Alfian Sa’at
On 3rd September 2009, both the Straits Times and the Malaysian Insider carried the article ‘Proud To Be Malay Singaporean’. Written by Khartini Khalid, the article addresses among many things a statement made by former Malaysian Information Minister Datuk Zainuddin Maidin in the newspaper Utusan Malaysia.
In his column, the venerable Datuk made references to Singapore while discussing Malaysia’s current racial controversies. According to him, the main reason then Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman decided to kick Singapore out of Malaysia was ‘the speech made by its then Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew, in the Malaysian Parliament in May 1965 questioning the Malay government in Malaysia.’
This statement isn’t really about Singapore but a variation of the spooky ethno-nationalist warning against minorities who question the notion of Malay supremacy (as enshrined in Article 153 of the Malaysian Federal Constitution). Malaysian Home Affairs Minister Hishamuddin Hussein might wave a keris to make this point. Another politician might raise the spectre of the May 13 Incident.
Zainuddin had chosen to invoke the expulsion of Singapore. His message: ‘Don’t you dare challenge Article 153, or we’ll kick you out.’ Nevertheless, Khartini Khalid has seen it as her patriotic duty to defend Singapore from a perceived attack. And thus she begins her column with the line: ‘I am a Malay Singaporean and proud of it.’
It’s one thing to say, ‘I am a Singaporean and proud of it.’ It’s another to bring attention to the fact that you’re Malay. It’s quite obvious that the writer meant: ‘Boy, am I glad I’m not a Malay Malaysian! I can hold my head up high knowing that I never relied on crutches and handouts. As Whitney Houston’s song goes, I tried it on my own.’
The writer goes on to say that she first ‘realised how different I am from Malay Malaysians when I stayed in a kampung in Negeri Sembilan for a week.’ After the first four days, she felt that something was amiss. And what was that? The fact that she ‘had not seen a single non-Malay person for four whole days!’
I can’t speculate on her daily roaming radius, but I suspect that she was trying to say that she was staying in an ethnically homogenous village. According to her, there was a Chinese village ‘across the street’, while the Indians lived in ‘yet another village near some plantations’.
She goes on to compare this with Singapore, where a trip out of her house allows her to behold a melanin rainbow: ‘every day now, when we step out of our flats, we see our Chinese, Indian and perhaps Eurasian neighbours.’ I found myself sniggering. It was as if she was saying, ‘if we’re lucky, we’ll be able to spot a Eurasian too, and we’ll fulfil our multiracial sighting quota for the day.’
There are a few things seriously wrong with extrapolating the writer’s experiences in a remote village in Negeri Sembilan to the multicultural reality of Malaysia. First of all, I’m pretty confident that if she were to stay in a block of apartments in urban Kuala Lumpur, she would be able to visually feast on ‘Truly Asia’.
Secondly, what separated the Malay and Chinese villages was a street, not a wall. These villages were not garrisoned ghettoes. Just because they were spatially segregated does not mean that there was zero interaction between the communities. Conversely, just because I have neighbours of various races along a common corridor does not mean that any meaningful interaction occurs among us. One should not confuse the façade of multiculturalism with its substance.
I wonder if the Straits Times would have run an article written by someone after a trip to China, with the headline ‘Proud To Be Chinese Singaporean’: ‘Thank god I can have more than one child, am surrounded by breathable air and can access Facebook and Youtube!’ Or one that says, ‘Proud to be Indian Singaporean’: ‘Hindu-Muslim tensions, a nasty caste system, and movie stars-turned-politicians—how wonderful that Singapore is spared from all this!’
It’s unwise to make such judgments without understanding the real complexities in the society that one is so eager to denigrate. This is the kind of attitude that has earned Singaporeans a reputation for arrogance. Wave our flag by all means, but make sure that we don’t hit other people’s faces with it.
The generalisation that Khartini makes is that Singapore’s multiculturalism is somewhat superior to that of Malaysia’s. To her, the Malaysian ‘model’ practises ‘discriminatory policies favouring one group over others’, while Singapore has ‘a system of equity based on merit’.
Thus we’re back to comparing Singapore’s ‘meritocracy’ versus Malaysia’s ‘affirmative action’ (although it is more correct to call this ‘ameliorative action’). I am not a big fan of Malaysia’s National Economic Policy, which was instituted in 1971 as a means to allow Malays a greater economic stake in the country (at that time, they held around 4% of the economy—the rest of it was controlled by Chinese and foreign interests). This discrepancy was due to a colonial divide-and-rule policy: political power for the Malays, economic power for the Chinese.
It is clearly an unfair policy, but it has to be examined in terms of what it aims to achieve: an equality of outcome. The idea is for Malays to be given extra state support such that they will feel as if they have an equal share in the country. However, the initial socialist goals of the NEP were gradually abused over time, taking on a communalist character. Eventually, it ended up narrowly benefiting an elite class known as ‘Umnoputras’ more concerned with feathering their own nests than the alleviation of the Malay poor.
On the other hand, meritocracy is premised on equality of opportunity. But it can sometimes lead to consequences that might be argued as unfair. It is no secret that the majority of government scholarship awardees come from affluent, middle-class backgrounds. This is because of the ‘unfair’ advantages they enjoy, often referred to as social capital; these include an English-speaking home environment and the means to afford private tuition. We tend to overlook that meritocracy, while based on egalitarian ideals, often produces elitist results.
The debate over ‘meritocracy’ and ‘Malay special rights’ is therefore not one that can be reduced to which system is better. They have to be understood within the context of the societies which practice them, as well as contesting notions of what constitutes ‘equality’.
Similarly, we have to be careful about the indices that we use to judge the ‘standard’ of multiculturalism in a country. There are many Malays in Malaysia who are against the NEP because it violates their notions of social justice. Malay politicians like Anwar Ibrahim have campaigned on a platform of abolishing the NEP and replacing it with a more equitable system. The lawyer who defended the right of Lina Joy to convert out of Islam is a Muslim — Malik Imtiaz Sarwar. In Malaysia, we have members of the majority speaking up for disenfranchised minorities—something unheard of in today’s Singapore.
The watershed Malaysian election of 2008 revealed that many voters were actually crossing racial lines. In Singapore, the entrenched idea that voters only vote for their own race led to the formation of the Group Constituency Representative scheme, where minority candidates supposedly piggyback on the appeal of a Chinese candidate in a Chinese-majority ward (meaning all wards in Singapore) to get into Parliament.
Cultural producers such as Yasmin Ahmad also provide a glimpse into the active conversations on race in Malaysia. The advertisements by the visionary director Yasmin Ahmad are a case in point. Yasmin’s work (Tan Hong Ming, How to spell Dinosaur, From Madrass) not only convinced me that Malaysia wasn’t a scary country ripped asunder by NEP-apartheid, but also made me wonder why we don’t make such vignettes celebrating our racial plurality in Singapore.
In his National Day Rally address to the Malay community, the Prime Minister said, ‘Malay/Muslim Singaporeans have developed your own distinct identity. You have become different from Malays in Malaysia, Indonesia or Brunei. When abroad, you want to be identified as Singaporeans first.’
This is a mystifying statement. I wonder if the PM said something similar to the Chinese community: “You have become different from Chinese in China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau, Indonesia, Thailand or Malaysia.” But the subtext is of course the issue of Malay loyalty to the state. 44 years after Independence, the Malay community still finds that it has to demonstrate its willingness to defend the country in the event of armed conflict with neighbouring countries.
Seen in this light, I shouldn’t be too hard on Khartini. There is something strategic in her renunciation of Malay Malaysians. One detects a hidden oath of allegiance in her exaggeration of differences: ‘Malay Malaysians and Singaporeans live in different political and social realities’. One could forgive the shoddy sociology, the simplistic us-vs-them posturing in her article. Ultimately, the fact that Malays in Singapore need to constantly defend their nationalist credentials says a lot more about Singapore’s multiculturalism than a corridor of neighbours who are Chinese, Malay, Indian—and perhaps Eurasian.
——
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
Alamak b,
The ‘main thrusts’ are in the article lah. I also don’t know how to make it any clearer. Am I to summarise the article and pick out the more salient points? Maybe my English not so good?
You’ve listed three points, I’ve given you another three…hmmm how many thrusts do you need?
Dear Oxford Dude
Its very common for High ranking civil servant in HK to have A level or just local degree. Donald Tsang is just 7 years older than Lee Hsien Loong. HK police boss Tang King Shing another A level is 2 years younger than loong. Many others…
HK civil service is deem to be more efficient than SG by many observers. To make it short, our system is one of the worst. It tramples anyone else except scholars using unfair ranking and promotion system.
Anyone the non scholar civil servant can tell you stories. Only naive will believe in meritocracy mantras.
la nausee,
In general,Malay community since the olden days does not really see education an integral part to suceed.
After years of constant pushing and encouragment,slow improvment began to take place in the education arena where competition to suceed is for grabs.
I am a Malay,and Malays in general are not gold diggers (eyeing too much on luxury).
We are a bunch of ppl who ‘just wish’ to have some good old breeze of wind blowing at our face.
To have some sort of NEP as what Malays in Malaysia enjoyed is a grave mistake especially in education.
After decades of assistance,Malays in Malaysia economically still lagging but politically assisted.
The gap in wages between Chinese and Malays are result of one sole breadwinner earning.
That’s where the problem rise..
@antz (#100),
An NEP-like policy, I agree, would be too rigid (how should the quotas be determined?) and may foster a dependency complex. The main problem, though, is that it’s a shortcut: it imposes an ‘equal’ outcome without addressing the root causes of inequality, like low household incomes, poor education, high teenage pregnancies and divorce rates, etc.
The Government’s strategy, for the most part, attempts to be ‘colour-blind’; either it implements programmes of a general, non-race-specific character (which are therefore largely ineffective) (e.g. tweaking the MOE school curriculum for all students, mounting pro-family campaigns), or it indirectly supports community-oriented VWOs and charities like MENDAKI but on an equal footing with (e.g.) the Chinese clan associations (which thus fail to address the problem of relative inequality).
I think this approach is largely correct, but I think that (1) far more emphasis should be placed on the second prong; and (2) far greater assistance should be given to organizations which cater to minority communities.
Dear Alfian,
I am a Singaporean living in Malaysia as an expat and I cringed when I read Khartini’s article last week, when it was sent by another Singaporean back in Singapore. To me, her article was defensive, myopic and ‘plastic’ if I may use the word.
I have been working in Malaysia for a good 3 years and I would say the multiculturalism here has alot more substance than the plastic facade we are used to back at home. And mind you, Malaysia’s multiculturalism is not all about being Malay/Chinese/Indian/Eurasion—but it cuts through many other cultures like the Kadazans, Ibans, Dayaks even the different states although bumis, practice different cultures which is so distinct, it is like talking about different races altogether. And yet, Khartini simplistically made judgements about Malaysia as thought it is comparable, by physical and geographical landscape to super tiny Singapore.
Thank you for echoing most of my sentiments and the sentiments of fellow Singaporeans working/staying here. We are patriotically Singaporeans, but we cannot help loving Malaysia for its flavours–which more often than not, we couldn’t find in Singapore.
My humble comments in pee65.sg:
Kartini after being a tourist for a week in a Malaysian kampong claims to explain how the Singapore system is “very distinct” from Malaysia’s.
She admits putting herself up in a “Malay village” but no, she complains after regaining her mind four days later that there is no interracial fun.
She benefited from the warmth of Malay Malaysian host families, but no, according to Kartini, Malay Malaysians are still different from the more human “Malay Singaporeans”.
Malay Malaysians let non-Malay students sleep in their homes, but no, she still thinks Malay Malaysians and other races are not “at peace with one another”.
She chides the unmeritocratic system in Malaysia but no, addressing the object of her ire as “Datuk Seri”, a rank based on patronage, is fine.
She cites the wondrous integration of races in Singapore, but no, she still vehemently describes herself “Malay” first, as adjective to “Singaporean” in her tourism.
Her identity is what she herself calls “a label” but no, she still would like to defend a label.
She thinks Malay Malaysians are not as “phenomenal” as those in Singapore but no, she does not say or is not aware that Malay Singaporeans:
- have twice the primary school and secondary school drop out rate compared to the national average
- are four times less likely to go to universities compared to the national average
- have lower proportion of degree holders than minorities in other countries such as African Americans or Hispanics in the USA
- are made up of over 50% cleaners, laborers, factory workers and clerks
- have twice the divorce rate and four times the single-parent birth rates of the national average
and many others.
She goes to Tufts and is “a proud Malay Singaporean” because she is just not all these.
She calls herself a realist, but she has no clue of actual realities.
Ignorance imbued with arrogance teaches us great lessons – but only to those who want to learn from it.
Dear fellow netizens,
Might I urge a bit of restraint?
Please don’t make any personal attacks on Miss Khartini. I do not know her personally, but I hope people will refrain from ad hominem attacks.
It is not fair to call her an establishment mouthpiece simply because she has written for the p65 blog and the Straits Times. She has expressed her views in her article, and I have no reason to doubt that those are her personal convictions.
So do please hold back from accusing her of serving political paymasters, harboring careerist agendas, etc. I think there’s this impression that either Khartini or myself is reflecting the more ‘accurate’ sentiments from the Malay community. But I don’t think either of us is speaking for constituencies–we speak first and foremost for ourselves.
antz,
Please keep your comments to the issues raised in the article. As a reminder, the article is not about whether TOC should publish such articles. That is the prerogative of TOC editors. You can agree or disagree but it is not a point of discussion here.
You can write to us at theonlinecitizen@gmail.com and we will communicate with you there on this matter.
Also, please refrain from making personal challenges or remarks about the writer. Stick to the issue/s in the article.
Thanks.
Alfian Alfian,
Evidence from Kartini show otherwise. Look at her SPH background. Berita Harian!!! p65!?!?! N tat article!!! Is more hard not to think Kartini is PAP lappy.
Aiyo.. what’s so controversial about this article? I think one of its main points is “Wave our flag by all means, but make sure that we don’t hit other people’s faces with it.” This is simply basic courtesy, especially when others (including Zainuddin Maidin) are not intending to denigrate Singapore.
Both Khartini and Alfian are wrong.
The Singapore government divides the population along those who have money (all rich foreigners are welcome) and those who are less well-off.
The less well-off can leave the country for good. The very poor, please die early.
NS men are to protect the rich ass and their property. HDB is actually on loan to you at a high price.
This is why after 50 years LKY said Singapore is still not yet a country.
Lee kuan Yew conveniently accept article 153 when want freedom from London and make a fuss of it when already apart of Malaysia. Don’t you think this is a ploy rather than a genuine member of Malaysia states.
PAP lapdog will always proud to be 2nd class citizens of Singapore. No matter Meritocracy or Not. Singapore is the image of Malaysia in terms of racial policy or maybe worse.
To LKY Malays and others are just imigrant and there is no original ihabitant of Singapore( Maybe orang asli). But he also conveniently forget that the British deal with the Malay Sultan and he is in Malay archipelago.
Alfian, we can all say our views and agree to disagree and all that. At the same time we should also look at the person making those views and call a spade a spade. I denounce Ms Khartini along with her arguments. I think both are vile.
Alfian, when i read the article, I took it objectively as a person’s point of view. Not sure Khartini belongs to PAP or WP and it never cross my mind when I read it. Does it matter since I am focusing on the content and can disagree as well ? We haev to keep our minds open. But it is important that she feels proud to be in Singapore and as a Malay Singaporean whether she is PAP or not. Same for those PAP people. If they are serving the citizens and I know they have this Meet MP session, then I can embrace them as my fellow Singaporeans trying to do good, just like you. Then we would have gone beyond party or not party subject and to me, that is about loving Singaporeans and Singapore, not fighting amongst ourselves. Khartini’s article speaks a lot and assured my own beliefs too. I have lived in 3 other countries working in the private sector. Now with that overseas experience, I can only say Singapore has room to improve but to me, not in necessary in those areas you have mentioned. I think the country did well to give everyone a chance to develop. To shine, it really depends on us as individuals.
antz – if you dont like to read alternative viewpoints, you can choose not to read. Its your choice – please dont impose your opinions onto others. thats just so…”PAP”-like.
yes, i agree with Alfian in that let’s not be haste and criticize Khartini. I am Malay, born and raised in Singapore. and have family in Malaysia.
I see the points raised by both Khartini and Alfian. When i visit my family up there, we’ll end up talking politics, and there’ll always be big heavy discussions between Singapore and Malaysia.
Between my family up there, there’s hardcore UMNO, PAS and Keadilan supporters. I see the Malaysian Malay views, from 3 different angles.
i recall fond memories of my late grandpa – who’s a hardcore UMNO, quarrel with my uncle (his son), who’s PAS and his son-in-law (Keadilan). “If not for UMNO, you’ll still be kissing the feet of the white man.” “UMNO is sucking up the money thats meant for the rest of the Malays to catch up with the Chinese.” “Malaysia cannot be run by Malay ulamaks who’s only education come from kampung madrasahs. We need the best that Malaysia can offer – across all races, to drive Malaysia forward.”
The funny thing is – when we’re all together, it will turn into a Singapore-bashing discussion, without fail :-)
And this is where i find both Khartini’s and Alfian’s views most interesting.
But my point being, whenever i’m with my family up there, i turn into a Khartini. While i agree that her arguments are too simplistic, i can understand if she sounds defensive – and i too take on some of her arguments when i talk with my family.
But whenever i’m back in Singapore, and talk with my non-Malay friends (most of whom are my closest friends), i take on Alfian’s points.
So, its great to see the discussions going on here, and may both Khartini and Alfian continue to have more writings to unearth the Malay psyche.
May i just say that i am enjoyed reading the Comments by Commenter Law#103, Fresh Pond Dweller#105 and Seng Hin#114. The perspectives and views offered in those comments are truly objective.
patriot
TOC and alfian-My apology if i step over the line.
But this is an online net,the ‘only’place where u can speak of your mind.
This type of things rarely seen in public media..
so my apologies again if I sound harsh.
“101) antz on September 7th, 2009 2.47 am la nausee,
In general,Malay community since the olden days does not really see education an integral part to suceed.
After years of constant pushing and encouragment,slow improvment began to take place in the education arena where competition to suceed is for grabs.
I am a Malay,and Malays in general are not gold diggers (eyeing too much on luxury).
We are a bunch of ppl who ‘just wish’ to have some good old breeze of wind blowing at our face.
To have some sort of NEP as what Malays in Malaysia enjoyed is a grave mistake especially in education.
After decades of assistance,Malays in Malaysia economically still lagging but politically assisted.
The gap in wages between Chinese and Malays are result of one sole breadwinner earning.
That’s where the problem rise..”
A worldview brought in by the colonial powers that stated Malays are Lazy, Chinese are hardworking, Indians are “belit”, bla, bla, bla……
And LKY inherited this worldview by saying “Malays cannot succeed in Maths and Science because intelligence is inherited”(he said something like that).
So when talking about the fate of Malays in Singapore, we will always have to do some UMNO/NEP bashing. I just think that this is quite backward.
If you want to look at Malaysia, then look at Pakatan Rakyat. Sit down with Malays in the Pakatan Rakyat(the government in waiting) and hear their views. They have a totally different mindset.
The increasing wage gaps is the government’s fault. Because Malays were not given access to the opportunity. I don’t need statistics to emphasise this point. Just go to CMPB, and you wait at the counter and see the officers going in and out of the door. No Malays or other races. Navy/Airforce, no Malays. Private sector: They ask you the multi-million dollar question, “Can you speak Chinese?” ”
Why?” you ask. “Oh because ah…you will need to deal with Chinese speaking customers. They be comfortable, bla, bla, bla….” So what has the government done to stop this practice? Nothing.
Maintaining the racial balance by bringing in Chinese from other parts of the world and giving them citizenship is the government “dirty” population engineering program. It is open secret that there are more Malay youths than Chinese. It goes to show that they, the PAP, under the guardianship of LKY, adheres to rascist agenda.
Malays are lazy and not after “worldly gains” are negative stereotye being promoted to justify the discrimination. All the Malays and other minorities wanted is a level playing ground. We did not asked for subsidies and free gifts.
P/S: I am not a Malay.
I attribute the gap in Malay development to both government’s “useful negligent” and to certain aspect of Sunni Islam.
Instead of hiring FT in certain sectors like bus drivers, constructions, all these jobs could have given to locals. By restricting FT, law of demand and supply will ensure, that wages rises to acceptable level. Now those wages of manual jobs simply link to salary in Bangladesh….etc. Our HDB SBS earns high surplus where that actually could be fairly re-distributed.
Our public housing is now effectively unbearable which transfer a large % of income from poor family to government. That is on top that a substantial portion of public land is acquire through robber land acquisition act. This is the most unjustice form of transfer of wealth.
Our school uses English predominantly which render venacular speakers big disadvantage.
Even the most capitalist USA has “Food Stamp Program” which feeds its poor with VERY good food.
The underdogs in SG certainly are tougher. They do not want government to take care like those in US. Instead of useless apologetics, SG government should be thankful for such hardworking people, and water down policies which could have cause high gini.
(I agree many aspect of FT, education but the intensity and the draconians way of implementation is certainly unfair )
Indeed Malays in Spore should be proud to be Malay Sporeans. Over the years, they have significant progress in the areas of education, businesses as well in the medical fields. The Malays have also made significant progress in the SAF. Now we even have a one star General (BG) in the SAF. In the past, our northern neighbour always critisized SG for not allowing the Malays to serve in SAF . Today, we have proved them and many other critics wrong. Nevertheless, Malays Sporeans should not allowed success to go to their heads and be too proud. They should always remain humble and continue to aim for greater success.
I think there are certain aspect of Sunni Islam which discourage development in philosophies and natural sciences. The 1st Muslim Nobel Prize laurate Abdus Salam has persecuted and tomb deface by fundamentalist.
The highest educated Arabic Muslim communities are ironically Arabic Israelis. And among the Arabs, Lebanese Christian are the only one that are able to achieve higher income and education without petro-dollar.
Despite oil-wealth among Arabic countries, Shite Iran under world wide sanction are achieve 2nd most advance technology in Middle-east after Israel.
The Shiite clerical class has a traditional independent anti-establishment track. Besides, clerical Shiite class often produces outstanding scholars in natural science if their member decided not to pursue theology.(good example is larijani family)
But Sunni mullah are subordinate to rulers, which in middle east, most sheiks are corrupt. And it would suit the interest of Sultans for their mullah to preach that their faith is solidly achored final revelations, and forbid further inferences.
The lack of relativistic outlook so important in science is what is made Sunni state currently backward in natural sciences and modern ideas.
It takes several generation to change.
While I like your writing style and the way your argue your case, Alfian, I think you’ve been a tad unfair to Khartini. She expressed views that I have heard from some of my Malay friends too. Yours was equally good too – but another lot of views. I celebrate the diversity.
I agree some of us here have been a bit too personal towards Khartini. But read her Khartini’s replies to Alfian n other commentators, she seems unwilling to engage with the issues raised by those pple. So I think it goes both ways.
n her using ppl’s name-calling as an excuse to sidestep the other valid points raised does not add to her credibility. Comes off as insincere / evasive.
No need to keep telling everyone we’re so proud of being this and that lar! Maciam so insecure lidatt. The more you say the more people hav e doubt!
-122:
ya don’t bother,.. that lady got no more credibility.
This episode shows the need for diversity of newspapers. The way ppl read ST and think it’s the only truth is very scary.
“Now we even have a one star General (BG) in the SAF…”
yeah sure, through the PAP government’s blessing on when and how should anc could the malay community be trusted and thrust the principle of meritocracy as applied?
As much as we need to observe the diverse viewpoints, we should’nt ignore the perils of government based propelled propaganda. It’s too much of a facade, immersed in poison, to be taken at literal level.
Having commentators to challenge and suggest migration is a big mode of denial from the said denying opportunities of free speech, involvements in concerns of community and diverse views based on democratic tolerance. Obviously such rebuttal from a certain commentator shows how indoctrinated he/she is from the shady system.
32) Harrison on September 5th, 2009 10.17 pm Hi Andrew Chuah,
“LKY’s recent pronouncement that the Malays have a problem with teenage pregnancies is really degrading. Fact is teenage pregnancies is prevalent across all races due to western cultural influences and easy access to pornography on the Internet. Moreover, the problem transcends across the various income groups”
Regarding your comment above, I would like to ask how you can on one hand regard lumping teen pregnancies with the malay community degarding yet in the same breath suscribe to the tired old cliche that gives “western influence” all the credit when it comes to sexual promiscuity and depradation? Easy access to porn may on a certain level be understood or even acceptable as a significant cause of overactive hormones but seriously, pardon my blutness, since when do we Asians need an ‘Angmoh’ to teach us how to F***? You want to blame someone? Blame our ’2 working parents’ economy that effectively give teens across the country Hours of freedom in an empty flat with the partner of their choice.
Looking at the statistics (though I have to question on the sources still), has made me realise how far behind we are than I initially would’ve thought. So instead of pin-pointing the blame and criticizing one another’s opinion, why don’t us Singaporean Malays (so to speak) persevere to work harder and move forward together. There clearly is a problem within our community. It’s about time that we address these problems and start thinking positive from now.
…and oh btw, Happy Break-fast :)
More exchanges from pee65.sg. I would suggest people interested in engaging the author express their views there.
————————————–
Khartini Khalid
September 7th, 2009 at 8:44 am
Fresh Pond Dweller, are there not many problems for the Malays in Malaysia too? Are they much better off as a whole with the bumiputera policy in place?
Fresh Pond Dweller Returns
September 7th, 2009 at 10:57 pm
She is a proud “Malay Singaporean” but no, even she acknowledges (subconsciously) the extent of socio-economic problems in the Singapore Malay community with her use of the word “too” in “are there not many problems for the Malays in Malaysia too?”
She claims to have “good grades” and goes to university, but no, judging from the quality of her writing and rebuttals, one questions if there really was no affirmative action in Singapore.
She shouts “come on people, give viable alternatives!” (exclamation mark and all), but no, she is obviously not aware that good alternatives have been proposed but shot down by her previous paymasters in as facile a way as her rebuttals.
My dearest Khartini – you cannot assume everyone who engages you in the net is like every student in vocational school you used to teach in real life. You are entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to promoting vacuous thinking.
shamin,
to make it simple,there’s no country that have precise equality.There’s no such things as ‘colour blind; in the world.
when u know the facts,I suggest stop whining and complaining cos that got u to nowhere.
Not happy,then relocate..simple.
To 132 antz,
U r WRONG! One CAN be colour blind… Let me give you a REAL example that you will not be able to rebut.
When I was a kid… when a Hokkien man married a Teochew woman, people will say “YI CHUA BAT SEK LANG” meaning “he married other colour people”. At that time, even people of different dialect group have somewhat different physical features…
Now, people do not say that anymore. Even our kids do not know the difference between Hokkien and Teochew. Even their physical features are very much the same. And now, people do not quarrel or fight along dialect group. Even our younger generation of different ethnic origins have more and more common physical features…
Only people like you and those with ulterior motive will continue to hang on to racial prejudice and stop the world from progressing…
129) True Patriot Down South on September 7th, 2009 6.46 pm
Yes, besides what had been cited, agreed with you that the economic factor of working parents has contributed to this problem.
Hollywood is a great trendsetter because of America’s liberal nature. Any other country would have been just as trendy if it has been just as liberal. That’s why
“that gives “western influence” all the credit when it comes to sexual promiscuity and depradation?”
Some observations.
Shamin’s (120) comment that ‘maintaining the racial balance by bringing in Chinese from other parts of the world and giving them citizenship is the government “dirty” population engineering program’ needs sober reflection.
The identity dynamics of local born Singaporeans get tilted and woefully affected by the excessive intake of Chinese from PRC, Taiwan and Hong Kong. But people, I suspect, would be much more comfortable, if the bulk of the additional population we need, are made up of Chinese from Malaysia and Indonesia because their ‘mind antenna’ is more tuned in to local channels. There are also inherent dangers in importing mainland Chinese en masse but this is an issue that needs to be discussed separately.
Ages back as a young boy I lived in Kampong Kapore area in a row of terrace city council houses where the front and back doors of the houses remained open most of the day (no thieves then!). We boys from there would play ‘catching’ chasing each other running through the back door and coming out from the front of one house and then to get in from the front and get out from the back of the next house. We just ran zigzag and it didn’t matter to us or to the families either, be they Chinese, Malay, Indian or Eurasian. We were one happy family.
Again each one of us would identify ourselves as a hero of yester years like, Tarzan, Flash Gordon, Captain Marvel and Superman and wrestle with each other to prove who the strongest hero is. We slugged it out bare-bodied smelling the sweat pouring out from the bodies and arm-pits of each other, often losing grips, until one of us surrenders. We were not conscious of our separateness or identity then because there was none as far as we were concerned. It was a plain joyous care-free world.
The Malays generally are a pious and cultured people – then and now. It is a sight to behold for me to see tiny-tots paying obeisance to elders by bowing and kissing their hands and get blessed in return. In the past they were more insular. But with education things have changed tremendous lot. 30-40 years back young Malays, even the well educated, spoke to each other only in Malay. But today it is hardly so. They speak in English. They are progressing well along with the other races.
As for me – whatever the history books may say- the original settlers of this island were the Malays and they deserve the special privileges enshrined in the Constitution.
Dearest ALFIAN, I may not totally agree with you,but i really respect your guts and honesty. Well, ahead of your journy is rough. Be strong and fearless. God bless you and your family.
Doesn’t anyone here realise that local chinese actually dislike the PRCs?
They don’t regard the PRCs as “our own people”,,,
Thanks for writing this piece, Alfian. Certainly got me thinking deeper about issues. I first read the other piece by Khartini, thought it was tad redundant.
Why do i get the feeling that “antz” is part of the PAP’s covert “anti internet insurgency” effort. posting irrelevent and illogical rebuttals with so much dogged persistence.
now u know wat pee65 writers are for larr. pap apologistss!!!
#139 I agree with you infiltratr. He comes across as a pap apologist.
I do wish he would polish up his English. There are a couple of subject-verb disagreement in his postings. Speak and write good English, please. After all, the government has been funding a couple of thousands of $$$ each year in its Speak Good English Campaign – which is all about speaking (and writing grammatical English).
Hello true Malaysian@76:
I apologise if I had overlooked your question.
Yes, firstly I am quite aware that the Malaysian constitutional definition of a ‘Malay’ contains a religious clause.
In Singapore, to my knowledge, there isn’t such a statist definition of what ‘Malay’ means. The terms ‘Malay-Muslim’ or ‘Malay/Muslim’ is the subject of various debates. It’s quite funny if you think about it–a battle between a hyphen and an oblique.
There are two groups who contest that term ‘Malay-Muslim’. Firstly, there are people who consider themselves Malay, but who do not think that race and religion should be conflated. They might be Muslims themselves, but they believe in religious freedom, and constantly hold up the line in the Quran that says ‘there is no compunction in religion.’
For your information, there is no apostasy law in Singapore. In addition, if a Muslim wishes to marry a non-Muslim, there is no compulsion on the non-Muslim partner to convert to Islam–they can register their marriage under civil law.
Up till I believe the 1970′s, there was a group of Orang Lauts who did not profess Islam and were more rooted to animist beliefs–the Orang Kallang and Orang Seletar (names of rivers here in Singapore). I think there is broad consensus that they *are* considered as ‘Malay’.
I don’t think I want to really expound on what is ‘Malay’-ness, but maybe it is useful to see that the word is actually quite loose and can mean different things in different contexts. Blumenbach and Raffles introduced the idea of a Malay ‘race’, somehow reinforced by the works of the naturalist Alfred Russel Wallace, who wrote the book, “The Malay Archipelago: The land of the orang-utan, and the bird of paradise” (!).
Then there is Malay as ‘ethnicity’, which pretty much covers the indigenous peoples of East Sumatra, the Malay peninsula, the coast of Borneo and the Riau archipelago. If I use the term as Wallace would have, the Balinese would be considered ‘Malay’, even if they are predominantly Hindus. If I use the term as a lot of Indonesians do, then the ‘Melayu’ people are mainly those from Riau, who speak what is considered the purest form of a language that later became the basis of Bahasa Indonesia. A Balinese Indonesian would definitely make this distinction from his or her Melayu Indonesian counterpart.
The second group who contest the term ‘Malay-Muslim’ are those who are Muslims, but do not consider themselves Malay. These include Arabs, Indians (and to a lesser extent those of ‘Indonesian’ origin). That said, there has been some degree of assimilation by these communities into the Malay community–some of this is due to bottom-up processes such as intermarriages, and some of this is due to top-down policies such as our bilingual education system.
Thus I can’t give you a very straight answer as to what I deem ‘Malay’ in the Singapore context. In Indonesia, the Riau people are a minority (maybe around 3% of this Javanese-majority country), and thus ‘Malay’ becomes a kind of ‘regional’ identity. In Singapore, on the other hand, ‘Malay’ is an ‘official’ race, and thus the other identities, like Indian-Muslim (which consists of both Malay-speaking Jawi Peranakans and Tamils), ‘Indonesian’ (I always put apostrophes here, because technically Indonesia is an entity that emerged only in 1945), Arabs, etc, become sort of sub-ethnic identities.
That said, a self-help group like MENDAKI in Singapore is probably more likely to offer a scholarship to a top Indian-Muslim student (who probably did Malay as his Mother Tongue in school), rather than an equally deserving Balinese-Hindu. But since the latter situation has yet to emerge in Singapore, this at best remains guesswork.
All right now to address some of your points…
“You see, Malay is probably the only ethnic in this civilization that identified itself with being a race that is a Muslim, speaks Malay and follows Malay tradition, with or without the definition in Malaysian Constitution.”
Not sure what you mean by this; if you mean that Malays are the only ethnic group which tends to conflate religion and identity, then I’d tend to disagree. There are various groups where religion is actually central to their ‘ethnic’ identity; these include Judaism, Irish Catholicism, Thai Theravada Buddhism, Japanese Shintoism, etc.
“It is this element of Islam-Malay that put the Malay race a close-knit race compared to ethnics like Chinese and Indian.”
I’m not sure I quite get you here…’close-knit’ can have different connotations. A positive one would mean that the Malays have strong and cohesive ties within their community. A negative one would mean they are therefore insular and detached from the other races. I’ll assume that you’re referring to the latter.
“I think it is this correlation of Malay-Muslim that bogged down the progress of the Malay race, politically as well as integration with other ethnics of the world both in Malaysia and Singapore.”
All right. I think you have this idea that being Muslim has made the Malays exercise greater boundary-maintenance, leading them to accentuate their differences with others, and hence leading exclusionary lives. I don’t believe this at all. Historically, Islamic states and empires have been known to be some of the most accommodating. The medieval state of Al-Andalus (Andalusia) was known for its tolerance of its Jewish and Christian members. There are many Thai Buddhist temples in the supposedly Islamic state of Kelantan, and one of its temples hosts one of the biggest Buddha statues in SE Asia. Of course the Talibans at Afghanistan destroyed the Buddha statues at Bamyan, but I think you need to distinguish between the kinds of Islam practised in SE Asia and that in other parts of the world.
“If we look back at the history of the Malay civilization before Islam were introduced into this region of Malay archipelago, many Malays were of Buddhist and Hindu faiths. That is why we see the existence of Baba-Nyonya or Peranakan culture in Malaysian and Singapore, where assimilation occurred naturally without the need of compulsory conversion into Islam as what we see in Malaysia.”
Actually Islam spread to the Malay Archipelago by around the end of the 14th century. The arrival of the Chinese, facilitated by the opening of free ports and the acceleration of trade, happened most significantly in the 15th and 16th centuries. Hence the Peranakan culture was formed when the region had already been Islamised.
“Sometime I wonder, would it be better if Islam was not brought into this region? Will Singapore still remain as part of Federation of Malaysia?”
Heh. This is an interesting question to explore. But let’s try other what if’s too. What if the Dutch and British had not colonised this part of the world? Would Singapore and Malaysia be part of Indonesia? What if the colonialists had not initiated policies that encouraged the immigration of Chinese and Indian labourers to the region? Would the ethnic balance in Singapore have been different, allowing it to be more easily absorbed into the Federation? What if Malaysia had a ruler like Thailand’s Pibun or Indonesia’s Suharto, who insisted that the Chinese assimilate and abandon their surnames, language and culture? So many if’s… : )
81)Alfian
ayhay,I just happen to glance through here..
You are telling antz that its nothing productive telling you to write for ST…
Then how come you are asking me to visit China for 1 week and write to ST ?
I saw somewhere you are asking commenters not to have personnel attack on Ms Kartini…but who started it?
Alfian,
I thank you for your response. My purpose is actually to understand how different Malay it is in Malaysia and Singapore contexts. Let leave out Indonesia and other places in our discussion.
As we are all aware, the Malay race is often being used by politicians in Malaysia. They often quote how Malays in Singapore fare as a reminder to the Malays in Malaysia, that if they (Malays Malaysia) lose political power, their faiths will be like that of Malays in Singapore. At my point of view, the Malaysian politicians should leave Malay Singaporean out, even if they want to continue playing race politics.
I am interested to know how you, as a Malay Singaporean look at this, as if you as a Malay in Singapore agree to what Malaysian politicians perceived, then, it will definitely affect the ties of Malaysia and Singapore. Singapore government may see this as Malay Singaporean still have their loyalty to Malaysia (like what Malaysian government looks at Chinese Malaysian being loyal to China during the initial years)
This ‘loyalty’ element, is essentially important for both countries, as it affect greatly in term of policies, specifically in the area of security, like the top military personnel in both countries, top government positions and so on. I personally think this issue need to be address so to build up ‘trust’ that is seriously lacking as what I mentioned in my comment No. 58.
I shall come back to you on other points. Thanks.
agongkia@146:
Sorry if I wasn’t clear. I wasn’t asking *you* specifically to write in–I said “Get someone who’s Chinese (are you? If you are then you can volunteer) to spend a week in China.” So don’t treat it as personal lah.
You see, I don’t think Khartini’s article was just ‘I am proud to be a Malay Singaporean’.
Once you read through it, you’ll realise it was saying, ‘I am proud to be a Malay Singaporean because we are better than Malay Malaysians.’
People like to say that Singapore’s one ideology is pragmatism.
But, if you examine all these discussions about ‘the Singapore system’, there are two words that crop up, both beginning with M: multiracialism, and meritocracy.
Khartini is saying that compared to Malaysia, Singapore has a better form of multiracialism (apparently due to the housing quota system) as well as a more equal system, known as meritocracy. And these are what makes her feel proud.
I just wanted to provide evidence that our two M’s aren’t as perfect or as inviolable as they are made out to be. Thus I highlighted how our multiracialism might be more concerned with form than content. And that meritocracy is never a perfect system and might sometimes need to be supplemented by other systems.
Note, for example, that an uncritical glorification of ‘meritocracy’ often leads us to think that poor people deserve it because they are just not working hard enough (either when they were in school, or later when they are holding jobs). The Singapore government has often used the rhetoric of ‘meritocracy’ to escape from discussions on social welfare.
A second point I want to make is that I doubt the Straits Times would run a piece comparing Singapore and China, with China cast in an unfavorable light.
For example, someone might have observed, however isolated, an instance of a Chinese local official accepting bribes. That someone would probably go on to praise Singapore’s ‘incorruptible’ governance. Or, someone might notice some Chinese townsfolk spitting on the streets, and conclude that Singapore’s Courtesy Campaigns have eradicated such anti-social behaviour.
There would be too much at stake in “angering” China through these unnecessary comparisons. Strangely, Malaysia seems to be a convenient whipping boy.
Maybe Khartini was retaliating to Zainuddin’s remark that Malaysia had a more ‘developed democracy’. But she should know that many Malaysians don’t take his remarks seriously anymore. It was an attention-seeking gesture on his part–if Malaysians bochap him, then maybe a Singaporean might rise to the bait. And that was exactly what Khartini had done. She has given his remarks the publicity it never deserved in the first place.
I might be an ignorant 17-year-old, but I don’t think I’ll be proud ever, after hearing horror stories of discrimination against malays in the workplace.
Thank you for your lengthy explanation #148. I almost missed the <i<political aspect. You do put a lot of Singaporeans to shame. We re sucha naive and gullible bunch!!