Everyone in M’sia is racist except certain people

Sat, 04 Sep 2010 06:10

By Suresh Kashuerin

COMMENT It’s incredible that one line in Malay in the Namewee video – You tak baca? Siapa buat Malaysia kaya? – (You didn’t read? Who made Malaysia rich?) could cause such uproar among the guardians of Malay pride. Is it a case of “siapa makan cili rasa pedasnya (if the cap fits, wear it). Where were these same guardians of Malay pride when school principal Siti Inshah Mansor abused her Indian and Chinese pupils in outrageous language? There wasn’t even a peep out of them. She wasn’t accused of racism. In fact, she’s even being treated by the Education Ministry with kid gloves despite non-Malay uproar. It wouldn’t be surprising if she’s kicked upstairs soon as one of those modern-day heroines in Malay celluloid.

Then, there was the later case of a principal up north who advised the Chinese pupils of the school to go back to China since AirAsia flights were now every cheap. This was after they were caught eating at the school canteen by the principal during the fasting hours. They were accused, in some kind of warped logic, of not respecting the holy Muslim fasting month of Ramadan.

What their own gnawing hunger has got to do with Ramadan and respect was not explained to the errant students.

Now, there’s a real possibility that this Namewee character will be charged soon with sedition. This emerged after police, who don’t seem to have better things to do with their time, grilled him for three hours. Sedition, put simply, is the act of stirring up rebellion against the state.

Within any context, a racist can be defined as one who denies others their place in the sun. Déjà vu? If one stands up for his or her place in the sun, without denying others their rights, the question of being racist does not arise.

In Malaysia, the definition of racism is the reverse.

Ibrahim Ali and Mahathir Mohamad of Perkasa routinely twist and turn every issue into a racial issue in order to play to the gallery and force the Malays to circle their wagons under one platform, that is, Umno. They are hailed as great heroes standing up for Malay rights.

Their hidden agenda is to mask the “thievery” that goes on under the guise of development. Government procurements and contracts cost twice, thrice and even up to 10 times what it should cost the taxpayer. So, behind the rhetoric and polemics generated by Ibrahim and Mahathir to pull the wool over the people’s eyes, they are in cahoots with their “comrades in crime” who steal the people’s sweat from the public treasury.

When Hindraf Makkal Sakthi kicked up a fuss over the continuing marginalisation of the Indian underclass in the country, they were accused of being racists. The New Economic Policy (1970-1990) pledged, among others, that poverty would be eradicated irrespective of race, religion, class and caste.

Elsewhere, when Hindraf pointed out that Article 153 of the Federal Constitution provides for the legitimate aspirations of the non-Malays and non-Natives, they were accused of questioning Malay special privileges. In fact, Article 153 doesn’t mention special privileges at all.

Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim himself, ironically fighting on a platform of change and reform, accused Hindraf of being racists and questioning Malay rights and privileges. He was playing to the gallery, like Umno, to project himself as the great protector of the Malays but at other people’s expense.

Hindraf was further accused of stoking racism when it stressed that Article 153 only mentions a reasonable proportion for the Malays and Natives in four specific areas, namely intake into the civil service; intake into government-owned institutions of higher learning and training privileges; government scholarships; and opportunities created by the government to do business.

The implication is that Article 153 is a “sapu bersih” (clean sweep) policy which gives a licence to commit the worst transgressions in the name of race.

Ninety per cent of the staffing strength in the civil service today is Malay, a number which is way above the 60% they represent in the population. When this was pointed out, the Chief Secretary to the federal government explained with a straight face that intake was based purely on merit and that there was no quota system. In short, the Malays and Natives don’t need the protection of Article 153 to secure jobs in the civil service.

Again, the NEP pledged that there would be no identification of race with economic function and place of residence.

It’s like a “heads I win, tails you lose” kind of policy in government. This means certain people are always on the winning side while others are forced to be born losers all the time through no fault of their own. This is not racism, according to the perpetrators.

On the other side of the South China Sea, there has been no Borneonisation of the federal civil service as pledged by the Malaysia Agreement. Almost all the top jobs are held by Malay civil servants from Peninsular Malaysia in the fashion of the British colonialists.

The federal government is also not being shared equally by Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak.

In politics, the local proxies of the ruling elite in Putrajaya are used to prevent the majority community – Dayak in Sarawak and the KadazanDusunMurut in Sabah – from heading the state administrations or being appointed as governors or ambassadors.

At the board level in Petronas, and its numerous subsidiaries, there’s not even one person from Sabah or Sarawak. When queried recently in Parliament, the reply from the federal government is that race is not used by Petronas as a criterion in appointments to the board. If that’s the case, why is that all Petronas board members, and subsidiaries, are from the same community? Not racism!

Everyone in M’sia is racist except certain people