to "lapik" or not to "lapik"

My previous posting about "hormat" and "berlapik" resulted in several email replies. I agree with the notion that you will need to justify your statements if it goes against the "normal" perception of events. That is to be expected from human nature. But I want to add here that there is a tendency to go into what Irving Janis called "groupthink" if we have been in the same circle for a considerable amount if time. Groupthink is not without danger as those who try to against the groupthink risk castigation if strong justification cannot be supplied, even the groupthink itself may be flawed. My point is, the "normal" way of thinking or acting (eg: only asking "why" when it does not fit into our world-view and assuming that it is "normal" when things fit into our world-view) is not necessarily correct as it may have been formed by a very long period of groupthinking. But my real contention is about the necessity of "berlapik" when voicing out disagreement. I cannot help but to wonder why is it that when speaking to my non-Malay friends, I can freely say "you are wrong" and the can freely say "you are even more wrong". We can criticize each other just as comfortably as we praise each other. And age difference never gets mentioned in any of our heated discussion. It is so irrelevant.

Perhaps this culture of "berlapik" is also a result of groupthink???

When talking to non-Malays, I can speak my mind without any need to find ways to "soften" my approach. But when it come to Malays, I have to be careful. As a result, problems / issues are resolved openly with / among my non-Malay friends. It is sad but there was a time when I said to myself that chit-chats with non-Malays are more sincere / honest than with Malays. Things are swept under the carpet among us Malays. We hide so many things under the pretext of wanting to be nice, not knowing that the things are still there under the carpet. No wonder we are left behind......