SEJARAH subjek yg paling kita boring kat sekolah dulu menjadi topik paling 'hot' sekali hari ni. disebabkan satu isu sensitif dibangkitkan. ramai yg menyarankan sejarah dikaji semula fakta dan bagaimana ia di olah dulu. haha.. baru-baru ni ja perkara ini dibangkitkan tu pun pasai isu bukit kepong tu dibangkitkan kalo tak kita masih lagi lena dalam kelas sejarah. jadi hari ini baru orang nak celik pasai sejarah ini tentang kebenaran faktanya. kat sini aku nak ciwi la dgn hampa pasai 2-3 sem sebelum ni aku ada argue dgn Dr. Rie Nakamura (salah sorang lecuter killer course aku) pasai sejarah ni dalam salah satu 'assignment' aku. aku nak tayang kat hampa ni pon pasai Dr. Nakamura agak setuju dgn hujah2 aku berkenaan sejarah berdasarkan pemerhatian dan pendapat aku. pasai aku dah 2-3 sem lepas lagi dah terpikir pasal fakta dan olahan sejarah dunia yang disuap dalam otak kita sejak kita tau apa tu sejarah..
'This paper is about my thought of History subject that was taught at school and also my opinion about the history education at school and my thought and opinion about the history that have been made in my home country Malaysia and some other around the world. This paper is an attempt to understand the reason why the history subject had been teach in school and also an attempt to explain about my opinion how the history education contribute to create national history. I will elaborate my paper in two parts. In part one I will examine what kinds of history was taught at school also explain about the history syllabus in that been teach in Malaysia and in the second part of this paper I will argue with my opinion about all my thought about the history in my home country Malaysia and some other around the world.
I remember back in time when I was in the first year in high school when me and other student were introduce to the history subject. The most un-favorite subject among the student because this is the subject that we need to read a lot and bored to be teach during the classes. I remember that time that I always slept during the history class at that time. I also remembered the first topic that had been learned which is explained to what is history. If I not mistaken, the term ‘History’ introduce by Herodotus was an ancient Greek historian who lived in the 5th century BC also known as father of history in Western culture , that he state that history came from the word his story that mean a story from somebody.
In first part of this paper which I examine which history was tough in school. In the first topic also the student had been show about all the successful history of Malaysia for example the Independent of Malaysia, Thomas Cup success, launched of the first national car Proton saga and The Petronas Twin Tower. As because the history is a part of the nation-state building, this is as a way to fire up the spirit of nationalism among the student to this country this is because the third aspect of instrument of homeland making which is creating the symbolic national landscape state that a particular landscape is chosen as the symbolic presentation of the entire homeland and the images evoke nostalgic feeling about the land, the people and its past. After that as I remember, the subject continue with the history of how this country began. As everybody knows, the state of Malaysia started with the Malacca Sultanate long-long time ago.
The first king of Malacca which is Parameswara a prince from Palembang from the once Srivijayan empire, established a dynasty and founded the Malacca Sultanate. Conquest forced him and many others to flee Palembang. According to the Malay Annals, here Parameswara saw a mouse deer outwitting a dog resting under a Malacca tree. Taking this as a good omen, he decided to establish a kingdom called Malacca. He built and improved facilities for trade. By this event, we can refer to the Instruments of homeland making that state that construction of national monuments and commemorative sites. Argue that the selection and commemoration of historic figures, events and sites help to ground the nation and homeland in specific places and times. This show that the history of the nation already been created and selected in certain time in order to create an image and symbol of the homeland.
In this case, I was wonder why Malacca Sultanate had been selected as a beginning of this country while there is another old government than the Malacca which is ‘Kedah Tua’ that is existed long before the Malacca Sultanate. The existence of ‘Kedah Tua’ government also need to be include in the history and Malaysia but ‘Kedah Tua’ only be mention just a few part in the history of Malaysia.
The second part of this paper, I want to argue with my opinion about the history in my home country and some other in the world. This is because, in my thought some of the history were be made or had been added more story from the original one. With this argument, I have state before earlier in this paper that the term ‘History’ introduce by Herodotus that stated that history is a story from somebody. To stand my argument I give the example of the story of Hang Tuah the legendary warrior/hero who lived during the reign of Sultan Mansur Shah of the Sultanate of Malacca. Some people argues whether Hang Tuah is really a hero of the Sultanate of Malacca because a story from the famous book ‘Hikayat Hang Tuah’ deliver a really good image of Hang Tuah as a hero of Malacca while the other story from the old folk stated that he is not really like that which is Hang Tuah had a bad attitude. Some story from the old folk told that Hang Tuah was having an illicit affair with one of the Sultan's stewardess ‘dayang’ and also a affairs the Princess of Pahang Tun Teja that later became the wife of the Sultan. This case also we can refer to the third aspect of homeland making that is creating the symbolic national landscape where is Hang Tuah is a good image from the past that make him icon of this day.
In the other story, I was interested by a film 300 a American action film adaptation of the graphic novel of the same name by Frank Miller. In the film, King Leonidas leads 300 Spartans into battle against Persian "God-King" Xerxes and his army of more than one million soldiers. What a wonderful famous Greek history that we can see in this film on how strong the Spartan army is. How 300 men can take over others one million soldiers? This is a really interesting story in this film. While I am tempted by this film, in my thought are this is another story that made by the famous Greek historian. This is because in this film we can see that one of the 300 soldiers of the King Leonidas squad known as Dilios survived from the death and returned to Sparta and form over 10,000 Spartan soldier to face the evil Persian army. Before the battle, he told this glorious 300 Spartan story to high up the spirit of his soldier forward the battle. This is because although they are still outnumbered, Dilios declares that the Greeks shall be victorious, and praises the sacrifice of King Leonidas of Sparta. He then leads the Greeks in a charge against the Persian army, beginning the Battle of Plataea.
From this story I feel that in my opinion was the history of glorious 300 have been made to fire up the spirit among the soldier to the Battle of Plataea. What I can say here this is one of the propaganda during the ancient time when there are in kind of situation like this as we know they are 10,000 Spartan to face ten times of Persian Army of their size. Also we know ancient Greek also famous with their god story as example the famous god Zeus, Poseidon, and Hades and some of them married to human that came with a child called demigod such as Achilles and Hercules the story that we hardly to believe. From this I think is true if some of the history from the past are originally made from the story from somebody that according to Herodotus term that ‘history’ is a story from somebody.
As a conclusion, we know that history is one of the instruments of nation-state homeland making. History itself became a symbol and an image of the country which make we know who we are and where we came from. With history also it presents the image and the symbol of one country. The main idea of my writing in this essay is that I want to explain based on my opinion that history is have been made. Although not as the whole of the history, I believe some part of the history is actually created by somebody in the day before. In the first part of my essay I write that the history is created and have been chosen to present the image of the country while in the second part of my essay I express my opinion that the history is been made or been added from it original edition.'
nak menambahkan lagi hujah aku kat sini. pihak yg berkuasa mempunyai pengaruh untuk mengawal apa saja bahan untuk disalurkan kepada rakyatnya sebagai contoh pengunaan media massa sebagai alat propaganda mereka. ini telah dinyatakan oleh Antonio Gramsci(sapa tak kenai google jala) iaitu "nilai2 kapitalism telah dipupuk dan disalurkan kedalam minda kita melalui pembelajaran" contohnya subjek sejarah, dimana kapitalism yg menguasai dunia menggunakan 'intellectual hegemony' mereka melabelkan komunism itu adalah jahat. dan lagi dunia sudah lama dikuasai oleh kapitalist dan sekutu2nya dan tak hairanlah jika sejarah dunia telah diolah mengikut acuan mereka dan sejarah2 yg kita baca dalam buku teks ini sebenarnya adalah hasil karangan mereka dan juga kerajaan Malaysia.
7 comments:
so..apa pendapat ang pasai the real komunis and komunis in malaya..are they the true fighter(killing unsins people,cuz my arwah datuk was killed by them even arwah bukan org british..just petani kampung)just like mat sabu said?? yes..if the polis bukit kepong tu org british sekalipun and depa nak bunuh cuz they dont like british and their kroni...why they killed isteri and anak2 kecik polis tu..are they org british too?
main idea aku kat sini bukan la nak menyokong hujah mat sabu tu.. idea post aku utk argue tentang kesahihan fakta sejarah tu.
fyi, tokwan aku pon soldier masuk hutan halau komunis dulu.
ok. pndpt aku pasai komunis tu kalau lah depa menang lwn british dulu dan depa dpt Tanah Melayu kita tetap dijajahkan? dijajah pulak oleh komunis. kita nak label depa sbagai hero ka?
dan semestinya sejarah yg ditulis dalam versi komunis pulak yg depa adalah hero a.k.a true fighter. dan kita terpaksa terima.
dan kita jugak kena paham tentang idea sebenaq pahaman komunis. komunis yg ada kat tanah melayu dulu tu bersal dari china dan depa tak ikut idea sebenar oleh Marx. depa mgamalkan Maoism tp melabelkan diri depa komunis.
aaa...maoism.lama x dengar word tu. so boleh la kita cakap yg everybody claim they are superior,hero kan.so..what the real marx idea about communist..? just ask ur pandangan...
kalo diikut kajian dlm video the arrivals pon depa katakan yg sejarah dunia spt perang2 tu adalah agenda freemason. mgkin satu konspirasi yg dirancang. dan sapa yg superior dlm dunia ni?
communism ni adalah satu ideologi yg memperjuangkan society yg tanpa kelas dan rakyat boleh masuk cmpur dlm aspek membuat keputusan dr segi politik dan ekonomi. pahaman komunis yg asalnya adalah memperjuangkan nasib golongan bawahan iaitu petani dan buruh mana kita boleh lihat pada logo komunis yg sebenaq iaitu sabit dan tukul (rujuk bendera soviet)..
idea marx ttg komunis dlm tulisan dia 'the communist manifesto' menceritakan ttg golongan ploretariat iaitu gol petani dan buruh tadi tu la yg ditindas oleh gol borjuis. Marx menyatakan hanya satu jalan untuk menyelesaikan masalah-masalah ini adalah bagi golongan pekerja (proletariat), yang menurut Marx adalah pengeluar utama kekayaan dalam masyarakat yang dieksploitasi oleh kelas kapitalis (borjuis), menolak golongan borjuis ini daripada kelas pemerintah bagi menubuhkan masyarakat bebas tanpa pembahagian kelas dan kaum. itulah idea communism Marx yg asal iaitu menolak kapitalist.
good..so the maoism mania ni dah salah gunakan word komunis and they all bukak fahaman baru la ni atas nama komunis.
begitu juga la yang jadi kat puak wahabi ni..they all buat fahaman baru yang jauh terpesong atas nama sunni/islam...and ramai yg terperdaya.nape aku kaitkan bnda ni dengan entry ko..hehe..this is about sejarah islam yang cuba diselewengkan hingga tercipta hadis2 palsu yang di create oleh puak2 tertentu yang claim depalah mazhab yg superior..
back to komunis..so boleh ke kita terima pakai idea marx ni...walhal..disebalik idea positif yang marx bagi..ada gak idea negatif yang dibawa oleh dia ni...because byk agenda lain yg marx try to exposed to peeps before he dead =).btw..good explanation.
kalo nak di kira sejarah islam kita just refer to Al-Quran. that the real fact yg tak boleh dicanggah lg. psai pa kita perlu refer to puak2 yg refer depa mazhab yg superior..
psai idea marx ni ada yg boleh diterima kalo anda lihat diri anda dlm gol poletariat. bg aku walaupun ko tak keja buruh dan petani pon ko ttp ditindas oleh sistem kapitalism hari ni dgn bebanan hutang dan segalanya.
aku bukan la menyokong sepenuhnya komunism ni, aku ttp hidup dlm sistem kapitalist dan menerima kapitalism dlm daily life aku. psai pulak komunism ni bkn la bagoih sgt sebab dia menolak agama secara mentah dan mngangap agama boleh meracun pimikiran.
psai negative influence oleh marx mgapa kita mesti nak terima. kita diberikan akal untuk berpikir menerima yg baik sj.. yg tak elok tu buang la.. btw.. aku tulis pon based on apa yg aku phm ja.. lebih pd tu aku tak mampu la nak merapu lebih2..
haa...sejarah islam x boleh direfer dekat al-quran semata2.sebab al-quran itu universal..yang tidak terhad kepada masa dan waktu.maksud dia..apa yg akan berlaku sebelum,sedang dan akan datang ada diceritakan dalam al-quran.sejarah islam perlulah juga direfer pada hadis yang sahih..hadis pulak perlulah betul2 sahih. sebab banyak pengkhianatan yang berlaku selepas kewafatan rasulullah saw.sebagai contoh ada hadis dari abu hurairah yang mengatakan.."makan bawang boleh masuk syurga" tapi bila para ulama kaji balik..bnda ni x betul dan palsu(ada cerita dan hujah mengapa) thats why..mcm yg ko cakap..guna akal sebelum menerima sesuatu. pasal mazhab plak..mazhab yg anda pegang juga mengaku berada dalam HAQ..aku berani kata yg ko sendiri merujuk sejarah islam dari golongan mazhab ang jugak kan..kan..hehe.
xpa2...depends on perception masing2..for me..its better to take islamic thinkers philosophy because islamic philosopher better than western even western byk bagi idea2 yg ok.cuma kita x nmpk sbb byk sgt didedahkan dgn western punya idea..dari sekolah sampai la universiti..even student master pun still diajar tentang idea western ni.
ini baru boleh kita kata SEJARAH DISELEWENGKAN bila muslim philosopher diketepikan dalam every subject yg kita balaja.bila dari root lagi dah diselewengkan thats why sampai sekarang apa yang kita dapat dari sekolah semua x betul=)
Post a Comment