The Chinese dilemma
By Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad
’KONGSI’ CONCEPT: Each side has to sacrifice something so that the other can gain something
IN response to the emergence of a Malay political party, Umno and its success in rejecting the British inspired Malayan Union, the Chinese community of the 1940s saw the need for a political party of their own to present their views to the British government.
Thus was the MCA conceived and born, led by Malacca's Sir Cheng-Lock Tan. Although it was intended to counter the influence of Umno and protect the interests of the Chinese community, events changed the strategy and role of the MCA.
In 1952 the Kuala Lumpur Umno leaders and the Kuala Lumpur MCA branch leaders decided that in the Kuala Lumpur municipal elections, they should not contest against each other, but instead should support each other's candidates in their respective constituencies.
The results startled them as they defeated almost all the non-racial parties. Realising the political advantage of cooperating with each other the Tunku (Abdul Rahman) and Sir Cheng-Lock Tan, and senior leaders of the MCA and Umno decided to formalise their cooperation by setting up the Alliance, a coalition of MCA and Umno.
The basis of this coalition was the idea of supporting each other and sharing the power gained. Buoyed by the success of the Alliance party in the 1955 elections, in which the MIC had joined, the Tunku looked more kindly at the proposal of Sir Cheng-Lock that citizenship should be based on jus soli (citizenship by being born in the country) and not jus saguinis (citizenship based on the Malaysian citizenship of the father or mother, i.e. citizenship based on blood relation).
The Tunku did not quite agree but he nevertheless decided to give one million citizenships to unqualified Chinese and Indians.
With that the confrontation between the Chinese and the Malays changed into positive cooperation.
It was a classic kongsi that was set up. The essence is an undertaking to share. Sharing involves a give and take arrangement, in which each side has to sacrifice something so that the other can gain something.
As the Malays made up the majority of the citizens they naturally led the Alliance. But the Chinese and Indians were not without adequate power. In any case Malay political power would be mitigated by Chinese and Indians' voting and economic power.
The Tunku saw immediate benefit from the "kongsi" as he believed Malays only wanted to be government employees and the Chinese wanted to be in business. There would be no conflict or tussle between them.
The Indians would fill up the professional posts. He did not foresee the days when government could not create enough jobs for the greatly increased number of Malays.
The kongsi Alliance worked well. But in 1963 Singapore joined Malaysia.
Immediately the PAP tried to gain Chinese support by condemning the Alliance kongsi for being disadvantageous to the Chinese. Malaysians, said the PAP, were not equal. There should be a Malaysian Malaysia where all the benefits should be based on merit alone, with the best taking everything, irrespective of race.
Without saying so in so many words the PAP was inferring that the Malays did not deserve their positions. The best people should rule the country. In the eyes of the PAP, Singapore was ruled by the best qualified people. That they happen to be almost all Chinese is incidental.
In the 1964 elections the MCA and Malaysian Chinese generally valued their cooperation with the Malays. They rejected the PAP and its chauvinistic appeal, giving it only one seat.
The Tunku realised what the PAP was up to and decided that Singapore should not be a part of Malaysia. But the PAP was not done. The remnant of the party in Malaysia set up the DAP to carry on the Malaysian Malaysia meritocratic formula for undermining Chinese support for the MCA.
Harping continuously on the so-called Malay privileges and the unfairness to the Chinese, the DAP slowly eroded the idea of kongsi in the multi-racial coalition of the Barisan Nasional.
Despite the fact that the Barisan Nasional supported Chinese education and the use of the Chinese language, the DAP convinced many Chinese that the Chinese, their culture and language are not given proper treatment by the Barisan Nasional coalition.
The MCA was attacked for not doing enough for the Chinese.
In my opinion, there are politicians, and there are statesmen.
Many are quick to jump on this article, branding it as racist, pitting the Chinese against Malays. But if we read it in the proper context, what it says is quite true. Sometimes, we must be willing to see things as they are, no matter how hard it is to accept.
The Chinese, would instinctively be on the defensive. Especially DAP leaders, such as Lim Kit Siang, because of what Dr. M wrote about the DAP. While I respect the elder leaders, such as LKS & Karpal's unwavering determination on certain issues in the past and standing up for his principles, I disagree with his views on this.
Excerpt from LKS's blog:
Malaysia does not have a Chinese dilemma but a Mahathir dilemma
The author of “The Malay Dilemma” has tried to coin a new complex, “The Chinese Dilemma” which he defined as “whether the Chinese in Malaysia should make a grab for political power while dominating economic power or to adhere to the principle of sharing which has made this country what it is today”.
Former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad is making history in coining a complex which exists only in his febrile imagination, as it does not afflict any single Chinese in Malaysia – whether in Pakatan Rakyat or Barisan Nasional!
I will like to know whether there is any Chinese in Malaysia who will stand up and state that Mahathir is right that there is such a “Chinese dilemma” in Malaysia!
So, here I am... standing up. The truth is there is indeed a Chinese Dilemma. More like a crisis the way I see it. While politicians like to tell the people to think about the country, the same applies to the politicians as well. Pitting different communities against each other is just evil.
If you must defend your party, by all means do so. But do not use the Chinese as an excuse or justification. The Chinese community is not DAP.
Anyway, as I've written many times before, politicians will always be politicians. Their view on issues will always be from a political perspective. Whereas the people view it from a social perspective.
The way I understand it, the article is not even disparaging or insulting the Chinese. Blaming DAP, yes. The Chinese? No. Instead, I find the message truthful. A reminder.
He was actually referring to MCA. Comparing MCA with DAP.
His core message is for the MCA, on whether MCA will do what is right for the Chinese community, and Malaysia in general. Or has MCA forgotten it's roots. And also to the Chinese readers, on what their priorities are, and whether they still trust MCA. Or have they forgotten.
Education has always been the top priority for the community. Economy, second. Have the Chinese forgotten that? or were they distracted by the other issues concerning the economy, corruption, freedom of speech, etc that they have failed to realise it?
The danger of being blindly led by politicians is that the people will give what the politicians want, power, but gain nothing for themselves.
The Malays, especially the UMNO supporters, do not see the real Chinese dilemma. The fact is, every community has it's own problems and issues. Politicians will exploit these issues for their own benefit. The Malays see it as political. Actually, it's social.
The Malays (in general) see the Chinese as chauvinists hating Malays, grabbing power, unpatriotic, etc.
The Chinese (in general) see the Malay government as oppressors, systematically pushing the Chinese from this country.
There a reason for this perception. When the Chinese 'make noise', it is viewed as the voice of the community as a whole. When Malays do the same, it is usually viewed as the voice of UMNO or the government itself. That is because the government and by extension it's agencies, are predominantly Malay.
For example, watch this video which was taken recently, purportedly happened in Puchong involving traders & MPSJ.
The Chinese view this as bullying and discrimination by Malay authorities. The Malay community would see this as Chinese bullying the Malay authorities, who were only doing their job. See?
If we view this without racial glasses or prejudice, it is actually enforcement against unlicensed traders. I think it is part of the enforcement carried out recently:
MPSJ cracks down on illegal traders
Council raids Selangor Wholesale Market in Seri Kembangan after receiving complaints from public and licensed traders there
Jun 29, 2013
SUBANG JAYA: THE Subang Jaya Municipal Council recently seized the merchandise and equipment of a trader who was found to be carrying out business illegally at the Selangor Wholesale market in Seri Kembangan.
In the at 9am operations on Wednesday, seven compounds were also issued against several others under the Petty Traders Bylaw 2007 for trading without a licence.
Perception.
1. Malay dominance in government. If those enforcement officers comprised of various races, it will not be viewed with racial prejudice. Same with the recent school controversies. Same with other government agencies. The incident below happened in Danau Kota, Setapak...
2. The second video above, disproves the earlier racial bias... Petty traders, especially illegal ones have always been a problem. But some are sympathetic towards these traders. Illegal traders comprises of various races, and everyone are not spared. Yes, it looks cruel to confiscate their goods. So I think enforcement sometimes must not be so heavy-handed. Maybe issue fines instead. Confiscating their goods is taking away their capital. Some borrowed money to guy their goods. But then, if allowed unchecked, then nobody would want to apply for trading licenses anymore. Moderation is the key.
All of us are familiar with those illegal VCD sellers, and the periodic enforcements, which can turn violent at times. Those involve the secret societies, which is actually a social concern for the Chinese community. Scores of young Chinese are lured into it every year.
3. More importantly, and most disturbing, is the behaviour of the affected young Chinese guy in the first video, presumably a trader. His actions speak for itself. Violent. Hurting himself, to frame the officers.
Watching that first video, the Malays will feel angry towards the Chinese. The Chinese will feel the same towards the Malays.
I only feel sadness.
Is this what the Chinese want for their community? Their youths behaving like this? Which part is culture? Which part are values? Which part is Chinese?
No comments:
Post a Comment