A Malaysia for all Malaysians?

M. Nadarajah

APRIL 15 – In recent times, the cultural and political notions of

“Bangsa Malaysia” and “One Malaysia” have gained currency of use
and are fast becoming household terms. They seem to have caught
the imagination of many well-meaning sons and daughters of
Mother Malaysia.

Our fourth Prime Minister, Dr Mahathir Mohammad, conceived the

former and the present Prime Minister, Najib Abdul Razak, came up
with the latter. Both these leaders are connected to Umno and BN,
formations that belong to the era of ethnic politics.

Both these concepts were conceived to deal largely with the

demands by Malaysian citizens to create a Malaysia for all
Malaysians, irrespective of race/ethnicity, religion and gender.
Malaysian citizens attempted to represent the post-March 2008
Malaysia as “New Malaysia” to articulate a new kind of politics –
post-ethnic politics – with a cultural orientation that strongly
promoted unity through celebration of cultural diversity.

In the 70s and 80s, we had intense discussion on National Cultural

Policy. It was an intellectual and emotional movement that, among
other concerns, focused on the needs of non-Malay Malaysian
communities, seeking a fair and sensitive representation of their
cultural elements in the development of a National Culture, which of
course included vernacular education.

The spirit of “Rukunegara” also came to strongly articulate a similar

tendency, comprehensively: “achieving a more perfect unity
amongst the whole of her society; preserving a democratic way of
life; creating a just society where the prosperity of the country can
be enjoyed together in a fair and equitable manner; guaranteeing a
liberal approach towards her rich and varied cultural traditions; and
building a progressive society that will make use of science and
modern technology.”

Another concept, “Malaysian Malaysia”, used in the early and mid-

60s was widely associated with the then Singapore Prime Minister
Lee Kuan Yew. Of course the notion has gone into oblivion, only
raised in opposition slogans here and there, now and then.

Because it was critical of article 153 and directly challenged the

notion of Malay privileges, it was seen as an intensely disruptive
concept and was criticised by many, including the then MCA
president, Tan Siew Sin.
Earlier, and at the time of the conception of the political entity
called Malaya, there was Dato' Onn Ja'afar and those who supported
him, who represented the principle that in Malaya then and in the
future (i.e. Malaysia), no citizen should have more privilege than
another. He promoted inclusive politics.

“Malaysia for all Malaysians” is an imagination and a national need

very strong in the soul of multicultural Malaysia, corrupted only by
politicians and intellectuals with myopic and gutter political and
cultural views.

Now, by design or default, we have allowed the concepts of Bangsa

Malaysia and One Malaysia to set the agenda for us. We use these
ideas to imagine a Malaysia for all. It is part of our everyday
exchanges, discussion and debates.

They have come to consume the intellectual labour of many

amongst us. They appear on television. We may soon have photo
and essay competitions. And, probably national and international
conferences.

It may be part of Corporate PR campaigns and CSR initiatives. Or,

part of other national campaigns, popular imagination and popular
culture. And possibly like “Malaysia Boleh”, now a part of Malaysian
black humour.

But have we moved forward with these ideas? Are we, in any way,
privileging the urge for unity at the expense of diversity? Are these
notions benignly (with the potential for being aggressively)
hegemonic? Are we by default setting the ground to privilege any
one culture in the context of multiples religious and ethnic cultures?

Do these concepts address the issues raised in the 70s and 80s on
National Malaysian Culture? Or are they aligned to the notion of
post-March 2008 “New Malaysia”?

Are these ideas the refuge for Malaysians who have lost connection
to their mother tongue, ethnic or religious cultural affiliations and
seeking a cultural ground to stand on?

Are these ideas the refuge for hybrid communities who seem to feel
a state of being neither here nor there, culturally speaking?

And, who will inhabit One Malaysia? Citizens who want to be

identified as “Bangsa Malaysia”, or those who think/feel for
“Malaysian Malaysia” (governed by “Rukunegara”)?

It is certainly a cultural action strategy of subalterns to appropriate

notions from the mainstream or the dominant culture and to make
them stand on their head, to redefine their meanings and to use
them radically.
But without careful examination of origins and unstated orientations
of cultural notions, we must be conscious of the danger of
inadvertently lending support to notions that are not democratically
developed and therefore not properly fleshed out. Critical cultural
flash points may have not been addressed overtly (or even covertly)
by any long term and deep institutional solutions.

It may be status quo wrapped in acceptable, palatable form, with

critical details carefully avoided.

A cursory examination of the sociology of the notions – in particular

“One Malaysia” - suggests neither a careful analysis of their pre-
history nor a planned institutionalisation of them within a
democratic, multicultural and sustainable framework.

If present actions of the government are an indication, they are

certainly not consistent with the citizen's notion of “One Malaysia”.

While there are a number of attempts to flesh out meanings of these

notions and values behind them, at least for now there are hardly
any genuine attempts to institutionalise them.

There are really no significant, culturally-sensitive and sustainable

institutional changes which can reassure all Malaysian citizens.

So, instead of moving ahead with the work of institutionally building

the “Malaysia for all Malaysians” that we have imagined and we
want, we are spending hours of intellectual and creative labour
trying to still formulate our national foundation, defining who we are
and detailing our national “social contract”.

In the end, the notions of Bangsa Malaysia and One Malaysia may
not really contribute to strengthening the soul of Malaysia, a
Malaysia for all Malaysians.

While courage, creativity, and caution are necessary on the path

ahead, without genuine and deep institutionalisation, we will not be
taking our ideas forward. We will, instead, be stuck in a whirlpool of
ideas and more ideas.

---------------------

Originally published in Malaysian Insider and is located here (May

2009):

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/index.php/opinion/breaking-
views/23365-a-malaysia-for-all-malaysians-m-nadarajah-