Of ‘pendatangs’, playgrounds and swing sets

Who a ‘pendatang’ is depends on how far back in time we go.

COMMENT

By Hafidz Baharom

I’ve always equated the “pendatang” issue with kids in a playground arguing over a swing set, saying “we were here first” and using this to hog the set out of spite when others just want to have the same amount of fun.

Well, in Malaysia today the metaphorical playground is packed with kids, and we really need to learn to share.

Anyone can call another a “pendatang”, depending on how far back you want to go in time.

If we go back to the time of the Vietnam War, I’m sure we can find Vietnamese “pendatangs”. If we go back to the Marcos regime in the Philippines, we will find Filipino “pendatangs”.

If we go back to the purges of Sukarno and later Suharto, we will find Indonesian “pendatangs”.

If we go back to the British empire, a lot of Indians are “pendatangs”. If we go back to China’s Cultural Revolution and their civil war, even the changes in dynasties one after the other, we will also find “pendatangs”.

If we go to the era of Chola ascension, we will find Hindu “pendatangs”. If we go back to the days of the Abbasid Islamic dynasty, we will find Islamic “pendatangs”.

If we go further back, we will find that Melaka was started by a murderous “pendatang” who tried to take over Singapore and failed.

If we go back even further, to those believing in evolution, we are all African “pendatangs”.

Or, if you believe Abrahamic religions, we are all heavenly “pendatangs” cast out because our ancestors got conned by the Devil as a snake to eat a fruit.

Thus, do we go all the way back to Adam or do we nitpick and choose which part of history to fit our narrative of ownership over land?

Because if we do wish to look at history and claim a land simply because we were here first, using religion, then what differentiates us from the Zionists of Israel?

At the same time, if we lay claim to a land without looking at who lives there currently, and who initially set it up, just wanting it for ourselves by demanding a share and ousting the population using force, or economic power or even laws favouring the rich, then what differentiates us from the Zionists of Israel?

So, where we stand on this is rather precarious. It’s an age-old question that needs to be answered but needs to be answered with tact and consideration.

But most of all, what is needed is acceptance of current conditions and reconciliation towards a unified people beyond racial, religious and economic considerations.

That would be as close to utopia as you can venture.

So, what should the government do? It’s tried racial affirmative action time and again to no avail.

What was once a privilege of using the swing set has become a right to be claimed for eternity.

This is particularly so because the affirmative action with a racial tint forgot to look at those who hoard wealth on one end of the spectrum while also forgetting about equal opportunities on the other.

In other words, the kid with his personal swing set at home comes up with a gang to claim the playground swing set for his friends, rather than invite his friends home to share his own swing set.

So perhaps the government, being the metaphorical parent, should consider more swing sets and inform people to share, rather than expect the kids to sort it out on their own.

Hafidz Baharom is a FMT reader.