Infernal Ramblings
A Malaysian Perspective on Politics, Society and Economics

Malaysia and South Africa, In Denial?

Written by johnleemk on 4:20:01 am Oct 21, 2007.
Categories: ,

Earlier today, the South African team won the Rugby World Cup for the second time. It was a poignant moment for them, considering the divisive nature of sport during the era of Apartheid.

Before the granting of full rights to black South Africans in the early 1990s, football was a sport for blacks, and rugby a sport for whites. The divisions persist to the present day; the South African rugby team has only three blacks on it.

However, the last time South Africa won the World Cup, it was hailed as an immense triumph not for white South Africans or black South Africans, but for all citizens.

South Africa is a favourite point of comparison for critiques of Malaysian ethnic policies; Malaysia's division of its people into de facto first and second class citizens is often compared to apartheid. I think that's a reasonable comparison to make.

Of course, there are a lot of people who would beg to differ. Most Malaysians accept that different races are just different; to them, as long as everyone minds their own business, it doesn't matter that we aren't united. What really makes Malaysia unique as a nation is how its different people are united solely by their belief that they should be divided.

Every race demands the right to be special; every race wants special treatment. Everyone wants to be Malay, Chinese and Indian; they are interested in being Malaysian only insofar that it assists them in constructing their own separate identities.

If we truly are not like apartheid South Africa, I wonder, why is it that we are so much worse than post-apartheid South Africa? Although like any heterogenous country, they have their ethnic tensions and ethnic problems, South Africa's government and their people largely recognise that they are not primarily black or white; they are South African.

In Malaysia's case, we seem only interested in perpetuating our ethnic differences. They say that the first step to recovery is admitting that you have a problem. South Africa admitted it had a problem 13 years ago. Malaysia continues to deny that there is any problem at all with treating its people differently.

Why am I intrinsically less Malaysian than someone else? Why is this not my country as well? Too many Malays say I don't appreciate what they give me; too many Chinese and Indians share this opinion. But what we fail to grasp is that what we have is not the Malays' to give.

Of course, you can make the case that 50 years ago, the Malays consciously granted a substantial number of non-Malays citizenship. Maybe you can hold that against those non-Malays, such as my grandparents.

But why hold any of this against me? Why am I not entitled to the same rights as a citizen, the same recognition and acknowledgement of my worth as a Malay Malaysian? Because I happened to be born into the wrong family?

We often wonder why Malaysians migrate; we often wonder why we lack patriotic sentiment. Not too long ago, it was announced that 70% of those who renounced their citizenship in the past decade were Malay.

OF course, the primary reason is economic; nobody cares if they don't have legal rights if they're rolling in money. A million dollars can buy you any of the rights you want. But at the same time, these Malaysians who leave, these Malaysians who don't have any significant passion for their country (and this includes the Malays) have recognised that our country has a problem. There is something innately wrong with declaring your citizens to be of different standing based on an accident of birth.

South Africa has recognised her problem; Malaysia continues to deny it, as epitomised by our Foreign Minister's recent scandalous remarks. Until we admit that we have a problem, we really are little better than apartheid-era South Africa.


If you'd like to keep informed about updates to the site, consider subscribing to our web feed:

Infernal Ramblings is a Malaysian website focusing on current events and sociopolitical issues. Its articles run the gamut from economics to society to education.

Infernal Ramblings is run by John Lee. For more, see the About section. If you have any questions or comments, do drop him a line.


Comments

Thoughts? Comments? Discuss this and other ramblings at the forums.
(Alternatively, contact the author privately.)

Related comments from forum thread "Comparing South Africa and Malaysia":
johnleemk
Infernally Rambling Thoughtless Mind
Head Administrator
Posts: 949
IP Logged

Posted at 10:10:44 am Nov 8, 2005
In many ways, South Africa and Malaysia are different. South Africa has only two major races; Malaysia has three. South Africa is in, well, Africa, and Malaysia is, well, truly Asia. South Africa has a violent history of bloodshed. Malaysia, aside from a few crazy communists and some hotheaded Malays, has had a relatively peaceful past.

And if we look closer, there are even more subtle differences and yet similarities. For instance, both countries have implemented forms of apartheid; South Africa's was targeted at the Black majority, and imposed by an oligarchy of the minority, while Malaysia's was targeted at the non-Bumiputra (including non-Malay aboriginal groups) minority, and imposed by a tyranny of the majority. South Africa's apartheid is in its past; Malaysia's apartheid looks to be just beginning and growing.

South Africa faced international pressure to tear down its apartheid; Malaysia has seen its apartheid largely overlooked. While South Africa isolated Blacks and overtly treated them as dirt, Malaysia just told the non-Bumiputras one thing and did another - with the government begging foreign graduates to "come home" and yet appointing politicians who yell "you tak suka, you keluar dari Malaysia".

Of course, there are some similarities. South Africa and Malaysia have both implemented policies designed to segregate their people; while in South Africa it was confining Blacks to particular areas, in Malaysia, the education system ensured a whole generation would grow up making friends from only one culture and race. And for the big whopper...

South Africa has now implemented policies designed to aid the majority Blacks, largely by encouraging the development of Black millionaires. Incidentally, so has Malaysia - 35 years ago. South Africa's policy is called BEE - Black Economic Empowerment. Malaysia's is called, variously, the New Economic Policy, National Development Policy or, the brand new name - New National (my ass) Agenda. South Africa's policy has been criticised as only benefiting the rich Blacks, who just happen to be close to the ruling party. So has Malaysia's. (As Lee Kuan Yew poignantly said, "Of course there are Chinese millionaires in big cars and big houses. Is it the answer to make a few Malay millionaires with big cars and big houses?"

However, there the similarities end. While Malaysia has ignored such cries to create a more egalitarian society, South Africa has recently embarked on brokering deals that benefit more Blacks - the largest change ever in the ownership of the famous DeBeers diamond company involved handing over 13% of the shares to, among others, the disabled, disadvantaged women, De Beers employees and pensioners and communities living around the DeBeers mines.

South Africa's apartheid eventually broke down due to the lifelong efforts of one outstanding man, Nelson Mandela. Will Malaysia's apartheid collapse? That is a pointless question. All political and economic systems throughout history based on dividing the people of a nation and oppressing them have fallen. The only question is when and how the system will collapse. Is it 50 years down the road? A hundred? Will it fall violently or peacefully? What will replace it? That is an open-ended question, and as Malaysians and citizens of the world, it is our task to ensure that the answer to when is soon, the answer to how is through peaceful means, and the answer to what will be its replacement is an egalitarian system providing equal rights for all.
Last five replies (5 comments not shown):
johnleemk
Infernally Rambling Thoughtless Mind
Head Administrator
Posts: 949
IP Logged
Posted at 11:47:47 am Nov 19, 2005
There is only two ways as I see it. Many Chinese will not accept being forced to learn Malay when they know Malays are not the only Bumiputra and Dayak, Portugese and Kadazandusun are also Bumiputras.
Exactly. Coercion is not the key. Arbitrarily assigning Chinese to Penang is coercively forcing them to identify themselves with Penang, regardless of their true feelings.

OTOH, English is a universal languages acceptable to all races, Dayaks, Kadazandusun, Chinese, Tamils, Malays, and Punjabis and the Chinese can accept it. This is because English is a creol and even Singapore and India make English the official lingua franca.
Which is why I personally advocate making English our second official language or at least, you know, actually forcing our secondary school graduates to pass the SPM English paper (not that our exams actually test anything effectively).

I don't really see what is wrong with communalism. Division creates diversity that is what the founders of America have said. I prefer a heterogeneous nation over a homogeneous one.
Ah, there is your failure. You view culture as a zero-sum thing, but it is most certainly not. Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn (born in Brazil, studied in France, worked in America, now leads a traditionally insulative Japanese company) has a motto: Culture is additive, not negative. When two or more cultures come together, what naturally ensues is not a clash to see which will subsume the other or the erecting of a wall to avoid any of them subsuming the other(s), but a mixing until the resulting culture is a culture (not cultures) but nevertheless, not exactly any of the cultures that produced it. It is an amalgam that is far more valuable than the sum of its constituents.

Communalism is predicated on the concept that culture is zero-sum. So is the belief of the British National Party that Britain belongs to the Whites, and that White culture should assume the place of honour in Britain. Communalism divides people into arbitrary groups decided by the basis of birth. It may preserve each individual culture, but in the long run, it holds back the development of a unifying culture worth more than the sum of the cultures that made it.

Furthermore, communalism generates friction between the groups it arbitrarily creates, making it an untenable philosophy. Communalism operates on the presumption that each culture has very different interests, hence the creation of different racial-based parties such as UMNO, MCA and MIC. This is patently false. All people innately share similar needs and wants - we will all perish if we do not eat. As a result, there is room for people of different cultures to work together.

Communalism prevents the development of a spectrum of wide beliefs - I can agree with some Malays that vernacular schools harm the country, but I can never join UMNO, where I have a better chance of expressing my views (in this instance) and having them put into action. This can often lead to clearly inappropriate results. For instance, let's say 49% of all Chinese, Malays and Indians agree with A and 51% don't. The three elected leaders of MCA, UMNO and MIC will therefore disagree with A. Therefore, the opinions of 49% of the population go unheard. It is presumed race and political ideology correspond exactly in a 1-to-1 manner. However, they clearly don't, as anyone with an ounce of common sense can tell you.

Iraq is split into a Kurdish north and an Arab south. Yes, it is a divided nation but does that matter?
Iraq itself is an artifical construction, arbitrarily drawn up by Britain. It should never have been created.

No one American can agree on a racial or a religious issue yet they have managed to build a great nation.
But note the lack of publicly-funded communal vernacular schools. Note the irrelevance (and in some territories, illegality) of race-based parties. Note that the people of America call themselves Americans first, not Whites or Blacks or Californians or New Yorkers or Christians or Atheists. You ask any American his ultimate defining characteristic, and the huge odds are is that it will be his American-ness. We Malaysians, because of communalism, have no such pride in calling ourselves Malaysian. We call ourselves Malay, Chinese and Indian. (Or, as in the case of some, Muslim, Christian, Buddhist or Hindu.) We are not united as a nation. That is what communalism does to a country.

It's a blatant misrepresentation to cite America as an example of communalism. Either you and I have different definitions of the word, or you have misunderstood what the United States is founded on. It is built on power to the individual and his community, not the individual and his race. You are welcome anywhere in the United States - not just in certain designated "Asian quarters" - whatever your race is. And that is why America has become a superpower - its acceptance (not mere tolerance) of people, and its assimilation of them into its culture. These assimilated people don't lose their culture - instead, they contribute it to American culture. Assimilation does not alter your culture - it alters the culture you are assimilated into.

User61:
Your views sound oddly similar to one "budakcina" from Malaysia Today. I hope you aren't the same person.

I think vernacular schools are detrimental to our country because they encourage insulation and communalism, not because of the language or whatever. The problem is that our national schools are essentially Malay vernacular schools, not national schools.
User61
Member
Posts: 17
IP Logged
Posted at 4:07:47 am Nov 20, 2005
I've never went to the Malaysia-Today site until a few minutes ago.
tanstaafl
Member
Posts: 9
IP Logged
Posted at 2:16:50 pm Mar 16, 2007
In your comparison of developing countries, I note that you mentioned "history" as a possible big contributor to the current state of a country.

I believe its equally important to consider the extent to which the former colonialist or superpowers or both continued to influence the politics and leadership of those countries.

Whilst evidence is spotty, it would seem clear that outside intervention in South American and African countries since their independence has had huge detrimental effects on countries there. Asia has perhaps been more fortunate due to its distance and the significant cultural dissimilarity with the former colonialists powers.
johnleemk
Infernally Rambling Thoughtless Mind
Head Administrator
Posts: 949
IP Logged
Posted at 11:48:32 pm Mar 16, 2007
It's true outside intervention probably plays a role, but if you want to go by a foreign presence post-independence, it wasn't so long ago that the Brits and Aussies had troops stationed in Malaysia and Singapore. ;) I think the strongest factor is history - those colonised by benevolent people interested in maintaining a civil society (e.g. the British) have almost invariably been better off than those colonised by people only interested in exploiting the country's resources.
whodhellknew
Member
Posts: 17
IP Logged
Posted at 11:22:07 pm Apr 14, 2007
With relation to language, why not go with the American Way - no official language, but a language of government.

In any case there are similarities between Malaysia and SA, but if you look close enough, you'll always find similarties between any two countries in the world. Magazine columnists would have much less to write about otherwise.

The proportions based on ethnicity in SA is much more skewed than Malaysia: over 80% are blacks. Of course we could go on deeper and dissect the black population into separate groups as well. Due to history, not many blacks are fond of the Zulus, so there would be friction there. But years of collective oppression has agglutinated the community into one nearly coherent group.

The biggest difference between our two countries are however, our general commercial culture. SA had a Western influenced capitalist culture that has helped it raise high tech industries and rather highly competitive ones such as the arms industry. Malaysia has no such thing.

But there is one striking similarity, between the two: the resilience of rural culture and life, ranging from the continued prevalence of shamanic beliefs (paralleled here by bomohs) and the general wealth gap between the two worlds.

cheers


Latest:
Personality Cults Come With the Territory
Popular:
Personality Cults Come With the Territory

Most Recently Read

  1. Malaysia, A Constitutional Monarchy
  2. Absolute vs Comparative Advantage
  3. Racial Stereotyping As Seen in Crash
  4. The Injustice of a Minimum Wage
  5. Analysing the Beatles' Success
  6. What is Secular, What is Islamic?
  7. The Flawed Argument Against Welfare
  8. Don't Fear, There's Freedom of Speech
  9. In Defence of the Sin Tax
  10. The Problems of France
Latest active forum topics
Quoth the webserver...
A teacher who can arouse a feeling for one single good action, for one single good poem, accomplishes more than he who fills our memory with rows on rows of natural objects, classified with name and form.
— Goethe
Poll
Sorry, only registered users may vote. Please register or login.

There are currently no polls running.