///What is required therefore is a spirit of universal citizenship and a commitment to a non-racialised and non-communitarian Malaysia:///– Farish A Noor.

This must have been the aim of the founders of the Alliance party. Unfortunately, 51 years after independence, the country is on the path exactly opposite what has been stated above. The journey in the reversed direction took root since TDM came into power in 1981. In 2008, he even suggests, or questioning on behalf of some professionals who exist only in TDM’s mind, that Tunku was wrong in granting citizenships to non-Malays. That questions the very foundation of the country. His article “Malay unity and Malaysian unity” appearing in CheDet.com on 15 September says it all.

I wish to take this occasion to present my comments on his article, and I hope that others can offer their view on his article too.

From CheDet.com 15 Sept 2008

///1. Malaysia has a multi-racial population but is quite unique in that the division is not just by race alone but by religion, language, culture and economic situation. Unity in such a diversity is extremely difficult to achieve.///–TDM

Unity will only grow when people believe that they share common destiny. They will gain as much in prosperity, and suffer as much in time of difficulties. Together they will strive to make the environment better. Diversity is strength where each will do better with their comparative advantages. When the people in charge of the fate of the nation decided to achieve certain superiority either in terms of identification with race or religion, and when those who are not so identified, as TDM will calls them not integrated, they face discrimination. When the people could not communicate well, misunderstanding existed, but after 51 years of independence all misunderstandings have been removed. People know very well that discrimination by race and religion is government policies, either in the law, or in the implementation. Unity was made difficult by the people in power, but they blame it on the differences in race or religion.

///2. If we study other nations where people of different ethnic groups have immigrated, we will find that integration and unity depended on several important factors. Firstly the indigenous people or the people who had set up the country make up at least initially, a very big proportion of the population. Additionally they would be dominant and materially successful. The small numbers of immigrants trickling in found it judicious and beneficial to be identified with the numerically superior and powerful dominant inhabitants. They would willingly forget their original languages and adopt the language of the people of the country as well as their culture; they would intermarry and over time they would be totally absorbed and assimilated and identified with the indigenous people. In such a situation unity is not a problem. The United States is one such country where the original language and basic culture of first settlers are accepted by later immigrants.///—TDM

USA is successful in military and economic power because it practices democracy, and people there may not be born equal, but they are equal before the law after birth. At the time of our independence in 1957, there was still segregation in USA where blacks were not allowed to be in white schools and they were not allowed to ride in buses with the whites. We did not have such discrimination nor did the government of Malaya organized racial discrimination at the time of independence. Today, the people of USA are treated equally in every respect, jobs, education, and economic opportunities. When race relation between the people progresses in USA, it regresses in Malaysia under the aegis of the government through a dominant race-based political party.
In TDM’s words, the people who [“They would willingly forget their original languages and adopt the language of the people of the country as well as their culture; they would intermarry and over time they would be totally absorbed and assimilated and identified with the indigenous people”] are represented by the family tree of TDM would help unity in the country. The fact was these people not only pretend to be the indigenous people, they were the persons who insisted that different treatment should be made to those whom TDM identified with, and the others who happened to belong to different religious groups.

///3. In the old days before the coming of the Europeans the few Chinese and Indians who settled in Malacca adopted the language and much of the culture of the Malays. Though there was no assimilation nevertheless good relations existed between the immigrant settlers and the Malays. Unfortunately when later the China-born Chinese-speaking immigrants dominated in numbers as well as economic wealth, the Malay speaking Baba and Nyonya deliberately dropped their Malay language and Baba culture and reverted to being Chinese in every way possible.///—TDM

TDM’s words :“the Malay speaking Baba and Nyonya deliberately dropped their Malay language and Baba culture and reverted to being Chinese in every way possible.” are a figment of his imagination. TDM would assume that culture is something one could switch on or off, rather than a part of living. One learns languages and uses the medium which could be most effective in communicating with other persons. Ordinary person without superiority or inferiority complex would not bother which language medium of communication is chosen. Language used for diplomatic occasions and purposes excepted.

TDM’s words: {Unfortunately when later the China-born Chinese-speaking immigrants dominated in numbers as well as economic wealth,} serve to create wrong impression and to distort facts. The Chinese did come to Malaysia in large number over time; some were as far back as 10 generations ago, not counting those who had been Nyoya and Baba since the Malacca sultanate. Did the Chinese dominate economic wealth, or was it the other foreigners?

TDM could have used the ownership data appearing in the Five-Year-Plan where Malays’ share of corporate ownership was shown at1.43% in 1970 for his argument. But that figures cannot be relevant, and is certainly not true. FELDA in 1970 owned a million acres of rubber and oil palm plantation, as many acres as all the European owns estate combined. A million acres well managed FELDA plantation (at RM 3,000 an acre at the average price per acre of small holding in 1970) would have put Malay ownership of agriculture at RM 3 billion in 1970. It should have accounted for 18% of total corporate wealth at that time. The government has said that Malays’ share of corporate ownership reached 18% in late 1990s, and remained at that for over a decade. They certainly know that the statistics is false, and that explains why they have not been prepared to reveal the true data having promised to do so two years ago. The controversy over ASLI’s report on this issue has not been settled.

///4. Difficulties in assimilation arise when the late comers are more dynamic and better equipped to progress than the indigenous people. A feeling of superiority towards the indigenous people tended to keep the late-comers apart. As their community grew they established separate enclaves and erect invisible barriers against the indigenous. As their numbers grew the separation became deeper.///–TDM

Assimilation is a term used to describe the extent the people adapted to the life in the new place they call home. Acquiring the language and culture of the local is always done out of necessity, and for seeking happiness. It cannot be the sense of superiority that kept immigrant apart from the local people. It is the convenient of staying together with those who can communicate without having to take the trouble to consciously learn a new language, as man is by nature lazy. Over time, immigrants do acquire slowly some vocabulary to go by.

TDM should thank god that most of the Chinese who migrated to Malaya then were not as educated as his father was, coming to be the headmaster of a school. TDM’s had a head start and thought that all the Chinese were equally blessed, and were able to act sombong bodoh against the local.

Though the immigrants grouped among themselves, and lived apart from the Malays, they were always courteous towards each others. There were no conflicts, and they were decent to each others as acquaintances, and later as friends. Though they had limited vocabulary for the different races then to be engaged in in-depth discussions, they each led their separate lives in peace. Today though most people have the command of common languages they are not able to engage in true heart to heart talk. The political parties and government policies keep them apart, especially after the emergency rule in 1969.

///5. The British are only partly responsible for the separation of the races in Malaysia, for keeping the Malays in the rural areas, the Chinese in the urban areas and the Indians in the estates. The different races are also responsible. They made no attempt to mix together as a matter of preference.///—TDM

The preferences were out of convenience without malice. It was not a case of superiority complex of one against the others as TDM suggested. Strangers are usually not enemies until somebody poisoned them.

///6. The Malays before World War II really believed that the Chinese and Indians were temporary guests who would return to their countries once they had made enough money. So it was at the beginning.///—TDM

TDM is trying to justify the statement of one person who was suspended by UMNO. Did the inspiration come from TDM for the controversial speech in Permatang Paul by-election?

///7. Even when they showed signs of staying permanently, the Malays and their Rulers believed the British would honour the treaties which recognised the Malay States as the land of the Malays, the peninsula as Tanah Melayu or Malay Land.///— TDM

This is the creative way of changing history. The British honoured its promise to make Malaya an independent country respecting the constitution. The government should have taken oath like the US president to uphold the constitution.

///8. But after the Brits returned after the war they talked of “giving” this country to whoever wishes to stay here. Although the Malays rejected this and forced the Malayan Union to be abandoned, they realised that things had changed and they had to recognise the claims of some of the non-Malays at least.///– TDM

The citizenship right agreed to by UMNO leaders under the presidency of Tunku must have taken past history into account. It is not comprehensive to make selective justification here.

///9. To cut a long story short independent Malaysia recognised the citizenship rights of the non-Malays and gave them quite freely. This is unlike many countries in the region where strict conditions were imposed. In fact, some immigrants were actually expelled.///– TDM

Different countries have different names just like their history. What is done outside has no basis for justifying action within this country.

///10. The hope at independence was that the non-Malays would accept a single national language and a single national identity. But it became clear very quickly that the Chinese and the Indians wanted to retain their identities, their mother tongue and their culture. They did not want to be solely Malaysians, certainly not Malays.///– TDM

The non-Malays have always been law abiding, before and after independence. UMNO leaders before TDM never intended non-Malays to be Malays. Some might be regretting that they might have wrongly admitted undesirable elements as Malays. Tunku had said something like he certainly was not a Mamak. TDM is still expressing his objection to the Chinese and the Indians for retaining their identities, their mother tongue and their cultures, he should ask whether these Malaysian Chinese and Indians are any less Malaysian in retaining all their identity. The definition of ethnic cleansing is to remove all those who differ from the identity of the majority.

The United Nations convention recognizes retaining mother tongue and culture as basic human rights. Yet a head of government for 22 years of a country which is a member of United Nations would ignore such convention in his writing. He must have been an international outcast all this while.

///11. At the beginning some prominent people tried multi-racial politics but this was rejected by the ordinary Malays, Chinese and Indians. In the end we settled for a compromise – retain your racial identity but cooperate with each other in a coalition of racial parties.///–TDM

That worked well until somebody engineered the emergency rule in 1969. After that UMNO has been most happy with the results. It openly threatened to bring a repeat of it.

///12. Politically it was a good formula and it worked. But when English schools were abolished and the Malay, Chinese and Indians children went to their own schools rather than to the national schools where the teaching was in the National Language. The hope for true national integration faded. After this even the attempt to put the schools from the three language streams in one campus was rejected by the Chinese.///—TDM

Some 60,000 Malay students are in Chinese primary schools. They who did not know Chinese education have chosen them, certainly because they are convinced of what good the school could offer. Naturally the parents of Chinese students would send them to one they are certain to be good for their children. It is again provided in Human Rights convention of the United Nations that parents should choose where to educate their children. Is TDM against that charter?

TDM was insinuating that the Chinese choose the schools for reasons of his own imagination. He mixes education with politics, and in the process, his policies lay foundations for the greatest harm to human resources in the country.

///13. It is no good blaming the politicians for perpetuating racial schism. Some of them who tried to ignore racial loyalties simply failed politically. For various reasons the races preferred to stay separated. They may meet at their work place or the playing field but they go home to separate enclaves according to their race.///– TDM

The polarization of the races is due to racist politics. The people mixed well during Tunku’s reign. Racial relationship began to rot after the emergency rule in 1969, and NEP. It is because people are afraid to fail politically that they cling to racist politics. It is because politics is not a profession for serving fellow citizens but a ticket to gravy train that politicians chose politics as the most convenient route to wealth. They would migrate when the country goes to the dogs.

///14. We had opted for democracy and popularity decides who rules the country. Those who reject racialism simply lost popular support. But those who embrace racialism won.///– TDM

The pioneer was none other than TDM. It was because politicians were too lazy to care for the good of the people, and be judged by their performances for the benefits of the voters that opportunist politicians chose the approach of divide and rule to ensure reelection to position of power. That started the vicious circle, and so racism became the means to an end, and justifiably so. Ever since, the objective of politicians were to win, and they created a culture that the end justifies the means. When racism became a norm, politicians were able to use spoil-sharing approach to perpetuate power through corrupt means. Voters of the dominant race would condone the actions of corrupt politicians when they got to partake in the share of gains through corruption. That explains why when corruption in the BN government has been so rampant, with TDM himself squealing on the practices, and the voters fully aware of the malpractices, racial voting returned BN parties the majority to rule.

///15. They are not racists. The leaders of the different races were, at least in the beginning, able to get along well with each other. They developed close friendship. But they had to be very conscious of their racial backing and to cater to racial demands.///– TDM

The problem the so-called leaders faced was their own creation. They chose not to develop the mindset of their followers to value the virtue of fairness and justice. They were made to believe that might is right, and so long as there had the numbers, they were able to demand unreasonable share of their rights. So, all issues turn racial, and leaders are then their own captive, when they were serving as politicians not for the interest of the nation, but for their own personal interests.

It was worse when a leader moved away form racists’ policies, but was faulted by his nemesis that he did not do enough for his race and religion. The examples were TDM accusing Tunku for not doing enough for Malays, and he continues to make such accusation years later when nobody would come to Tunku’s defense. TDM promised to be the greatest racist of all Malays, and succeeded in holding power as absolute emperor for 22 years. Later when PM AAB said he wanted to be a PM for all Malaysians, TDM accused AAB for not doing enough for Malays. The greatest danger is not catering to the needs of the community, but to the desires of opportunists in the same party.

///16. The lower ranking leaders, the ordinary members of political parties and the people as a whole had shown no sign of forgetting their racial identity. There may be few liberal minded ones who reject race, but some who do this do so because they believe their own race would gain by it. So even these people are racialist at heart. ///—TDM

The mindset is that politics is the easiest route to wealth and power, and the success stories are dominated by racists. Tunku was a negative example on path to failure, for those who did not know the true cause of it.

///17. Then came the resurgence of Islam worldwide. The Malaysian Malays began to adopt Islamic conservativeness especially with the dress code. This tended to push them further apart from the non-Muslims who saw this as an attempt to differentiate Muslim Malaysians from non-Muslim Malaysians. Some people suspect that this is the intention.

18. The behaviour of some extremist exponents of Islamic separateness did not help.

19. And so the races drifted further and further apart. All the time the so-called non-racial parties with their single-minded campaign against the positions of the Malays and Islam as agreed upon at the beginning actually intensified Malay racial sentiments, causing them to yearn for Malay unity rather than Malaysian unity.///–TDM

Nobody questions the position of Malays and Islam, but the race-based party creates the impression of under a state of siege so that they could rise as the saviour of the race and religion. The people only question the implementation of the policies. For example, when article 153 provides that a reasonable proportion of education facilities should be reserved for Malays, that proportion could not be 100%. When one talks about reserving a reasonable proportion, it could at most amount to the population ratio. NEP was said to be implemented as promised by the late Tun Razak for 20 years, ending 1990. Would not a right minded person think that when the 20 years is up, a stop ought to be made to it? It was mentioned that a 30% ownership share for Malays was the aim of NEP, should not an evaluation be made to the actual achievements 38 years after the advent of NEP? When statistics is used, and everybody knows that statistics can lie, should it not be reasonable to have independent evaluation of the relevance and reliability of statistics on the actual situation? That is not questioning Malay rights, this questions government’s governance.

///20. The ideal of having a non-racial Malaysian nationality has now been almost forgotten. As the self-proclaimed non-racists attacked Malay racialism, the feeling among the Malays hardened. Openly the Malays have not attacked Chinese racialism as manifested by their practical rejection of the use of the National language, their rejection of the National schools, their Malaysian Malaysia slogan. If they do it would be muted and certainly not as blatant as non-Malay attacks against Malay racialism. ///–TDM

Is it not the correct aspiration of all Malaysians that they are treated equal in the country, which PM AAB had even promised as such? There is no where in the world where there is a state organized racial discrimination programme against the minority group. Citizenships signify equal rights and equal obligations. As society progress, idea of superiority about race and religion should cease; it should cease too in the country. The governments elsewhere swear to uphold the constitution where the states have one. The people only yearned for the protection of the constitution, and that are their basic citizenship rights.

Parents choose to send their children based on their conditions and it is their human rights. Language is a means for communication, and it is only people who like to incite hatred against others that count the use of language and medium of education as a sign of loyalty to the country. There are traitors who are experts in languages, and so language proficiency is no proof of loyalty. When a person who suggested that he preferred the participation of another country to fight the British and consequently be part of another nation rather than to accept all inhabitants as citizens without having to fight his loyalty is suspect.

///21. The Malays have seen what has happened to the Malays of Singapore and they have no desire to be like Singapore Malays.///—TDM

A survey should be conducted on whether Malays in Malaysia would like to be under the government by people who rule like the Singapore government through its meritocratic approach, or under the BN government which rules on cronyism. That should remove the choice based on the resources the two countries could offer. Nobody would want to have only one-fifth when you can have one whole unit of any earning.

///22. So their reaction is to seek for Malay unity. They feel threatened, and their fear is real. Admittedly there are among the younger educated Malays a few who claim to reject Malay unity. But these people do not represent the vast majority of the Malays.////–TDM

It is most convenient to assume one’s preference as the majority choice, and the others the minority. It is easy to quote statistics, pulling it out of thin air to justify a case. This is especially so when there is no evidence to dispute.

The word unity here is in the context of a vote, to gain majority in an election. The people do not have to decide whether actions were right or wrong since unity would demand that the members take the side the race chooses. Similarly, the issue of fairness and justice cannot influence individual choice.

To ensure a win in election, Malay politicians emphasize Malay unity for the security of their political career. For that purpose polarization by race is useful, so that grouping of unity by race can be easily achieved. Towards that end ordinary Malays were threatened to fear the absence of Malay unity.

///23. Malay unity, if it becomes stronger will make it more difficult to bring about Malaysian unity. But it must be remembered that the Chinese and Indian are also keen to retain their identities more and more. The Hindraf memorandum is very telling. And the Chinese educationists want even stronger role for Chinese language.///—TDM

The role of Chinese language does not depend on the Chinese in Malaysia. China has already made it the most popular language in the world. Language should not be politicized as TDM likes to do it all the time. People remain what they are, and they do not consciously decide to choose to retain Chinese or Indian identities. They have no political advantage for doing so. It does not make them less obliged for paying taxes, or as a citizen. Only those who intend to split the society would harp on difference between races and religion, the use of languages, and the schools they go to. Have there been anything else which TDM could throw at the Chinese or Indians?

Everybody knows and would form his own opinion on what Hindraf memorandum is all about. It is only in this country that supporting something could land a person under ISA.

///24. The trend is obviously against Malaysian Unity. A weak and unstable Government with its crude attempts to win over the different races through giving in on all demands does not help. Every time it gives in to the demands of one race it simply antagonises and pushes the other races further away.///—TDM

The demands of the non-Malays if that can be so termed are that they are treated equally as citizens in all sphere of their living space. That should not be seen as demands at all by the BN government, but as a reminder to the government to honour the non-Malays of their basic citizenships. The Malays lose nothing to the non-Malays’ reminder, but in pursuing Malay unity for block Malay votes, UMNO politicians have always find means to demonstrate their heroic acts as saviour of Malay race. TDM excels in zero-sum game of the races, and never fail to criticize AAB for not doing enough for Malays.

TDM does not intend the paragraph to say that because Malays made demand, non-Malays were pushed away. He had other motives.

///25. If we still want Malaysian Unity we need to be willing to make sacrifices regarding what we consider to be our racial rights. Everyone has to do this. The leaders must be given some mandate to discuss these matters in private and to make concessions. After each step the lower rung leaders of each race must be given full briefing as to why the concessions have to be made. It would be useless if they don’t agree.

26. Provided we can roll back the present unhealthy trends and redirect it towards more positive non-racial objectives, provided we do this slowly by small steps we may be able to create a truly Malaysian identity where race would gradually become less important. It will take time but with sincerity we may reverse the present trends and move towards increasing co-operation and integration. ///–TDM

Nobody can cry wolf twice. When Anwar is the PM, and TDM keeps to his words to migrate, we will be able to go back to pre-1969 days.