Moving beyond race

The TehTarik sessions are the brainchild of a group of young Malaysians at Cambridge University who desired a non-partisan platform to foster open discussion on burning issues. Sessions are open to all as long as they have a shared passion for Malaysia. The following is based on the discussion that took place over a hot cup of self-made teh tarik.

"In Malaysia, if it is a Malay issue it is a national issue; if it is a Chinese issue, it is a racial issue; if it is an Indian issue, it is a non-issue."

A rather crass statement but resonant amongst many Malaysians, it alludes to one fundamental problem - a nation divided by race. Yet historically, Malaysia was not always so. Socio-political events of pre-independence were as much based on class struggles as it was on race.

A short documentary titled ‘Hartal: Sepuluh Tahun Sebelum Merdeka’ recounts the fallout of events prior to 1957 which led to the eventual replacement of class-oriented political struggle by racial politics.

In order to appreciate the implications of such turn of events, one needs to take a closer look at ensuing events that shaped the econo-political structure of Malaysia. Many Malaysians would freshly remember the racial riots of May 1969, which came traumatic for a young and fragile nation.

Determined that such tragedy should never recur, the government initiated the New Economic Policy (NEP) which aimed to reduce poverty irrespective of race, and to eliminate identification of race with economic function. Instead, moving into the 1970s, the intended objectives became divisive laws and therein giving rise to much of the controversial contentions today.

During the same period, government-led drive for industrialisation resulted in heavy public sector debt. The state of the economy was further exacerbated by a weak global economy between 1973 and 1979. Subsequently, the government instituted radical changes in economic policies, paving way for the Golden Age of the Malaysian economy between 1986 and 1997.

Real GDP growth averaged as high as 10 percent. By 1990, and in subsequent years, the first objective of NEP to eradicate poverty was essentially achieved. However, the implementations for the second objective were mostly counter-productive and brought the nation further away from unity.

It is remarkable to note how despite of or because of the NEP, the gap between the rich and the poor has been widening in that the income discrepancy between the rich and poor bumiputera is greater than the discrepancy between other Malaysians.

Throughout its implementation and more so in recent years, the NEP has been subject to much politicising and its original objectives manipulated to suit the interests of certain parties. Although formally ended in 1990, the NEP carries with it heavy psychological and political baggage.

Yet despite the significant bearing to both its proponents and opponents, nobody seems to be able to truly explain what the NEP does or is formally anymore. It has taken on a form that is beyond what was envisioned.

Ironically, one could hardly distinguish the original objectives of the NEP from the economic agenda of Pakatan Rakyat in the recent general election, with its dual emphasis on poverty eradication and national unity.

A place under the Malaysian sun

Malaysia is akin to a patient needing major, albeit long-term, treatment. The pressing question is how do we move forward as a nation?

It is imperative that we move beyond racial econo-politics. There will always be parties adverse to change but concerted efforts coupled with time and persuasion would ensure a peaceful transition. It should be noted that changes usually take a long time as in the case of China, where it took 15 years to convince its people of the need to join the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

A reputable technocrat once said that in any reform, there will be three groups of people.

First is the powerful elite minority who benefits from and wishes to maintain the status quo. Second is a small group of people who desire change but are themselves not powerful enough to effect the change. Third is the reform’s biggest gainer, usually the largest group but also one that is mostly naïve of the potential benefits of such reform.

For a successful reform, the second group needs the buy-in of the third group. That said, the modus operandi of the buy-in, in the context of all Malaysians, remains a difficult and open question.

While we are beginning to feel apparent signs of changes, the aspirations and hopes of many Malaysians rally behind His Royal Highness the Regent of Perak, Raja Nazrin Shah as he famously declared, “Malaysians of all races and religions need to believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that they have a place under the Malaysian sun.”

---

The discussion is anchored by ALLEN NG and the above article is edited by WILLIAM TAN. Ng (BA, MPhil Economics) is an alumnus of Christ's College. Tan is currently reading chemical engineering. An arts and music enthusiast who plays the piano during his leisure, Tan also takes interest in and discusses passionately about economical, political and social issues.


Previous TehTarik articles

Race and prejudice in Malaysia
Our varsities: The good, the bad and the ugly