S Thayaparan
Published: Mar 31, 2025 7:03 AM
Updated: 6:23 PM
“A [national] flag has no real significance for peaceful uses.”
COMMENT | Do you know when governments are wary of the people they govern? When they march on the streets for whatever reason. When people of their own volition raise the national flag.
A national flag is an object, a thing, which people imbue with certain ideas. The ideas are the dangerous part, which is why depending on who is raising the flag, those ideas either ensure the social cohesion of a populace or destabilise it.
So, you see, it is not the object but rather the ideas imbued in the object or contained within it. Take the banning of books, for instance. The government banned books because of the ideas contained within them.
This is why, faced with a possible ban by Madani for two of their books, Islamic Renaissance Front (IRF) founder Ahmad Farouk Musa said, “It seems to us that this issue of creed - asha’irah and maturidiyah - has been weaponised by the religious authorities in this country to suppress any ideas that were deemed to be critical of the issues faced by Muslims concerning the revision of history associated with the Muslim scholars of the previous generations and any issues related to critical thinking.”
Published: Mar 31, 2025 7:03 AM
Updated: 6:23 PM
“A [national] flag has no real significance for peaceful uses.”
- English writer HG Wells
COMMENT | Do you know when governments are wary of the people they govern? When they march on the streets for whatever reason. When people of their own volition raise the national flag.
A national flag is an object, a thing, which people imbue with certain ideas. The ideas are the dangerous part, which is why depending on who is raising the flag, those ideas either ensure the social cohesion of a populace or destabilise it.
So, you see, it is not the object but rather the ideas imbued in the object or contained within it. Take the banning of books, for instance. The government banned books because of the ideas contained within them.
This is why, faced with a possible ban by Madani for two of their books, Islamic Renaissance Front (IRF) founder Ahmad Farouk Musa said, “It seems to us that this issue of creed - asha’irah and maturidiyah - has been weaponised by the religious authorities in this country to suppress any ideas that were deemed to be critical of the issues faced by Muslims concerning the revision of history associated with the Muslim scholars of the previous generations and any issues related to critical thinking.”
It is the same with religious totems. The items themselves are not important, but rather the ideas they inspire for those who hold them in reverence. It gets to the point when it is Pavlovian in nature.
See the object, and certain emotions are stirred. Fortunately for us, the Jalur Gemilang does not have such powers. If it did, there would not be this need to constantly make people aware of its existence.
How do you teach kids?
The Education Ministry is now making it mandatory for school kids to wear the Jalur Gemilang badge. The thinking behind this diktat is - “The Education Ministry plays a key role in inculcating patriotism and love toward the country among students and educators.”
My question is this, what are the ideas behind the badge that the Education Ministry wants to inculcate? Everyone is supposed to be equal before the national flag, right? But does reality reflect that?
Deputy Education Minister Wong Kah Woh asks, “How do we teach our children to take pride in being Malaysians? How do we educate them to unite under the Malaysian flag?”
That is a good question. How do you teach kids that some kids cannot do certain things as “equal” citizens of this country? How do you teach kids that other kids have special privileges that cannot be questioned?
How do you teach kids that they are barred from certain educational institutions? How do you teach kids that there are quotas for their educational aspirations?
How do you teach kids that their religious beliefs are open to demonisation even though laws that prohibit that kind of behaviour are enforced against them if they are perceived to step out of line, but not against others?
How do you teach kids that there are political parties that cater for a specific race or that political operatives will say that it is their duty to defend a specific race and religion even though everyone is supposed to be equal before the national flag?
Defining patriotism
So, when it comes to symbols, the ideas behind those symbols are important. Whether you choose to imbue those symbols with power is entirely up to the individual, but the reality is that only the state has any power when it comes to enforcing ideas behind the symbol.
Enforcing “respect” towards a symbol has always seemed fascist to me. After all, if you have to force people to respect symbols, what does this tell you of the “need” of some people to disrespect what is supposed to be a symbol which represents all that we are supposed to believe in?
Here is another thing about patriotism. It is about people and not allegiances to totems. And in this country, mired in the toxic politics of race and religion, can the Education Ministry define patriotism that would make sense to children who are living in a polarised world?
Here is a great example of how patriotism is about people. In fact, this letter is a blueprint as to what defines patriotism and how the state has trampled on egalitarian sentiments that used to define patriotism in the military and, yes, in this country.
Close to a decade ago, Persatuan Patriot Kebangsaan (PPK), under the aegis of Arshad Raji released a statement on the enrolment of non-Malays in the military.
Here are five important parts:
(1) For such fighting men of valour to function, there has to be genuine love and care between the commanders and personnel. Everyone has to feel needed and important. The accomplishment of the mission is the ultimatum.
(2) The government’s affirmative policies of the 1980s had seeped into the military administration. Strange sayings like “orang kita” (our people) have crept into the minds of military commanders. Slowly and surely, the commanders saw some of those under their command as half-brothers or stepsons, unlike the “all are equal” mindset of previous years.
(3) Yearning for a merit-based promotion system, the non-Malays would not mind if their Malay subordinates were promoted if they were really deserving. Perceived as incapable by many non-Malay officers, there had been a haphazard promotion of officers very much undeserving of their roles and ranks.
(4) Needless to say, a mediocre officer given promotion and command would breed mediocrity and substandard results. Further, numerous deserving Malay officers of merit were also adversely affected. Malay officers who were promoted based on their merits earned an endearment of loyalty and respect from the non-Malays.
(5) Starting from the late 1980s, the military had become increasingly religious-centric, and non-Malays felt ever more alienated. The officers’ mess life and the lives of soldiers became very much dictated by religious sensitivity. This eventually affected esprit de corps and comradeship negatively in multi-racial military units.
So what can we learn from this letter? Patriotism is about one’s empathy for his or her brethren regardless of race and religion. Equality encourages such sentiments. Politics, race, and religion nullify such sentiments and create a toxic environment.
Does anyone really think that a flag on a badge is going to create a sense of simpatico amongst kids?
Well, as the prime minister says, it is free, so just wear it. That is how much Madani thinks the Jalur Gemilang is worth.
S THAYAPARAN is Commander (Rtd) of the Royal Malaysian Navy. Fīat jūstitia ruat cælum - “Let justice be done though the heavens fall.”
