Tanah Malaysia bukan hanya Tanah Melayu. That's the crux of the matter - if the Malays want to recover imperial dominance, then a modification of the constitution must occur. In order to achieve this, yes, you need Malay unity. But if individuals cannot be persuaded that Malay imperialism is the end goal, then they will focus on racially egalitarian democratic ideals instead ... perhaps based on religion, perhaps not.
Some see Islam and Malay identity as inseparable in the political realm. I see it otherwise. I see the racial identity as the weakest link in structure, so I expect it to fail eventually. I just don't know in which century hahaha
Discussion :
fit3_89_5 : The term Tanah Melayu as Malay imperialism is a bit weird. Malaysia consist of federation of states. 2 of the states situated in Borneo while the other states located in the region which being called as Tanah Melayu since Malay culture and language is dominant culture and language there. 11 states situated in this region. 9 of these states collectively called as Negeri-negeri Melayu since Malay culture is the dominant political structure there.
Other 2 states are either former territory of Malay state or the capital of Malay state.
"Tanah xyz", more relevant in the context of constitution article 89 and others on land, Malay reserved land.
"Imperial dominance of Malayness" is a fact of the federation also ( role of king, etc.) . However there is a perception among ultras that this is being eroded. You are familiar with the commonly raised issues of course : language, religion, king's mandate, party symbolism and dominance, race of the prime minister, dis/allowance of non-Malay culture in public spaces, etc.
Translating Ketuanan Melayu as Malay Imperialism must be controversial.
Imperialism broadly is associated not just with rule, but with expansion. Thereafter a discussion of the relationship between sultanates and Sg, Sh, Sk, Mk, Pg becomes interesting.
Moreover the constitutional division of population rights and privileges based on confessed creed. Which, I refer to as kedukaan sebangsa Malaysia, yang termaktub.
Such controversy can be appreciated academically. It may be simply be offensive to people uncomfortable with uncertainty.
In Malaysia : each self-identifying group, asks every other, how much more do you want beyond what you have already? Everyone has a victim mentality.
Kini, polemics about Malay Imperialism occurs in this context.
The traditional non-Muslim, non-bumi, approach, has been to simply
- (a) focus on private matters
- (b) leave the country.
But that is not enough for a robust chat.:)
F : To reduce the term Tanah Melayu to just constitution is restrictive ignoring the historical, political and culture of that region.
As a non-Malay, my interest is mainly on the official contract.
The hurt and pain of loss beyond that, is a private matter for the Malay community. But it of course, seeps into public spaces as a result of (various factors).
Please note I am not a professional academic. I am simply a private citizen who hasn't yet been arrested for voicing their own views. I expect however that one day it might happen if I am too offensive. Haha
F : Official contract not come out of thin air but from the historical, political and cultural environment which the contract being made.
Even to reduce Malay as merely community in peninsula is also a bit reductive. Malay is beyond community. Malay is civilizational force being developed out of its intellectual tradition which shape the history, politics and culture of the region which being called as Tanah Melayu.
Well precisely, why I say DAP has more in common with PAS than with UMNO. Islam is a more formally defined framework for governance.
Malayness is looser, admitting many things that anyone who self-identifies as a Malay, might claim. This is less formal.
This is the underlying governance architecture that Malaysia has been subject to during Mahathirism, and we are still working with it it.
To maintain Mahathirst policy direction, or to move away from it? Further chats and waiting.
F : But Islam is the core of Malayness or the coming of Islam shape what it means to be Malay.
That is your opinion. Anyone, who calls themselves Malay, is free to express an opinion about what makes Malayness Malay.
I am not Malay, I am only Malaysian. So I express a symmetrical opinion about what makes Malaysianness Malaysian. Based on my understanding, Malaysianness includes non-Malay, non-Islamic elements.
The whole discussion about too little or too much, is based on the way the constitution is written. :)
F : That is not merely my opinion. When I say Islam is the core of Malayness, I am saying within the context of it's intellectual tradition written in Malay and intellectual pedigree surround it. For any culture and society, what is the best in describing their identity is their intellectual tradition. Hence the best in describing Malay identity is their intellectual tradition which the best one rooted in Islam or born out of larger Islamic intellectual tradition.
All that is very nice. But, it isn't reflected in the contract, i.e. the law.
The overall concerns are often polemicised outside the formality of law. None of that forces any action upon the contractors.
I encourage all groups to define their political interests as legal amendments. That is something I have time for. While I am often an anthropologist, I do not consider myself a man of culture, as that is too divisive. I prefer being a mechanic.
F : Human is not merely law. There's other which make human, human beyond the law.
Again, all that's very nice. But I am free to disregard it as isi tersirat.
I need the unsur tersurat in order to plan my life. :)
F : Isi tersurat lahir dari isi tersirat. Isi tersurat semata-mata isi tersurat tiada "isi".
And I have the opposite view, as a mechanic. In my view, the animals are temporarily inconveniences of civilisational progress 😂
To me the future is just like the Borg in star trek.
Anyway, we will disagree on where to place our bets. You are fully valid in your freedom to choose imperial islam or imperial malayness. I prefer to choose imperial technocracy.
We enjoy our common contract.
F : Therefore, it is very hard for you to understand Malayness because Malayness develop by Malay society is beyond law.
Yes, that is the point of my entire conversation with you.
And I am neither obliged, nor incentivised to understand Malayness, even though I am Malaysian by birth.
But if you feel I should be obliged, then you must change the law to make it so.
F : Yes, you don't need to understand Malayness but what you understand about Malayness will become obsolete.
Oh that's fine. I am 42. Malaysia has not changed much to become more rational since I was born in 1983. It has changed a bit, but I do not expect to see it acquire a rationalised government before I die lol. Would be nice, but I don't expect it. I just do the jihad, in my spare time
