This is in response to J Allen Otten's 'To effect change, join the governing process' of Aug 29. Democracy does not precede literacy. It is the other way around. Literacy is one of the basic conditions precedent to participatory democracy (the other is a sound economic base and reasonably fair distribution of wealth).

By literacy, I mean the people must be literate enough to keep the community, politics and public discursive space clear of the human tendency to become 'provincial' and remain open to the 'Other' rather than harbouring biases of all kinds based on race, religion, culture and gender. Their level of literacy should be such that they are influenced by rationality rather than swayed by demagoguery!

It is only against such a background can the people participate in the community and dialogue about cogent issues, and meaningfully interface with the elected representatives as suggested by the writer.

All this means is that when one evaluates the level of democracy that can realistically be achieved by a nation, one has to look directly at her national education infrastructure to which the roots of democracy cling!

What we see is alarming.

What Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad was reported to have said in the opening of the Malay Education Congress here on the day before is alarming (See Sunday Star of Sept 2). The PM basically said that:

(a) "Over-zealous educationists driven by their desire to extend the acceptance of the national language as the medium of instruction changed Chinese and Tamil schools into national schools and there were ministers who closed English schools and turned them into Malay-medium schools resulting in many non-Malay parents sending their children to Chinese schools instead of national schools;" and

(b) "National schools had become almost similar to Islamic religious schools, in terms of philosophy and practice. If any quarter in the school directs that something be done in the name of Islam (for example, the rule requiring boys to wear long pants while playing football) no one would dare to oppose it. Even if the directive does not come from the ministry or the headmaster and if the religious basis for the directive is weak, no one will object.''

If true, it would appear that not only is racial polarisation and segregation being aggravated by such a national education infrastructure, it actually lays the seeds of religious extremism, the greatest potential threat challenging a lawfully constituted government and facing the nation and the way of life she has accomplished so far today.

The problem, to be sure, extends beyond the national educational infrastructure that is influenced by forces operating in the larger society.

Extremism as a threat arose most markedly after the ex-deputy premier exit from government. Extremists are able to capitalise on general outrage. With general discontent arising from complaints of cronyism and other aspects of economic development that is not participated meaningfully by less literate rural folks, many riding on such outrage would do an about-face, turning against modernisation and secular development towards spirituality and succumbing to the blandishment of deviationist spiritual teaching by those who profess they know and whose way of life seem simple and in accord with spiritual values.

After all, the architect of integrating spiritual values and modernisation under the vision of the masyarakat madani (civil society) embedding both Islamic values and a secularist, democratic, pluralistic framework is no more holding the reins of government but serving time in Kajang.

Adherents, increasing in number, will be drawn to the more "purist" and fundamentalist extreme, and they begin to permeate all strata of society, seeping into educational and religious establishments, civil service and so on.

Challenges thrown to the lawfully constituted government will be by way of all kinds of civil disobedience including demonstrations (all in the name of democratic expression) in the hope that police crowd control methods will produce casualties that in turn will fuel even more discontent and outrage against it.

The country is actually at a crossroads where much is at stake and it behoves the government to intelligently and creatively respond to such challenges under a strong leadership. Extremists will exploit tough law enforcement action, necessary though it may be to preserve national security and public order, as being repressive and undemocratic to galvanise public disaffection against the government.

Though many of your readers will disagree in vehement protests, this is actually the time for those who truly believe in the destiny of this country and its path, tortuous though it may be to prosperity, stability and reform - to rally around and support the prime minister and the ruling party, imperfect though its policies may be. I am sure events of the last two years have made them see the mistakes of their policies, which require time to remedy.

The DAP that believes in the democratic pluralistic society has to reflect deeply and sincerely whether it will be acting in national interest to continue collaborating in whatever form in a coalition in which other component parties either aggressively assert or passively acquiesce in the extremist and fundamentalist agenda that has won support in the unusual events of past two years.