LETTER | Malay elites and Malay politics
I Lourdesamy
Published: Feb 14, 2025 9:03 AM
Updated: 12:19 PM
LETTER | Recently, the proposal by the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Religious Affairs) Na’im Mokhtar, to introduce a new set of guidelines for Muslims participating in non-Islamic events was rejected by the cabinet as “unnecessary”.
Of course, everyone knows it was because of a backlash from both non-Malays and Malays.
While this is welcome, it is important to understand why this proposal was made in the first place. The proposal is worrying because it reflects a certain determination to control the minds, actions, and behaviours of Malays in their daily interactions with non-Malays in the country.
In one sense, the proposal is surprising because it came from the Madani government which is supposed to be a “unity government”. The proposal would not have contributed to national unity.
On the contrary, it would have restricted interactions between Malays and others in the country, which could be detrimental to national unity and national development. In fact, it would be a betrayal of the very foundations of the Madani government.
Then, what is the rationale behind the proposal? It is not rocket science to see that it is a continuation of the old politics to cement the hegemony of Malay-Muslim political control over the country. This objective has characterised Malaysian politics since 1969.
Two undercurrents have provided the motivational force for this direction in Malay politics and political culture. One was the feeling of relative deprivation by Malays that their country had been taken over by others, especially the Chinese.
Chinese dominance in urban areas and business was visible. It reinforced Malay discontent and fear of “losing” their country to immigrants.
Opportunity for self-enrichment
The New Economic Policy (NEP) of 1971 was primarily aimed by the Malay-dominated BN government to take back the country for Malays, although it was couched in the language of economic and social restructuring.
This mindset has remained strong in Malay politics and has dictated all government policies and programmes since 1969. There was some accommodation for non-Malays but the goal was clear - Malay dominance in politics, economics, commerce, and government administration.
It was Malay nationalism, a reaction to what was perceived as non-Malay dominance in the country. The social contract theory was used to justify affirmative action in favour of Malays.
This Malay-hegemony politics could have worked if there had been more restraint on its outreach and more accommodation to the non-Malays. The NEP was hijacked by Malay elites who saw in it an opportunity for personal gain and self-enrichment.
Malays in positions of power in politics, government, business, NGOs, and even religious organisations saw the opportunity to make money in the name of “Malay-Muslim rights”. It was no longer Malay nationalism, but simple opportunism.
This led to increased corruption, nepotism, and exploitation of national wealth for personal gains.
Keeping Malay identity intact
This abuse of power in the name of Malay rights by Malay elites could only work as long as two conditions prevailed. One, the Malays had to continue to believe in the need for affirmative action for them and that the non-Malays were the cause for their economic and social backwardness Second, the Malay identity in terms of race and religion remained intact.
Any dilution in the identity would undermine affirmative action and hence the power of the Malay elites. It was important and necessary that the Malays remained as Malays.
Hence the continuing reinforcement of the concepts of the Malay race, Islam, Malay culture, and Malay language.
Any signs of cracks in the Malay identity, such as greater interactions with non-Malays, greater personal freedoms, more open minds, and more open debate on religion and race were considered trigger points that could undermine the prevailing Malay politics dominated by Malay elites.
Hence, all such breaks in the Malay identity had to be prevented. This has been the prevailing Malay political strategy and culture since 1969.
It was not nationalism or patriotism. It might have begun as Malay nationalism but quickly degenerated into opportunism. The proposal made by the minister is a manifestation of this need to retain the Malay identity.
Opening Malay minds
However, the reaction to the proposal from the Malays shows clear cracks in the Malay identity as one monolithic group. This development is inevitable.
The Malay ruling elites can’t use race and religion to keep the Malays locked mentally and emotionally forever. There are forces at work that are opening the Malay minds.
The NEP provided access to education and social mobility to many Malays which gave them a certain level of security and confidence to question Malay politics.
Urbanisation brought Malays to cities and towns where they interacted more with non-Malays and often worked side-by-side in organisations.
The Internet and social media exposed the Malays to information that challenged the controlled narratives of governments and government agencies like the Islamic Development Department (Jakim).
Intellectual discourses by prominent Malay leaders like Mohammad Tajuddin, Siti Kasim, Mariam Mokhtar, Bakri Musa, and others helped to check the skewed narratives of Malay politics offered by governments and the Malay elites, especially the narratives coming from PAS, Bersatu, and certain elements in Umno.
Organisations like G25 and Sisters in Islam have offered more inclusive interpretations of Islam in a plural society.
The numerous court cases involving Malay leaders in corruption and other crimes have contributed to undermining the credibility of Malay leaders as champions of Malay rights and Islam.
The royalty is also playing a critical role in defining a broader perspective of Islam and Malay hegemony.
All these factors will inevitably make it more difficult for governments and agencies like Jakim to operate as in the past.
Change may be slow, but it is inevitable. Therein lies the hope for Malaysia.
Published: Feb 14, 2025 9:03 AM
Updated: 12:19 PM
LETTER | Recently, the proposal by the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Religious Affairs) Na’im Mokhtar, to introduce a new set of guidelines for Muslims participating in non-Islamic events was rejected by the cabinet as “unnecessary”.
Of course, everyone knows it was because of a backlash from both non-Malays and Malays.
While this is welcome, it is important to understand why this proposal was made in the first place. The proposal is worrying because it reflects a certain determination to control the minds, actions, and behaviours of Malays in their daily interactions with non-Malays in the country.
In one sense, the proposal is surprising because it came from the Madani government which is supposed to be a “unity government”. The proposal would not have contributed to national unity.
On the contrary, it would have restricted interactions between Malays and others in the country, which could be detrimental to national unity and national development. In fact, it would be a betrayal of the very foundations of the Madani government.
Then, what is the rationale behind the proposal? It is not rocket science to see that it is a continuation of the old politics to cement the hegemony of Malay-Muslim political control over the country. This objective has characterised Malaysian politics since 1969.
Two undercurrents have provided the motivational force for this direction in Malay politics and political culture. One was the feeling of relative deprivation by Malays that their country had been taken over by others, especially the Chinese.
Chinese dominance in urban areas and business was visible. It reinforced Malay discontent and fear of “losing” their country to immigrants.
Opportunity for self-enrichment
The New Economic Policy (NEP) of 1971 was primarily aimed by the Malay-dominated BN government to take back the country for Malays, although it was couched in the language of economic and social restructuring.
This mindset has remained strong in Malay politics and has dictated all government policies and programmes since 1969. There was some accommodation for non-Malays but the goal was clear - Malay dominance in politics, economics, commerce, and government administration.
It was Malay nationalism, a reaction to what was perceived as non-Malay dominance in the country. The social contract theory was used to justify affirmative action in favour of Malays.
This Malay-hegemony politics could have worked if there had been more restraint on its outreach and more accommodation to the non-Malays. The NEP was hijacked by Malay elites who saw in it an opportunity for personal gain and self-enrichment.
Malays in positions of power in politics, government, business, NGOs, and even religious organisations saw the opportunity to make money in the name of “Malay-Muslim rights”. It was no longer Malay nationalism, but simple opportunism.
This led to increased corruption, nepotism, and exploitation of national wealth for personal gains.
Keeping Malay identity intact
This abuse of power in the name of Malay rights by Malay elites could only work as long as two conditions prevailed. One, the Malays had to continue to believe in the need for affirmative action for them and that the non-Malays were the cause for their economic and social backwardness Second, the Malay identity in terms of race and religion remained intact.
Any dilution in the identity would undermine affirmative action and hence the power of the Malay elites. It was important and necessary that the Malays remained as Malays.
Hence the continuing reinforcement of the concepts of the Malay race, Islam, Malay culture, and Malay language.
Any signs of cracks in the Malay identity, such as greater interactions with non-Malays, greater personal freedoms, more open minds, and more open debate on religion and race were considered trigger points that could undermine the prevailing Malay politics dominated by Malay elites.
Hence, all such breaks in the Malay identity had to be prevented. This has been the prevailing Malay political strategy and culture since 1969.
It was not nationalism or patriotism. It might have begun as Malay nationalism but quickly degenerated into opportunism. The proposal made by the minister is a manifestation of this need to retain the Malay identity.
Opening Malay minds
However, the reaction to the proposal from the Malays shows clear cracks in the Malay identity as one monolithic group. This development is inevitable.
The Malay ruling elites can’t use race and religion to keep the Malays locked mentally and emotionally forever. There are forces at work that are opening the Malay minds.
The NEP provided access to education and social mobility to many Malays which gave them a certain level of security and confidence to question Malay politics.
Urbanisation brought Malays to cities and towns where they interacted more with non-Malays and often worked side-by-side in organisations.
The Internet and social media exposed the Malays to information that challenged the controlled narratives of governments and government agencies like the Islamic Development Department (Jakim).
Intellectual discourses by prominent Malay leaders like Mohammad Tajuddin, Siti Kasim, Mariam Mokhtar, Bakri Musa, and others helped to check the skewed narratives of Malay politics offered by governments and the Malay elites, especially the narratives coming from PAS, Bersatu, and certain elements in Umno.
Organisations like G25 and Sisters in Islam have offered more inclusive interpretations of Islam in a plural society.
The numerous court cases involving Malay leaders in corruption and other crimes have contributed to undermining the credibility of Malay leaders as champions of Malay rights and Islam.
The royalty is also playing a critical role in defining a broader perspective of Islam and Malay hegemony.
All these factors will inevitably make it more difficult for governments and agencies like Jakim to operate as in the past.
Change may be slow, but it is inevitable. Therein lies the hope for Malaysia.
No comments:
Post a Comment