I refer to the Malaysiakini report Mukhriz: Close down vernacular schools.

What was so wrong with the suggestion made by Mukhriz Mahathir that earned him condemnation from almost of all us? Was it the essence of the suggestion itself or was it because he is an Umno man? Or could it be because he carried the eighth cardinal sin of being the son of Dr Mahathir Mohamad?

On a personal level, I feel the issue was carried with much bias. The focal point of the issue was the shutting down of all vernacular schools, but if read in detail, the reasoning given was one that we have all been championing for.

He went on to say that while Bahasa Malaysia would be the main medium of communication, the Tamil and Mandarin languages should be made compulsory for all Indians and Chinese respectively, and Malay students would also have the option of learning these subjects.

Now, in what way are we deprived of our constitutional rights? Are we prevented from learning our own languages? Clearly, the answer is no. If so, why are we whining over it? If the Indians and Chinese feel that we want a school of our own, wouldn't the only possible reason be for the purpose of mixing around with those of the same colour?

And it is amusing that it is the same people who speak highly about the ‘Bangsa Malaysia’ spirit, who are now advocating a race-based segregation system for young Malaysians. Furthermore, why shouldn't Bahasa Malaysia be the main medium of communication when it is clearly stipulated in the federal constitution that Bahasa Malaysia is the national language of the country?

The ‘Bangsa Malaysia’ concept that we all aspire to would require instruments that would help us bridge the racial divide that is seen among us, Malaysians. One important tool would surely be the national language itself.

Undoubtedly, even with the slightest of stereotyping, it can be concluded that the command of the national language possessed by those in vernacular schools is relatively low compared to those of the national school system. Arguably, this itself contributes to the widening of the racial gap.

Now, the DAP has lodged a report against Mukhriz for his alleged seditious comments. However, this appears more of a political vendetta considering the fact that BN has often used sedition as an excuse to charge pro-opposition figures.

How could the Indians and Chinese be worse off when the suggestion made by Mukhriz would only mean that it is compulsory for them to take up their own languages? Note that in the current system, it is not a compulsion. How could Malaysians be worse off when a system that gathers all Malaysians under one roof regardless of race, comes into play?

In the first place, doesn't this system fit into DAP's ideology of a Malaysian Malaysia? Yet, they are against it simply because it was a proposal from an Umno member. Hypocrisy at it's best, once again.

Lim Kit Siang was quoted as saying: 'My purpose now is not to discuss the merit or demerit of Mukhriz proposal for a single education system (but) the validity of his contention blaming the vernacular school system for the polarised society which allegedly caused the poor understanding of the Ketuanan Melayu or Malay supremacy concept among the non-Malays and his view that the disunity in Malaysia arose from the different education system.'

From the statement above, it can be construed that Kit Siang refrained from discussing the merits or demerits of the proposal knowing that it would be difficult for him to counter a suggestion that is very much in line with his party's beliefs.

However, since Mukhriz is from the opposite side of the political block, he was not prepared to even admit that the proposal could potentially benefit all Malaysians. Instead, he focused his energy into explaining how Mukhriz has violated Section 3(f) of the Sedition Act by proposing the closure of Tamil and Chinese schools. It appears that the basis for him scrutinising Mukhriz lies more on a technical ground.

This is the politics that we are seeing today, where there is not much room for independent -thinking intellectuals like Zaid Ibrahim. BN sees nothing positive in what the Pakatan Rakyat does, vice versa. But they can be forgiven, for they are politicians and this is exactly how their game is played. It is the survival of the fittest, and exploitations know no mercy.

But we cannot be forgiven for being drowned in this game. We often forget that we are the king- makers. We place who we want to place in Parliament, and we kick who we want to kick out of Parliament. Just like the most of you reading this, I am more inclined towards Anwar Ibrahim's Pakatan Rakyat.

But does that mean that we, the king-makers, would have to justify every action taken by them? Does that mean that we, the king-makers, should ridicule every move taken by BN? Let us act on principles, along the line of righteousness.

Whilst acknowledging that Mukhriz's suggestion is positive, he should not be let off the hook too easily. This exact standard should apply to all education levels, be it primary, secondary and even tertiary. Remove vernacular schools, place the students in national schools, and at the same time, open up institutions like UiTM and MRSM for students of all races.

It is easy to gain political momentum in Umno by suggesting a change of system in vernacular schools but if it was indeed a genuine statement with no political bearing attached to it, be bold enough to explicitly state that the same approach has to be applied for all educational institutions.