THE CICAK.com

Unity among Barisan parties a facade

By THE PIANIST

I know it’s a little early to be writing an article on independence, but I couldn’t resist the urge after I read this.

I love these quotes:

“‘1957 will not be the work of a political party but a story told from a Malaysian perspective, on how independence was achieved because every race played its role,’â€? a source said.â€?

“The movie will be directed by award-winner Suhaimi Baba … who directed the hit movie Pontianak Harum Sundal Malam and its sequel, is the country’s top director.�

Hit movie?

With all due respect to Suhaimi Baba, I think Yasmin Ahmad of Sepet fame is the most suitable director to direct such a multicultural film. I cannot help but feel that 1957 will be another Barisan Nasional pitch to highlight how muhibah Malaysians are. This is the same, tiresome, predictable pitch that we find in our moral studies and history textbooks in primary and high school.

So, what exactly is it which makes me so skeptical about this movie? Firstly, I expect the movie to glorify Barisan National. But really, this is not necessarily a bad thing. Secondly (and most importantly), I’m skeptical about this movie because it will most probably play down (or worse, omit) the following pivotal pieces of information. And this would definitely be a bad thing.

1. The sole purpose of UMNO at its conception was to unite Malays and to campaign for the reinstitution of the Sultan’s sovereignty.

Remember those history lessons where the Malays greatly opposed the formation of the Malayan Union? Why exactly were they so against it? This was because citizenship would be based on the jus soli principle (NB: Latin for “the law relating to the land [of one’s birth],â€? it is the rule by which birth in a state is sufficient to confer nationality), and equal rights would be given to all citizens regardless of race. What’s more, the Malay Sultans would concede most of their powers to the British Crown.

The Malays were really upset with a system which would allow immigrant Chinese and Indian workers to have the same privileges as them, among other things, so much so that they took to the streets and mourned the creation of this system. Thus on 1 Mar. 1946 UMNO was formed to oppose the Malayan Union and succeeded in bringing it down on 31 Jan. 1948.

The Federation of Malaya succeeded the Malayan Union. Some of the key features of the Federation of Malaya included the conditional acceptance of the jus soli principle of citizenship, whereby non-Malays had to acknowledge the special rights of Malays as well as acknowledge Islam as the official religion of the new Federation. This thus paved the way to affirmative action in Malaysia.

2. It was not until 1951 that UMNO changed its policy towards achieving independence, and it was not until 1955 that the Alliance was formed.

Coincidentally, it was during this time that the Malayan Emergency was widespread in Malaya. The communists were steadily eliminating British personnel a head at a time. What better a time for the Alliance to take over by offering to help out the British than as the communist insurgency was depleting British coffers?

But of course, our reserved and collected White oppressors were not going to immediately hand over independence on a silver platter to UMNO. It needed proof that Malayans could work together and form a favourable government to rule the people. The Alliance was the answer. This created two favourable situations to UMNO’s benefit.

The first was that the communists were already greatly subdued at the expense of the British and its Allies; ergo, UMNO did not need to worry about more uprisings and communist dominance.

Secondly, a spent and exhausted British side would gladly hand over Malaya provided that a favourable government be formed. The Alliance demonstrated their abilities in this area, and thus the British relinquished their rule in Malaya and allowed the Malays to take over.

3. Then there was MCA, and boy, did they have a lot of money.

MCA was formed in 1949 by the Kuomintang to resist the Malayan Communist Party. Its initial party heads were military leaders, and best known amongst them was Colonel Tun H.S Lee.

As with UMNO, at its conception, MCA wasn’t formed to champion independence. It was to ensure the welfare of the Chinese, or rather, to save the Chinese from being repatriated to China. However, if the Chinese are good at one thing, it is, without a doubt, making money. This is a fact that can easily be traced back to Yap Ah Loy, Kapitan Cina of Kuala Lumpur and big-time capitalist. And I think UMNO has definitely taken advantage of MCA’s money-making abilities to further their cause.

MCA obtained a licence from the British in 1949 to run a lottery to raise political funds. Since the gambling licence was withdrawn in 1953, MCA has been successively setting up various businesses like Multi-purpose Co-operative Society Ltd. (1968), Multi-Purpose Holdings Bhd. (1975) and Huaren Holdings Sdn. Bhd. to generate profits and thus funds. Currently, under its subsidiaries, the MCA owns big companies in Malaysia such as The Star.

But why the zealous support for UMNO? If you would track back briefly, the reason why MCA was formed was to oppose the communists. The Kuomintang and the communists were at war back in mainland China, and they surely did not want the communists to spread their influence to Malaya. The Malays definitely did not want the communists here either, disturbing their lands, practices and beliefs. As the saying goes, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Thus, in essence, the road to independence was UMNO-led and MCA-backed.

4. What about our MIC brethren?

The Malayan Indian Congress was formed in August 1946 by its founder-president John A. Thivy to fight for India’s independence. He met Mohandas Gandhi in London when he was studying, and became inspired by the Indian nationalist movement, and consequently became involved after attending one of Subhas Chandra Bose’s rallies. In January 1948, he became the first official appointed by Nehru to represent the Indian Republic in Southeast Asia.

The fourth President of the MIC, Tan Sri V. Manickavasagam, was in office for about five years. This visionary pioneered the Blue Book, an orchestrated effort of a think-tank of top Indian business, political and education leaders collaborating to augment the future of the Indian community.

Unfortunately, he died while still in office, and his successor, Dato’ Seri S. Samy Vellu, replaced him in 1979. Only parts of the Blue Book have been implemented by Samy Vellu, to his own benefit and to the detriment of the Indian community at large.

Supporters of the Blue Book, such as Dato’ S. Subramaniam, do not find favour with Samy Vellu, and thus many fallings-out have occurred between the two men. This unrest within the MIC stems from its deviation from serving the needs of the Indian community.

Alas, the UMNO-dominated Barisan National is not the Alliance our history books portray. Both MCA and MIC have long been subservient to UMNO, supporting it in everything it wants to achieve, even acknowledging that Malaysia is an Islamic state without considering the ramifications.

And although the recent controversy over Article 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution and the thought of Malay supremacy unnerved MCA and MIC party leaders and prompted the submission of several memos, the memos were later withdrawn.

What does this say, then? That they dare not oppose what’s wrong? Or are they too afraid to speak their minds?

I always wonder why it is this way, why UMNO is so powerful. And then I think of the 1969 racial riots. Our history books in school teach us of a very united and equal Alliance, but in 1973 it came up with the New Economic Policy (NEP) which suddenly made Malays more equal.

Between the racial riots and the NEP, a blur exists that does not explain the abrupt shift in the equality of the three parties. A blur that questions how MCA and MIC party leaders could allow the the inception of the NEP, knowing there were those among their people who were just as equally at a disadvantage.

I often wonder why these two parties have failed to place their own man at the top of this government, as we are all Malaysians, after all. Then it becomes clear to me: because the government’s agenda was born out of that pivotal period – that era of 1957 – and this is something I can assure you this movie will not address.

—
THE PIANIST is a contributing writer for theCICAK.

He is an aspiring writer and full-time student. In his free time, he enjoys writing and reading, and when he’s occupied he’s either reading or writing. To unwind, he fancies some Chopin or Debussy, or a cold Heineken with a good game on the idiot box.