38 things you MUST know about Malaysia!

[civfanatic]

Democracy is the rule of the majority. Plain and simple. Until the majority of Malaysians (who are bumiputras) want to enshrine equality into their law and personal practice, these policies are bound to stay. Yes, objectively, they seem to be wrong, but then such "bumiputra" policies have been in place in India as well under the guise of the "reservation system". Who are we to criticize Malaysians?

There is simply no comparison between Malaysia and India. Malaysia is a racist, Islamic, pseudo-modern republic while India is liberal, secular, and respects diversity. The reservation system in India is meant to uplift the disadvantaged sections of Indian society who have suffered from millennia of caste discrimination and socioeconomic marginalization. The racist "bhumiputra" system, on the other hand, is meant to accomplish the exact opposite, i.e. ensuring that a single ethnic group (Malays) retain their political dominance. In fact, the "bhumiputra" system is quite similar to the Hindu caste system; I have heard that even intermarriage between Malays and non-Malays is prohibited. The main architect of the Constitution of the Republic of India was an untouchable (Ambedkar), and India has had several untouchables in major political positions. I wonder how many non-Malays hold key political positions in Malaysia, and approve of these racist laws?

BTW, the ultimate irony is that the very term bhumiputra is not even Malay but of Indian (Sanskrit) origin. This is because the great Malays had no civilization or sophisticated culture whatsoever until Indian merchants and Buddhist monks brought it to the region in the early centuries of the first millennium, and the earliest kingdoms in Southeast Asia were almost all Indianized Buddhist states. Malays even today do not have their own civilization, but now follow an Arabic ideology (Islam) instead of an Indian one, and then look down upon the same Indians that civilized them in the first place. The Indonesians are much better in this regard, as they at least acknowledge their diverse cultural origins, despite being Muslim, and many of them continue to sport Sanskritized names and even have symbols of Ganesha on their currency.

 

[Razor]

Here's the logic for the bumiputra policy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action#Malaysia



Just like the reservation system in India, once it was instituted, it has stuck due to the majority feeling entitled to those benefits. There's nothing especially heinous or uncivilized about this particular policy compared to policies in other countries.

I would have provided this data myself, if it weren't counter-productive to my argument.
But the Chinese and Indians got richer (in Malaysia), I would assume, by hard (relative) work and proper use of business acumen, unlike the caste system in India.

The Indonesians are much better in this regard, as they at least acknowledge their diverse cultural origins, despite being Muslim, and many of them continue to sport Sanskritized names and even have symbols of Ganesha on their currency.

Their national emblem has Garuda on it. Just sayin'

 

[amoy]

Very good question! I was expecting this from some Chinese member or another!

The difference, dear @amoy is that while in China and Malaysia the discriminatory policies are sanctioned by the state and enshrined in law, in India, caste discrimination was abolished in 1947! In fact, it is the upper castes who are "officially" discriminated against by government policies which mandate 50% or more reservation of seats in educational institutions and jobs in the public sector for lower castes! Indian law and constitution does not officially discriminate against any religion, race or colour etc. In India, everyone is free to practice their culture, religion etc, unlike in China, where Tibetans and Uyghurs do not have such freedoms!

Hope you will appreciate this difference! :thumb:

No, I certainly appreciate the difference. How can u expect non-Indians to truly appreciate a thing called CASTE or Indian "FREEDOM"?? Hm hm let's agree to differ.

Okay now back to Malaysia
'Chinese tsunami' hits Malaysian politics

(AFP) - Malaysia's Chinese minority has for decades gone about its business and left leadership to a Malay-dominated regime, but in weekend polls they deserted it in what the premier called a "Chinese tsunami".

Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak's term has since gone viral, touching off a debate over whether Sunday's bitter election battle presages a deepening divide between increasingly assertive urban Chinese and the country's majority Muslim Malays.

"Overall, the results show a trend of polarisation which worries the government," Najib said after declaring victory Monday, ruefully noting a "tsunami from the Chinese community."

Malaysia has enjoyed relative harmony among its main ethnicities for decades under the authoritarian template of the Barisan Nasional (National Front) coalition, but the mere mention of racial tension remains a sensitive issue.

 

[Known_Unknown]

There is simply no comparison between Malaysia and India. Malaysia is a racist, Islamic, pseudo-modern republic while India is liberal, secular, and respects diversity. The reservation system in India is meant to uplift the disadvantaged sections of Indian society who have suffered from millennia of caste discrimination and socioeconomic marginalization. The racist "bhumiputra" system, on the other hand, is meant to accomplish the exact opposite, i.e. ensuring that a single ethnic group (Malays) retain their superior social position and minority ethnic groups are kept perpetually marginalized. The main architect of the Constitution of the Republic of India was an untouchable (Ambedkar), and India has had several untouchables in major political positions.

Wrong. Take a look at the statistics from wiki in my earlier post. The Malays were on the whole disadvantaged in their own country compared to the Chinese and Indians who came barely a century or two ago. The purpose of the bumiputra policy was not to "retain their superior position", but in fact, elevate the Malays from the inferior position they occupied in society compared to the Chinese and Indians.

BTW, the ultimate irony is that the very term bhumiputra is not even Malay but of Indian (Sanskrit) origin. This is because the great Malays had no civilization or sophisticated culture whatsoever until Indian merchants and Buddhist monks brought it to the region in the early centuries of the first millennium, and the earliest kingdoms in Southeast Asia were almost all Indianized Buddhist states. Malays even today do not have their own civilization, but now follow an Arabic ideology (Islam) instead of an Indian one, and then look down upon Indians. The Indonesians are much better in this regard, as they at least acknowledge their diverse cultural origins, despite being Muslim, and many of them continue to sport Sanskritized names and have symbols of Ganesha on their currency.

Why should Malaysians regard Indian civilization as superior? In most of SE Asia including Malaysia, the populace voluntarily converted to Islam. It wasn't conversion by the sword, but conversion through conviction. They were persuaded (for whatever reason), that Islam is a better religion and way of life, hence they adopted it wholeheartedly.

 

[civfanatic]

I would have provided this data myself, if it weren't counter-productive to my argument.
But the Chinese and Indians got richer (in Malaysia), I would assume, by hard (relative) work and proper use of business acumen, unlike the caste system in India.

The fact is that Malaysia would be nowhere today without Indian and Chinese migrants. The Malays want the best of both worlds: profiting from immigration while using the power of the state to enforce discrimination and prevent immigrants from becoming truly integrated into society. It is basically a more democratic version of Saudi Arabia, and just like Saudi Arabia, immigrants will continue to work in Malaysia due to economic reasons, despite the institutionalized racism.

The ironic thing is that a supposed Malaysian member here argued repeatedly for "globalization" and "intermixing of cultures", while the government policies of his own supposed country are exactly against that. As Gandhi said, "be the change that you wish to see in the world" (this supposed Malaysian member also expressed his love for Gandhi on several occasions, so I hope he will heed Gandhi-ji's words).

 

[Known_Unknown]

I would have provided this data myself, if it weren't counter-productive to my argument.
But the Chinese and Indians got richer (in Malaysia), I would assume, by hard (relative) work and proper use of business acumen, unlike the caste system in India.

Even if we accept your argument for a moment, did the Kshatriyas and Brahmins work any less harder or less smarter than the lower castes? Should they be penalized for the lack of a zeal among the lower castes to improve their lot by, for example, converting en masse to Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism or the Abrahamic religions?

 

[Known_Unknown]

I find it quite hilarious that people who wholeheartedly support massive state sanctioned discrimination under the guise of "affirmative action" in India, detest the same when it occurs in Malaysia. A principled stand would be to either support or oppose both systems, not change colours as and when it becomes convenient to do so!

 

[Razor]

Even if we accept your argument for a moment, did the Kshatriyas and Brahmins work any less harder or less smarter than the lower castes? Should they be penalized for the lack of a zeal among the lower castes to improve their lot by, for example, converting en masse to Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism or the Abrahamic religions?

Well, considering the circumstances, it would be difficult to summon some zeal.
In states like Kerala, untouchability by the Nairs, Nasranis (yup it was practiced among xtians too) and Namboodiris was extreme, with a stipulations that polluted classes must maintain such and such distances from the Higher castes. Can the lower castes develop their life under such oppression ? There is no doubt that lower castes were oppressed to varying degrees in various parts of India. Whether they are taking advantage of the current system is not for this thread, but to be noted is that it can not be compared to the Malays having lower incomes.

 

[civfanatic]

Wrong. Take a look at the statistics from wiki in my earlier post. The Malays were on the whole disadvantaged in their own country compared to the Chinese and Indians who came barely a century or two ago. The purpose of the bumiputra policy was not to "retain their superior position", but in fact, elevate the Malays from the inferior position they occupied in society compared to the Chinese and Indians.

The Malays always enjoyed political dominance, and never the Indians and Chinese. When the Indians and Chinese migrated to Malaysia, the Malaysian Peninsula was ruled by Malay sultanates under British suzerainty, and there was no institution which inherently favored the Indians or Chinese (unlike chaturvarna, which favors the upper castes at the expense of the lower castes). In fact, most of the Indian migrants came as poor, indentured laborers to work on plantations; if they became more economically prosperous than the native Malays, it is because of their own labor and dedication. The Malays' "inferior" position in society economically is due entirely to their own failing. So really, there is no comparison between India's reservation system and Malaysia's racist "bhumiputra" system. What you are saying is like saying that the Jewish minority in Germany is more prosperous than the German majority, so there should be discrimination against the Jews to "uplift" the poor Germans.

Moreover, the very term "bhumiputra" implies that the main raison d'etre behind this racist system is ethnicity and place of origin, with economics being just a veneer. If not, why use this term "bhumiputra" in the first place?

Why should Malaysians regard Indian civilization as superior? In most of SE Asia including Malaysia, the populace voluntarily converted to Islam. It wasn't conversion by the sword, but conversion through conviction. They were persuaded (for whatever reason), that Islam is a better religion and way of life, hence they adopted it wholeheartedly.

The point isn't whether or not Indian civilization is "superior". The point is that the Malays have no civilization of their own. Before, they were followers of Indian civilization (Buddhism and Hinduism), and now they follow Islamic civilization which originates in West Asia, far away from Malaysia. Given this, it's ironic how the "bhumiputras" (which itself is not even a Malay term) seek to uphold their own "culture" and exclude foreigners from it, when their own "culture" would be nothing without the non-"bhumiputras" (Indians, Persians, Arabs, and Chinese).

 

[afako]

All Chinese should convert to Islam in Malaysia, so they could enjoy peace and prosperity.

 

[pmaitra]

Where is asianobserve to defend "his" country. Did he forget under which flag he posts here?

I think he is observing this thread at the moment.



@asianobserve, I think Mr. Ewald is missing you.

 

[cw2005]

When you enjoy majority, you could be democracy and racial discriminative at the same time.

 

[amoy]

I think Malaysian politics is quite unique - almost all major parties are ethnicity based, forming a ruling coalition, and the opposition more or less mirroring so. The merits may include tipping an ethnic "balance" by sharing n allocating power within the alliance.

Also ""Malay"" or Muslim population is perhaps deliberately ballooned, for a demographic dominance, as most non-Chinese non-Indians communities are grouped as "Malays". However most east Malaysian indigenous are non Muslims diff. from mainland "Malays". Cant back my claim with links right away being on a small screen.

Sent from my 5910 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Ray]

Definitions of bumiputra in public use vary among different institutions, organizations, and government departments and agencies.

Guidebook for entry into public higher learning institutions bumiputra as follows, depending on the region of origin of the individual applicant:

Peninsular Malaysia
"If one of the parents is Muslim Malay/Orang Asli as stated in Article 160 (2) Federal Constitution of Malaysia; thus the child is considered as a Bumiputra"

Sabah
"If one of the parents is a Muslim Malay or indigenous native of Sabah as stated in Article 160A (6)(a) Federal Constitution of Malaysia; thus his child is considered as a Bumiputra"

Sarawak
"If both of the parent are indigenous natives of Sarawak as stated in Article 160A (6)(b) Federal Constitution of Malaysia; thus their child is considered as a Bumiputra"

In addition to the interpretation given above, a broader definition of bumiputra include groups such as the Indonesian Pribumis, Malaysian Siamese, Muslim Indian Malaysians, Straits Chinese or Peranakan, Khmer people and the Kristang people of Portuguese-Eurasian descent.

Most of these encompass the community that have been established in southeast Asia prior the arrival of the British colonist that have forever altered the demographic of Malaysia.

Article 153 of the Constitution states that,
It shall be the responsibility of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to safeguard the special position of the Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak and the legitimate interests of other communities in accordance with the provisions of this Article.

Article 160 defines a Malay as being one who "professes the religion of Islam, habitually speaks the Malay language, conforms to Malay customs and is the child of at least one parent who was born within the Federation of Malaysia before independence of Malaya on 31 August 1957, or the issue (off-spring) of such a person."

Article 8 of the Constitution, states that all Malaysian citizens shall be equal under the law, and "Except as expressly authorised by this Constitution, there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the ground only of religion, race, descent or place of birth in any law or in the appointment to any office or employment under a public authority or in the administration of any law relating to the acquisition, holding or disposition of property or the establishing or carrying on of any trade, business, profession, vocation or employment." Article 153 itself expressly forbids particular forms of discrimination; clause 5 states that "All persons of whatever race in the same grade in the service of the Federation shall, subject to the terms and conditions of their employment, be treated impartially," while clause 9 states: "Nothing in this Article shall empower Parliament to restrict business or trade solely for the purpose of reservations for Malays."

The term of the Bumiputras' special position has been disputed. The Reid Commission, which drafted the Constitution, initially proposed that Article 153 expire after 15 years unless renewed by Parliament. This qualification was struck from the final draft. After the 13 May Incident in 1969, representatives within the government argued over whether the special position of the bumiputras ought to have a sunset clause.

Ismail Abdul Rahman argued that "the question be left to the Malays themselves because ... as more and more Malays became educated and gained self-confidence, they themselves would do away with this 'special position'." Ismail believed the special position was "a slur on the ability of the Malays." In 1970, however, one member of the Cabinet said that Malay special rights would remain for "hundreds of years to come."

In the 1970s, the government implemented the New Economic Policy (NEP), designed to be a more aggressive form of affirmative action for the Bumiputra than Article 153. Article 153 provides specifically for the use of quotas in the granting of scholarships, positions in the civil service, and business licences, as well as native reservations of land. Policies under the rubric of the NEP include subsidies for real estate purchases, quotas for public equity shares, and general subsidies to Bumiputra businesses.

Former Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and his predecessor Dr. Mahathir bin Mohamad have both suggested that Malays should depend less on government assistance. Many observers believe full abolition of bumiputra privileges is unlikely, especially in view of the constitutional issues involved, although successive administrations since Mahathir have attempted to reform the system of government aid for the bumiputra. Some bumiputra groups believe further affirmative action is necessary.

Parliament began to use the term bumiputra in 1965. Following debate of the act to create the Majlis Amanah Rakyat (MARA), the government founded an agency to preserve bumiputra interests.

From Wiki

 

[Ray]

Interestingly, one of my relative, who was born in Malaysia and his family were in Malaysia over generations, married an Malaysian lady who was a Muslim of Indonesian origin. He converted to Islam, and is more steeped in all Islamic tenets than his wife or children, is not considered a bhumiputra. I think his children are!

 

[mylegend]

I think he is observing this thread at the moment.



@asianobserve, I think Mr. Ewald is missing you.

He did obeserved and voiced his opinion by that liked

 

[pmaitra]

He did obeserved and voiced his opinion by that liked

My Legend Bhai, looks like you are very observant as well.

Good job.

 

[civfanatic]

He did obeserved and voiced his opinion by that liked

At first, I thought "asianobserve" liked your post as well. Haha.

 

[Blackwater]

This list covers a period of about 49 years since Independence Day in Malaysia (1957)

(1) Out of all the 5 major banks in Malaysia, only one bank is owned by multi-racial, the rest are controlled by Malays.

(2) 99% of PETRONAS (the only one petroleum company) directors are Malays, and the former Prime Minister work as Consultant in PETRONAS.

 (3) 3% of PETRONAS employees are Chinese.

(4) 99% of 2000 PETRONAS gasoline stations are owned by Malays.

 (5) 100% all contractors working under PETRONAS projects must be "bumi's status" (Malay).

(6) 0% of non-Malays staffs are legally required in Malay's companies. But there must be 30% Malays staffs in Chinese companies. And big companies in Malaysia require a Malays hold as director status with51% shareholder. Which this mean non-Malays own company needs to give their property to Malays. And non-Malays citizen can't really own their business.

 (7) 5% of all new intake for government police, nurses, army, is non-Malays.

(8) 2% is the present Chinese staff in Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF), drop from 40% in 1960"¦

(9) 2% is the percentage of non-Malays government servants in Putrajaya (Malaysia main government office). But Malays make up 98 %.

(10) 7% is the percentage of Chinese government servants in the whole government (in 2004), drop from 30% in 1960. Only 2 position for non-Malays in political status.

(11) 95% of government contracts are given to Malays; even it is an open tender. Non-Malays contractors tender the lower price and use better materials can't get the contract that government given.

(12) 100% all

 Business licensees are controlled by Malay government e.g. Taxi permits, Approved permits, etc. and all the license are given to government officer families.

(13) 80% of the Chinese rice millers in Kedah (north of peninsular Malaysia) had to be sold to Malay and controlled by Bernas (Government Org.) since 1980s. Otherwise, life is make difficult for Chinese rice millers.

(14) 100 big companies set up, owned and managed by Chinese Malaysians were taken over by government, and later managed by Malays since 1970"²se.g. UTC, UMBC, MISC, etc. This company now is the sole company.

(15) At least 10 Chinese owned bus companies (throughout Malaysia, throughout 40 years) had to be sold to MARA or other Malay transport companies due to rejection by Malay authority to Chinese application for bus routes and rejection for their application for new buses.

(16) 2 Chinese taxi drivers were barred from driving in Johor (South of Peninsular Malaysia) Larkin bus station. There are about 30 taxi drivers and 3 are Chinese in October 2004. Spoiling taxi club properties was the reason given.

(17) 0 non-Malays are allowed to get shop lots in the new Muar (city in south peninsular Malaysia) bus station (November 2004).

(18) 8000 billions ringgit is the total amount the government channeled to Malays pockets through ASB, ASN, MARA,  privatization of government  agencies like Tabung Haji etc, through NEP over 34 years periods.

(19) 48 Chinese primary schools closed down since 1968 â€" 2000

(20) 144 Indian primary schools closed down since 1968 â€" 2000

(21) 2637 Malay primary schools built since 1968 â€" 2000

(22) 2.5% is government budget for Chinese primary schools. Indian schools got only 1%, Malay schools got 96.5%

(23) While a Chinese parent with RM1000 salary (monthly) cannot get school-text-book-loan, and a Malay parent with RM2000 salary is eligible.

(24) 10 all public universities vice chancellors are Malays. And politics in universities  are held by Malays. If non-Malays want to form a Politics parties, there is no way to get approved.

(25) 5% – the government universities lecturers of non-Malay origins had been reduced from about 70% in 1965 to only 5% in 2004 with the reason Malaysia Education Ministry give full support for Malays only.

(26) Only 5% is given to non-Malays for government scholarships over 40years.

(27) 0 Chinese or Indians were sent to Japan and Korea under "Look East Policy".

(28) 128 STPM (High Study / A Level) Chinese top students could not get into the course  that they aspired i.e. Medicine and doctors (in 2004). Malays with not qualify result can get into the course.

(29) 10% place for non-bumi students for MARA science schools beginning from year 2003, but only 7% are filled. Before that it was 100% Malays.

(30) 50 cases whereby Chinese and Indian Malaysians, are beaten up in the National Service program since 2003.

(31) 25% is Malaysian Chinese population in 2004, drop from 45% since1957 because government are not support non-Malays like government support Malays.

(32) 7% is the present Malaysian Indians population (2004), a drop from 12% since 1957.

(33) 2 millions Chinese Malaysians had emigrated to overseas since 40years ago due to unfair politics.

(34) 0.5 million Indians Malaysians had emigrated to overseas.

(35) 3 millions Indonesians had migrated into Malaysia and became Malaysian citizens with bumi's status.

(36) 600000 are the Chinese and Indians Malaysians with "red I/C" (a temporary identity card) and were rejected repeatedly when applying for citizenship for 40 years. Perhaps 60% of them had already passed away due to old age. This shows racism of how easily Indonesians got their citizenships compare with the Chinese and  Indians

(37) 5% – 15% discount for a Malay to buy a house, regardless whether the Malay is rich or poor

(38) 2% is what Chinese new villages get compare with 98% of what Malays villages got for rural development budget.

38 things you MUST know about Malaysia!

how many sardars settled in malaysia????

 

[LurkerBaba]

Singapore was once part of the Malaysian union. They broke off (expelled actually) due to discriminatory policies of Malays. However, Singapore turned out waaaay more successful. Take per capita income for eg:

$61,046 - Singapore
$16,942 -Malaysia