A group of friends came over yesterday and we had a good two hour discussion on race and religion in Malaysia. Issues covered were numerous. We reflected on how ethnicity heavily influenced Malaysian politics, how the ethnocentric pull dominates policies proposed by almost any Malaysian political parties, and the influence of ethnicity in PAS.
A signifincant amount of time was spent on debating whether the rise of ulama' in PAS did actually transformed PAS into a religious-based party. History tells us that Dato Asri was dethroned by the ulama' camp because the ulama' disagreed with Dato Asri's nationalistic stance. But did the ulama' actually remove narrow-minded racism (ie: the struggle to represent just the Malays at the expense of the non-Malays) from PAS? We did not reach a solid conclusion but we agreed that, many times, ethnicity played a bigger role than religion even within PAS.
I took the opportunity to ask if we can ever imagine PAS proposing to abolish bumiputera policy. As expected, nobody thinks PAS will ever make such a move. But on the other hand, everybody agreed that policies in favour of one race is unfair. The solution is meritocracy. Nobody doubted the need for meritocracy, but the question was how to get to that aim?
We suggested that perhaps we do not need to abolish bumiputera-ism just yet. That would be political suicide. Meritocracy is the ideal, but we need to get there in stages. What we really need first is to ensure all Malaysians receive the help they need regardless of race. Thus, we need to develop a policy to help the non-Malays to complement the bumiputera policy. This additonal policy will enable everybody who needs help be helped regardless of the colour of their skin.
Once both policies work in full swing, society will move towards equality, and at that stage, the bumiputera policy and its counterpart will naturally become obsolete.
Sorry I couldn’t make it, but here are a couple of points instead.
We have already seen that bumiputera welfare policies have failed the bumiputeras on so many counts. How will a new welfare policy for non-bumiputeras necessarily be any better? You’re remarkably optimistic by saying that “once both policies work in full swing, society will move towards equality” – but given that one policy has not produced the intended equality how will a parallel policy for non-bumiputeras produce it either? (Unless, of course, you’re being very cynical and suggesting that only an equally bad policy will produce equal inequality!)
A better three step strategy might be: 1. fix the bumiputera policy as far as possible (i.e. make it work as originally intended) then 2. introduce the non-bumiputera one on the same basis then 3. abolish both once parity between the groups has been achieved.
Also, the absence of bumiputeraism does not necessarily mean the presence of meritocracy, since many bodies might still employ/choose people on the basis of race (or some other non-meritocratic criteria).
If you really want meritocracy you’ll have to 1. outlaw individuals from choosing and being chosen on the basis of ethnicity and then 2. actively promote (or legislate) meritocracy – which probably means more government intervention.
Of course, we’ll both agree that it’s wrong for government to assume that it has all the answers – employers and schools should choose people according to their own criteria, not the Government’s. So the solution, therefore, isn’t meritocracy – it’s choice, and trusting Malaysians to make the right choices.
1. I supposed the unstated assumption at that time was that the bumiputera policy (and the proposed additional policy) be implemented properly.
2. The main idea was that the bumiputera policy should one day be abolished. When we discussed practical issues, we discovered it is politically unwise to campaign openly for abolition. Bearing in mind that the ultimate aim is still abolition, the steps proposed will still get us there. Of course, once again, there is an assumption that the policies are implemented properly.
3. I agree with the three steps you stated. In principle, similar.
So….. any possible differences in our ideas are – quoting Charles Kennedy – “essentially resolved”.
Btw, it would be an even more interesting discussion if you were there. This one was far more heated than the one on Maududi! I have a feeling the one in February will be equally interesting. I am searching for short literature (max 40 pages) on Libertarianism for that one.
Hello there,
From a distance, all seems fine and dandy. I’m not sure to what extent have you discussed the issue, but maybe you could elaborate on how the following issues can be resolved:
1) Chinese dominance of trade and business – and their racist selectivity in conducting business
2) The outflow of wealth from Muslim hands to non-muslim hands (due to meritocracy and equal distribution of opportunity and wealth to all citizens)
3) Influx of secular materialistic influences from chinese/non-muslim controlled businesses such as ASTRO.
The following is an interesting perspective of Malaysian society written by a Muslim scholar whom I know personally:
Malaysian Society: Moral Standards
In a Muslim nation the moral standard of society should be consistent with Islamic standards of right and wrong moral behaviour. In Malaysia, which is a Muslim nation, the moral standard of society is not the Islamic standard, but instead is determined by prevailing non-Muslim standards. In essence the moral standard of Malaysian society is determined by what is considered right and wrong by the large and influential Chinese non-Muslim population; and their moral standard is largely determined by the influences of Western, secular materialistic social values. The impact of these un-Islamic social values and moral standards, both from within and without Malaysian society, has had a powerfully detrimental effect on the Muslim population of Malaysia.
A multicultural society will always drift toward the lowest common denomination of social values and moral standards unless there are effective constraints placed upon the members of that society specifically directed at maintaining the social values and moral standards above the level of that lowest common denominator.
An example of this drift toward the lowest common denominator can be seen in the nature of boy/girl relationships in Malaysian society. The Islamic standard would not allow free mixing of the sexes, and would expect pairing off to take place only at the time of marriage. The Chinese non-Muslim standard, influenced by Western, secular materialistic standards, allows free mixing of the sexes and pairing off at a relatively young age, certainly before marriage. A result of this free mixing of the sexes and early pairing off means that increasingly we see young couples publicly expressing their affection, and/or lust, for each other in public places. These public displays of affection have recently became more and more common and have resulted in some high government authorities taking a position that this is just the way things will be in the modern world.
I can guarantee that if young people are allowed by the prevailing social values and moral standards to mix freely, to pair off at a young age, and to participate in public displays of affection such as holding hands, hugging, and kissing (all of which can be seen daily on the streets of Malaysia) then in private many of these same young people who mix freely and have paired off will be going far beyond hand holding, hugging, and kissing when they are alone in private situations. In such a situation it must be expected that a wide range of sexual behaviour will result.
True Islamic belief and practice cannot exist in a society where such an important part of human social life as sexual behaviour does not conform to Islamic standards and moral values. If Islamic standards of right social values and right behaviour are not to be the social standards for the nation then we must accept we will no longer be a Muslim nation and right Islamic belief and right Islamic practice will disappear from Malaysian society.–>
wansaiful says:
We suggested that perhaps we do not need to abolish bumiputera-ism just yet.
Hmm….This just shows _you_ PKR and PAS supporters are a liars and hypocrites who are simply political oppurtunitists. Also “Bumiputraism” equals Muslim supremacy and therefore until special economic priveledges (hak istimewa) to lazy Muslims are abolished, the Chinese, Tamils, Dayaks and Kadazans will NEVER support PKR and PAS.
DAP is truly multi-racial as it is CERTIFIED by Socialist International, a world-wide alliance of leftist political parties. DAP pledges to ammend the Constitution of Malaysia to make Mandarin, Tamil, English and Bahasa Melayu as the 4 national (official) languages of the Federation. Every special priveledges accorded to those lazy Muslims will be abolished, as ‘hak istimewa’ equals to imposition of Jizyah and Kharaj taxes.
That would be political suicide.
This comment tells you are a political oppurtunist just as Anwar Ibrahim, a racist Malay who imposed a racist policy called Bahasa Baku, not to forget insulted Chinese by telling them Mandarin will NEVER be official language in Malaysia. The Black Eye given to Anwar Ibrahim by his fellow Malay, Abdul Rahim Noor (ex-IGP) God’s punishment for Anwar’s homosexual, corruption and racism.
Meritocracy is the ideal, but we need to get there in stages. What we really need first is to ensure all Malaysians receive the help they need regardless of race. Thus, we need to develop a policy to help the non-Malays to complement the bumiputera policy. This additonal policy will enable everybody who needs help be helped regardless of the colour of their skin.
Tell me that again! PAS has always practised racism as its Kelantan Government refusing to award Chinese (such as Lim Kit Siang) ‘Datukship’ for fighting UMNO. There are NO Chinese have been given ‘Datukship’ by PAS government(s) on occasion of Sultan’s birthday. And don’t give me Anuar Tan Abdullah, who has already ‘masuk Melayu’ and considered a racist Malay who supports genocide on murtads (aka Chinese and/or non Muslims).
Once both policies work in full swing, society will move towards equality, and at that stage, the bumiputera policy and its counterpart will naturally become obsolete.
That’s what UMNO has been claiming all along but until today special previledges (political, economic and social) to the Muslims have never been abolished. So, is there any difference between the current UMNO and the so-called ‘reformists’ dubbed Barisan Alternatif (PAS and PKR) ? My answer will be NO as both parties in the BA refuse to uphold these non Muslim demands:
1. Re-write the Malaysian Constitution of 1963 to be compliant with international human rights standards, such as the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Geneva Conventions, etc. A model social contract will be the Singapore Constitution, the new Iraq Constitution, the U.S. Constitution, or the Turkish Constitution.
2. Declare a multi-ethnic society upholding ‘Unity in diversity’ just as in USA, Turkey, the New Iraq, and Singapore. There shall be FOUR (“4″) official languages, namely, Mandarin, Tamil, English, and Bahasa Melayu.
3. Allow freedom of religion, including the right for Christians to prosetylise Malays (regardless Muslim and Muslimah) and the right for Malays to be murtads and ultimately the right to build temples anywhere there are Christians, even in Muslim-majority areas.
Finally, tell us why has PAS-led Kelantan government failed to abolish the Anti-Murtad laws in Kelantan despite rulings the Malay-majority state for very very long? We demand that the PAS-led Kelantan government allow the National Evangelical Christian Fellowship (NECF) right to prosetylise Muslim people. We, Christians wish to heal the Malays from this mental illness they are suffering from.