What is One-Malaysia?

It was meant to indicate that no one in this country would be sidelined but that affirmative action policies will continue to persist in the aid of one particular race and that the special rights of Malays to be retained. If this is so, what is the difference between “before” and “after” One-Malaysia? 

By Hakim Joe

When Najib became the sixth PM of Malaysia, he espoused the concepts of One-Malaysia without going into details. So I ask, “What the Hell is One-Malaysia”?

If one were to look up the atlas and attempt to locate Malaysia, we would not be too surprised to find that there is only “one Malaysia” on the globe. If we were to look up the list of countries in a map book, we would not be too surprised to find that the list only contains “one Malaysia”. Does this mean that our PM wants us to look at the atlas or maps to find the answers to his riddles? 

Or did he, in his own obtuse manner and way, mean that the citizens should unite as one in Malaysia? Are we at war? Alternately, did he mean that the government would treat all its citizens equally regardless of religion, race or creed? If this is so, does Najib mean that the citizens were never treated equally and fairly before? Or is he proposing to adopt what the Opposition has been championing all this while, a Malaysia for all Malaysian? Wouldn’t that be unconstitutional since Article 153 of the Constitution stipulates the special rights of the Malays and other Bumiputeras as well as the position and rights of the other races in the country? 

It took Umno-owned Mingguan Malaysia to refute that their new master’s utterings were nothing akin to Lee Kuan Yew’s Malaysian Malaysia concept (before Singapore separated from Malaysia) and that it was meant to indicate that no one in this country would be sidelined but that affirmative action policies will continue to persist in the aid of one particular race and that the special rights of Malays to be retained. If this is so, what is the difference between “before” and “after” One-Malaysia? 

In an ideal world, there would not be partiality and prejudice. In a democratic country, the same concepts should apply. Hey, wait a minute here … isn’t Malaysia a democratic country? Anyway, since doggie Mingguan Malaysia so carefully explained what Master Najib meant, the one only important aspect of One-Malaysia would be the non-sidelining of the other races (since the Bumis have been really well taken cared of).  

If I am correct in thinking what this indicates, it would mean that the rest of us non-bumi would not be ignored anymore. I didn’t think we were before (by the taxation department) but I could be proved wrong. “Non sidelining” anymore could mean that the Inland Revenue Board sending people to my house every month to collect taxes – now, isn’t that a privilege (of sorts)? Or it could mean that the Home Ministry would now really, really concentrate on the “Race Issue” and henceforth send more Indians and Chinese to Kamunting instead of Malays. 

Mingguan Malaysia also had this to say, “Indeed there is a need to continue the affirmative policies due to historical realities and the social contract while the government intensifies efforts to increase the quality of life for all”. Did this mean that Agus Salim, Abdul Matin Anol Rahmat and Johar Hassan did not possess a “good” quality of life and that Kamunting can provide a “better” quality of life? Hey, those three newest ISA detainees’ names aren’t Indian or Chinese. Well, they are not Malays either. They are Indons. One can argue that this is not indicative of what One-Malaysia advocates for its people since Indons are not Malaysians. I just wish that you could apply the same concepts to Syed Hamid since he is half-Indon. 

When questioned about the One-Malaysia term during the recent 63rd annual general meeting of the Associated Chinese Chambers of Commerce and Industry of Malaysia, our illustrious leader said that it is akin to the “formula” that formed the “glue” that held the country together through the years (someone’s been sniffing the adhesive again) and that the formula of “power sharing, equitable wealth distribution and eradication of poverty” still holds true.

What he did not mention was who was sharing the power, how the wealth was distributed and that it has taken more than 30 years since the inception of NEP and yet poverty still persists. He later said that One-Malaysia “… is an overall philosophy that can be defined from many perspectives but it should not be a rigid interpretation. I believe it has to be an overall philosophy of staying together, developing trust and mutual respect between the various ethnic communities and working together hand-in-hand as one people, the Malaysian people.” Might as well be asking him what the next 4D 1st prize number is. 

And then there is the “People First, Performance Now” slogan. Who are these “people” anyway? Malaysians, or are we talking about Eskimos, dead Mongolians or Laplanders? Then there is the “performance”. Is this why rich doggie KTK got in through the backdoor (belakang masuk) to become the national “performance” keeper? Is this why it is called “doggie-style”? Also, does performance mean “wayang”? 

Well, I have one of my own. “So easily said, so hard to achieve” (where is my applause?).