Sabah/Sarawak at 50, ignoring history at your own peril
Also, as I understand it, the history textbook was actually written by a historian who also happens to be a supreme council member of Perkasa. Do I need to say more about the sort of history that is being taught in school?
James Chin, TMI
As we approach the 50th anniversary of the Federation of Malaysia, there will be a lot of articles about three things.
First, Sarawak (and Sabah) did not “join” Malaysia but help establish the Federation of Malaysia. Second, Sarawak (and Sabah) should be treated as equals, rather than merely a state in the Federation.
After all, Sarawak became “independent” or “self-government” on July 22, 1963 while Sabah achieved the same on August 31, 1963.
Third, the promise of autonomy in the “20 Points” was never kept. For example, how many of you know that there was supposed to be a review of the guarantees 10 years after Federation? As far as I know there was no formal review in 1973 although some letters were exchanged.
Where you stand on the three things I mentioned above will largely depend on your political leanings. It is also dependent on how well you know your history.
And this is where the problem starts.
In general, Malaysians do not know their history because the “official” history taught in secondary school is a version of history that is supposed to shape you into a Malaysian nationalist, i.e. do not challenge Malay authority. It is not meant to provide an unbiased view of history.
Also, as I understand it, the history textbook was actually written by a historian who also happens to be a supreme council member of Perkasa. Do I need to say more about the sort of history that is being taught in school?
In short, Malaysians know little or next to nothing about Malaysian history and East Malaysians know even less about the history of Sabah and Sarawak.
Read more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/sabah-sarawak-at-50-ignoring-history-at-your-own-peril
