The 1971 National Culture Policy is ‘illegitimate’

 

From Kua Kia Soong

The National Culture Policy (NCP) 1971 was foisted on the country after the trauma of the May 13 incident in 1969.

In my 2007 publication, “May 13: Declassified Documents on the Malaysian Riots of 1969”, I shared a declassified official document from May 23, 1969, that had been written just 10 days after the incident.

“Ghazali Shafie’s assertion is that Malaysian society must be ‘native-based’. This means a greater acceptance and use of the Malay language and the development of a unifying Malaysian culture which is inward-looking and which … is basically Malay in character” (FCO Telegram No. 563, May 23, 1969).

It is clear from this document that both the NCP and the New Economic Policy of the ascendant Malay ruling class were being drafted soon after May 13.

Thus, it was decided at the 1971 National Culture Policy conference at which diverse Malaysian communities, namely the Chinese, Indian and multiple indigenous stakeholders, were notably absent.

Only a token number of non-Malay academics had been invited. And it was this unrepresentative assembly that decided on a new National Culture Policy that would be based on the following:

(i) that the national culture must be based on Malay culture;

(ii) that suitable elements from other cultures may be accepted as part of the national culture; and

(iii) Islam is an important component in moulding the national culture.

The young generation today will not remember the acrimonious controversies during the 1980s when the government attempted to implement this policy by banning lion dances and other non-Malay cultural forms in schools and other functions.

There was an uproar from the Chinese and Indian communities.

Fifteen major Chinese associations and 10 major Indian associations submitted memoranda of protests (see my 1990 publication, Malaysian Cultural Policy & Democracy by the Malaysian Chinese Research Centre).

To date, Umno’s education policy remains committed to this policy of “Bahasa Malaysia only” in all schools, and that is why Umno does not allow the progressive growth of Chinese and Tamil schools even when such schools are bursting at the seams with huge enrolments that include non-Chinese students.

The 1990s onwards have been relatively freer of such controversy simply because the government realised that revenue from tourism was not to be sneezed at and tourists were more fascinated by “Malaysia Truly Asia” rather than “Malaysia Mainly Mono-Malay”.

The challenge of globalisation and the reality of tourism as a growth sector had forced the Barisan Nasional government to rethink its mono-cultural policy for the simple reason that monoculture does not sell.

Tourists prefer the choice and charm that cultural diversity offers and would not want to come to a country that imposes Islamic symbols and restricts the cultural symbols and expressions of the non-Malays.

For example, the Thaipusam festival at Batu Caves now attracts more tourists than a similar event in Tamil Nadu. Likewise, some Chinese festivals like the Nine Emperor Gods and the Hungry Ghosts festivals are celebrated in a bigger way here in Malaysia than in China or Taiwan.

Taking the ‘national’ out of cultural policy

The idea of a “national literature” that can only be written in Malay has been lampooned by both Malay and non-Malay scholars and writers. At the same time, the neglect of Chinese and Tamil schools because of the NCP has been a source of resentment by the Chinese and Indian communities in Malaysia all these years.

Failure to protect and nurture mother tongue education will lead to extinction of these languages.

Only recently, the former attorney-general of Sabah lamented the fact that 80% of the Kadazandusuns in Sabah do not speak their mother tongue any more.

Culture is everchanging and perhaps one of the critical lessons of the NCP controversies during the 1980s is the folly of claiming exclusivity for one dominant culture.

Still, the Umno-dominated state has not jettisoned its “uncultured” NCP and occasionally little Napoleons spring up to reimpose this policy.

For example, recently, we saw the farce over the FFM (Malaysian Film Festival) awards marginalising “non-BM” films. Bravo to Malay filmmakers such as Afdlin Shauki, who could see through and scoffed at this patently divisive policy.

In 2018, the Selangor government decided to take down bilingual road signs without proper explanation or rationale.

In Johor, the municipal council created a storm when they wanted Chinese shop signs that had been embossed onto the shop pillars for nearly 100 years to be removed.

It is timely that true artists speak out against the narrow conceptualisation of culture in the NCP.

It is not coincidental that the director of “Tanda Putera” is one of the few filmmakers who support Finas’ “BM-based” awards.

During the 1980s, there were also writers such as the late Salleh Ben Joned who courageously took a public stand against the NCP and its practice of giving awards for Malaysian literature only to works written in Bahasa Malaysia.

Modern realities

Since the 1990s and the split in the Malay vote, Umno leaders have had to adjust their Malay-centric ideology.

We have heard the re-invented slogans of “Bangsa Malaysia”, “1Malaysia” and now “Keluarga Malaysia” which are aimed at attracting the Chinese and Indian voters.

Still, Umno is in a dilemma over its populist Malay-centric ideology to woo the Malay voters when PKR and PAS have abandoned their race-based policies for an Islamic stance, thus putting Umno’s exclusive “Ketuanan Melayu” on the spot.

This reassertion of traditional cultures by the Chinese and Indians in Malaysia has been a reaction to the restrictions of the National Culture Policy imposed in the 1980s.

The same is true of the indigenous cultures in East Malaysia and even the Thais in the north of the peninsula.

The government’s promotion and spread of multimedia technologies and satellite television has also meant that Malaysians are impacted not only by Tamil and Chinese programmes but by global cultures 24 hours a day.

Globalisation and the privatisation of tertiary education have also led to the dominance of the English language in commerce and industry.

In recent years, the government under Dr Mahathir Mohamad even reneged on its own Malay-centric policy by enforcing the teaching of Maths and Science in English.

In such an environment of its own making, it is strange that the government would still insist on imposing its restrictive national culture policy.

Ironies of the NCP

It is ironic that Islamisation has led to the banning or extinction of traditional Malay cultural forms like the Mak Yong and wayang kulit ostensibly because of their animistic and pre-Islamic elements.

Meanwhile, Indonesia has accused Malaysia of heritage theft by usurping its folk songs such as Rasa Sayang, and musical instruments like the angklung, and even batik, wayang kulit and other traditional dances.

It is also ironic that at the Umno general assembly in October 2010, their leaders were joking about their immigrant (pendatang) origins – Mamak, Bugis, Javanese and others.

At the same time, it was revealed that while the Chinese at Kampung Pulai in Kelantan had been there for five centuries, they are regarded differently and still do not possess land titles.

Vive la difference

In recent years, cultural diversity and democracy have been established by the world community (Unesco) as the basis of cultural policies for all countries in the United Nations. And while our Education Act and National Education Policy may be otherwise, the Malaysian Federal Constitution does reflect a spirit of cultural democracy.

The assimilationist approach has been thoroughly discredited as unworkable and unrealistic.

It is now widely accepted in the world community that it is a multi-ethnic society that can function most effectively and harmoniously based on pluralism, that is allowing and assisting ethnic minority communities to maintain their distinct ethnic identities within a national framework of commonly accepted values and practices.

The obligation is on the government to ensure equal treatment and protection by the law for members of all groups, together with equality of access to education and employment, equal freedom and opportunity to participate fully in social and political life, and equal freedom of cultural expression.

Cultural policy must involve the stakeholders

Any national cultural policy must involve all the stakeholders. In our society, this means the associations that represent our diverse communities, namely, Chinese, Tamil, Kadazan, Iban, Bidayuh, Orang Asli and other indigenous education, social and cultural organisations.

Any attempt to repeat the 1971 conference and foisting a policy with a few token non-Malay academics will be similarly illegitimate and doomed to failure. - FMT

Kua Kia Soong, a former MP, is an FMT reader.

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.