Demonizing the ‘Other’ in Malaysia

It was therefore disheartening to hear of the Prime Minister demonizing people of varied sexual orientation for being who they are. And if you thought a change of government would bring about a change of attitude, think again, for Mr Anwar Ibrahim and his gang do not seem to be any different.

Stephen Doss

Recently Mr Anwar Ibrahim has gone on record to say that it is right to discriminate against homosexuals, In reply to a question from lawyer Firoz Hussein if Malaysia should “discriminate against homosexuals,” Anwar said: “Yes”. “We do not give space to homosexuals.”

Anwar had said that Malaysian law must be “crafted in a way we must believe in the sanctity of marriage between a man and woman…we do not promote homosexuality”. Anwar said this during the hearing of his suit against the UMNO-owned Utusan Malaysia for character defamation.

His daughter Nurul Izzah who is Parti Keadilan Vice-President has since gone on record to say that she supports her father’s view that there should be laws to discriminate against homosexuals.

Incidentally, there was no mention of other dangers to the sanctity of marriage caused by infidelity from heterosexuals. But that is another article for another time.

Prior to 2008, Malaysia had always been a state which had never been friendly to homosexual practice but it had never gone out of its way to demonize homosexuals to the extent it has since.

There is a clear difference between supporting, not supporting and demonizing.

Recently we have had politicians from both sides of the fence calling each other communist, politicians from both sides of the fence also routinely call each other Jew lovers.

Politicians being politicians routinely engage in demonization of the ‘other’. Definition of the ‘Other’ is part of what defines or even constitutes the self. It has been used in social science to understand the processes by which societies and groups exclude ‘Others’ whom they want to subordinate or who do not fit into their society. Identifying the ‘other’ is imperative to national identities, where practices of admittance and segregation can form and sustain boundaries and national character. The ‘other’ helps distinguish between familiar and unfamiliar, the uncertain or certain. It often involves the demonization and dehumanization of groups, which further justifies attempts to civilize and exploit these ‘inferior’ others.

The idea of the other was first philosophically conceived by Emmanuel Levinas, and later made popular by Edward Said in his well-known book Orientalism. Despite originally being a philosophical concept, the ‘other’ has political, economic, social and psychological connotations and implications.

While we expect politicians to indulge in rhetoric to shore support for their respective parties, we seldom do not begrudge them their stage for we seldom take what they say too seriously as the motive is clear, ‘fear-mongering’ for votes.

But what is unacceptable is for policy makers, and people who are elected to office who are expected to speak on behalf of all people to engage in discrimination of certain communities. For no community is exempted from taxes because of their sexual orientation or their ideological beliefs. Neither are they non-citizens with their corresponding rights denied.

It was therefore disheartening to hear of the Prime Minister demonizing people of varied sexual orientation for being who they are. And if you thought a change of government would bring about a change of attitude, think again, for Mr Anwar Ibrahim and his gang do not seem to be any different.

And politics being all about expediency, none among the ranks of the federal opposition who so proudly advocate themselves as human rights activist could muster even a hint of disapproval of this demonization that has reached new heights in this country.

The only condemnation of this demonization has come from abroad. International NGO Human Rights Watch has criticised Anwar Ibrahim for advocating discriminatory practices against homosexuals, calling the opposition leader’s anti-gay position “shameful” and “fundamentally wrong”.

Deputy director of Human Rights Watch (Asia division), Phil Robertson, accused Anwar of playing politics with civil liberties. “Anwar is fundamentally wrong when he maintains that it should be permissible to discriminate against homosexuals. “While this might be a good vote-getting strategy in some parts of Malaysia, his claim shamefully runs completely contrary to the central principle of non-discrimination in international human rights law,

Religious beliefs based on religion are clear about not supporting homosexual practice, but I have yet to find conclusive evidence of the need to demonize homosexuals.

I leave you with this quotation from Martin Niemoller. He was a prominent Protestant pastor who emerged as an outspoken public foe of Adolf Hitler and spent the last seven years of Nazi rule in concentration camps.

Niemöller is perhaps best remembered for the quotation:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out–
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out–
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out–
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me–and there was no one left to speak for me.

Stephen Doss is a social activist and a political observer. He is President of the International Social Media Chambers and Secretary-general of the Malaysian Interfaith Network. He can be followed on twitter @stephendoss