Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 80

Thread: The rat race part v - the malaysian rat race


Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    The rat race part v - the malaysian rat race


    We are recording the count-down to the crisis to see when is the tipping point
    Financial Crisis End-game
    We expect that it will take place by the end of 2009 with disastrous results for Malaysia. By then UMNO will fall.

    Similar articles appear in:
    A look at Malaysian history beyond race and religion 25 May 08
    and 11 May 08

    Chapter 1: Introduction & Review

    We hope these articles can help us look beyond race and religion, to truly see ourselves as Rats and to recognize that our problems are class-related. We need to accept the idea that we are Rats caught in a Rat Race. If we cannot, then it is advisable to review the earlier articles or to skip and move on.

    We have presented four Parts, I to IV, to explain the Rat Race, our roles, how we are exploited by the Ruling Class at the apex of the Pyramid power structure. We need to consider the situation from a global perspective to learn how to understand our situation within Malaysia. The reasons are:

    • Secrecy and misinformation surrounding events here. On a global basis, especially in the US, more information and analysis is available. All Ruling Classes exchange information and techniques for mass control as they are linked to the Global Pyramid. What is used in the US will be used here albeit in a different form. The challenge is to learn to recognize it.

    • The opportunity for us to view global events dispassionately. Emotions colour our perception and understanding. Again, looking at the US, what seemed to confuse most Americans, is very obvious to us. Eg. The US Invasion of Iraq.

    A quick review of the previous articles in these series:
    THE RAT RACE PART I: WE ARE DOING WELL! is just a wake-up call. This was first published in Malaysia-Today on 19 Feb 2008, just before the Mar 08 2008 General Elections.

    THE RAT RACE PART II – THE SYSTEM is a description of the Rat Race. Part II appeared in Malaysia-Today on 20 Feb 2008.

    RACE PART IIIA - HOW THE SYSTEM WORKS? introduces the concept of mental model no. 1 - The Pyramid and explains how the system works.

    THE RAT RACE PART IIIB: MENTAL MODEL NO. 2 – THE CIRCLE explores the Pyramid in more detail, discusses the strategies used by the Exploiter and introduces mental model no. 2 – The Circle. (In Malaysia-Today on 25 Feb 2008.)

    The Rat Race Part IV – The Pyramid studies the Pyramid in detail, identifies those at the top of the Global Pyramid (the Financial Class & Ruling Class), the possibility of the existence of a conspiracy to control the world, the concept of money and financial control. This article appeared after the Mar 08 Elections so it is useful to bear that mind while reading it.

    To supplement these articles and to flesh out certain principles not covered there, refer to the Finance & Economics Board. A sample list of relevant articles are shown below: (Note: We suggest you read the Rat Race Part V first before exploring the Board as there are quite a lot of material there and it can take a few days to read. We never said it would be easy. :)

    We started to alert our readers about the coming crisis here
    Financial Crisis from 8 Apr 2008

    We tried to explain why the crisis occurred here
    Understanding the Financial Crisis

    We are recording the count-down to the crisis to see when is the tipping point
    Financial Crisis End-game
    We expect that it will take place by the end of 2009 with disastrous results for Malaysia. By then UMNO will fall.

    We discussed the issue of petrol & diesel prices here:
    Petrol & diesel prices
    and the issue of the global food crisis here:
    Aliran: Global Food Crisis Review

    Here is an explanation on what we can do to protect our assets:
    Relationship between gold & the USD. The reason this is important is the USD is the global reserve currency and almost every nation have their foreign reserves in USD as a major component.

    Here is an explanation on how to buy precious metals to protect ourselves:
    How to buy precious metals

    Although they appear to be disconnected, economics, finance and geopolitics are vital components of the Rat Race System used by the Ruling Class to exploit us. Readers can refer to the Conspiracy Board for relevant articles.
    Conspiracy Theory

    Conceptually, as Rats, we are caught in a constant struggle for survival that appeared as a never-ending cycle. We work for pieces of paper called money issued by the Ruling Class who could print any amount at will. For the Ruling Class, money was free but the Rats had to work for it. This is even worse than slavery. At least, slaves were fed and clothed by their masters.

    Part V is posted in chapters to provide for discussion and comments. This is going to be the most difficult part of the series because of the emotions associated with race and religion. We hope readers can put aside the lens of race and religion, and look at the issues dispassionately from the perspective of the Rat Race System. For a lot of us, it will be very difficult to let go but unless we do, we will not be able to understand and internalize the concepts. Without that understanding, it will be hard for us to get out of the Rat Race.

    **IMPORTANT PRINCIPLE** We are Rats divided by class. Our labels, of race or religion, are irrelevant. Those labels are useful for the Ruling Class to divide us, control us and manipulate us. They apply psychological warfare on our minds to manipulate our emotions, to make us do their bidding, to pit one group of Rats against the other. Part of their strategy is to champion one race or religion and use them against the others. When it comes to rewards, the Ruling Class will keep the bulk, leaving the crumbs for the rest. Such deception can continue indefinitely. It is still ongoing.

    The System is neutral and considers every Rat as an economic digit.

    The Ruling Class does not operate alone. They have the intelligence services who serve them in spying on and waging psychological warfare against us - attacking our emotional vulnerability. We must recognize the tactics and strategies to understand how it works. The ideas presented below seemed very far fetch when they first appeared but today, many of them are routinely applied:

    Please read: 1984
    and Animal Farm

    Watch: The Matrix
    and V for Vendetta

    Next - Chapter 2: The Social Contract - How We Got It All Wrong!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Chapter 2: The Social Contract - How We Got It All Wrong!

    (A look at Malaysian history beyond race and religion)

    Chapter 2: The Social Contract - How We Got It All Wrong!


    For 50 years both sides of the political spectrum believed they were right, blissfully unaware that they were conned as Rats!

    We have to break free from the mental cage of race and religion and learn to look at our situation through the concept of class division and as Malaysians. Until we do, we will never be free.

    As explained earlier, the Global Rat Race System (GRSS) is an attempt to explain the world around us using a mental model. This mental model consists of several mental sub-models –

    Model no. 1 The Pyramid
    Model no. 2 The Circle

    Within the GRSS there are smaller pyramids within each country that co-exist and support the GRRS, eg The Malaysian RRS (MRRS) and the Malaysian Pyramid.

    On the surface it may look complex but once we grasp the principle ideas, it is actually quite easy. The key to the mental model is simplicity and flexibility. And the primary driving forces are greed and fear. The objective is power and wealth. This is achieved by stealing the Rats’ time and state resources. In every situation, always remember the objective of the Ruling Class – power and wealth. Don’t be confused by words or actions.

    Also note that there are collaborators of the Ruling Class even among the opposition ranks. The skillful ones are very difficult to detect. We can try to do so by observing the consequences of their actions, not their acts, not their words. At times, they may even appear to be a victim of the Ruling Class, such is their mastery of subterfuge. In case of doubt, assume they are collaborators. It is better to err on the safe side. (09/02/09: The current debacle in Perak should be very enlightening. We can identify easily who are the collaborators.)

    From here onwards, we shall try to use the MRRS to explain historical events and see how it fits in. If it can explain more than 70% of the major incidents, we can consider it workable. Bear in mind, it will not be 100% accurate. It cannot be because it behaves as a living organism, able to mutate and change to suit the external environment. To understand inside (Malaysia), we usually look outside (world). The reason is the secrecy that surrounds many government decisions in Malaysia due to the Official Secrets Act (OSA) and Sedition Act.

    Royal Professor Dr. Ungku Abdul Aziz said on 12 May 2008: No such thing as social contract. But Mahathir disagreed,

    Tunku gave one million citizenship to the Chinese, in return, he expected the Chinese would give some support to the demand for independence and to the sharing concept. He didn’t spell it (the contract) out 100 per cent, but there was this understanding, not written,” he said.

    Merdeka 1957 tunku abdul rahman

    It is good to pause here and ask ourselves: Who is more believable?

    The words of Tunku who is no longer around?
    The words special position in the Constitution?
    The recommendations of the Reid Commission?
    Or Mahathir?

    Will this be the end of the debate? Absolutely not! People will believe what they want to believe, and If a lie is repeated often enough, eventually people will accept it as the truth. We are seeing the success of mass propaganda at work. The Ruling Class and the secret service attack the Rats’ emotions and senses to make them believe their story. And it has worked successfully for more than 50 years.

    There are a few “truths” that the Ruling Class (UMNO) holds true.

    1. UMNO believed they inherited Malaya from the British. In other words, they own Malaya.
    2. UMNO have been taught by the British to always ensure they retain power, even to the extent of cheating during elections. To them, it is just a strategic procedure.
    3. Elections are merely a fig-leaf, held to demonstrate to the world that Malaysia practises democracy.
    4. What the Ruling Class fear most is the Rats uniting and turning against them.
    5. Among the Ruling Class and their collaborators, we can observe all races and religions co-operating together because they are bound by the common objective of greed.

    Once we know these “truths”, UMNO’s behaviour is easily understood. Please refer to the books Animal Farm and 1984. Use them as a manual to interpret UMNO’s actions.

    Now, let’s look at a subset of the GRRS – The MRRS. First a short history:

    Post WW II, 1947 to 1957 :
    The End of Empire and the Making of Malaya by Timothy Norman Harper

    The biggest problem facing the British government following the end of World War 2 was the restoration of civil government. Because the Japanese had been removed with violence Malaya had suffered little loss of life or damage to its towns and cities but many of its tin mines and plantations had been destroyed to prevent the Japanese using them, so the Malayan economy was slow to recover after the war. The Japanese occupation had also sown the seeds of future unrest. They had pursued a policy of divide and conquer by favouring the Malays while persecuting the Chinese who were already anti Japanese due to the Japanese actions in China. This resulted in some violence in the period between the Japanese leaving and the British returning. (This is what UMNO had continually played on to frighten the Malays ever since)

    Exhausted by WW II, under pressure from the US to dismantle the British Empire, economic costs of fighting the Malayan Communist Party who claimed to be fighting for independence, the British were ready to withdraw from Malaya. During that period, the British were the Ruling Class supported by an expatriate bureaucracy assisted by the local civil service. They controlled the major rubber estates, tin mines, import agencies, business trading houses, banks and Shell, in effect, probably up to 80% of the economy.

    In their plans for withdrawal, the British had several considerations:

    Transfer of power & protection of their assets:

    Old habits die hard. They have been in the colonial game for centuries and had got it down to a fine art. Looting colonies was a very profitable business, much better than slogging in the miserable British climate back home. If they could manage it, they would rather continue to control Malaya, albeit from behind the scenes. Deviousness was an inherent characteristic of the British. All they had to do was to persuade a couple of the top people in UMNO to buy into their scheme. From their perspective as the Ruling Class, they had decided that they could do business with the aristocratic Malays heading the party, notably Tunku Abdul Rahman and Tun Razak. It was just a matter of “transfer” of power from one class to another.

    When they leave, the British would be leaving behind substantial assets that they still wanted to retain control over. From a business point of view, it made sense to maintain those assets and continue to generate wealth from it.

    Their Immigrant Rats (coolies) or Pendatang:
    What to do with the 2.5 million immigrants they imported from China and India to man their rubber estates and tin mines?

    They could send them back to their home countries. But they had just granted independence to India and unfortunately, the natives proceeded to slaughter each other during the partition with Pakistan. So India, being dirt-poor as it is, was not in a position to absorb another half a million repatriated Indians from Malaya. In any case, there was this delicate matter of which country (India or Pakistan) these people really belonged to, after having left India for more than a generation.

    Then, there was China, almost destroyed during WW II under Japanese occupation, and now having a civil war between the Chinese Communist Party and the Kuomintang. Sending 2 million Malayan Chinese back to a war zone was political suicide.

    Repatriation cost:

    Next there was the cost of repatriation that would have to be borne by the British, which could amount to a few hundred million dollars. The British, at that time heavily in debt to the US, certainly was in no position to take on such a burden.

    Residual management:

    Finally, there was the matter of who would help them run their Malayan businesses if all the immigrants left. They could not rely on the locals who were happy staying in the kampongs, planting padi or fishing. In fact, that was the reason why the Chinese and Indians were brought here in the first place. If the immigrants abandoned Malaya, the economy would collapse.

    Their solution was neo-colonialism. They figured that if they offered to hand power over to the Tunku in return for citizenship for the immigrants as a quid pro quo, their dilemma would be solved and they could continue to exercise economic control even after independence.

    Getting the Tunku onboard:

    The problems related to the immigrants and the advantages of retaining those Rats in Malaya were explained to the Tunku. The Tunku was no fool. Coming from a royal family, he was raised in the shadow of power and had seen how the British built Malaya with the immigrants. He fully appreciated the advantages of having a couple of million of hard-working Rats under his control and helping him run the country. Being of a fun-loving nature, he certainly did not relish the prospect of working his head off trying to build a country with his own people, who were known to be easy-going and laid-back. It was much better getting those immigrant Rats to do the hard work. And they had such low maintenance, being fully self-sufficient. They even built and ran their own schools. Who could ask for more? The clincher was, he did not want to inherit a bankrupt country, which would be the case if the immigrants abandoned the country.

    Coming from the aristocratic class, a Rat was a Rat. It did not particularly bother him what colour the Rat was. As the incoming Ruling Class, he quickly saw the advantages of offering citizenship to the immigrants to retain them as Malayan Rats. Naturally, such a deal could not be disclosed to the locals. This had already caused an uproar in 1946 over the issue of citizenship for the immigrants under the Malayan Union. But it was different this time. They were talking about acquiring power and 2.5 million assets (Rats) to go with it. This was a management takeover.

    Social Contract:
    So the British and the Tunku worked out a deal whereby the immigrants were offered citizenship in exchange for the locals being recognized as having a special position in the Federal Constitution under Article 153. The MCA and the MIC were roped in to convince the immigrants, which they did admirably. The Reid Commission had recommended that a sunset clause of 15 years be included in the constitution on the special position, as a safeguard against abuse. The various parties agreed verbally but due to the sensitivity of the issue, it was not written officially into the Constitution.

    Then UMNO went round the countryside selling the idea of independence to the Malays, special rights. UMNO cynically misled the simple folks about what was provided for in the Constitution. The Malays trusted UMNO, accepting them as their protector since UMNO had successfully spear-headed the opposition to the Malayan Union in 1946 leading to its dissolution in 1947. To their minds, therefore special position was special rights. To the immigrants, special position was that described under Article 153. Thus was formed the Federation of Malaya, born of a lie and on which laid the seeds of racial discord that lasted to this day. But everyone forgot that it was just a new Ruling Class taking over from an old Ruling Class.

    There was no Social Contract! It was a handover of power from the British Ruling Class to the UMNO Ruling Class. And that is why UMNO believes and behave as if they own the whole country!

    For 50 years both sides of the political spectrum believed they were right, blissfully unaware that they were conned as Rats!

    We have to break free from the mental cage of race and religion and learn to look at our situation through the concept of class division and as Malaysians. Until we do, we will never be free.


  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Re: Chapter 2: The Social Contract - Citizenship to the non-Malays

    Quote Originally Posted by pywong View Post
    (A look at Malaysian history beyond race and religion)

    Chapter 2: The Social Contract - How We Got It All Wrong!


    For 50 years both sides of the political spectrum believed they were right, blissfully unaware that they were conned as Rats!

    We have to break free from the mental cage of race and religion and learn to look at our situation through the concept of class division and as Malaysians. Until we do, we will never be free.
    Citizenship to the non-Malays
    ARCHIVES 2010

    Friday, 18 June 2010 admin-s

    What about the magnanimity shown by the non-Malays in agreeing to recognise the special position of the Malays in reciprocation to give them a better life? Wasn’t that a magnanimous act on the part of the non-Malays? What if the non-Malays had from the outset refused to concede to the Malay demand on this issue and had remained unyielding till the end. Would the Malays be enjoying the sort of life they are leading without the goodwill of the non-Malays?

    By Sivakumar

    Citizenship to the non-Malays: Not given at the behest of the Malays
    Historical facts should be projected in the right perspective without any bias

    I refer to the article entitled, ‘“The Tunku, Merdeka and Malaysia,” by V.Chakaravarthy in Aliran Monthly Vol 30. No 1 where he stated, “Tunku was able to convince the Malays and they showed their magnanimity by granting citizenship to the non – Malays in exchange for the ‘special position’ of the Malays .This was the social contract which was bequeathed to us by our founding fathers’.

    Although the article was written in praise of the Tunku, certain aspects of the article, with particular reference to the granting of citizenship to the non-Malays, need to be addressed and put in proper perspective as the above statement is generally the theory propounded by the Malays. At the same time it is also pertinent to reaffirm certain relevant issues regarding the role played by the non–Malays in achieving independence for Malaya.


    While the non-Malays are without any reservation grateful to the Malays for accommodating them as citizens of this nation but to say that it was by the magnanimity of the Malays that enabled the non-Malay to enjoy citizenship status is, to say the least, an exaggeration and a distortion of a historical fact. Some Malay politicians even keep harping now and then that the granting of citizenship by the Malays was a great favour done to the non-Malays for which the latter should remain indebted to them for

    This sentiment is also echoed at the Biro Tata Negara (BTN) courses conducted by the Government where it was alleged that some Malay speakers had blatantly told the non-Malay participants that they should be grateful to the Malays for their magnanimity in granting them citizenship. It looks like even the Government is tacitly reiterating this fact to the non-Malays openly. Such a preposterous statement will not help to foster harmonious relationships between the Malays and non-Malays but will only mar the goodwill that exists between them.

    First of all, the Malays do not have the legal authority to grant citizenship to others as the granting of citizenship is governed under the Constitution. It is quite clear that under the Constitution, citizenship may be acquired by a person by (a) operation of law (b) registration (c) naturalization and (d) incorporation of territory.

    However, it must be pointed out that prior to the Federation of Malaya Agreement 1948 there was no Federal Citizenship. One was either a citizen of one of the Malay states or a British citizen if residing in the Straits Settlement states of Malacca, Penang or Singapore.

    However, by virtue of the Federation of Malaya Agreement 1948, non-Malay residents in Malacca or Penang, who were British citizens, were entitled to acquire Federal citizenship automatically by operation of law. Thus the acquisition of citizenship by the non-Malays by operation of law is a vested right under the Constitution and not something given at the behest of the Malays as claimed by some.

    To support my statement, I quote below from the book entitled, “The Constitution of Malaysia “written by Harry E Groves, Head of Department of Law, and Dean Faculty of Law, University of Singapore, which is self-explanatory.

    “Malays are subjects if born in the State. Others are subjects if born in the State and one parent was born in the Federation of Malaya. Malacca and Penang, being without Rulers, did not have any State citizenship. Those who came within the terms of the Federation of Malaya Agreement, 1948, recognized operation of law, registration and naturalization as methods of acquiring citizenship of the then Federation of Malaya. In addition to all subjects of rulers having Federation citizenship by operation of law, so did citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies who had certain designated contacts with the Settlements of Malacca or Penang or with the Federation of Malaya.’’

    Social contract

    The so-called Social Contract is a term used by latter day Malay leaders like Dr Mahathir to refer to the reciprocal concessions agreed to by our Malay and non-Malay founding fathers to safeguard the interests of the respective communities, as a sequel to independence. Only our founding fathers would know exactly in what context the concessions or compromises were made as the Constitution only speaks of “safeguarding the special position of the Malays and the legitimate interest of the other communities” - and nothing more.

    However, some Malays claim that the Social Contract was a pledge to confer citizenship rights to the non-Malays upon their agreement to recognize the special position of the Malays. It is a pity that our founding fathers are not around today to confirm the true position. Nevertheless, going by the version propounded by some Malays, it would appear that the granting of citizenship to the non-Malays was compromised on a quid pro qua basis and not by the sole decision of the Malays. If so, then what is there for these Malays to insist and state that the Malays were the ones who gave citizenship to the non-Malays and to that extent they were very magnanimous.

    What about the magnanimity shown by the non-Malays in agreeing to recognise the special position of the Malays in reciprocation to give them a better life? Wasn’t that a magnanimous act on the part of the non-Malays? What if the non-Malays had from the outset refused to concede to the Malay demand on this issue and had remained unyielding till the end. Would the Malays be enjoying the sort of life they are leading without the goodwill of the non-Malays? So, the question of magnanimity did not rest with the Malays alone but with the non-Malays as well. This fact must be appreciated by the Malays at all times. The majority of Malays of goodwill have no problem recognising this fact.

    Furthermore, when the NEP was passed in 1970 after the 13th May 1969 debacle, didn’t the non-Malays unselfishly agree to pass over to the Malays 30% of their business equity in the interest of the Malays, as required by the Government? Wasn’t that a magnanimous act and a great favour done to the Malays by the non-Malays in order to uplift them from their poor economic standing?

    Giving citizenship alone is not a bounty, for the non-Malays have reciprocated in no small measure by developing and contributing immensely to the economic progress of this nation, the fruits of which are also enjoyed by the Malays. Hence, it may not be an exaggeration to say that the non-Malays have given more to the Malays than taken from them in the form of just citizenship only. Yet, the non-Malays do not brag or crow about it as it is everyone’s duty to help one another.


    There is also an erroneous perception on the part of some Malays that independence for Malaya was fought by the Malays only. This view is not only unfair to the non-Malays but is without any foundation. Although it must be admitted that the Malays were the ones who initiated the Merdeka movement, they could not, on their own, have succeeded in their mission as the British government was not inclined to grant independence without the participation of the other races namely, the Chinese and Indians. As such the Tunku, as leader of UMNO and the Merdeka movement had to seek the support and co-operation of MCA and MIC respectively to achieve his goal.

    These non-Malay political parties gave the Tunku their whole-hearted support in his hour of need. If the Chinese and Indians had dissented they could have left the Tunku in the lurch by telling the British that they were not interested in independence and preferred to remain as British subjects. But the non-Malays, being magnanimous, didn’t do that. Instead, they co-operated with the Tunku to lift the country from the colonial yoke. To pursue their goal, the three political parties namely, UMNO, MCA and MIC formed a coalition, known as the Alliance to ask for independence from Britain and what followed next is all history, with Malaya attaining independence on 31st August 1957 to the jubilation of all the races.

    I quote below the relevant passage from Mr. Harry E. Groves's book (pages 12&13) which reveals that the quest for Merdeka was the joint effort of all the races and not that of the Malays alone. To say otherwise is tantamount to ignoring and dismissing the non-Malays and their loyal support to the Tunku in his effort to gain independence for Malaya.

    “The sentiment for independence continued to grow during the ‘emergency’ period of Communist warfare. In time it became apparent that independence could only be achieved through some joining of forces of the communal parties; and in 1952 the United Malays National Organization, the Malayan Chinese Association, and the Malayan Indian Congress formed a political coalition, the Alliance, which carried a number of State and Settlement elections. The British Government in 1954 agreed to make a majority
    of the seats in the Federal Legislative Council elective rather than appointive as formerly. Of the fifty-two seats to be filled in the first such election in July 1955, fifty-one were won by the Alliance, with voting across racial lines being one of the most striking features of the elections. Discussions were begun in August 1955, between the British Secretary of State, the Rulers and the new Alliance Ministers on the next steps toward self-government.

    Reid Commission

    It was agreed that a Commission to review the Constitution of the federation should meet in London early in 1956. The Federation of Malaya Constitutional Conference met in London in January and February 1956. Agreement was reached on full self-government and independence within the Commonwealth. A Commonwealth Constitutional Commission was agreed upon to make recommendations for a constitution. Only five members served on this Commission: Lord Reid, a Lord of Appeal in Ordinary as Chairman; Sir Ivor Jennings, Master of Trinity Hall, Cambridge; Sir William McKell, a former Governor-General of Australia; Mr. B. Malik, a former Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court; and Justice Abdul Hamid of the West Pakistan High Court. No Malayans served on this Commission.

    The Commission was given five specific terms of reference:
    (a) the establishment of a strong central government with some autonomy in the States,
    (b) safeguarding the positions and prestige of the Rulers,
    (c) providing for a constitutional head of state,
    (d) creating a common nationality and
    (e) safeguarding the special position of the Malays and the legitimate interests of the other communities.

    The Commission met in Malaya in the summer of 1956. It solicited memoranda from organizations and individuals and received 131 such memoranda. It held 81 hearings in support of the memoranda throughout the peninsula. It visited each State and Settlement
    conferring with officials, British and Malay, and met informally with other official and private persons

    • The Commission went to Rome to prepare its report” ….
    • The new constitution came into being with the new nation on August 31 1957, Merdeka Day.

    However, notwithstanding the fact that independence was achieved some 53 years ago, it is lamentable that we are still living as Malays, Chinese and Indians and not as one people. It will be noted that an interesting feature of the terms of reference to the Commonwealth Constitutional Commission, as revealed in Mr. Harry E. Groves’s book, at page 13 (see above extract) was the creation of a “common nationality”, following independence. It is regrettable that the Government has failed to achieve this noble objective hitherto. On the other hand the Government has divided the people into Bumiputras and non-Bumiputras to be treated differently contrary to the spirit of the Constitution.

    Perhaps the Government prefers to run the nation on ethnic lines as it brings advantages to certain groups of people. This kind of classification certainly does not augur well for the future of the nation as it is bound to create chauvinistic instincts in some people, especially among some Bumiputras, and keep them apart from the others forever.

    If the Prime Minister, Dato Seri Najib bin Tun Razak is really sincere about uniting the people under his 1Malaysia concept, then it is high time we dismantle racial borders and treat all as one people.

    In conclusion, suffice to say that ours is a wonderful nation where all the races have been living together harmoniously for generations in the spirit of give and take. Hence, let not a few overzealous Malay leaders distort historical facts on the pretext of seeking glory for their race by portraying themselves as the only magnanimous people on earth. What these misguided individuals are doing is using the name of the Malay community to promote their own selfish interests. Thinking people can see through them.

    The intention of the writer in writing this article is not to criticize anyone but to stress that historical facts should be projected in
    the right perspective without any bias so that our harmony and peace can be preserved for our mutual benefit.

    P Sivakumar is an Aliran member and President of the Malaysian Indians Business Association. Malaysia-today....

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Re: Chapter 2: The Social Contract - Don't question social contract, says Najib

    Don't question social contract, says Najib

    Hehhehheh. With depressing regularity, these UMNO-clods will come up with this baby to club the opposition into submission: -

    This argument involves a mental sleight of hand on the definition of the social contract. Once we let that slip through, the rest of the argument is easily won by the UMNO apologists.

    UMNO is claiming that the natives of Malaysia granted citizenship to the Chinese and the Indians in exchange for special privileges. We won’t go into the argument about who is the real native of Malaysia.

    So, we will not question the Social Contract. Instead, we will revisit it.

    First a definition. What is a Social Contract? Here’s what Wikipedia says ( –

    1. An agreement by the governed on a set of rules by which they are governed.
    2. An agreement whereby the people give up sovereignty to a government or other authority in order to receive or maintain social order through the rule of law.

    Definition 1 is very simple – that’s the Federal Constitution. Article 153 has been talked to death but there’s not one word about special privileges! Recognition of the special position (meaning economically-weaker position) of the natives, yes. But special privileges – no. But UMNO has turned the argument on its head to justify the NEP. There are enough reasons elsewhere to explain its lack of constitutionally, so we won’t go into it here. (see bottom of this article)

    Definition 2: the people gave up some rights in exchange for government maintaining social order.

    What are these rights given up by the people? It actually refers to certain obligations undertaken by the people to the government:

    A. Obligations of the governed (the people)
    • The obligation to pay tax, (even this is disputed by many Americans going back to 1913!)
    • The obligation to defend the country during war,
    • The obligation to comply with the Constitution and with any amendments to the Laws drafted by the Government.

    Let’s examine the performance of the people.
    • Have we not paid taxes?
    • Has our forefathers defended the nation during war? Did we not fight the Japanese during World War II? Did we not fight to kick the British colonialists out of the country?
    • Have we not complied with the Constitution and its more than 650 amendments since 1957?

    Clearly, we have kept our part of the bargain.

    B. Obligations of the Government (or the Ruling Party running the institution of Government)
    • Provide social order through the Rule of Law. Note carefully the words – Rule of Law, not Rule by Law,
    • Social services such as healthcare, infrastructure, utilities, education,
    • Help the weak and socially-disadvantaged regardless of race or religion,
    • Security both internal and external.

    Has UMNO/BN honoured the agreement?

    • Is the people governed fairly in accordance with the Law? Can we trust our judiciary, the MACC, the Police or for that matter any government institution?
    • Are social services provided by the Government at reasonable rates, or have they privatized it out to private operators? This is effectively a hidden form of taxation except it is for the benefit of private operators.
    • Is the weak and socially-disadvantaged helped regardless of race? No!
    • Is crime and public security a problem in the country? Yes!
    • With the way defense equipment are procured and jet engines can fly out of the country under the noses of our armed forces, do we have confidence that our defence is secure? No!

    Clearly, the Ruling Party (UMNO/BN) has not kept their part of the Social Contract. In other words, they have lost the mandate to rule. During the next general elections, let’s kick them out and put in a new ruling party.

    Refer to posts above for more information: #2, 10, 11, 19, 20, 21, 22, 33, 34, 50, 53, 54, 55, 57, 59

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Social Contract: Setting the Record Straight

    Quote Originally Posted by pywong View Post
    (A look at Malaysian history beyond race and religion)

    Chapter 2: The Social Contract - How We Got It All Wrong!


    For 50 years both sides of the political spectrum believed they were right, blissfully unaware that they were conned as Rats!

    We have to break free from the mental cage of race and religion and learn to look at our situation through the concept of class division and as Malaysians. Until we do, we will never be free.

    Merdeka 1957 tunku abdul rahman
    BTW, in that 1957 photo, the real power lies with the white man bedecked in white uniform and white hat. This is a system known as neo-colonialism, whereby the British set up UMNO as the front man, exactly like what they did with the Sultans pre-Merdeka. It only ended in 1966 after the Commonwealth Army left at the end of Confrontation with Indonesia.

    Setting the Record Straight

    Friday, 22 October 2010 Combat

    By John Doe

    There is no mention of "Hak Melayu" in the Malaysian Constitution.
    There is no mention of "Hak Melayu" in Malaysian Law.
    "Hak Melayu" is simply a myth.

    Not only is "Hak Melayu" a myth, Prof Dr Timothy Barnhard explains in his book "Contesting Malayness" that even the Melayu concept is simply a Myth.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    RPK: The Real Social Contract 1956 - Memorandum by the Secretary of State for the Colonies

    Memorandum by the Secretary of State for the Colonies, pages 1 and 2.

    RPK: "You want to know about the Social Contract? Okay, let’s study history."

    Friday, 22 October 2010 Super Admin

    Today, I am going to publish the first two pages of the 33-page document, which is the so-called Social Contract that everyone is talking about. This series of articles shall continue over the next few days until all 33 pages are published.


    Raja Petra Kamarudin

    Teach the young to appreciate history, says Puteri Umno

    (Bernama) -- Puteri Umno has called on party leaders as well as Barisan Nasional (BN) leaders to undertake the responsibility to educate the younger generation about the country's history so that they understand their role in the country.

    Puteri Umno's human resources bureau chief Fahariyah Md Nordin said appreciation of history was important at a time when certain sections of the younger generation had been voicing out that they had nothing to do with the decisions made by the previous generations.

    "The question is, don't they realise that by denying history, they are denying the very history of their existence?" she said when debating the policy speech of the Umno president at the 2010 Umno General Assembly today.

    She also called for a better way of promoting history among students such as by utilising tools like the Internet.

    History should also be made a compulsory-to-pass subject in school to drive home the point on the importance of learning the country's history, she said.

    Fahariyah added that it would be dangerous for the younger generation to be influenced by those who are bent on rejecting the provisions in the Federal Constitution, especially those concerning the rights of the Malays and Bumiputera.


    A few months ago, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad said that the Social Contract does exist. However, it is not a written Contract. It is a verbal Contract, said Dr Mahathir.

    Do you know what lawyers have to say about verbal contracts? A verbal contract is not worth the paper it is written on.

    The ongoing Umno General Assembly appears to be about warning the non-Malays as well as the ‘traitor’ Malays to not question the Social Contract, unless they want to see a ‘May 13 Version 2’. Even the Umno running dog, MCA President Chua Soi Lek, has been told to shut up.

    Puteri Umno wants the young to be taught ‘the correct version of history’. Well, you know me. I just can't resist being that teacher to educate the young on the correct version of history.

    No, I shall not deny history, as what Puteri Umno said. I shall also not distort history, as many Malays accuse me of doing (40% truth and 60% lies, as some would say). Instead, I am going to publish SECRET documents of ‘Her Britannic Majesty’s Government’ -- which have since been declassified and are available from The National Archives in London (so I am not violating Britain’s Official Secrets Act).

    Today, I am going to publish the first two pages of the 33-page document, which is the so-called Social Contract that everyone is talking about. This series of articles shall continue over the next few days until all 33 pages are published.

    (Many Malaysians are not capable of reading more than four pages of any document or article so I need to give it to them in small doses if I want them to read everything).

    After you have read the entire 33-page document you can then decide whether the Social Contract does or does not exist (and whether it is written or verbal). You will also be able to understand what was agreed in that Social Contract that the Malays, Chinese and Indians entered into in 1956, just before Malaya became independent on 31st August 1957.

    Remember, this is not what I say. This is what was agreed and reported back in 1956. And this was the basis of the Reid Commission’s report and recommendations (, which eventually saw the birth of a n ew nation called the Federation of Malaya together with its new written constitution called the Federal Constitution of Malaya.

    Oh, and by the way, I am not looking for a PhD, like our good Minister Rais Yatim who earned his PhD for writing a thesis that opposed the Internal Security Act and then ‘changed his mode’ after he got back into the government and was appointed a Minister.Malaysiatoday....


  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Memorandum by the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Part 2

    Pages 257, 258, 258A, 259 -

    A Constitutional Conference was held in London from 18th January to 6th February 1956 attended by a delegation from the Federation of Malaya, consisting of four representatives of the Malay Rulers, four representatives of the Alliance Party (the Chief Minister of the Federation, Tunku Abdul Rahman, and three Federation Ministers), and also by the British High Commissioner in Malaya and his advisers. This is a report of that conference.


  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ was not part of the Merdeka deal part 3

    ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ was not part of the Merdeka deal (part 3 of the series on the Social Contract)
    ARCHIVES 2010

    Sunday, 24 October 2010 Super Admin

    The Constitutional Conference, which was held in London from 18th January to 6th February 1956, was attended by representatives of the Malay Rulers as well as the newly-elected government of Malaya that won 51 of the 52 seats in the elections six months before that. And this government was the Alliance government of Umno, MCA and MIC. This, therefore, demolishes the argument that Umno negotiated Merdeka. It was actually negotiated by a coalition of Umno, MCA and MIC. And this Conference was the basis of Malaya’s new Federal Constitution -- the handiwork of the Chinese and Indians as well.


    Raja Petra Kamarudin

    There is now an urgent need for people on both, indeed all, sides of this question – and all Malaysians generally – to understand what exactly those agreements now designated as “the social contract” in fact were.

    Malaysians need to reach a historically well-founded consensus concerning “the social contract”, what its terms were at the nation’s formative moment and in its founding experience, and what it means today and for the future. The coherence, strength and political sustainability of the nation require no less.

    ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ not part of the deal

    It needs to be widely understood that, whatever they provided and mandated, “Ketuanan Melayu” was not part of what those agreements enshrined. Any suggestion that Malay political domination in perpetuity, continuing Malay “ethnocratic” ascendancy over other Malayans (and now Malaysians), was any part of those foundational agreements now designated as “the social contract” is simply wrong.

    Those who argue to the contrary that Ketuanan Melayu is a constitutionally guaranteed “foundational” component of Malaysia’s national sovereignty and international public identity are disingenuous, mischievous, or simply ill-informed.

    The attempt to “read back” subsequent notions of Ketuanan Melayu into ideas of “the social contract” and in that way to embed them within newly fashioned but quite dubious views of the constitution is simply an exercise in anachronistic revisionism. It is the duty of serious historians and legal scholars to say so. -- by CLIVE S. KESSLER, Malaysiakini


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    The rat race part v - ch. 3 a review of malayan history


    During our younger days, we found history deathly boring. We did not realize then that history was a very powerful tool used by the Ruling Class for indoctrination, manipulation, propaganda, misinformation and spreading of lies.

    George Santayana (Spanish-born American Philosopher, Poet and Humanist) said:

    Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

    And Hitler’s Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels said:

    “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Repeated Lies.

    Naturally, nowadays, we don’t use such titles anymore. So we have Minister of Information, often supported by the Minister of Home Affairs. Their jobs are to lie to the public to keep them quiescent. Still, Goebbel’s Principles of Propaganda are constantly referred to by those distinguished people.

    In studying history, it is not important that we know the names, the precise dates and who did what to whom. What is more important is to understand the sequence of the events, the results and their patterns. That will enable us to create the mental models to process new information and assess the impact on the future.

    This is the key point: The mental model enables us to assess new information quickly and to decide whether it is important or relevant to us. If not, we discard it. That way, we reduce our information load. Important information, once it is absorbed into our mental model in a pictorial form, is more easily remembered and retrieved for future reference. That anchors us on a more solid foundation and helps us to resist the manipulation of the politicians.

    Later, we will demonstrate how knowledge of history can be used to interpret claims made by politicians based on historical events.

    Let us consider four major periods of our past up to Merdeka in 1957. Then we will study the structure of the Malayan Pyramid. For background, please refer to the following:

    1. History of Malaysia

    2. Rustam A. Sani’s in Social Roots of the Malay Left and Amirmu Blogspot #2 of 60, 9 May 2008

    3. Malay Nationalism before UMNO

    4. 1947 Hartel. This is an award-winning film that must be viewed by all Malaysians. Download it!

    5. British Malaya, 1946 – 1957

    6. Aliran Human Right article

    7. Emergency Propaganda

    8. Malayan Emergency

    9. The Penang Story: Secret Societies

    But do this later at your leisure as there is quite a fair bit of reading to do. However, if we really wish to understand that period from 1900 to 1957 it will be worthwhile to do so.

    Malayan history before the British arrival (pre-1786):

    Malaya as an entity did not exist. There were some minor sultanates and kingdoms who ruled their states under a feudal system.

    2nd Century AD: Langkasuka was founded in old Kedah.
    AD 634: Kedah kingdom founded by Maharaja Derbar Raja of Gemeron, Persia.
    AD 1136: Kedah Sultanate founded.
    AD 1402: Melaka Sultanate founded by Parameswara.
    AD 1511: The Portuguese conquered Melaka. The Sultan’s family fled and eventually set up the Johore Sultanate and the Perak Sultanate.
    AD 1528: Johore Sultanate founded.
    AD 1641: The Dutch won Melaka from the Portuguese with the help of Johore. Their control was confined solely to Melaka. With the Dutch’s help, Johore established hegemony over Negri Sembilan & Selangor. Perak remained independent. The northern states, Patani, Kedah, Kelantan, Perlis and Terengganu were vassals of Siam.

    British Colonial History, 1786 - 1942

    AD 1786: Kedah turned to the British for protection from the Siamese. To entice the British, the Sultan of Kedah leased Penang and Province Wellesley to them. But still the British did not offer the protection that Kedah sought.

    AD 1819: The British governor, Stamford Raffles, acquired Singapore from the Sultan of Johore.

    AD 1824: The British took over Melaka from the Dutch under the Anglo-Dutch Treaty in exchange for Sumatra. The Dutch renounced all interest in the Malayan peninsula. The British now had a free hand in Malaya to extend their influence.

    AD 1826: Burney Treaty signed between Siam and the British. Siamese claim over Kedah, Kelantan, Perlis and Terengganu was acknowledged. British ownership of Penang was confirmed and given rights to trade with Kelantan and Terengganu.

    1861 – 1874: Malay chiefs brought in Chinese Triads to mine tin in Perak. Turf wars started among the various groups for control over the tin. Eventually the British were called in to keep peace.

    AD 1873: Negri Sembilan accepted British Resident to enforce peace after a civil war over tin taxes.

    AD 1874 Treaty of Pangkor: Perak became a British colony and accepted a British Resident.

    AD 1875: Selangor Sultanate accepted British Resident.

    AD 1888: Pahang accepted British Resident.

    AD 1889: The British established the Federal Council to administer the Federated Malay States, Perak, Selangor, Negeri Sembilan and Pahang were placed under a British Resident-General, making them de-facto colonies.

    AD 1909 Anglo – Siam Treaty: Perlis, Kedah, Kelantan and Terengganu taken over by British from Siam. Siam retained Patani, Jala, Satun and Narathiwat.

    AD 1914: The Unfederated Malay States, Kedah, Kelatan, Perlis, Terengganu and Johore were governed by the British Residents through the Sultans. The whole peninsula was now under British hegemony.

    The Straits Settlement, Penang, Melaka and Singapore were a Crown Colony, ruled by a Governor under the supervision of the Colonial Office in London. All residents, half of them Chinese, were British subjects.

    AD 1930: Malayan Communist Party formed to end British colonial rule.

    AD 1931: A census showed that the Malays constituted less than 50% of the population in Malaya.

    AD 1938: Kesatuan Melayu Muda (KMM) formed from the peasant class. These were led mainly by the Malay-language teachers & journalists with strong socialist affinity.

    The British started to incorporate English-educated Malays from the aristocratic class in the bureaucracy.

    Japanese occupation of Malaya 1942 - 1945

    AD 1942: Japanese over-ran Malaya and Singapore, breaking the myth of the invincibility of the white man. They treated the Malay intellectuals, the Malay civil service and the Sultans relatively well, regarding them as a colonial people whom they had liberated. The KMM leaders were released. So the Malays collaborated with them. The Japanese treated Chinese as enemy aliens and killed 40,000 of them in Malaya and Singapore, resulting in the Chinese supporting the Malayan People’s Anti-Japanese Army (MPAJA) to resist the Japanese.

    AD 1945: By 1945, the Japanese knew they were losing the war. They planned to grant independence to the Malays of Malaya and Indonesia in Aug 1945. Atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan that same month. After that Japan surrendered unconditionally. The independence plan of Malaya & Indonesian was aborted. But the Japanese Command in Malaya still did not wish to give up. They made overtures to Chin Peng, the leader of the MCP, to join up to fight the British. However, Chin Peng refused to take up their offer.

    These events are important and have an important impact on our history. Unlike what UMNO would like us to believe, history did not start in 1946 upon the formation of UMNO.

    Post-war history until Merdeka, 1945 - 1957

    Aug to Sept 1945: Between the surrender of Japan and the return of the British to Malaya, there was a period of lawlessness during which there was a lot of settling of scores, both inter-racial and intra-racial. That gave rise to a lot of bad blood. (In the bigger scheme of things, this is only a minor event in our history. Vengeance after a war is common and we can see it in France, Italy, China and elsewhere after the end of WWII. It has nothing to do with race. But UMNO kept on playing it up as a racial event to divide the people)

    Sept 1945: British returned to Malaya to accept the Japanese surrender. Partai Kebangsaan Melayu Malaya (PKMM) set up by ex-leaders of KMM.

    1 Apr 1946: Malayan Union formed with 2 basic principles – sultans’ power to be curtailed, jus soli principle , Head of State changed from Sultan to President. Malays opposed vigorously. The Union was abrogated shortly thereafter.

    May 1946: UMNO formed by Dato Onn Jaafar in Johore Bahru. They were supportive of the British and not really interested in independence. The leaders were the sons of the aristocratic class and tribal chiefs that the British had taught in English schools from young and were well-known anglophiles.

    Dec 1946: Leftist non-Malay political bodies set up AMCJA formed to oppose the Federation of Malaya plan.
    Aug 1946: MIC formed to fight for Indian independence from the British. After India gained independence, they shifted their focus to fight for independence for Malaya.

    Feb 1947: Left wing Malay parties form Pusat Tenaga Rakyat (PUTERA).

    AD 1947: PUTERA-AMJCA launched the People’s Constitutional Proposals for Malaya in opposition to the Federation of Malaya agreement. The British ignored them. In response, PUTERA-AMCJA planned a general strike in protest.

    20 Oct 1947: Hartal – general strike led by PUTERA-AMCJA

    Fahmi Rezas Film on 1947 Hartal.

    Download from DVD quality film here: 1947 Hartal

    This film demonstrated how the various communities, especially the working class, united in their fight against the British for Independence and clearly showed that there was no racial problems nor was it UMNO who alone fought for Independence. This was what UMNO did not want the public to know.

    An indication of the importance of this event is that UMNO has consistently tried to suppress public knowledge of it. Mind you, this happened before UMNO even came to power! Do not miss this show!

    1 Feb 1948: The British rode roughshod over all opposition to form the Federation of Malaya with the support of UMNO. By now, the British had decided to use UMNO as their front to continue their control after granting independence to Malaya.

    18 Jun 1948: Malayan Emergency declared to fight the MCP. At the same time, the British detained the leaders from the leftist parties such as API, PKMM, Bisbul Muslimin, as well as the unions, to pave the way for UMNO to take power. Many unions were controlled by the MCP and the leftist parties were sympathetic or linked to the unions as well. These unions were used by the MCP to foster strikes that disrupted the economy drastically and were part of the MCP’s campaign to destabilize Malaya in readiness for a takeover.

    Feb 1949: MCA formed by Kuomintang members with support from the British.

    26 Aug 1951: Dato Onn Jaafar left UMNO to form the Independence of Malaya Party (IMP) to fight on a multi-racial platform. Although the British supported him vigorously, he did not receive much public support. His later Malay-communal Parti Negara was equally unsuccessful.

    Tunku Abdul Rahman, a Kedah Prince, took over as President of UMNO with the active encouragement of Abdul Razak.

    1951 Winning Hearts and Minds: The British resettled the Chinese to new villages to deny the MCP access to food and logistics support. They further granted the Chinese citizenship and the right to own land to win them over. Malays were provided food and medical aid. Without the support of the Chinese, the MCP effectively lost the war.

    1952: UMNO teamed up with MCA to contest Kuala Lumpur municipal elections.

    1954: Alliance of MCA, MIC and UMNO formed. State Elections – Alliance won 226 out of 268 seats.

    1955: Federal Legislative Council Elections – Alliance won 51 out of 52 seats.
    Baling Peace Talks between the Alliance and the Malayan Communist Party – unsuccessful.

    Jan 1956: Independence talks in London between the British and the Alliance

    1956: Reid Commission to assist in drafting of the Federal of Malaya Constitution.

    31 Aug 1957: Merdeka. Political power was handed over to UMNO giving them control of the intelligence services (Special Branch), the police, the army, the bureaucracy in particular the National Registration Department in charge of citizenship. The mantle of “protector” of the Malay rights passed from the British to UMNO. MCA and MIC were retained as junior partners to control the Chinese and the Indians. They were left in charge of the economy. But the real masters were the British who controlled 80% of the economy and had stationed a Commonwealth army to fight the MCP. So, the British found a new formula to continue their control of Malaya with UMNO replacing the sultans as the new figurehead - neocolonialism.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Quote Originally Posted by pywong View Post

    During our younger days, we found history deathly boring. We did not realize then that history was a very powerful tool used by the Ruling Class for indoctrination, manipulation, propaganda, misinformation and spreading of lies.

    George Santayana (Spanish-born American Philosopher, Poet and Humanist) said:

    Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

    And Hitler’s Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels said:

    “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Repeated Lies.
    Shariah, the rulers and citizens: remembering 1963

    Rama Ramanathan trained to be an engineer, retired as a global quality leader and now works to catalyse change in society. He blogs at

    Published: 25 June 2015

    Malaysia is a miracle nation. When the Union Jack came down in 1957 and Malaya became a member of the British Commonwealth, many thought we would soon fail.

    We had one of the oddest constitutions in the commonwealth. We defined “Malays” and granted them a special position.

    We entrenched nine Rulers and at the same time stripped them of powers. We “barred judicial review of some breaches by Parliament of the fundamental rights of citizens” (Shad S Faruqi).

    We were beset by internal and external strife. There was massive poverty. Economic activity was race-based. A communist insurgency was on.

    Many institutions – including the police force – continued to be helmed by the Brits, who also owned vast plantations and most large corporations. Indonesia sought to subjugate us.

    Yet despite predictions of failure, unlike many other nations in the commonwealth, we did not tear up our constitution. We merely made over 650 amendments to it.

    Some amendments were good. For instance, a special court was established to prosecute the Rulers.

    Some amendments were awful. For instance, numerical limits on the sizes of electoral constituencies were removed.

    As a result of this our Election Commission can pretend that one is approximately equal to four. (In the 13th general election, Sabak Bernam had about 37,000 voters while Kapar had about 144,000 voters.)

    Our Constitution has kept us from crashing as a nation over the past 58 years.

    Due to the role given to the Rulers, governing Malaysia requires more internal diplomacy than governing any other nation.

    The modus operandi of Perkasa, Malaysia’s crude Malay superiority group, is to interpret everything they oppose as a threat to the Rulers.

    That is also the modus operandi of the two Malay political parties, Umno and PAS. They compete to present themselves as defenders of the honour of the Rulers.

    Malaysian Indians have caught on: a deliberate decision to adopt the modus operandi of the Malay parties is the only tenable explanation for the police report which 46 “Indian NGOs” made last week against minister Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz for his “we will whack you” rejoinder to the crown prince of Johor when the latter criticised Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

    The NGOs wished to be seen as supporters of the prince who may one day rule Johor.

    I’ve been thinking about our constitution because Malaysia’s Islamist party, PAS, is trying to get Parliament to give the state government of Kelantan the right to legislate on matters which are currently the sole prerogative of the federal government.

    Our government has responded to PAS by offering to support Kelantan’s desire if PAS agrees to get into bed with Umno, Malaysia’s Malay-Muslim party.

    Four citizens have responded to our government by filing an injunction in court to prevent the tabling of Kelantan’s desire in Parliament.

    The four citizens have caused the parliamentary tabling of Kelantan’s desire to be put on hold until the court hears and rules on their argument that a fundamental change cannot be proposed without first obtaining the consent of the people.

    The citizens’ injunction reminded me of another injunction, filed 52 years ago.

    In 1963 the state government of Kelantan filed an injunction to stop the federal government from forming the Federation of Malaysia by bringing in Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak as new members.

    The basis of Kelantan’s argument was that fundamental changes were being proposed without first obtaining the consent of Kelantan. (The term “basic structure” was not used at that time.)

    The changes did seem fundamental. The three “new members” would not be equal partners with the prior members.

    Sabah and Sarawak would have disproportionately large representation in Parliament, would have the right to impose domestic immigration controls and would have the right to impose taxes beyond what the prior members had.

    Islam would not have ceremonial pre-eminence in Sabah and Sarawak. (In the interest of brevity I omit Singapore’s privileges.)

    PAS/Kelantan raised the issue before the court as a challenge of state power by the Federal government. One of their five arguments was, “Constitutional convention dictates that consultation with Rulers of individual states was required before substantial changes can be made to the Constitution” (Johan S Sabaruddin).

    The court had to act rapidly, as Kelantan began the action on September 10, 1963, a mere six days before Malaysia day.

    The court ruled against Kelantan. Malaysia was not aborted. The decision was clear. The Rulers need not be consulted. The people were sovereign, through Parliament. The constitution triumphed. The miracle continued.

    The 1963 constitution should be the lens through which we look at the challenges of governing Malaysia, exploitation of patronage and attempts to thwart federalism. – June 25, 2015.

    * This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insider.

Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast

Visitors found this page by searching for:


a pyramid of the three estates in the french revolution

ishak haji muhammad

British realized  they would fail without the support of the Malay Union.

angkatan pemuda insaf

dr burhanuddin helmi

malaysian rat

colonial society pyramid

pyramid of political in malaya

price of road barriers to buy in selangor

proposal of federation of malaya

reid commission

berita malai

articles of british colonization in malaysia impacttree diagram templatepyramid of races superior englishFEDERAL MALAY STATESdr burhanuddin helmyDIAGRAM CONSTITUTION IN MALAYSIAchinese triadscrown colony diagramhorse racing sector diagramhassan adliatlantic slave trade rank pyramidchinese society pyramid emperor king governor
SEO Blog

Tags for this Thread


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts