Singapore and Malaysia should not have different memories of the colonialism

due to the fact that they were never two different entities to begin with. Before
Raffles came, Singapore was considered to be the Navel of the Malay countries
as Rajas ruled places such as Johor, Singapore and the Riau Islands. 1 Singapore
was not a sovereign nation and was still very much part of the Malay world.
Yet, it is obvious that both countries have polarized memories, mostly attributed
to bitter feelings and selective amnesia. With the colonial rule, came the
construct of race as they deemed it a necessity to control the Archipelago. 2
Different ethnicities were segregated to Chinese, Malay, Indian and Others
(CMIO). As Colonial powers favoured migrants for their efficiency, Malay
aristocrats progressively lost their power and migrants became increasingly
affluent.3 The taste that lingered in the mouths of Malay dominated Malaysia
must have been more rancid than that of Migrant dominated Singapore.
However before Singapore, Penang and Malacca were administrative hubs to the
British. Albeit ratio differences, these places all saw an influx of immigrants. 4 This
resulted in the Peranakans and Eurasians in these places as people intermarried.
Until today, we still see a shared lingua franca, similar ethnic mix and even
hybridized food. Looking back objectively, it should be seen that Colonialism
brought similar changes to both Singapore and Malaysia. However, it should be
noted that this societal shift was not unprecedented. 14 th century Temasek and
Portuguese Melaka that rose after saw a similar shift when they acted as
middlemen to China and the Portuguese.5
After separation, in hopes of not capitulating like former hubs after the loss of
support, Singapore anomalously recognised with its Colonial founders, separating
itself from the Malay world. Singapore chose to build a national identity where
the people recognised themselves as Singaporeans while dissatisfied Malaysia
reverted to favouring Malays, segregated ethnicities. 6 Singapores embracement
of Multiculturalism and Colonialism ascribed equality to all races and allowed it
1

Anthony Miller, Singapore's Role in Constituting the "Malay" Narrative in Nicholas Tarling (Ed) Studying
Singapores Past: C.M. Turnbull and the History of Modern, 133-135.

Ibid., 137-139.

Charles Hirschman, The Making of Race in Colonial Malaya: Political Economy and Racial Ideology in
Sociological Forum, Vol 1, No.2 (Spring,1986): 341-347

Daniel P.S. Goh, Between History and Heritage: Post-Colonialism, Globalisation, and the Remaking of Malacca,
Penang, and Singapore . TRaNS: Trans -Regional and -National Studies of Southeast Asia, 2, pp 79-101

Peter Borschbergs, Portuguese, Spanish and Dutch plans to Construct a Fort in the Straits of Singapore,
ca.1584-1625, 55-88

Anthony Reid, Singapore between Cosmopolis and Nation" in eds. Karl Hack, Jean Louis Margolin, Karin
Delaye, Singapore from Temasek to the 21st Century: Reinventing the Global City,37-52.

[Type here]

to look past ethnic differences, work together and strive to remain viable.
Meanwhile, Malaysia found itself with labour problems as it ostracized its
immigrants. While the short-sighted version of Singapores history has helped it
flourish, we must remember that British Colonialism was not unique, nor was
Singapore the only port to have risen in the region. Today, Singapore again faces
the issue of migrant influx. The national identity Singapore has built around
Colonialism may lead its citizens to resent immigrants who are very much a part
of any regional Entrepot. While choices have very much defined how
Singaporeans remember Colonialism and define themselves today, the Longue
Duree Singapores history is very much linked with the Malay world. Singapore is
not intrinsically more strategic as its national history suggests. If it is to survive
as a hub, Singapore should choose to remember itself as and prepare for the
challenges that have plagued this part of this Malay world.

[Type here]