“After 50 years of Merdeka, aren’t we all bumiputera now?” Dr. Azly Rahman

If we read the Malaysian Federal Constitution of 1957, we will not find the word “bumiputera” – hence some would say the origin of the word is grounded in the political agenda of some politicians to discriminate against citizens not of Malay ethnicity. In short there is no constitutional legitimacy in the use of the term “bumiputera” except for its purpose which is to discriminate for the sake of discriminating.

Some fifty years after independence from the British, the demographic profile of its population has changed. Most of the Chinese today are no longer foreign born, and through the principle of ‘jus soli’ (Latin meaning ‘right of the soil’) are citizens by birth.

The word “bumiputera” (Sanskrit meaning “sons of the soil”) which came into popular use after the riots of 1969, is a convenient term not grounded in the science of anthropology but in the politics of race – in other words its use is a convenient invention by Malay politicians and Malay leaders to justify the policies of UMNO which dominated the ruling alliance, which came to be known as the New Economic Policy (NEP). It could have been called “The Great Affirmative Action Policy” but the architects of the NEP are visionary leaders whose motives go beyond affirmative action. It is not a coincidence that post-1969 saw the rise of business oriented leaders in UMNO and the political demise of the Malay school teachers whose hold over power in the Party suffered a setback. The labeling is important as events many years later are to demonstrate to us that more is envisaged rather than just affirmative action.

So where is the need, Dr. Azly Rahman, to add yet another dubious sounding term like “neo-bumiputera” which could only lead to the continued use and justification of yet another phase or another policy not unlike its precursor the NEP? I respectfully submit to Dr. Azly that it only serves to perpetuate the state sponsored and sanctioned racism in Malaysia. Let there only be one class or let Malaysia be a nation of the ‘classless’. Malaysians do not need a caste system like we find in India. The introduction of yet another artificial class of Malaysians albeit in substitution of or in addition to an earlier one, like “neo-bumiputera” and “neo-bumiputraism” would not draw us from the brink of possibly yet another tumultuous phase in the nation’s short history.

Enough is enough. The word “bumiputera” creates a class of Malaysians based not on ethnicity but on some dubious criteria with religion factored into it. It is conceptualized for the convenience of policy makers who rode on the wave of Malay nationalism unleashed after May 13, 1969 to maintain their position of power and influence.

The faster we do away with the word “bumiputera” the better it will be. The use of the term “bumiputera” post-1969, I submit, has less to do with affirmative actions but more to do with politicians who see in it the opportunity to maintain their hold over power.

It is time power be handed over to a fresh breed of Malaysians who think less in terms of Malay, Chinese and Indian or ‘bumiputera’ or ‘non-bumiputera’ but more in terms of Malaysians of different ethnic descent. But let us not lose our perspective. The United States has been independent for more than 200 years but is still today struggling with racism. Malaysia is still politically a toddler learning to walk. Success is about what happens when we fall rather than in the walking.

“Malaysian Trade Minister Rafidah Aziz said Malaysian authorities would not alter the affirmative-action program.” Rafidah Aziz

Malaysia’s Fat Lady ought to know better.

The U.S. is not asking Malaysia to drop her affirmative action policies but to open up the process and make it more transparent. The United States has its own affirmative action programs – minorities who deserve financial grants and assistance are still getting them, be it in education or business.