Showing posts with label Malays. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Malays. Show all posts

Thursday, January 6, 2011

malaysiakini: Malay problem root of nation's problem... by AB Sulaiman

Malay problem root of nation's problem
AB Sulaiman
Jan 6, 2011, 1:43pm
 
 
COMMENT About a year and a bit ago, the Old Boys' Association of the Royal Military College otherwise known as 'Old Putras' organised an evening of discourse. 
 
The forum noted that the Malaysian people were fragmented, the economy at a virtual standstill, and democracy eroded by dictatorship, returning feudalism, and theocracy. Those present wanted to analyse the degeneration and like good citizens we were to come up with some solutions.

It was then that one speaker, Mohd Dahan if I remember correctly, who stood up to say, “Solve the Malay problem, and you solve the country's problem.” Now we are in the first month of the second decade of the 21st century, the ring of truth in his statement still prevails.

But at this time, 53 years after independence and 10 years to becoming a high-income country, it appears we are still embedded deep in a long list of unsolved national problems, with many getting worse than before.

Here are but some of them: A restive and fragmented population, high migration rate, poor rate of growth, broken public institutions like education and the judiciary, high crime rate, degenerating personal and public morality, price increases, inflation, and a generally authoritative, intimidating and arrogant government. Our comparative indices with other countries like in areas of transparency, human rights, education, are all on the downward swing.

And corruption, the perennial social cancer, taking place at the highest possible level, involving amounts that would make Carlos Slim (currently the richest man in the world according to Forbes) and Bill Gates almost poor by comparison.

Hope lies eternal, so let's see whether we can try to solve at least some of the national problems, by first solving some Malay problems, for this coming year.

But first, what exactly is the 'Malay problem'?

Unable to break the inertia

My observation of this matter stemmed from the collective Malay lack of knowledge and of modern technical skills and thereby negatively reflected in the country's wealth distribution scenario.
In 1957 the record books indicated that Malay economic involvement was no more than at a paltry 2 percent. This is not good at all as viewed and agreed on by the founding fathers and every meaningful citizen of whatever ethnic background.

Since then the Malays have been given all opportunities to be more fruitfully involved in the country's economic activities. In 1970, a name was given to this ground-breaking exercise known as social engineering under the New Economic Policy.

Lavishly-funded government policies and programmes were introduced to even the playing field for Malay incursion into the national economy.

But try as they might, the Malays could not manage to break the inertia and achieve any planning targets. (Please spare me the need to repeat even some of the details for they have been pretty well and regularly documented by proponents, supporters and critics alike.)

This was to me the first time the Malay problem surfaced. It's that the perception that Malay economic backwardness (and 'problem') is solely economic in its cause and could largely be solved under the NEP.
In fact its architect, Abdul Razak Hussein, asked for 20 years for the project implementation; surely thinking that this period was enough to see the Malay through.

Sadly, history has indicated there has been a fundamental flaw in this presumption. In reality, his economic ineptitude being one, but far more is his psychological or mental deficiency.

Psychological or mental? Yes. He has this innate inability to realise that upon independence the country was morphing progressively into a new era: From old to new, rural to urban, agrarian to manufacturing, ancient to modern. From a life aligned with nature and the natural featured by myth, magic, miracle and mystery, to one surrounded and led by technical principles and science. It was an era of change.

Change requires a few mental subtleties. First there must be awareness or consciousness of the advent of change, and second, it requires a willingness to adapt to it. Without these two, any change is but a natural progression. The mind must therefore be equipped to be conscious and be aware of change. This is what the Malay did not have. 

Ketuanan Melayu

History tells us that the Malay has not been able to produce the thinking faculty to recognise the coming of change to begin with. Hardly surprising therefore for him to show an inability to adapt at the appropriate time. He has no ability to accept and adapt to change.

So this is to me the root of the 'Malay problem'.

This inability to change again to me reflects the inner features and characteristics of Malay thinking:

i) It is ethnocentric: it believes in the superiority of its own type over all other types.
ii) It is non-scientific: it believes in not yet ascertained truth and in non-provable ones.
iii) It is quick in denial.
iv) It is not aware of its mistakes.

They would produce the following end-product or behaviour patterns:
v) The Malay is a superior race.
vi) Islam is the one and only religion that gets approval from God Almighty.
vii) These are irrefutable truths.
viii) Anyone denying the above is a traitor to the race and an apostate to religion.

Items (i) to (iv) indicate that the Malay is racially conscious and highly religion bound. Items (v) to (viii) reveal his racism and religious tendencies. They in turn at least partially explain the favourite Malay ideology 'untuk agama, bangsa dan negara'.

They have also been personified by the ketuanan Melayu entity, and giving rise to the Perkasa movement.

Doubters to this contention might wish to counter check: Are ketuanan Melayu and Perkasa not ethnocentric? They are for championing 'Malay rights' when the constitution says it's only Malay 'special privileges'.

They are also non-scientific for championing Islam, or at least the government-approved version of Islam: Sunni sect, Imam Shafie line, and until recently, Islam Hadhari variety.

Who then are ketuanan Melayu members? To me, the ketuanan Melayu entity comprises those who generally harbour the eight features just mentioned above. As individuals they are:

i) The ruling party members, especially Umno leaders;
ii) The civil servants running the government machinery;
iii) The officers and personnel running government agencies like the police, military, customs, immigration, etc.;
iv) The ulama whose job is to protect and propagate Islam;
v) Political chiefs aspiring to get to the top of the party ladder.

It's eerie to think the obvious - that this list would net almost the entire educated, urban, middle class, Malay population. And they are the embodiment of the Malay problem!

In other words, the root, core, essence of the Malay problem is the Malay collective culture!

Shameful performance

How has this collective culture been performing as the top leaders and managers of the country? Well, unless I am grossly wrong, you can't create something good out of something rotten. Ketuanan Melayu (i.e. racism and religious fundamentalism) to me is something definitely rotten. So Malay supremacy has been able to create in the last decade or so the following:

a) Bending the laws to suit Malay interests. In this case the constitution has been amended a record 40 times (with 650 individual amendments) since 1957. Compare this with the US that has amended its constitution about 27 times since its founding. Or, Singapore, four times. Racism is institutionalised in this country!
b) Breaking the thin line between Syariah and civil laws. The supremacy of the constitution has been eroded.
c. Breaking down of institutions like the check and balance features of democratic governance. Democracy is all but dead. Have the periodic general elections, and that's it, democracy is observed. Whatever happens in between is another matter altogether.
d) The flagrant use of lies, deceit, hooliganism on the part of the ruling elite against its own people. There is this massive breaking down of individual and public morality.

There are countless thousands of others.

We come back to Dahan's wisdom. Now that we have re-acquainted ourselves with the Malay problem, how do we go about solving it?

This is no easy task for the obstacles are enormous. On the one side we have a people under the ketuanan Melayu ambit digging deep into the fortress of race and religion and not at all ashamed to use the political power available at its disposal. To the Malay, the saying that the ends justify the means is enshrined in gold.

The government and ketuanan Melayu are not about to let go easily. They are deep in the quagmire of lies, deceit, corruption, even sin and criminality. Only by them staying in power will they be able to prevent the law from taking its course.

On the other side we have the 21st century world demanding a 21st century open and flexible mind. Some of them are: Technical ability, professionalism, openness, honesty, fairness, justice, morality, transparency, responsibility, accountability and integrity.

Solutions


Whatever programme we have to solve the Malay problem, two elements must be present: The secularisation of the Malay mind and the restoration of basic human rights to the peoples of Malaysia.

It has to be repeated that it won't be easy.

But hope against hope, the government must restore power to the people; the ulama must come to terms with universal realities. Civil servants too should reorient their thinking to serve the people rather than the politicians.

And the people, the average Malay down the road, must come to realise that the world is not an oyster, that individualism is the key to any personal or national development.

How can all these be achieved? Thinking influences behaviour - the ketuanan Melayu Malay mind must change from its ethnocentricity and non-scientific features to one of openness, fairness, rationality and respect for other men. 

Develop the sense of the individual in him. Secularise Malay thinking. Open his closed mind. Go for secular education. Teach philosophy in schools. Do not teach children about religion until they are able to think for themselves.

Do anything to make the Malay more receptive for change. Then perhaps we can begin to solve the Malay problem, in 2011 and onwards.

AB SULAIMAN is an observer of human traits and foibles, especially within the context of religion and culture. As a liberal, he marvels at the way orthodoxy fights to maintain its credibility in a devilishly fast-changing world. He hopes to provide some understanding to the issues at hand and wherever possible, suggest some solutions. He holds a Bachelor in Social Sciences (Leicester, UK) and a Diploma in Public Administration, Universiti Malaya.

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

malaysiakini: All this race nonsense... by KJ John

All this race nonsense
KJ John
malaysiakini, Dec 21, 2010
3:58pm

I am no sociologist by any definition or imagination. My good friend who is now a Distinguished Professor at UKM, is probably the most recognised sociologist in Malaysia; and founder or director of three Institutes at UKM. His current position is the founder-director of the Inter-ethnic Studies Unit at UKM. Therefore, if I make any serious mistakes with this column, I am sure at least he will correct me.

Recently, someone told me that the root word “melayu” actually describes the wilting process of a plant or flower. I then asked where did this word come from and why were the Malays (the English equivalent word) called such?

The closest answer I have received from a researcher is that there is a Sungai Melayu in Sumatra from which this sea-faring community originated. Therefore they were called Orang Melayu or Orang Sungai Melayu to be accurate. True? I do not know but I am floating these ideas so that I can be corrected if I am wrong.

How then did this one of 300-plus ethnicities of Indonesia become the “dominant race of Malaya?” After all in the Sejarah Melayu (which I have not read) I am told that the same thesis of the origin of the Melayu is also recorded.

So, why then did the British, or Dutch, or Portuguese create the Orang Melayu as a racial category and the Bahasa Melayu as the uniting language of the then-region called the Malay Archipelago and the Persekutuan Tanah Melayu?

azlanAnd, even more so, why did the British craft into our federal constitution the 'Malay language and culture' as a formal definition of “Malays - as those who follow Malay culture and practice Islam?” This constitutional definition is what appears to now have been misapplied as the new racial definition for all and sundry, when in fact, premised on modern genetic science research, there can only be one race in the world; that is the human race?

Therefore, from 1957-1963 there were Malays, Chinese and Indians in Malaya as they were almost explicitly referred to in Article 153; and there was very little confusion as to who the 'constitutional Malays' are or, who were the 'other races'. But then in 1963, with the formation of Malaysia, the new nation-state became called Malaysia not 'Melayu-sia!'

Always only Malaysians first

Therefore today, we are always only Malaysians first, with our various religions second, and various ethnicities third, and so on. Finally, also because we are always part and parcel of the human race, the God-given human conscience makes us all part and parcel of the epitome of God's created animals.

So, why is there all this overemphasis on the so-called “Malay race nonsense?” Sure, we know who is and who is not Malay by the constitutional definition. All Malay Rulers are these without doubt. But, they are not of the Malay race by any definition. In fact, they each have a different historicity and are from differing ethnic origins. If I am wrong, can anyone please correct me? I do not think they can now choose to deny their history and past either.

azlanTherefore, while PM Najib Abdul Razak may have not consciously and clearly defined his 1Malaysia in such ethnic terms; my simple and logical argument is that it really and only means we are only Malaysians first and foremost; with our religious affiliations second, and our ethnicities third. While both nationality and religions can be changed in the global world of nations, we do not allow for such a crossover only for Muslims in Malaysia.

Therefore, we condemned Lina Joy to migrate because of her faith. Ethnicities too, we cannot change, as God does not allow for it; and for those who try to do so, they may pay with their dear lives, as Michael Jackson found out.

Let me try therefore to apply the above logic towards the nation-state we call Malaysia. First and foremost, the word Malaysia is not a 'Melayu' word. It is an English equivalent for the Melayu peoples of Sungai Melayu in Sumatra.

This category of people, when mixed with other people groups (or ethne's) of Borneo (of which two states are now called Sarawak and Sabah) and Singapore; they all became called Malaysians. The concept of Malaysian is not an ethnicity but rather a nationality; much like the British or Americans (as opposed to Welsh or Irish or the American Indians).

That new nation-state definition includes all the original people groups (or ethnicities) of Malays of peninsular Malaya, Chinese of Penang (also an English equivalent of Pinang) and Malacca (or English equivalent of Melaka) and the Indians of the original rubber industry scattered all over peninsular Malaya but maybe mainly in Kedah, Perak and Selangor.

They also included the different Chinese ethnics of Singapore and all the different ethnicities of Sabah and Sarawak. For that matter in constitutional terms, the different Chinese and Indian ethnicities of Sabah and Sarawak are actually naturalised Malaysian citizens and should not have to apply for blue ICs by default.

The federal government, with due respect, cannot deny every natural Sarawakian or Sabahan this right and privilege which is only denied in peninsular Malaya.

A federation of three states

Now, let me further emphasise my nation-state argument. Malaysia is today a federation of three states; and not of thirteen states. The Agong is the Head of State for the Federation of Malaysia; and not just the Persekutuan Tanah Melayu. When he is the Head of State of the Federation; is he first and foremost an ethnic Malay by constitutional definition but is he is always first and foremost a Malaysian; like all the rest of us.

Only within the nine Malay States of the peninsular do we have Heads of a State who are both; constitutional Malays and the Head of Islamic religion in their states. My argument is that when they rotationally and democratically become Head of the Federation of Malaysia; they are always and by definition only a Malaysian first, religionist second and ethnic third.

The Agong as representative Head of the Council of Rulers of the nine Malay States and other Heads of State are therefore only symbolically of “the socially constructed reality” called an ethnic Malay by the Malaysian constitutional definition.

sultan mizan zainal abidin the new agong agung kingConsequently too, for example, the Sabahans and Sarawakians can ask in Parliament for the Agong to protect and preserve the practice of their religions; regardless of their particular form of faith, including those from an Animistic faith.

And it is the job and responsibility of the elected Constitutional King of the Federation of Malaysia to do so because he is just not a mere Malay Ruler of solitary state but the King of the new nation-state; whenever elected to this portfolio, and never by lineage or birth.

Former member of Parliament for Kuching and now a contributor to Malaysiakini, Sim Kwang Yang summarised this well in his last opinion piece: “I am personally against all politics of race, because I do not think there is such a 'thing' as a real 'race'. Our polity is made up of individuals, and not of races. The concept of race has no ontological basis.”

I fully agree! May God bless Malaysians to understand this.



KJ JOHN was in public service for 29 years. He is now dean of the Faculty of Economics and Policy Science at UCSI University, Malaysia. The views expressed above are truths that matter to him as an individual citizen wearing private and civil society hats and therefore are not opinions of the university or faculty. Do send feedback to him at kjjohn@ohmsi.net