FMT: Shocking racial disparity in civil service.... by Joseph Tawie

Shocking racial ‘imbalance’ in civil service

Joseph Tawie

 | August 20, 2011

The Chinese community make up less than two percent of the Malaysian government service.

KUCHING: Change, like charity should begin at home.  Likewise Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak should have begun implementing his 1Malaysia concept within the civil service first before attempting to ‘teach the world’.

Alas this has not happened and Najib, according to Sarawak DAP has failed miserably in improving the racial composition of the civil service.

The situation is a poor reflection of his seriousness in implementing the 1Malaysia concept.

“He (Najib) has been shouting about the concept for the past two years, and yet the racial composition between the Malays and Chinese in government departments has not improved,” said Sarawak DAP secretary Chong Chieng Jen.

According to Chong,  he had asked the PM, during the recent sitting of Parliament, to disclose the total number of civil servants in all the ministries and the racial breakdown of Malays, Chinese, Iban and Bidayuh staff.

He said he had asked for the update on number of civil service staff in the government’s employ up to 31 March 2011.

The revert, he received was shocking.

“In the Prime Minister Department, there are about 31,297 Malays to 797 Chinese. This is about two percent.

“And it is no better in majority of the other ministeries.

“Based on the reply given to my question in Parliament there is a big discrepancy between the Malays and Chinese civil servants.

“The worst is in the Rural Development and the Federal Territory Ministry where there are 2,442 Malays to 18 Chinese or less than one percent of the Chinese,” said Chong, who is also Bandar Kuching MP.

Listing out the detailed breakdown of Malay and Chinese civil servants, Chong said there was a clear ‘imbalance’ in racial compositions in all government departments, agencies and ministeries.

“It also clearly shows Najib’s 1Malaysia slogan is a mere slogan.

“There is no concrete policy to implement the 1Malaysia concept.

“There has been no improvement in the racial composition even after he announced the concept…even his department is worse than average.

He said: “There is no improvement in the racial composition based on the racial breakdown in the

“It shows that Najib is not the PM for all, but the prime minister for one single race,” Chong said after releasing the Malay to Chinese staff breakdown in the various ministries.

Breakdown

He listed out the reply from the PM’s department as below:

Ministry of Youth and Sports 2,980 Malays, 32 Chinese,

Ministry of Home Affairs 40,263 Malays to 614 Chinese;

Ministry of Works 6,221 Malays to 156 Chinese,

Ministry of Health 130,106 Malays to 9,500 Chinese,

Ministry of Finance 15,835 Malays to 508 Chinese,

Ministry of Foreign Affairs 1,215 Malays to 53 Chinese

Ministry of Education 273,791 Malays to 43,669 Chinese

Ministry of Tourism 455 Malays to 19 Chinese

Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development 5,461 Malays to 75 Chinese

Ministry of Information, Communication and Culture 8,839 Malays to 402 Chinese

Ministry of Higher Education 15,012 Malays to 334 Chinese

Ministry of Transport 9,028 Malays to 205 Chinese

Ministry of Defence 12,078 Malays to 113 Chinese

Ministry of Housing and Local Government 11,363 Malays to 173 Chinese

malaysiakini: Set up a national education reform consultative council... by Toh Kin Woon

Set up a national education reform consultative council

Toh Kin Woon
Aug 3, 11
2:50pm

LLG Cultural Development Centre is highly concerned about the announcement by the Education Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin in mid July that the ministry was readying a study on a complete revamp of the existing education system.

The report is to be submitted to the cabinet for approval end of this year.

Education reform is of paramount importance. Any country proposing to review its national education system as a whole, will inevitably have to study thoroughly the shortcomings of the current education system, and to consult the opinions of various stake holders in relation to education reform.

We urge the Education Ministry and the Higher Education Ministry to make public details of the proposed education reforms such as the guiding thoughts, principles, objectives, strategies and implementation in the course of undertaking such reforms.

The proposed reforms must be carried out in a transparent manner, allowing people and education organisations to take part in the process. This is to ensure that the true spirit of democracy will prevail, particularly in this area of utmost importance to all the people.

We hold the view that the government should set up a national education reform consultative council, comprising representatives from various education organisations.

These representatives should be involved in the process of brainstorming, idea contribution, planning, implementation and monitoring of the education reforms.

LLG Cultural Development Centre contends that the education reform ought to incorporate four principles as follows:

1. Democracy in education decision-making The government should reform the highly centralised decision-making process in the education system.

The government should also dismantle policies which prohibit strictly certain education providers, particularly those providing vernacular education, from acting as education providers.

In fact, the government ought to decentralise its educational decision-making power to the state governments, municipal governments and even down to the community, allowing the community people to participate in the planning of education.

If the people decide to increase the numbers of Chinese schools, Tamil schools, national schools or any other linguistic schools in their community, the respective governments must seriously consider implementing the proposals.

In short, the government should not suppress primary, secondary and higher education provided in the various mother tongues as medium of instruction. In fact, the federal government should provide educational resource to support these efforts.

2. Equitable provision of education resources. The government must recognise the equal status of all schools by ensuring the fair and equal distribution of education resource for all the schools.

If the government maintains the discriminative education policy and subject tax payers who send their children to Chinese schools and Tamil schools to unfair treatment, the education reform will lose its progressive meaning and is a contradiction to the concept of 'people first' as advocated by the prime minister.

To ensure equality, we propose the adoption of an Education Equality Act that stipulates clearly that the government must treat all schools fairly. To us, this act is an important cornerstone of any education reform.

3. Academic Independence. The most worrying issue for higher education in Malaysia is the lack of academic independence.

The vice chancellors of universities are taking orders from politicians, as witnessed by the recent parking of riot police trucks in university campuses, something that would be taboo in countries that observe strictly the principle of university autonomy.

The universities and politicians have been working hand-in-hand to manipulate campus elections. Academicians with critical thinking have been sidelined and denied promotions by the authorities.

The promotion of academicians is not based on merit but nepotism and ethnic identity.

The University and University Colleges Act suppresses the freedom of thought and movement of students, nurturing graduates who follow uncritically the thoughts and ideas propagated by state elites.

The education reform must abolish all these problems if higher education is to be intellectually strong, creative and vibrant.

4. Elimination of racism. We are extremely worried about the escalating racist mindset in university campuses and schools.

For instance the indoctrination of racist thinking by the Biro Tata Negara, the use of history text books that have been severely distorted and imbalanced, the adoption of the Bahasa Malaysia text book 'Interlok' that instills the idea of Malay supremacy, and the hiring of teaching staff who insult students with racist statements, and the like, are some such examples.

The government must dissolve Biro Tata Negara, abolish all practices that promote racism and seriously punish teaching staff who make racist statements.

TOH KIN WOON is president of the LLG Cultural Development Centre.

Malaysian human capital outflow... By Michael Lee

Malaysian human capital outflow

By Michael Lee
May 14, 2011 | The Malaysian Insider

MAY 14 — Once, on the way to the airport in the cold dead of night, I had a heated discussion with an acquaintance of my father from the US about having a life outside of Malaysia.

I was in my teens then, fresh from the Malaysian public education system and was a staunch supporter of our government’s policies. The man who initiated the discussion, on the other hand, was a successful overseas Malaysian himself and was going on about the many merits of leaving Malaysia for a better life abroad. He himself had left Malaysia decades ago after getting his degree and has since found success in an auto-parts business he founded.

Throughout the drive, he cherry picked on the rampant corruption and injustices, particularly against non-Bumiputeras, like us, deep set in the Malaysian social, economic and political system.

While I believed most of what he said to be true, it was not something I haven’t heard before.

Again and again, my defence was that Malaysia was young in being independent compared with the US and needed more time to mature before the inequalities and inefficiencies fade away. The conversation ended in, what I believe, a stalemate, with his detailed reasoning unable to pierce the wall that was my youthful optimism. This took place about 18 years ago.

Fast forward another 6-7 years, in a mamak stall somewhere south of the Klang Valley, with my two friends, both many years my senior. One of them raised his decision to move to Taiwan and to start a life there with his Taiwanese wife. Coincidentally, he had just a few months previously returned from Taiwan after his privately-funded tertiary education there ended. Despite our suggestion, he did not believe that bringing his new Taiwanese wife to Malaysia instead would be an alternative worth considering.

Again, as with my father’s friend, I attempted to sway him home, albeit unsuccessfully. Halfway into the drinks, his reasons for leaving unmasked into, again, the injustices, perceived or real, that plagued the non-Bumis in Malaysia. He saw no agreeable future for him in Malaysia. There was nothing we could have said to convince him otherwise. He moved to Taiwan later that year and has since worked hard to start a small food shop that sustained his family’s life there.

By far the most poignant experience I have on the matter was with my distant cousin in Ireland. He was there working part time as a small-time cook for a former Malaysian in a two-man operated neighbourhood curry shop to finance his culinary studies in a nearby town. He studied during the morning and worked in the afternoon and late into the night. On weekends, he worked all day and well into the night. All the while, he stayed in the cramp and dusty attic of the curry shop by himself, sleeping on an old mattress on the floor.

It was during my visit in the middle of winter that I experienced for myself first hand just how lonely and bitter that type of living arrangement was. Unlike the previous two, it was obvious, even to me, that the man did not need any convincing Malaysia is good, because evidently, his willingness to go through what he had been going through daily was conviction enough for all to see. As it worked out, a handful of years of perseverance later, he is now residing in UK as a successful chef and, the last I heard, had since succeeded in his own pastry business there.

On a related note, and I’m not sure if it’s still the going trend these days, but back when I was a secondary student at my Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan (SMK), I have watched many of my better-than-average secondary classmates whisked away to Singapore via the Asean scholarship and, to my knowledge, none have returned back to Malaysia. Our southern neighbour was so keen on Malaysian academic achievers that some of those who failed to apply for the Asean scholarship programme were approached individually after their STPM exam.

A close friend of mine attests to this as she herself has experienced this. In her first few months in Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), Nanyang Technology University of Singapore (NTU) contacted her directly at her house to offer her a full scholarship for a degree course in information technology. Ironically, the course offered has always been her first choice but the course she was studying at UKM at the time was the last on her list of choices.

Due to family obligations at that point in time of her life, she was forced to decline the offer. But this was not the end to it. Further to this, NTU called her again days later to ask her reasons for declining their offer and gave her the opportunity to reconsider again.

After much thought and consultation with her friends and family which was unanimous in their bias, she took up NTU’s offer and left for Singapore. She is now working with a multinational corporation there and has since taken up permanent residence in Singapore.

The above are just an inkling of some of the real cases that I have personally come across. I don’t think it’s necessary to point out other examples as I’m pretty sure a lot of Malaysians may be already intimately acquainted with this phenomenon. Given the very recent World Bank statistics on Malaysia’s human capital outflow, the above, unfortunately, are but a scratch on the surface.

The fact was not lost on me, of course, that the Malaysian government throughout the years has had more than its fair share of unflattering news, deserved or otherwise. But I always held on to the hope that all the corruption, inefficiencies and misdirection would be scraped away eventually in due time. Not so because of some inner sense of righteousness or of my own naive optimism in the conscience from our leaders but from a more practical and realistic standpoint — that being, because we live in among an increasingly competitive global economy and we are quickly running out of excuses and options.

But that did not happen.

As a nation, we have been steadily but surely reaching an impasse. The fact that we are overlooked by foreign and even domestic investors nowadays shows that Malaysia is no longer the “Asian tiger” it once was.

The rise of the opposition political parties after the 2008 “tsunami” elections intensified the in-fighting among our leaders and stirred the incumbent BN leaders to become more preoccupied in staying in power rather than to govern the country properly for once.

The news we read in the media grew more and more unbelievable and outrageous. From unsinkable submarines to RM25,000 laptops purchased by civil servants, from the provocative act of dragging of a cow’s head in public to the Molotov cocktail attacks on churches, from the rise of Perkasa/Pembela to the Allah debacle in east Malaysia, from calling for the abandonment of English in our education system to the recent import of 300 American teachers, etc, etc. The list goes on, even today.

And while those sensationalistic news peppered itself regularly all over the local media, boiling beneath the surface are the bread-and-butter issues that have been increasingly plaguing the day-to-day lives of the average working Malaysian.

From the price of homes to the price of food, the rapid rise in the cost of living is now more prominent than ever. For an ordinary salaryman like myself, even as a degree holder, I foresee that my meagre income will no longer be able to meet my young family’s future financial needs.

I found myself starting to apply for a job overseas since a year ago, just to chance the possibility that some company outside of Malaysia might want to consider hiring me. In the beginning, my family, I especially, had been very reluctant to even consider leaving as I have a very rewarding career in Malaysia. Also, Malaysia is my home. I was born and raised in Malaysia and has always felt that Malaysia is a wonderful place to call live. This is not solely because I’ve been told this repeatedly by the government-sponsored media since I was young, or because I grew up well integrated with our public national school system philosophies.

To cut a long story short, and to my surprise, a job did find me months later, and following in my predecessor’s footsteps, my wife and I, together with our three-year old son have recently moved to Hong Kong. To be honest, the overall package offered was only slightly more lucrative than my job in Malaysia when one factors in the cost of living. Even so, it did not affect our eventual decision to take the job because that was not the sole reason for applying for an overseas job in the first place.

I do not think it’s necessary to go through the faults of Malaysia, or more specifically, its government, just to prove that it has faults. Perfection is not something to be expected from an individual let alone from a collection of provincial populists strung loosely together by bureaucracy. Understandably, no government is perfect. But that’s not really the point.

Even as I type this, I am watching the headline news on HK local television network talking about the effects of the recent minimum wage implementation. I believe that this is a newsworthy issue that directly affects the majority of HK residents. Now contrast this with the headline news in Malaysia two days ago about a major Malaysian newspaper inciting fear against the Christians for allegedly wanting a Christian Malaysian prime minister?

I cannot speak for others who had left the country as to their reasons or their motivations for doing so. I can only speak for myself and, to an extent, my wife. I came to seek our fortunes overseas because I feel that the opportunity cost of just staying put is far too high. Furthermore, in my line of work, I may soon find it difficult to get work in the future due to the shrinking pool of my potential employers.

With regards to the human capital outflow, it is my humble opinion that the government should take steps to build up the country properly first before even considering setting up ad hoc agencies like Talent Corp.

If Malaysians like me who has only recently left Malaysia would not consider moving back to Malaysia solely based upon any temporary and half-hearted measures by our Talent Corp, what are the chances of enticing Malaysians that have been overseas for much longer than I and more entrenched in their lives abroad?

If anything, I believe that, at the moment, the government would be better focused in creating reasons and opportunities for Malaysians living in Malaysia now to prevent them from leaving rather than waste money and effort trying to lure overseas Malaysians to come back.

No one really wants to go through the difficult decision of leaving home, away from family and friends for an extended amount of time if they felt that they had a reasonable choice in the first place.

* Michael Lee reads The Malaysian Insider.

NST: Why ex-envoy Malott has got it all so wrong... by Johan Jaaffar

Why ex-envoy Malott has got it all so wrong

by Johan Jaaffar

NST 12 Feb 2011

I FIND it mindboggling that the former United States ambassador to Malaysia, John R. Malott, could be so wrong in his assessment of the current state of racial relations in this country ("The Price of Malaysia's Racism" -- Asian Wall Street Journal, Feb 8). It was written sadly at a time when the US and Malaysia are enjoying their best ever relationship thanks to President Barack Obama and Datuk Seri Najib Razak. I can understand the ouster of then deputy prime minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim would still haunt Malott to this day. He has, of course, every right to make his own judgment of what happened back then. For the record, it took place 13 years and two prime ministers ago, historically speaking that is.

I am sure we have all moved on even if he has not. Too many things have changed since then. One positive thing Malott should understand is that freedom of speech and expression has reached new heights as a result of that incident. Malaysians are becoming more open, more vocal and more assertive. The Internet has changed the way people perceive the government, the media and themselves.

Malott should be proud of that fact if he is at all a supporter of all things free and open. The alternative spaces are widening, bloggers are having a field day and people's journalism is making inroads. We have seen the repercussions of that "open policy" -- Barisan Nasional was punished, rightly or wrongly, at the last general election. BN accepted the fact. But BN stands by its motto that this country is better ruled by a coalition of race-based parties than those based on chauvinistic dogmas and fundamentalist leanings.

It is so easy, if Malott had paid some attention while he was here, to play to the gallery. Just play the racial card. Portray oneself as the champion of a particular race. The temptation is irresistible. But BN and the parties in the coalition choose not to, the bigger agenda supersedes short term gain.
In a country like Malaysia, it is easy to create racial tension -- a cow's head, slices of pork, destruction of temples and mosques -- all hell can break loose. Just like that. But that is not the Malaysian way. We have survived despite our problems these many years. After all, we are not perfect.

Just last week, I wrote about the imperfections that I noticed in race relations in this country over the years. In "a bubbling, bustling melting pot of races and religions", it is impossible to be perfect. We are just too diverse, too different. But that does not mean we cannot live alongside each other. We have a reasonably good record in race relations management compared with many other countries. But why should we compare ourselves with others? The US, too, has its racial problems the last time I checked.

Perhaps Malott spends too much time listening to a hotchpotch of diplomatic gossip and irresponsible murmurs, so much so that he finds it difficult to differentiate fact from fiction, truth from hearsay. He was here when Malaysia registered the best ever economic growth. He didn't sound a warning bell about economic discrimination back then. He saw what happened to the region in 1997. He can't blame it on bad governance here when South Korea, Thailand, Indonesia and Singapore were badly if not worse hit. But we did not see turmoil as experienced by some of our neighbours.

The fabric of our society was intact even during the economic meltdown. We have addressed the racial imbalance economically, thank God, after 1969, though the policy was said to discriminate. The Chinese tauke, the Malay tokoh korporat and the Indian businessman were all hit.

The New Economic Policy (NEP), despite being savagely condemned, had achieved some of its desired results. At least it addressed the very issue that has bedevilled all multi-racial societies -- the danger, as Amy Chua rightly pointed out in her book World on Fire, of "market-dominant minorities". The NEP was not carved out from the Robin Hood principle of stealing from others to give to the Malays. The others are prospering, in fact more so after the implementation of the NEP that some segments of Malay society felt they would forever be left behind. The policy favouring the Malays has helped the rise of a new middle class among them, many of whom, for the record, are not enthusiastic supporters of the government. BN has to live with that.

Why invoke Perkasa's position when even the Malays themselves are nervous about it? There are tendencies of raucous chauvinism in the vernacular press -- the trend, while unhealthy, is certainly in line with Malott's notion of an open society. The media -- mainstream or otherwise -- is pushing the envelope and cyberspace has become a lawless domain. The government is not in the business of closing newspapers, suing bloggers or even censoring the Internet. But openness and freedom must come with responsibility. You don't need to go to journalism school to know there is such a thing as the S-word here. There are sensitivities we have to observe or else we will end up with anarchy.

While I agree that many of our people are working outside the country, I find it hard to believe that just because millions of Britons, French, Germans and others work in the US, these nationals are abandoning their country or unhappy with certain policies. We are dealing with a global economy and this is a global phenomenon. People have been crossing borders for better lives since time immemorial.

While it is true many of those working abroad "are skilled ethnic Chinese and Indian Malaysians", let's not forget that the Malays are also complaining that their children are not coming back after their graduation overseas. The brain drain involves Malay young men and women, too. It is not that they love Malaysia less, it is the lure of better pay and opportunities. To cite that "500,000 Malaysians left the country between 2007 and 2009" is an exaggeration at best, irresponsible at worst.

It is easy for Malott to bring up one or two incidents involving ministers or aides to portray the government as not sensitive to other religions. To say that racial instability is one reason for foreign investors to shy away from Malaysia negates the fact that Malaysia remains competitive among many emerging markets. We are not expecting Malott to understand the economic reforms made by the prime minister or his 1Malaysia campaign to unite the people.

Sadly, this old Malaysia hand, if he wants to label himself so, is just too far away and too far off the mark to understand the changing dynamics of this country.

Read more: Why ex-envoy Malott has got it all so wrong http://www.nst.com.my/nst/articles/17malot/Article/#ixzz1DjEB9SvT

East Asia Forum: Can Malaysia graduate?... by Hal Hill, ANU

Can Malaysia graduate?

East Asia Forum
January 19th, 2011
by Hal Hill, ANU

Malaysia is one of the developing world’s great success stories. Few countries outside of East Asia can match its development record. Since its independence over 53 years ago per capita incomes have risen more than eight-fold, and absolute poverty has been all but eliminated.

But it currently faces three key, interrelated challenges, some generic to upper middle income developing countries, others specific to Malaysia itself.

The first, how to graduate to the rich-country club, has been clearly articulated by the country’s Prime Minister, Tun Najib: ‘We are now at a critical juncture, either to remain trapped in a middle-income group or advance to a high-income economy … We now have to shift to a new economic model based on innovation, creativity and high value added activities.’

The second, shared by some of its Southeast Asian neighbours, is the country’s slower development trajectory since the Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s. Even before the current global financial crisis, which it has navigated quite successfully, economic growth in the 2000’s was about two percentage points below that of the decade 1986-96.

Particularly worrisome is the slump in investment, which has been stuck at little more than 20 per cent of GDP since the late 1990s. This is 10-15 percentage points of GDP lower than the country’s historic ratio. With savings remaining buoyant, the country’s external position has been transformed dramatically. In 2002, the country had net liabilities equivalent to 35 per cent of GDP. By 2008, this had been transformed to net assets of 20 per cent of GDP. Put simply, Malaysians have been finding overseas investment increasingly attractive, while foreigners have been less attracted to Malaysia.

The third challenge relates to the development of high-quality institutions to underpin a modern market economy in a country that has experienced continuous one-party rule for over half a century. Malaysia’s ruling United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) is in fact the world’s longest-serving governing party currently in power among all ‘quasi democracies’. Not surprisingly, elements of UMNO exhibit the problems of complacence and arrogance that one expects from entrenched one-party dominance.

Malaysia’s strengths are not to be underestimated. It has always been one of the most open economies in the developing world, to both trade and foreign investment. It has rarely had a severe macroeconomic crisis, in large part because of this openness. It derived a major early mover advantage from its adoption in the early 1970s of export oriented industrialisation through foreign direct investment, before it was fashionable to do so.

Among emerging economy manufactured goods exporters, it has progressed from 15th ranked and 1.2 per cent of the total in 1969-70 to 5th ranked and 5.2 per cent of the total in 2006-07. It is a major player in the global electronics industry. In 2006-07, it accounted for 3.8 per cent of global parts and components exports, in East Asia behind only the highly industrialised economies of China, Japan and Korea.

But Malaysia is struggling to shift out of low-skill activities, where it is no longer competitive with lower wage neighbours. These problems have been exacerbated by its vigourous promulgation of one of the longest running affirmative action programs in the developing world. Designed to redistribute employment and wealth to the dominant Bumiputera – principally ethnic Malay – community after the nasty communal conflict of May 1969, the so-called New Economic Policy (NEP) and its successors played an important role in promoting racial harmony in the country where there are large differences in living standards across racial groups.

But these programs have created a culture of entitlement, and they have resulted in institutionalised leakages that permeate practically every aspect of Malaysian commercial, social, political and educational life. The programs to advance Bumiputera development have benefited spectacularly the politically well-connected within this community, through preferential contracts, share allocations, and general commercial advancement, while all too little has trickled down to the general community. The programs can hardly be justified as anti-poverty programs when the principal beneficiaries are already egregiously wealthy.

As a result, some of the country’s industry policies have backfired. Malaysia might have been expected to be the leading Southeast Asian automotive producer, but Thailand has become the ‘Detroit of Asia’ owing to Malaysia’s disastrous national car program. In addition, the ‘spillover’ benefits from the large multinational presence in manufacturing have been limited by the fact that Malaysia’s small and medium enterprises (SMEs), that are predominantly owned by the ethnic Chinese community, prefer to stay small, below the threshold above which Bumiputera employment quotas become mandatory.

The country’s public universities, once among the region’s best, have also slipped in East Asian rankings owing to these ethnic quotas as well as heavy bureaucratic control. The civil service is bloated and in need of reform, while there is a very large state enterprise sector that functions in a non-transparent manner and subject to little public accountability.

Moreover, Malaysia has missed out on emerging service sector opportunities owing to the slow pace of liberalisation in that sector, itself a product of the very large presence of state-dominated firms and the NEP-preference schemes. And the country continues to experience a substantial brain drain as a result of the exodus of skilled professionals from the Chinese and Indian communities.

It is fashionable in Malaysia to attribute its current malaise to China, a country that is able to out-compete Malaysia in low-end and increasingly a sophisticated range of manufactures. While the ‘export similarity index’ (that is the composition of their exports) for the two countries is quite high, and thus there has some been some loss of market share to China from Malaysia in third-country export markets, the notion that the rise of China explains Malaysia’s current difficulties is untenable. That view overlooks the positive sum game for Malaysia from China’s rise.

As a resource-rich economy, Malaysia has benefited from the general China-fuelled rise in commodity prices, for example its exports of palm oil and oil and gas. Similarly, commercial opportunities in tourism and education have been rising rapidly, with two-way investments rising very quickly. And Malaysia is a central player in the increasingly China-centred East Asian production networks that export to the world.

Hal Hill is HW Arndt Professor of Southeast Asian Economies at the Australian National University. With Tham Siew Yean and Ragayah Haji Mat Zin, he is co-editor of ‘Graduating from the Middle: Malaysia’s Development Challenges’, forthcoming in 2011.

TMI: The future!! Happy people!? Beautiful country!? by Ahmad Mustapha Hassan

The future!! Happy people!? Beautiful country!? — Ahmad Mustapha Hassan

December 22, 2010

DEC 22 — In the 50s and the early 60s, when I was actively involved in the struggle for independence, I was more than convinced that with independence the country would experience a future full of promise, stability, prosperity, with a happy  and united nation.

During the colonial period, economic activities had been segregated by race. The British were only interested in making as much as possible from the country. The arrangement that they had created had served them well.

Independence would mean the integration of all these activities, and as such, there would be interactive relationships among all. The breaking down of these segregated economic walls, however, did not materialise in a systematic and speedy way. Thus conflicts occurred.

Remedial measures were carried out but it was hijacked by greedy and self- centred politicians. Instead of moving forward, the country went backwards and more acute problems arose. The vision and goals of independence had been thrown into the gutter. We thus moved towards a failed state status.

This is the problem faced by all former colonies. Leaders after tasting power, instead of taking care of the welfare of their people, took care of themselves first and forever. The people remained poor and neglected. Just see the conditions in the African states. See what is happening in Myanmar. Malaysia is no better. See the palaces built by politicians in power.

In Malaysia, to remain in power and continuously rape the wealth of the country, race is used to frighten the followers, that if they abandoned this (greedy) leadership, their future will be in jeopardy.

In fighting for independence, the people were cajoled to support the cause but after the achievement of independence, the people are again coerced into fear of their future if they abandoned the current leadership.

Race is the menacing factor that is being used to their personal advantage, that it will threaten the stability of the country. Not only that, it will also bring about intense communal feelings.

For failure to improve the lot of the Malays, the powers that be encouraged the phrase emphasising the supremacy of the Malays — “Ketuanan Melayu”. This never cropped up during the struggle for independence, nor was it ever used after independence. Only now suddenly it rears its ugly and venomous head, to frighten the non- Malays.

Naturally, a much wider chasm is created and the authorities simply have turned a blind eye to what it has unleashed. The agenda is to create divisions as done by the British colonial powers for self enrichment. But it must be remembered, this is the 21st century and not the late 19th or the early 20th centuries.

The environment and the scenario have changed and the situation is now wrought with all kinds of happenings that can become examples for fear and suspicion. Killings and ethnic cleansing in the name of race have become common occurrences.

The world too has become a smaller place and with that people are no longer incapable of sizing things up. People turn to emigration to escape what they feel may be an impending catastrophe. Even the Malays have no hesitation leaving the country as they feel things have gone too far in this mania of seeking wealth without regards to the welfare of others. The country is suffering from brain drain and only the corrupt are happy with this.

The situation cannot go on like this indefinitely. It is bound to proceed towards disaster. Children in schools have already been made familiar with racial profiling. Teachers are no longer dedicated in their professions. Instead of showing good examples to the students, they have become the source of creating tensions among the students with their brainless comments about the races in the country. But the authorities have shown reluctance in meting out stern action against these recalcitrant so-called teachers.

As long as they are Malays, they can commit these hideous acts and the government will try to provide excuses for their unpardonable acts.

The non-Malays will fall into a different category. Any slight excuse, they will be hauled up as what had happened to the young man Namewee. The young man will be persecuted for all kinds of reasons. This is done to satisfy and pacify the Malay communal extremists.

That racism has been on the increase in the country cannot be denied. Evidence is everywhere, be it in the social sphere, economy or even education.

The activities of the Malay ultra group have only pushed the other racial groups to emphasise more on their own well being and not that of the country. This is the direct result of not stopping the actions and utterances of those advocating the supremacy of the Malays.

The government only talks of racial unity but very little positive action has taken place. Even the governing political party has not moved towards integrating all the parties into one single political entity.

Of greater danger, however, is not the racial element but the religious aspects. This is a much more vicious and serious threat to the country. Unless the country maintains its secular nature and eliminates the dominating character of the religious authorities, the future does not augur well.

Although Islam is the official religion of the country, it does not mean that Islam overrides the interest of other religions in the country. The unwarranted religious conversions have to stop and the episodes of body snatching will have to be put to an end.

These incidents have caused a lot of family sufferings and the government must not condone such acts. The government will have to be bold if it wants to safeguard the future of this country. The Syariah courts now seem to be having the upper hand in every family dispute. The courts will naturally support the Muslim member of the family at the expense of the other members. The civil courts have been reluctant to play its role in all these conflicts.

This only brings about a sense of injustice to the aggrieved parties. They have no recourse to correct the injustice that they suffer. The government has not acted on these conflicts for fear of antagonising the religious zealots.

A church that was erected by the Orang Asli who professed the Christian faith was demolished on reasons that could easily had been overcome and the word “Allah” has been banned from use by Christians although in East Malaysia, the word had been in use for a very long time.

The Fatwa Council has become very powerful. Their approach is always negative in nature. Instead of trying to bring about the understanding of Islam to a wider circle, it functions as if everything about Islam is its prerogative to interpret and nobody else’s.

It also takes on the role of seeing that the unfortunate Muslims, who it believes being ignorant and stupid, are not led astray by the non Muslims. Thus non Muslims cannot quote from the Quran as this will confuse the Muslims. There are other major issues which have passed the scrutiny of this wise and able council.

All these are trends that will create greater suspicion among the people in the country. There is no attempt to make each understand the others’ religion and beliefs. The Muslim authority has kept away from associating itself in the interfaith group as this will affect Islam’s standing in the country. This is arrogance of the highest order.

The two most critical factors that will determine what the future of this country will be are race and religion. The government must act fast to counter the ruinous nature and the possible catastrophe that can be brought about by the uncontrolled and emotional makeup of these two elements.

The ugly writings are on the wall.

* Ahmad Mustapha Hassan is the author of “The Unmaking of Malaysia” and a former general manager of state news agency Bernama. He was also the press secretary to prime minister Tun Abdul Razak Hussein and the then deputy prime minister, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The Malaysian Insider does not endorse the view unless specified.

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?

And, 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.

Therefore, 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.

Consequently 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

malaysiakini: Last refuge of a scoundrel... By Kee Thuan Chye

Last refuge of a scoundrel

By Kee Thuan Chye | Nov 11, 10
Malaysiakini

COMMENT “Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.” So said Samuel Johnson, the famous British man of letters. He is believed to have said that to condemn the false use of the term “patriotism”.

The same can be applied to Defence Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi. However, in the Malaysian context, it might be read as “When you want to malign some people, you call them unpatriotic”.

In Parliament recently, this minister said that among the reasons for the small number of Chinese and Indians joining the armed forces was their lack of patriotism. It was so sweeping, so unsupported by evidence, that it could amount to nothing more than a false claim. What was his real motive for saying what he said?

More than that, it is indeed false patriotism to say that if you don’t join the army, you are not patriotic. Nothing could be more ridiculous than that. It is the same kind of thinking that goes along these lines – “if you are not with me, then you are not patriotic”.

Extended further, it is the same kind of thinking that informs the BN propaganda – if you don’t vote for BN, you are not patriotic. This, of course, is the ultimate hogwash.

Patriotism can be expressed in many ways that people tend to overlook. Those who campaign against a government that is corrupt because they want to see reform and the emergence of a better country are patriots. Those who stand up in defence of our institutions and our freedoms are patriots. Those who uphold principles in the work they do daily are patriots. Those who go out daily to do a decent day’s work to earn an income to feed their family and pay their taxes are patriots.

Unfortunately, our government has a narrow definition of patriotism. Apart from joining the army, it’s flying the national flag on Merdeka Day. The latter preoccupation is mostly surface display. What counts more is the intrinsic feeling a Malaysian has for his country. I don’t believe in flag-waving but I can bet that I’m more of a patriot than corrupt politicians who seek to suck our riches dry.

Truth to be told
Theodore Roosevelt, the 26th president of the US, has something significant to share on one of the meanings of patriotism:

“Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official, save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country.

“It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country. In either event, it is unpatriotic not to tell the truth, whether about the president or anyone else.”

In these volatile times and in the face of the many trials we are going through, these words should strike a chord among Malaysians. Now is the time to tell the truth – not to hide it, to manipulate it, or to dish out the ultimate hogwash.

Samuel Johnson was someone who valued true patriotism. For a poignant example of that in our own country, we need only look at the Second World War and ask who the true patriots were at the time.
Who fought the Japanese when the British army had surrendered and fled? To some Malaysians, it is taboo to consider the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) patriotic, but the evidence suggests the contrary.

How can the CPM not be considered patriotic when it refused to give in to the Japanese while other Malayans took the easy option of collaborating with the enemy? And although there were valiant Malays and Indians in the CPM, who were most of its members if not Chinese?

Of course, the fact that the CPM provided patriotic resistance against the Japanese is not known by many Malaysians. It has been expunged or distorted in our history books.

The current History syllabus at SPM level is clearly written by the victors, i.e. BN, mostly Umno. Just look at the Malaysian section of the textbook and you will see how the subjective selection of what goes into it serves to manipulate the truth.

Now that it has been decreed that History is to be a must-pass subject at SPM, you can bet the new syllabus will be constructed to further serve the victors’ cause. Malaysians would be naïve to believe that “history is history and we cannot concoct something that is not history”, as said by Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin. While they may not concoct, they can nonetheless construct.

History is a construct. It is not objective; it can be manipulated. How it is told depends on who is writing it. If Muhyiddin does not know that – which is unlikely – we at least should be aware.

Yap Ah Loy and Co
MCA president Chua Soi Lek could have been more explicit and to-the-point when he responded to Ahmad Zahid’s statement.

He could have mentioned Chin Peng and the CPM.

He could have mentioned the sacrifices of Yap Ah Loy and his band of 87 miners who were the first to set up a mining camp at the confluence of the Klang and Gombak rivers, 17 of whom died within the first month from malaria. That became the base from which Kuala Lumpur grew.

He could have mentioned the late Tan Chee Khoon who worked tirelessly to promote non-communal politics in Malaysia, and who fought against attempts to pervert the Constitution.

It is not enough for Chua to make general statements saying that the Chinese remained loyal to the country during the Japanese Occupation and the Indonesian confrontation, to illustrate the patriotism of the Chinese. He needs to give concrete examples.

His party has expressed concern about what the content of the new SPM History syllabus will be. Will the MCA do all it can to ensure that the new construct will include truths from various sides? Will it do all it can to ensure that the new syllabus reflects the patriotism of Malaysians regardless of race?

M. Kulasegaran, the MP for Ipoh Barat, made an important and pertinent point when he reminded Malaysians that non-Malays had headed the armed forces before, citing the excellent example of Rear-Admiral K Thanabalasingam, who was appointed the first Malaysian chief of the Royal Malaysian Navy in 1967.

How many Malaysians knew that? Would that be reflected in the new History syllabus?

There was a time when an Indian could be the chief of the country’s navy. When will that ever happen again? Meanwhile, is there any wonder that non-Malays are not keen to join the armed forces?

Ahmad Zahid, why don’t you tell us the truth?

KEE THUAN CHYE is the author of ‘March 8: The Day Malaysia Woke Up’, which just won 3rd prize in the Popular Readers’ Choice Awards. It has also been translated into Chinese.

malaysiakini: Unpatriotic non-Malays: Gov't should ask why... Lim Teck Ghee

Unpatriotic non-Malays: Gov't should ask why

Lim Teck Ghee
malaysiakini, Nov 11, 10, 6:49pm

Defence Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi should be commended for stating in Parliament that the reason Chinese and Indians made up only a tiny proportion of Army recruits was because their "patriotism spirit is not high enough".

This is because he has inadvertently brought out into the open a perception which is shared by the majority of Malay leaders and also possibly by a very large proportion of the Malay population. It is a perception that should not be suppressed - on the contrary, it needs to be fully aired and dissected so that rational thinking and fact-based policy formulation shall prevail.

What has been criticised as a "racially biased, shallow and chauvinistic" statement questioning the loyalty of young Malaysians may in fact be correct.

Non-Malays may be much less patriotic than Malays which accounts for their low enrolment in the military and civil service, as well as for their lack of participation in other national activities when patriotism and loyalty to the country are showcased. But it could also be wrong as it ignores other factors that may be instrumental in explaining the low number of recruits.

In many countries of the world, it has been found that the main factor underlying military recruitment is the socio-economic class that recruits come from. This is likely to be a major explanation for the past and current trend of recruitment in Malaysia too. It is unlikely that we will find recruits coming from youths of the middle or upper class of Malaysian society - whatever their community or sense of patriotism - now or in the future.

The only way to find out whether this larger perception of the lack of loyalty and patriotism of non-Malays - as compared with other communities - is correct or wrong is to carry out rigorous studies on the disputed subject and not to silence the messenger. Following from these rigorous studies and the wide dissemination of their findings, a more rational discussion and analysis can take place in Parliament and in the public arena.

It is important that these studies on the subject of patriotism and loyalty amongst different communities in the country as well as on the related issues of the lack of non-Malay participation in the army and other sectors of the public service should be conducted by credible and independent researchers. In view of the sensitive and controversial nature of the topics, it may be too much to expect our local social scientists and researchers to conduct these studies without fear or favour.

Outsourcing the studies to reputable institutions from abroad which have a strong track record for carrying out ethnic perception research - in collaboration with local teams - may be a possible way forward in carrying out these urgently needed studies.

At the same time, there is a need to sustain the public space to explore, analyse, and arrive at a more informed, coherent, and sympathetic understanding of how our multi-ethnic society works and does not work. For that reason, we should not seek to silence these statements, baseless or shallow or insensitive as they may be.

If politicians in the country remain true to the facts and their views are based on the scrupulous adherence to evidence produced by researchers and more informed stakeholders, it can only benefit our nation by holding them to higher standards of knowledge, responsibility and governance.

Finally, if there is indeed a lack of loyalty and patriotism amongst young non-Malays, then clearly the country is in deep trouble and we should address the root causes immediately.

LKS blog: Transformation starts with transition... By Thomas Lee

Transformation starts with transition

By Thomas Lee

In one of my recent postings on Facebook, I stated that my choice for Prime Minister is Nurul Izzah, the intellectual and independent-minded eldest daughter of Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim.

My good old friend Chong Phow Yew asked why I opted for the unbranded maverick young lady, and not veteran DAP leader Lim Kit Siang or his popular luminous son Guan Eng.
True, either Kit Siang or Guan Eng will make a first-class PM, perhaps even better than Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore.

But the political reality in Malaysia is such that as long as the race factor is the major consideration in Malaysia, the pragmatism is that the time is not ripe yet for the acceptance of a non-Malay PM, even if the person is a Chinese Muslim. It took the US more than 200 years to finally accept and elect a Black American as its president. Even so, President Barrack Obama’s religious faith is a matter of controvery until now.

A period of transition is needed, during which liberal moderate and intelligent Malays like Nurul Izzah, Zaid Ibrahim, Khalid Ibrahim, Nizar Jammuludin, Khalid Samad, Harris Ibrahim, Raja Putra Kamarudin and many others, who have no racial inferiority complex, no intellectual insecurity, and no social inadequacy, could initiate a mental revolution among the new generation of Malaysians to have a broadened perspective in life and thoughts.

Hence, I strongly support the sending of our students overseas for further studies, hoping that the exposure, experience and education would help in broadening their worldview and transforming them to be more rational, inclusive and judicious in their life and thought, with a real discreet sense of values and wisdom.

Unfortunately, this is not happening, as most of them who are supposed to be “educated” nowadays seem to lack the intelligence and intellectual capacity, the sagacious discernment, good judgment, and astute ability to accurately assess situations or people. Some are downright dishonest to what they personally know and understand, and sell their souls and principles for the sake of money, positions and power. Take the case of one who calls himself an “intellectual” who wrote a doctorate thesis on the evil of the Internal Security Act (ISA), but who rebuts his own research findings by endorsing and supporting the oppressive law when offered a top government post.

Basically, what is woefully wrong in our nation is the fundamental lack of a clear and comprehensible education philosophy based on truth, honesty, scholarly orientation, and an objective worldview. What we are having now is a baffling perplexing education system premised upon racial and political expediency, with nary a concern for the real mental and intellectual development of the young minds. Even a very ingenuous matter like the learning of languages such as English or mother tongues has been turned into a controversial polemic dispute with an ugly racial overtone.

The recent proposal by the federal government to make History a must-pass subject in the SPM has, not surprisingly, elicited reactions and responses from various quarters, mostly concerned about the reinterpretation and reenactment of the local history based on racial factors.

History per se is a very subjective subject, involving the interpretation of events, facts and figures. The narration of historical events is generally coloured by the personal perception, bias, and skewed orientation of the interpreter. The fact that an event took place could not be disputed, but how and why it happened are subjected to interpretation by the historian. The May 13 incident, for example, did happen, but there are many versions of how and why it happened, depending on who is doing the interpretation and reporting of the incident.

Hence, the study of History in our schools is a highly contentious and querulous matter, especially with regards to the official textbooks which are perceived by many people to be tainted with twisted inferences to promote certain racial agenda or political objective.

What we need now is to work for a real transformation of our nation into a truly demoncratic liberal society with thriving and flourishing fundamental common universal values such as the acceptance and respect for each other, without the discriminative coloured considerations of racial, religious, cultural, linguistic, gender, and economic class status. The basic human, civil, and constitutional rights of all citizens must be preserved, protected and promoted.

The destiny of our nation and the fate of our children are in our own hands, and what we, as citizens of Malaysia, must do is to stand up and be counted, by doing our individual part in the promotion, persuasion, and performance of tranforming our nation into a place where everyone of us is proud to call home. Don’t allow the march to Putrajaya to turn from a virtual dream into a dreadful nightmare!

TMI: Beyond the economics of merit... By Kapil Sethi

Beyond the economics of merit

By Kapil Sethi

TMI: November 08, 2010

NOV 8 — A new Talent Corporation is to be set up to reverse brain drain. Lots of glitzy new infrastructure projects will be implemented under the ETP. A slew of performance benchmarks will ensure that there are no goof-ups at the implementation stage. All this and more is supposed to move us out of the middle-income trap into a high-growth, high-income trajectory to become developed by 2020.

Are these pipe dreams or an achievable vision of the future? Economic models and projections are just that — models and projections based on hard data. Life,on the other hand, has a peculiar habit of intervening at the most inopportune time to turn the so-called future on its head. It’s called the human factor.

In all kinds of collective human endeavour, for any project to succeed, clear ambition and an even clearer unity of purpose are prerequisites. We have to want to put up a theatre production, and everyone has to play their appointed parts in synchronicity for it to be a success. A corporation has to be hungry for new business, and the sales team has to play their parts to perfection in a pitch to the prospective client for the company to be successful. Even for wars to be prosecuted successfully, a clear enemy and a committed military operating as one are essential.

In our case, the ambition to be a developed nation by 2020 is clear and has been for a while now. Where it breaks down is in the unity of purpose. We all want to be rich, but insist that other races in the country are impeding our path.

Is following the NEP for another 10 years the way to do it? Is emphasising merit also racist, as implied by a senior statesman recently? Does the current government know best and should we give them a chance? Is throwing money after it the solution? Or is using predictive economics the way to go?

It might be worthwhile to step back and understand why we are unable to derive a consensus on how to approach the issue.

In front of a global audience, we are able to forget race. We claim ownership of Lee Chong Wei, Shalin Zulkifli and Nicol David equally proudly. When we visit a nasi lemak stall in London, we introduce it to Mat Sallehs as a Malaysian, not Malay dish. In business especially in the private sector, we treat each other as colleagues in task accomplishment. Love increasingly has no boundaries.

It is actually only in situations that we are surrounded primarily by people of our race that we play up the perceived differences between us. It is after all a very fundamental social characteristic to protect the ones closest to us and repel all others who are identified as the other.

But in the context of our economic ambitions, emphasis on race is a hindrance because it frames the definition of “us” very narrowly, and the “other” too widely. If we aggregate the strengths of all of us, Malaysia has to compete with the rest of the world. But if we emphasise the strengths of only a race, then we have to first compete with other races before competing with the rest of the world.

Whatever be their other shortcomings, the current crop of politicians have not been slow to recognise this. When it comes down to it, both coalitions before deciding which candidate to put up for elections look at “winnability” — a peculiar amalgam of the ethnic composition of the electorate, the loyalty of the candidate to the party, his personality and positions on issues, even her smile.

The appeal of the prospective candidate has to generally go beyond race today. The wider the definition of “us”, the greater the winnability of the candidate. As we have witnessed in several by-elections, once the decision is made and there is grassroots acceptance of the winnability of the candidate, there appears a unity of purpose in the ranks and momentum can be shifted, a no-hoper made a serious contender and vice versa.

This is not to say that we should just bury our racial differences, but in a hyper competitive world we need to widen our definition of “us” in our public lives to accommodate all Malaysians so we can achieve our economic ambitions. This is why the call for a merit- and needs-based model for the future is more in consonance with our ambition than a race-based model.

Expansion of educational and workplace opportunities on the basis of merit and/or economic needs does not need to diminish our racial identity, it just aligns our skillsets to the economic realities of the world. In today’s world, affirmative action needs to support every citizen’s right to opportunity, unhindered by a lack of means.

Race has its place in our private and social lives, but if we want to achieve our economic goals, it should not have any place in school, not in sport and certainly not in business. Race and merit need to co-exist, not compete. Our ambitions need to be aided with an even clearer unity of purpose.

At home though, surrounded by people of my own kind you can always find me with a bottle of whisky in my hand loudly denouncing all those who call us alcoholics.

Kapil is an advertising strategist turned brand consultant based in KL, who likes nothing better than to figure out why people behave the way they do. Naturally this forces him to spend most of his time lounging in coffeeshops and bars. He can be reached at kapilanski@yahoo.com