Stating the obvious

I am Chinese. You may be Malay. Or you may be Indian, Dayak, Eurasian. So what, you say. Exactly, so what.

I find myself closer in spirit, thought and values with a number of Malay friends than I ever could any profiteering, conniving Chinese. And this includes family. Put me in a room with these ringgit-smacking beasts and I’ll cringe in pain, I’ll yawn or I’ll deliberately start a broiling debate on the table just to charge the mood a little. Ditto with my Indian buddies – I’ll go through seven tolls to help them out, Samy notwithstanding.

That’s stating the obvious, you say. Of course just about everybody has friends from different races whom they click just nicely. People form groups comprising individuals of similar ideas, goals, causes and wavelengths. That’s just natural.

I am definitely stating the obvious.

Now if that’s so obvious… why then is our political system today grooved along racial lines?

It’s plain clumsy. It's low IQ, low EQ. It’s perpetually divisive. How can this country ever talk about satu Bangsa, satu Negara when the leaders in government represent their respective races rather than core values?

Shouldn’t political parties and consequently government be founded more along value-based ideologies?

Why should I join the MCA to guard Chinese Malaysian rights when I am more interested in other aspects of equality and progress in society? Why should there be an UMNO when the Malay padi farmer in Kedah has more in common with a Chinese vegetable farmer in Cameron Highlands than with his fellow KL Malay sitting lumpy with a clutchful of APs speaking in some bahasa Barat? And you can try convincing me MIC can successfully promote the interests of the Indian Malaysian estate worker who earns RM200 a month as fairly as the hotshot Indian Malaysian lawyer.

I can see the logic for race-based parties 50 years ago. The country’s terrain was different then.

It seems to me Malaya as an entity was born divided. It was a land of spice, rubber and tin, and the British lords happily welcomed whoever was willing to come here to work. It was not about home, it was a field of labour. It was about migrants who came to make money with perhaps the intention of going back to their homeland.

The divide-and-rule strategy was a legacy of the colonial British in managing the different ethnic groups. Fair enough. They ruled us then. And the influx of Chinese, Indians and Indonesians fresh off the boat was so rapid and immense, divide-and-rule could be justified as a plausible, even humane, policy. Literacy was low, language proved a barrier, and these people were complete strangers to each other. It was all about economics and pragmatism for both the colonial masters and our immigrant forefathers (again this includes Indonesians).

Argue how you want, the British may have exploited us – which colonialist doesn’t? – but they had heart and goodwill. And among the many infrastructure, when it came time to leave, they left behind the Reid Commission as a roadmap to how an independent Malaysia would mature.

A key point in the report stressed on continuity of special privileges for the Malays with the recommendation that “in due course the present preferences should be reduced and should ultimately cease”. From the tone of the document, I sense the drafters of the Commission genuinely believed that the infant Malaysia had what it takes to grow up a rational, fair, and harmonious nation. I sense they believed Malaysia could be critical enough to grow out of its former colonial master’s methods like divide-and-rule and the ISA when its usefuleness have been outlived.

Forty-eight years onwards we haven’t fared too well as far as politics and government go. Rather than a wonderful tapestry, the nation is slashed along racial lines thanks to continued but modified divide-and-rule policies by a government made up of race-based parties. And we’re still threatened with the ISA long after the communist insurgency is over. You can dangle all kinds of national symbols and icons, change the names of towns and streets, change the history books, but the truth is we’re still practising the colonial British methods of government. If the agenda back then was about economics and pragmatism, today it’s about paranoia, fear and greed.

Closed doors, closed books, closed records, closed accounts instead of transparency to foster dialogue and debate. Case closed.

My goodness, here we are, 21st century Malaysians who desire kinship more through commonness rather than race, being forced to remember we are brown, yellow and black because of policies made by dimwitted bigots. Here we are with an ever-expanding middleclass, with an increasingly diverse and capable society, being told: “This has been passed by the cabinet, nothing to talk.” Like we are still illiterate. Here we are still yelling medieval slogans like: “Kalau tak suka, keluar.”

Honey, four generations of Indians, Chinese and Eurasians born on this soil is enough proof that we are Malaysians, no more immigrants. Four generations of looking up to the flag and Negaraku is enough proof that here indeed is where Tanah tumpahnya Darahku. Let’s not get into trivialities of qualifying loyalty.

It’s clear to me the country can no longer be governed along racial lines. It has grown beyond that stage. It’s clear to me that I will never support a political party where race forms its organizing spine. It doesn’t make any sense today. At best it can only offer wayang after wayang. Neither will I ever support a political party where religion forms its organizing spine. Definitely not in multi-cultural Malaysia.

Without trying too hard, I can foresee an able government sincerely wanting to integrate the people via sound policies and inclusiveness yet faithfully respecting Article 153 of the Constitution. The government today is not it.