ADUN SPEAKS | I read with great interest and enthusiasm the ideas of Chandran Nair, author, businessperson, and think-tank founder.
If everything goes well, he plans to establish the Malaysian Anti-Racism Institute or Mari.
His focus is on how Malaysians, both Malays and non-Malays, confront the question of racial discrimination that has been institutionalised and normalised over the years.
While former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad talked about the Malay dilemma, Chandran wants to touch on the non-Malay dilemma, after 64 years of the country’s independence.
What is the non-Malay dilemma? The non-Malays are accustomed to accept the reality of being second-class citizens.
Some of them believe this is the price to pay to have a slice of the pie; opposition to this state of affairs might not be an option. Many non-Malays have resigned to accept the status quo of entrenched and divisive racial discrimination.
The Malays, particularly the elite, are the beneficiaries of the racially entrenched system. Some are not aware of the actual situation but, with many having benefited, don’t intend to remove the system that feeds them.
This entrenched racism has meant among other things that Malays do not have to compete on equal terms with the non-Malays.
The grand narrative of discrimination against non-Malays has also provided an ideological justification for continuing the racist system.
Dismantling the racist system
The question is how to dismantle the racist system? What will be the role of both sides of the divide?
Chandran thinks parliamentary elections might not bring about the desired change in removing the racist system and that non-Malays should be bold to question their status, speak out on racism in non-racial terms, and engage with Malays to show their displeasure.
That they should write letters and publish stories about their sad state of affairs to reclaim their lost rights as citizens of the country.
Like-minded Malays who understand the situation then should articulate their thoughts that the racist system will not be to their long-term benefit but will impoverish them.
In other words, both communities, at least those who are aware, must join hands to fight and dismantle the pernicious system.
He says the non-Malays must be brave to lash out at the unjust and oppressive racial system.
The formation of civil disobedience movements, protests, and others could be the start of such an awakening to move away from the institutionalised racist system.
I really have no disagreement with Chandran on the matter of the non-Malay dilemma he is at pains to articulate. I also agree that the move towards a non-racist society must be separately and jointly articulated by both the non-Malays and Malays.
It must be certainly a joined effort at some point for the oppressive racist system is harmful to both ethnic segments.
The interests of both ethnic groups must coincide with the larger interest of the country. However, dismantling the entrenched institutionalised racist system of several decades having its antecedents in the past cannot be removed just overnight.
Yes, awareness is important, but the need to honestly and bravely speak out against the injustice of the system is equally important.
No matter how attractive is the argument put forward to dismantle the racist system, I find it has not been contextualised historically.
Need to consider historical context
Without the historical context of the struggles and political movements meant to create a just Malaysian society, the piece by Chandran might run into the problem of duplication.
He is not the first to argue against the racist system or for its removal. There have been others in the course of the history of this country.
How different is his analysis from others?
Has he forgotten about the left-wing movement in the country? About its position on the racial system and how it sought for the system's removal?
Chandran simplistically dismisses the quest for parliamentary power. It is apparently nothing but being confined to the corridors of power and lacks relevance to the removal of institutionalised racism.
However, racism in the country is the outcome of the nature of racial and religious politics that is well entrenched in the institutions. Removal of the institutions and the ideology surrounding is a Herculean task.
Such a task needs movements or grand political coalitions not just to bring an end to racism but to bring better progress to society.
The move away from racism needs to be included in the larger agenda of providing an alternative version of a better emancipated Malaysian society.
Racism cannot be eliminated by developing and sustaining an anti-racist narrative or dialogue.
A focus solely on dismantling the obnoxious racist system might be counterproductive. It has to be integrated with the larger agenda of progressive reforms.
Years of racism have created divisive forces in society. In fact, there is hardly any dialogue between non-Malays and Malays to find a common ground to discuss the matter of institutionalised racism.
Chandran suggests everyday forms of resistance against the manifold manifestation of racism in workplaces and others. Everyday forms of resistance against racism and the unjust system are already there, such a thing is not something new in the country.
The problem with these kinds of resistance is that they are not organised, localised, and very often spontaneous. Given this, they are hardly effective instruments of change.
Bringing change through politics
Change must come through organised resistance in the form of social and political movements with the objective of changing the system.
Gandhian-inspired overt passive resistance might be important in some contexts but not in others.
It might have been effective in India to drive out the British, to some extent effective in the civil rights movement in the USA, or even the removal of the apartheid system in South Africa.
I am not sure of the utility of passive resistance in Malaysia.
While Chandran talks about movements, I am not sure whether he was referring to political or social movements.
But he certainly thinks that political movements in quest of parliamentary power might not be the right strategy.
I can understand his predicament with politicians in the country. However, from a broader perspective, no social movements are devoid of politics.
The minute any movement has an objective to attain, then it is political in nature.
I certainly respect Chandran for coming out with a perspective on how to go about addressing the difficult and sensitive matter of racism in the country. - Mkini
P RAMASAMY is the Perai state assemblyperson and deputy chief minister II of Penang.
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.