Deepavali — and darkness precedes light — Dr David KL Quek
The Malaysian Insider, November 06, 2010
Some of us lament the fact that many such events have lost their spontaneity and genuine warmth that used to showcase our “Malaysian”ness. Many subscribe to these engineered social events out of sheer political affiliation or the availability of free lunches. But they do give that picturesque semblance of the Malaysian brand, even if they appear cheesy or superficial.
Nevertheless, public holidays also provide for some of us, sporadic commentators, the much-needed time to time-out and perhaps to reminisce and reflect.
Deepavali or Diwali, as the Festival of Lights for Hindus, is one of those special celebrations that should offer us that opportune moment to contemplate where we are once again in the post-election aftermath of March 2008, for the much-anticipated political awakening, and our tottering attempts at social and political change for the better.
Prior to this, the fearless Hindraf movement burst upon the Malaysian scene to spark the improbable impudence of people power, perhaps igniting for the very first time in a long while, the demand for empowerment of a long-suffering downtrodden people. Light from darkness, which embolden perhaps many other citizens to awaken from their long slumber of sociopolitical apathy.
More than five decades of nationhood should provide us with the experience and the audacity to establish and behave as a nation, which truly “can do”, mature in every aspect of human development and social egalitarianism. We should already have a unifying national vision, which empowers and incorporates every citizen to partake of our immense wealth, our consecutive good fortunes and our shared aspirations. Much remains to be done. It also means that we have to work more cohesively to garner greater momentum as a whole, to hopefully realise our collective goal towards becoming a fully developed nation by 2020.
Yet, truth be told, we are beset with greater sociopolitical and religious divisiveness than ever before. The more ethnocentric and religious-minded nowadays shun inter-ethnic contacts for religious or other reasons. Neighbourly cross visitations and social interactions are also becoming fewer and shallower, because many worry about the political or peer correctness of their actions. Worse, many are contemptuous of and disdain the other, fanned by parochial misinformation!
Thus, there is that heightened sense of religiosity and/or ethnic superciliousness that breeds growing avoidance of others different from the self or group. There is that comfort zone indulgence which generates even greater insularity, narrow-mindedness, and plain tribalistic intolerance.
Most if not all are wary of sharing and eating “tainted” non-halal food from unclean crockery and utensils. There is the fear that cross visits might also be construed as pandering to politically-incorrect ideas, as condoning idolatry or worshipping of different gods and deities, fear of labels of heresy (kafir-mengkafir), or insult to their religiousness, etc.
Let’s be brutally honest about this: our tolerance towards one another has been wearing very thin, of late…
Still, our open houses are unique and should serve as auspicious opportunities to foster closer interethnic and inter-religious understanding and tolerance. Well, at least they are supposed to do so, for those who dare or who are brave and liberal enough to surpass their fears or prejudices of the ethno-religious unknown or uncertainty.
How is it that many years ago such tensions never seem to deter our natural inclinations, our sincere if inattentive cohesiveness, despite the broken “pasar” Malay, the strongly accentuated stereotypes of ethnic peculiarities, which continue to evoke laughter and jest in a “cosy” if crude and sometimes irreverent manner? What has happened?
Why have we become so different and divided as we move through these 50-odd years of supposed maturity into a nearly-developed nation, to have become more and more separate and isolated within our own communities, so long a part of our Malaysian history and brand?
As we gather and celebrate our diversity and extraordinary relationships, we must learn to understand and delve deeper into our special circumstances, which make us Malaysians unique in the happenstance of history. We must learn to celebrate our nurtured schema of multiculturalism, so much touted in this uncertain world of disparate and widening chasms. We must strive to eschew the so-called “clash of civilisations”.
Indeed, isolated if intermittent incidents of ethnic and religious outbursts in Malaysia provide a microcosm of the possible civilisational tensions which exist in the world today. It is arguable if Malaysia and our authorities have handled our discords well, or evenhandedly at that. But, there is no template the world over, of what is the right thing to do; we just have to do better! We must find better alternative approaches than mere confrontation and headstrong immovable tit for tats.
Our leadership must robustly and clearly guide the moral direction of where we want our nation and our Malaysia to go, without wishy-washy flip-flopping pronouncements, which only pander to opportunistic bigots and partisan groups! But this is not to say that we should usher in a new era of authoritarian dictates; this should never be the case. Nor should there be intimidating and selective sanctions by the arguable applications of the rule of law!
Simmering tensions and subterranean anger continue to plaque our cohesiveness, our unity — which increasingly appears fragile and sometimes ostensibly shattered by shameful acts of irrational bigotry and repeated hurtful rhetoric by aggressive chauvinistic politicians.
Slogans of progressive and moderate civilisational Islam or Islam Hadhari, notwithstanding, most non-Malay and non-Muslim Malaysians are increasingly feeling isolated and alienated. Malaysian Indians and Chinese, with their unflinching advocacy towards cultural and linguistic “identity” and unrelenting demands for education in their mother tongues, continue to rankle detractors who consider such a “separate” system as divisive towards nation building.
But, unfortunately, the ethnocentric fears of educational standards and opportunities, of perceived biased religious or racial overtones (at the expense of the minority religions and cultures) are not readily understood by the authorities, which are seen to have increasingly dispensed with wider multiethnic input or inclusiveness.
Recent exposures of BTN propagandist lecturers and racist outbursts by some school principals underscore the doctrine of inherent intolerance among even the most senior of civil servants. It is not unreasonable to expect that many more similar incidents might not have been exposed. Schools and the civil service are, therefore, becoming more and more mono-ethnic and mono-religious in character.
In fact, our entire civil service is now so mono-ethnic that this doctrine of separateness has become so entrenched that we have become “them and us”! There is that expected “ketuanan” relationship of top-down approach (not necessarily of genuine respect and regard), but also a reciprocal, if insincere and begrudging obeisance.
This only begets even more divergent undercurrents of separateness, anger, envy, feeling of unfairness, snide contempt and possible abhorrence. Outwardly, there is that superficial acceptance, deference and unspoken tension. This probably extends to their relationship with other authorities such as the police, the military and other agencies. Thus, non-Malays are more and more driven into a “minority cluster”, which is merely tolerated but not really accepted.
One surprising pronouncement of PM Datuk Seri Najib Razak during the Umno general assembly only underscores the separateness of the Chinese and the Indians in Malaysia, when his concept of who is a Malay now encompasses literally everyone else who is Bumiputera, and anyone who adopts Islam as a religion and practises customs and language of the Malays, or whoever is Muslim, notwithstanding their recent origins from within or outside the actual boundaries of the nation…
Unfortunately, such a declaration only serves to marginalise the non-Muslim non-Malay Malaysians all the more. We may no longer be called “pendatangs” but we are also not among the “favoured” citizens as well. Such is the interpretation of the so-called “social contract”, based on but not explicitly stated in Article 153 of the Federal Constitution. Worse we are now urged not to question or raise these concerns, that we must refrain from discussing this “social contract” so that inter-communal harmony can be preserved in the nation!
This concept of differential citizen’s rights runs counter to most nations around the world where full citizenship rights — apart from “jus soli” (citizenship acquired by birth within the territory of the state, regardless of parental citizenship) — are based on one’s economic or special contribution, and where one’s preferred choice of nationality is based on the individual’s special qualities or contributory worth, and takes precedence over any religious or ethnic differences. Once we become citizens or are born one, then shouldn’t we all be equal before the law?
How much one is willing to sacrifice to the greater good of any form of discriminatory citizenship would sorely test the resolve of a modern global citizen, no matter the patriotism that one wishes to inculcate or even indoctrinate!
Such would be the dilemma of the Malaysian-born non-Malay in a globalised world, where one’s professional or technical expertise, natural talent or financial worth would dictate preference and attraction to most countries around the globe. How can we now talk about talent retention and attraction to boost Malaysian intellectual property strength and power, when the core principles of fairness and merit are not sacrosanct?
How then can one find meaning and purpose in our individual and collective resolve to belong, to be an integral part of that Malaysian dream, especially if one is a born Malaysian but of “wrong” ethnic origin? Should this really matter at all?
“Malaysian citizenship, at its very core, was not based on equality but it was made to fit the reality (of the country’s) long-term goals and interests,” says Najib. So does this mean that one’s interpretation of “history” cannot be allowed to change with the times?
How then can we simply say that such is the inflexible and immutable quirk of fate and history that we are but unequal citizens, for all time? Yet, we are exhorted to be selfless responsible citizens who would subsume ourselves for the greater good…
But like Lim Teck Ghee and others (malaysiakini: Malaysians ready to discuss ‘social contract’), I believe that “the Malaysian public has reached a level of political maturity that we can have a rational and public debate on the way forward in terms of any inter-communal accord or understanding arrived at, and on what needs to be honoured and respected.”
Just gagging such discussions would otherwise cause the riptides of feelings of injustice and discrimination to slowly but surely corrode and destroy the so-called accord of working together as a united Malaysian team. Silencing rational debate would undermine the expected positive contribution that we hope for, from all the collective talent and entrepreneurial prowess of our citizens!
The highly competitive globalised economic climate would demand that every single citizen pull his/her own weight to productively contribute towards nation building if we wish to prosper, as we work towards 2020 and beyond! There will be no free-lunchers, no stowaways, no tolerance or margins for errors or wastage…
Let’s make every Malaysian count and be counted, and not shortchange or undermine his/her loyalty to become a full-fledged, fully committed citizen.
From the darkness of introverted ethnic communalism, let there be light! Let the festive lights of Deepavali enlighten our cobwebbed mindsets and help illuminate a new bold path for all Malaysians!
No comments:
Post a Comment