DON’T BOYCOTT, BUY MALAYSIAN PRODUCTS!

We, a group of concerned Malaysians would like to urge Malaysians to buy Malaysian-made products and brands first.

On the onset, the calls for buying Muslim products first or boycotting products made by non-Muslims may seem smart to some segments of the Muslim community. If they were to study this deeper, however, they will find such moves to be very unwise.  

Many non-Muslim companies have a significant number of Muslim staff. In fact, in many instances, they even form the majority. Even when a business is predominantly run by non-Muslims, economic activities form chain reactions that involve each and every community. This ranges from the sourcing of the raw materials, to producing and supplying the product to end customers. That is the fundamental basis of the economy, be it at the national or even global level. Furthermore, all profit-making companies, regardless of ownership, pay taxes that are then used towards the benefit of the Malaysian society as a whole. These include employing and sustaining our civil servants, building our national infrastructure and enhancing our public services such as healthcare, education and more. 

If anything, the taxes paid by all Malaysian-owned companies have also contributed to the betterment of Islam through the annual government budget allocation to JAKIM. Thus, it is indeed unfortunate that the few who are propagating this exclusionary approach either fail to understand the basics of economics or are simply attempting to spread an insidious agenda; all while playing with the emotions of the average Muslim.

We want to remind them that Malays and Muslims hold a substantial number of shares in most public-listed companies. They are also represented on the board of directors of these companies. Most Malaysian companies have also invested in ensuring that their products are halal-compliant and certified. Malaysia is now considered one of the top halal hubs in the world, thanks to the concerted efforts of Muslims and non-Muslims alike. 

Any boycott would only hurt fellow Malaysians, Muslims included. We must support all Malaysian brands and products in order to make our economy stronger. Boycotts along racial and religious lines are not only impractical but also hypocritical in the modern-day economy, given the fact that all of us use products from all over the world. From clothing to food, to technology and transportation, every item we use or consume could be traced back to producers, founders and manufacturers of various religions, ethnicities and even nationalities. Such is the nature of the globalised economy. So how can we then say with absolute certainty that we are only using or consuming goods from members of our own race and religion?

As Malaysians, our lives and livelihoods are significantly interconnected. A Malay makcik selling nasi lemak in front of a Chinese factory every morning to support her family is a common sight in a diverse and multi-ethnic country like ours. So is seeing an Indian roti seller plying his wares in a predominantly Malay-Muslim neighbourhood. Are we willing to let this uniqueness that define us disappear thanks to the divisive rhetoric of the select few?

We strongly believe that rather than boycotting and dividing ourselves further, we should enhance our integration and practice more diversity and inclusion in our daily living. Our goal should be helping Malaysian businesses to grow, to keep prices down, to curb the cost of living emphasizing affordable but quality Made in Malaysia products. In that way, we as Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or background will prosper and grow.

The statement was jointly signed by:-

Tawfik Ismail

Tajuddin Rasdi

Syed Sadiq Albar

Shad Saleem Faruqi

Nurul Haqq Shahrir

Noor Farida Ariffin

Johan Jaafar

Jahaberdeen Mohamed Yunoos

Hussamuddin Yaacub

Chun Wai, Wong

Chandra Muzaffar

Anas Zubedy

HOW YOU CAN LIGHT UP A HOME IN SABAH WITH JUST RM350 (and it is tax deductible)

#LIGHTUPSOMETHINGNICE is a zubedy-mercy Malaysia partnership social project.

RM350 to Light Up their Lives (#LightUpSomethingNice) is a project to help the families in Sabah to have portable solar lights.

With donation of RM 350 per house they will receive a total of 2 portable solar light.

Why contribute for #LightUpSomethingNice?

• They can still be productive after night fall
• Children can study more and do homework
• They can cut down using candle, lamps and fire to improve
security and health

When and Where?

• This project started on 10th January and ends on 16th
September 2019
• We are aiming to help 100 houses in Terian (Penampang)
and Ranau.
• We call all Malaysia to unite individual or group of friends to
help us collect or donate for #LightUpSomethingNice

Donation made will be channeled through MERCY MALAYSIA’S account

To Donate (TAX DEDUCTIBLE):

• Reference/Tittle: #LightUpSomethingNice
• Account Number: 8000 7929 08
• Account Name: MERCY Malaysia 
• Bank: CIMB

For tax exemption please email to Farhana at farhana@zubedy.com the following details with subject #LightUpSomethingNice, Donation: Proof of payment / Full name / IC Number

Should you like to know more, kindly contact Hana at 019-9493720

Thanks, anas

THREE GOOD BOOKS - PART 2 - The Chinese

'The Chinese Dilemma’ by Ye Lin-Sheng ISBN:978-097-5164-61-7

Why do you recommend this book?

This is a book written from the perspective of a business person; so maybe it is personal because I am a business person myself. It is written in a very pragmatic way. It looks at the country from both sides and takes in both the positive and negative aspects. It is very honest, very brave, and very direct. The author Ye Lin-Sheng’s parents were from China; he grew up in a middle-class family but made it big in Malaysia and became a successful businessman.

Ye offers the perspective of a Chinese Malaysian, mainly addressing issues of affirmative action and preferential treatment. It has been suggested that ‘The Chinese Dilemma’ could be as controversial as Tun Mahathir’s ‘The Malay Dilemma’ because in the same way it openly addresses many controversial issues that are on the minds of many Malaysians. But the author is pragmatic because he discusses it from a non-partisan angle, pointing out both the positive side and the negative effects of the NEP and other challenges faced by Chinese Malaysians in the bigger picture. At the same time he admits that his opinions may not be accepted by many other Chinese Malaysians.

What does ‘The Chinese Dilemma’ address?

Mainly, it addresses the attitudes of the Chinese, the Malays, and the Westerners towards the New Economic Policies. Ye Lin-Sheng’s position is that Malaysia found a viable solution to historical problems of race and economic division through the NEP, which to him has “delivered the goods” at “an acceptable price”. (pg. 38)

He compares the situation of the Chinese in Malaysia to Chinese Diasporas in other parts of the world.

“Think of those Boat People (many of them of Chinese origin) forced to flee Vietnam; think of Cambodia, where the Chinese were killed or driven away; think of Indonesia, with its persecution and expulsion of the Chinese; think of the Philippines, where for so long the Chinese were effectively denied citizenship. Of course there is Thailand, where the Chinese are said to suffer no discrimination, but that is because they are assimilated to Thai society and have in a way given up their Chinese identity.” (pg. 39)

He also extrapolates this comparison further out to the United States, Canada and Australia, where the Chinese has had to struggle against exclusion and victimisation. In these states, the Malaysian Chinese who migrated to these countries have had more difficulty achieving economic success because of “lack of opportunity, indirect discrimination, the so-called ‘glass ceiling’ and stiffer competition”. (pg. 39)

Ye Lin-Sheng steps out of the fold to present views which are not commonly spoken among non-Malays. To the author, what is missing is the sense of appreciation of how well the Chinese have been able to do even as minority migrants in Malaysia. At the same time, he feels there has also been a lack of sensitivity towards how galling it must be for the Bumiputera to see “the Chinese…putting our stamp all over their cities, how wounded they must have been in their pride”, even if it is not their nature to express their frustration (pg. 46).

The author argues that whatever the cost, because the NEP has helped to reduce the socioeconomic gap between communities, returned a level of autonomy to the Malays and allowed both the Malays and Chinese to increase wealth, its benefits are indisputable.

The book is balanced as it also addresses the grievances of the Chinese. In the same way that Tun Mahathir gave feedback on what is in the heart of the Malays in ‘The Malay Dilemma’, I see Ye Lin-Sheng does the same thing here for the Chinese. He airs out the apprehension of the Chinese towards losing the right to live in the country, which leads to their defensive posture. Another is their difficulty reconciling the idea that the Chinese position is ‘subsidiary’ to the position of the Malays. He brings out the question that is in the back of the minds of many Chinese - “How long must we continue to pay the price of citizenship?” (pg. 56)

“Rightly or wrongly, many Chinese are not reassured that the Malay will act in good faith. Can we trust them to be fair? In shifting the balance of advantage do they know where to stop? If we lower our defenses, will we find ourselves at the start of a slippery slope? If we don’t complain about the NEP, will they think it is not hurting us enough and prolong it indefinitely?” (pg.57)

At the same time, he also deals with the negative points of the NEP – among others, how Chinese-Malay relations is made worse by what he terms ‘Ugly Malays’, individuals who have exploited the NEP (pg. 62). Other negative impacts he points out are the demoralising effects on the beneficiaries of NEP, how it encouraged past victimisation and blaming the Chinese for the plight of the Malays; and how it has polarised race relations.

These are fair questions that are nagging at the back of the minds of the Chinese which often dictate their behaviour. It is fair and important that someone expresses how we Malaysians feel to help us understand each other better; and this book actually does that.

In the concluding chapters, the author brings the discussion to a bigger picture, comparing the experiences of Chinese Malaysians with other Chinese communities around the world.

“When we keep an open and skeptical mind, we may see that the non-Malays has not had a bad deal in Malaysia. To those who disagree with me, my rejoinder is just look around the world. The lesson is clear - peace and national cohesion is better than war and disintegration. I’m not saying that the non-Malays have no grounds for complaint - they have, as earlier chapters have made it clear. But in grievances as in all things, it’s best to have a sense of proportion.” (pg. 135)

I like this idea of a sense of proportion. Let’s have a sense of proportion and evaluate things in a balance. We need to look ahead. In his book, Ye does not deny that some Chinese may feel hurt by the NEP and it is hard to put the past behind, but he writes, “we Chinese have always been good at saying, Suan le (‘Forget it’ or, ‘let it be’) and getting on with the next task.” (pg. 192)

Ye ends the book by sharing a quote from a young black American from the book ‘Native Stranger’:

“Neither a black American or a white American says he has anywhere else to go now. He is here to stay, he must make it work or lose it all here.” (pg. 197)

Ye suggests that this also reflects the situation of the Chinese Malaysians – make it work or lose it all here.

In short, the book is written very directly and pragmatically - not everybody will agree with what the author says, but it is a book worth reading to understand the feelings and position of the Chinese Malaysian community better.

End of Part 2

Peace,
Anas Zubedy
Malaysian Movement for Moderates

PART 3 will cover the Malays - ‘The Malays: Their Problems and Future’ by Syed Husin Ali. ISBN: 978-983-9541-61-8

Note : This article is taken from my book The Middle Path, chapter 4.

PAKATAN HARAPAN AND THE MALAY POSITION - DR. CHANDRA MUZAFFAR

A lot of Malaysians are worried about the frequency with which ethnic controversies are erupting in the country.

Ethnic controversies by themselves which we have had to confront right through our history do not portend doom. It is the context in which they occur and how they are linked to power which matters.

UMNO’s ouster from power at the Federal level on the 9^th of May 2018 has given rise to a perception within a segment of Malay society that the ethnic equation of authority has changed. It is felt that Malays no longer constitute the anchor of state power.

This is a gross misperception. It is being deliberately fuelled by a segment of the political opposition reinforced by a wide range of civil society groups. The purpose is obvious: it is to undermine the Pakatan Harapan (PH) government.

If the principal source of power and authority in a political system like ours is the Federal Cabinet, the majority of its members are Malays. The majority of members of Parliament are also Malay just as the majority of the Judiciary are from the same community. The civil and public services are largely Malay just as the police and armed forces are also mainly Malay. Of course, the nation’s constitutional monarchs are Malay.

What this shows is that regardless of whether UMNO is in power or not, the Malay presence and position in society is secure and stable. It is fallacious therefore to view UMNO as the guarantor of the Malay position. But for many Malays, UMNO is still the protector of the Malay position which is why in spite of all its wrongdoings it still managed to win 54 Parliamentary seats in the 14^th General Election making it the largest single party in Parliament at that point.

There are many reasons that explain UMNO’s continuing --- though waning ---- grip upon the Malay mind. Apart from UMNO propaganda, there is no doubt that as the party at the helm of government for 61 years, it had succeeded to a great extent to eliminate poverty among the Malay masses, expand educational opportunities, enhance social mobility, create a sizeable middle class, and in general endow the community with a sense of accomplishment while ensuring that Islam and the Malay language remain at the core of the nation’s identity. It is all this that has helped to forge a bond between the party and the Malays.

PH has to address this bond if it wants to overcome the challenge posed by UMNO and its allies in the days ahead. How this bond expresses itself in various spheres and what its ramifications are should be at the crux of the PH’s concern.  This demands a clear understanding of the Malay position which UMNO claims to protect.

The Malay position is not only part and parcel of the Malaysian Constitution but is also a product of the evolution of Malaysian politics and society.  Its most salient features are i) the status of the Malay Rulers as constitutional monarchs ii) the Malay core of Malaysian politics iii) the Special Position of the Malays in the Constitution and the aspirations of the Malay economy as a whole iv) the role of Malay as the official and national language and v) the position of Islam as the religion of the Federation.

It is incumbent upon the PH and Malaysian society as a whole to understand and appreciate the emotional and psychological power behind the idea of the Malay Position. If Malays are deeply attached to the Malay Position it is mainly because it is the protective shield of sorts   that emerged in the wake of the tremendous changes that occurred as  a result of British colonial rule and colonial migration which impacted adversely upon the community. The Malay Sultanates from the early 12^th century (Kedah 1136) logically should have coalesced into a Malay Federation, a Malay nation-state but it did not happen partly because of the massive accommodation of the huge recently domiciled Chinese and Indian communities. In a sense the Malays as a people who historically gave the land its name were relegated to a community among communities. 

The challenge now before PH is to articulate a vision of the Malay Position which is more just and equitable than what UMNO has hitherto offered. On the Rulers, for instance, it should commit itself totally to principles and practices that require them to adhere strictly to the rule of law and remain above politics and business. Similarly, Malay political leaders should be beacons of integrity and honesty fulfilling their trusts to the people. Working with their non-Malay and non-Muslim counterparts in pursuit of the larger good should be their central mission. It follows from this that emphasising justice that forefronts the needs of the weak and vulnerable while recognising and rewarding ability and excellence irrespective of ethnicity and religion should be PH’s agenda. The PH coalition should also strengthen and popularise Malay as a truly Malaysian language.  Its present endeavour to develop an inclusive, progressive understanding of Islam focused upon the substance of faith should be further enhanced and refined.          

             

By articulating such a vision of the Malay Position, the contrast between PH and UMNO would be highlighted vis-à-vis a goal that both seek to protect. In more specific terms, Malays would realise that UMNO’s notion of a Malay leadership core is mere attachment to ethnicity devoid of any genuine commitment to ethical practices. They would realise that its protection of the economic well-being of the community has in fact led to a widening gap between the ‘have-a-lot’ and the ‘have-a-little’ accompanied by abuse of opportunities by the well-connected. Malays and Muslims would hopefully become aware that glorification of form and symbol in the name of religion does not do justice to the essence of Islam.

When the Malay Position is understood and implemented in an enlightened manner, it would synchronise with PH’s reform agenda, elements of which have already become reality such as the food bank programme for the needy and the declaration of assets and liabilities by legislators. Indeed, an alternative approach to the Malay Position will strengthen just, ethical   governance as a whole. In the process, the Malay Position itself will be transformed for the well-being of the community and the nation.

Dr. Chandra Muzaffar is a political scientist who has authored a number of books on Malaysian politics.

Kuala Lumpur. 

26 August 2019.              

THREE GOOD BOOKS about MIC - Malays, Indians and Chinese :) in Malaysia (PART 1 - The Indians)

Why do you recommend reading books to understand each other better?

We need to continually get to know each other better and there are many ways to do this. The best way is to live and work together, but reading can facilitate easier and quicker understanding. When we are better informed, we are less likely to be hoodwinked by anyone, whether politicians, business-people or anyone else.

Here I would like to propose three books that I have found helpful – The Malaysian Indians: History, Problems and Future by Muzafar Desmond Tate; The Chinese Dilemma by Ye Lin-Sheng; and The Malays: Their Problems and Future by Syed Husin Ali. There are many other books that are available in the market, but I suggest these three as a good start. And of course, someday we hope to see a good, balanced book on Malaysians as a whole

i) ‘The Malaysian Indians: History, Problems and Future’ by Muzafar Desmond Tate ISBN: 978-983-3782-54-3

Can you tell us a bit about the book on the Malaysian Indians?

Among the three books I am proposing, this is the most balanced one. Muzafar Desmond Tate was specifically commissioned to write the book to provide a balanced perspective as a distinguished educationist and historian. Unfortunately, Muzafar Desmond Tate passed away before he could see the published work.

It is a good book, very balanced and scholarly yet written in an easy to read manner. We are fortunate to have this book on the Malaysian Indians available to us. It is a wide-ranging view of the background of the Malaysian Indian community, their economic and political contributions, and the divisions and problems that exist among them, many of which have not changed much until today.

The book is most useful in helping us to understand the diverse Malaysian Indian community, including its poor and marginalised sections.

Can you share some important points from the book?

Let’s start from the origins of the Malaysian Indians. The book explains that the Malaysian Indian community had arrived in this land in various batches. The earlier travelers were Buddhist and upper-caste Hindus, very different in character from the Tamils who arrived during the British colonial period. These were from the lowest ranks of Tamil society, recruited under the contract system to be labourers for tin mines, agricultural estates, railway construction and public work departments. To pay off their costs of passage would take them almost their whole term of service.

At the same time, alongside this mass migration of Tamil labourers, there was a small group of upper-class Tamils who came on their own accord as merchants, traders and money-lenders, the Tamil Muslim merchants and Tamil Chettiars among them.

These groups eventually became absorbed into the Malay community. The book also explains in detail about the communities of other Indians, including the Telugu, Malayalee, Sikhs and other Punjabis, and the Bengalis.

The composition of the Malaysian Indian community was highly fragmented in many ways. At one point, there were 150 Indian societies and associations with their own communal and sectarian agenda; most were directly influenced by similar movements in India. Apart from ethnic or political fragmentation, there were fragmentation of religion between the Hindus and Muslims; as well as divisions between social class. To make matters worst, there was very little social mobilisation.

Tate writes:

“In a community where, in great contrast to its Chinese counterpart, social mobility hardly existed, Malaysian Indians were, by and large, highly compartmentalized and there was little social interaction between the various categories.”(pg. 25)

The book traces the journey of the Malaysian Indians from different backgrounds at the crossroads during the formative period of Malaya’s political development. Post-Independence, however, the economic and social gulf between the middle class Indians and the working folks remained.

Although there was an obvious need for the Indian community to unite and speak with one voice, this did not happen. It was not because they did not have leadership – according to Tate, there were many “very able and highly articulate” Indian leaders, but,

“The root cause for this failure lay in the still highly fragmented nature of the Indian community; while in the post-war world political circumstances had radically altered, the main characteristics of the Malayan Indian society had not. Indians in Malaya continued to be wracked by differences of race, religion, caste, occupation and language as they always had been, to a degree not found amongst either the Malays or the Chinese.” (pg. 78)

Politically, since Independence there has always been a group of disaffected Indians,

“filling the role of the Indian community’s alter ego – the voice of dissent and protest against corruption and cronyism in high places, the champion of human rights, civil liberties and social justice, the standard bearer of alternative non-communal point of view.” (pg. 112)

This alternative Indian establishment played a role to ask for change in Malaysian politics throughout the first fifty years after Independence.

Between 1957 to 2000, alongside most other Malaysians the Indian vital statistics steadily improved. However, economically and socially, the separation between the Indian middle and upper classes and the working proletariats remained.

“The middle classes, to all appearances, have held their own. Their numbers relative to their own community have remained larger than those of their Malay and Chinese counterparts, and they still appear to dominate certain professions (especially law and medicine) even if Indians of the younger generation face stiffer competition from the other races than their fathers did a generation ago.” (pg. 105)

In the same period, however, the greatest social change to happen was urbanisation. It brought new social problems, most glaringly “the presence of a rootless class of urban squatters, who have come to be associated in the public mind with an upsurge of violence and crime” (pg. 105). This was the new poverty syndrome of the Indians in town, while the problem of poverty in the rural areas and estates still remained.

This large gulf between the segment of middle and upper class Indians and the community of Indians still stuck in the trenches of poverty gives us a clue of why the NEP was not able to help the Malaysian Indian poor out of poverty the same way it helped the Bumiputera. Tate writes,

“What distinguishes the Tamil estate worker from his impoverished counterparts both in the Indian community and amongst the Malays and the Chinese is not so much the degree of his poverty as his difficulty in escaping from it. Though the Malays are by far the largest group affected in Peninsular Malaysia, they have enjoyed the full attention of the government and are also economically and socially much more accessible and amenable to assistance. The Chinese poor, on the other hand, of whom there are a good number, have the benefits of the well-organised and comprehensive social organisation maintained by the Chinese community itself.” (pg. 123)

The primary cause of the rural Tamil poor, however, is historical. It has roots in “the manner of their immigration, employment and settlement during the colonial era, in the physical isolation of their places of work from the mainstream of economic development and growth in the Peninsular, and in the paternalistic fold in which they came to be enveloped.” (pg. 123)

An interesting portion of the book addresses the New Economic Policy and its failure to make headway for the Malaysian Indian community.

The final chapters of the book describe the dilemma faced by the Tamil community in terms of education. While the grassroot Tamils were deeply attached to their language and culture, they faced the dilemma that Tamil-medium education ‘had no economic value’ and would leave the children only to continue in the legacy of being estate labourers, continuing in the cycle of poverty, with little hope of social uplifting. (pg. 172)

In his conclusion, Tate states that while in the years after independence the Chinese and Malay communities have managed to advance their socioeconomic position, for the Indian community, little has changed in terms of their composition, structure, organisation and nature of their problems. A big portion of them are still lagging behind. The book arrives at a crucial conclusion.

Tate concludes:

“At the time of Merdeka in 1957, the communal approach to politics appeared to be – and probably was – the only practical way to achieve the sense of national identity and purpose necessary to achieve Merdeka. However 50 years and one and half generations later, the social chemistry has changed, and class or special group interests are beginning to replace those of race as the determinants of evolution…It is becoming increasingly obvious that these social problems can only be overcome by a concerted national effort that is not based on race. The Indian community’s socio-economic problems can never be overcome within the present communal mould of Malaysian politics.” (pg.181)

This is just a brief overview of the contents of the book – as can be seen, it reveals many important details about the composition, situation, dilemmas and problems faced by the Malaysian Indian community. It is a good book for all Malaysians to get and read because it provides an accurate and balanced, non-political picture to help us understand our Malaysian Indian brothers and sisters.

End of Part 1

Peace,
Anas Zubedy
Malaysian Movement for Moderates

PART 2 will cover the CHINESE - ‘The Chinese Dilemma’ by Ye Lin-Sheng ISBN:978-097-5164-61-7

Note : This article is taken from my book The Middle Path, chapter 4.

JANGAN SESEKALI BERI PENGIKTIRAFAN KEPADA SEGELINTIR GOLONGAN PELAMPAU YANG BERNIAT MENYAKITI ORANG LAIN

Ia adalah perkara biasa di dalam mana-mana komuniti ada golongan yang berpandangan melampau dan keterlaluan.
Kita tidak seharusnya beri perhatian kepada golongan ini kerana ia memberikan mereka legitimasi/pengiktirafan dan menunjukkan seolah-olah merekalah pembawa arus perdana. Kita seharusnya melayan mereka sebagai golongan minoriti dan beri tumpuan kepada golongan majoriti yang moderat (berpandangan sederhana).
Sebagai contoh, terdapat orang-orang barat yang suka menyamakan Islam dengan keganasan kerana mereka memilih untuk mengiktiraf kumpulan pengganas seperti IS dan AlQaeda yang minoriti ekstrem sebagai mewakili Islam dan bukannya 1.6 billion golongan majoriti Muslim yang cintakan keamanan.
Di Malaysia, kita mesti memilih untuk menyerlahkan golongan yang terbaik dalam kalangan kita iaitu golongan majoriti moderat dari kesemua kumpulan etnik dan penganut agama dan jangan sesekali memberikan legitimasi kepada sekelompok kecil yang menjajakan pandangan-pandangan eksklusif, melampau dan menyakitkan.
Salam, anas zubedy Pergerakan Moderat Malaysia.

NEVER GIVE LEGITIMACY TO THE EXTREME FEW WHO WANT TO HURT THE OTHERS

There are always those with more extreme views within each community.

We should not focus on them as that will give them legitimacy and show as though they are the mainstream. 

We must always treat them as the minority and highlight the moderate majority. 

As an example, there are those in the west who like to equate Islam with terrorism because they choose to give legitimacy to groups like IS and AlQaeda who are the extreme minority as representing Islam intead of the majority 1.6 billion Muslims who are peace loving. 

In Malaysia, we must choose to highlight the best among us, the moderate majority from all ethnic groups and religious believes and never give legitimacy to the few who are peddling exclusive, extreme and hurtful views.

Peace.

Anas Zubedy
Malaysian Movement for Moderates