poor countries a lot of this opposition has, in fact, been ill-thought through. Most of it comes from that “anti-imperialist” Left, in the West, that also lines up with assorted reactionary “anti-imperialist” forces in some of these countries that are the immediate and real enemies of the workers there. In fact, for the same reasons that Marx saw Capital performing a revolutionising role in India, and Lenin saw it performing in Tsarist Russia, globalisation performs a truly revolutionising role in industrialising poor countries, and creating the basis for them transcending Capitalism through the creation of powerful new Labour Movements. Of course, Marxists do not condone or encourage the oppression and exploitation of workers in this country, but the solution to that as in the opposition to the rule of Capital at home is to organise the workers into Trade Unions, Co-operatives and Workers Parties, not to condemn the peoples of these countries to perpetual backwardness. Of course, workers here are limited in what they can do to assist such a development in poorer countries simply through their Trade Unions, and campaigns such as “Fair Trade”, which focus simply on consumerist boycotts and so on can never provide a real solution to the workers in these countries. But, Worker Co-operatives can, because they have a direct incentive to assist in the development of worker owned Co-operatives in those countries, and to integrate them into such an international Co-operative conglomerate.Such a development is a direct means of ensuring direct technology transfer into these economies, and the immediate effect that would have in raising both the productivity and living standards of workers there. It would also provide a powerful motive force to encourage further development, not to mention encouraging further such Co-operatives and he consequent effect on workers class consciousness and the facilitation of the development of Labour Movements and Workers Parties.In short the spread and co-ordination of Co-operative production on a global basis is a direct and practical application of the slogan – “Workers of the World Unite”.5. The Greening of BusinessIn recent years business has responded to the growth of environmental concerns by taking on board green issues. Even Investment houses have established so called Ethical Funds, which only invest money in companies that conform to some code of ethics, be it in terms of environmental impact, avoidance of trade with certain regimes and so on. Some of the leaders of these companies do actually seem to be committed to these ideals, but in large part it is, of course, just a marketing exercise, intended to win market share from that large number of middle class consumers who wish to assuage their consciences. In the end, capitalist business will continue to attempt to maximise profit – the current downturn has seen a marked move away from concern for such issues by companies that have tried to maintain their bottom lines – and this is just a ploy to that end. Having said, that in the process some useful tools have been developed in the way of Green Audits, Carbon footprinting and so on that will be useful to workers in developing Co-operatives that really do have a concern for the environment.More than that, it has become clear that the amount of investment that should be being directed to green industries is not being made, partly due to the frictions that arise from large amounts of Capital remaining tied up in traditional monopoly capitalistic business. Considerable scope exists for Co-operatives to expand into these new technology areas, which because they are at the leading edge tend to have a low organic composition of Capital in their initial stages – that is they require relative small amounts of Capital compared to the high value intellectual Labour involved in developing new technologies and technological products – but which have high value added, and potentially high growth rates driven by exceedingly high rates of profit. A Co-operative conglomerate could and should help to foster such industries and development.6. Taking on the socialised production of the stateIn the twentieth century the State socialised considerable functions important to the running of a modern Capitalist economy. It provided an educated workforce via State Education, it provided a healthier longer-lived workforce via socialised healthcare, it socialised social care through National Insurance Pensions, Unemployment Benefits etc. in order to maintain a calmer social order, and more compliant workforce, it socialised Housing Provision through the construction of Council Housing and so on.During the Long Wave downturn from the mid 90’s to the end of the 90’s it rowed back from some of these programmes as the cost became too high, reducing them to minimum levels, and where possible privatising provision. As I have written previously it was no coincidence that the State introduced National Insurance just at that point where workers living standards had risen to a level where their own Friendly Societies could have become well-financed Social Insurance organisations directly owned and controlled by workers, and instead diverted those funds into the pocket of the Capitalist State, for scant return, and no control. Marxists should not support the privatisation of these functions, but we should look to transfer them back into the hands of the workers themselves so that the workers have control over their own finances, and can use them for their own purposes not to finance some latest idea of the Capitalist State such as building a new Trident nuclear submarine and so on.In the news today, for instance, was the crisis over housing. One of the BBC Newsreaders asked the Government spokesman why with lots of unemployed building workers, and lots of housing needed the Government could not itself simply employ those building workers, providing them with a job, and the homeless with a home. Of course, no reply was forthcoming. But, we should not expect the Capitalists’ State to do that anymore than the Capitalists themselves. It operates according to the same principles of profit, and concern for the profit of the Capitalists who would pay the taxes to finance such a scheme. They work according to different criteria and interests to us.But, the point itself can be addressed to the workers movement itself. The Co-operative Bank is in the midst of a £70 billion merger with Britannia Building Society. The latter as a mutual BS is controlled by its members as is the Co-op. Both have links with the Labour Movement, and the Co-op in particular through the Co-operative movement. Brittania finances people to buy houses, the Co-op Bank in addition as part of its business helps finance businesses. It seems obvious to me that the focus of attention of the merged organisation should be to prioritise and direct their funding towards a) the creation of Housing Co-ops, which can buy up existing properties that are empty, and the construction of new co-operative housing, and b) towards the financing of worker-owned and controlled construction Co-operatives that could employ some of those unemployed building workers at decent rates, and who could then build and maintain the former housing thereby not only housing the homeless, but who through their rents/and or mortgage repayments would not only replace the wages and costs of the Co-operatives, but would create a large new pool of finance to cover the expansion of the Co-operative Housing sector.The solution to these problems lies within our own hands, if we only mobilise to bring it about rather than sitting back and waiting for the bourgeois state to do it.7. The Decentralisation of productionAs the introduction of new technologies has once again revolutionised production, so property forms and social relations are once again undergoing change, and the form of co-operation is once again changing in consequence. Alongside all of the above, the concentration of production etc. is occurring a contradictory development, not the concentration of production, but its decentralisation. That has come about as a result of a number of developments.Firstly, mass production led to automation, and automation has led to computerisation and roboticisation. Where mass production manufacturing has not already been shifted overseas it is now undertaken in huge factories that employ few actual workers, and where many of the repetitive jobs have been taken over by robots. There are already a number of fully automated workplaces. Similar, transformations have occurred in distribution too. Point of Sale terminals in stores now send instructions directly to computer systems that automatically place orders with suppliers once some minimum stock level is reached, and those computers communicate directly with the suppliers computer to make the order, which in turn sends those instructions to robots which pick the necessary products from the shelves, and take them to be shipped out. Now even the shipping function might be further automated. Not only do the huge freight ships have very few crew for their size, but a new technology is being introduced, which will enable a convoy of vehicles to be led by a single lead vehicle with a driver, whilst the others are computer linked to it behind!Even in banks and other service industries, computers have replaced cashiers, and increasingly banking is done electronically by Internet. It cannot be long before the cost of maintaining large supermarkets and stores becomes such that the advantages of online shopping will see a change in that area to. Already online shopping is increasing at a far more rapid rate than through retail outlets. And in high cost areas, already there is a move to avoid the high cost of office space by encouraging home working. The danger for workers of such a development is of isolation and atomisation, undermining collective bargaining power.The simple answer to that is to use the techniques that peasant producers have developed in Europe, the establishment of marketing and distribution co-ops. In fact, such a solution could be useful as a response to the increase in casualisation of labour. In other words workers could form their own distribution Co-ops that acted as suppliers of labour power. It would in fact be a way of replacing all of those private manpower agencies that rip workers off and provide them with no protections in the supply of temporary and part-time labour to minimum-wage paying employers. A Co-operative Labour exchange of this kind could act as a monopoly supplier of Labour Power to Capital, thereby raising the price of labour-Power as a commodity, and putting an end to the back street sweatshops.But, more than that already there has been established Co-operative ventures into the world of ISP with Poptel. Not only should such Co-operatives be developed, but a Co-operative for homeworkers could also ensure that the potential for their atomisation was overcome, and their services could be marketed by such a Co-operative over the Internet.And as I have said, previously the tendency is increasingly towards consumer spending on Leisure and entertainment as living standards rise and spending on traditional consumer items declines as a percentage of spending. That together with the Internet and the cheapness of much of the required technology has led to the growth of new artists and creative people selling their product over the Internet to a global marketplace. Again, such production is highly suitable to organisation and distribution through a Co-operative. In fact, a Co-operative for Creative people already exists - Creative Co-op . If all of those socialist film directors, writers, musicians, actors and other creative people were to combine their talents in such a Creative Workers Co-op what a tremendous force that would be to undermine the monopoly of bourgeois ideas, and the bourgeois media!

Capitalism Rejected and why this beast should be brought to heel and inexorably destroyed?

Capitalism Rejected and why this beast should be brought to heel and inexorably destroyed?
By William Bowles
Posted By tom rigbert On March 27, 2009 @ 1:48 pm In American Imperialism, American politicians, Ideological combat, Revolutionary Crises, wealth and poverty
Wherein Bill Bowles sets forth the reasons—for the obvious good of humanity and planetary survival— why the capitalist beast should be brought to heel, and inexorably destroyed.
SO I GET THIS NOTE: would I like to write an essay under the heading of ‘Capitalism: Rejected‘, to which I immediately added the question mark, after all, a host of countries rejected the damn thing throughout the course of the 20th century only to see their labours, their dreams shattered as capitalism launched its successful counter-revolution.
Nevertheless, what are the chances that we could, once more, reject the beast, at least within our lifetimes? This is, as far as I’m concerned, the burning issue of our times, perhaps more so now than at any previous time.
It’s long fascinated me that with so much actual knowledge and experience about how exactly capitalism works that we on the ‘Left’ have failed to produce a workable and convincing alternative. All kinds of theories have been advanced as to why, especially in the aftermath of the collapse of the socialist projects.
One explanation, laid out in a book Marx’s Revenge by Meghnad Desai, advances the theory that there are two major reasons as to why socialism failed first time around. Firstly, he says that in essence, the success of the Bolshevik revolution pre-empted the spread of capitalism across the world, thus stopping the full development of capitalist productive relations and the commensurate development of a global, industrial working class that would have formed the basis for a world socialist revolution. This follows from Marx’s original idea that it was only when capitalism was no longer able to expand, in other words when it had filled as it were, every available niche, every market, would the objective conditions exist for socialism to come about as a world phenomenon.
Constant revolutionizing of production, uninterrupted disturbance of all social conditions, everlasting uncertainty and agitation distinguish the bourgeois epoch from all earlier ones. The need for a constantly expanding market for its products chases the bourgeoisie over the whole surface of the globe. It must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connections everywhere. —The Communist Manifesto – Karl Marx.
Understandably, Marx saw this process as ‘progress’, as laying the groundwork for a future communist revolution. One thing I am sure he did not foresee is that such endless and insane production would threaten the basis for maintaining the ecological balance that has made the emergence of human existence possible.
But does this undermine Marx’s basic premise about industrial capitalism being the basis for a future communist society? And, as intra-capitalist rivalries resurface once more with the end of the Soviet Union, we are seeing a return to the ‘bad old days’ of imperialism unleashed as never before, given the immense technological power it now possesses. The situation is made worse by the failure of socialism, insofar as it’s given rise to a struggle between modernism and tradition best epitomised by the rise of fundamentalism in all its forms. A deeply unsettling trend that threatens to undo all the gains of the past century of struggles.
Second, and related to this idea, Desai says that the development of socialism under conditions of scarcity is impossible; crudely put, there just isn’t enough dosh to go around. Trying to develop socialism in conditions of under-development and within a world capitalist economy is doomed to failure, unless the major capitalist economies can also be overthrown. This goes back to the century old ’socialism in one country’ debate between Trotsky and Lenin.
Of course, all this is with the benefit of hindsight, after all, should the Bolsheviks have aborted their revolution predicated on the idea that it was premature? Lenin and the Bolsheviks were convinced, wrongly as it turned out, that the Bolshevik Revolution would trigger a more general revolution right across Europe, especially in Germany, the most developed of the capitalist economies in Europe and the one with the most advanced working class.
Instead, the Bolshevik Revolution - which occurred in a country that had more in common with the economies of the colonial world - triggered revolutions in countries which were least able to put socialist theory into practice, at least as Marx envisaged it.
So were all the cards stacked against socialism from the getgo?
At this point I’m tempted to ‘put the cat amongst the pigeons’ by advancing a totally heretical idea, at least when set against so-called ‘classical’ socialist philosophy, namely that the fundamental nature of capitalist production is the antithesis of socialism; the factory, the assembly line, the mass production of an endless stream of products, the ‘excreta’ of which is polluting the biosphere and which is the basis of wars and exploitation, has to be dumped. The socialists of the early 20th century looked to the most ‘advanced’ economy, the United States, as their model, seeing it as the shortest route to development, perhaps not realizing that capitalism and industrialism were joined at the hip. That ultimately, the idea that industrial production is essentially neutral is false. As the climate goes down the tubes and along with it the finely tuned planetary ecology - the biosphere - that exponential industrial capitalist (and ’socialist’) production has upset, it raises the fundamental question of whether ‘development’ of the kind we have had for the past centuries is a dead-end, both literally and metaphorically.
But with what do we replace it if the poor of the planet are to enjoy the fruits of their labours? This conjures up images of an unrealistic ‘return to nature’ such as was envisaged by the early socialists such as William Morris, who wanted to re-invent an economy based on hand-crafted production and the cooperative, an idea which was to re-emerge later as Syndicalism or the self-managed, worker-owned enterprise.
Of course, it could be argued that the industrial system, which is still essentially a 19th century form, is but a phase through which we pass on our way to some more rational system integrated into the Gaia, but will we survive in order to realise it? [1]
The problem with this approach, given that in theory at least, we know what needs to be done, is the reality that capitalism is an addiction for vast swathes of the planet’s population, either because they want, or appear to want, what capitalism offers; consumer goods, the automobile, washing machines, the whole, fucking nine yards.
The key here is that as socialists, we do know what needs to be done; first and foremost, we need to break the habit of capitalism. This entails a complete transformation of our consciousness, our priorities, the most difficult thing to do. Those of us who are, in theory at least, ‘lucky’ enough to be born in a developed economy are unlikely to give up our privileges voluntarily, only a complete collapse of capitalism or an ecological catastrophe on a vast scale is likely to force us to re-order our current priorities. Will it come to this?
At this point, I’d like to posit the idea that given time and in a world without two competing ideologies, the scientific and technological developments of the past centuries do make it possible to envisage an advanced technological civilisation, global in scope that does use resources rationally, doing ‘more with less’, that satisfies the needs of everyone. Obvious you might think, again, we do know what we need to do, the only thing getting in the way of such a future is capitalism itself, a system that is incapable of revolutionising itself out of existence. Only an alliance of the most advanced elements of capitalist society can produce such a revolution.
The infuriating aspect of the current situation is that many of these essential ingredients do already exist, for example, the ‘green’ movement, the misnamed anti-globalisation movement, the deep unhappiness that many within developed economies feel, that manifests itself as a deep yearning for a lost past, whether mythical or real. A loss of meaning, of belonging to something larger than alienated families, whose only salvation is spending, consuming, trapped on a treadmill that has no end. Moreover, there are many millions of us who are clinically sick because of it all, our mental hospitals are crammed with the casualties of capitalism. It’s true to say that capitalism is bad for your health, but then so was industrial socialism.
Hence, one of the fundamental problems we confront lies not in the objective conditions within which we live but in the subjective, our states of mind, states that see no solution except to drop out of the political process as struggle is pointless. We have lost faith in our ability to take charge of our own destinies and largely because the promise that socialism made has not been realised.
It should be apparent that there is a paradox wrapped up in an enigma here, for the objective conditions created by industrial capitalism of the 19th century that led to working people demanding to be in control of their own destinies whether through trade unions, political parties and all manner of expressions of what used to be called working class culture, have not been realised. Indeed, some would argue that we have been let down by the promises of the socialists of the 20th century, that the countries that embarked on the socialist ‘road’ failed us.
Or, perhaps we failed ourselves and for the very reasons I stated above, namely our addiction to capitalism was just too strong to break the chains that bound us. It would be just too easy to blame our own failures on the Soviet Union or China, or anywhere else that took the non-capitalist road, no matter how distorted they were. But can we not think for ourselves? Apparently not.
This doesn’t mean that the ideas, the ethos, the yearnings were false, for they still occupy the central issue of our times, which the ‘war on terror’ epitomises, albeit in a nihilistic expression, for failing to offer a progressive and viable alternative to capitalism opens up the way for the Usamas of this world to fill the gap that would have otherwise been filled by a truly revolutionary consciousness.
The rise of the anti-globalisation and global justice movements points to the fact that the struggle is far from over, indeed, it could be argued very forcefully, that these point to the beginnings of a new socialist movement but coming about in a very different environment from the traditional one of advanced capitalism. The problem for these movements is that they lack a clear alternative programme beyond a vague ‘anti-capitalist’ ethos. It seems that at every juncture we see that the problem is the failure of socialist theory to come up with the goods.
But if we as socialists have failed to meet the challenge, the idea of socialism most definitely occupies the capitalists, if not us. It is what they fear more than anything else. What else is the rollback of our civil rights all about if not to pre-empt any organised resistance to capitalism that must surely come about? Why the obsession with Chavez’s Venezuela or Fidel’s Cuba and the attempt to brand them, or any other country that challenges the hegemony of capital, as ‘terrorist states’, if not the underlying issue of socialism, or at least the idea of it, versus that of capitalism?
Underpinning the resistance, for example, to reducing our consumption of oil or the uncontrolled consumption of resources, whilst 80% of the planet’s population live in poverty, is the struggle against an idea, for that’s all it is at this point in time, an idea, the most dangerous ‘terrorist’ of them all.
There are then, two strands to capitalism rejected; one at the ‘front line’, in the developing world and the other, the subjective struggle that is occurring within our own imprisoned consciousness, here in the developed world. Can these two strands be joined together? In fact, is socialism ever possible unless they are joined?
These two questions make up the bedrock of the struggle, for whilst it is true that the struggle at the ‘front line’, in the developing world, is one that will go on regardless of whether or not we join it, the experiences of the 20th century surely should have taught us that the two struggles are joined at the hip.
And although the two struggles are taking place on very different terrains, it is impossible to conceive of either succeeding without the success of the other. Yet if Desai’s thesis is correct, that socialism is impossible to achieve under conditions of scarcity and underdevelopment, surely one should argue for the spread of capitalism?
The problem with this argument is that capitalism in some countries is only possible if there is under-development in others. This is after all what made capitalism as we know it possible in the first place! It is precisely this under-development that makes the current situation possible and at the same time, untenable.
So, how to resolve this apparent paradox? In my opinion, the onus is on us, in the developed world and a struggle not merely to express ’solidarity’ with our brothers and sisters in the developing world, but to break the chains that bind us to capitalism.
In order to do this the Left and progressives in general must break away from a deeply imbued racist mindset that precludes their identifying with the great majority of the planet’s population, who are not white, and relinquishing the privileges that go with belonging to this elite, the so-called white race. This is not merely paying lip service to opposing the more overt expressions of racism, as some kind of ‘add-on’ before getting back to the business of ‘anti-capitalism’, or business as usual. For racism is something that goes to the very core of our position of privilege in the world. It pervades and determines all our assumptions about who we are as human beings, and the same can be said of the relationship between the sexes. Formal expressions of opposition to racism and sexism don’t really confront these issues, for as with our addiction to capitalism, it’s what we refuse to see and hence won’t confront that are the major obstacles to transformation.
For as long as we regard people of colour as the ‘Other’, as essentially not belonging to ‘our’ world, as people who do not experience life as we do, we will not be able to deal with the fundamental issues that maintain the rule of capital. It is a sorry reflection on the Left in the developed world that we have failed to come to terms with the centrality of racism in maintaining the rule of capital. By racism I mean the ideology that has underpinned the justification for capitalism over the past five centuries.
Many of us on the Left refuse to see that the lives we live are directly dependent on the exploitation of the poor of the planet, not because we don’t care but because the white Left see that “their very existence is now imperilled and there’s danger in being scared to death of losing those privileges of white supremacy and covering by accentuating the objective, racist economic relations of capital”, [2] when the reality lies in changing our own consciousness. This means embracing, without reservation, a vision of a single humanity united by common needs, and common desires and dreams. I contend that until we face this very uncomfortable truth, we will not be able to escape our addiction to the capitalist way of life.
The struggles of the 19th and 20th centuries were largely about our material conditions and understandably so. Where we failed is in the realm of the ’subjective’. Subjective insofar as the issues that are now central to our future survival hinge upon jettisoning the values we have taken onboard as our own, on reprioritising our lives. But in order to do this it is necessary first to reject consumer capitalism and in so doing undermine the entire rationale for Western ‘civilisation’. So if you like, the first act is not overtly political, it is instead the rejection of a set of values that are alien to life on the planet.
But don’t misunderstand me, I am not advocating some idealist, ‘back to nature’ philosophy. Instead, it means the rational and sensible use of the vast knowledge we now have of how the planet, how nature works and our place in it. It’s ‘Marx meets Buckminster Fuller’ with Norbert Weiner thrown in for good measure. Capitalism is structurally incapable of doing this. Capitalism’s motto, if it has one, is ‘expand or die’, an ethos that is diametrically opposed to the idea of a sustainable, human-centred socialism, such as I am advocating.
But, it is perhaps the general rejection of modernism that underpins the failure of the Left to produce a new analysis of a revanchist capitalism. By this I mean that the failure of the socialist projects of the 20th century to ‘deliver the goods’ has had the not unexpected effect of triggering a general rejection of modernism, thus the return to absolutist and what we choose to call fundamentalist ideologies that promise a return to some idealised past. This is not a new phenomenon, and indeed is indicative of times of social upheaval and disruption.
Thus, although it is probably true to say, especially in the poor countries of the world, that capitalism is rightly being rejected, at the same time, socialists have failed to produce a convincing alternative, or at the very least convince people that they have a viable alternative to the various idealisations being offered in its stead.
At the same time, it also true to say that a comparable malaise infects those of us in the developed world, where for very different reasons we also find a rejection of modernism and strive to ‘return’ to an idealised past. The challenge for socialists is how to unite these two strands. Much depends, I contend, on breaking the ties that bind us to a culture of consumption, one into which we are locked through debt, dependence and an inherited ideology of empire that has split us off from our common humanity.
Thus far, socialists in developed countries have failed to produce a coherent response to this reality, and I argue that this is for precisely the same reasons, namely that we too are part of a privileged minority that benefits from the plunder of the planet’s poor and their resources. The paradox of the situation is not lost on me, for at the same time we suffer from diseases of wealth; mental illness, drug dependencies, a deep dissatisfaction with the lives we lead, in jobs most of us hate, that deliver no satisfaction; social alienation and the resultant breakdown of networks of support and solidarity.
By contrast, the ruling political class is all too aware of this ticking time bomb, in part it explains the construction of the corporate, security state, precisely for the coming breakdown already being manifested in the actions of the most alienated and oppressed amongst us, the so-called under-class of which the ‘riots’ in France and in cities across the UK are but the tip of the iceberg of unrest.
For the rest of us, it manifests itself as a rejection of the political process itself, expressed through the complete loss of legitimacy suffered by the ruling political class. It is therefore with a sense of real urgency that those of us who call ourselves socialists need to confront these fundamental issues, issues that are first and foremost ’subjective’; that is, we have to answer our own loss of legitimacy as socialists and dare I say it, as standard bearers of modernism.

SPEECH BY YAB DATO' SRI MOHD NAJIB BIN TUN HJ ABD RAZAK

Friday, March 27, 2009

Speech By Dato' Seri Mohd Najib Tun Razak
SPEECH BY YAB DATO' SRI MOHD NAJIB BIN TUN HJ ABD RAZAK DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF UMNO AT THE OPENING OF THE JOINT ASSEMBLY OF WANITA, PEMUDA AND PUTERI UMNO 20098.30 P.M. 24TH MARCH, 2009, MERDEKA HALL, PUTRA WORLD TRADE CENTERDelegates and observers,1. Praise be to Allah, let us all give thanks to the Almighty for his Grace in allowing us to congregate here tonight.2. First of all we would like to congratulate Wanita, Pemuda and Puteri UMNO for having successfully exercised their responsibility in convening their branch and divisional meetings.3. Indeed Wanita Pemuda and Puteri are respectively the backbone and the wings of UMNO. The rise and fall, the success or failure of the party depends on all of you, the members of our party. With great drive and tenacity, Wanita, Pemuda and Puteri must strive with great commitment to act as a force which ignites the torch of our struggle. Have not the slightest doubt that this road upon which we have chosen to travel is an honorable one.4. Recently we went through two by-elections namely the Permatang Pauh parliamentary by-election followed by the Kuala Terengganu parliamentary by-election. Even though in both cases fate was not on our side, I would like to record my appreciation to Wanita, Pemuda and Puteri for displaying a spirited show of force. We fully believe that the same great spirit and confidence will come forth once again for all three by-elections which we will face on April 7th.Ladies and gentlemen, 5. This is the first Assembly for us since the 12th General Elections on March 8th, 2008. Clearly, the results of that General Election have been the worst in the history of our party. We lost the two-thirds majority in Parliament for the first time since Barisan Nasional was formed more than three decades ago. It is an awful and bitter truth, but a truth none the less and one which we must accept.6. Whether we like it or not, we must acknowledge that what happened had very much to do with certain weaknesses which are prevalent within our party. To the perception of many, UMNO has swayed far from its original struggle and its raison d’être. Obviously there must have been a reason why a large number of the rakyat who once walked along side UMNO, have since changed their direction.7. That being the case, your collective duty as General Assembly delegates this year is the heaviest duty to have ever been borne by any delegation in the history of UMNO. Starkly different from the party elections of previous years, at stake this year is not just a handful of party posts, nor is it a matter of positions or status for any individual. What is at stake is nothing less than the very fate of UMNO. The decision we collectively make at this assembly will determine the future of our party; whether we continue to shape and mould history, or just become an entry in the annals of history.8. The fact remains that UMNO is still very much loved by the Malays. No one can deny this. It is because of this that they have voted to retain UMNO as the biggest party with the most number of seats in the Dewan Rakyat even though a two-thirds majority was denied. What is painfully clear is that UMNO must learn from the message that was conveyed to them by the Malays (through the ballot box). If we do not heed this message, their seething anger will become hatred and in the end this may cause them to abandon us altogether.Ladies and gentlemen, 9. As Muslims, when we face any challenge or difficulty, it is best that we return to the teachings of our religion. Let us look at the following three verses of the Holy Quran as guidance. Verse 26 of the surah Ali Imran reads as follows: “Say: "O Allah. Lord of Power (And Rule), Thou givest power to whom Thou pleasest, and Thou strippest off power from whom Thou pleasest: Thou enduest with honour whom Thou pleasest, and Thou bringest low whom Thou pleases..”In the Surah Ar-Ra’d verse 11, Allah says:For each (such person) there are (angels) in succession, before and behind him: They guard him by command of Allah. Verily never will Allah change the condition of a people until they change it themselves (with their own souls).Whereas in the Surah Az-Zumar, verse 53, it is written:Say: "O my Servants who have transgressed against their souls! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah. for Allah forgives all sins: for He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.10. Taking lessons from those holy verses, we gather here tonight not to wallow in sadness nor to lament our fate. But as a party, we are here today but for one singular purpose, that is to chart the way forward for UMNO and our struggle.11. The wise have often said, we must first examine history and at the same time evaluate the present in order for us to be able to forecast the future. History has shown that in the sixty three years it has been in existence, UMNO has contributed greatly for the development of the nation and her people. UMNO was a leading force in the successful fight for independence. Such was the monumental achievement when UMNO carried the will of the people and the aspirations of the masses.12. In those heady days of seeking self rule, realizing that independence cannot be meaningful if the Malays worked alone, the UMNO leadership wisely laid the foundation for an enduring power sharing formula amongst all the major races. To the fulfillment of that formula, UMNO made great sacrifices in the first General Election of 1955 when it agreed to allow Malay majority constituencies to be represented by non-Malay parties. That noble sacrifice has become UMNO’s tradition and is still practiced until today.Ladies and gentlemen, 13. The achievements of UMNO in more than six decades of existence, is by no means small or insignificant. It did not end with the attainment of Independence, but rather continued with and unparalleled record of excellence in nation building. UMNO members should be proud of this and should never be apologetic when faced with the empty rhetoric and baseless accusations of opposition parties.14. (First Decade Post Independence 1957-1970) In the political developments of our country, UMNO has never stood as a mere observer in the sidelines of history but instead has always played a pro-active role in carving and shaping the path for the nation and the people. Immediately after the Emergency in the first decade of independence, was it not UMNO that launched a war against poverty, and opened up new lands through the Felda land settlement schemes and through the development of rural areas?15. (Second Decade Post Independence 1971-1980) In the second decade after Independence, when the people’s unhappiness manifested itself in the tragedy of May 13th 1969, was it not the UMNO leadership that quickly acted to identify the causes of the problem and unveiled the New Economic Policy? It was the NEP that successfully created a substantial Malay middle class and became the foundation for Malaysia’s economic growth for the next three decades.16. (Third Decade Post Independence 1981-1990) In the third decade after Independence, when we were hit by an economic slump following the collapse of commodity prices, was it not UMNO’s leadership that launched the industrialization initiative and a wide-scale infrastructure development program to modernize the country?17. (Fourth Decade Post Independence 1991-2000) Following that, in the fourth decade of nationhood, was it not UMNO’s leadership that unveiled the Vision 2020 as a basis to catapult the nation into the era of information technology and globalization? In the financial crisis of 1997 and 1998, was it not UMNO that saved Malaysia from spiraling into the quagmire of the Asian economic crisis? Indeed we even found our own way out of the crisis, using our own formula and without need for recourse to the IMF. Ironically, the way we dealt with the crisis back then is today a template that is being followed by the very same countries that had roundly condemned our approach.18. Praise be to Allah. UMNO has clearly proven to be a party that brings hope in place of misery. It has also been proven that UMNO is a party that is capable of building a proud and civilized nation that is respected the world over. It is this party that has done so much to uplift the lives of Malaysians, extricating them from the clutches of poverty and elevating them to higher quality of life in just one generation. Let there be no doubt that it is this great party that leads the way forward. UMNO has always been and must always be a Leader of the Times.Ladies and gentlemen, 19. Having said that, I must add that UMNO members must have their feet on the ground, no matter what our achievements have been in the past. We cannot just remain nostalgic about past glory and fail to record new accomplishments and successes. The political landscape of this country has completely changed. To remain relevant, we have no choice but to move with the times.20. Looking at the demographics, we find that more than one third of the Malaysian population can be categorized as ‘Youth’ i.e. they are within the 15-40 age group. More than 70 percent of those below 40 were born after the tragedy of May 13, 1969. Overall, 90 percent of the population were born post Merdeka. whereas those born after the end of the NEP, i.e. those born in 1991, will be eligible to vote by the year 201221. These changes, coupled with advances in ICT, greater accessibility and mobility, economic progress and better education have directly resulted in the birth of a class of voters who are better informed, very demanding and highly critical. We must always remember that this generation may not be able to relate to the past struggles of our party because they were never there and they only learn of past events from books and stories.22. This is not to suggest that the struggles of the past are therefore no longer important. But it demands that we once again assume the role of the leaders of change in our effort to fulfill aspirations, especially those of the Malays. To that end, there must be some introspection on our part followed by renewal and rejuvenation. It is clear that our advancement is conditional upon our ability to correctly asses our strengths and weaknesses. Weaknesses must be addressed whereas strengths should be further amplified. If we do not undertake this process UMNO will continue to be seen as a party still in denial. This effort to reinvigorate the party demands that we revive the ideals of our struggle.23. To do this UMNO must first remove itself from being linked to “money politics’ and any other form of unsavory activities. UMNO, or for that matter ay party or organization will be destroyed if its leaders are enshrouded in the evils of money politics. Leaders of good standing who do not indulge in corruption will be sidelined in favour of those who bribe. The party will be led by those who will bring their culture of corruption in the way they lead.24. Clearly if this evil is not halted and is allowed to grow and fester, it will become so commonplace that leaders and followers alike can make light of it with humorous remarks like “ beri salah, tak beri kalah” (To give would be wrong, not to give would result in defeat). This is no laughing matter. We must resolve to eradicate money politics right down to the roots. If not, we will all be collectively responsible for the demise of this beloved party of ours.Ladies and gentlemen,25. UMNO cannot afford to be seen as a party that is resistant to new ideas and new people or a party that does not welcome the young. In actual fact, we are the political party that has been credited with increasing access to education especially at tertiary level. Now 38 percent of those in the 17-23 age group have access to higher education. This is expected to rise to 40 percent by 2010, and 50 percent by 2020. These well educated youngsters are the product of UMNO’s effort and we cannot sit back and just allow them to be enticed by others. We must capture their imagination and convince them that our party moves in line with their aspirations.26. We must ensure that we as a party cease and desist from the deplorable acts of eliminating and blocking talented members from making progress in the party. Such despicable behaviour only serves to alienate those who sincerely wish to contribute to the struggle. If this goes on unchecked, it will spell the beginning of the end for this glorious party that has for so long served as the backbone of the people and the nation.27. Apart from that, whether we realize it or not, there is now a perception that the aspirations of UMNO are far removed from the aspirations of the masses. To those having this perception, they feel that what UMNO wants is very different from what the rakyat expects. As such we must correct this perception and we must not get trapped in our own cocoon. We mustn’t get too caught up in the internal processes of the party. We must never be too preoccupied with winning positions in the party, to the extent that we forget that the real measure of success of a democratic political party is whether or not it can win elections. Indeed, what is the point of winning party positions within a party that is bereft of authority and is no longer in power?28. Furthermore, we know that not all Malays are members of UMNO. It follows that UMNO will become stronger if it opens its doors to as many Malays as possible and if it continues to be the party that represents their aspirations. UMNO will be truly great if the culture of humility and readiness to serve is embraced by all its members. UMNO will be more resilient if UMNO members stop asking what they can get from the party, but instead ask what they can give to the religion, race and nation through UMNO.29. Therefore it is imperative that we shed and discard the image and perception that UMNO’s leaders are elitist and out of touch with the people. UMNO leaders must be adept at interpreting the needs and wants of the people and in understanding the developments in the community. Let us not forget our roots. Let us remember that UMNO is a grassroots party, a party that was born from the will and spirit of the masses wanting to affect change. Understand that on our shoulders we bear the heavy burden of nothing less than the fate of our people.30. If indeed we have floundered from the soul and spirit of the origins of UMNO’s struggles, then let us change and go back where we were before. Let us put UMNO back on track. To do this we need leaders who are able and are themselves enablers, leaders who dare to change and are accepting of change; who dare to criticize and are willing to accept criticism.Ladies and gentlemen, 31. As the biggest of all of UMNO’s wings, Wanita UMNO under the leadership of Tan Sri Rafidah Aziz has displayed unwavering commitment whatever the circumstances, especially each time we face election. The unity of Wanita is extremely important for UMNO. Therefore let us not for sake all that we have achieved thus far just because of a temporary excitement over contests for party posts. We do not want to see disunity. Be united, for indeed the winner does not take all and the loser does not lose all. The victor must be magnanimous and accept the vanquished with an open heart. The vanquished must accept the decision of the delegates and continue with the struggles of the party. 32. To Pemuda UMNO, you are the warriors who safeguard the party. Pemuda have always been at the forefront of our struggles. The last decade that has been so fraught with difficulties saw Pemuda steadfastly guarding the party. On this occasion allow me to record my highest appreciation to Datuk Sri Hishamuddin Tun Hussein who has successfully led Pemuda from an era of uncertainty to one of stability and then displaying leadership and commitment in supporting the ideals of the struggle for more than a decade.33. The same also goes for Puteri UMNO which we formed almost a decade ago. Puteri has successfully ignited the interest of young women to be involved in mainstream politics. I thank Datuk Noraini Ahmad for a job well done throughout her tenure as the leader of Puteri UMNO. What is important here is that we wish to see Puteri continue working hard as an important element that refreshes and brings rejuvenation to the party.Ladies and gentlemen, 34. This assembly marks the handing over of the torch of the party’s struggle to a new generation of leaders. The invaluable experience of the first 50 years after Independence shall serve as guidance for the next 50 years to come. However in order for UMNO to remain current and relevant, it must be borne in mind that the second 50 years after Independence will be very different from what we have been used to. UMNO leaders must ensure that they remain ahead of the curve and not become mere reactionary followers. This entails a careful reevaluation and re-examination of the attitudes and value systems of the members of UMNO.35. For a simple example, let us look back at the elections of 1999, when the New Media first appeared as an influential forum. We took it lightly and paid very little heed to that development. Five years later in 2004, we still paid very little attention to the importance of the alternative media. We were lulled by the massive mandate given to us to the extent that we made no preparations for battle within the cyber sphere. In the end we were rudely awakened in 2008 when we suddenly realized the folly of not understanding the power of the new media.36. Like it or not, we cannot regard the new media as our enemy. The new generation of UMNO leaders must be active participants in this important development. The younger generation of UMNO must be able to speak the language of the cyber community. They must also be leaders in the utilization of technology as an essential part of our political arsenal. Only then can we win in the battle of ideas and influence in the arena of politics.Ladies and gentlemen, 37. In the tradition of Malay Muslims, when we find that we have lost our way, we are taught to return to the beginning through the process of reflection and introspection. Therefore in honour of the month of the birth of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (P.B.U.H), let us take lessons from his history and experience as the greatest transformational leader of all time. He successfully led and educated the pagan Arabs from a period of darkness into the age of enlightenment.38. During the Hijrah (Exodus from Makkah to Medinah), he united the tribes of Auz and Khazraj, and subsequently he brought together as one the Muhajireen and the Ansar. Later he proceeded to unite the Muslims and the non-Muslims. All this was done because the Hole Prophet understood the importance of unity as the foundation of strength for the city of Medinah at that point in history. This goes to show that the success and failure of a certain civilization depends not just on physical developments alone. Rather there are more important elements like unity and solidarity which comes from emotional and spiritual factors as well as the value system of a particular community and its leadership.39. Among the most important values that will determine the success or failure of any peoples are the values of comradeship, discipline, respect for time, honoring one’s word, dedication to work, efficiency in the implementation of tasks, diligence and the placement of the interest of the larger community over and above the interests of the individual. Indeed these are the universal values of Islam that the Holy Prophet has enjoined in leading the ummah towards success and glory.40. History has shown that Malays are greatly respected when they adhere steadfastly to the teachings of Islam. With the history of the Muslim Civilization as a guidance, we must understand that in the name of survival we must undertake a complete transformation that is total and tangible. Looking back at history, we can only conclude that national unity must first begin with Malay unity. Unfortunately, Malay unity today is being torn asunder day after day by the deplorable culture of spreading hatred through slander, the spreading of half truths and the fabrication of horrible lies. Today, slander is not just practice of the hypocrites (Munafiq), but sadly it has become a norm for individuals claiming to be Muslim leaders and religious scholars.41. Looking at this situation, UMNO as the political platform for the Malays must correct its mission and direction and it must identify new and refreshing initiatives to transform UMNO in order to re-claim its position as the party of choice for all Malays.42. Towards the fulfillment of this objective it is important for us to improve the way we train and educate our political cadres. At all levels, members of UMNO must be given sufficient training and education so that they fully understand the history of the party’s struggles. Only then can we foster loyalty predicated on the full belief in what UMNO stands for. This is not something we can take lightly for history has shown its importance in determining the success or failure of a particular civilization. Therefore we must strengthen the political training and education of our members through well planned courses, carried out in stages and based on a carefully crafted curriculum which emphasizes history, self-confidence and espirit de corps.43. We would like to suggest that leadership training in the form of 3-day 2 night courses or 4-day 3 night courses be carried out at camps or training centers across the country. The modules for such training ought to focus on the strengthening of values aimed at creating honorable future leaders. The training should also include stints in the jungles or the sea, not only to toughen up the trainees but also to foster greater camaraderie and brotherhood among UMNO members and party leaders.44. Secondly we must change the way UMNO chooses it leaders including reexamining the quota system. We must give the right to choose the leaders to a greater number of members. As it stands, the deciders are a delegation of some 2600 delegates from 191 divisions. Clearly the choice of these delegates cannot correctly reflect the preferences of more than 3 million grassroots members from across the nation. To my mind, the time has come for us to review the Constitution of UMNO regarding this matter so that the selection of UMNO leaders will be more inclusive of a greater number of UMNO members from all levels.45. This move will be able to put to an end the problems of money politics and abuse of power. This is the path we must take if we are to regain our strength by returning to the grassroots the mandate for choosing party leaders. When the people are with us, UMNO will regain its full-strength once again. And we can accomplish this if each and every member and leader in UMNO embraces the passion for service to the people. Every problem that we resolve for the people, every difficulty that we ease, every complication that we unravel for our constituents ought to serve as reward and encouragement enough for us to continue to serve.Ladies and gentlemen, 46. Today, about two-thirds of the Malaysian population live in urban areas. On the back of successful development policies created by UMNO, many among the Malays have now chosen to become urban dwellers, seeking better opportunities in cities and towns. Unfortunately not all of them have done well and there are families from the lower income group in the cities who find it difficult to even make ends meet. In light of this, UMNO must now not only focus its fight to end poverty in rural areas, but also in urban areas.47. UMNO divisions in the cities must play their part in helping the lower-income urban Malays. It is our proud record to have been able to eradicate hardcore poverty in the rural areas through various programs and initiatives. Now it is time for us to shift our focus towards addressing the real problem of urban poverty. UMNO as one of the core parties in the ruling coalition will ensure that the eradication of urban poverty is given top priority by the government.Ladies and gentlemen, 48. UMNO holds sacred the position of the Federal Constitution as the supreme law of the land. The Malay rulers and the Monarchy are an essential part of the Constitution. Even though in our system the Monarch reigns but does not rule, the state governments and the federal government rule in the name of the Malay rulers as the head above the executive arm of government. Therefore if the Malays themselves fail to show the utmost respect to Malay Rulers who have all this time served as the symbol of unity and stability, then who else will?49. Therefore let no one twist the facts of history in recounting UMNO’s actions to amend the law with regard to the Rulers. It was never done in bad faith, but rather with the noble intention of preserving the Royal Institution and upholding the doctrine of the separation of powers which is the basis of any democratic government. I wish to take this opportunity to remind all Malays not to do things which we might regret later. To those who speak with a forked tongue, do not pledge allegiance in the morning only to betray by mid afternoon. Ladies and gentlemen, 50. With all the national and global challenges that we face, we are fast running out of time. The global economic crisis that we now face is far beyond anyone’s expectations and is in fact the worst crisis since The Great Depression. Therefore we cannot afford to be lulled into a false sense of security and divorce ourselves from the stark realities that plague the world. Malaysia’s economy today is very different from our economy of 50 years ago. Today we are among the top 20 trading nations of the world with trade in a year valued at more than one trillion ringgit.51. We cannot avoid feeling some of the effects of what has happened to the global economy. The prosperity that we enjoy today is greatly linked to the state of the rest of the world. We will find it difficult to progress if the global economy continues to slide. But more importantly, we cannot recover if there is no confidence from the people. In fact, a precondition of economic recovery is political stability and a nation strongly united. And so in these trying times let us put aside petty differences and see the bigger picture. Let us put the interest of the Rakyat over and above narrow political interests.Ladies and gentlemen, 52. There is a Malay proverb that says “language is the soul of a people”. I wish to categorically state here that the special position of the Malay language will always be upheld no matter what happens. However, I would also like to remind all of us, that if a people perishes what good is the language of that people? Consider Latin after the collapse of Rome. It is now almost extinct but for ceremonial use in academic institutions and traditional ceremonies. Consider also Sanskrit, and the Incan and Aztec languages all of which have perished with the extinction of the people who speak them. The more important consideration is strengthening the people or the race that speaks the language. Indeed, who would care to learn a language of a people who are weak, poor and lacking in knowledge?53. As such, the continuity of a particular language largely depends on the strength of the people to whom the language belongs. Only a people of great strength and high standing will raise the dignity of their own language, their culture and their value system. And so the crux of the matter lies in strengthening the people or race, first and foremost. To do this, we must first master knowledge and wisdom, much of which is today documented in the English language. Therefore, our younger generation must master the English language. Not only that we must be proficient in at least three major languages in order to be able to truly shine in the global arena. Please have no fear. Learning another language does not diminish who we are as Malays. Instead it will make us stronger and increase our self confidence in facing the challenges of a globalized world.54. Let us not waste any more time. Stop these pointless polemics. Put an end to the ridiculous politicizing of this issue. Let us all roll up our sleeves and harness the strengths of this great nation so that we can ensure her continuous progress and prosperity. Remember, UMNO is not just any political party like those of the opposition. We are a party entrusted by the people to spearhead the government. The people depend on us as a party that will provide leadership and solve their problems.55. UMNO and the Malays can never be separated. Like the river and its bank, like a song and its melody. History has shown that when UMNO and the Malays move as one, we rose to far greater heights than we ever thought possible. But when we are in disarray to the extent that there are those who abandon the interest of the Malays for their own selfish gains, then that is when negative elements quickly seep in and fan the flames of discontent. Now, we see that the Malays seem lost and weakened. Because of that there are those who dare question what has previously been agreed to and entrenched in the Federal Constitution. There are even those who have the audacity to accuse us of Apartheid, when history will show this is far from the truth.56. Let it be known, that the policies introduced by the government in aid of the Malays are not formulated because we feel that the Malays are better than everyone else. Rather, we create these policies precisely because the Malays are left behind compared to others. In fact, if we allow the Malays and the Bumiputera who form more than two thirds of our population fall by the wayside of progress, without any assistance or aid, then surely this is a formula for instability. At the end of the day, the policies of the government will always be anchored on the principle of fairness for all.57. For UMNO, it must remain relevant by continuing to win the hearts and minds of the Malays. Whether we like it or not, we must change for the benefit of the people. We must dare to change and abandon negative behaviour in favour of praiseworthy attributes. Change from being aloof to being friendly and approachable. Change from always thinking of our self interest to instead putting the interest of the people above our own. Change from laziness to diligence. Change from doing the required minimum to embracing a passion for service. We must change. For if we do not, we shall surely falter.Ladies and gentlemen, 58. At this juncture I, on behalf of UMNO, would like to record my highest appreciation and thanks to the party President who has led the party for the past five years. YAB Dato' Seri Abdullah Hj Ahmad Badawi, in his effort to increase public confidence in the judiciary established the Judicial Appointments Commission. He also continued his effort to fight corruption by establishing the Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission.59. We thank Pak Lah for his contributions, especially in providing a social safety net in terms of fighting hardcore poverty and strengthening the agricultural sector.60. The foundation of all these initiatives was the emphasis by the Prime Minister on the importance of nurturing a strong pool of human capital. Pak Lah saw that half a century after we attained independence, we successfully built modern infrastructure of world class standards. All of that had to be complemented with competitive and highly skilled human capital. This effort to strengthen our human capital became a pillar of our National Mission, and we will continue this journey towards achieving our National Vision.Ladies and gentlemen, 61. Looking back at my own personal political journey, it has been more than 33 years that I have been with the UMNO Wings, every time we converge for the General Assembly. It is with mixed emotions that I stand before you here tonight, speaking to all of you for the last time as Deputy President of the party. I am extremely moved by the notion that I have been entrusted with the faith and confidence of the grassroots lead the party and nation.62. Indeed I am most humbled by the reality that this path of leadership upon which I am about to traverse was pioneered by the greatest of men. I stand on the shoulder of giants like Allahyarham Dato’ Onn Jaafar followed by Almarhum Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra Al Haj, who was later followed by my beloved father Allahyarham Tun Abdul Razak. He was followed by Allahyarham Tun Hussein Onn who was then succeeded by YABhg Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad. Now, the burden carried by YAB Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi will be handed over to me. And so in these most trying of times for the party and the country, I bear on my shoulders the enormous responsibility to continue UMNO’s struggle to fight of the betterment of the people.63. I wish to sincerely record my personal thanks to each and every member of UMNO who have given me their support. And I wish to express my highest gratitude to Wanita, Pemuda and Puteri for giving me their fullest cooperation for the whole of my tenure as Deputy President of UMNO.64. It is my hope that I will receive the same support and cooperation from all of you when I the time comes for me to assume the Presidency of the party. I also believe that the same support will be given to the new Deputy President of UMNO who will be elected soon. I greatly believe that if we al stand shoulder to shoulder and work hand in hand, there will be no burden we cannot carry, no hurdle we cannot surmount as we work together to lead the times.65. Finally, I implore you to give me a line of leaders who are strong and able. Present to me a team that has the traits of loyalty, integrity, ability and dedication to duty. I pray to Allah that the voice of UMNO’s struggles will continue to reverberate in these hallowed halls. Whatever the challenges may come our way, we shall face it all unflinchingly and together, with great determination we will reach the highest summit.66. In the name of Allah, the most Gracious, most Merciful, I hereby officially open the Joint Assembly of Wanita, Pemuda and Puteri UMNO 2009.

Graduate Employability and The Complex Nature of Skills and the need to value Lifelong Learning and Training

Graduate Employability and The Complex Nature of Skills and the need to value Lifelong Learning and Training

Graduate employability (Winter 08/09)
· Graduate Employability
· Summary
· Introduction
· The history of the skills agenda
· Definitions of employability - the complexity
· DIUS: Higher education at work
· Learning as a continuous process
Graduate Employability
The Complex Nature of “Skills” and the need to value lifelong learning and training

Summary
In this article, HECSU researcher, Kathrine Jensen, looks at the recently published consultation document regarding the high level skills strategy from the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (DIUS) in the light of the employability agenda. A brief look at the history of the skills agenda and the issue of employability reveals the difficulty of defining the concepts. The idea of employability as simply a matter of producing lists of required skills which can be matched with employers’ needs is criticised. Instead, the complexity of skills and employability is underlined and the view that employability is a continuous process much connected to the idea of life long learning is argued for.

Introduction
In April 2008, the high level skills strategy, Higher Education at Work – High Skills: High Value was published. The purpose of the consultation was to consult employers, learners and higher education providers on what more was needed to equip the workforce with the skills required for an innovative and competitive economy. Now, in October 2008, the consultation has finished and a full report has been published.

The history of the skills agenda
Before we take a closer look at the high level skills strategy, it is worth just revisiting the history of the skills agenda as the notion of skills underpins the discussions about employability. In the report Employability in Higher Education: What it is and what it is not (2006)1, Mantz Yorke outlines the way the public emphasis of skills in higher education started and the way the terminology has changed. From the late 1980s where the term 'core skills' was favoured to the term 'key skills' coming into use with the Dearing Report in the 1990s (NCIHE, 1997)2. The idea of 'transferable skills' and 'generic skills' came to the forefront also in the 1980s. However, Yorke points out that what exactly 'skills' entailed was (and some argue still is) not at all clear or supported by enough evidence or been demonstrated by proven models:
The Dearing approach to key skills is symptomatic of a widespread failure to underpin key skills with theory. Various lists of skills appear in the literature relating to employment, but they seem to have been produced on an ad hoc basis 3
This is important to keep in mind as we move on to discussing employability as everyone can agree that employability is essential but achieving consensus on what it is and how to achieve it is a far more complex matter.
Yorke emphasises that graduate employability is something that governments around the world are imposing on national higher education systems and he argues that the “…interest in employability reflects an acceptance of human capital theory… Under human capital theory, the task of government is to foster conditions that encourage growth in the stock of human capital, since this is seen as vital to the performance of knowledge-based economies in a globalised society”4. This view emphasizes the connection between the higher education system and the economy.

Definitions of employability - the complexity
In a literature review on graduate employability from 2002, Dr Dawn Lees describes employability as a “multi dimensional concept”5 which encompasses much more than simply “key skills”. She also underlines the importance of distinguishing between employment and employability. Actually getting a job is different from having the “potential” to obtain a graduate job. A useful definition that takes into account many of the dimensions is suggested by Yorke:
a set of achievements – skills, understandings and personal attributes – that makes graduates more likely to gain employment and be successful in their chosen occupations, which benefits themselves, the workforce, the community and the economy6
Similarly Lee Harvey argues against a simplistic “magic bullet” model of employability and emphasizes that a number of other factors that could be considered relevant are personal characteristics, age, gender, external economic factors etc7. He presents two models to illustrate the difference in the two ways of thinking:
Figure 1: “Magic bullet” model of employability
Figure 2: A model of graduate employability development
The second more complex model is based on viewing employability as a process and as part of a lifelong learning journey. It is also important to note that the second figure incorporates the concepts of engagement, pedagogy, reflection and articulation which are processes that are ongoing.

DIUS: Higher education at work
The DIUS consultation document from April focuses on the term 'high level skills' defined as the skills associated with higher education. Again high level skills are linked to helping a sustainable knowledge economy. In the consultation report, high skills training is seen as bringing potential increase in productivity or profit. On the subject of skills, the consultation document says that:
Employers particularly value broad ‘employability’ skills, such as communication, motivation, independence, analysis, confidence and problem solving. This is one of the strongest messages from employers to government8
And in the October consultation report, the report again states that employers require 'broad-based employability skills'9.
From the consultation report one key theme appears throughout:
Higher education institutions and employers have different cultures and norms and there is a need for them to work in partnerships in order to develop a better, more mature, relationship with each other.
The report is very much a call for the various stakeholders to find ways to work together to mutual benefits. There are many different suggestions in the report with regards to which role different organizations should take on, for instance should Sector Skills Councils represent employers etc…However, much emphasis is placed on HE institutions to change, to prioritise employer engagement, reinventing course design and deliver flexible provision. The report does also underline that employers must take responsibility for investment in training.
Although the report raises a number of practical suggestions and has many good ideas, there still seems to be an underlying view of skills as simply “objects” that can be acquired and a lack of understanding of the complex process that is actually involved. The other underlying assumption has been described earlier as the view that Higher Education is connected to the economy which means the role of HE is to produce “employable” graduates. A business view of the role of HE to meet skills needs is one that some contributors to the consultation disagreed with.

Learning as a continuous process
An alternative way of viewing skills and employability as a continuous process of learning comes from a research project commissioned by the Higher Education Careers Services Unit (HECSU). The qualitative project was carried out by Helen Bowman, Phil Hodkinson and Helen Colley and is entitled Employability and Career Progression for Fulltime UK Masters Students (2005)10.
The research project sampled four students from each of six different Masters courses in two universities and conducted four rounds of semi-structured interviews. The interviews were conducted at the beginning and end of the Masters course, 6 months after they left and 18 months after they left.
The research was examining “transitions into employment” and the findings lead the authors to argue for the need to see this as a “a continuous process of change, which began long before the Masters course, and will continue well after our research was completed. Throughout this process, the young people were learning about themselves and their place in the world. They actively constructed their own sense of student and employment identity, and their own employability. In this transitioning work, students went through phases of greater or lesser pro-activity”11.
On employability, the research concludes that:
If students were learning to become employed and employable during their courses, much of the significant learning took place after they had left. None of these young people were ‘oven ready’ for high-level employment, despite the increasing demands from employers that they should hit the ground running. Even those with the smoothest transitions had to learn once in the job, and often, …relied on learning done during extensive work experience prior to taking the degree, in order to get and hold down the sought after position.
It was not only that people learned how to do whatever job they were aiming at. They also learned to construct their own employability. Rather than acquiring general core employability skills, this entailed getting to know the ways into particular, targeted arenas of employment, such as interpreting. It entailed developing and increasing their social and cultural capital in relation to the targeted field…..Put differently, rather than acquiring the skills, understanding and knowledge about employability, successful students learned how to change themselves into the sort of person who was more likely to be employed in a particular occupation12.
The research highlights that rather than focusing on generic skills, it is important for the graduates to have actual sector specific knowledge, contacts and be part of networks in order for them to be successful. The research findings underline the very non-linear and coincidental ways that the graduates travel during and after their Masters course and the many factors that influence, limit and make possible their choices.
1.The report is part of The Learning and Employability series published by the Higher Education Academy. All available at http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/publications/learningandemployability
2.NCIHE (1997) Higher education in the learning society [Report of the National Committee
Of Inquiry into Higher Education: ‘The Dearing Report’]. Norwich: HMSO
https://bei.leeds.ac.uk/Partners/NCIHE/
3.Employability in Higher Education: What it is and what it is not (2006:12), Mantz Yorke
4.Employability in Higher Education: What it is and what it is not (2006:3), Mantz Yorke
5.Graduate Employability - Literature Review (October 2002: 2), Dr Dawn Lees. Accessed 1st December 2008 at http://www.palatine.ac.uk/files/emp/1233.pdf
6.Employability in Higher Education: What it is and what it is not (2006:8), Mantz Yorke.
7.Employability and Diversity (2006), Lee Harvey. Accessed 1st December at
http://asp2.wlv.ac.uk/webteam/confs/socdiv/sdd-harvey-0602.doc
8.Higher Education at Work - high skills: high value consultation document (2008:6). Accessed at http://www.dius.gov.uk/consultations/con_0408_hlss.html
9.Consultation Report (October 2008:62). Accessed at http://www.dius.gov.uk/consultations/con_0408_hlss.html
10The full report is available at http://www.hecsu.ac.uk/hecsu.rd/research_reports_129.htm
11.Employability and Career Progression for Fulltime UK Masters Students (2005:94), Helen Bowman, Phil Hodkinson and Helen Colley
12.Employability and Career Progression for Fulltime UK Masters Students (2005:97), Helen Bowman, Phil Hodkinson and Helen Colley