By Daniel John Jambun
We are now in the middle of another a ruckus about Malay supremacy, a resurfacing of a rather old issue, but only that this time the exchanges have turned on a marked increase in aggressiveness and tones.
The term has now become a reminder of several images, the most unforgettable of which is of Datuk Hishamuddin, as the UMNO Youth Leader wielding first a normal-sized keris and in the following year a sword-sized one, with the warning, “Takkan Melayu hilang di dunia,” (the Malays shall surely not disappear from the world) and “Jangan cabar kami!” (Don’t challenge us!). He later ‘corrected’ it, saying, it was to symbolize protection for all Malaysians, and after the March 8 elections, apologized if what he did contributed to the electoral loss for the BN.
The concept of Malay supremacy has engendered various beliefs and attitudes among many of us. Among the Malays, the concept had become part of a strong paradigm in which they look upon themselves as the superior group, the unquestioned custodians of rights and privileges that supersede that of the rest. The Malay phrase for the term, “ketuanan Melayu” (which in fact should be more accurately translated as “Malay lordship”) implies privileged superiority, and automatic lordship over the rest of us. It also means that Malaysia is a Malay country, founded upon the long tradition of Malay rule that date back to the establishment of the Malacca sultanate by Parameswara. The independence of Malaya in 1957 was celebrated with acceptance of the ‘social contract’ that Malays held preeminence over the rest. This understanding had brought about a certain attitude in which the Chinese and Indians are continued to be looked upon as immigrants who are now here under the accommodation of the Malays. When Malaya, Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak agreed to come into equal partnership to form a new federation called Malaysia in 1963, the idea of Malay supremacy was not stated as a part of any understanding but was implied as an understanding that was to be read between the lines in the 20 Points agreement. In fact the worry about the loss of Malay superiority through loss of majority in the Malaysia demographic was the principal factor that led to the expulsion of Singapore from the federation. Since 1957, the idea of Malay supremacy remained an unquestioned understanding--until recently.
Even before the March 8 elections the MCA had made overtly questioned the issue, at one time reminding at one time that around 80 percent of the Malaysia income tax is paid by the Chinese. But the decibel in the expression against the idea of Malay supremacy noticeably increased after Anwar Ibrahim, himself once seen as an ‘ultra-Malay’, courageously introduced the idea that ‘ketuanan rakyat’ (the people’s supremacy) with the clear message that the idea of Malays supremacy is obsolete and no longer relevant in the context of the globalized society of the new millennium. It was a daring step for a Malay leader to denounce the long-held and treasured concept of his own people, in a clear self-rebranding to assure the people that he is a leader for all Malaysians, in line with PKR’s multiracial concept.
The March 8 elections showed the Malaysia acceptance of the new idea of people’s supremacy, as shown by the tsunami effect which transformed Malaysian politics. The Malays themselves opted to vote for the Pakatan Rakyat, sending the message that they wanted change. Tun Mahathir in one statement said that Sammy Vellu (as an Indian) should be grateful (for having been so privileged in Malaysia), causing the later to rebut strongly, asking what it was that he was supposed to be thankful for as a Malaysian who had contributed so much to the development of the country.
Now we hear so many national leaders, mostly from the BN itself, questioning again the idea of Malay supremacy, some bringing up again that the prickly issue about Malays being immigrants too. Lim Kit Siang had recently claimed that ketuanan or lordship implies the necessary existence of hamba (slaves or servant). Pro-Malay groups have come forth to reaffirm Malay supremacy with one intellectuals grouping led by Dr. Zainal Kling going even to the extent of saying that even Sabah and Sarawak actually belonged to the Malays because the states were at one time under the Brunei empire, which is like saying that Malacca today belongs to the Portuguese, or that Malaysia today belongs to the Japanese of the British. Even the royals such as Raja Nazrin Shah of Perak have come forward to say that Malay supremacy should not be questioned. And a member of the Negeri Sembilan royalty had just called for a reinstatement of royal immunity in Malaysia, which PKR has pledged to fight for.
But we can no longer deny that the idea Malay supremacy is now seriously under fire, and this won’t be the last of it. Many may not accept the reality but the idea is indeed obsolete, irrelevant and counter-productive not just for Malaysians but for the Malays as well within the hard realities of the new millennium. It is now very clear that non-Malay Malaysians are no longer willing to be seen as subservient to the Malays, preferring equality in every sense. The idea of the Malays being ‘supreme’ and being more privileged smacks of arrogance and causes other Malaysians to be slighted and hurt. It actually goes against the very idea of unity and goodwill (muhibah), social harmony, competitiveness, level playing field, mutual respect, even justice and fairness. It is clearly a social liability standing in the way of the nation’s progress. With one race claiming more superior than others, how do we expect to become a proud and great nation built on the genuine struggles based not on privileges but on merits?
The other rationale for rejecting this concept is the fact that in the progressive nations of the world, the idea of one racial group being the privileged race doesn’t exist. In the progressive egalitarian societies, the root of progress is the open and competitive environment offering a level playing field for all. It has also been confirmed that all of all the affirmative programs which have ever been tried in any part of the world, none has ever succeeded in helping any group. As a matter of fact, such programs have brought declines in the socio-economic performances of many groups.
The question is, how long can the idea withstand the change that is now sweeping the nation? Various factors, not all of them political, are now challenging the very idea of Malay supremacy. The number one factor is not politics but economics. Can the Malaysian social contract of Malay supremacy continue to hold its ground in the face of the risen and rising economic superiority of the immigrant groups such as the Chinese and Indians? New aggressive immigrants groups have already entered the Malaysian economic scene: Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, Indonesians, and even Nigerians. The Indonesians too are Malays, and they are going to double benefit from the social contract by gaining economic momentum through aggressive competitiveness and government affirmative programs, so even in this case the Malaysian Malays are going to lose to them. Even if the non-Malay groups were to willingly accommodate the Malays, and sacrifice their full potentials and social positions, how long can the Malay pretend that they are a superior group when in fact they are the most dependant group in the nation?
Can the Malays continue to claim privilege in the face of the economic superiority of the non-Malays, and expect to be spoon-fed with gifts and subsidies through affirmative programs such as the NEP? Can the Malays expect to progress to a world-class race by continuing to be protected from open competition through soft loans, ready scholarship, and automatic employments? Will the Malays benefit from educational and socio-economic policies which continue to give them preferential treatments, resulting in them losing the initiative, creativity and hard work while the rest of Malaysians continue to move ahead under the spur of the need to survive?
Are the Malays saying they are willing to become an inferior race by continuing to act and pretend they are superior? It’s high time they realize that the idea of Malay supremacy is not benefiting them. They may find it very hard to accept but in reality, the concept and practice of it is actually a threat to their future in the long term.
