Malay Ideas on Development. From Feudal Lord to Capitalist 9971654105

Citation preview

'We will do anything for the poor man, anything but get

off his back.' Leo Tolstoy.

'There goes the prosecutor! He lived and lived,

and then he died! And now 1Ehey'll write in the

of

papers that to the great sorrow his subordinates and all rnanlzind, a respected citizen has passed away, an excepiionaé other and" an

of

exerrzplary husband, and they will say all sorts

of things and maybe add that he was accompanied to the grave by weeping widows arza' if

orphans, whereas, one were t o investigate the matter seriously, all there'd be left to his credit

would he that he once had bushy eyebrows'

from Nikolai Gogol'5 'Dead Soulsi

ACKNO WLEDGEMENTS This book has been possible only with the help of many. It is based on my doctoral dissertation submitted to the Department of Malay Studies, National University of Singapor (1 i n 1905. I was supervised by Professor Syed Hussein Alatas, to whom I am grateful for his guidance. I am also grateful to the Central Library, National University of Singapore, for the use of its facilities in my research. l would like to thank my family for all their support and encouragement, which enabled me to concentrate on my work. Lastly, although I am indebted to many for their contributions, the final responsiiiility for the ideas expressed and the form of the book rests solely with the writer.

Dr Shaharuddin Maarul

Malay Studies Department National University of Singapore

CONTENTS iv

Acknowledgements

Introduction

vi

1

1: A study of Malay feudal values

2: Feudalism through the eyes of Abdullah Munshi

24

The feudal elite in league with colonial capitalism

41

4: The influence of capitalism on religion and nationalism

62

5: An allegorical reply to the challenge of non-Malay capitalism

6: Competition between two forces of nationalism

1 13

7: In pursuit of a /37

capitalistic millennium

Conclusion

Notes

149

157

Selected bibliography

178

91

INTRODUCTION

This book addresses itself to the issue of Malay development, which is a long-standing one in Malaysia. Political leaders, community leaders, literary figures, the religious elite and academics have dwelled upon it and made it central to their programmes and activities. Various theories on Malay development, or rather the lack of it, have been advanced; This book attempts to provide a cross-section of these views and to evaluate them. I have been studying the problems of Malay development for some years now. In my book, Concept o f f Hero in Malay Society, l discussed how some negative values promoted by the dominant Malay elite impede development among the Malays. I sought to establish this by examining their ideal of excellence as reflected in their concept of the hero)

The present book is a sequel to the Concept of a Hero in Malay Society in the sense that it

is

a continuation of my enquiry into the

problems of the elite, their ideas and values. In the present enquiry, I examine ideals of development among some prominent members of the Malay elite, their ideological leanings and evolution in Malaysia. One of the aims of the book is to call into question some of the present assumptions in looking at the problems of Malay development. Too often, discussions on the subject take for granted

concepts like 'nationalism', 'development', 'Islamic values' and "interests of the Malays', assuming that there is a consensus on their

meanings. Utilising some insights from the sociology of knowledge, I seek to show how various social concepts such as these mean u:

Introduction

different things to different personalities, depending on the interests and social groups they represent. Accordingly, they differ too in their definition of problems and challenges, and in their responses to them. . Though differences of ideas can be healthy and constructive, we need to be wary of ideologies, in the sense of ideas which seek to justify or rationalise certain interests which interfere with objectivity. Such ideologies may prevent the Malays from understanding and tackling their problems of development effectively. Urgent problems and appropriate remedies may be overlooked for the simple reason that they do not enter into the Malay consciousness.; The themes of this book, indicated in the chapter headings, have been so selected and formulated for continuity. The overriding interest is to attempt a synthesis and documentation of certain neglected aspects of Malay history. Chapter One takes a critical look a t the values and ideas of the Malay court circle during the days of feudalism as they bear upon the development of the Malays. It hopes to balance the prevalent and widespread romanticising and glorification of that period." Chapter Two evaluates the ideas of Abdullah Abdul Kadir Munshi on Malay development. Abdullah has always been a controversial figure in Malay intellectual history. He has been

considered a traitor as well as an 'Anglophile'.4 Besides examining these allegations, the chapter seeks to give insights into another system of values and ideas which is more relevant to the aspirations

and problems of the Malay masses. Chapter Three analyses the relationship between the traditional Malay elite and the capitalism that was introduced into the region by the colonial powers. The traditional elite have been considered by many writers as the vanguard and symbol of the struggle against colonialism! The chapter attempts to show the cooperation between the elite and colonial capitalism as dictated by common interests.

Chapter Four analyses the ideas of Syed Sheikh Alhady and :Za'ba. This enquiry is undertaken for several reasons. Their names have been associated with Islamic reforms and Malay nationalism.

As thinkers and writers, they are held in high esteem." An examination of their ideological leanings enables us to understand U it

MALAY IDEAS ON DE VELOFMENT

better the nature of the reforms they advocated in response to colonial capitalism. In Chapter Five, we look at the thoughts of Abdul Rahirn Kawai

and Ishak Hali Muhammad. Kawai is considered by many as 'the father of Malay journalism' and both he and Ishak are regarded as pioneers of radical Malay nationalisms As such, the issues they raise and values they advocate merit a close examination. Chapter Six deals with the ideas of Tunku Abdul Rah ran. He was a central figure in the Independence movement and later became the first Malaysian Prime Minister. He is generally acknowledged as Bapalz Malaysia (Founding Father of Malaysia). The chapter examines his ideas on development and nationalism . Chapter Seven evaluates The Malay Dilemma, a book which has been controversial for well over a decade now. Needless to say, Dr Mahathir is discussed as the author of a book which touches on the problems of Malay development, and not as Prime Minister which he now is, or as a politician. A common theme running through all the chapters giving a sense of continuity is the interplay between Malay feudalism, capitalism, Islam and nationalism in shaping the ideals of development among Malays. This book does not pretend to cover all ideas, values or significant personalities in Malay history. Firstly, this is not possible in a single volume such as this. Secondly, the concern of the book is to study only dominant ideas of development which have significantly shaped Malay views about it. Ideas considered as

dominant are those that are influential and widely discussed in the mass media. They are promoted and propagated. y They enjoy a H

widespread following and are very much a part of Malay consciousness. To a significant extent, they influence government planning and official policies. Explicitly or implicitly, they enjoy the backing of power and are endorsed by either the dominant, feudal, colonial or post-Independence elite. Influence, rather than intellectual quality, is our measure of dominance. As such, ideas and values representing minor and dissenting trends are excluded though some of them, such as those of Data Onn bin Ja'afar and Dr Burhanuddin Al-Helmy, may be

more intellectually stimulating than some of those included in the present book. It is a paradox of history that misleading ideas may vii:

Introduction

be influential, whereas rational ones fail to get the support of society due to historical and sociological reasons.

Two central concepts in the book require clarification SO as to avoid misunderstanding. The term 'feudalism' refers to a social, political and economic order, as well as a method of government. It is characterised by a big gulf between the subjects and the ruling class in the economic, political and judicial fields. The order is dominated by aristocratic groups who control large self~sufficient estates cultivated by the peasants, who receive in return strips of land for their own use. The chiefs have a right over the unpaid l a b o r and services of his dependents. At the apex of the system is the sultan (ruler), who is virtually above the law and enjoys tremendous judicial, economic and political power- In the feudal system, the warrior class enjoys high status and considerable power. The feudal order lacks functional division and is usually weak in terms of centralisation of power and administration The term 'colonial capitalism' refers to a social order in which an alien power dominates the control of and access to capital. The government is mainly run by members of an alien power. The major part of the economic life is in the hands of dominant aliens, who naturally serve their own interests. The development philosophy reflects a bias towards a traditional subsistence rural economy, as opposed to the plantation economy, commerce and industry.

Since attention is mainly on primary products, there is minimal expansion of technological and scientific skills. The conditions of

labor are poor as there is all absence of guilds or trade unions to challenge exploitation. A large portion of the population is not involved in direct capitalist enterprise. The social order reflects a set of antitheses which can be described by the term 'dualism'.'

nm

In writing this book, I have utilised various sources. description of feudal values and ideas is based on feudal historical sources and narratives like the Sejarah relays, Miss relays. Saladin, BusMnul Saladin, Hikayat Raja-Raja Pasai, Hikayat Hang

Tush, Tub fat-al-Nafis and Me works of A b d u a h Munshi. On other values and ideas, I refer to Malay literary sources as they reflect recurring motifs relevant to ourgtheme. third source of materials comes from the social writings of prominent personalities and political leaders. ix

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOFMEN'Y`

Lastly, in writing and_publishing this book, it is my hope that it will contribute to the on-going discussion on Malay development, thereby making a molest contribution to the progress of the

Malays.

x

A STUDY OF MALAY FEUDAL VALUES

This chapter is based on the Sejaralo Melayu, which is one of the most comprehensive records of 16th century Malay feudal society.' It is a useful text for the study of Malay feudalism because it is more than a history of the royal house of Malacca. The ruler commissioned the Sejaralo relays to he written as a record of the stories and ethics of Malay rulers and their protocol, for the benefit of future descendants? It is clear then that the Sejaral9 relays was intended to be a guide on certain morals or ethics. This is also reflected in the book's original title, Sulalatu'I Saladin or The Ethics of Kings,3 But the Sejaralo relays, as it is more commonly known, did not confine itself only to discussing the Malay rulers, but clearly portrayed the social life around them. The following is an attempt to grasp various aspects of life under Malay feudalism as portrayed

in the records. In the feudal concept of society, the elite or ruling class is regarded as the only prime force in history. The common people arc mentioned only in terms of their relationship to the ruling class.'

The history of the court is considered synonymous with Malay

history. Accordingly, knowing and understanding court ethics constitutes a basic understanCihig o-fthe world order. Such a world order, however, is considered to-be historically given and divinely sanctioned. It is not to be questioned' 'Whosoever reads it, do not discuss it with a proper discussion because this hikayal (historical

narrative) is as the Prophet would say, . . . concern yourself with the majesty of God and do not think about the essence of God." Here, the feudal social order and its corresponding values are 1

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

compared to the authority and essence of God which should not, therefore, he questioned. As it attempts to legitimise the feudal social order, the Sejarak Malaya shows us many aspects of feudal values. Wealth, grandeur, power and military rig-htare greatly emphasised. The pride with which the Malay royalmhouse claims to he the descendants of Raja Iskandar Dzul-Karnain or Alexander the Great reflects such values. Since the account of the origin of the Malay royal house in the Scarab relays is closely associated with feudal values, it is necessary for us to give a brief account of it. The story begins with Raja lskandair Dzul-Karnain conquering the world. In one of his conquests, Raja Iskandar defeats an Indian ruler named Raja Kida Hindi, and marries his daughter- The matchmaker is Nabi Khidzir, a prophet of God, a fact which bestows a religious aura to the union. Nabi Khidzir asks for the princess's hand on behalf of the king 'to whom (rod has delegated the lordship of the world'."' The wedding ceremony is conducted amidst great wealth and grandeur. Once the marriage is sealed 'princes, chiefs, ministers, war chiefs, theologians, divines and jurists . . . strewed gold, silver, gems and precious stones of every kind at the feet of Raja Iskandar, until gold and precious stones stood before him in heaps . . .' The next day, Raja Iskandar presents his bride with 'robes of h o n o r , complete with royal insignia and bestowed upon her jewelery past all counting . . .' To the nobles, he presents 'ornaments of rich

distinction, all of them of gold studded with all kinds of gems, the contents of three treasuries' and to his father-in-law 'a hundred gold caskets filled with precious stones and rich gems, and a hundred hand-picked horses with trappings of gold studded with all kinds of gems . .' The display of wealth is so striking that it 'astonished all beholders looking upon them'.

.

Raja Iskandar's children are portrayed as great conquerors and extraordinary men. One of them rules for 350 years." Another, Raja Suran, conquers the world. The admiration for military might and martial prowess is evident as the author describes Raja Suran's army. 'lt was so huge that when it marched all the forests would be Battened, the ground would tremble like an earthquake, the mountains would move and their peaks would slide down . . . all 2

A study

of Malay

feudal values

.

big rivers would dry up, becoming muddy . . the darkest night would be lighted I I . ; 'In the shining weapons and the glittering crowns of nobles; if there was thunder in the sky, it was eclipsed by the great din caused by the war cries of the warriors and the shouting of the people, all sounds blending in with the sounds of I

elephants and horses . . ."' Feudal psychology is obsessed with power." Continual conquest and domination is basic to its psychology. These traits are seen in

Raja Suran. Not content with conquering the world, he descends into the ocean by means of a glass box, and finds a kingdom there." He introduces himself to the ruler in terms characteristic of a mind drunk with power. 'I am from the world; I'm the ruler of all mankind . .' Then he marries the ruler's daughter and has three sons who return to the world upon attaining manhood to inherit

.

the power of his lineage 'so that the kingdom of Raja Iskandar shall not perish . . .' When they appear at Bukit Siguntang in Palembang, their arrival has a miraculous effect. The area is transformed. 'The pad had grains of gold, leaves of silver and stems of gold alloy and the whole hill turned into a golden c o l o r . " The significance of the episode touches on an important element in feudal thinking, that the world can be influenced for good or bad and prosperity and well-being can be dispensed only by the rulers and the nobles." This idea establishes a relationship of patronage between the ruling class and the masses, obstructing self-determination among the people. When patronage becomes one of the main organising

principles of society, we can expect two types of character traits. On the one hand, we have the egoistic sense of power among the ruling class, since patronage is nothing but a concentration of arbitrary power to shape and mould people's lives. On the other hand, we have fatalism and resignation among the subject class in the sense that they do not recognise the power of their own individuality to shape and determine their history."'

The feudal concept of history is fundamentally different from the modern one. Its notion of change is different from that which characterises the modern mind.15 To men of the feudal age, the conditions of their existence are given in the form of a feudal structure and its hierarchy divinely sanctioned through the agency of the rulers. 3

MALAY IDEAS ON DI*I'»'EL()PMEN7`

A pledge of loyalty But to return to the Scarab relays, Nila Pahlawan, one of the three brothers who arrive at Bukit Siguntang, becomes the ancestor of Malay royalty. He has a personal mystical force known as daunt which becomes an integral aspect of the institution of the ruler." Because of his daunt, Nila Pahlawan or Sang Sapurba, as he is renamed, cannot have sexual relations with ordinary ladies. Forty unfortunate ladies suffer a terrible disease after their wedding nights. In another illustration of the power of his daunt, Sang Sapurba changes some sea water in a container into fresh water by dipping his feet into it. Continuing his search for a wife, Sang Sapurba asks for the hand of Wan Sendari, the beautiful daughter of the ruler of Palembang. Faced with the prospect of having a diseased daughter, the distraught father, Der rang Lobar Darn, consents to the union in exchange for Sang Sapurba's protection and patronage for his people: '. . . the descendants of your humble servant shall be the subjects of Your Majesty's throne, but they must be well treated by your descendants. If they offend, they shall not, however grave their offence, be humiliated or reviled with evil words; if their offence is grave, let them be put to death, if that is in accordance with Muhamaddan law."? Sang Sapurba agrees on condition that the ruler pledges unquestioning loyalty to him and his descendants on behalf of the Malay subjects: '. . . that your descendants shall never to the end of time be disloyal to my descendants, even if they are cruel and evil." Both parties agree 'on solemn oath to the effect that whoever departed from the terms of the pact, let his house he overturned by Almighty God so that its roof be laid on the ground and its pillars he inverted'. This agreement lays down the basis of relations between the Malay rulers and their subjects. The Sejarah relays then paints the

ideal feudal relationship as conceived by the agreement which produces an equilibrium that maintains the feudal social order.

'And that is why it has been granted 'by Almighty God that Malay rulers have never put their subjects to shame, and those subjects however gravely they offend have never been bound or hanged or humiliated with evil words. l-f any ruler puts a single one of his subjects to shame, that shall be a sign that his kingdom will be destroyed . . .' On the other side of the equilibrium, 'it has been 4

A study of Malay feudal r/'alnc*5

granted by Almighty God that Malay subjects have never been disloyal or treacherous to their rulers, even if their rulers behave cruelly or unjustly towards them'. A few important points should be noted about this agreement. Firstly, it does not base the relationship between the ruling class and the sub. j e t s on religious injunctions or philosophy. The Islamic emphasis on justice and the obligations of leaders to their subjects

are ignored." Islam regulates the affairs of man in accordance with values like justice and the rule of law, and in this light declares that all men are equal in the eyes of God. The agreement is based more on the notion of Dal/dat. Secondly, the agreement is one-sided. It imposes few obligations on the rulers, requiring only that they do not shame their subjects. This is far short of what Islam demands of

leaders. On the other hand, the agreement denies the subjects of any rights whatsoever. This doctrine of blind loyalty conflicts with Islamic values which forbid loyalty and obedience to leaders if it entails a violation of religious values. This inequality is a eentrai feature of Malay feudalism. Demanding total submission and servility to the ruling class, it precludes all elements of selfdetermination and independent judgment on the part of the subjects. Absolute values are lacking. It endorses the arbitrary use of power by the ruling class. After the agreement, Sang Sapurba marries Wall Sendari. The agreement seems to have a beneficial effect, and Wan Senclari is spared the dreaded disease.

19

In is implied here that Malay subjects

can be spared the adverse effects of daidat only if they pledge blind loyalty and submission to the ruling class. The rest of Malay history as portrayed by the Sejaralv Malaya is mainly an account of the spread of the dynasty founded by Sang Sapurba. It portrays the evolution of the feudal social order and its corresponding values. These values seek to legitimise and maintain

the feudal social order. Since the distinction between the ruling class and the subjects was maintained in all areas of life, Malay feudal society evolved very distinctive authoritarian values and cultural .forms based on the concepts of daunt and blind loyalty." The dominance of the ruling class is sanctioned not by function or utility but by sanctity, that is, by its relationship to the one highest in the hierarchy, which is the ruler. The ruling class derives 5

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

its power from the prestige of having the approval of the ruler. The ruler's approval means sharing the power and prestige of his daunt. In this way, the ruler legitimises and sanctions the ruling class."

This function of the ruler is symbolically presented in the following incident. Once the people sought Sang Sapurba's help to get rid of a mythical snake. Instead of killing the snake himself, Sang Sapurba authorities a warrior to kill it with a magic sword from his royal regalia The incident shows how Sang Sapurba's daunt operates through the sword and how the warrior is the agent of his authority. Although the Sejaral'J Meiayu depicts Sang Sapurba's ancestors as great conquerors, Sang Sapurba himself is not one. His significance is mainly as the embodiment of daunt by which he legitimises the power of others-

_

Malay feudal society was very conscious of status and mm constantly hierarchy.la Man's superiority; ID-{€I'iOI'ltY ,,r#*"'* emphasised. This was reflected in many areas of life. Certain terms of deference, for instance, were usedonly when interacting with the nobles. By means of such terms, people acknowledged their different status within the rigid feudal hierarchy. The introduction of such class element in language, contributing further to social inequality, was considered important by the Sejarah relays which therefore recorded for posterity the first person to have used it. According to the book, Demang Lebar Damn was the first to use the terms Yang Dipertuan (Your Highness) and '*;'"

an

pazela (your humble servant).14 The Sejarah relays records Sultan

Muhammad as another great innovator for being the first to forbid the use of yellow by commoners and making it exclusive for royalty and their close relations." Houses of certain designs, ornamented sheaths for weapons, the use of jewellery on their feet, were all forbidden to commoners. Even the richest men were not allowed to use gold without royal consent."

A ac-:rson's status was clearly announced by a hierarchy of colors. 'A white umbrella is higher than a yellow one, because white can be seen from a distance . . . the ruler uses a white umbrella . . . yellow umbrellas are for children of royalty and nobles, while maroon, red and green ones are for other palace officials and warriors. Even blue and black umbrellas are meant only for those with titles . .'-"

.

6

A .study

of Malay feudal values

The seating arrangement at court was meticulously observed to reflect the different status and estate of men." Messengers from other courts were given different receptions reflecting their various status. Royal messengers from Pasai and Haru were accorded full h o n o r and were received with the complete regalia minus one item because 'the rulers of those states are of equal status with the ruler of Malacca'. The senior officials would wait for them outside the city with their elephants. On their arrival, the messengers would be escorted in until they were close to the court. Messengers of lesser courts were greeted merely with 'the drum, the flute, and yellow umbrella; if the use of an elephant is in order, it is used; if the use of

a horse is in order, it is used; the messengers are dismounted outside the furthest gate'. Thus, in addition to colors, there was a gradation of mounts and gates reflecting the hierarchical concept of society.

When a person was invited or summoned to the court, he would be fetched by persons befitting his own status' '. . . very important persons are fetched by senior officials; minor personalities are fetched by junior officials; those in between will be fetched by middle range officials."

Whenever the ruler travelled, the members of his entourage were meticulously positioned around him to reflect their status in the feudal hierarchy: '. . . the chief treasurer holds the front of the litter on the right side and on the left we have the laksamana, and as for the back of the litter, we have the two ministers holding them; the

chain near the ruler's feet is held by Serf Bija Dirac; and the warriors walk in front of the rulers, each occupying their respective positions. The whole royal regalia is carried in front of the ruler, one official spear on the right, and one on the left, and in front of the ruler we have the sword-bearing palace officials . . .' Likewise

the various items of the royal regalia were arranged meticulously. As we can see, the social atmosphere was such that one was

constantly reminded of one's position and status. The whole social atmosphere was saturated through and through with the idea of inequality and all manner of protocol that even the author of Scarab relays remarks: Where is much more than what has been described; if one is to give an account of everything those listening would be anxious. V

MALA Y IDEAS ON DEVELOPA/fEN'f`

Psychology o f the ruling class When ideas of hierarchy, inequality, superiority and inferiority are continually impressed upon the mind, it is bound to have far-reaching effects on the development of personality and character." Culture and ethics assume the authoritarian form with its strong sadistic and masochistic character traits. On the one hand we have a lack of restraint amongst the ruling class, and on the other, servility and submissiveness amongst subordinates. Many' episodes in the Sejarar' relays revolve around the nature of

authoritarian ethics. They dwell on the interplay of arbitrary power and submissiveness before it. The Sejarah A/Ielayu therefore gives many insights into the psychology of inequality, involving both the psychology of the ruling and the subject class. One characteristic of the psychology of the ruling elite is its lack of self-restraint." This must he attributed to the habit of wielding absolute and arbitrary power and of being obeyed unquestioningly.

The nobles were more than conscious of this aspect of their character and psychology. It forms the subject of their contemplations in critical moments of their lives. Nobleman Merak Situ counsels his two children on his deathbed: '. . do not be greedy for people's property, you should not desire people's wives and daughters, and you should maintain harmonious brotherly relations between yourselves. Do not desire things you should not desire for, and do not offend against each other." Essentially it is a

.

warning against greed, rapacity, licentiousness and the propensity for aggression and conflict. The presence of such tendencies in the

feudal temperament must have been real enough for Merah Situ to warn his children against it.

Merak Situ also requests his faithful aides to take good care of his two children and to be loyal to them: '. . and you both should never waver in your loyalty to my two sons, and do not serve any other nobles besides them." Essentially, we have here a reconstruction of the feudal agreement between Sang Sapurba and Demand

.

Lebar Damn. The two brothers, Sultan Manson and Sultan Tahir, however, fail to benefit from their father's counsel. One day, Sultan Manson plans to visit his brother. Knowing feudal temperament and its lack

of restraint, Sidi Ali Hisarnu'd Din (the senior minister who had pledged loyalty at Merak Silo's deathbed) entreats him: 'Your 8

A study

of Malay

feudal values

Majesty should not go; it may lead to a misunderstanding." Sultan Mansor however goes to his brother's palace where he fancies one of the palace ladies and takes her back with him. On coming to his senses, he admits to Sidi Ali that he has been guilty of a serious transgression: 'I have created a very serious problem." He recognises the violent fit of feudal passion and its lack of restraint: '. . . I lost my sense of judgment because I was overwhelmed by my desires . . .' He expects retribution: '. . . I will be destroyed by my own doing." Sidi Ali concurs- 'The law of Allah has come to pass on his subject." How does Sultan `Ilahir react to his brother's provocation? He develops a deep resentment and a desire for vengeance. The desire for vengeance needs expression and acting out, for vengeance is another element in the feudal temperament which is difficult to restrain." He holds a circumcision ceremony for his son, which is really a trap for his brother and Sidi Ali. At the ceremony, he has them both arrested.

At this stage, the other main theme of feudal ethics, that of loyalty and fidelity comes into play." Sultan Tahir orders Sultan Marisol to be detained separately. But this is

r

unbearab e tor a Enya] feudal servant, and Sidi Ali chooses death

rather than separation: 'It is .Ereferable that my head he severed from my body than to be separated from my master.' His loyalty costs him his life. It is not a simple execution. He is beheaded, 'his head thrown into the sea and his body pierced in Kuala Pasai'. Even in death, the loyal servant seeks to be at his master's side. As Sultan Mansot is being deported to Mahjong by sea, 'the Pawing (medicine man) notices a human head sticking to the rudder'. Sultan Manson has the head fetched and discovers that it is Sidi Ali's. He then requests for Sidi Ali's body from Sultan Tahit, pieces the head and body together and gives his loyal official a decent burial-

Once Sultan Tahir's need for vengeance is satisfied, he regains his senses. He regrets his action and considers the cause of the conflict really trifling. 'How rashly have I acted- Because of a woman, I dethroned my brother and deprived him of his kingdom and executed his official." He admits that it is the violent urge of his feudal temperament that has caused these excesses and seeks to 9

MALA Y IDEAS O N DEVELOPMENT

make amends by sending for his exiled brother and reinstating him as a ruler. But this is not to be. In what follows, we have the interplay of loyalty and divine retribution. On his way back from exile, Sultan Manson stops by Sidi Ali's grave and asks for leave: '. . . farewell to thee, I have to go as my brother has sent for me.' Sidi Ali's loyalty, however, remains even in death and he implores from his grave: 'Where do you want to go? It is nicer here.' This time Sultan Mansor listens to his advice, and 'takes his ablution and prays.

After praying, he lies down beside Sidi Ali Hisamu'd Din's grave and dies'. Sultan Tahir's reaction conforms to the erratic and unpredictable nature of the feudal temperament with its extremes and excesses." From being proud, irritable and power-conscious, he goes to the other end of the scale. He abdicates his throne, making the ultimate sacrifice within the context of feudal values. His atonement has to be as extreme as his craving for vengeance. Thus, both brothers lose their thrones and kingdoms due to their violent feudal temperament.

Sultan Tahir's deathbed advice to his son shows a preoccupation with the weakness of the ruling class. He advises self-restraint: '. . . do not ignore the advice of your senior officials . . . consult your ministers; do not be nasty when it involves the feelings of your subjects; exercise patience when it concerns contemptible deeds, do not neglect your worship of God; and do not violate the rights of any human being

. . _no

,

The best example of a feudal personality lacking self-restraint is Sultan Mahmud of Malacca. His late father had advised him not to succumb to the dictates of the unruly feudal temperament: '. . be merciful to your subjects and take good care of them . . . Allah approves of those who are patient and restrained. He was told to give precedence to religion in his life: 'When you are faced with two duties, one towards God and the other to the world, give priority to the duties towards God, leave that of the world and submit yourself to the will of God. He was also advised not to be cruel to his subjects; '. . do not kill, unless they are guilty of treason."

.

.

But self-restraint is not one of Sultan Mahmud's virtues- He kills with such ease. According to the Scarab Melayu, 'there was a man

who offended against him and the offence was not really serious', in)

I

A study of Malay feudal' values

yet he was executed by Sultan Mahmud. When an official, Semi Bija

Dirac, mildly disapproves of the execution, Sultan Mahmud takes it as a personal affront and an act of disloyalty. Given his highly strung and irritable feudal character, Sultan Mahmud is quick to conclude that 'Semi Bija Dirac does not like me to be his master'. When the official turns up late for Hari Raya, Sultan Mahmud uses it as a reason to execute him." Sultan Mahmud is both cruel and licentious. He has numerous affairs with married ladies. Once, at the crack of dawn, while returning home from duty, Tun Biajid encounters the Sultan leaving his house. Tun Biajid is furious and would have killed the ruler if not for his feudal loyalty. He exclaims: 'is this how you treat me, Sultan Mahmud? lt is a pity that you are my master. If you were not, I would not be a man if I did not spear you."" Sultan Mahmud's guards move aggressively against Tun Biajid only to be restrained by the ruler. This reaction is an interesting one as it shows the conflicting system of ethics in the feudal personality. He holds his men back, saying: '. . . he speaks the truth, l have transgressed against him. According to the law, he should kill me, but because he is a Malay subject who does not want to commit treason, he restrained himself." The Sultan is aware of the conflict between Islamic and feudal values. He splits himself into two, so to speak, and judges each according to the two traditions. As a Muslim he censures himself, but as a feudal ruler, he acknowledges the blind loyalty of his subject. On another occasion, Sultan Mahmud goes to the house of a lady named Tun Dewi. He finds a rival suitor, Tun Ali Sandang, there. The Sultan hints to Tun Isap, who is passing by, that he wants his rival eliminated. In response to the feudal value of unquestioning loyalty, Tun l a p assasinates Tun Ali Sandang."

The feudal psychology of the ruling class did not value moderation and humility. It was always craving to indulge its desires." The driving spirit was basically egoistic. For instance, Sultan Mahmud's explanation as to why he wanted to marry the legendary princess of Gunung Ledang is that 'marrying an ordinary royal princess is common among rulers; what I want is something other rulers do not have

..

..44

The same uncontrollable urge characterises his desire for Tun II

MALAY IDEAS O N DEVELOPMENT

Tera. To anyone who could bring her to him he promised anything; ' . . . whatever he wants, I shall grant him; even if he wants half my kingdom . . ."'5 The craving for the gratification of desires is fuelled further by the feudal doctrine of blind loyalty. Hang Nadia seizes the opportunity of winning the Sultan's favour by kidnapping Tun Teja. The combination of absolute arbitrary power and the opportunism of those who entertained it was the root of cultural corruption and backwardness in Malay feudal society. For kidnapping Tun Tera, Hang Nadim is greatly rewarded. 'The ruler was full of praise for Hang Nadirn, whom he h o n o r e d with a robe equal to his own; and gold, silver and treasures past counting."'°

Also illustrative of Malay feudal ethics is the conflict between Sultan Mahmud and Bendahara Semi Maharaja's family. The Bendahara does not present his daughter Tun Fatimah to the Sultan before arranging for her marriage to Tun Ali. When the Sultan sees Tun Fatimah for the first time at her wedding, he is struck by her beauty and wants her for himself. Used to getting his way, the Sultan is frustrated at being denied and feels a deep resentment for the Bendahara. 'How evil Fa' Mutahir is; he has a daughter of such beauty and yet did not present her before ne."" He becomes bitter and vengeful. According to the Sejarafv relays, '. . . he could not eat. Tun Fatimah did not escape his heart. Day by day, he contemplated ways of dealing with Bendahara Semi Maharaja'. Opportunity presents itself when a trader visits the Bendahara to bribe him and a rival businessman feels threatened by the move-

The rival spreads a run our that the Bendahara is plotting 10 become the ruler. Sultan Mahmud uses this excuse to eliminate the Bendahara's family. 'Upon hearing the slander, his prayer is answered, like one who is sleepy being shoved a pillow, for he h a r b o r s a deep grudge against the Bendahata because of his daughter Fatinlah . .' He orders the Bendahara's execution.

.

When the Bendahara's men hear of the sentence, they attempt to resist but are restrained by the Bendahara. He scolds his son: 'Hassan, are you trying to disgrace your elders? It is the Malay custom never to commit treason." Here again, blind loyalty instils a sense of resignation before injustice. The Bendahara and his family accept the death sentence. Tun Ali, Tun Fatimah's husband, is also killed and Sultan Mahmud marries Tun Fatirnah. IZ

A study

of Finlay feudal'

v¢zfm>s

In a society where there is inequality, where ore's life depends greatly on one's station and status, there is bound to be great pride in one's power and rank.48 Such pride explains many deeds of the men in Malay feudalism. Whenever the rulers interact, they do so in such terms. Take, for example, the relationship between Sultan Manson of Malacca and the ruler of China. Once the ruler of China sent a peace message to Malacca along with a vessel full of needles. He explains that 'there is no greater ruler than me, 110 one knows the size of my population; by asking a needle from each household I obtained the needles sent to you'.*" Sultan Manson responds by sending some sago to China, explaining that each grain of sago was prepared by a Malay subject. It is his way of boasting about the great number of his subjects. The Chinese ruler, impressed not only by the great number of Malay subjects but also by the Sultan's complete domination over them, resolves that 'if the ruler of Malacca can make his subjects prepare sago manually, surely I can do so too. From now onwards, the rice I eat must be peeled by my subjects, and not milled'. In this feudal rivalry, however, Sultan Manson gains the upper

hand through the power of his daunt. The Scarab relays tells us

.

that when the ruler of Malacca paid homage to the ruler of China, it had a debilitating effect on the Chinese ruler: I I , the ruler of

China was affected by an itch all over his body paralysis him." His physicians fail to cure him, explaining that the emperor has been

affected by the daunt of the Sultan. They prescribe a cure: '. . . unless you drink and wash your face with the water with which the

ruler of Malacca washes his feet, you will never he cured." The emperor does so and recovers immediately. The love of power and position caused a lot of injustice in Malay feudalism. Let us look at some examples. According to the Sejaralv relays, Singapore was once invaded by swordfish. Paduka Semi Maharaja responds in a typically feudal manner, displaying a total disregard for the lives of his people. He makes them form a human chain on the beach. Many of them are thus killed by the swordfish. The sight of such unnecessary loss of lives provokes a boy to question Paduka Semi Maharaja's wisdom. The boy suggests that banana stems be used instead of human beings. This idea is implemented and the invasion is successfully checked. 8;n Many others probably saw the senselessness of Paduka Semi Maharaja's 18

MALA Y IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

action but fear prevented them from speaking up. Hof our and reward now seems in order for the boy, but he is instead put to death. This unexpected turn of events can be understood only in the light of feudal psychology. The boy is considered dangerous because he is capable of independent judgment." The court officials submit to the ruler that 'this boy is too bright. Even as a boy, he is already bright, what more when he attains maturity. It is best we put him to death'. Such reasoning appeals to the authoritarian ethics of Paduka Serf Maharaja, who resents any challenge or threat to his power and domination. To

him, such reasoning 'becomes the truth' and he orders the boy's execution. The tragedy of Bendahara Semi Wak Raja is another example of the feudal obsession with power and position. In feudalism, one's power and position depends mainly on winning the approval of one's superior. This explains the Bendahara's horror of being disapproved of by the ruler. Once the Bendahara arrived a t the court late, after the ruler had left. On arrival the Bendahara finds the door closed. His extreme sensitivity to the ruler's approval or disapproval causes him to conclude wrongly that he has fallen out of favour: 'My lord is angry with mc, so much so that when 1 arrived he ordered the door to be closed.' In great humiliation and despair, he returns home and commits suicide." Certain rash actions of members of the ruling class must be attributed to the arrogance of power and position of influence. Take, for example, the case of Raja Nluliammad who went horse

riding in the Bendahara Paduka Raja's village one day. The Bendahara's son, Tun Besar, who is playing sepal raga (a ball game) with some of his i n n accidentally hits Raja Muhammad's head-dress, knocking it to the ground. In a violent fit of extreme irritability which could have come only from the arrogance of power, Raja Muhammad kills Tun Besar. The killing leads to tension as the Bendahara's men prepare to retaliate. Raja Muham-

mad is saved only by feudal loyalty. The Bcndahara restrains his men: 'Do you intend to commit treason" . . it is never the custom,

.

Malay subjects never ever commit treason.""

When Raja Muhammad was the ruler of Pahang, he would kill whenever he felt his power and authority slighted. For instance, when he heard that the Telanai of Trengganu had paid homage to 14

A study of Malay feudal values

Malacca without first informing him, he was very angry and sent Semi Akar Raja to assasinate the Telanai.54 Malay feudal history is littered with instances of bloody and cruel power struggles. One interesting case involves Tun Fatimah. The bloody and tragic circumstances leading to her marriage to Sultan Mahmud have been given earlier in this chapter. Once married to the Sultan, she develops a taste for manipulating the succession to the throne. To this end she uses her feminine charms. She starts her intrigues by snubbing her husband. According to the Sejarala relays, 'since marrying Sultan Mahmud, she hardly smiled let alone laughed . . . thus making Sultan Mahmud unhappy too'.5' Whenever she became pregnant, she would have an abortion. When the Sultan asked why she did so, she explained: 'What is the use of you having children by me when you already have your heir?' The love-crazed Sultan replies: 'If you conceive again, do not abort it. Should it be a son, I will install him on the throne." In order to accommodate Tun Fatimah, Sultan Mahmud kills his son by another wife on the flimsy pretext that the boy was rude to senior officials. In studying the causes of wars in the Scarab Malaya, we cannot fail to conclude that they were mainly due to the obsession of power and the pride of rank." The war between Majapahit and Singapura starts because the Majapahit ruler feels insulted when the ruler of Singapura 'fails to pay him homage'.'" Sultan Manson of Malacca invades Pahang because he simply wants it within his empire. According to the Sejaralo Malaya, in Pahang 'the rivers were shallow, and their sand was nice; the water was fresh right out to the sea . . . there was gold there, the fields were wide, and there were elephants, seladang (wild buffalo), deer and monkeys'. However, Pahang is invaded not for conscious economic or

political considerations, but simply because 'when Sultan Manson heard about Pahang, he developed a craving for it'. Sultan Manson invades Siak and Kemper because they 'fail to pay homage to Malacca' while Sultan Mahmud orders the invasion of Kelantan because it 'did not pay homage to Malacca'. The cause of the war between Haru and Pasai is more interesting. Haru sent a messenger to Pasai with a letter saying 'your elder brother sends his greetings

The Pasai official, however, read the word as 'respect' instead of greetings. Given feudal sensitivity, this was interpreted as putting 15

MALAY IDEAS O N DE VEI.Ol'MENT

the status of Haru lower than that of Pasai. Thus provoked, the men of Haru ran amok. The incident escalated into a full-scale war with Malacca being involved later. In Malay feudalism, the link between power, position and wealth was a close one." The Sejara/:I Mere;/u describes how through the influence of power and position the Malaccan nobility was able to amass great wealth. Bendahara Semi Maharaja, for instance, was so wealthy that whenever he was relaxing he would gather the young children of his family and say to them: 'Take a fistful of gold each to play with.36'8 The children would leave the gold all over the place and people would steal them. When the children found their gold missing, they would cry and the Bendahara would console them by

giving them more. The Bendahara was aware that he had more than enough wealth, often saying: 'MY wealth would not be exhausted even if my children and grandchildren live on it." The power and status of a person influenced too the style of amassing wealth. The more powerful nobles expected traders and merchants to present gifts to them with deference. Once a rich merchant tried to approach Bendahara Semi Maharaja at the court. The Bendahara contemptuously brushed the merchant aside, scolding him: '\X/hy, you ill-mannered Indian, is it right for you to approach me a t court* Can't you come to my house*' Tun Hassan Temenggong, the Bendahara's son, was like his father in this respect. He would expect traders to come to his house and would never go to theirs. It was common for lesser officials to go to the houses of traders and accept gifts. A house frequently visited by

_

officials was that of Ali Manu Nayan. The Sejarala relays says: ' . . whenever people turned up at his house, he would give them clothes, gold or exotic things. So all. the important nobles would go to his house." One day, Ali Manu Nagar presumptuously

invites

Tun Hash Temenggong and tempts him with the promise of gifts; 'All the nobles of Malacca have been to my house except you . . . please come along. If you could care just to stand in front of my. shop, I would make you g gift of ten tahfls of gold." Tun Hash Ternenggong takes this as an insult. In a violent fit of temper, he reviles the trader: 'Indian bastard! You want to treat me like a beggar. Others you can treat so." Powerful and influential persons not only amassed great wealth for themselves but also condoned opportunism and extortion 16

A study of Malay feudal values

among their followers. Whenever Tun Hash Temenggongs men had no money, they would say to him: 'Tuankc (Lord), our streets are not orderly, the shops are haphazardly arranged; Tuanku should put matters right . . .' Tun Hash would then tell them to conduct a survey and where necessary demolish some shops. Opportunities for extortion and bribery were thus created. In order to protect themselves, the traders would bribe Tun Hash's men: '. . . some offer bribes of a hundred, some two hundred, some thirty or forty each.'

Miracles and fan fastic happenings What was the form of religious life as portrayed by the Sejarah Malaya? The approach to religion was characterised by a great interest in miracles and fantastic happenings-" Conversions to Islam were never through spiritual or intellectual discovery but were often through claims of miracles. Take, for example, the conversion of Raja Kechil Besar of Malacca, who apparently experiences a revelation and miraculous dream. One night he dreams that the Prophet Muhammad asks him to recite the article of faith. The Prophet gives him a Muslim name and informs him of the arrival of 8 travelling missionary whose instructions he must follow: 'Your name is Sultan Muhammad; tomorrow at the time of tsar (afternoon prayer), a ship will arrive from Judah; a passenger will alight and pray on the Malacca beach; you are to follow whatever he says.762 It is perhaps significant to

note that the dream is not expressed in the form of mysterious signs or symbols requiring much interpretation or unraveling. It is in clear and exact terms. Fvents to take place are specified to the day

and hour. The interest in miracles is not to be taken as a measure of great spirituality. It was, in fact, a reflection of a very worldly and sensual philosophy of life." Since the mind is very worldly, it demands a strong antidote or counter-force to convince it of the reality of spiritual life. What can better serve this purpose than miracles? We have seen earlier in the chapter many examples of the worldly preoccupations of the Malaccan nobles. There is no way we can reconcile their worldly preoccupation with genuine spirituality or 8. religiosity. The interest in miracles is only the resection us

I7

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

worldly psychology struggling to convince itself of the spiritual dimension of life. This interpretation is not without evidence, for the kind of miracles demanded by the Malaccan were not just any kind of miracle but were of a particular type. They had to leave behind concrete physical signs accessible to the senses. The Sejarah relays tells us that upon waking up the next day, Raja Kechil 'found his body smelling of perfume and his private part looked as if it had been circum '. Only after witnessing the physical signs of his alleged spiritual encounter is he convinced that it was a religious experience and not the work of the devil: 'I had a dream and I was not deluded by devils.' The approach to religion was so tuned to stories of miracles that it imitated them. The story of Raja Kechil's conversion follows the account of Prophet Muhammad experiencing revelation where,

with the help of God through his archangel Gabriel, the Prophet was able to recite a verse of the Quran. This is imitated by the Scarab Malaya with a minor variation in that Raja Kechil recited .am article faith instead. After his spiritual experience,

.u

Prophet Muhammad had his initial doubts as to whether his experience was from God or the devil, and this was imitated too b y

the Sejarah Melayu. It is significant that Raja Kechil was renamed Muhammad by the Prophet. In the case of Sultan Muhammad (Raja Kechil), his story even outdoes that of the Prophet's, and what follows takes the form of a court spectacle. There is pandemonium a t the Malacca court: 'Sultan Muhammad recites the article of faith endlessly.' We note

that the measure and portrayal of faith is not in genuine spirituality or values but is more in the form of a mechanical and endless recitation. The court reacts with awe and wonder: 'And all his palace girls were astonished to hear what he recited." The queen wonders if the ruler has lost his sanity: 'is the ruler possessed by the devil or has he gone mad? The Bendahara is hastily sent for, to be

greeted upon arrival by the wondrous sight of the ruler repeating endlessly the article of faith. This sets him wondering:

'What

manner of language is he reciting? When the ruler informs him of the dream, he challenges the ruler: '. . . if Your Majesty really had a dream, what are the signs?

The ruler submits the evidence of circumcision: 'This is undoubtedly a sign that l dreamt of the Messenger of God.' In 18

A study

of Malay feudal values

addition, he predicts the arrival of the ship of which he had been informed in the dream. The Bendahara examines the evidence of circumcision and is astonished. This association of circumcision and the conversion of faith reflects the superficial notion of religion professed then. The mind tended to regard superficial rituals as a measure of the depth of faith or genuine spirituality."' The Bendahara then decides to verify the second sign. When the event predicted materialises, it takes the form of a public spectacle. There is awe and wonder all around: 'The people of Malacca were astonished . . . they pushed each other to see the missionary; what a crowd . . . and such a din . . .' Sultan Muhammad goes to the beach to witness the spectacle himself and confirms that it is exactly as he had dreamt. The missionary is accorded the highest of feudal hospitality. He is invited to mount the ruler's elephant and is taken to the palace where he becomes the ruler's instructor. The Malaccans are then commanded by Sultan Muhammad to embrace

Islam. Again we have in the above the identification of rituals with genuine faith. Although, when given proper understanding and spirit, the ritual of worship is a central tenet of Islam, it is doubtful

that this association by the Sejarah relays is accompanied by such understanding and spirit." Contextual interpretation of the lives of the Malaccans seems to bear this out. It is interesting to speculate that Raja Kechil could have known the mind of the Malaccans well and had planned the whole episode to help him convert Malacca. Since what was demanded by the people was simply physical proof of the 'miraculous', such evidence could easily be arranged - circumcision, the mastery of professing the article of faith, the arrival of the ship and the missionary praying on the beach. Raja Kechil might have decided to convert the Malaccans by exploiting both their love of miracles and fantastic happenings, as well as their feudal loyalty. On the other hand, the account of Raja KechiI's conversion could have been the fantasising of actual events." In this case, the fantastic elements in the account would themselves he evidence of superstition and irrationality in the religious life of the ruling class in

Malacca.6?

As has been said, the religious life of the ruling elite was very IN

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

superficial and ritualistic. It was only by emphasising ritual to the exclusion of the essence of Islam that the Malaccan nobles were able to reconcile Kial with their worldly and sensual style of living. Basically, there was a form of dualism in their lives." One aspect of the dualism was represented by feudal ethics, the other by Islam. The reconciliation of the two was normally achieved by combining the essence of feudalism with the rituals of Islam. This approach accounts for the worldly, feudal and sensual life of the ruling class side by side with an emphasis on religious rituals. This dualistic morality is well illustrated in the following example. During the fasting month, whenever the ruler intended to go to the mosque at night, his prayer mat would be ritually escorted to the mosque during the day, couplet# with the elephants and accompanying nobles." Likewise, the ruler's head~dress for praying would be separately escorted with full protocol. Through such dualistic approach the ruling class was able to alienate religion from genuinely influencing the affairs of man in the world. Religion was thus strictly speaking alienated from social life and confined to the sterile domain of ritual." At a personal level, the best example of this dualism was the cruel and licentious Sultan Mahmud himself. Although he killed easily and lived a sensual life, he had a great interest in studying religion." His teacher was a fastidious religious personality by the name of Maulana Yusof. One peculiarity of Maulana Yusof was that 'whenever someone's kite flew over his roof, he would ask people to throw stones a t it. Once he got the kite, he would break it'. He would revile the kite: 'Why are you so ill-rnannered as to pass by

MY

l'OOfQ'?;

Sultan Mahmud seemed impressed by Maulana Yusof and sought to study under him. His first attempt to do so was rejected. One day, mounted on his elephant and escorted by a large retinue, Sultan Mahmud goes to Maulana Yusof's house. Maulana Yusof reacts rudely: 'Why would a ruler come to the house of a fafzir (ascetic)? Shut the gate." But Sultan Mahmud, who had killed men for a lesser offence than this, was not offended. This is again due to

the dualistic morality of the Malay feudal nobles. They respected religious personalities whom they believed possessed supernatural powers or were protected by God." These were men of God, quite Z()

of A/IaL:z;' feudal

A study

values

separate from the ordinary subjects whom they treated with condescension and contempt. After being rudely shut out, Sultan Mahmud decides to try again. That very night, he sneaks back to Maulana Yusof's house carrying his own kitab (religious book) and accompanied by only two boys.

At the door, he introduces himself as 'falzir Mahmud'. Maulana Yusof responds approvingly~ 'If it is faleir Mahmud, open the door; it is right for a falzir to come to the house of another fal2ir.' The point Maulana Yusof was trying to impress upon the .ruler was the Sufi doctrine that the world is only an illusion and so are position and wealth." Men should not be vain about their worldly

possessions and influence, but should realise their equality before God as his humble creatures. Sultan Mahmud could agree to all this because of his dualistic morality. He could humble himself before God without humbling himself before man. He could acknowledge the equality of man before God without believing in the equality of men among men. The counsels of nobles as they lay dying furnish us with interesting material on the nature of their religious life. Though the counsels were couched in religious terms, they were expressions of lIIls1lll1I1 a worldly outlook on life." In them, 'Al n regret and bitterness on the passing oiflie world. A's an exanip.-, Sultan Mansor says on his deathbed: 'Let it be MOwn to all Hill:a? T feel the world has slipped away fromI . I have only the world hereafter before me.375 Quite often the counsels reflect the regrets of one who sees the I

-

n.

error of his ways as death approaches. It is not motivated by piety or Islamic wisdom but is motivated more by a disillusionment of the inevitability of the hereafter. On his deathbed, Sultan Mansor advises his son, Raja Hussein; 'After I am gone, my son, you should practise patience and justice; do not be greedy for the property of

others because living off the property of fellow Muslims is indeed a big sin, unpardonable . . many of God's servants will be assigned to your charge. Help them if they are in difficulty; if they are victirnised, you should look into the matter very carefully so that it will not be burdened around your neck by God . . . your just intervention will be enquired into: God will ask the subjects about

.

.

their rulers . . therefore you should enforce justice and equality so

that God will lighten your account." 2 i'

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

What is being advised contrasts with the realities of Malay feudalism, and Sultan Manson himself certainly did not practise what he preached. Such rhetoric from the nobles was only theoretical and was never implemented in real life." The concept of equality held merely meant the inevitability of death for all men and

justice was advocated mainly for fear of divine retribution. Another interesting deathbed counsel was that of Bendahara Paduka Raja or Tun Perak: 'My dear children and grandchildren, do not exchange your religion for the world. The world is not forever because life will inevitably end in death. We detect very worldly sentiments in the above. The tone is that of regret and disillusionment with the world. According to such thinking, the world is not worth having because it cannot be had forever. It is a psychology that covets the world but feels cheated by death that robs it of the world.

Tun Ferak's counsel also shows the dualistic morality typical of the Malaccan nobles. Their world-view is not integrated with religious social philosophy and values." This is indicated by the posing of 'the world' and 'religion' as antithetical categories. Such categorisation is characteristic of a worldly and sensual mind in

conflict within itself against the restraint of religion. To those whose world-view is integrated by religion, the world is very much an aspect of religion which therefore cannot be categorised as distinct from it."'

Tun Perak tries to reconcile the feudal notion of loyalty with religious life. He advises those present: '. . . all of you should not

forget to serve your ruler. When you serve your ruler, it is tantamount to serving God . . .un When the ruler visits him, Tun Pcrak says: 'Ti»ra7zku, I have a feeling that the world has slipped from my grasp and now I face only the world hereafter. The phrase 'my grasp' suggests a psychology of possession, acquisition, conquest and domination. Tun Perak advises the ruler against the cointon pitfall of the feudal character, that is, its lack of restraint; 'The temptation of impulse and desires originate from the manipulation of the devil. God destroyed the kingdoms of many great rulers because they succumbed to their desires.'S4 He advises self~restraint not because of noble values but for the more utilitarian concern of maintaining power, Tun Perak was not exactly the embodiment of Islamic virtue 22

A study of Malay feudal values

himself. He was a cruel megalomaniac who schemed for power in total disregard for Islamic ethics. He created social disorder and violence if it suited his ambition. 85 The worldly outlook of the Malaccan nobles influenced the raising of problems in theology too. Once Sultan Mansor consulted Pasai on a theological issue: 'Will the dwellers of heaven be forever in heaven, will the dwellers of hell be forever in hell?586 The problem is suggestive of a worldly and sensual mind calculating the risks against it in the world hereafter; it contemplates the finality of being in hell and toys with the hope that there may he escape. 'Seven trails of gold and two ladies of Mengkasar origin' are offered to anyone who can answer the question. There is certainly nothing spiritual about these giftsThe religious leader of Pasai replies that the dwellers of heaven and hell stay there forever. Tun Bija Wangsa, who is in charge of Sultan Manson's delegation is disappointed and remarks: 'Can it be any different? The religious leader answers firmly in the negative. Sensing that the Malaccans want to hear otherwise, the ruler of Pasai intervenes. He suggests that the religious leader should revise his stand: 'If the position is as you have replied, the Malaccans are aware of that; why should they ask us? Maybe they want a different reply.' The religious leader then invites the Malaccan delegation and privately reverses his stand. The Malaccans are delighted and

give him his reward. The reply is then proclaimed publicly in Malacca.

23

FE UDALISM T H R O UGH THE EYES OF ABD ULLAH MUNSHI

Abdullah bin Abdul Kaclir Munshi was born in 1796 in Malacca

and died in 1854 in Jeddah on his way to Mecca. He knew several languages including Arabic, Tamil, Malay and English. Although he left us several works in Malay, the most relevant work for a study of Malay feudalism and social history is his Kesah Pelayaran Abdullah which he wrote in 1838.' Apart from the fact that he was a witness to Malay feudalism, Abdullah's writing is interesting for several other reasons. in contemporary Malay society, Abdullah is, in a way, a controversial figure. Though his contribution to Malay literature is generally acknowledged, historically and politically Abdullah is regarded by many as a traitor to the Malays and a slave of Western imperialism. One frequently comes across such views in various writings found in the MaTay press and journals. Such harsh judgment is due to

several reasons. Firstly, it is due to the history of colonialism and imperialism in the region. The kind of nationalism that has developed among many Malays in response to colonialism frowns on all criticism of Malay society. It is a partisanship that lacks objectivity. Critics of Malay society run the risk of being regarded

as anti-Malay and pro non-Malays. Abdullah is a victim of such narrow

nationalism

and partisanship.

Secondly, Abdullah £5

regarded by some as a traitor mainly for ideological reasons. His thinking is basically reformist in that he searches for the roots of Malay problems within Malay society itself. Such a perspective is bound to hayc a somewhat unsettling effect on the establishment. The dominant Malay elite thus feels the need to denounce Abdullah

and the perspective he represents. 24

'I `brc;»ugl1 toe eyes

of Abdullah

Mlu1sbz`

It is a fact that Abdullah's critique of Malay society was used by British colonialism to legitimise itself.-' This fact should not, however, make us lose sight of the value of his criticisms. We should be able to judge his work on its own merit as a piece of social history and social critique. Besides, Abdullah should be understood contextually. He lived and wrote at a time when consciousness of the injustice of Western imperialism was not high in Malaya. The involvement of the English in the region was still limited and not too blatant. The stirring of national consciousness in South-east Asia was still a long way off." Abdullah himself died long before the British Forward Movement in 1874. The ideological use of his works by the British was a feature of 20th century British colonialism and therefore Abdullah was not a conscious and direct collaborator of British colonialism as such. Apart from the controversy surrounding his figure, Abdullah stands out for other things. His work is the earliest Malay social criticism based on Islamic values and his critical and reformist thinking stands out in glaring contrast to the ritualistic and dogmatic religious 'lTI'e this time.ml attitude to religion was free from the influence of Malay l'euda*l'fsm and was based mainly on a living interpretation oof Islam. notions of social justice, humaiiityl rationals 'individua ism_, equality, freedom, reform, progress, human development and leadership as understood and advocated by Islam underlie his work. There was a conscious attempt to link Islamic values with social philosophy, principles of

To an

social organisation and the problem of social order or structure.

Abdullah was one of the first to reflect consciously on the problem of poverty and backwardness among the Malays. He recognised early how this was related to the problem of the elite or leadership, to social values and attitudes and to the social order. Apart train being influenced by his religious values, his thinking was partly conditioned by his contact with the West, its liberalism and capitalism. He felt keenly the contrast between feudalism on

the one hand and liberalism and capitalism on the other. His works arc thus an early record of a Malay and a Muslim evaluating differing social milieus on a comparative basis in the light of his religious tradition . It has been observed that there was no rise of independent and free cities within Malay feudalisms The rise of independent cities 25

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

influenced greatly the course of European history towards

the

decline of feudalism and the rise of democracy and capitalism6 The closest thing that the Malays had to independent cities in the 19th century were pockets of colonies under foreign liberalism and capitalism, which relatively speaking offered greater freedom than Malay feudalism. Malacca and Singapore were such colonies and

Abdullah sheltered under them. The relative freedom of his milieu undoubtedly influenced his thinking. Thus in a way, Abdullah's thinking and attitude can he taken as a measure of what could have been the development of Malay values had there been the emergence of independent and free cities within Malay feudalism. Putting it in another way, in studying Abdullah's thinking against the backdrop of Malay thought under feudalism, we have a good measure of the impact of feudalism on the Malays.

Opposition to change Kesab Pelayaran Abdullah was based on Abdullah's travels by sea from Singapore to the east coast states of Pahang, Trengganu and Kelantan in the middle of the 19th century. He was employed by the English to deliver a letter to the .ruler of Kelantan. While on his travels, Abdullah made many perceptive observations of the conditions of feudal social life. He interacted with members of both the ruling class and their subjects. Abdullah also recorded his feelings and reactions to various aspects of Malay feudalism. One of the things that struck him most was the nature and attitude of the ruling class. He noticed that they were not interested

in improving and reforming their society. Their thinking was basically opposed to any changes which might threaten or affect

their interests. Maintaining the status quo was their chief concern as the existing situation served their vested interests best. Coming from a different social and political milieu, Abdullah keenly felt the static notion of history as understood and held by Malay fcudafism. The elite justified their opposition to change and reforms in terms of Ada! or custom and daunt. A typical reaction to any suggestion

for change or reform would be: "_ . . the present Adm.L or customs are all based on adar or customs of olden days . . . whoever changes or breaks them will be affected adversely by the daunt of past rulers."

Such conservatism and traditionalism became so much an integral aspect of their thinking that they began to believe that it was in the 26

Through the eyes

of Abdullah .Munshi

nature of things not to change. It was argued that change would upset the working of the universe and the natural order. Once Abdullah asked a nobleman why the awkward denomination of the local currency had not been reformed, and the nobleman replied: 'How many times my father thought about changing this adar. The tigers became aggressive and attacked the people and the crocodiles in the rivers became violent; that's why he had to abandon the idea of changing the adds." The change suggested was only an administrative one and yet the opposition to it was quite strong. We can imagine how much stronger the opposition would be to fundamental social reforms and social reconstruction. Given such conservatism and traditionalism, we cannot expect a creative, reformist and dynamic leadership from the ruling class in Malay feudalism.

Consistent with their dogmatic traditionalism, the elite lacked self-introspection and reflection upon their own society." There was self-complacency all around. Their intellectual horizon was narrow

and limited. Even with the threat of the West at their very doorstep, there was no awareness of the need to widen their intellectual horizon, to embark on necessary reforms or to assimilate necessary innovations in the way the Japanese did in response to the West.'" Abdullah was greatly exasperated with this: '. . . all of them think they are the only clever ones . . . such a feeling arises out of their unwillingness to follow the customs of other people, and furthermore they are not knowledgeable . . . like the toad under the . . . the toad thinks the coconut shell is the sky." Such

coconut shell

exasperation must be understood against Abdullah's own development and background. He had always emphasised the importance of knowledge which he regarded as 'priceless' and a 'miraculous gift from (god'. The value of knowledge was first instilled in him by

his religious education. This was then reinforced by his contact with the English at Malacca and Singapore."

Language, Iitcratune and religion Abdullah observed with regret how the feudal elite neglected the intellectual development of the Malaya. There was no intellectual culture or tradition as such in the genuine sense of the word." Such

apathy and indifference was clearly reflected in the attitude towards language, literature and religion. There was no conscious effort to 27

MALAY IDEAS ON DEWJLOMIENT

cultivate the Malay language as a tool for expanding the consciousness of the Malays. This neglect of the language went hand in hand with a superficial and unthinking approach to religion. Although there was great interest in religion, Abdullah observed that religious life was mainly ritualistic. He wrote of the Malays' '. . . they do not study their own language; instead, all of them right from young start reading the Quran without understanding . . . in a thousand maybe not one understands the Quran properly." Such a mechanical and unthinking approach robbed the Malays of the consciousness of the full wisdom of their religion. Abdullah, realising the need for a more rational and intellectual orientation,

wished earnestly that the elite would pave the way for such development: '. . . if only they would bother . . . to recruit knowledgeable teachers to teach . . . the Malay states would be peopled by subjects capable of reading, writing and composing all kinds of lzitab (books) and various forms of knowledge . . .' He advocated that the elite should patronise learning and intellectual culture and cultivate scholars around them. As things were, the elite obstructed the intellectual consciousness of the Malays by alienating them from the wisdom of Islam. Such alienation was accomplished by the neglect of the Malay language and severing it from religious teachings, ideas and content, and by encouraging the study of religion in a language which was beyond the understand~ ing of the vast majority of the people. Abdullah considered the whole exercise Meaningless' because it led nowhere: 'What is

pursued is not obtained, what is in hand is being left behind . . . the Arabic language is not being acquired and their own language is discarded." What Abdullah advocated was not the use of language for

language's sake. He advocated the development of the intellectual and philosophical spirit through the development of the Malay language as a vehicle for ideas and concepts. He was disturbed by the neglect of the Malay language because for him it meant the neglect of the intellectual and moral development of the Malays." He felt it to be such a great loss and a crime when the Malay elite neglected their language: '. . . isn't it a serious crime JL. to waste away the growing years of the children . without making them

. .

learn their own language?'"' He criticised those w-ho thought that 28

Through the eyes

of Abdullah

I'l/huzsl

intellectual development and scholarship should be attained without conscious striving and cultivation, including the conscious study of one's own language: '. . to their thinking . . the art of

.

.

composing and writing is a light and easy one . . . something that can be acquired merely by listening and imitation." On the contrary, Abdullah argued that without conscious effort, the intellectual development of a people would be stunted, and this would. he reflected by the lack of 'sweetness and power' in their language. The moral and cultural development of a people depends to a significant extent on their intellectual and philosophical spirit." Such a spirit has a civilising function and ennobling effect on the human character.18 Abdullah advocated the cultivation of this spirit among the Malays through the development of their literary taste because 'when there are more people who . . . are eloquent and capable of appreciating the joy of language and its mysteries, so will there be more . . goodness and refinement in °. . their behavior'. He emphasised the duty of the elite to lead the way:

.

.

.

' . . if . . . there are many members of the royal household and

others who can read and write, and who understand the meaning and devote their time to scholarship, wouldn't that be a noble thing? He deplored the fact that this was not taking place. If such apathy and indifference continued, it might prove fatal for the Malays: '. . . when this deterioration and neglect are left unchecked, ultimately it will lead to the end of the Malays in the world . . .' His gloomy prediction is a measure of the great significance he attached to intellectual and philosophical development in the rise

and fall of a people. In expressing these feelings, Abdullah was emotionally involved and concerned. He was not condescending and contemptuous as some have alleged.

Values o f the ruling class Instead of encouraging or indulging in socially useful activities,

the ruling class was preoccupied with non-productive ones. They were generally indolent. Instead of patronTsii'15_ anal' cultTvati115 men of learning or substance around them, they welcomed anti-social elements with whom they spent much time. According to §B64 This is different from capitalism' '. . . even if the English sultan himself . . . wants something done . . . he will fix the payment first; otherwise the people will refuse to

work . . ."5

Abdullah was bitterly opposed to feudalism and its injustices:

. .

.

' . it is hurting and distressing . . to reflect on its customs . . . laws . . _is He predicted the downfall of Malay feudalism~ '. . . their dynasties and customs . . . will perish . . they cannot last, given those conditions . . . they do not adhere at all . . . to God's injunctions and laws but merely follow the dictates of their desires . .' With a vision, he writes: '. . . these are the symptoms that these states will without any doubt perish . . .'

_

.

40

THE FE UDAL ELITE IN LEAGUE WITH COLONIAL CAPITALISM

About 25 years after the death of Abdullah Abdul Kadir Munshi, what he predicted came to pass. The decline and internal decay of the feudal states reached its logical and inevitable consequence. The negative values of the ruling elite, feudal oppression and injustice sapped the strength and life of the states. The fall of Malacca in 151 l to the Portuguese did not lead to self~inti-ospection and reflection. The need for internal reconstruction or reform was not consciously felt. In other words, Malay feudalism failed to learn from that carly defeat at the hands of a Western power. Studying the records of Malay feudalism after the fall of Malacca, covering the next three and a half centuries or so, one gets a clear picture of the indolence, moral and intellectual bankruptcy of the ruling class. The Malay states continued to be divided amongst themselves and wars were almost a permanent feature in their relations with each

other.' The states were greatly reduced in strength and dynamism by internal strife and civil wars caused by frequent power struggles. All in all, by the close of the 19th century, the period recorded by Abdullah Munshi, the backward and weak Malay states were in an advanced state of decline and were ready to fall. The debilitating effects of oppression, injustice and negative values of the ruling elite, however, destroyed all seeds of opposition or change within

itself. The fatal blow came from the outside. The tottering Malay feudalist stood no chance whatsoever against the encroachment of the West.

It is an irony in the history of the downfall of Malay fcudalisni that the feudal ruling class had always failed to recognise the dangers of Western imperialism? Right throughout the three and a 4I

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT half centuries after the fall of Malacca, the rulers were more wary

of their internal rivals than of the Western powers on the whole. It is not suggested here that there was no conflict between the feudal ruling class and the Western powers like the Portuguese, Dutch and English. On the contrary, there were serious and long-drawn-out wars between them? These wars, however, were not patriotic or

nationalistic wars against the encroachment of the Westerners as such. They were caused more by a conflict of direct vested interests between the feudal ruling class and the Western powers. Whenever it suited their political ambition or economic interest, the rulers were quick to enter into alliances and treaties with various Western powers.4 Most illustrative of this mentality was when Malacca fell. Raja Abdullah, a Malay prince, rushed to Malacca to enter into an alliance with the Portuguese, hoping to be installed as the ruler of the Malaccan empire since he was a descendant of the Malaccaii royal dynasty. He was instead captured and taken to Goa.' By the first half of the 18th century, the Malay rulers were already actively trading with the Westerners. Sultan Mudzafar Shah of Perak, for instance, gave the monopoly of the tin trade in his state to the Dutch.6 He allowed them to build an impressive warehouse and a fort along the Perak River at Pangkalan Halban. Sultan Mudzafar Shah eliminated his political rivals like Raja Alam and Encik Hasil with the help of the Dutch. By the end of the 10th century, Sultan Iskandar of Pcrak had trading relations and friendly ties with the English despite Dutch presence in his state- The Temenggung

of Shore and Tengku

Hussain ceded the island of Singapore to the English in 1819 and entered into an alliance with them because the English were willing to install Tengku Hussein as the Sultan of Riau, instead of Tengku

Abdul Rah ran, upon the death of Sultan Mahmud, their fathers The British intervened in the dispute in order to acquire Singapore and strengthened their influence in the region against the Dutch. By the 19th century, the nature of the Western economic system demanded a more organised, systematic and comprehensive exploitation of other lands beyond their own frontiers." In the previous centuries, imperialism had taken the form of carving out isolated trading bases or footholds in foreign lands. Operating from such trading bases, the Western powers extended their trading

activity into the hinterland by means of various alliances with 42

Feudal elite and colonial capitalism

friendly and accommodating local chiefs, and siding them in local political conflicts against their rivals? To a large measure, this had limited effect on the structural transformation of the Malay world. Structurally, feudalism was left intact and Western capitalism and its law and social order had no significant influence whatsoever." With the advance of Western technology, which was effectively harnessed to the interests of capitalism, industrialisation in the West found its own frontiers too confining to sustain its own growth. Surplus capital and goods searched for new world markets. The need for raw materials in order to keep its industrial wheels turning necessitated greater control of the producing areas. Isolated

trading places in the Malay world were no longer adequate for the economic ambition of Western capitalism and imperialism. The

hinterland needed to be brought under control and converted into an ordered producing and consuming region. The conditions for such development had to be created and the imposition of various aspects of Western law and order which had f a v o r e d capitalism at home was considered necessary and desirable. With the combination of superior Western technology, arms and capitalistic acquisitiveness, a new era of imperialism was about to dawn in the Malay world.

Imperialism and the power o f the rulers As far as the Malay peninsula is concerned, the crucial event in the history of Malay feudalism and Western imperialism was the

signing of the Pangkor Engagement between the Malay chiefs of Perak and the British in 1874." Unaware of the new and greater dangers of Western imperialism and still thinking they could interact with Western powers the way they did before, more or less as equal allies, the Perak chiefs had no hesitation whatsoever in involving the British in their local political conflicts. When a succession dispute arose in Perak between three rival claimants, one of them by the name of Raja Abdullah wrote to the Engli 11 for support, offering to place the state under the protection of the

British flag if they would intervene and install him as Sultan. The British were fast to seize the opportunity to spread their influence

and control by signing the Pangkor Engagement with Raja Abdullah and other Malay chiefs. 43

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

It has been correctly observed that imperialism can come in various forms and styles, all of them however having the common objective of exploiting foreign lands for the benefit of the imperial powers. One basic dichotomy of imperialistic styles is that of direct and indirect rule." In the system of direct rule, the imperial power

acquires political control and administers the territory concerned. With indirect rule, the imperial power retains the indigenous or traditional native political institutions and governs the territory concerned through them. The British in the Malay peninsula adopted the system of indirect rule in advancing their imperialism. Such a practice offered several distinct advantages over that of direct rule. Firstly, it allowed economic exploitation the peninsula without the burden of full political responsibility that goes with direct colonial rule. Such a responsibility would" require greater resources and manpower from the mother country. Secondly, indirect rule served adequately the purpose of keeping out rival Western powers. Thirdly, through indirect rule, economic

exploitation and control could be accomplished more subtly than in direct rule which normally involved a greater degree of disintegra~ son or disruption of traditional indigenous political and social institutions. Such disintegration and disruption normally brought with it greater political conflicts with the natives. Indirect rule in a way concealed the encroachment of imperialism from the bulk of the local masses and therefore had the effect of slowing down the development of anti-iinperialistic or anti-colonial ideas in the consciousness of the indigenous masses. Thus in many ways the

objectives of imperialism could be accomplished with a minimum of burden, commitment and responsibility. The main terms of the Pangkor Engagement would appear to provide a good synthesis between the preference of the British for indirect rule and the vested interests of the Malay feudal ruling class. By means of loose and ambiguous drafting, the British managed to drive in the opening wedge of imperialism while reassuring the Malay chiefs, at least on paper, the autonomy and

survival of Malay feudalism. First of all, Raja Abdullah was recognised as the Sultan of Perak, demonstrating British goodwill towards and acceptance of feudal institutions and social order." Then an important clause provided that 'the Sultan receive and provide a suitable residence for a British officer, to be called 44

Feudal elite and colonial ctzpitafisnz

Resident, who shall be accredited to his court, and whose advice must be asked and acted upon on all questions other than those touching Malay religion and custom'. Given the different perspectives of the Westerners and the feudal chiefs, each party felt that it had gained much by this clause while making a small concession to the other party. For the British, the qualification 'other than those touching Malay religion and custom' must have meant little. They might have thought that such qualification Inerelv meant paying lip service to some exotic observances and rituals having little to do with a comprehensive world~view or an integrated culture. For the Malay chiefs, however, their notion of religion and custom meant a whole world-view or an integrated way of life, given the traditional nature of Malay society. To them the phrase 'Malay religion and custom' would mean simply Malay feudalism and its corresponding culture and social order. It was also provided in the Pangkor Engagement that 'the collection and control of all revenues and the general administration of the country to be regulated under the advice of the Resident'.14 Basically the Pangkor Engagement became the model for the further expansion of British influence in the

Malay peninsula. Between 1874 and 1888, British protection was established in Perak, Selangor, Negri Semhilan and Pahang. The meeting of Malay feudalism and British imperialism was not without conflict and differences. The imposition of Western law and style of administration along capitalistic lines naturally led to some disintegration, disruption and displacement, causing resentrnent, hostility and friction.

In Perak, some chiefs under the

leadership of Maharaja Leia took up arms and resisted the encroachment

of the British. The first Resident

to the state,

j. W. W. Birch, was assassinated. The uprising was, however, speedily and easily contained. Those chiefs responsible for the

assassination were tried and hanged. The ruler himself, Sultan Abdullah, was exiled to the Seychelles for his involvement in the affair." Another uprising took place in Paharig under the leadership of Dato' Bahamian. This did not go beyond minor skirmishes and was easily quelled by the British in league with the chiefs who cooperated with them." The suppression of these early uprisings impressed upon Malay feudalism that the British were quite capable of getting their own way and imposing their will by means of superior technology and techniques of organisation. Henceforth, 4_5

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

the history of Malay feudalism was that of the gradual erosion of the power of the ruling class by British imperialism and the gradual replacement of the feudal structure by a Western political and economic system along the lines of Western capitalism. In studying or analysis Malay response to British imperialism, it is important to bear in mind that Malay society was itself constituted of diverse social elements. It would be a serious flaw in scholarship to represent the response or reaction of one particular social stratum as the response of Malay society as a whole. In reality, the responses were as varied as the diverse elements constituting Malay society, for each social stratum had its own interests and ideological leanings. The failure to tale into account the diversity of Malay society has often led the Malay intelligentsia to misinterpret their history. in their w r i t i n , one very often comes across simplistic views which do not do justice to historical facts. For instance, every form of opposition to the British or foreigners is quickly or readily proclaimed as an act of patriotism or nationalism, regardless of the motivation and vested interests involved. In this way, feudal chiefs who fought the British because they were politically displaced and their tax revenues adversely affected by colonialism were erroneously proclaimed Malay patriots and nationalists- Feudal lords who opened up their states to colonial capitalism because they had much to gain by it were promoted as inodernisers of the Malays." Anyone who spoke in the name of the Malays, though in reality they were merely representing the interests of a particular class or social stratum, was seen as

championing the cause of the Malays in general. For this reason, many undeserving personalities have been promoted as Malay heroes though they lacked genuine idealism, achievements and contributions to Malay history." At the highest level or stratum of Malay society, we had the rulers. With the spread of British imperialism and the imposition of Western capitalism and law, their autonomy was greatly undermined. The details of the political and constitutional changes which

gradually eroded their absolute power will not be discussed here as the subject has been competently dealt with by many authors. Suffice it to say that from the Pangkor Engagement of 1874 until the Second World War, there was a gradual decline in the power of the rulers. Personally, the rulers were well taken care of by the 46

Feudal elite and colonial capitalism'

British. They received generous regular allowances and their palaces were grander than they were in the pre-colonial days." Politically, their position was more secure than in the past. Under British protection the Malay states attained a period of peace and order which ushered in a period of political stability. Apart from that, the British had always been quite well disposed to the idea of the rulers having their own private business ventures. Though they gained a lot at the personal level, in terms of actual political or legislative power, the rulers were reduced to mere figureheads of symbolic significance by the British. To a great extent, the historical function of the rulers during this period was that of the functionaries of British rule. In their dialogues with the British through the Conference of Rulers or the Federal Council, the rulers could not be said to have championed the rights and interests of the masses. One issue they gave expression to was Malay participation in the administration?" Contextually speaking, this issue was in the interest of the aristocracy and elite. With the spread of British influence and the expansion of capitalism in the peninsula, the position of the bureaucrat or government official increased in prestige. In terms of occupational grading or valuation, the administrative sector came to be associated with the prestige of the ruling class. British officials considered themselves superior even to Europeans who were not associated with the administration, like the planters, traders and

business people." Small wonder then that the Malay aristocracy and the traditional elite aspired to be given a share in the prestige of

the new ruling class, SO to speak. It was out of this desire that Sultan Idris of Perak paved the way for the establishment of the Malay College at Kuala Kangsar in 1905. One of the objectives of the college was to educate and groom children of the Malay aristocracy

for positions in the British administration." Another issue raised by the rulers was that of decentralisation which was a dominant theme of politics in the period from 1895 to the 1920s. The significance of the issue can be grasped only against the background of the gradual erosion of the absolute power of the rulers. Basically they were reduced in political stature in two stages. From 1874 to 1895, they lost their power to the British Residents of their own states under the term of the Pangkor Engagement which provided that the ruler was to act upon the advice of the Resident in 47

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

the running of the state. Events, however, took 21 turn for the worse. In practice, the Residents stopped giving advice and acted independently without so much as consulting the rulers." The political power and stature of the rulers of Perak, Selangor, Pahang and Negri Sernbilan was further reduced when a federation

was formed by their states in 1895. The federation was formed because the British felt that greater centralisation and rationalisation would boost. their economic imperialism and ensure the rapid development of their capitalism. The new federal bureaucracy with its headquarters in Kuala Lumpur soon accumulated great powers and eclipsed the Residents, the rulers and the various councils of the Malay states. When the rulers of the Federated Malay States complained of over-centralisation in Kuala Lumpur and argued for decentralisation, they were arguing for their own position and influence. Their resentment and objection to the erosion of their position was clearly expressed by Sultan ldris in the Conference of Rulers of 1903. He argued against over-centralisation, which blurred the separate identities of the states making up the federation, as well as against the amalgamation of the states into

one since that would be tantamount to depriving the rulers of their political position. He formulated the fear of the rulers- 'A Malay proverb says that there cannot be two masters in one vessel; neither can there be four rulers over one country." Citing the authority of the Pangkor Engagement, he expressed the hope 'that the affairs of each state may be managed by its own officers, so that the government m a y be separate entities'.

The issue of decentralisation lasted till 1927 when some steps towards decentralisation were taken by the British. We should not, however, exaggerate the role played by the protest of the rulers in

influencing such development, though it might have played some part. The development of decentralisation was in the main influenced, like many other things, by the interests of British imperialism and capitalism. During the boom period up till the First World War, the trend of official policy was towards centralisation. This was mainly due to the influence of the business circle who felt that greater ccntralisation., rationalisation and coordination among

the states would greatly boost capitalist exploitation of the region. the 19205, however, there was an economic decline in the Federated Malay States due to a post-war slump. A critical attitude

111

48

Feudal elite and cc,n'rJni¢:I =c'a'pzltal'i5m

towards the existing structure emerged among officials and the capitalists. Attention was focused on the abuses, extravagance and high living of the federal officials. Centralisatiori was now opposed as over-hureaucratisation and as being top-heavy. British state officials joined in the chorus of criticism as there had been a longstanding conflict between the state and federal bureaucracy. in addition, there was a conflict of power between the High Commissioner in Singapore and the Chief Secretary in Kuala Lumpur. It was felt that the Chief Secretary of the federal bureaucracy was getting to be too independent and powerful. lt was also felt in the official circle that decentralisation could attract the Unfederated Malay States into a loose union alongside the Federated Malay States. Such a union was considered necessary for the economic reconstruction and revival in view of the post-war slump, Opinion developed that British policy in the Malay peninsula had departed erroneously from the original policy of indirect rule thereby losing its full advantages. This naturally entailed the boosting of the prestige of the rulers from the ceremonial and protocol point of view. In order to restore their prestige and improve their image which had suffered from obscurity during the years of centralisation, the British even went to the extent of arguing for Malay feudalism as exemplified by the speech of Sir Hugh Clifford before the Federal Council in 1927: 'These states were, when the British (Sovernment was invited by their Rulers and Chiefs

to

set

their troubled houses

in order, A/Iuhammadan

monarchies. Such they are today, and such they must continue to be. No mandate has ever been extended by Rajas, Chiefs, or people to vary the system of government which had existed in these territories from time immemorial: and in these days, when democratic and socialist theories and doctrine are spreading like an infection, bringing with them too often, not peace hut a sword, I feel it incumbent upon me to emphasize . . the utter inapplicability of any form of democratic or popular government to the circumstances of the Federated Malay States, the system of

.

administration

must, in its essence be autocratical.' In 1927, the

rulers were removed from the Federal Council where they had been sitting only as ordinary members. Their legislative sovereignty was restored to them in the sense that henceforth their signature would 49

MALAY IDEAS ON DFVELOFMFNT

be required to transform a Bill of the Federal Council into an enactment. This marked the beginning of the rulers becoming in effect constitutional rulers. lt will be seen from the above that the issue of decentralisation was quite alienated from the problems of the ordinary Malays. The issue was more closely related to the personal position and power of the in/lalay reliers and ltitish officials, and to the vested interests oi'-iiritisli imperialism and capitalism. To the ordinary Malays, the erosion of the power and autonomy of the rulers meant little. From their point of view, things had changed very little politically. In their eyes, the prestige and power of the rulers remained as high and intact as ever, thanks to the ceremonial and protocol importance accorded them by the British. Within their own world, the Malays remained steeped in feudalism. From the economic point of view, the dislocation and the deprivation caused by imperialism and capitalism was not immediately felt because the masses had always lived in poverty any way. The issue of Malay participation or stake in the new capitalistic economy did not gain any significance with the masses simply because in the main the cconotnic ethos of the Malays remained traditional and non-capitalistic.

The masses lose our to colonial capitalism

It will be recalled that in Malay feudal history, there was no such thing as the emergence of independent cities as in the history of feudalism in the West. There was no development of an indepen-

dent bourgeois class undermining feudalism and finally replacing it with a capitalistic social order. In European history, there was a

gradual rise of the bourgeois class undermining feudalism over a period of centuries, beginning as far back as the 14th and 15th centuries, as in France and England." From the Malay point of view, seen from the internal historical perspective, feudalism survived structurally until well into the middle of the 19th century. It was not possible for an independent capitalism to develop within Malay feudalism, given the harsh and inhibitive conditions observed by Abdullah Munshi. While the social-economic conditions obstt°Llcted the emergence of an independent trading class, the Malay feudal ruling class did not embark on reforms towards the rationalisation of society as the feudal ruling class in Japan did."

so

Feudal elite and colonial capftafism

The challenge to Malay feudalism at the structural level came in the 19th century from the outside, in the form of an externally imposed capitalism under the patronage of British imperialism. It was the equivalent of the bourgeois revolution of the West. Capitalism, however, did not represent the whole of British policy or philosophy in Malaya but was merely one facet of a dualistic approach to the region. On the one hand, the British sought to develop capitalism and champion its cause in so far as it served British imperialism, on the other they officially maintained the traditional economy and kept the Malays on the land. The historical role given to the Malays by the British was that of growing food for the new and fast expanding cities under the impetus of colonial capitalism. This attitude was clearly shown 16

when the Malays responded positively to the attraction and the prospects of new cash crops like rubber during the boom years. When many Malays attempted to switch over to the more lucrative rubber cultivation in the early 20th century, abandoning the poor rice cultivation, the British officially checked the trend for fear that

food production might be adversely affected. A 'no rubber' clause was imposed as a condition in the alienation of agricultural land to the Malays and land utilisation was specifically stipulated diverting the Malays away from commercial and cash crop cultivation other than rice. District Officers went so far as to have illegally grown rubber destroyed. Though the policy was in part justified and rationalised in terms of protecting the rubber industry and the quality of its production in the world market from being adversely

affected by the alleged uncontrolled, unscientific and unprofessional cultivation of the Malay peasants, historical evidence showed that, to the contrary, the rubber cultivation of the peasants was competently carried out to an extent that it was capable of competing with the plantation economy. The official policy was more likely a response to the lobby of the bigger and foreign dominated plantation economy which was one o n e pTTTarst>""'f't'§'e new colonial capitalism. The hostility and discrimination continued until at least up to the Second World \'lIar. While the Malays were condemNed to the traditional economy, the official attitude towards .-m.. sector can only be described as injustice, perpetrated in favour of capitalism." Their utter neglect went 8 long way in preserving and reinforcing the 51

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT poverty of the Malays which had been a feature of Malay feudalism. On the other hand, everything possible was done to boost capitalism. Generous assistance was given to foreign planters in order to attract their investments to the Malay states. They were given the choicest of lands at nominal rates and with the minimum of restrictions. This was accompanied by a liberal l a b o r policy to ensure the capitalists their l a b o r supply. The government subsidised the immigration of Indian laborers into the country. The plantation economy was given institutional backing like scientific research solely geared to their requirements and problems. Infrastructurcs like roads and railways were provided for them by the colonial government at considerable cost. On the other side of the picture, no serious or significant attempt was made to safeguard the interests of the peasants against the encroachment of capitalism and its disruptive effects..JJ More and more land was taken over by the capitalist sector, like the rubber

and tin industry. The latter came into direct conflict with the peasant economy as they competed for the same land in the same area. Mining caused silting of peasant lands, and polluted the waterways. It diverted water supplies from peasant holdings into mining areas. As a result many peasants had to give up their lands and were forced to sell out. Discrimination against the peasant

economy was also shown in budget allocation, reflecting clearly the lopsided priorities given to the capitalist sector. Irrigation, which was badly needed by the peasantry, was not given serious consideration.

Although the Krian district was seriously hit by

drought in 1895, controversies surrounded the decision to construct an irrigation scheme there. Work started only in 1898 and it was completed only in 1906. No serious effort was undertaken or budget allocated for the development of water control technology which could have benefited the peasantry tremendously.

Budgetary bias in favour of capitalism was justified and rationalised in terms of capitalistic arguments. Only allocations which ensured profitability and f a v o r a b l e financial return should be given priority. As a result, the requirements of the peasant economy often had to be ignored or shelved in favour of capitalistic ventures. For example, proposals for irrigation schemes were often turned down or frozen .for the reason of lack of funds, whereas available resources were readily spent on the drainage of coastal 52

Feudal elite and colonial capitalism

areas for the use of the plantation economy. Huge sums were spent

for the development of communication like roads and railways for the benefit of the capitalist. The policy of f a v o r i n g the capitalist's ventures in planning communication denied the peasants of reliable marketing arrangements for their products. It was argued that only big capitalist ventures were in genuine need of marketing facilities and good communication. Attempts by the peasants to construct

their own irrigation schemes had been recorded. The peasants did not benefit from any scientific and relevant research into the problems of their economy as the research done by the government was largely oriented towards the plantation economy. No serious attempt was undertaken to communicate to the peasants whatever little research findings that might be of some relevance to them. The lack of. scientific input was one of the main causes of the low productivity of the peasant economy. Although the economy was rapidly mortised by the British, which worked against the traditional and subsistence economy of the peasants, no credit institution was set up for them as was done for the capitalist sector where huge loans were readily given by the government. The British government did not provide credit for the peasants because they were considered bad creditors. Half hearted measures were made to institute small loans for the peasants which soon broke down due to poor administration, poor publicity, unnecessary red tape and competition from private non-Malay moneylenders. lt took only one day to obtain credit from chettiars whereas it would take a t least three and a half months to obtain a small loan from the

government at great trouble and inconvenience. Hard-pressed for credit, which became indispensable under the mortised economy, the peasants were forced to rely on private znoneylenders who charged exorbitant interests on their loans, sometimes as high as 36 per cent per annum, The unpredictability and fluctuating nature of their economy soon landed them in great difficulties. In the early decades of the 20th century, many farmers lost their land to inoneylenders. .-1u Indebtedness continued to be a major problem of the peasants throughout British rule. In 1913, when the rulers protested against Malays being rapidly pushed out of their lands by the capitalist sector, the British enacted the Malay Reservation policy. 8 I The expressed objective of the policy was to prevent Malay land from passing into the hands of ".|

.5 :>

MALA Y IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT' non-Malays. It was generally felt by the British and the Malay elite that the masses were too ready to sell their land to non-Malays for quick, easy money. It was alleged, therefore, that the masses needed protection against themselves since they were too easily tempted by the offers of the non-Malays. The stereotyping of the Malay peasants as a lazy, fun-loving and spendthrift people definitely

contributed to such ideas." The policy gave the Residents the power to set aside some land for exclusively Malay ownership. The ability of the Malays to mortgage or sell lands alienated under such schemes to non-Malays was curtailed by legislation which declared all transactions between Malays and non-Malays concerning interests in Malay reserved land as null and void. The Malay Reservation policy cannot be interpreted as a genuine concern for the Malay masses by the British. In the first place, the British were apologetic to the capitalist sector concerning the policy. It was not given much publicity .for fear that it might provoke protests from the capitalist sector. The British liked very much to pretend as if the policy never existed." Secondly, the Malays themselves had little say in the implementation of the policy. The main decisions were left in the hands of District Officers who evaluated the suitability of any particular land to be designated as Malay reserve. Before deciding, they would normally consult the capitalist sector. This procedure suggests that only lands

not highly demanded by the capitalist sector were delineated as Malay reserves." Thirdly, the immediate effect of the policy worked against the interest of the peasants. This artificial device to 'protect'

the Malays from the eneroaehing capitalism, pretending as if land tenure and the rural economy had not been mortised, caused the

Malays financial loss. The value of Malay reserve land fell, in some areas by as much as 50 per cent, as compared to land outside the reservation. Since the implementation and the consequences of the Malay Reservation policy did not in any way suggest genuine

concern for the Malay peasants, we have to look for the historical significance of the policy elsewhere. The policy was very much in line with the dualistic philosophy of the British. It served the goal of keeping the Malays on the land. By establishing Malay reserves and excluding them from the capitalist market, the traditional economy would be maintained as a sector distinct and separate from the

capitalist sector. The identification of the scheme with the 54

Feudal elite and colonial capitalism

traditional peasant economy was so dose that the Malay elite saw the scheme as conflicting with their own interests. It was argued for instance by the Dato' Penghulu of Rembau in the Federal Council that the Malay Reservation policy was only in the interests of the peasants and did not therefore cater to the interests of emerging Malay capitalists. He suggested that a separate, preferential land policy be enacted for Malay capitalists.

Educe Lion for the masses The dualistic philosophy of the British, on the one hand

championing capitalism and on the other preserving the non-

capitalist, traditional and feudal world of the Malays was also reflected in their education policy. Their idea of education for the

Malay masses was naturally tuned towards the safeguarding of their colonial or imperial interests. It is to be expected, therefore, that such education was not geared towards genuine intellectual

development and the cultivation of a critical and independent spirit." The Malay vernacular education constituted of only four years of elementary education, emphasising mainly the three Rs.

The general conditions of Malay vernacular education were pathetic. The schools were housed in rriakeshift premises. Qualified teachers were lacking. Candidates for teacher training were themselves students of such elementary education. Proper and appropriate textbooks were not available. The teaching emphasised classical Malay

romances of the feudal tradition

which could

hardly be relied upon to cultivate the awareness or consciousness of the masses as to their democratic rights." The official aim of Malay education was very limited and narrow in that it aspired only to produce future peasants who could read, write, count and who were well adjusted or adapted to their lot of living in the traditional economy; This was clearly reflected in the remark of a British Director of Education in 1920: 'The aim of the government is not to turn out a few well-educated youths, nor a number of less well-educated boys; rather it is to improve the bulk of the people, and to make the son of fisherman or peasant a more intelligent fisherman or peasant than his father had been, and a 1?

man whose education will enable him to understand how his lot in

life fits in with the scheme of life around

llim.738

Providing better 55

M A L A Y IDEAS ON DE VELOFMENT

education than this was considered by the official circle as courting danger and political trouble for British rule. A member of the Federal Council argued in 1915 against higher education for the masses and he was supported by the British Residents: 'The great object of education is to train a man to make a living . . . you can teach Malays so that they do not lose their skill and craft in fishing and jungle work. Teach them the dignity of manual l a b o r , so that they do not all become kranies (clerks) and l am sure you will not have the trouble which has arisen in India through overeducation.' In a speech to the Federal Council, a British High Commissioner said in 1920: 'It is no real education that qualifies a pupil in reading, writing and arithmetic and leaves him with a distaste, or perhaps even a contempt for the honorable pursuit of husbandry and handicraft. lt will not only be a disaster to, but a violation of the whole spirit and traditions of, the Malay race if the result of our vernacular education is to lure the whole of the youth from the kampong to the town.' The aim of Malay education was, according to him, to preserve the character of the Malays as essentially a rural and agricultural people: '. . . to breed a vigorous and self-respecting agricultural peasantry such as must form the backbone of every nation.' R. O. Winstedt, the well-known writer, was influential in the formulation of education for the Malay masses. He was appointed Assistant Director of Education in 1916 on the ground of his reputation as a person conversant with Malay culture and literature. He toured the Philippines and Java to study the colonial

education there. In 1917, he recommended an education policy which he dubbed 'the new education'. What he advocated can only be interpreted as a blatant policy to stifle Malay intellectual development and political consciousness, thereby safeguarding the vested interests of British imperialism. He assimilated enthusiastically from the Dutch in Java the idea of leaving out the teaching of history. Winstedt recommended that the basic character of Malay education should be 'rural' with a 'a strong manual, agricultural

bias'. Basket making and handicraft were to be given emphasis in order to instil the idea of the dignity of l a b o r . Comparing Malay education to colonial education in Java and the Philippines, he felt that the level of Malay education had been too high. He regretted the fact that there was no way to retract from this wrong or 56

Feudal elite and co.*r,>n.iaI capitahsmr

inappropriate policy. Winstedt's policy remained influential in British Malaya until the Second World War.

The limited aim of colonial education was supported by the traditional Malay elite in the official circle. Like the British, they raised the scare of 'over~education' among the Malays. Raja Chulan, for instance, argued in the Federal Council against Malay demand for English education in the name of preserving peasant agriculture. Quoting English sources representing the colonial argument, he said: 'We have to avoid the mistakes committed in other parts of the world. History has taught us that Lindereducation is not so serious an evil as over~education, especially education of a kind that does not provide the means to keep its young occupied.' The expansion of English education into the rural areas was considered undesirable 'because Malay youths who gain a smattering of English at these schools do not take kindly to the pursuits of their forebears'. He criticised the aspiration of rural Malays to work in the non-agricultural sector and deplored the fact that there was a great reluctance on the part of those living near the towns to work the land when they see youths of other nationalities obtaining regular employment solely on account of their English education. Although the traditional Malay elite was responsible for some reforms in Malay education, Sultan Idris, for instance, was actively involved in the establishment of a teachers' training college at Tanjung Maliin, they cannot he said to have championed a concept of Malay education which was independent of colonial views on the matter. As far as education for the masses was

concerned, there was a common front between feudal and colonial ideology in maintaining the traditional and rural outlook of the masses and obstructing their democratic and political education. It meant the continuing power of the elite, which in turn meant the preservation of British imperialism which justified itself in the name of the elite. Influx o f non -Malays

The policy of retaitliiig, the Malays on the land, however, created a problem for the rapidly expanding capitalist sector which required a massive supply of l a b o r . The Malays, however, did not opt for the alternative offered by the new capitalism. As a people 57

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT steeped in a subsistence and traditional peasant economy, whose world-view was still bound by feudalism and its values, they were

not an ideal source of l a b o r . They valued their independence too much to become a hired hand or a coolie in the foreign-owned

mines and plantations." They had not acquired a purely materialistic concept of life and therefore did not readily succumb to the temptation of wage offers even though their more independent life meant having less money. It is an expression of this love and desire for independence that the peasants responded to the rubber boom by growing their own rubber in small holdings instead of hiring their l a b o r out to the plantations of the capitalists. It was their reluctance to become hired hands that gave rise to the unfounded

allegations that they were lazy and fun-loving. There was another reason why Malay l a b o r for the new capitalism was lacking. The preservation of feudalism and its traditions prevented any serious social disintegration or dislocation in Malay society. As a result, there was no major displacement of the rural population. Western capitalism in Europe received its supply of labour from the emancipated serfs who abandoned the land to seek a living in the cities." The breakdown and disintegration of feudalism and the traditional agrarian life led to an exodus of cheap and desperate l a b o r into the industries. There was no equivalent process in the history of the Malay masses. Their history, in fact, moved in the opposite direction. The Malay elite and the British consciously formulated and implemented a policy of maintaining intact the traditional world of the rural Malays-

Nevertheless, the problem of labor needed resolution. Labour was required to mine the tin, clear the jungle, construct the communication lines, plant the rubber, establish plantations and so

on. The British resorted to the importation of cheap l a b o r from China and South India." The poor from these densely populated regions were willing enough to venture to Malaya in the hope of improving their lot- Initially, they came only with the idea of earning and then returning home, but with the passage of time a more settled noni-Malay population was established. The import of foreign l a b o r was so significant that it became one of the outstanding features

of British

imperialism

and capitalism

in

Malaya. *MIM close nnection between imported l a b o r , British imperialism and capitalism has been described in the following 58

Feudal elite and colonial capitalism

terms: '. . . the surest index to the general state of affairs in Malaya is the racial composition of each of its several units. The presence of a large number of Chinese and Indians as compared with the Malays in any region is a sure sign of large alien investments and an intensive British administration, while Malay predominance in the local population indicates slight foreign investments, a more or less primitive and self-sustaining economic system, and a simple administrative structure manned almost exclusively by Malays with the exception of a handful of key posts at the top."

The influx of non-Malays soon revolutionised the demographic pattern." By 1931, the Malays had been outnumbered in their own country. The new immigrant population and the rapidly expanding capitalism pushed the Malays more and more into the interior from the more desirable and highly demanded lands along the main communication networks, particularly in the Federated Malay States of the west coast. in 1931, the total population of British Malaya was 4,385,346, of which 1,962,021 or 44.7 per cent were Malays, while the Chinese numbered 1,709>392 or 39 per cent, the Indians 624,009 or 14.2 per cent. The Europeans numbered only 17,768 or 0.4 per cent. The changing balance of Malay and non~Malay population is reflected in the following statistics. In 1911, the Malays made up 53 per cent of the total population of 2,651,036, in 1921, 49.2 per cent of 3,358,054 and by 1931, 45 per cent of the total population of 4,385,346, and this declining proportion persisted despite continuing Malay immigration from the surrounding region outside Malaya.

The immigration of the Chinese into British Malaya left a strong imprint on the development of capitalism in the area. The major influx was at the end of the 19th century. In 1881, 89,900 Chinese arrived in Singapore and Penang, 224,100 in 1901, 278,100 in 1913. The voluine was temporarily checked during the war years but increased again to 435,708 during the rubber boom of 1927. The Chinese population of Singapore increased from 164,041 in 1901 to 421,821 in 1931. In 1981, in the whole of Malaya less than 57 per cent of persons residing were locally born. In Singapore, the figure was less than 40 per cent.

The Chinese community soon developed along capitalistic lines with its own upper, middle and lower class, in contrast to the European and Indian communities. The Europeans in Malaya

59

MALA Y IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

formed only an upper class, while the Indians, on the whole, formed only the lower class during British imperialism in Malaya. The Chinese middle class constituted of shopkeepers, merchants, artisans and government employees. A smaller group of capitalists ruthlessly fought their way up to head banks, big mercantile houses and owned mines and plantations. Chinese capitalists managed to carve out a major slice of the new capitalism for themselves, second only to major European interests or holdings. Until the First World War, they dominated tin mining with the British controlling only a quarter of the industry. Only with the introduction of superior mining technology and greater capital input after the war did the British manage to outstrip Chinese control in the industry. In the rubber industry, Chinese holdings in the plantation economy far outstripped those of the Malays and Indians. There are social-economic factors which contributed greatly to

the expansion of Chinese capitalism. Firstly, the involvement of the Chinese in the Malay peninsula started earlier than the British

themselves. There was no British investment in the Malay states prior to the Intervention or Forward Movement of 1874. The

Chinese, however, had been active in exploiting the tin of the Malay hinterland long before that. Secondly, even after the Intervention of 1874 and the establishment of British protection in the Malay states, the British did not immediately seize the opportunity for capitalistic exploitation. The early opportunities

were taken by large numbers of Chinese from the Straits Settle~ merits.

Thirdly, in the Straits Settlements, the British had left the

Chinese to run their affairs and administration independently for a long time. The combination of such autonomy and the stability of the Straits Settlements was most conducive for the development of

Chinese capitalism.44 The position of the Chinese was very different from that of the Malays on the mainland. Feudal oppression of the past, British policy of preserving feudalism and the retaining of

Malays on the land inhibited capitalism among the Malays. Fourth, the immigrant nature of the Chinese population contributed to the assimilation and cultivation of capitalistic values and outlook- leaving their peasant and feudalistic background in China and entering the urban .and capitalist sector in the Straits

Settlements, they underwent a revision of values which was necessary for their survival in the new environment. Furthermore, 6()

Feudal elite and colonial capitalism

the Chinese immigrants were poor folk in China who left their

homeland bent on improving their lot. Though some departed from that goal, many stuck to their original aim. Fifth, the nature of Chinese capitalism was different from that of the Europeans. The owners of European holdings lived abroad in the metropolitan countries. Most of the Europeans in the Malay peninsula were either managers, agents or technical experts acting on behalf of the various European joint-stock companies." The Chinese holdings, on the other hand, were locally owned. Being on the spot, the Chinese capitalists were in a position to take greater interest in the running of their own business and the promotion of their interests.

Sixth, the vast opportunities opened up by the British in the Malay peninsula must be mentioned and the Chinese were favorably placed to exploit them. According to a writer, 'the Chinese have been given virtually free reign in it (British Malaya) by the British in all spheres except the political, and they have known how to make good use of it'.46

61

THE INFLUENCE OF CAPITALISM O N RELIGION AND NATIONALISM

It has been said that there was no development of bourgeois capitalism from within Malay feudalism. The main structural challenge to Malay feudalism came in the form of an externally imposed capitalism. After : grafting with such capitalism, however, capitalististic values began to c o l o r the thinking and ethics of the Malay elite who had been exposed to urbanisation and capitalism. These were usually those who were closely associated with the Straits Settlements of Singapore and Penang. Given the colonial policy of retaining the masses on the land, the preference of the traditional elite for the administrative sector, and the rapid development of non-Malay capitalism, the Malays found themselves to be an economically depressed people in the capitalist sector of

the economy. Willi the

assimilation of capitalistic

standards or categories into their thinking and evaluation, there was a growing concern among the elite about Malay 'backwardness' and their lagging behind in the growing capitalism. Wliile the traditional elite considered it desirable that the Malays should continue to be a rural and agricultural people, the elite who had been exposed to urbanisation and capitalism began to look down

on the traditional economic sector and the non-capitalistic, traditional world-view of the Malays. As early as the end of the 19th century, these Malays had discussed the alleged laziness of their people, echoing the ideology of colonial capitalism.'

The

unfavourable position o t h e l\/lalays in the new capitalism gave rise to a form of inferiority complex amongst them and led to 'an orgy of self-vilification and self-condemnation The need to adapt to 62

The influence

of capital'zlsm

capitalism was keenly felt and advocated. This naturally led to a conflict with Malay traditionalism which was considered to be an obstacle to their adaptation to capitalism. This conflict was clearly reflected in the realm of religion.E. Those influenced by capitalism began to feel the irrelevance of a traditional interpretation or approach to religion. They felt the discrepancy between traditional religion and the new demands of the capitalist structure and environment. In order to overcome the conflict felt, they developed a new perspective to religious thinking, bringing about reconciliation and adaptation which enabled them to adjust to capitalism while keeping their basic paradigmatic experience through religion? There are various alternatives or responses open to a traditional world facing the encroachment of Westernisation and capitalism.

Firstly, it can close up and defensively affirm a traditional and millenarian kind of religion; secondly, ir can be indifferent to the changes happening around it, saying that such changes have nothing to do with religion; or thirdly, it can accept the changes as something desirable and then seek the legitimacy and justification for its acceptance within religion itself. Influenced by capitalism and its corresponding urbanisation, some well-known Malay writers chose to adopt the third alternative. Although they are generally regarded today as prominent Malay thinkers, reformers, nationalists, patriots, and literary figures, the ideological leanings of their thoughts within the historical-social context has not been given much attention or analysis. This chapter attempts to examine

the ideological content of their thinking. A good example of Islamic thinking representing the influence of capitalism is Uganda Islam day Aka! (Islam and Reason). in this

hook, Syed Sheikh Shady strongly argues for a rational and individualistic approach to religion. It has been shown that rationalism is a central feature of a capitalistic philosophy which

advocates that man should develop and adopt a rational and systematic orientation towards life as this is necessary in the pursuit of profit, which is a defining trait of capitalism." individualism, too, is closely associated with capitalism as it contributes to this orientation towards life by throwing man back upon his own resources instead of relying on the mechanical habit of following tradition-' 68

MALAY IDEAS O N DEVELOPMENT

Since traditional religion emphasises blind faith and an uricritical acceptance of intermediate authorities, whereas capitalistic religion advocates greater individualism and independent judgment, there is an open conflict between the two approaches to Islam. Capitalistic Islam considers traditional or feudalistic Islam a major obstruction in the development of a rational and systematic orientation towards life and is therefore hostile or critical of it." In his book, Syed Sheikh Alhady censures traditional or feudal Islam for its blind faith and uncritical acceptance of intermediate authorities. According to him,

'Islam highly respects reason' and appeals to it in verifying and accepting the existence of God. Islam invites man to study and reflect on nature precisely because of its high regard for man's reason. It urges man to 'observe nature . . by applying his thinking on the nature of God's creation, which is governed by intricate laws . . . showing the relation of each cause to other causation It is contended that God's purpose in directing man's attention to nature is to encourage him to utilise and apply his rational faculty in his worldly affairs: 'God's purpose is to attract man's rational faculty . . to the habit of discussing and investigating the origin of all things and happenings . . . in his environment and knowing . . . the purpose and law behind them." For Seed Sheikh Alhady, religious observances and practices have no meaning whatsoever if they are not subjected to the test of rationality or reason. The emphasis on knowledge in Islam is understood to be an extension of the emphasis on reason- »i-. since treason . . says . . . up rid for nothing . . . that God . . ha I

.

.

.

I

.

he should be keen to acquire the knowledge of each thing created

..

by God . and the utility or application of each one of them." The uncritical acceptance of tradition by the Malays is strongly deplored: '. . . they don't want to free their mind from bondage . . . so that their reason can roam freely . . their rational faculty is

.

wasted, not being utilised . - . in investigating the tightness or the wrongness of a particular matter . - . (they) merely follow what has

been long practised or observed

...

and

forebears and their community in the past

...

. . .'

believed by their Given the feudal

psychology and tradition of the Malays, individualism and independent judgment were not highly developed- Objectivity and independence of spirit had to give way to the influence and authority of position and power. This is not in line with the 64

'Hoe influence

of capitalism

thinking of capitalistic religion. Syed. Sheikh Alhady advocates a more objective and independent judgment: '. . . we have to base our acceptance of an opinion or teaching on reason by evaluating only the opinion or teaching itself - and not base it mainly on the . . . high position and status of those who advocate it . . _>8 Although the dignity of the individual and the equality of man is an integral or doctrinal aspect of Islam, these elements were not really given free expression under feudalism. With the coming of

capitalism, which ushered in a social structure and environment which was favorable to greater individualism, the idea of the dignity of the individual and the equality of man entered into the consciousness of religious thinkers and received a more concrete formulation and expression. Capitalistic Islam revolted against the social inequalities of the feudal past which now seemed outmoded, obsolete and illogical. Syed Sheikh Alhady rejects such inequalities on the premise of reason. He argues that reason dictates to us a common humanity, equality and brotherhood of man. 'All religions revealed by God . . . preach brotherhood and equality amongst man.' It is contrary and unacceptable to reason that 'there can be

. . . some powerful personalities professing the article of faith of Islam . . . who are entitled to seize the property of others by virtue of their high position or to hurt others simply because they are rich . . . or powerful He emphasises that there is equality and the rule of law in Islam: '_ . . Islam . . . absolutely docs not discriminate between king and subject, the rich and the poor . . . male and female, the knowledgeable and . . . the ignorant . . . all of them are

subject to one law and the idea of justice . . . without discrimination

. . . based on

their position and status." Far from condoning inequality and sanctioning the privilege of leaders to discriminate against the WOW, Islam places a heavy

obligation and duty on them to uphold justice, equality and the welfare of their followers. They ate to act as 'judges and rulers, who

.

are capable of safeguarding all rights . . restoring all the r i o t s of the weak which have been violated by those in power . punish those who have been cruel to their victims . . give leadership . . . in useful work that benefit the public and . . adhere to the teachings and demands of the religious laws . . the rulers .¢=»s~=-=1. must seriously . . . look after the interests and welfare of their subjects'.' Within the context of the time and the social~historical background, such

.

.

.

. .

65

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVMLCJPMENT

views represent a justification of the new Western style of administration and the capitalistic social order with its idea of social contract, individualism and the rule of law, as against feudalism, its social inequalities and the arbitrary power of its leaders. In other words, such religious thinking represents the conflict between a capitalistic and feudal philosophy or concept of society.

Man 's striving on earth It has been observed that one trait that distinguished between

traditional feudal religion and capitalistic religion is the attitude towards man's economic activities in the world. In traditional religion, there is a strong denouncement of the world." Worldliness and the pursuit of secular economic interest are scorned or disapproved of. Withdrawal from or abandonment of the world is often associated with spirituality and religious virtues. Piety and religiosity are closely associated with disinterestedness in worldly striving and toil. The whole negative attitude towards worldly economic activities and the pursuit of individualistic economic interests is summed up by the sociological concept of other-worldly asceticism. In striking contrast, capitalistic religion emphasises man's

economic striving on earth. It sanctifies and confers upon secular economic activities a n aura of spirituality. pursuit of one's

economic

The individualistic

interests is considered a religious virtue.

Secular economic striving is promoted as a religious duty. The world is seen as having been created by God tor man's use or benefit. Worldly l a b o r and toil is therefore a glorification of God's majesty and bounty. Worldly economic success is a sign of divine grace, just as worldly toil becomes an important path towards winning it. The whole spirit towards secular economic activities is summed u p in the sociological concept of worldly asceticism. The

notion of religious duty in association with economic striving is represented in the concept of a calling." The changing values towards man's striving on earth is reflected in Uganda Islam Dan Arai. There is a marked change in the attitude towards religion. The main emphasis in religion is not man's salvation in the world hereafter through the abandonment of the 66

The in/Yz5?:1¢r6

of caj7iIalt's;pn

world, but guidance for man on earth. It is God's command and design that man should utilise his talent and potential for his benefit on earth. One main talent conferred by God for this purpose is man's rational faculty: 'God had planned that man should be capable of exploiting His bounty by means of knowledge . . . He granted man his reason, by means of which he can attain whatever he desires . .' There is no denouncement of the pleasures of the world but it should not he unbridled. There should he restraint, balance, limit and moderation. Excesses, greed and self-centredness are scorned. Capitalistic Islam rejects both the other-worldly asceticism of traditional religion and the worldliness, sensuality, self-indulgence and indolence of feudalism: 'It is permitted by God for man to enjoy things that benefit him or which contribute to his physical and spiritual well-being without excesses and waste, but it is forbidden for man to do anything that harms himself, his soul and others." Other-worldly asceticism is rejected because it causes man to neglect his duty on earth: 'In is forbidden for man . . to be excessive in his religious activities to the extent of neglecting his duties in this world." Syed Sheikh Alhady's concept of religion shows a trait of utilitarianism, which is another significant feature of capitalistic religion." It has been observed that the values of capitalistic religion is strongly influenced by utilitarianism which serves the goals of capitalism. For instance, honesty is considered useful because it assures credit; so are punctuality, industry and frugality.14 In his desire to see Malays competing f a v o r a b l y in the new capitalism,

.

.

Seed Sheikh Alhady presents a whole interpretation of Islam that serves to instil the spirit of capitalism in the Malays. The main function of religion is that of an ideological force in propelling man along the path of worldly asceticism and progress on earth, besides ensuring salvation in the world hereafter. Religion is for 'victory in

the world, as well as in the hereafter'- Muslims and Malays had achieved a great civilisation in the past but are now backward and lagging behind because they have neglected the world in contradiction to the calling. They 'had deviated . . from the true path . . .'

.

making them 'weak and disunited'." Such reference to the Golden Age of Islam does not vitiate our assertion that Seed Sheikh Shady sought to instil the spirit of capitalism in the Malays. in Islamic

literature representing a whole range of differing and contrasting 67

MAL/lY IDEAS O N DEVELOPMENT

ideologies, one often comes across references to the Golden Age of Islam. Each ideology sees different things in the Golden Age. Often many cite it merely to increase the appeal of their own ideology and to heighten the effect and emotional value of their message. Needless to say, not everyone is guilty of this and there are sincere and objective attempts to extract and promote specific aspects of

the Golden Age beyond the mere propagandising and politicising of it.

The idea o f self-h eip Consciousness of the disadvantaged and unfavorable position of the Malays in the new capitalism produces a kind of complex amongst the capitalistic Malays. A process of self-condemnation and self-vilification ensues. They embark on a 'refornlation' of Malays along a capitalistic philosophy. A f a v o r i t e line taken by

capitalistic Islam has always been the idea of self-help. The impact and influence of social structure, environment or planning on the world-view or the economic position of a people is not acknowledged. There is much naivete in their idea that the position of a people depends solely on their capacity for self-help and has little to do with the social structure. Such a lopsided perspective is another characteristic of capitalistic religion.'" The advocation of self-help for the Malays is just another facet of the view that Malays are lazy and indolent. Poverty is readily associated with laziness and capitalistic success with hard work and toil."

In the history of capitalism, we often come across successful capitalists attributing their success to their own struggle, effort and hard work, as if they had not received any assistance or benefit from the favorable conditions of a particular social economic structure. Such self~praise is normally accompanied by a disdain or contemptuous attitude towards the poor. For instance, in 16th and 17th century England, the poor were actually punished for being poor because poverty was considered to be the consequence of their laziness." Poor adults, as well as children, were made to work in factories without remuneration or maintenance because it was felt that their corrupt and lazy souls could only be cleansed by hard work. Poor unemployeds were also fined for their poverty. Studies on capitalistic religion show that it is normally devoid of genuine 68

The influence of capiraftsm

programmes for reforms of the social order or structure." Its main emphasis is always that man should accept his economic status and work hard within it. Such conservatism helps to justify and ensure

the smooth functioning of capitalism. It fosters good relations between capitalists and the workers. That some men are capitalists and others mere workers is seen' to be due to providence and divine plan. The affluence of the capitalists is regarded as divine grace won by hard l a b o r while the destitution of the workers as the lack of grace which has yet to be won by them through greater toil. Such prejudice against the poor was a prominent feature of the Victorian era and the age of Western imperialism.2° Similarly, using Quranic teaching to legitimise its prescription, Uganda Islam dan Aka! reminds the Malays that 'God helps a people who help themselves'. They can improve their economic conditions only if they live by Islamic ethics, since it is the mission of Islam 'to refine Man's b e h a v i o r and make his action progressive . . .' The utility and effectiveness of such ethics in ensuring progress is independent of creed and belief: 'Whosoever . . violates . . . its . . . purpose and intention . . shall land himself in trouble and be destroyed, even though he may consider himself a Muslim . . whosoever lives or abides by it, victory will surely . . be his." The progress of the West is attributed to Islamic values and ethics: 'love . . study history, we would note that it was the teaching of Islam which laid the foundation . . . for the progress or the modernisation of contemporary European nations . . . which they assimilated from

.

.

.

.

.

the Muslims of Andalusia (Spain) during the period when the light

of the progress of Islam shone . . . all over Europe." Islamic brotherhood, unity and communal living are stressed in Uganda Islam dan Arai. But like many other religious concepts, these are susceptible to ideological interpretation and meaning. The preaching

of brotherly

love and communal

living was thus

emphasised along with individualism for the following reasons. Firstly, iridividualisrn and the doctrine of the calling is usually justified in the name of the religious community and its cause. In Calvinism, for instance, l a b o r in a calling was justified in terms of brotherly love. This line of thinking serves the cause of capitalism and its individualism. in this way, the relationship between capitalists and workers is seen as mutual participation and cooperation in God's religion. Both the efforts of the capitalists and 69

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

the toil of the workers become a struggle for the greater glory of God. Secondly, the exhortation for some kind of communal living and solidarity is necessary because the desire to promote a rational and systematic organisation of life along capitalistic lines requires some kind of social mobilisation and cooperation. This is particularly true of the Malays in view of their disadvantaged and unfavorable position within the new capitalism. Thirdly, the notion of brotherhood and communal solidarity advocated by capitalistic religion is normally impersonal and devoid of genuine social-rnindedness

or humanitarian considera-

tions. Quite often the exhortation of the communal cause and struggle violates or transgresses genuine humanitarian values and ideals, although Seed Sheikh Alhady is not guilty of this. Weber makes the following observation on the concept of brotherly love

and the Christian cause advocated by Calvinism in the early stage ocapitahsm in the-1/-est: #_ i. . they obviously originate in the ideas, running t r • u p me whole Puritan ethic, according to which the w

duty of one's neighbor is satisfied by fulfilling God's commandments to increase His glory. The n e i g h b o r thereby receives all that is due to him, and anything further is God's affair. Humanity in relation to one's n e i g h b o r has, so to speak, died out. That is indicated by the most various circumstances." The idea of charity upheld was demeaning and dehurnanising to the recipients: 'It served the glory of God precisely to the extent that all personal and h u m a n feelings were necessarily insulted by in."

The notion of communal living advocated by capitalistic religion is quite different from that advocated by traditional religion. Traditional religion sees society as something held together by a system of mutual, though varying, obligations, and less as an expression of competitive economic interests. This is why economic individualism was scorned in traditional society. Before the rise of

capitalism in Europe in the 16th and 17th century, profit was condemned by the Church because it was seen as the fruit of economic individualism which violated the spirit of communal living and obligation." The idea of the market forces of supply and demand and the price mechanism is not part of the thinking of traditional religion. Likewise, in the traditional Islam of the Malays before the influence of capitalism, the idea of economic individual70

The influence

of cap zM lism

ism was absent. Given their feudal, rural and agricultural back-

ground, religion emphasised cooperation and mutual obligation more than individualism and competition.

The instinct to compete Under the influence of capitalism, however, the idea of economic individualism and competition entered religious consciousness. We note this change in Uganda Islam dan Arai. Seed Sheikh Alhady points out that God had created in man the natural instinct to compete and ITg'hr for his own self-interest. He sees the utility or function of religion to be the regulation of this natural tendency. He writes that on his own, 'man desires to further his own self-interest

. . . his claim has . . . no limit whatsoever. . .' Therefore, religion is considered necessary for it furnishes some guidance and regulation, which . . reduce the chances of conflict amongst them . . . in the competition to further their interest . . .' God then becomes an arbitrator in man's economic competition. la/Ian's belief in God acts as an ideological spur for him to compete and struggle in life, besides furnishing the rules and regulations of that competition. It is stressed that the idea of competition is compatible with Islam: 'The religion of Islam absolutely does not forbid . . . man championing his self-interest or those of his community. To the contrary, it encourages Muslims to do so: what is absolutely

.

forbidden is fanaticism or extremism to the extent of hurting others. The utility or function of prayer is considered to be the

awakening of nan's conscience in the competition to further his

. , God"s law and prohibitions . . . in the Quran . . . are often forgotten by His servants . . in . . their pursuit of their self-interest. Therefore they are in need . . . of constant reminders interest; '.

. . .'

.

.

In prayer man faces God in humility, asking 'for forgiveness as to his transgression . . and for deliverance from further infringement . _us The changing orientation from traditionalism to capitalism is

.

.

reflected in the values promoted by Ugrima Islam dan Arai. Some values represent capitalism and an anti-feudal orientation, while others reflect the continuity of traditional values. Values which are compatible with a capitalistic discipline and mercantile life, for

instance, thrift and frugality, are strongly advocated: 'Islam 71

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

.

strongly advocates Muslims to be thrifty . . because by being thrifty a person can safeguard his body from many dangers . . . wasting property without any justification results in the depletion of property, as well as in the destruction of the body . . .' Those who waste are considered to be brothers of the devil and the Quran is cited to that effect. They are regarded as infidels. Toll, presumably in capitalistic ventures, is praised because it is regarded as spiritually cleansing. According to Syed Sheikh Alhady 'a life of effort and work' is advocated in Islam because 'laziness in not

doing any work whatsoever is bad for the health and it soils the soul'. Prophet Muhammad's saying is quoted in support: 'One cannot eat better food than . . the fruits of his own work '

.

Quranic verses exhorting man to be economically enterprising on earth are freely translated and cited: 'God has created the earth in a

spread for you, therefore all should walk its corners and partake of the bounties which have been created for you." And another: 'And there is nothing for man except that (which is derived) from his work and his effort shall be witnessed by man."-"' The element of worldly asceticism is unmistakable in the above. Other values promoted by the Uganda Islam dan A/za! are: '. . . speaking the truth, honesty, patience and perseverance, not losing one's temper easily, forgiving the faults of others, solidarity, obedience and kindness to parents and kindred, avoiding hurting fellow villagers, the keeping of promises, cooperation in good or beneficial work, kindness towards the weak and the lowly, charity towards the poor, and compassion, even towards anitnals.71

Objectively, these are indeed values enjoined by Islam. We have to explain sociologically, however, their selection and the emphasis given to them by a particular style of thinking against a particular social-historical background." In doing so, we would note that these values are compatible with a capitalistic discipline and the demand for a rational and systematic orientation of life. These values were similarly promoted by the Protestant religion when capitalism was still in need of the religious support during its early stage of growth." Values like charity, kindness, compassion and respect for parents are general universal ideals which do not conflict with capitalistic ethics and are therefore retained. They are equally emphasised in traditional and capitalistic religion.

As had been discussed, the cooperation between the British and /2

The zkfluence

of capitahsrn

the traditional elite basically maintained the feudal and traditional Malay society and its world-view intact. On the other hand, the expanding capitalism had its own peculiar world-view which was quite opposed to that of the traditional society. The conflict was clearly reflected in the Malay concept of religion.

A cal] to adapt and change Whereas feudal and traditional Islam was characterised by static thinking, uncritical ritualism and other-worldly asceticism, capitalistic Islam was more open and receptive to adaptation and

change?" In Uganda Islam day Arai, Seed Sheikh Alhady argues for change: '. . the guidance for living . . . is formulated by Islam in general terms . . . rejecting evil and enjoining the good, for life on earth cannot be determined only by one set of rules for all circumstances because the time, place and the cultures of man vary . . . (Therefore) it is permitted by God for religious elite who understand the purpose of religion to interpret religious injunctions in accordance with the time and human conditions, accommodate ing the ways of living then. He criticises the Linthinking ritualism of the religious elite: '. . . unfortunately the praying lessons taught to our children by those who claim to be knowledgeable and who are acknowledged as such consist mainly of excessive physical movements, the sequence of recitation, and the inernorising of prayers the meaning and purpose of which are not understood by the students . .' Those who pray

.

...

.

mechanically without understanding,

presumably in blind obedi-

ence tO the religious injunctions and out of fear for their salvation in the world hereafter, are censured for their 'parrot-like prayers'

which consist of 'mere movement of the tongue'. He quips that their main concern in prayer is 'to improve the tune of their recitation and

.. .

to

meticulously observe

the spelling and

pronunciation' in order to impress others. Such prayers are meaningless 'though they may leave dark bruises on their foreheads . .' This unthinking approach to religion is one of the main causes of Malay backwardness: '. . . if all the religious teachers seriously teach their students the meaning and significance of the recitation prescribed . by God in the prayers to the extent of only a quarter . . . of their emphasis on hair-splitting discussions on categories of

.

..

7.3

MALA Y IDEAS ON DE V E L ( ) P M . E N T

water, intention . . . and excessive physical movements, the Muslims . . . would never be . . in backwardness and degradation." With great regret, he observes the changed function of the mosque from a dynamic social institution of the past into a meaningless one. He tells the Malays that it is not the function of the Friday sermon to enable the congregation 'to watch the wiggle of the officials climbing up the pulpit or to listen to their sing-song in a language which the majority, . . . including the officials themselves, do not understand'. The proper function of the mosque

.

should he the promotion of Muslim solidarity, brotherhood, common cause and the regulation of their competition in daily lives: '. . to instil the feeling of mutual love through the congregation . . to listen to the counsels, teachings, criticism and exhortations which are beneficial . . . to the community . . . and which remind all brothers . . . not to be carried away by greed to the extent of hurting others in the competition to further their own

.

.

interest . . .' Instead of performing this function, the mosque has become obsolete and alienated from the new environment and its needs, devoting its attention 'to worn out issues which are relevant to people who lived seven or eight hundred years ago . . .' He feels the inadequacy of the traditional approach to religion within the new capitalistic environment. He writes of the traditional sermons: 'They are of no use to the conditions of today.' The traditional elite, he says, use the mosque only for fear for their salvation: '. . . they transform the mosque into a place for those with important

positions to drum their foreheads on the ground with guilty feelings

. . . once in seven days . . .' The religious elite are criticised for their

abuse of the mosque: '. . . the mosque is a place for them to earn a living by trading religion' and 'a place of vanity and egotism for . . . leaders or officials who administer the mosque." Syed Sheikh Alhady castigates the elite for failing to organise religious institutions for the betterment of the Malays and Muslims. For instance, he hits out at the abuse of the zalzar fund (religious tax): '. . . there is no attempt to appoint people or boards with integrity to manage the Yakut fund in the way demanded by Islam . for the benefit of the poor and the Muslims in general." They are deprived of the benefits of the zakat because of mismanagement

. .

and opportunisinz 'We dare say that 90 per cent of the total fund is 74

The in fluence of capitalism

spent on people who have no rights, who are not eligible or who should never receive anything from i t ' Instead, he says, the proper running of the zakat could go a long way in improving the position of the people in the new capitalism: '. . . Islamic colleges and universities could have been built long ago . . . as well as industries, which could provide jobs for poor Muslims . . .' One undeserving element responsible for squandering the bleat, says Syed Sheikh

Alhady, was the religious elite: 'Is it stated anywhere in the [drab (religious books) . . . that what is meant by poor folk . . . includes the lebai (religious teachers) with their white caps or big headgear and long flowing robes; or anybody who can read and teach the kitab to stupid people for just an hour or two a day, and who then sits around waiting for charity and zalzat money . despite being physically very fit?'24* The conflict between capitalistic and traditional religion is well illustrated in Syed Sheikh Alhady's interpretation of the significance of the pilgrimage to Mecca. He sees the pilgrimage as God's indirect way of organising the greatest trading exhibition on earth. For many traditional Malays, however, the pilgrimage is one way of enhancing one's social status, besides being one of the tenets of Islam. The laajz' (one who has made the pilgrimage) is highly respected in the community because his status is not only a measure of his piety or religiosity but is also an indication of his economic means since only individuals of some means can afford to go on a

. .

pilgrimage. The two differing perspectives are reflected in Uganda

Islam dan Arai. According to Seed Sheikh Shady: "In a great modern nation, the elite continuously organise various grand exhibitions . . . because they want people . . . nations . . . to come and see what they have set up at considerable cost . . this can

.

benefit their trade, industries, craft etc. We dare say that there has never been a greater exhibition on earth . . . than "God's exhibition in Mecca", that is, the pilgrimage. He argues that the pilgrimage is God's way of encouraging Muslims to trade. He also cynically criticises the traditional view of the pilgrimage and the basis: '. . the purpose of the pilgrimage as intended by God is not to enable or to compel a person to put on the robe and the headgear, and to confer on him the title of faaji so that he can accept payments for praying upon the dead and for his supplications at the feast for the

.

souls of the dead.' 75

MALA Y IDEAS O N DE VEI.OPA/IENT

Za'be and Malay capitalism The influence of capitalism on Malay thinking is more clearly shown in the writings of Za'ba. While Syed Sheikh Alhady confines himself to social reforms and the advocation of some values which he feels has been neglected by traditional religion, Za'ba goes further. He openly and blatantly admires the new capitalism. He is contemptuous of the Malays because of their unfavorable position in the new capitalism. He judges his people by the yardstick of capitalistic prejudices and biases. His thoughts are inspired by the myths and ideologies of colonial capitalism. In a

study of Malay values, an examination of Za'ba's writing is necessary for several reasons. Firstly, he was and is still regarded as one of the most prominent Malay thinkers and reformers by many Malays as well as foreign writers on Malaysia." Secondly, the ideological content of his writings has not been studied. Thirdly, he is considered by many as a Malay nationalist and patriot. It is necessary, therefore, to subject such an evaluation to a critical examination. Fourthly, he is easily one of the most influential Malay writers. In many ways, as will be shown later, Za'ba is the main ideologue of Malay capitalism and his thinking has a strong influence on the contemporary thinking of the Malay elite, intelligentsia and middle-class. In 1927, Za'ba published an article entitled 'The Poverty of the Malays', a reflection on the unfavorable position of the Malays as compared to non-Malays in the light of the new capitalism and its

rapid expansion.5? The capitalistic success of the British and Chinese gave rise to a complex in Za'ba which led to his unsympathetic judgment of his own people. Since his values were colored by a capitalistic standard, Za'ba could only see negative traits in the Malays who were still essentially a traditional and feudal peopleAccording to him, the Malays 'arc poor in education

and

knowledge, poor mentally and lacking in good values'. With such defects 'they are obstructed and lag behind in the march of the races'. The Malays are not only poor materially but are ' f a r worse than that'. They are people of poor quality. They lack 'all the

prerequisites and the requirements for a successful and great race'. He is careful to clarify that he does not mean success or greatness in 76

The influence

of capftahsfn

the feudal sense, which normally means 'greatness in being a raja (prince) or to be decorated with titles . .' Instead of identifying specific negative values among the Malays, he condemns them as a people: '. . . the Malays are poor in knowledge, poor in the treasury and growth of their heart, poor in general attributes necessary for the enrichment of their heart and thought and for the cultivation of valuable traits in them." He finds their literature poor in quality and not to his capitalistic taste: 'Their literature or the collection of kitab (books) and kvilzayat (historical narratives) in their own language is poor and not of the kind that enlightens the mind.' The writer does not disagree with but wants to note the basis for Za'ba's evaluation. A contextual interpretation shows that what Za'ba means by 'enlightening is a literature that represents a capitalistic philosophy or at least one that is in harmony with it. There is no indication whatsoever that he could have meant a more profound and wider intellectual development. Za'ba thought little of the products of the traditional educational institutions and considered their to be yet another aspect of Malay poverty: 'Many of the young Malays who are considered educated (in fact some of them are loajisl) are a disgrace to their race.' They are poor in religion, too. Their religious life is described as 'very poor in the original spirit of its content'. Islam, as practised by the Malays, has 'drifted far and changed significantly in character from the pure and crystal clear teachings of Prophet Muhammad . . .' ZLa'ba finds the traditional Malay social atmos-

.

phere, which is devoid of capitalistic individualism,

optimism,

aggressiveness and competitive spirit, depressing and disheartening: 'Their home environment is poor in proper education and guidance. Seldom indeed does it cleanse the soul, show exemplary conduct or instil high and noble ideals. Their world-view is poor in living spirit and is dominated by dullness, gloom and despair which

has seldom or never experienced the illumination of joy and happiness. According to Za'ba, the general defects of the Malays are not 7]5

due to natural traits but are caused by environment. There are two factors. The first and major cause is the nature of their religious beliefs- 'Firstly and mainly, (the cause is) the conditions of their Islamic religion . . a belief which has deteriorated from the original purity and excellence to the lowest level . . . while it is their

.

77

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

religion which dictates their way of life . . .' An investigation into Za'ba's concept of Islam, however, reveals a capitalistic interpretation and therefore, it is to be expected that he should consider the traditional and feudal interpretation of Islam as a deviation from 'genuine' teaching. The other cause of the poverty of the

Malay character is feudalism. He describes their lives as 'dominated by oppression, suffering and unbearable cruelties'. He contends that feudal oppression 'was the mould which shaped the Malays into what they are today, leaving a legacy of debasing and demeaning customs and behaviors from the time of their forefathers; for hundreds of years they have been enslaved, pressed and squeezed dry by the feudal ruling class . of their own race.s3" An analysis of Za'ba's writings does not, however, show a deep understanding of the impact of feudalism on the economy and the value system of the Malays. just as his judgment on their religious life is influenced by his capitalistic perspective, so is his criticism of feudalism. What he means by their 'debasing and demeaning whole list of negative traits based on a customs and-hehav-ion rs prejudiced stereotyping of the Malays. This negative stereotyping forms a part of the ideology of colonial capitalism which sought to rationalise and justify itself. Similarly, Za'ba was mainly motivated by his need to justify and rationalise the new capitalist structure and its orientation towards life that he greatly admired. He was against feudalism simply because it inhibited Malay capitalism.

..

he

Success is linked with hard work When Za'ba focuses his attention on the position of the Malays within the new capitalism, his prejudices and biases surface. His writings indicate a great admiration for capitalism, accompanied by

a condescending attitude or even contempt for the disadvantaged Malays. For instance, he writes of the Malays; 'Their country is rich, blessed by God with many resources, but theyare not the ones who reap the profits and the benefits of the wealth.' He points out admiringly how the resources of Malaya are mainly exploited and reaped by the more aggressive non-Malays who are 'busy in every corner and side of the towns . . . even to the most remote of Malay villages'. In contrast, he observes bow the Malays invariably end up 78

U16 f'nTluence

of capitalism

on the lower rung of the ladder, 'becoming office~boys, errand-boys (tambz) . . . or in positions not requiring the use of the brain'. In explaining the success of the non-Malays and the failure of the Malays, he associates capitalistic success with hard work and failure with laziness and negative character traits. Since this success and failure are closely identified with ethnic and racial groupings, Za'ba forces this association of ideas into an explanation at the ethnic level. Although he states that Malay poverty is not due to natural traits, his explanation is not entirely free from a racial framework of thinking. He uses the Darwinian idea of the survival of the fittest to explain the success of the non-Malays; 'The Chinese have been used to hard work for thousands of years because of the competition for food due to a big population, forcing them to work hard in order to eat. The trait then hardened into natural ways and habits which they inherited from past generations . . .' In Malaya, in is tic ambition: '. . . they live solely this trait is reinforced C to accumulate wealth in order to improve their difficult lives or to bring the wealth back to their country . . . that is why the people of their race are hardworking, enterprising and not choosy about jobs, and they are so clever and brilliant in accumulating wealth that the Malays . . . who arc so used to wasting their time are awed.>40 We shall not refute Za'ba's racial theory since such thinking has long been rejected by the scientific community.*' However, the migrant factor touched upon by Za'ba did account to some extent for the capitalistic drive of the non-Malays, as has been discussed in the previous chapter. 4

There is a contradiction and inconsistency in Za'ba's attempts to explain what he conceives to be the negative traits of the Mala's. According to him, harsh conditions of life led to the habit of hard work among the Chinese. He uses the same argument to explain the opposite phenomenon among the Malays. As he himself acknowledged, life under feudalism for the Malays was difficult. The traditional and feudal structure caused the Malays to be poor. The

same kind of structure caused the Chinese to be poor in their homeland. In Malaya, they were free from feudalism and this had a great influence on their capitalistic success. The Malays, on the other hand, continued to be fettered by feudalism that was further

reinforced by colonial policy, as has been discussed." But this is not how Za'ba sees the historical significance of Malay feudalism. His 7O

MA I.A Y IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

perspective is colored by his ideological need to justify the new capitalistic structure, and to give validity and support for his

stereotyping of the Malays. Both aims are achieved by discrediting feuclalisni and blaming it for the alleged negative Malay character. Given his prejudices, he presumes these negative traits. What is needed is only an explanation for them. He seizes upon feudalism: 'The depraved ways arising out of the enslavement of the past have hardened into the habits of the present Malays . . . anything that has hardened into a habit becomes second nature next to hereditary traits . .' A few points need to be highlighted here. Firstly, we note Za'ba's contradiction in saying that a harsh life led to negative traits among the Malays, whereas it worked the other way round for the Chinese. Though lue Malay population was not as big as the Chinese population was in China, the elements of struggle, toil and hardship were not. lacking in the lives of the Malays. The idyllic picture of Malays living in an easy environment where serious effort was not required to survive is a colonial myth. Secondly, Za'ba is not referring to specific feudal values which obstructed their progress or modernisation. He is referring to the Malays as a people and their character as a whole. Thirdly, there is a reluctant racism in Za'ba's thinking. He is reluctant to conclude that what he secs as the negative Malay character is racial in nature. He is not content to call it a cultural trait and wants something stronger than that. He solves his dilemma by explaining it as something that 'has hardened into habit' and has become "second nature'. In this way he comes close to racial stereotyping without altogether being guilty of it. He considers the negative traits to be such an integral aspect of the Malays that 'we require quite some time to eradicate the habits . . at least a quarter of a century for each century of corruption is needed to change the Malays . . .>4.i The change he advocates is a move towards capitalism. Success is to be measured by a capitalistic yardstick-44 For him the self-respect of the Malays depends on their capitalistic prowess. He judges them harshly for lagging behind and complains `ol"aTael< of dynamism as reflected in their 'enterprises, industries, commerce and in the content of their brain'. We notice that Za'ba tends to associate intelligence, the 'brain', with capitalistic aggression and success. By implication, he regards the Malays who lagged behind as stupid.

.

.

80

The inHerence

of capitalism

Seeing the world through the eyes of capitalism, Za'ba could see only negative traits in the Malays which he says has become the 'flesh and blood of the race'. He suggests that they change their ways or character because 'the prosperity and greatness of a race is based upon the foundation of national character . . . no movement whatsoever . . . can bring success to . . a race which does not improve the character of its people.1*'"

.

'povc-rty'

On the

o f the Malay character

The myth of the lazy or negative native is an integral aspect of colonial capitalism. By negatively stereotyping natives who do not serve its interests, colonial capitalism justifies and legitimises itself.

The injustice of colonial capitalism is camouflaged by attributing the backwardness of the natives to their indolence and negative attitudes. Likewise, the exploitation of colonial capitalism can be concealed by attributing the success of the capitalists to hard work, dynamism, creativity and many other positive attitudes. Completely influenced by the negative image of the Malays, Za'ba makes it the central problem of his reforms. He writes of the Malays: 'They lack self-reliance, perseverance, sense of responsibility, sense of duty, punctuality, industry, self-sacrifice, public spirit.' It is necessary. for us to quote Za'ba a t length on the subject of the poverty of the Malay character, to feel the spirit and tenacity

with which he handles the problem. He says that the Malays lack 'self-reliance; the habit of refusing the help of others, or the habit of

wanting to do a particular thing on their own . . .' He describes their character as 'poor in the habit of pursuing their ambition (perseverance), not giving up easily when faced with difficulty, consistently working at a particular assignment to its completion no matter how tough it is, not easily bored or interest not easily lost, sticking seriously to something started; poor in the habit of recognising one's own assignment (sense of responsibility), not passing on easily a particular assignment or task to others, poor in the willingness to undertake and complete properly any task or responsibility assigned (sense of duty) so that people's expectations are not let down; poor in the habit of being on time (punctuality), considering and calculating time, valuing and using every moment productively; poor in the habit of struggling and working hard 8I

MALAY IDEAS O N DEVELOPMENT

(industry), exerting body and brain; poor in qualities necessary for business and commerce; poor in the habit of integrity, truthfulness, keeping promises and fulfilling obligations undertaken ( the most important of qualities for human success); poor in leadership attributes or in leading others in any task (qualities like wisdom, courage, good judgment, decisiveness, resourcefulness in the face of

difficulties, good at placing people in the right places, good at public relations and being considerate, etc.); poor in the habit of self-sacrifice, that is the willingness to sacrifice themselves, their property and their comfort for the sake of others, especially for the general good (for instance, the idea 'never mind i l l die as long as he is saved') . . .; lacking in high ideals and noble goals in life'. In Za'ba's evaluation, the Malays are completely lacking in good qualities. 'Our poverty . . is not only in one, two, or three or four of the above attributes . . we are greatly lacking in them, in fact we are not only lacking but poor and destitute altogether in them.' Needless to say, such a portrayal of the Malay character is borne of prejudice. Had the above qualities been absent altogether in the Malays, they would have vanished from the face of the earth. Survival would not have been possible at all. Elsewhere, Za'ba conternp tuously caricatures the Malays: 'We excel only in a lifestyle of ease, in the ability to waste our time, in not being bothered by any kind of activity . . . easy food, easy sleep, easy spending and theindulgence of the desires . such a lifestyle is useless: the lives of animals are more meaningful than this.' He sees

. .

..

their life as characterised by 'the love of wasting time on useless

activities . . . sensual indulgence in sexual and beastly desires . . .

and extravagance'. And more of his humiliating remarks: '_ - . they're always placing themselves in the role of dependents and slaves. They have never been willing to walk on their own feet without being supported, what more to walk with any load . they don't want . . . to walk . . on their own like people of other races." The association of hard work and effort only with the pursuit of profit is clear in the following condemnation: 'We Malays are. not like people of other races who are hardworking, enterprising, always ready to experiment, daring to take the risk of losses and willing to struggle against odds . . as for us Malays, the habits we have inherited for centuries are antithetical to diligence and hard work, etc. . _=46

. .

_

.

H2

Tfve influence of capitalism

Za'ba's prejudice is so strong that it transcends any feelings of patriotism or nationalism. He would rather blame the Malays than see the injustice of colonial capitalism and Western imperialism. He defends the colonial government against the Malays: 'Many people think that we must beg . from the government . it is very easy (anybody can do it) to blame the government for everything: especially when the government is of other races' Echoing the colonials and the capitalists, he blames the Malays for their poverty and backwardness: 'But then why not blame ourselves first" The government is absolved of all responsibility while the Malays are

. .

..

entirely to blame for their predicament: 'The government has done and is doing its best . . . to fulfil its obligations. But we have not done our part to help ourselves, without looking for or depending on others.' The government bias in favour of capitalism is not

criticised, while the neglected Malay masses are seen as a spoilt and dependent lot; '. . . they always like to have others doing their work or solving their problems for them . . . like children who are forever dependent on parents for everything.` Za'ba singles out as his main target the peasantry. He writes condescendingly of them: '. . . the habit of asking for help, and the lack of self-reliance is most prevalent among the "gentlemen" of the peasantry in Malay villages. They do not understand what is meant by independence and its importance." He implies that the peasants lead a parasitic life and that their philosophy of life is summed up by the saying: 'Where else can the lice eat except on the head?' Then he says sarcastically" 'But then why should one want and even enjoy

being a lice? Isn't it a shame and a disgrace to be forever squatting and living off the charity of others?' The disruptive effect of capitalism and the money economy on the peasantry is not

considered. When many peasants are forced off their land by exploitative Inoncylenders, Za'ba blames their lack of selfreliance. It is this, he says, which has led to 'debts with the chettiars, losing their independence, . . lands and pad fields . . .' He invokes God to validate and sanctify his prejudices. He claims that (Jod has abandoned the peasants because of their negative character: ' . .that's why even God does not really care to help them." The

.

.

prejudice of the middle-class against the peasantry also shows up in

.

his thinking. He has only contempt for the peasants; '. . if possible they don't want to do any work a t all, to struggle and toil on their 83

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

own. Their idea of the ideal life is sitting all day long at their doors or at the doorsteps of their friends not doing any work and yet having plenty of rice to eat so that all their time can be spent on empty talk, gossip and slander, and on indulging in their sexual desires all year round."

Malay capitalism

-- An emerging dream

The dream of having Malay capitalists and a Malay middle-class is already discernible during Z.a'ba's time. This is reflected, for instance, in his idea of social reforms and Malay education. He urges the Malays to cooperate in raising funds for their education.

Echoing colonial policy on Malay vernacular education, he advocates for the .peasants an education that aims at correcting negative character traits like being spendthrift and producing peasants with a rudimentary education. They are to be taught 'thriftiness, maintenance of the village compound, health, poultry and livestock farming, general farming, buying, selling and small business . . .' In addition, he condescendingly advocates that they acquire some craft and skills: '. . with the money gather the hundreds of our village youth who lazily sit around in the villages and force them to learn the following skills; metallurgy, goldsrnithing, tailoring . . shoe repair, carpentry and others which are useful for the earning of a living." In a different tone altogether,

.

.

Za'ha recommends that sponsorship and scholarships should be

provided for the education of the elect abroad. They should be the vanguard of his dream of having Malay capitalists and a middle-class. Apart from scholarly pursuits, they should acquire 'practical knowledge' which should include 'knowledge of surveying . . . electricity, engines . and manufacture. Another category of knowledge advocated was 'industrial knowledge' which should include 'commerce and mining . .' They should also learn

..

.

the special professions like 'law, medicine

. . . accountancy . . .is

Dazzled by the success of the new capitalism, Za'ba adopts a capitalistic interpretation of religion. The influence of capitalism is

strongly reflected in his book, The Habit of Self-RelMnce (Perangai Bergantung Facie Dirt' 5€1¢dzlrz`).49 The idea of competition and economic individualism receives much emphasis here. He writes for 84

The influerfzce of' capitalism

instance: 'Our life in the world is a life of action and work, of struggle and competition as if in a race. Each person should play his role without . . depending on others. He must himself feel the responsibility of fulfilling his obligation in the struggle and competition" We cannot miss here the central dogma of Western liberalism which believes in the myth of free competition and the principle of non-planning. The direction of social change and development is to be leftto the spontaneous social mechanism set in motion and regulated by the idea of competition. To ratio nalise his capitalistic and liberal concept of social. order and life, he quotes the Quran' 'He who created Death and Life that He may try which of you is best indeed: And He is the Exalted, in Might, Oft-Forgiving." Thus, a verse enjoining righteous conduct and the pursuit of excellence is conveniently cited and interpreted to sanctify competition and economic individualism. A superficial reading of The Habit of Self-Reliance gives a false picture of nationalism and patriotism because Za'ba adorns his writings with much rhetoric. For instance, he advocates selfreliance because it is 'the root of all success', 'the basis of all

.

progress towards victory' and an indispensable requisite for national 'greatness and progress When we probe deeper, however, we will discover that such trappings of nationalism and patriotism are devoid of any content, providing only a camouflage for his

capitalistic and class prejudice. This is indicated in his explanation of why self-reliance is important: 'It is sure to encourage one to work hard - . . to struggle dynamically and seriously . . it does not

.

tolerate the habit of fatalism which causes backwardness and degrades one's humanity.s5l Isn't this inspired by his negative image of the peasants? His _gaps ilistic leaning becomes clearer when we raise more clIemaiNding questions which unmask his ideological camouflage-" For instance, what is his idea of 'progress', 'success' and 'victory' that the Malays should strive for* What should they work hard for? What is the criteria of hard work? What is the kind of fatalism he is against? Would he advocate genuine political and intellectual emancipation of the Malays or merely to the extent of their assimilating capitalism? Let us investigate his ideas further. Za'ba writes on the significance of self-reliance for national glory; "When there is the habit of self-reliance among a people, they will certainly be progressive and their country will progress because 85

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT of their struggle and seriousness in their work. They will attain great heights, their nation will attain great heights too; they become great and noble and their race becomes great and noble because of

them.953 But then there is no indication of the national goals and values to be aimed at. A vision of the kind of society to aspire for is absent. Neither are the ideals that should guide the national cause indicated. All we have are general terms like 'progress', 'struggle', 'seriousness', 'work', 'great heights', 'great' and 'noble'. What is the measure of all these concepts? Such problems of national goals, values and philosophy are not given meaningful consideration by Za'ba. He simply writes further: 'The rise and fall of a nation and a race, its progress and backwardness, are dependent on the

character of each individual making up the race or the nation.' Self~reliance is important, he says, because 'what is said to be a "race" is a body or a group made up of the individuals in it'. This line of individualistic thinking which brushes aside the problem of social order is in blind imitation of classical Western liberalism and capitalism with its myth of free competition, principle of nonplanning and self-adjusting social order. In a significant passage, Za'ba links economic individualism with Malay nationalism: 'Each individual or group making up a race who works hard because of self-reliance and self-confidence is working for the success and progress of his race, for its rise and prosperity. Whatever benefits him or the group will surely benefit the race too.' Thus capitalistic individualism is elevated to the level of a national cause and struggle. This linking of capitalism and

nationalism is to become an integral aspect of Malay thought for the next half century, right to the present day. In order to justify and rationalise his anarchic individualism, consciousness of the problem of social relations and the social order is characteristically brushed aside: 'There is no difference in this matter between the

humble worker and the ruler who lives in his big palace. In fact, if there is no worker there will not be any ruler or noble , and if both of them do not exist, there will not be any race or nation.95" An argument of this nature is typical of status quo and ideological thinking. It avoids reflection on the social order and does not represent genuine reformist thinking. In a way, it is amoral. It does not question the defects and shortcomings of a particular social order. The question of exploitation and social injustice is not 86

The zkfzfluerzce

of cap:'$aI.!l5npz

raised. Every social order has its own idea or definition of 'hard work'.5$ The feudal lord expects his serfs or subjects to 'work hard' for him. The capitalist in 19th century Europe expects minor to 'work hard' for him under the inhuman conditions of the industrial revolution. Dictators like Hitler, too, expect the people to 'work hard' in the service of their regime. Surely, there is a distinction to be made between their concept of 'hard work' and that enjoined by an egalitarian and just social order in the service of humanitarian goals. Apart from being amoral, Za'ba's brand of nationalism is essentially a kind of prejudice against the masses, the peasantry and the poor. It can be appropriately termed 'capitalistic nationalism'. His seemingly nationalistic exhortation of self-reliance and selfpride functions as an ideological tool against the masses. His brand of nationalism sneers at the poor and rationalises the individualism and self-centredness of the Malay elite. Utilising the Darwinian notion of natural selection and the survival of the fittest, he writes: ' . . each individual of a race who is not self-reliant is so because he lacks self-confidence. As a result, he is not able to fulfil his obligation to struggle and work hard in order to achieve victory in the competition of life . . he always thinks that he is weak, helpless, not fit to compete and incapable of success unless helped by others. "Unless helped by others" . . . that is a disgraceful and humiliating condition! . . such people are left behind; when there are many like them, their race will be left behind too, and they are

.

.

.

the cause of backwardness.15' Thus the poor and the weak are

considered a burden and an obstacle to 'Malay nationalism'. Knowledge and ra tonality

His admiration

for capitalism

and economic individualism

naturally leads to a critical attitude towards the traditional interpretation of Islam which neglects these elements. Za'ba criticises the traditional approach to religion in the name of reason: 'As far as possible we have to judge ourselves using reason and knowledge . . we are not asked to follow or to accept blindly . .' He continues: 'God condemns . . people who follow the traditional ways of their forefathers without thinking whether they are right or wrong . . by the use of their reason and knowledge . . blind

.

.

.

.

.

S7

MAI.AY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

faith is condemned by religion and by those who are rational because it brings harm and the possibility of deviation . . . without us realising it.' He advocated the rational approach in religious observances: '. . in all matters we should not follow blindly but instead judge the good and the bad by our reason and knowledge. Once its correctness is established . or it appeals to reason, then only we accept . .75? He argues for a receptive attitude towards change arid advocates the abandonment of traditionalism: 'We all want good and (not) evil . . . to improve . . . what is lacking . . . to change whatever is

.

.

. .

backward, replacing it with something progressive and better in accordance with the demands of the time . . . we want to scrap our obsolete and . . . rotten thinking . . and replace it with refreshing and living thought and a faith whose truth can be verified by an

.

interpretation of the Quran which is based on reason and knowledge . . we want reform and renewal . . Capitalism presupposes some form of modern scientific knowledge and technology; its ideal of maximising profit demands to an extent a rationalisation of its exploitation of the environment and business. The assimilation of modern knowledge is therefore often advocated by a capitalistic philosophy. But it is not, however, a

.

commitment to genuine intellectual development or emancipation.

Neither is it an advocation of genuine modernisation in the furtherance of humanitarian and universal ideals." The advocation of knowledge and rationality is merely dictated by the practical need of maximising profit.

Za'ba's argument for the assimilation of modern knowledge can only be interpreted within the context of the capitalistic value of knowledge. He criticises dogmatic traditionalism

in religious

interpretation simply because it obstructs the assimilation of new forms of knowledge necessary for capitalism- '. . . there is no rule whatsoever which says that we "have" to limit or restrain ourselves from acquiring a deeper and wider knowledge than the people of the past . . in addition modern man can acquire many other forms of knowledge not known to men before . .' A conflict is felt between his capitalistic value of knowledge and the traditional

_

.

belief in the perfection of the past. He emphasises the accumulative nature of knowledge and censures traditional religion for failing to

take into account the social change brought about by the new 88

The influence

of capitaiisrn

capitalism: '. . . how shocking . . . they say that man's knowledge decreases from that of past generations. Or . . . they say that no one . . . can ever be as knowledgeable (aim) as the imams (spiritual leaders). With such a notion, man will inevitably become like the wild man in the jungle, or even worse'. He rejects the idea that the z`mams were infallible and perfect: ' . . . even the imams of the past did not master all the knowledge that God had revealed in their time . . . to the extent that "everything" they expounded was correct and appropriate for all times and human conditions." The imams were themselves men of their age who had to operate within the limitation of their times' ' . . . the people of the past had their own level of knowledge and in their times had taught about their religious matters independently

in the light of the vet'ses.' He exhorts the Malays to do the same in order to accommodate the new capitalism: 'Have the past generations exhausted all possible interpretation of the meanings of the Quran? . . . the progress of the world has ushered in new changes and discoveries which naturally demand a new understanding of religion appropriate to the changes. Otherwise, can we honestly say that Islam is appropriate for all times?""' The traditional elite Is castigated for confining the concept of knowledge advocated by the Quran only to theology. He says it should include secular knowledge for the improvement of life too.

To accommodate the new capitalism, Za'ba argues for worldly asceticism, rejecting the other-worldly asceticism of the traditional elite. He points out that it is a misconception on their part to define

righteous conduct only to mean 'preparation for the world

..

hereafter or only for death . which has nothing . . . to do with improving morality, behaviour, life conduct . . . which are necessary for improving the living conditions on earth . . . benefiting from both the world and the world hereafter.' He considers the undue emphasis on sin, grace and retribution in the world hereafter of the traditional religious elite as childish and immature. This is like being 'children who are still in need of treats and threats'. Such an approach, he says, is not necessary if 'mature adults and is absolutely irrelevant for those whose ethics and spirituality are refined and noble'. Other-worldly asceticism is harmful because it

_

downgrades worldly concern which for Za'ba means capitalistic ambition and drive." 89

MALAY IDEAS ON DE VELOPMENT

Under the heading of 'broadmindedness', Za'ba attempts to formulate a value tem for the Malays based on Islam. His attempt suffers from formalism and the failure to link values to the problem of institutions and social structures.

90

AN ALLEGORICAL REPLY TO THE CHALLENGE OF NON-MALAY CAPITALISM

In the previous chapter, we discussed how in the early 20th century some of the Malay elite regarded the success of the non-Malay capitalists and middle-class as the model for Malay development and progress. Their thinking was characterised too by an ideological condemnation of the Malays, particularly the masses. In this chapter, we shall discuss another style of thinking which developed around the same time among the elite as a consequence of colonial capitalism. Unlike the ideas represented by Syed Sheikh Alhady and Za'ba, this is characterised by a deep resentment and hostility against the development of non-Malay capitalism and the immigration of aliens in general. It is important for us to examine this style of thinking because it was and still is an integral aspect of the thinking of many Malays. In fact, to a great many, such thinking is

synonymous with Malay nationalism and patriotism. indeed its major exponents are considered by the contemporary Malay elite as

heroes of Malay nationalism and they are promoted as such. An examination of this style of thinking furnishes us with further insights into the concept of nationalism upheld by the elite. It shows us the goals aspired for, the ideological leanings or values which c o l o r -their struggle. It shows us their ends and means. The resentment and hostility towards non-Malay capitalism and aliens is strongly reflected in Malay literature. With the emergence of capitalism, Malay poems, short stories and novels began to be influenced by strong economism. They lament that the wealth of their homeland is being 'plundered' by aliens or foreigners.' Their lamentation is usually accompanied by an exhortation to respond 91

MALAY IDEAS O N DE VELOPMENT

to the call of the motherland in ridding herself of foreign domination. Given the political censorship of the British, these political elements are usually expressed in allegorical or symbolic form. The motherland is usually represented by the rivers of the regions, like Semantan River representing the state of Pahang. The

love of the motherland is normally expressed by praising the beauty of the land, its mountains, streams, hills and skies. The nobility of the struggle is often expressed by the physical environment in which the main characters swear their commitment to the cause of the homeland. The moon is usually bright and full, with a clear sky? Often lovers join hands in serving the homeland, at other times, they sacrifice their love for each other in order to serve a higher love for the homeland. Memories of the struggle of the feudal chiefs against the British are evoked in symbolic terms. For instance, lovers go sailing during a moonlit night on the Sernantan River where Datuk Bahamian used to ply. Likewise, colonialism and economic domination by outsiders are lamented by having the main characters shed tears into the river. The whole format is usually standardised and predictable. The symbolism is monotonous and stereotyped. There is no profound expression or understanding of freedom and patriotism beyond lamenting the domination by foreigners and the emotional call to serve the motherland.

Ten one, an idyllic village A representative work of the genre is Cherida Auang Put at (The Story

of Awing Put at)

by Abdul Rahim Kajai (1894-1943).~* This

short story reflects strongly a psychology of resentment, bitterness and hostility towards the spread of non-Malay capitalism and alien cultural elements in the Malay world. The story unfolds with Kajai's longing to return to the days before the coming of the non-Malays. He paints an idyllic picture of Malay society with all its perfection and prosperity as represented by the village of Tcnong, which forms tlmesetting tor His story: ' hard to come by a village as tranquil as Tenongwbere the lielcis are

wide, spreading as far as the eye can see i i and its countless villages scattered like islands . .' There is a life of abundance as the streams 'are as clear as tears . . . full of ti.sh'. The social life is harmonious, characterised by 'solidarity and . . . mutual love and cooperation'.

.

92

I

An allegorical reply

Non-Malay capitalism has not made any inroads into this world : ' . to buy basic kitchen needs, there is no need to go to the town because almost daily Malay traders will turn up in their boats loaded with wares." The inhabitants are steeped in their culture, untouched by Westernisation: '. . fishing nets and traps . . . are the ornaments of their homes like the tennis and badminton rackets in the homes of modern folk." Religious faith and solidarity are strong in spite of their simple ways: 'Although their mosque is only a wooden one, it is full on Fridays, particularly on Hari Raya." This tranquility is soon disrupted by the encroachment of non-Malay capitalism, the arrival of aliens and Western administration. With the introduction of compulsory education in government schools in Tenong comes a Malay teacher of Tamil Origin, Cikgu Maj id Shah. Kajai's resentment of non-Malays encompasses those of mixed blood. Cikgu Maj id is a worthless, untrustworthy, hypocritical and debased character. Even his credentials as a teacher are in doubt: '. he knows only the jaw (Arabic) script. As far as the alphabet and geography are concerned, he is still learning' He is employed as a teacher simply because 'no one is available'. Non~Malay capitalism arrives in Tenons in the person of Ah Kay, who opens a shop there. Kawai blames the spread of non-Malay capitalism on the betrayal of the Malays by the elite. This betrayal is portrayed through the Penghulu (village head), Tok Rangkaya Bangkong. It is Tok Rangkaya Bangkong who allows Ah Kau to set up shop on his land. Ah Kay's business prospers, and he

..

.

..

takes over the local trade and acts as a middleman for local

products. The only resistance to this comes from the young Awang Put at and his gang of local boys. Kajar expresses his resentment towards the non-Malays and their capitalism through the antics of the boys. They often pinch sweets from Ah Kau's shop. Once a member of the gang is caught and the gang rallies to his aid by punching Ah Kay. The incident leads to strained relations between them. The boys throw stories a t the shop a t night. Here antagonistic elements are clearly represented. It is significant to note that in Kawai's

thinking the end justifies the means. Non-Malay capitalism should be checked by whatever means, even dishonest and violent ones. The Malays who support this capitalism and encroachment instead of resisting it are represented by boys who spin their tops in 9.3

MA 1,A Y IDEAS ON DEVELOFZVIENT

the compound of Ah Kau's shop and elders who go there to practice the flat (Malay martial art) or to relax. Their support transforms the shop from a 'club' to a 'market-place'. The betrayal of the elite is portrayed at the village level, with its own network of corruption and vested interests. It is implied that non-Malay capitalism manages to thrive only on the corruption and opportunism of the elite. The corrupting effect is shown through a regular practice of Ah Kau's: '. . . every week he would bring gifts of flour, sugar and tobacco to the Fenglvulzfs house and . . that of Cikgu Maj id. As Hart Raya approaches, a load of firecrackers is sent . . _>5 Kajai

.

alleges that through such bribes, the smooth development of non-Malay capitalism is ensured and opposition to it is weakened. Bribed by Ah Kau, Cikgu Maj id canes Awang and his gang at school, and warns them not to bother Ah Kay again. The Pengloulu on his part, visits the boys' parents, threatening to arrest the boys if they do not stop harassing Ah Kau. The boys get another beating at home. The lack of resoluteness among some Malays in facing up to the non~Malays is criticised. The leader of Awang's gang switches sides, along with Pendekar Choline, his father, who is

a s i l t instructor. The betrayal of the elite is thus portrayed through the corruption of three respectable institutions in traditional Malay society, that is, the Penghulu, the teacher and the martial arts instructor.

Encroachment t of on-Malays Awang, Kawai's hero, grows up watching the general corruption

of the Malays by capitalism and Westernisation. 'Ah Kay's shop expands into two units. He has five coolies, and there are Chinese vegetable farms in five areas in the district.' The bias of the colonial government towards non~Malay capitalism is cynically portrayed' 'The road . . . is improved by the government . . . Towkay Ah Kau's shop becomes more prosperous because by chance the new road passes in front of the shop . . . the crowd gets bigger.' The Malays are criticised for being complacent and easily influenced by Westernisation: 'The sun of modernism begins to shine . . . following the new road. The young soon learn to put on factory-made shoes, pantaloons and even neckties, going round on their bicycles to town especially when there is a football match

...

or a bangsawan (Malay opera) . . . almost every household has 94

An allegorkaf reply

discarded the traditional mengkuang (straw) mat replacing it with tables and chairs . . and they compete with each other to buy the phonograph' Even the religious life of Tenong is not spared the corruption. With the help of the Penghulu, Cikgu Maj id fixes the appointment of his brother, Hamid Shah, as chairman of the mosque committee. Hamid runs the committee domineeringly in contrast to the harmony and solidarity of the past: '. only his opinion should be listened to . . .' Any deadlock is referred to the Penghulu who invariably sides with Hamid. As a result, the quality of communal living deteriorates in spite of the physical developments brought by the new administration: 'The question of imams (mosque leaders) quarrelling or lehatib (mosque officials) disputing . . . never cropped up before . . . in the past the mosque had only a lantern, now it has learnt to use the gas light but the size of the congregation has decreased . even on the Prophet's birthday no cow is

.

..

..

slaughtered due to insufficient funds."

The Malays pay dearly for their complacency. In league with Hamid, Ah Kay cheats the Malays who trade with him. 'Ah Kau's shop has now become four units he has obtained a licence to buy rubber . Encik Hamid Shah . . works as Ah Kau's trading

. .

... .

clerk. Although he is the chairman of the mosque committee, many complain that rubber which weighed one and a half picul at home becomes only one picul and thirty-five or forty katis when weighed by Mr Chairman of the mosque committee . . but what to do, where else can the people sell but there?"

.

Kawai gives vent to his indignation at the displacement of the Malays from their land by non-Malays. Here, too, Hamid is the willing tool of non-Malay economic domination: '. . Towkay Ah Kay holds the mortgages on ten upon ten lots of land . besides the mortgages, Towkay Ah Kau is able to buy three or four lots of Malay land. Although he is a Chinese and is not allowed to buy land reserved for Malays, he does so by using the name of Hamid Shah the willing stooge of the Chinese, along with one or two other pure Malays who serve as brokers." Awang watches sadly as the non-Malays take over the economy. The Malays are forced by circumstances to rely on the non~Malays. The Malay trading class is wiped out. There is little they can do about their dilemma because the colonial government favours the

.

. .

...

95

MALA Y IDEAS ON DE VELOPMENT

non-Malays. The bitterness and disillusionment against the changes brought by colonial capitalism is expressed through Awang's reaction: '. . . his tears well up whenever he is reminded of the

sound of the gong, the call of the boat traders during his childhood days, which has now disappeared. Modernism has arrived but the farms . . . are overgrown with weeds and left unworked. The modern Malays today no longer grow their own vegetables but instead obtain their supply from Towkay Ah Kau's shop, including even their betel leaves.' The most affective of cultural symbols is used to express this bitterness: 'Awang PUt at is fully aware that it is the pigs . which have caused the farms to be overgrown and abandoned . . . whenever the farms are worked, the pigs uproot the

..

crops rendering all efforts futile. The Malays fear killing the pigs for fear of being arrested and fined.' There is more 'resentment in the following observation by Awang: 'Already there are ten places with Chinese pig farms, while the buffaloes of Tenong Malays get thinner and thinner. There is no space allocated for buffaloes while grazing by the main road leads only to arrest . . . to being fined . very often buffaloes are hacked, allegedly . . . because they eat the vegetables on the Chinese farms; funny though, no one has been arrested or fined for hacking buffaloes although there have been many arrests for stabbing pigs."

..

Aware makes a sacrifice Kawai feels that it is the patriotic duty of the Malays to check the

spread of non-Malay capitalism. He exhorts them to make personal sacrifices to prevent the disintegration of their community. He conveys this message through Aware. When Aware's mother asks him to marry, Aware explains that his patriotic duty is more important than marriage: 'I have no intention of hurting you, mother. Naturally l would like a wife but it is imperative for you to know that I intend to serve our village . which is cursed . . . In the past there was solidarity but now there is only disunity and

..

_

disintegration; where there was prosperity, there is now only indebtedness . .' His mother feels that such loftiness and personal sacrifice is misplaced: '. don't be like the fuse of a lantern forever serving others, while others live in brightness it burns itself out,

..

turning to ashes.' Through Aware, Kajai extols the virtues of 96

An allegorical reply

altruism and self-sacrifice, without which he says life is meaningless

. . you should know that the fuse made a sacrifice in providing light for man. Had it not been for it, man would be in darkness and the fuse would remain a piece of cloth which would ultimately be thrown to the ground." The struggle against the non-Malays is seen as continuing the past rebellion of the feudal and futile: '.

chiefs against the British. Awang's mother recognises the rebellious

spirit of the feudal chiefs in be son: '. . . some blood of the Orang Kala Semantan has descended to my son." There is relativism and an amoral streak in Kajar's nationalism. In order to check the non~Malays, all means are legitimate, even though they may violate Islamic values. In a way, Kajai is like the Malay warrior Hang Tuah, whose patriotism and nationalism was also amoral and relative. Hang Tuah would violate his religious values to keep up with what he considered his obligations as 'a son of the Malay race' and to serve his feudal master.8 Kajai's political philosophy is reflected in Awang Put at, who 'is accepted as a leader

.. .

because firstly, he has money, and secondly, because he is a good speaker and a good organiser of anything, whether it be gambling or vices or matters relating to the mosque or the sur au (minor mosque). He gambles but does not ignore the mosque. Many elders are impressed by him and their contempt decreases'.9 This relativism and amoral attitude is quite influential in modern Malay political life, right to this day. It is characteristic of not only inter-communal politics but also of internal power struggles. Money, rhetoric and talent for playing up to the gallery are

considered more important and politically effective than principles and integrity." Awang spends his time plotting, 'every day . . . instigating his friends . . to . . . hate Nana Hamid Shah - . .' He even instigates Hamid's wife against him in order to ruin his marriage. Awang tells Cik Teh, Hamid's wife and Awang's former lover: '. . . you must divorce your husband . he was the one who ruined our village. He ruined our mosque and caused our property to pass into his Towkay's hand. Now we all live in enmity towards each other. You have been wrong. We belong to the same village and loved each other when we were young, but . . you married an outsider." Awang rapes her in order to ruin her marriage and get his own hack

.

. .

.

on Hamid. His end justifies his means- 'Although Awang knows the 97

MALA Y IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

poem says that one must cut down the dragon first and then only pluck the flower, he believes that his design will be achieved by plucking the flower first before cutting down the dragon coiling around in.$11

A new consciousness dawns Awang's rise, representing the rise of Malay nationalism, coincides with retribution for those who collaborated with non~

Malay capitalism. Pendekar Choline, the village s i l t instructor and Cik Teh's father, 'regrets taking a son-in-law not of his own race'.12 He is double-crossed -by Ah Kan. Ah Kau schemes to take over Pendekar Choline's land by making the s i l t instructor indebted to him. Pendekar Choline takes a big loan for the grand wedding between Cid Teh and Hamid 'to show off his wealth to guests from Penang, for it so happened that many jaws Parana/aan (Malays of mixed blood of Indian origin) turned up to celebrate Hamid's wedding . . .' Pendekar Choline fails to pay back his loan. Hamid turns out to be a scoundrel and agrees to get Pendekar Choline out of debt only if Pendekar Choline transfers the land into his name. Hamid then .surrenders the land to Ah Kay. To complete his image of the non-Malays as a parasitic, opportunistic, exploitative, hypocritical and rapacious people, Kajai adds two more motifs to

Hamid's character. Cik Teh 'discovers that her husband has been sending money to his clan in Penang without her knowledge, which is not proper in any marriage based on mutual trust'. On top of

that, Hamid seduces Cik Teh's sister, making her pregnant. Awang exposes the devious ways of non-Malay capitalism as practised by Ah Kan: '. . . he shows the villagers how Ah Kay's wealth is gained by sucking their blood with the help of Hamid and

Penghulu Tok Rangkaya Bangkong

. . .'

A new consciousness

dawns on the people of Tenong. They are shaken out of their complacency; 'The villagers begin to be aware once again they grow their own vegetables . the vegetables in Ah Kau's shop soon

dry up . .

..

_#in

...

With the new spirit and resolution of the villagers, the

non~Malays are defeated: 'The vegetable farms of the Chinese have to be abandoned since there is no market for their produce the

.

Chinese coolies who tap rubber have to leave too since the people have sworn to work their holdings themselves . . _=14 98

An allegorical reply

In the previous chapter, we saw how Syed Sheikh Alhady advocates some values which are compatible with Malay capitalism while Za'ba holds up the non-Malay capitalist as a model for development and progress. In his turn, Kajai champions Malay capitalism in opposition and conflict to non-Malay capitalism. Like the others, Kawai links the cause of Malay capitalism with Malay nationalism. Through Awang, Kajai rejects the prejudice of the time which says that Malays can never be successful in business. The challenge of proving that Malays can succeed in business has become a cliche in the ideology of Malay capitalism right to this day. Wheli Awang attempts to start some business, the Penglvulu tries to block it. The Perzghulu ridicules Awang, saying '. . such work cannot be handled by the Malays . . . it is easier for Awang Put at to redirect the flow of the Pahang River from the estuary to the source than to open a rubber shop or a cooperative company'. Kawai feels that Malay capitalism should be more resolute and should not be easily discouraged by ridicule. So with a determined spirit, Awang sets up

.

his own rubber shop. Kajai also prescribes ruthlessness. With the help of his gang, Awang intimidates the villagers so that they patronise his shop. Through ruthlessness, intimidation and business acumen, Awang's shop prospers. Unfortunately, his shop is burnt down. Sabotage and foul play by the non-Malays are implied. While Za'ba advocates that the Malays should assimilate what he sees as the virtues of the non-Malays, Kajai suggests that the Malays should emulate what he sees as the negative ethics of the

non-Malays. This is suggested through Awang's response to the burning of his shop. Awang retaliates by organising a secret society 'on similar lines as the Chinese secret societies'." He organises a boycott against Hamid and Ah Kau and intimidates the villagers into supporting him. Awang blackmails Hamid into resigning his chairmanship of the mosque committee by threatening to expose Hamid's scandal with his sister-in-law. Awang answers violence with violence. One night 'the Pahang River becomes bright as fire consumes Ah Kau's four-unit shop . . . Towkay Ah Kau loses his head and almost commits suicide by throwing himself into the Fahang River, now that his wealth is gone'. The symbolism is obvious. Malay nationalism and capital99

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

ism are represented by the river. Awang's action 'brightens' it and it is ever waiting to devour non-Malay capitalism as represented by Ah Kay. Militant Malay nationalism and capitalism liberate the Malays: 'More than thirty land grants which had fallen to Ah Kau were destroyed by the fire, all debt records turned to ashes . . .' Malay nationalism and capitalism has come of age. When Ah Kay tries to make a fresh beginning by seeking the help of the Penghulu, he meets opposition. Awang intimidates the Pengbulu by 'threatening to burn down his house'. Out of fear, the Penghulu abandons Ah Kau, who becomes mad in the end. . The collaborators suffer the vengeance of the Malays. Hamid's ill-gotten wealth goes up in smoke when his shop is burnt down. 'Nowadays Hamid Shah often sits sadly, squatting like a monkey being drenched by the rain. He feels that the district of Tenong has become hell for him." Awang represents the triumph of Malay capitalism. He becomes a very rich and successful businessman, as well as a local leader. Cik Teh turns out to be the model Malay woman. She starts her own vendetta against the non-Malays in the spirit of the Malay warriors. To avenge her sour marriage and the deflowering of her sister, she lashes out at her husband. Dressed in the traditional attire of the warrior and carrying her father's Kris (Malay dagger), she confronts Hamid. Hamid insults the Malays: 'You belong to the Sakai (aborigine) race of Pahang.' For his insult, Hamid loses his life. Cid Teh stabs him- Her action wins Aware's admiration: '. . if only

.

the men of Tenons have Cid Teh's courage, what more if the

women too, Tenons would surely be saved . . .' Cik Teh is sentenced to only three years in prison. On the day of her release, Aware takes her to his house where he proposes to her. Much as she loves Awang, Cik Teh turns him down, out of admiration for his patriotic struggle: 'I too swear to sacrifice myself for the district we love.' For Kajai, nationalism is not compatible with marriage. So Aware says- 'If a woman has the courage . . to take the oath to serve our birthplace . why can't I as a man do likewise. I hereby swear to Allah that I will never take a wife to the

. .

.

end of my days. As for Cik Teh, I shall always treasure her in my heart until my death.'

Awang and Cik Teh remain true to the last. To symbolise their patriotic partnership, they meet once a year for a leenduri (a 100

An allegorical reply

traditional feast). After his death, many consider Awang a saint: '. . . his grave becomes a shrine where people go to ask for favors." To complete the melodrama, Cik Teh dies by Aware's shrine and is buried alongside him.

Ishak issues a call to duty Another writer reflecting the same style of thinking as Kawai is I s a k Hali Muhammad. Ishak's writing shows a similar resentment and bitterness towards the spread of non-Malay capitalism and the intrusion of alien cultures. The seed of Malay capitalism, too, is discernible in Ishak's works, despite their anti~capitalist trappings. It is to be expected that Ishak echoes many of Kajai's attitudes and sentiments, as in the beginning of his journalistic career, he worked closely with Kajai whom he considers to be a major influence on his thinking." In 1938, Ishak published Putera Gunzmg Talaan (The Prince of Mount Tatar), a satire against British colonialism, Westernisation and the spread of non-Malay capitalism." The author characteirises his first book in the following words: 'It has been written for those who think and not as reading material for school children . . . it is full of sarcasm and deep symbolism." It is the purpose of the book to exhort the Malays to respond to their patriotic duties: 'Anyone reading the book is sure to be conscious of his duties towards his homeland, race and culture, and henceforth be attracted to the cause of defending the religion, custom and the homeland against

destruction . . ..20 The book opens with a clear resentment against the coming of Western colonialism. lt links itself with the feudal chiefs who rebelled against the British. By way of explaining the background to his story Ishak extols an spirit of resistance and laments complacency in the face of colonialism: 'Pahang is renowned for the savage wars fought by the Iwialay nobles and their people

against the Europeans and their troops before the state became a British Protectorate. Tales of the courage of countless Malay

heroes, such as Bahamian, Mat Gajah, Mat Kilau, are inscribed in bold letters in the hearts of the people of Pahang. Unfortunately, their honour and glory have been betrayed by their descendants' Historical legitimacy is given to the struggle against Western 101

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

.

colonialism: '. . no matter how these shameless wretches try to defame their noble ancestors, their glory will never vanish. Tales of their glorious struggle to defend the freedom of the Malay people will live forever more . . . U I Ishak is as critical of the traditional Malay elite as Kawai is. Their criticisms are not directed, however, to the feudal social order as such but are part and parcel of the resentment against colonialism and foreign cultures. The elite are held in contempt for their cooperation and support for colonialism: 'Once upon a time . there was a war in Pahang. The whole state was in a turmoil. Many brave and worthy men died for the freedom of their country, leaving behind their wives and children. Many cowards ran helter~skelter into the jungle to the hills and mountains, to save their own skins. Among them were members of the royal family and nobles." The exploitation of the country by foreigners is sarcastically portrayed in an account of how two English explorers, Robert and William, go on an exploratory expedition to ascertain the suitability of Mount Tahan as a hill station and holiday resort: 'Malaya is very hot; white men miss their own cold climate when they are here. It might be said that these two white men were looking for a new heaven' Greed, materialism and the love of gain are seen to be the driving forces of Western colonialism. This is

..

portrayed in the conversation between Robert and William as they enter the jungle: 'Don't forget the five thousand pounds Great Britain is going to give us if we are successful . we might even discover gold and precious jewels. We will spend the rest of our

..

days in luxury." Malays who cooperate with the British are represented by the guides and bearers who work for Robert and William. They meet with a tragic end in their assignment. Ali, the main guide, dies of a cobra bite, while Awang, the bearer, dies of stomach pain and cold. Robert and William are thus left on their own in the jungle. They are parted from each other when Robert is captured by an

aborigine (Sakai) tribe. The tribal camp is the setting of the meeting of two conflicting cultures. Indigenous culture is presented as honest, trusting and ever polite, while Western culture is characterised by greed, materialism and the lack of integrity. The misplaced trust of the indigenous people towards Westerners is expressed in a speech to I OZ

An allegoriah' reply

welcome Robert. There is a misplaced expectation in the idea of a protectorate: 'Although we live deep in the jungle, we have heard how just, wise and respectful the white man is. We know that the land we sit on tonight is ruled and protected by him. And now you have come to us. We respectfully beg that you stay with us show us the path to truth and help us to progress in the world." The colonials, however, have other plans. They are motivated by self~centredness and not by humanitarian ideals. 'Mr Robert had no pleasure in his new position, nor did he consider it an h o n o r . He had studied many sciences profoundly and had come to Malaya with one goal in mind, to make a lot of money . to find fame and fortune.' Here, Ishak expresses his resentment against Western use of technology only to further its interests. With the grafting on of colonial capitalism, Malaya is a land of opportunity for the capitalists. But there is only deprivation and frustration for the local elite and Malay capitalism. Resentment mounts: 'Every white man who comes to Malaya comes for money. He cares nothing about leading or protecting the original sons of the soil. Even if he is somewhat stupid, he will, with no trouble at all, still get a position that pays hundreds and even thousands of dollars a month.'2'*

..

An old lady speaks for Malay nationalism In the aborigine camp, there is an old Malay lady of royal birth, She personifies

Malay nationalism as perceived by Ishak. In

essence, she represents traditionalism more than nationalism. Through her, Ishak expresses his bitterness against foreign encroachment and his disillusionment with the Malays for failing to resist. When Robert asks her why she has taken refuge with the aborigines, she explains bitterly- '. most of my race are bad, uncouth people; they are unkind and never lift a finger to help each

..

other. I hate them all. That's why I am staying in the jungle; I'd

rather be a Sakai.' The dialogue between the two becomes a dialogue between the Malays and the foreigners- She explains why some Malays opposed British rule: '. . we loved Pahang. We didn't want it to be ruled by

.

foreigners. Especially when their religion and everything about

them is different from ours.

It is worth noting that such an I03

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

argument does not indicate a deep understanding or strong desire for genuine political freedom. Colonialism is resented not for its

-British

violation and transgression of human rights and freedom but only because it is imposed by foreigners. Ishak fails to realise that a people can still be enslaved and exploited by a ruling class of their own race and culture. Ishak's sentiments reflect xenophobia more than nationalism." It is significant to draw a distinction between hatred for outsiders and genuine nationalism because the two need not go together. For instance, xenophobia has often been incited by various elites in history in order to justify its own vested interests. This happens in many Third World countries. The indigenous elite want to step into the shoes of the colonials in order to enjoy their privileges and benefits." The hypocrisy of the colonials, the betrayal of the Malay elite and the superficial V-esternSation of the Malays are portrayed through Robert's justification of British rule: 'This country has benefited enormously from rule . what with the railway, roads, large towns, beautiful office buildings, telegraph and telephone and all sorts of other things . . The kings and nobles live in luxury; they get good salaries, large quarters and all sorts of lovely titles. They are fat, healthy chaps; they never have to work, like in the old days. The boys receive a Western education and are very advanced - they drink as much as any European and wear fashionable clothes like them. It's a wonderful life; they never have

. . .

to clear the jungle or grow rice." The colonial argument which associates progress and enlighten-

ment with Westernisation is caricatured by Robert's observation'The women are very progressive too, they use soap and powder and rouge, and wear all sorts of attractive clothes just to make themselves look as nice as can be. All this is made possible by British money, wisdom and rule. Wouldn't you like to leave this dark jungle to see the rest of your country which has attained enlightenment? I dare say you'd scarcely recognise your family and

kinsfolk any more; they'll have changed an awful lot." Robert continues extolling the social change brought by colonial rule: 'Clothes, homes, villages, customs and for some even their religion have changed. In your days, Malay youths wore Malay trousers, jackets and head-cloths. They've given up their headcloths now for pith helmets. Malays used to have large, solid 1 O4

An allegorical reply

houses, because they were frightened of roaming elephants. Now they have charming little houses. They're called bungalows because the builders bungled them and it's awfully crowded with furniture inside. People used to have water buffaloes, cows, goats and sheep in their yard; now they have cats and dogs instead. Everything has changed from the old to the new. You really ought to leave this spiky old jungle. Do think about it please' The old lady is not impressed, She rejects Westernisation in a manner suggestive of dogmatic traditionalism: 'I would rather die among these aborigines . .' Bluntly, she exposes the selfishness and

.

insensitivity of the colonial government towards Malay culture and

feeling: 'You don't care about people's feelings as long as there's profit in it. You white men are all the same. You're not ruling our land for nothing. All you want is the money. Am I right or not?'" Although Ishak is right in criticising superficial Westernisation among the Malays, and the selfish motives behind colonialism, we have to enquire into the ideological leanings of his criticism. Judging by his symbolism, there are elements of romanticism, traditionalism and conservatism in his thinking. In Putera Gunning Tab an, we note a continuing antithesis between the idyllic and pure Malay world and the changing world. Rejecting Westernisation, he swings to the other extreme. His jungle setting, aborigines, the

posing

or a rustic village environment against the urban environ-

ment seem to bear this out. Ishak's traditionalism and conservatism is even more clearly shown in the way he kills Robert in his plot. When the old lady informs Robert that she studies magic, love and

hate charms from the aborigines, Robert ridicules her. Offended, the lady applies a love charm on Robert, who then falls in love with an aborigine. A wedding is arranged. As part of the wedding ritual, Robert must chase and catch his bride. Madly in love, he climbs a tree pursuing her. He falls and dies. The whole idea of primitive magic defeating sceptical Western culture suggests traditionalism and conservatism."

The prince

an ideal Malay leader

As for \X/illiarn, upon discovering that Robert has been captured, he continues his climb up Mount Tahan and meets the prince, who is pictured as the ideal Malay leader. He is wise to the manipulation 105

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

and craftiness of the British. When he learns that William is considering Mount Tahan for a hill station and holiday resort, he sternly warns him: 'I would like to remind you, Mr William, that this hill and the land around it belongs to me, and to me alone. May I also warn you against speaking lightly of taking this hill and turning it into a second heaven for the amusement of yourself and your friends . you must be scrupulously careful not to infringe on the rights of other people.' The prince is not easily bought over by the British: 'You may offer me a stack of gold as high as this mountain, all sorts of long, fancy titles, and dozens of medals, but I will never consent to sell you any of my Ian dl' William tries to sell the idea of a British protectorate and indirect rule to the prince: 'I'lI explain to my government that the peak of Mount Tahan and all the surrounding land belongs to you and your subjects. I'll recommend to my government that you be paid five thousand dollars a month for the rest of your life. And, further, l'll recommend that a special area be set aside for your use, and a beautiful home a palace be constructed there' But the prince rejects V/illiam's tempting offers: 'Your recommendations do not excite me. I know only too well what will happen later on. You will Hatter me, then stab me in the back as soon as I turn around . Thank God I live the way l do, untainted by hopes of fame, attention, and other sugar-coated bribes." William cites the examples of the traditional Malay elite: 'But, Your Majesty, all of the nine Malay states around Mount Tahan are now British protectorates. And they've really progressed. All the

. .

-

--

..

people are very modern' Sarcastically, the prince criticises British indirect rule and the cooperation of the elite- 'So I've heard. But the states are not so much under British protection as under the heel of your British administrators. Our kings and nobles are at the continual beck and call of you and your friends." Ishak opposes Westernisation because he feels it leads to permissiveness among the Malays. He warns them of the danger through his characters. To alleviate William's homesickness, the prince lets him use a magic telescope to see his wife in England. William sees his wife flirting around: 'She's with some chap , they seem to have their arms around each other. I saw her kiss him a number of rimes.' While William fumes, the prince criticises Western culture and society: 'I don't think either of them are to

..

I O6

An allegorical reply

blame. The fault lies in your society. Doesn't your custom allow man and woman to mix together without any constraint? The ridiculousness of associating permissiveness with progress is portrayed through William's naive deface: 'Your Majesty is quite correct. But these days, the custom is universal. It's so modern. We'll find it East and West; North and South, too, I dare say.' The prince affirms the Islamic position which forbids perrnissiveness~ 'Good Muslims would never do what God has forbidden." The prince observes with concern how the Malays have abandoned their Islamic values. The breakdown of traditional and religious values is symbolised by a Malay-owned dance hall which was formerly a mosque: 'It belongs to a very famous millionaire, I understand the building was meant to be a mosque but that has failed. Then lots of Malays asked the hajj (one who has made a pilgrimage to Mecca) to turn it into a religious school. But he wouldn't do that either. No money in it. So he built a dance hall and called it "The Cure for Sadness".' Ishak's hero asks with concern whether the dance hall is meant only for Malays. When he learns that the Europeans and the non-Malays frequent the place, 'mingling freely with Malays', he invites reflection on the disruptive effects of permissiveness: 'Have you thought Mammat the invasion of their custom to the East?' The evil of 'free mingling' is shown in the example of Princess Aishah. William explains her case to the prince: 'She is a genuine princess one night she told me she was three months pregnant. And she i;.ii't even married. I asked

-

who the bounder was who had ruined her. She said he was a

The cad left het as soon as he found out."

...

. .

The prince puts the blame on British colonialism: 'I am . deeply distressed. If the Malays are in such a wretched position, it is obviously the fault of the white man's government. You were supposed to protect us. We are no more protected than is a man under a shaky, thin, yellow silk umbrella. He is sheltered from neither the wind nor the rain." Putera Gunning Talaan is also critical of the traditional Malay elite. Through a magic banyan tree, the prince hears a c o v e r s ation between two men of different races. Pure and untouched by Westernisation, the prince fails to understand the conversation which is in English. William explains: 'They are speaking in English. The man dressed in European clothes on the right is a 107

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVEf-OPMENT

leading civil servant in the state. The one dressed in Malay costume is no more than a figurehead even though he is extremely well-placed.' Obviously, Ishak is referring to a British Resident and a Malay ruler. William describes the Malay as one whom 'all the Malays have to treat very well if they don't want to feel his long nails and sharp teeth.' The servility of the rulers before the British is contrasted with their authoritarian ways towards the Malays. Through the conversation, I s a k criticises the self-centredness, subservience, imitativeness and alienation of the rulers: 'The English chap is teaching the other fellow how to get on in the world. If he wants a good position and a decent salary, he ought to do exactly as he is told. If the Englishman says something is black, the Malay should call it black, too; if the Englishman says it is white, then it is white. It's done so as not to call attention to oneself. Above all, a man must guard his standing in the community. He mustn't mix with the people he is not sure of. The Englishman is encouraging the Malay to spend as much time as possible with Europeans, so that he can be "civilised".' To this the Malay can only react with servility: 'Yes sir, yes sir.'" In the end, William meets with a tragic death, symbolising the defeat of colonialism. He betrays the Malays by sending out secret communications

to the colonial office, recommending that they

take Mount Tahan by force. Two planes bomb the mountain. In the confusion, William is killed. The planes crash as they attempt a landing. The triumph of the Malays over colonialism is also symboliscd by a love conquest. Mrs \Y/'illiain comes looking for her

husband. The prince wins her love and marries her." Ishak's second satire In 1941, Ishak published Anal Mat Lela Gila (Son of' Mat Lela the Madman), his second satirical novel. 35 It shows the same resentment against colonial capitalism, non-Malays and foreign

cultures. Ana's Mat Leia Gila differs from Putera Gzmung Takao in that it shows a greater influence of capitalism. In the second novel, Ishak feels that non~lvIalay capitalism has spread individualism and materialism among the Malaya, disrupt-

ing their traditional bonds and contented life. Mat Lela Gila, an idealistic character, says: 'The money bills issued by the company 108

An allegorical reply

will make many lose their heads, leading to madness, conflict with each other, between brothers, fellow villagers and those of the same religion . That's right . . the money will make life in the world unpleasant, the food bitter and will make many evil and mad.7_*" In one episode, Bulat, the hero of the novel, is wandering hungry and cold in Cameron Highlands, a hill resort mainly for the English. Malay resentment against the injustice of colonial capitalism is expressed through his experiences and observation. He stumbles across a 'Lovers' Hut' where 'he finds a few slices of bread and a half tin of sardines, leftovers meant for the dogs and wild creatures in the garden .' The affluence of the colonials is contrasted with the deprivation of the indigenous people. Bulat sees 'the beauty of the white man's palaces basking in the rnoonlighti These contrast with the Malay houses: 'The width and length of the white man's houses measure up to hundreds of feet, made of bricks, complete with ornaments and gardens. Wow! There's a big difference between us, the poor, and the rich.'37 Bitterness and contempt characterise the attitude towards fore~ igners and non-Malays. It is felt that their arrival disrupts Malay life. This is expressed allegorically. Bulat dreams of an aborigine (Sakai) princess who is 'ashamed and angry because her homeland has been annexed by foreigners and her garden destroyed, so much so that the flowers in it are not as beautiful or sweet smelling as in

..

.

..

the past'. Pak Alang, a character representing traditionalism and cultural purity, has a daughter who married a Chinese. Coln~

plainingly, he describes his grandchildren to Bulat: '. . . different

-- slit-eyed and hair not wavy -~ they eat using chopsticks. Nationalism and patriotism are represented by the singer and his music. When Bulat announces his intention to be a singer, Pak Alang says approvingly: 'Music can entertain tens of thousands of your own race who are afflicted by deprivation -~ they are deprived from other people's grandchildren

of mental development, clothes, food

. . . many of your race have

lost hope, thinking that the world is a heaven only for other races;

they are themselves half-dead, dried up, dirty, devoid of life and feelings. You must . . . try to restore their spirit and feelings by your songs which praise the beauty of their homeland, its rivers, mountains, lakes etc.339 When Bulat asks Pak Alang why the Malays ION

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

are poor and degraded, Pak Alang attributes it to disunity and the lack of solidarity." Ishak's nationalism is based on a queer combination of traditionalism and capitalism. Traditionalism is strongly suggested by his allegories. Pak Alang, who represents wisdom, regrets all changes brought by colonialism and asserts cultural purity and primitiveness. He returns to the jungle, sporting the loin-cloth and using the blowpipe again." Bulat studies magical charms under him. Traditionalism is also suggested by Ishak's glorification of Malay feudal history. Pak Alang 'relates to Bulat the magical happenings of the past or historical events which pleases Bulat and strengthens his spirit. He shows Bulat wondrous items, evidences of the glorious Malay empire which had perished, hidden in the jungle

. . _ml

Infhzence o f capitalism in I5hak's satire

Ishak is himself not entirely free from the influence of colonial capital-ism. opposes only non-Malay capitalism and not the philosophy of capitalism itself. Mat Lela Gila represents the ideals of Malay capitalism ohen he manufactures bricks before the Malays even know what bricks are. Mat Leia Gila explains: '. . I manufacture those bricks to show to the people that if we work hard, we can equal the foreigners: building houses and warehouses of bricks, printing our own money bills and ruling our own

.

counti-y-"'3 A few points are worth highlighting here. Firstly, we

note the increasing economism in Ishak's thinking. Whereas Putera Gunning Tahari is characterised more by traditionalism emphasising cultural identity and purity, Anal Mat Leia Gila shows the greater influence of capitalism and the primacy of economic rivalry and competition. Secondly, we notice that under the influence of capitalism, Ishak's consciousness of structural problems besetting the economic life of the Malays is blurred. In a lapse, he attributes success, and by implication, failure purely to hard work or the lack of it.¢*" It is implicit in Ishak's thinking that the poor are such because they do not work hard enough, in other words they are lazy. Thirdly, we note the linking of Malay capitalism and Malay nationalism. Mat Lela Gila, the village idealist, is an early prophet of Malay capitalism. 110

An Maregorical reply

Contempt is shown towards the masses who live and toil in poverty, eking a decent living from the subsistence economy. When Bulat asks Pak Alang about the root of Malay poverty, Pak Alang explains: '. . their heart and ambition have become small . . while the non-Malays grow two thousand acres of tea, the Malays refuse to grow two plants because they are contented with one and a half. It is all right with them it they don't plant anything at all. We can buy tea from the shop, why bother? There are many items produced

.

.

by others . . .'45 Notice that the concept of high ideals or ambition is only associated with capitalistic prowess, big business and the primacy of economics. The influence of capitalism in lshak's thinking is best shown when Pak Alang, the man who wants to return to the jungle, dreams of having Malay tycoons. Being rich, he tells Bulat, 'doesn't mean having one or two thousand dollars, two or three houses and seven or eight acres of land, but having millions of dollars and gantangs of gold, claupaks of diamonds, tens upon tens of huge ships at sea loaded with cargoes and thousands of coolies, servants and clerks . among our race we cannot say anyone is rich'.46 Therefore, 1shak's traditionalism is only an expression of resentment against foreign cultures and non-Malay capitalism. It is not genuine nationalism or a humanitarian concern for social justice. Ishak's short stories and journalistic articles are animated by the same spirit that moves his novels. Of the Chinese, he writes: 'The purpose of the Chinese in coming to Malaya is to make money,

. .

acquire property and

wealth

...

CVCH

if it means becoming

prostitutes.' The Chinese are portrayed as dishonest manipulators and corrupters of the Malays, who are helpless beings completely at

their mercy. In one of his short stories, a Chinese character schemes against the Malays: 'Actually Malays are like the devil. We fear

them because they are evil, courageous and wise, but just as other devils, they are easily charmed, placated and appeased. Our success is based on burning fireworks, joss-sticks, praying to foodstuff like fish, pork, eggs, rice, bananas . . which we place by the roadside. The Malay devils (Malay Koi) can be charmed by a more or less similar approach but the easiest way is to use money and beautiful women or by teaching them gambling and other vices.'

.

Ishak pictures the masses as an indolent, fun-loving, spendthrift and negative people, thereby sharing the views of the colonials. We 111

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

have seen how Za'ba blames the alleged negative Malay character on feudalism and subtly on racial traits because he admires the

non-Malays as a model for progress and development. Ishak, on the other hand, blames it on the non-Malays. For him, it is a consequence of deliberate Chinese sabotage. As one of his Chinese characters says: 'One main approach is to instil laziness and indolence in the Malays by setting up coffee shops all over Malaya. Secondly, teach them to be indebted; instil in them the love of mortgaging and selling their land.' Like Kajai, Ishak resents Malays of mixed origin and non-Malay Muslims. He sees only opportunism behind their cultural assimilation and marriage into the Malay community. To be sure, it is to be expected that some of those assimilated were indeed opportunists but we cannot generalise and say that all were such. However, there is no room for such consideration in Ishak's thinking because it is coloured by racial sentiments. He belittles the religious ties between Malay and non-Malay Muslims. '_ . . changing one's religion is not difficult . . religion has been used by man for many things, as a baton to hit others, as capital for business, as a smoke screen for immorality. As a magic charm, poison and antidote." Ishak even questions the religious life of a people with older and historical roots in Islam than the Malays. He writes of the Arabs: 'I claim myself to be an Arab, a descendant of the Messenger of God, I put on the tarsus (Arab headgear) and I put a little bit of attar ointment on my beard or moustache . . . I will be addressed as Habib (a term

.

of deference for Syeds, who are descendents of Prophet Muham-

mad) and when people shake my hand, they kiss it.` Isak seems guilty of stereotyping when he adds: '. . . they (the Malays) have never suspected that among the Arabs there are many cheats, swindlers and traders of religion."

112

COMPETITION BETWEEN TWO FORCES OF NATIONALISM

In 1957, Malaya attained political independence with Turku Abdul Rah ran as the first Prime Minister. An analysis of Malay thinking and values can never be complete without a study of Tunku, who dominated the scene for the next thirteen years. Such a study will show us not onTo the nature of Malay nationalism which won the Independence but also the reaction of other Malay elements to it. Turku was definitely above Malay communalism. He h a r b o r e d no hostility or antagonism against the non-Malays. He was free, too, from the capitalistic brand of Malay nationalism. Tunku was born in 1903 of an aristocratic background. His thinking, therefore, reflected many elements of traditional Malay elite thought. As the son of a ruler, his childhood and upbringing was naturally worlds apart from that of the masses. For him, it was

a life of comfort and leisure: '. . . being members of the royal family, we were privileged to do exactly what we liked." From 1912 to 1915, he lived in Bangkok with his brother, attending school there. Turku had close family ties with the royal family of Thailand. When his brother died, he returned to his home state of Ked ah. While the masses had to contend with the vernacular education designed by the colonial government, Turku received the best of English education. From 1916 to 1919, he attended the Penang Free School, after which he was given a scholarship to study in Cambridge, England. He graduated in 1925 with a Bachelor Of Arts in history, then continued his studies in law. In 1930, he returned to

Malaya after being advised by the Director of Legal Studies to give I 13

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

up law. He went back to England in 1938 for a holiday as well as to try completing his law studies, but had to return to Malaya when the Second World War broke out. After the war, Tunku returned to England in 1946 to continue studying, passing his English Bar examinations in 1948. Tunku's account of his life in England as a student furnishes

valuable material for a study of the Malay elite. He describes vividly and humorously the lifestyle of his contemporaries. Many of them were to rise to positions of influence in post~Independent Malaya. On the whole, seriousness was lacking. The experience of the Malay elite in the West was different from that of a Jose Rizal or a Gandhi. For Rizal and Gandhi, coming into contact with Western civilisation had a profound effect on their intellectual consciousness. They underwent a creative intellectual process of discovering the best of their own cultural heritage, as well as selectively assimilating the best of Western civilisation which could strengthen their own.2. In striking contrast, Tunku's account of his student days and that of his contemporaries presents a picture of frivolity and imitative living. It was a comfortable life of parties, celebrations, booze, driving around and .football pools. Once Turku missed his examination and had to sit for it twelve months later. He mentions many enjoyable weekends which 'got me into lots of trouble'. There is no antagonism against non-Malay capitalism as the Malay elite was not really brought into the mainstream of .J5

capitalistic development, and as such, there was no competition

between them and non~Malay capitalists. There was also no radical anti-colonial attitude because in the main they were quite well taken care of by the government. Their complaints were confined to the field of administration where they experienced discrimination. Tunku writes of his position in 1945: 'I still remained as Superintendent, with nothing to do except dangle my legs and scratch my head." Frustrated, he applied for leave to go to England and complete his studies and left the next year vowing that 'if I failed once more to get through law, I would never return to this country again'." It is a reflection of the conservative nature of Malay nationalism that the man destined to be the leader of the

Independence movement four years later, and the first Prime Minister, could have entertained such a thought. Turku passed his 114

Two forces

of natiomffism

examination

in 1948, describing the experience as 'the most exciting day of my life', even more exciting than the day he declared national independence, the day he won the first national election, the day the Emergency ended or the day the Confrontation with Indonesia ended. Tunku was to be bitterly disappointed. A bigger frustration was in store for him back home. Subsequent events showed his

misjudgment of the full implication of colonialism. He thought that colonial injustice would be resolved by paper qualification. But it was not the case: 'I eagerly expected that I would be amply rewarded for my great achievement in successfully being admitted to the Bar. A good posting would be right and just, as I had not a fair deal as an official in the Ked ah Government Service because according to them I had not passed my Bar examination.' But 'what happened was the biggest shock of my life, like being suddenly struck in the face . . I received no appointment of any standing a t all . . . l had to sit at a table . . among the clerks, twiddling my thumbs and doodling; I had nothing to do'. It was still the era when the elite sought legitimacy within the colonial set-up. Self-worth was still measured by administrative appointment: 'Successful or not, obviously they did not want me. The minor blows . were bitter blows to my self~respect.' Tunku contemplated leaving the service. However, he had a change of luck when he was offered the position of Deputy Public Prosecutor in Kuala Lumpur. Later he was promoted as President of the Session

.

.

. .

Courts, which quite pleased him; 'For the first time, I began to feel I

was "important an . . .'" When Dato Orin bin Ja'afar, the founder of the United Malays National Organisation resigned as the president of the party in 1949, the post was offered to Turku. It was a reflection of UMEKO's conservatism that the post was offered to a prince. Dato

Onn commented in his farewell speech: 'UMNO was born in May, 1946, at the Istana Besar johor Bahru, a royal palace. Therefore, it is most appropriate that the new president is of royal descent." just as the party was conservative, so was Tunku's involvement in its politics. In the first place, it was his English superior and his wife who egged him on to leave the government service and join politics

when he hesitated. When he finally decided to do so, he was not fully motivated by nationalistic or patriotic sentiments. He saw 'I I 5

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

politics essentially as an alternative career and suffered the nagging doubts of a man contempt aging career prospects: 'I confess I was raw in the sphere of politics, not having proved much of a success so far, so my . future seemed uncertain." He also writes: 'I must admit l felt somewhat apprehensive of my future because UMNO was in a bad way at that time, without money and with little hope for the future' The UMNO under Turku was essentially a different one from the one led by Dato Onn or from the Malay Congress which led the movement against the Malayan Union. it is necessary to point this out because many writers or historians associate Tunku's UMNO or the post~Independence UMNO with the movement against the Malayan Union. Historically speaking, Tunku's leadership gave birth to an entirely different and distinct party. Once given the presidency, he embarked on 'the huge task of reorganising UMNO, of breathing new life into the party'. According to Turku, many of Dato Orr's supporters 'deserted' the party. Turku faced some

. .

opposition within the party but dissenters were expelled for the alleged 'disloyalty' and being 'undesirables'. The former Central Committee resigned of their own accord. of In order to rebuild and finance the party, Tunku made a personal sacrifice by selling 14 of

his shop houses in Penang."

U M N O and the rulers One major difference in the new UMNO was in its relations with the rulers. Under Data Onn, this relationship was characterised by

conflict. Turku managed to make the rulers his political allies. Data Onn was critical of Malay feudalism and its abuses, and spoke of reforms which caused the rulers to feel threatened. One example of the conflict was the issue pertaining to the appointment of a Malay as Deputy High Commissioner for Malaya. When Dato Onn suggested such an appointment, the rulers saw it as a challenge to feudalism and their position. They interpreted it as Dato Onri"s personal ambition to be appointed in that capacity and opposed the idea, arguing that it would be a violation of feudal protocol for a Malay to be placed higher than them. Dato Onn took the issue to the party, which pledged its support for him. This soured relations further and the rulers brought pressure to bear on Data Onn. He was given an ultimatum to choose between the party's presidency HE

Two forces of nationalism

and his service to the Sultan of Shore. He chose the party and resigned as the Mer tri Besar (Chief Minister) of Johore.'° Tunku's approach was different. He consciously sought legitimate cy for his political struggle within the feudal tradition- '. . . at all costs I wanted to avoid a split with the Rulers

...

Without the

protective influence of their Rulers, the Malays would lose whatever semblance of belonging they night have in the land of their birth."' He sought to maintain the traditional ties between the Malays and their rulers: 'If the Alliance Party decided to make an issue with the Rulers in the conflict of political ideas, there could be no doubt who would win the day, but the relationships between the people and the Rulers could never be the same again." Major party decisions were championed within the traditional framework. The demand for Independence and national elections, for instance, took the form of pledging loyalty to the rulers. Processions were organised throughout the states to present petitions to the rulers. Turku recollects: 'We marched in the sun and reached the istana at noon. Sultan Ibrahim stood at the top of the Istana steps to greet us, looking over the lawns below at the thousands of Alliance members of UMNO-MCA. In front of the vast crowd, l presented our petition and when the Sultan took it in his hands, from all around there rose a shout in salute, the words of homage, "Daimler Tuanlzu ", repeated three times . . the Sultan was moved visibly and affected by this demonstration of loyalty.' A personal insult to the Sultan of Selangor influenced him and other rulers to back UMNO. When the Sultan WERE tO the Selangor Club at the invitation of the Resident of Selangor, some club members objected and lodged a complaint to the committee for allowing an Asian into the exclusive white man's gas. Upon hearing of the incident, UMNO members threatened to march to the club and burn it down. The display and loyalty won

.

srsaaay

the rulers over to Uh/1NO's side- Tunku observes: 'This incident cleared a path for a meeting with the Sultan of Selangor, who was

rightly offended with the way he had been treated . . . it caused other Rulers to realise Sultans though they were, they had no social standing in the eyes of . . Colonials. The " c o l o r bar" recognised no rank, not even royalty." According to Turku, the incident breached the traditional cooperation between the rulers and the colonial government and made the rulers more approachable to

.

I.17

MALA Y IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

UMNO: 'Now that the Sultans ofjohore and Selangor had given a lead, we had no difficulty in gaining audiences with the rest of the Rulers . . . political obstructions melted away; the Rulers were now prepared to discuss terms with us.' Tunku's presidency brought another major change to the party. He gave prominence to new elements and created a new elite,

'younger Malay leaders who had been lying low during Dato One's leadership and great popularity Among them were Abdul Razak Hussein and Dr Ismail who were to hold important political positions. Razak was to become a Prime Minister and Dr Ismail a Deputy Prime Minister. The new party developed hostility against Dato Onn. Turku describes the transformation: 'A new UMNO party emerged taking the country by surprise, and subsequently events proved to be the late Dato Own's undoing; the loyal UMNO members decided to fight him, and new blood joined the party." UMNO and the Alliance gained strength. One main factor for their success was Turku's image as seen by different ethnic and political groups in the country. His aristocratic background and conservative political style gained him the acceptance of the rulers and the traditional elite, an important factor since feudal influence was still strong. As far as the masses were concerned, steeped in their feudal tradition, they were inclined to accept political leadership only from members of the elite. Turku's background was certainly a valuable asset and gave him an edge over his political rivals. Besides, Malay political groups who were critical of the elite and the British, like the Kesatuan l'vIelayu la/luda, were

banned by the British and their leaders imprisoned. As for Dato Onn's Independence of Malaya Party, the rulers and the elite mobilised against it through UMNO. It was criticized along communal lines for its experimentation with a multi»racial approach. Sensing that the IMP would not be able to command Malay support, non-Malay leaders like Tan Cheng Lock and others abandoned it and joined the Alliance. Thus UMNO and the Alliance could in a way be said to have had a free run in the political arena during the period leading up to independence. In - O§;75glCP€l'1dCI1 "iii 1 is.. Turku's personality suited British interests Malaya. Fei-vently anti-communist and anti-socialist, and an ardent liberal at heart, his conservatism and cosmopolitan outlook Q,

. . ... . .... . ...

promised political stability and racial harmony arid minimised the f 18

Two t*O1'C£'$ rat mz1ion¢zfi5:n

-be

risk of radical political change or revolutionary economic restructuring. Turku's liberal and cosmopolitan outlook also gained him the acceptance of the non~Malays. Firstly, it would ensure the survival and continuance of their capitalism and business interests. Secondly, it promised them tolerance and protection against Malay communalism and thro-centricism. Turku's multi-racial image indicated that their rights and participation in the political process would respected." Reading Turku's memoirs, we gain many insights into the nature off nations s I he traditional Malay elite. There was no place for the capitalistic nationalism of Aware Put at, Pak Aland and Mat Lela Gila or the capitalistic Islam of Syed Sheikh Alhady and Za'ba, since the elite was not in direct confrontation and competition

with non-Malay capitalism. Being quite well taken

care of by the British, relatively speaking, they did not develop a radical or revolutionary anti-colonial attitude. Their nationalism was essentially conservative and mild." lt was mainly characterised by personal grievances and discontentment.

In 1955, the Alliance won the first national election by a landslide. Pending full political independence and self-government, Turku and his colleagues assumed partial power. During that momentous period in Malayan history, one expects Tunku's

thoughts to be characterised by intensity of purpose, a historical sense of mission, lofty undertakings and great hope for the fledging nation. To

the contrary, his memoirs

concentrated

more on

personal grievances and complaints. For instance, he writes: 'On August 3, when I arrived to assume office as Chief Minister, l found to my surprise, dismay and annoyance that no house had been reserved for me nor for any of my colleagues. Nor were any cars provided for us or office space allotted." The shoddy treatment was considered 'an unforgivable omission and an act of disrespect to the incoming leaders." Upon complaining, Turku was given a big house. He then addressed himself to the issue of other perks for himself and his colleagues: 'On the question of cars, the Government refused to give us any. They could not expect me to use mine; it was worn out after miles and miles of travelling during the election campaign. My car was a Plymouth which had seen its best service, and l was happy to retire it, hoping to get a new I I9

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVEI..(_)FMENT

Government car. However, I finally managed to persuade the Government to lend money to me and my colleagues to buy new cars.' To some extent, Malaya attained its independence in 1957 due to one of Tunku's personal grievances. Had it not been for a leaking

roof and a sleepless night, political independence could have come two years later. Turku recollects: 'One night during a severe storm, the roof developed multiple leakages. At three in the morning, I woke up to find myself wet through. My wife and I had a lot of trouble trying to find a dry spot where we could push our bed. For the rest of the night it was impossible to sleep. Thereupon I decided that I could not put up with the Colonial Government any more. f would not wait four years for Independence. At that late hour in that damp house, I made a vow to win our freedom in half the time, rntwo rears, not four." Although Turku was not hostile to the non-Malays and frowned

upon Malay cornrnunalisrri, he was sensitive when they questioned Malay feudalism. Once Singapore's leader .Lee Kuan Yew said in Parliament that none of the major races of the country could claim to be more native than the others because all their ancestors carne to Malaya not more than a thousand years ago. This had the effect of denying Malay feudal history, touching Turku's sensitive spot. Turku said it was 'the straw that broke the camel's back' and 'one which disturbed the equilibrium of even the most tolerant Members of the House'. He reacted by citing the feudal history of Ked ah: 'My own family - . were la/Iongols from India, shipwrecked on the

_

coast of Langkawi more than 1,200 years ago when on the way to China- h-iarong lVlaha \X»'angsa bounded the dynasty and the Sultanate of Ked ah has lasted to this very day, though greatly reduced in sizeof:

Tunku's development philosophy Independence brought great hope to the Malays. They expected major changes in their lives. We have seen how feudalism and

colonialism were responsible for their poverty and various other grievances. Independence, however, failed to live up to their high hopes. The regime that came to power merely continued the development philosophy of the former colonial power and shared I20

Two forces

of nationalism

its biases and prejudices. There was no rethinking of the suitability and relevance of classical Western liberalism and capitalism to the Malaysian situation. The new regime failed to realise that it was mechanically and unthinkingly following a model which had been artificially grafted for the convenience and vested interests of foreigners. Left behind by colonialism, the model had long been obsolete, having outlived its original function and purpose of serving Western irnperialisrn.

Back in the West, classical liberalism and capitalism had long been questioned by its leading intellectuals and philosophers." By the time Malaya attained its independence in 1957, the debate between planning and liberalism had been going on for almost a century. in its development, the 'West had long abandoned the

various myths of 19th century capitalism, heading towards planning-thinking."

The development philosophy of the post-Independence elite was represented by Tilnkil's thinking. The allegiance to Western liberalism and capitalism was not in the form of an explicit pronouncement or conscious formulation but rather in the absence of thinking and reflection. This was due to two reasons. Firstly, a social philosophy and intellectual reflection never developed among the elite. Secondly, the model left behind by colonialism W8S taken for granted as historically given. There was no search for alternative models or a serious attempt at reform and reconstruction. Explaining his attitude against major departures, Turku writes- 'All it does is to create discontent and trouble . . . So we

decided and planned tO go slow, and at the same time aimed for progress." He believed in the continuity of the predndependcnce arrangement: Ally experience tells me that everybody wants to continue to live the life they have been living.'~"'

Tonku's thinking skims the problem of social order and planning- He had an idyllic and blissful picture of the country, which strongly influenced his administration and development approach. For instance, he writes: 'This is a land where there is plenty of scope for everybody; only one third of our total area is under cultivation; another third is planned to he cultivated in the course of time, and the balance will refrain uncultivated for a long, long time: it will provide for future scope for development. Here we note one of the myths of liberalism in his phrase 'plenty of scope 221

MALAY IDEAS ON DF VLL(.)I'MENT

for everybody'. It is a dogma of Western liberalism that the economy is equally open to everyone, that opportunities abound and everyone has equal access to them. In reality, the situation is very different. The peasantry, for instance, has always been beset by poverty, landlessness, lack of credit, poor and inadequate marketing, exploitation by middlemen, moneylenders, landlords, backward tech elegy and infrastructures and a thousand and one other problems. 22 Real opportunities are not determined by the objective existence of-resources or wealth. More significantly and decisively, the social order determines people's accessibility to the resources and wealth and their proportionate share in them. Turku's idyllic picture was partly influenced by the colonial myth of the lazy native. He overlooked the sufferings of the masses under the centuries of feudalism and colonial capitalism: 'Nobody need starve in this country, as one can just stretch out one's hand and pick one's own food. There are fish in every river, food in abundance on the land. Even the forests yield animals and vegetables that can be eaten. All that one has to do is to use a little energy, a little brain-work and one can get what one needs. Tllat's wh mypeo je are said to be lazy, because they don't have to work anciless struggle in order to live.71` Whenever confronted development problems demanding serious attention and reforms, Tunku would brush it aside. Poverty, for instance, he said was not an issue because though poor, the masses were happy and contented. Development and wealth, he argued, may change this.

,at

Such an argument seemed to justify the neglect of the poor."

The absence of reflection on a development philosophy was evident in TL1nku's thinking. He took for granted the model of development as seen by Western capitalism and industrialism. He writes in his memoirs: '. . . imposing sky-scrapers we have everywhere now! Wluat a change has come over our capital! We have so many fine and tall buildings, so many big commercial firms, so many banks . . . Wl1.at a grand life we are having"" He fails to ask, a grand life for whom? It is a fact that the country is still facing a serious problem of poverty."' 'A grand life' is still far off for th.c majority of the population. Besides, buildings and physical development are misleading indexes of meaningful development for the population in general." The same concept of development is expressed in the following 122

Two forces

of nalionafism

burst of optimism: 'The land flowed with milk and honey, with industries springing up in all corners of the country.1*` Elsewhere he writes: '. . . heavy industries grew . . . At last this country was on the way to becoming a developed nation . . . The standard of living of the people improved. Value of land and houses shot Llp. Those who sneered at the idea of Independence watch* with awe and envy at all the development that was taking plaee.'l° . . ...... The lack of seriousness towards social problems led to the strange idea that communism could be fought by discouraging .

seriousness among the people. He complains that the South-east Asians 'are becoming much too serious'. As a result the danger of communism spreading had increased: 'I want the people to be happy because only their good morale will stop a Red takeover. I believe the domino theory still exists, and if we take things too seriously and get wound up, Malaysia, Thailand, Laos and then Indonesia will fall, as Vietnam and Cambodia have. ,-Hal Contrary to Tunku's thinking, it is not seriousness but the lack of it among the ruling class which normally opens the door to communism and disruptive class conflicts. Instead of encouraging reform and reconstruction, Turku clung to public apathy and indifference as a safeguard :against communism: `. . . Corflrrltmlsm can never thrive in a country like Malaysia because the people here are happy-golucky and they like their freedom and way of lifc.'3l He overlooked the fact that without serious planning and social reforms, the people would cease to be happy-go-lucky with the spread of social 3

problems.

.

There was inaptitude and a lack of interest in the problems of social philosophy: 'Can our people give up their rice and curry, or their chapczti and shall, or their delicious Chinese me and k a y t o w for the bowls of rice-chowdar day in and day out that they must eat in China? I do not think they will. So what is the good of attempting to force on this country of ours by acts of violence a

foreign way of life when we are better off with our own Although we share Turku's stand against communism and violence, we should base our sympathy or opposition for or against certain social orders on an understanding of the virtues and shortcomings of each alternative structure. These virtues and shortcomings are quite independent of what people eat in various nations of the world. 12_3

MALAY IDEAS ON DE X/'EI,OFME_T\IT

The post-Independence elite continued the dualistic economy of the colonial government. They misinterpreted the status quo as a reflection of racial preferences. They assumed that the Malays preferred to be in the traditional,.agrarian and subsistence rural economy and were more adept in that sector. The non-Malays, on

the other hand, particularly the Chinese, were considered the vanguard of the nation's capitalism. The dualistic approach was implicit in Turku's thought: 'With Merdelaa (Independence) we had to plan afresh for the well-being and happiness of the people. We had promised to preserve Malay rights and at the same time protect the legitimate interests of the other races, so we had to work hard to give the Malays in the rural areas all the help they deserved to improve the living standards and- conditions, while at the same time encouraging commerce, trade and industry in every way to boost our national e c o n o m y "

The same dualism was reflected in many of Tunku's racial stereotypes. Of the Chinese, he writes: 'Chinese have no intention of taking over the country . (their) ambition is to do business . . .

..

(they) are happy to leave politics and the administration of this country to the Malays . . .'" He comments: 'The Chinese are materialistic as a race and a practical minded people. Generally, they were not interested in local politics, they liked to live in places

where law and order reigned and with a minimum of interference, so that they could go about their business, merely to make money' On the other hand, Tunku saw the Malays as completely devoid of capitalistic aspirations and economic ambitions. Quite oblivious

to the stirring spirit of Malay capitalism audits particular 'brand of nationalism, he clung to the traditional and colonial image of them as a tradition-bound, fatalistic and indolent people: 'The Malays, on the other hand, are a simple and contented people, used to their own way of life, their distinctive traditions, their deep Islamic belief in God and the Hereafter, and respect for their Sultans. Sons of the soil and the sea, they lived close to nature in a bountiful land- Why bother to work so hard? "Allah will provide", they would say. So economically they could not hope to compete with the industrious morn-noon-and-night Chinese for whom the Hereafter is an extension of the present so the better off you are on earth the more so it will be in the world to come." One of the functions of the Constitution according to Turku's thinking was to maintain the 122

Two forces

of zzarifomdism

delicate balance between the Malay rural sector and non-Malay capitalism' 'It was obvious, therefore, that the Malays might, without the protection of the Constitution, find themselves at a total loss in the on-ly llomeTan§ they hakl.This eventually might well mean trouble as' TE ouf'come. it? "Who" wanted that?334 Just for completeness, let us quote Turku's image of the Indians. He describes them humorously: '. . . the Indians are an excitable race of people with a temper as hot as their curry but as quickly as it Hates up it dies down. On the whole they are among the most peaceful people . . .*85

The feudal clemen r Tunku's background influenced the character of his regime in yet another way. There was a conscious effort to promote feudal elements in national life. Feudal titles were instituted as national honors." Feudal characters of Malay laikayats (historical narratives) were promoted as national heroes, for instance, Hang Tuah. There was an attempt to link nationalism with feudal history and cultural heritage. The feudal character of the movement was so distinct that we can consider it with justification as an attempt towards the feudalisation of the Malays. In striking contrast to capitalistic nationalism, which is best represented by Awang Put at, we note a different style of nationalism altogether which we can term traditionalistic nationalism. As a statesman, Turku was always aware of differing kinds of nationalism. He was and still is a most vocal critic of anti~feudal

tendencies among the Malays. Historically speaking, the political rivalry between Turku and Data Onn in the 19403 and the 1950s was a conflict between traditionalistic nationalism and anti~feudal nationalism. We have seen how Data Onn and his UMNO

conflicted with the rulers. It is perhaps significant that Dato Onn's conflict with the rulers over the appointment of a Deputy High Commissioner coincided with Tunku's return from England. Sultan Badlishah, who mobilised other rulers against Dato Onn, was Tunku's brother. It is probable that he was advised by Turku. Turku was himself at the centre of the controversy. He proposed that a non-Malay should be appointed instead, indicating that he shared the views of the rulers that Malays should not be placed higher than themselves." $25

MALAY IDEAS O N DEVELOPMENT

The conflict between the two kinds of nationalism within the context of UMNO was hinted at by Data Onn in his farewell speech, lt was a speech against the takeover of the party by feudalistic elements. Dato Onn touched sarcastically on the origin of UMNO in a royal palace and how appropriate it was that its new president was of royal descent. In the same spirit, he congratulated the Ked ah division which 'managed to double its members . . . although it faced various obstructions and obstacles in the state'. He was obviously referring to the conflict between UMNO and the Ked ah royal family. Dato Onn was charged with being 'disloyal (menderhak to the Malay race'. The nature of the charge and its formulation indicates

that it came from feudal elements. Within feudal thinking, challenging the rulers and feudal values is tantamount to being disloyal to the Malay race. In his speech, Dato Onn subtly criticised "IM feudal elements: 'Let us acknowledge that Malays have changed. The thinking of the Malays have changed.' And he appealed to them to accept the inevitability of democracy: 'Let us accept that the Malays themselves have clamored in the spirit Of democracy for an independent nation run on democratic lines.'" Throughout his life, whether in office or in retirement, Turku opposed anti~feudal nationalism. His deface of feudal tradition and customs takes various forms. Sometimes it is expressed in arguments for constitutional monarchy, at other times it . assumes feudal thinking and beliefs. I I M

1

In a way, Tunku can be regarded as a reformer of the feudal

tradition. He represented a feudalism forced to accept the realities of democratic revolution all over the would., Turku recognised that the survival of Malay feudalism depended on its flexibility and capacity to synthesis itself with democratic thinking-" He had the English monarchy as a model at the back of his mind. This is indicated, for instance, in his deface of constitutional monarchy in Malaysia against republican ideas: 'For twelve long; years, when I was in England, l was deeply impressed with the way the British people gave their loyalty to the Throne and to their Kings and Queens. In fact, the British people always have fashioned their lives

according to the reigns of the monarchs. For instance, they refer certain customs, traditions, or practice to the reigns of the

Sovereigns, speaking of the Regency, the Victorian or the Edwar126

Two forces

of natifmali5rn

dion periods. So deep in their hearts is their faith and loyalty to the Throne, that the British throughout history and today have willingly given their lives in the names of their Kings and Queens.1*" It was with the English model in mind that he negotiated the terms of Independence with the British. Informally, Turku must have given a lot of personal assurances to the feudal elements in Malay society. It was likely that he saw himself as a practical custodian and bastion of feudalism. In the negotiation for Independence, Turku gave himself the historical role of representing feudalism in its interplay with nationalism. As some concessions were necessary, given the rising tide of nationalism all over the world, Turku gave himself the task of accommodating and easing Malay feudalism into the new social, political and constitutional order left behind by colonialism. Here lies the historical significance of Turku as a personality. In many ways, he represents the feudal tradition reasserting itself, organising and planning its move after the damage inflicted upon it by colonialism. Turku m o l d e d , colored and shaped the nationalist movement into a valuable ally of Malay feudalism. Both sides could accept him because of his multifarious image. The feudal elements could accept and trust him because of his royal descent and strong allegiance to feudal traditions .and customs. The nationalist movement found him acceptable also because of his royal descent, which appealed to their still feudal and traditional outlook and his image as a benevolent, democratic and reformer prince, for the Tunku was quite critical of the abuses and excesses

of feudalism. Each nation, however, has its own historical and cultural peculiarities. The constitutional monarchy and the democratic tradition of Britain are centuries old, The case is quite different in Malay history. Structurally Malay feudalism survived right to the end of the 19th century. The feudal structure was then transformed not by an indigenous democratic revolution but by an externally imposed colonial capitalism. Even then, as we have seen, colonial capitalism merely sought to carve out of Malay feudalism a sphere for itself and its vested interests. Therefore, although Independence brought many constitutional changes, the feudal psychology

survived." A keen and perceptive observer of Malay society, who is capable of fathoming Malay psychology and values beyond the 127

MALAY IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

formal structure, cannot help but notice the old feudal spirit animating and coloring new social and political institutions which are borrowed superficially from the West. Though the terminology and the formal structure may appear democratic and modem, the essence and content of the institutions concerned remain in many ways feudal. There are competent studies on the continuity of the feudal psychology among the Malays. The writer merely wishes to supplement them using material from Turku's memoirs. They have their own special significance. Firstly, they record the experience of the first Malaysian Frime Minister leading the newly-created nation. Secondly, they throw much light on the problem of the old spirit in a new structure. Thirdly, they represent the thoughts of one steeped in feudal traditions and custom. Turku's comments would,

therefore, reflect the hopes and the disillusionment of Malay nationalism of the feudal tradition. In Turku, we note both the characteristic of a modern-day Prime Minister and a feudal-day Bandalvara.4-' J Some of Tunku's deface and arguments for constitutional monarchy go beyond constitutional and political expediency into the realm of feudal psychology. For instance, Turku failed to je

n

_

and

distinguish between the democratic concept i. constitutional monarch and the feudal idea of kingship which is normally

accompanied by collective representations or magical beliefs." As an example, take the following comment on a Malaysian king: '. . . he was most meticulously careful about the concept of Kingship

and anything connected with his high office. He would not leave

. . . until he was satisfied that the road was clear and the signs propitious . . . He insisted that the customs and traditions of Malaysian kingship were followed religiously." Turku remarks approvingly: 'This is as it should be.: a monarchy has a Monarch, it

should not be confused with a Republic' Another example of a feudal argument in deface of the monarchy is the following: '. . . there is a belief among the Malays in an aura of mystery verging on the sublime surrounding the Throne. So, too, with Royal regalia. Therefore, Royal regalia must always be treated with respect and looked after with reverence. Those who do not do so will stiffer a

severe misfortune which in Malay is known as Tullah.3*" Turku's beliefs in dreams and supernatural powers is rooted in L28

Two forces

of mztionulism

his feudal background. His memoirs recount how his late father Sultan Abdul Hamid was able to communicate with him through dreams whenever there was a misfortune or a crisis." Like the princes and kings of European or Malay feudalism of the past, Turku relied on dreams for guidance in public affairs.4*" Take, for instance, his reaction when he dreamt of sewer rats and blue flies before the racial riots on 13th May 1969: 'When I woke from my dream, I was at a loss to understand its meaning. I mentioned it to my wife, asking her if she could find an answer to this strange awful dream of mine. She said she could not . . . but obviously the dream portended some evil that would cause me deep trouble." Turku

then attempts at an interpretation: 'To my mind, rats and blue flies are the two dirtiest animals or pests in the world. So my dream must have signified something serious to happen . . I felt I had enemies who were out to harm me, or at least to block my way to peace and happiness. I immediately jotted down notes in my pocket diary so that later on I can know from any future events what this dream could mean.' Tunku's belief in dreams is more than curiosity or a momentary superstition: 'During the next few days, I kept on wondering what in fact the sewer rats and the blue flies might represent. The whole dream was too vivid, too symbolic of some bad and dire unknown beings at work for me to ignore it." In the course of events, Turku interpreted the sewer rats to be communists and blue flies as dissenters within UMNO who were out to depose him." Against criticisms of his superstition, Turku reaffirms

.

his belief: 'I confessed I was superstitious, and my intuition has paid

dividends in the past.M**' Langkawi Island has a special place in Turku's heart because of its association with the mythical beginnings of the Ked ah sultanate." Reverence for the island led him to a belief in its

supernatural attributes and legends. One example is the legend of Mashuri. In the 13th century, a Malay lady of noble birth by the name of Mashuri was unjustly sentenced to death on a trumped up charge of adultery. Before dying, she cast a curse on Langkawi. Turku believed that Langkawi's poverty and economic backward~ ness right up to the 20th century had a lot to do with the curse: 'The curse brought so much disaster to the peaceful island . . the Thais invaded it . . . The curse brought other misfortunes . . . in the place of pad fields and fruit trees, only castor trees grew wild and the

.

129

MALA Y IDEAS ON

DFVI"L()PMEN'.V

island was full of doves. Another curious thing that happened was that the dogs, instead of barking as is their nature, howled like wolves.' According to Tunku, when he was serving in Langkawi, a government official made a fatal mistake' 'He spent his time shooting dogs as he could not stand the howling. He was taken ill and died very suddenly.' Economic development and Western capitalism failed in Langkawi because of the curse, said Tunku: 'Nothing seemed to go right with the island. Padi crops failed and rice had to be sent to the island almost every year to help feed the people. No kind of business seemed to succeed.' Turku marshalled a list of business failures in Langkawi° a company attempted to produce altnandite and zerkin from black sand but 'the black sand disappeared gradually until there was hardly any left', '. . . copper which was discovered and finally mined but the copper disappeared';"' 'a European company . . . started a sardine business, as there was plenty of fish there. The business failed . . There was also the first big marble quarry started by a ]cw . . . and that also failed . .'" Misfortunes seemed to befall only those sceptical. Tunku suggests that good fortune awaits those who respect the legend. He cites his own example and that of a Chinese capitalist: 'I searched for Mashuri's grave . . built a tomb for her. The work was done by a Chinese contractor, Poh Sin Tong, who . . refused to accept the money. incidentally, after sanctifying the grave, I got a promotion

.

.

.

.

. . . Poh Sin Tong became . . . a rich man.""

For the Tunku, the lklalay identity is closely bound with feudal

heritage. This is reflected in his criticism of Malays who want a republic- 'Any Malay who sees it this way is like a shipwrecked man, who pushes away a floating log that comes his way, one to which he can cling to save himself from drowning . . . Malays in particular are .great believers in Royalty and all that the Crown symbolises; it is an integral part of their heritage . in the long centuries of successive foreign dominations, their faith in God and

..

in their Rulers were the only hopes that kept the Malay identity alive." He refers to such cultural tradition as 'an integral part of their heritage'. This heritage figures prominently in Turku's notion of cultural

development and progress. One of his criticisms against contemporary Malays is that they are fast forgetting their feudal etiquette: 1.10

Two forces

of :u1I/l0n1.;1[i5m

'I was surprised to find that very few members of the Civil Service know how to use the correct term or form of address when talking to a person of rank, like members of the royalty . . It appears to be quite common for most of them when talking to royalty to use the same words as they would when talking to ordinary people.154 Turku complains of the lack of deference shown to him as royalty: ' . . perhaps they think I am just one of them.155

.

.

Tunku always draws a distinction between his identity as i modern-day politician and as a prince. This is clearly illustrated in the following example. When he retired from politics, the Chief Secretary wrote asking him to surrender the train ticket issued to him as Member of Parliament. In his letter, the Chief Secretary failed to use the proper address for royalty. Turku took offence at this oversight and wrote back emphasising his royal status: 'I may have given up my post as a Prime Minister and as a Member of Parliament, but I have not given up my title as Yang Tera rat Malia and Turku . . so address me properly the next time you write . .' It is to be expected that the feudal psychology is stronger in the Malay states which used to be under indirect British rule than in the

.

.

former Straits Settlements- The weaker allegiance of the Malays in the former Straits Settlements to their feudal heritage is seen by the Turku as a serious flaw in their character. He criticises their lack of culture, so to speak: 'This is particularly so in respect of Malays who lived under direct British rule. When one comes to think of it, they cannot be blamed - they had no proper education, no place in the states in which they were born or grew up.'

Turku advocated a greater emphasis for feudal heritage in the

_

social education of the Malays: '. . Malays must make every effort to educate themselves, polish their conduct and keep abreast with

national progress." According to Turku, the education system was to be blamed for its neglect' 'The education our young people receive in schools is much to be blamed for their poor manners because the correct etiquette and words used in conversation or writing should have been taught in the classrooms.S5"

Democratic control of the rulers

between Malay feudalism and nationalism during the years leading to Independence, Tunku had to make In his mediation

131

MALAY :IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

certain compromises. Some important considerations had to be shelved or overlooked for the sake of consensus and cooperation. One such consideration was the democratic control of the power of the rulers." Tunku writes in his memoirs: 'One control . . . appeared to have been forgotten when the Constitution was drafted, and that was how to deal with the Rulers, who ceased to enjoy the confidence of their people. What is the exact nature of any offence or offences which can cause such a loss of confidence? lt was not actually a question of forgetting so much as our own anxiety to carry the Rulers with us in our struggle for Independenee.' Now that the goal had been achieved, Turku felt that a

constitutional reform might be necessary: 'Parliament can still rectify any omission or mistake in the Constitution, if the need arises." After retirement, Turku felt the need for greater democratic control of the rulers for two main reasons. Firstly, he had always felt the conflict between the old feudal psychology and his ideal of a constitutional monarchy based on the English model. Secondly, he was no longer able to play the role of balancing feudalism and nationalism as before. While in office, he could combine the roles of Prince and Prime Minister. Now he watched the delicate balance he had established deteriorating. In response, Tunku approached the problem from the aspect of social education and the m o l d i n g of public opinion. In doing so, he furnishes us with valuable material and insights into the problems of feudal continuity and constitutional monarchy in Malaysia.

Continuing his role, Tunku combined the two approaches of championing the monarchy and restraining the Malay rulers from

alienating the masses. We have seen how he championed the monarchy. l.et us quote some of his views on the latter. He raises the problem: 'It can be assumed that, while the Rulers enjoy their rights and privileges, they must live within these rights. It is expected that the Rulers will not commit acts that are likely to contravene the laws and, while they remain within the confines and limits of these rights, no quarrel can be found with them. But what guarantee is there that they will not exceed their powers? Arbitrary power and the servility it commanded was still very much part of the political reality. 'There are innumerable temptations, however, that could come their (the rLilcrs') way; so like all human beings 182

Two forces

of natMnalfsm

they could easily succumb. The Mentris Besar and the State Executive Councillors are supposed to be the "watchdogs"; their duties are to see that the Rulers do not commit excesses, but they, too, having to keep in favour with their Rulers, are inclined "to close one eye".' Turku quotes many illustrative examples of the conflict between feudal psychology and democratic control. One example was when he was the Prime Minister: 'Once or twice, I had occasion to step in to prevent a Ruler of a State from abusing his position, because the Mer tri Besar dared not stand up against his Ruler. I issued a directive that all applications for land in the State by either the Ruler or members of the Royal family should first come to the Prime Minister, before being considered in the State Executive Council. For a time this directive was respected- One la/lentri Besar, however

. . . conveniently

reverted to the more expeditious method of disposing of the subject in the "Exco" . . . When I came to know the facts, it was already too late to do anything and large tracts of valuable land were alienated to the Ruler. Such an abuse of power by a Ruler with the connivance of his "Exco" is one that must be avoided."

The conflict is even clearer in the following example' 'l remember on one occasion a Ruler came to see me, saying his Mer tri Besar had not considered his application for mining land, and he would like him replaced with someone else who would be more amenable. l told the Ruler that the Meritri Besar was the elected representative of the people. It was his duty to uphold the Constitution and to

carry out the administration with honor and fairness. If His Royal Highness could prove that he was not doing his duty, then he could be replaced; otherwise he was there until the people chose to displace him.'" Such conflict between the rulers and the Mer tri Besars was a regular feature in post-Independent Malaya. Commenting on the conflict between the late Sultan of Perak and his Mer tri Besar, Turku wrote of the personal vested interests that might have been involved: 'The powers of the Sultans are so limited that their role in the legislature of each State is infinitesimal, except for their powers over land and mines, and in these natural resources Perak is rich. This is perhaps the source of many misunderstandings between the Ruler and the Mer tri Besar. 559 Ever conscious of his role as mediator, Turku warned the rulers: 133

MALA Y IDEAS O N DF,VEf,OP.MENT

'I say with all sincerity and with the best of goodwill and intention that under the upsurge of the new nationalism, the Rulers must be constantly on the alert. They must set the best example, or show in Kingship as well as Sultanship that there is much they can do that can be appreciated and expected by their people." The rulers were reminded of their constitutional role and position: 'They must understand that in Independent Malaya it is very necessary for the Rulers to conform to the terms of the Constitution, even more strictly now than ever before . . . Under out Constitutions, either Federal or State, the Ruler is the fount of authority, and as such guardian of the Constitution. just as the Constitution ensures that his office is respected, so too must a Ruler respect the Constitution." Subtly Tunku warned them against the dangers of alienating the

people by their abuses: 'I think the institution of Rulership suits our people, but it must be preserved with h o n o r and dignity. As with all good things people can get tired, and want a change if they feel that all is not well with the institution of Rulers.' The rulers were counseled not to succumb to the excesses and arbitrariness of the feudal days: 'The best of food can also turn sour; likewise good medicine can do harm if an overdose is taken. So is it not better to keep an eye on one's diet, and follow out exactly the prescription laid down for any good medicine?' Tunku legitimised his forthright views on the basis of his dual identity as a prince and modern-day political figure: 'Perhaps I am the only person who can say all these things without fear of contradiction, because I come from one of the oldest Ruling Houses

in Malaysia. My ancestors iitst established the dynasty over 1,000 years ago, and have had the opportunity and good fortune to hold executive power for fifteen years. 360

The balance rips over By the 19605, the uneasy and precarious balance between Malay political power and traditional economy on one side and non~ Malay capitalism on the other collapsed. Turku found out too late

that beneath the outward calm, social tension was fast mounting in the young nation. In his 13261; May, Before and After, he writes: I frequently and openly said that I was the happiest Prime Minister in

the world. On May 13th, however, I suddenly found that I was the unhappiest Prime Minister." Right to the end of office, he put his 134

Two tbfces

of rzattrJn;z!zlsmv

faith in the dualistic arrangement and was quite oblivious to the social, economic and social discontent created by it: 'Little did we know that our dreams of continuing success would explode in out faces . in racial riots . . in violence completely unprecedented in both nature and character in this country's history."" Turku discovered that his racial stereotypes did not quite measure Up to reality. The non-Malays turned out to be quite

. .

_

capable of political interests and the Malays of capitalistic ambition. Bitterly he censured both. He criticised the Chinese 'who refused to acknowledge the hitherto accepted division of interests or balance of power as between political and economic forces for which the Constitution had so studiously and fairly provided. &g,.}. On the Malay side, given the general discontentment over the

issues of religion, language, Malay special position under the Constitution and their economic backwardness, the stage was right for the mobilisation of Malay opinion. The tense atmosphere was ideal for the linking of nationalism with Malay capitalism, which had long been frustrated by non-Malay capitalism right from the colonial days. Independence did not bring much fruit because the man at the helm believed in colonial dualism and continued it. In frustration, Malay capitalistic nationalism decided to depose Turku and replace him with someone more of their kind. Turku's 13th May, Before and After is a telling account of the political upsurge of' Malay capitalism within UMNO. The leadership crisis in the party following the riot involved much more than just individual differences. Historically speaking it was a tussle

between traditionalistic nationalism and capitalistic nationalism. Tunku describes the nature of the challenge: 'One might well ask

what is it they are after. inquiring through other people, I have tried to find out from some of the "Ultras" what the answer is, and as far as I know they want to establish a new order of things inside UMNO and the country." Turku realised that he was up against Malay capitalism- 'Some of these "Ultras" egg on Malay students to demonstrate . . . for aims of their own. There are no hounds to their ambition. They want to get into big business a t no cost or expense to themselves. They talk grandly about nationalisation of industries. What they mean by this is to transfer ownership in one way or another not for

the benefit of the nation but for their own purposes' 135

MALAY IDEAS ON DE VELOPMENT

just as he was cynical about non-Malays delving into politics, he was cynical of Malay capitalism. Influenced by the colonial image of indolent Malays and the myth that capitalist success depended purely on 'hard work', H advised the Malays against developing a capitalistic ambition: -5 eryone knows there is no short-cut to success. What is needed is hard work, honesty, determination and careful planning' Malays ought to remain in the non~capitalist, rural, agricultural sector, at least for the time being: 'If the Malays

take advantage of the Federal Land Development Schemes and own a piece of land each, the total acreage owned by Malay srnallholders will be the biggest rubber or palm oil collective holdings in the country. Some Malays will not wait for this, but want to enter immediately into big money-earning projects without first obtaining the means and experience to own and operate such big business.' Subtly the Malays were told that they did not stand a chance against non-Malay capitalism: 'There has never been and there never is, an easy way to the top. Those people who have

started with very little and have done so by hard work, dedicateeof to inherit wealth, they have been properly train

i

II

they happen to carry on

wiFE

the family business, whether it is manufacture, commerce or estates and mines."''

Under political pressure, Tunku resigned in 1971. A new cultural, political, economic epoch was ushered in by the rise of Tun Abdul Razak as the Prime Minister. Razak's rise represented historically the triumph of Malay capitalism on the political scene.

T .36

IN PURSUIT OF A CAPITALISTIC MILLENNIUM

The end of Tunku's office represented the beginning of a new and distinct political, cultural and economic epoch which has continued to this day. It deserves a separate study to do it justice? There is occasion here only for a brief sketch and illustration of its main features since the period has just begun. The new regime under Tun Abdul Razak rejected the colonial dualism continued by Tunku. It did not accept the division between Malay political power and non-Malay economic power. In its place, it introduced a new system of sharing political power. The new approach gave birth to the Barisan Nasiofzal (National Front), which replaced the Alliance of Tunku. In a sense, it represented a transformation in terms of the democratic life of the nation. The Bahsan functions like a huge power syndicate which

opens its membership to any political party with some backing and power. Ideologies and issues matter little among its constituent parties. In essence, the Barisan is like a conference of warloads which allocates the political cake and its benefits according to the political strength and worth of each party. The principle of sharing power resembles the relationship between the Malay ruler and the feudal chiefs of the past. lt is a gathering of political leaders around one supreme figure who dominates and mediates among them. The arrangement is designed to withdraw politics from the public and an affair behind closed doors. The political step was justified in terms of reducing politicking so that the ruling elite could concentrate more on development. The fallacy in the argument is obvious. lt overlooks the fact that H7

MA LA Y IDEAS ON DF, VELOPMENT an open democracy with genuine public involvement is an integral aspect of development in the wider sense of the word.Z When the ideal of democratic opposition and public accountability is undermined, public interest and well-being are bound to suffer. The difference between the Alliance and the Barisan is well summarised by Turku himself: 'When Tun Razak formed the Barisan Nasional he had in mind a one-party system. There appears to be no limit to the numbers who can join up, but whoever does join must toe the party line . . . His idea was that the country should have a one-party leader, and that would be the Prirne Minister. One thing seemed certain; whoever was Prime Minister would stay on as such unopposed and for as long as he liked.' Tunku's criticism of Razak's political style and his Brzrisan Nasional is most pertinent: 'He set up a one-party government and ran the country without squabbles or bickering . . . but I don't subscribe to this view because parliamentary dernocracy requires that every party in Parliament must express its views. Whether they hurt the government or not is immaterial, but each man sitting in opposition must speak his mind." The ideal of a democratic opposition can never be over-emphasised in a democracy, as Turku correctly points out: 'There was never any hard feeling in my heart for those leaders who had to oppose us. They were there to find fault with the government in power. The more they found the better they stood in the eyes of the people they represented. That's parliamentary democracy at its best."

In the economic sphere, there was also a major transformation.

There was a shift of emphasis from Turku's traditionalistic nationalism to capitalistic nationalism among the dominant Malay elite. This found expression in two significant works of the time,

the Revolusi Mental (Mental Revolution) published by UMNO Youth and The Malay Dilemma by Dr Mahathir Mohammad." Both echo the thinking of earlier writers like Za'ba and Kawai. There is one major difference between the two works and their predecessors. The writings of Za'ba and Kajai represented Malay capitalism during colonialism, without the benefit of political power. Revolusi Mental and The Malay Dilemma represented the thinking of Malay capitalism which had tasted pohticai power. iris a result, the works emphasis

the interplay of political power and Malay capitalism,

and can therefore be regarded as documents of Malay political 138

In pursuit of a cap Mzlfstic millennium capitalism.S Since the writer has published a detailed critique of Ref/olusz` Mental elsewhere, we shall focus our attention here on

The Malay Dilemma." Like Za'ba, Mahathir is influenced by the ideology of colonial capitalism. Their works reflect capitalistic prejudices against the

masses. Both believe the masses are indolent and lazy. There is, however, a difference. While Zalba was a reluctant racist, Mahathir is convinced of the racial inferiority of the Malays, in particular the rural folk. In The Malay Dilemma, he puts forth his racial theories with conviction and without apology: '. . . it is not expected that they will be easily accepted. The implications are too depressing and hold no promise of easy or rapid remedies."

The genes theory Mahathir explains the economic backwardness of the Malays not .in terms of socio-historical factors but in terms of evolutionary

theory, the principle of natural selection and the colonial image of the indolent native. He alleges that life was too easy for the Malays in the lush tropical plains with its abundance of food: 'No great exertion or ingenuity was required to obtain food. There was plenty for everyone throughout the year. Hunger and starvation, a common feature in countries like China, were unknown in Malaya. Under these conditions, everyone survived. Even the weakest and the least diligent were able to live in comparative comfort, to marry and procreate.' It is alleged, therefore, that the la/falays are on a lower level of the evolutionary scale since they were not screened by

natural selection' 'The observation that only the fittest would survive did not apply, for the abundance of food supported the existence of even the weakest. This genetic inferiority is then maintained in its purity by certain cultural practices, so he contends. One such practice is the preference for in-breeding: '. . . instances of in-breeding are greater among them (the Malays) than among the other major race in Malaysia the Chinese. In fact Chinese marriage custom specifically prevents in-breeding. And so it is correct to say that

-

in-breeding together with forced marriages of the unfit produce a

much greater percentage of human failures among Malays as

compared with other races." The coming of Islam had the effect of retaining the genetic inferiority by limiting intermarriages between 139

MALA Y IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT Malays and the non-Malays, particularly the Chinese: 'Islam forbade such (mixed) marriage except when certain conditions were met . . . the Malays had already become impervious to non~Islamic influence . Intermarriage between Malays and Chinese was extremely rare.' Applying the yardstick 'of capitalistic success as a basis for evaluation, Mahathir associates racial superiority with the Chinese and racial inferiority with the Malays. He ignores the socio-historical factors which favoured the development of non~Malay capitalism and attributes the success of Chinese capitalism to superior genes. Echoing Za'ba, he writes' 'The history of China is littered with disasters, both natural and man-made. Four thousand years ago a great flood was recorded, and subsequently floods alternated with famine, while waves of invaders, predatory emperors and warlords ravaged the country.' As a consequence, he points out, the Chinese underwent natural selection: 'In the process, the weak in mind and body lost out to the strong and the resourceful. For generation after generation, through four thousand years or more, this weeding out of the unfit went on, aided and abetted by the consequent limitation of survival to the fit only. But, as if this was not enough to produce a hardy race, Chinese custom decreed that marriage should not be within the same clan. This resulted in more cross-breeding than inbreeding, in direct contrast to Malay partiality towards inbreeding. The result of this Chinese custom was to reproduce the best strains and characteristics . , .' Ignoring the impact of

. .

feudalism and colonial capitalism on the economic development of

the Malays, Mahathir sees things only in the light of capitalistic biases, prejudices and racial terms: 'The Malays whose own hereditary and environmental influence had been so debilitating, could do nothing but retreat before the onslaught of the Chinese ilnmigrants.'"'"

Since Mahathir psychologically associates capitalism with superior genes, he explains the existence of Malay capitalists in a similar manner- 'A certain amount of intermarriage took place between town Malays and immigrant Indian Muslims and Arabs." This differentiates

the town Malays from the rural Malays: 'The

character of the town Malays became more diverse and they found

..

no difficulty in changing with the times. Some interinarried . These intermarriages enriched Malay stock. Of course not all town I40

In Pursuit of a capitalistic millennium

Malays married non-Malays, but as time went on, town Malays inherited a certain amount of mixed blood . . _ v i i As for the rural Malays: 'The absence of inter-racial marriages in the rural areas resulted in pure-bred Malays. This was further aggravated by the habit of family in-breeding. First cousin marriages were and still are frequent, and the result is the propagation of the poorer characteristics.' According to The Malay Dilemma, the history of the Malays right up to the Second World War was totally devoid of any

struggle and challenge whatsoever. But under the Japanese Occupation, 'the Malays were forced out of their complacent reliance on others. To survive, the Malays had to struggle for almost the first time'. The nationalist movement was seen as a momentary mutation of Malay genes: 'Under the stress of this rapid destruction of their hopes, the Malay character underwent a metamorphosis. Seeing their salvation in politics, the previously docile Malays, with remarkable rapidity and initiative, organised themselves . . . An aggressive spirit pervaded Malay society at all levels and this same spirit carried the Malays through to merdelza (Independence).' The temporary change soon wore o f f . Mahathir writes: 'Por a time it seemed as if they would really break away from their lethargic, sell-ei-facing past. But it would seen on closer examination that all these changes were superficial. Deep under, the inherent traits and character acquired over the centuries persist."

Capitalism is advocated In Mahathir's evaluation, only capitalistic endeavour can be considered a struggle. By implication all other endeavours are associated with indolence, including politics. He advocates that Malays should develop their capitalism: '. . . politics created for the Malays a soft environment which removed all challenge to their survival and progress' Capitalism is advocated in order that their racial quality might be enriched by the 'struggle'. He points out that Malay survival may depend on capitalism. He counsels against concentrating only on politics: '. (it) will not be good for the Malays. They will become softer and less able to overcome difficulties on their own. Because of this, political power might

..

ultimately prove their complete downfall." 141

MA LA Y IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

After putting forward his theory of Malay racial inferiority, Mahathir argues for Malay capitalism to be given patronage and preferential treatment. He uses the alleged racial inferiority as a justification. The colonialists and Turku believed in carving and maintaining a Malay sphere distinct from capitalist sector because they believed rural Malays to be indolent. Mahathir extends the idea of a distinct Malay reserve into the capitalist sector, legitirnising it with racial theories and stereotypes. He begins on the premise that capitalism is imperative for the Malays because they need to improve their strain or racial stock. Pure and open competition, however, is to be rejected because of the unequal racial quality of the Malays and the Chinese: 'Whatever the Malays could do, the Chinese could do better and more cheaply . . Removal of all protection would subject the Malays to the primitive laws that enable only the fittest to survive'

in

.

A special kind of policy is then advocated for Malay capitalism: ' . Malaysia has far too many non-Malay citizens who can swamp the Malays the moment protectio I is- removed. The frequent suggestion that the only way to help the Malays is to let them fight their own battles cannot therefore seriously considered. The answer seems to lie somewhere in between; in u M "constructive protection" worked out after a careful study of the effects of heredity and environment. Until this is done, the deleterious e : c t of-heredity and environment on the Malays is

..

likely to continue."

-

Capitalistic bias and prejudice are dearly reflected in the chapter, 'The Malay Economic Dilemmas Firstly, the chapter concentrates merely on the problems faced by Malay capitalists and does not discuss those faced by other Malays. Secondly, it Shows complete sympathy and identification with the history and the cause of Malay capitalism in striking contrast to the condescending and contemptuous attitude towards non-capitalist, particularly rural,

Malays.15 Let us quote a few examples. Take the portrayal of the trading activities of past rulers. The feudal capitalist is presented as dynamic and alert: 'In the history of the Malay sultanates of Ked ah, Kelantan and Malacca, there was a period when the Chinese shopkeepers were absent. These sultanates were then already 142

In pursuit

of cl cap ftahsttc

¢v11'!fenn:lum

organised societies . . . with internal and external trade. The marketing of produce, transportation and the buying and selling of goods imported OI' manufactured locally went on without the so-called indispensable Chinese shopkeepers.' Mahathir goes out of his way to absolve the early capitalists of any blame: 'It may be that the efficiency and enterprise of the Chinese were absent, but the

states were organised for commerce, primitive and limited though it must have been.' Even the feudal monopolistic trading of royalty is a source of pride: 'Evidence shows that the rajas themselves were involved in business, although in the main what this amounted to was the appropriation of a certain portion of goods belonging to their subjects, and exchanging these for goods brought by foreign merchants." The poverty

of the rural Malays is blamed on their laziness and racial inferiority. The retarding effects of colonialism are ignored. When it concerns the demise of Malay capitalism,

however,

Mahathir is quick to attribute this to the alliance between the 'completely unscrupulous Europeans' and the Chinese. The British are blamed for encouraging the Chinese influx~ 'First it was in trade and commerce, then in skilled work and finally even in unskilled labour." The Malay elite is also blamed for neglecting Malay capitalism. Mahathir portrays the dilemma and the lost opportuni-

ties of the Malay capitalists after the Second World War: 'Not adept at bribery and manipulation, and deserted by the better educated who had returned to Government service, the opportunity of getting rich quick and making a place for themselves was lost."'

The Malay Dilemma judges history from the perspective of Malay capitalism. Compliment and criticism are based on this. For instance, the British colonial administration is complimented for setting up the Rural and Industrial Development Authority and for listening to the grievances of Malay capitalists: 'It is to the credit of the British that they sensed this feeling of frustration while others remained completely insensitive to it.' Whilst the rural Malays are censured for their alleged over-reliance on others, government patronage for Malay capitalists is advocated and applauded.

Mahathir sees an important and revolutionary principle in the setting up of RIDA. It introduces the concept of government patronage for Malay capitalism: 'This was something completely new in terms of Government policy. Government aid for (Malay) 148

MALA Y IDEAS ON DEVELOPMENT

business was quite unknown.' RIDA is considered significant for several reasons. Firstly, it introduces the element of obligation on the government to patronise Malay capitalism: 'It banished once and for all the idea that the Government has no obligation to help improve the lot of the Malays in business." Secondly, it symbolised the rejection of the dualistic philosophy which excluded Malays from the capitalist sector. In other words, RIDA meant recognition

and legitimacy for Malay capitalism: 'RIDA also impressed on the non-Malays, especially the Chinese, that neither the Malays nor the Government were going to accept as a matter of course the exclusion of the Malays from the commercial life of the country.'"' Turku and Mahathir see the struggle for independence from different historical perspectives. For Turku, it was a struggle to establish a nation modelled on the English monarchy and democracy. Mahathir sees it as a struggle of Malay against non~Malay capitalists. He writes: 'It is no exaggeration to say that it was the Malays who most wanted independence. They knew that a Government in which they had a greater say would be more liberal in aiding them in commerce as well as in other fields. The Chinese tycoons saw this as well. They saw the end of the days when they could have the exclusive rights to whatever the British chose to leave behind in the business field. They saw an end to the evasions and manipulations that had in the past made a mockery of every law to protect the Malays. They foresaw an invasion of their business empire."

Patronage and preferential treatment r The Malay capitalist millennium, however, failed to rnaterialise with Independence. Mahathir blames the frustration of Malay

capitalism during the first phase of Independence on Turku's leadership: ". . . the economic dilemma of the Malays still exists. It is there because for every step forward that the Malays make in the economic field other races make ten. It is there because other policies of the independent Government of Malaysia offset the policy towards helping the Malays.'~'° TL1nku's administration is blamed for not continuing the British policy of backing Malay capitalism officially: 'In the first place the Government started off on the wrong premise . . . It believed that the Chinese were only 144

In puts:dt

of a capitalistic rniffenniurn

interested in business and acquisition of wealth, and that the Malays wished only to become Government servants.52' The dilemma of Malay capitalists is keenly felt and syrnpathised with: 'It can be seen therefore, that although the Malays have managed to enter the economic field, they have never been able to, and can never hope to catch up with the Chinese. Even as Independence brought the Malays increased opportunities, it has brought the Chinese even greater opportunities which have propelled them so far ahead as to make the entry of the Malays into business almost ridiculously insignificant. The Malay economic dilemma is still unsolved and seems likely to remain so. The Malays' feeling of frustration continues to deepen. In The Malay Dilemma there is no rethinking or reflection on capitalism or liberalism as a development model. There is no grappling with the problem of social reconstruction, reforms or a development alternative. What is advocated is purely patronage for Malay capitalism: 'Malaysia is a democratic country which believes in free enterprise . . By and large a free enterprise system is self-sustaining and self-correcting. Still, Government interference is at times required to correct adverse trends and also to ensure that competition is not too destructive or one-sided.' The cause of Malay capitalism is then associated with the cause of nationalism and Malay sentiment: 'The Malays are as much as everyone else for a free enterprise system. But it is becoming more and more apparent

.

that the competition which should be between individuals and business groups has developed into a competition between racial

groups in which one group has an absolute advantage over the other. This can hardly he termed fair competition." Patronage for Malay capitalism is justified in terms of national stability and harmony. lt is a sine q z a non for peace and good race relations: 'In

Malaysia, however, the facts are seldom mentioned for fear of racial conflict- What is forgotten is that failure to face these facts can lead to the very conflict that everyone wants to avoid. Such argument reflects a somewhat incomplete understanding of the causes of friction, conflict and tension in society. Instead of raising more fundamental questions about the shortcomings and defects of capitalism and liberalism as development models, it believes that all

problems can be solved by helping one group of capitalists against others. I45

MALAY IDEAS O N DEVELOPMENT

Mahathir defends Malay capitalism against all criticisms. While he is harsh in his judgment of the 'indolent' rural Malays, Mahathir defends Malay capitalists even though they may be indolent. Take the following deface of the government policy to appoint Malay directors in non-Malay companies: 'Everyone knows that more often than not, these Malay directors have neither a single cent invested, nor probably have they the personal capacity to contribute to the all-important job of making profits for the company. Everyone knows that some of these Malays are merely selling their names and taking advantage of the policies of a government which wants to see a more equitable distribution of wealth. Everyone knows that this is not really what the Malays or anyone else want. But everyone also knows that there is no alternative if the Malays are to get acquainted with the nerve centres of big business rapidly, as they must, if the gap between them and the non-Malays is not to

he permanent' Malay directors are considered to be historically indispensable to the Malays, regardless of their personal qualities: 'Good or bad,

able or incapable, the presence of these Malays on the various boards means that they must at least become familiar with the ways of business. Most of them are not entirely stupid. They definitely have the capacity to learn, and evidence shows that most of them are now sufficiently conversant with business methods to be able to actually impart a lot of know-how to new ventures launched by Malays.' They are presented as champions of the Malays: '. . . their mere presence on the boards prevents the bias against the Malays in

general, and employing Malays in particular, from being as absolute as it was in the past.'24* It is argued that these capitalists function as the custodians of Malay wealth: 'Finally, by virtue of their status, these directors are in a position to acquire riches. At first this might seem grossly unfair. These few Malays . . . have waxed rich not because of themselves but because of the policy of a Government supported by a huge majority of poor Malays. It would seem that the efforts of the poor Malays have gone to enrich a select few of their own people. The poor Nlalays themselves have not gained one iota. But if these few Malays are not enriched the poor Malays will not gain either.'

Having rich Malays, it is argued, is important for Malay pride, 146

In pzf.rsuz'z

of a ¢:ap1fltaI:lsti(: mH£'@nnf'um

self-esteem and sense of accomplishment. Without them: 'It is the Chinese who will continue to live in huge houses and regard the Malays as only fit to drive their cars. With the existence of the few rich Malays at least the poor Malays can say that their fate is not entirely to serve the rich non-Malays. From the point of view of racial ego, and this ego is still strong, the unseemly existence of Malay tycoons is essential'. The fact that the resources, institutional backing and subsidies that had gone into creating Malay tycoons could have well been channeled into social reconstruction and reforms for the benefit of the poor Malays is overlooked. The same opinion is shown in the following glorification of Malay tycoons and their mission in history. They are presented as the source of Malay capital and the vanguard of Malay economic

upliftrnent: '. . . these rich Malays have become a source of capital and leadership in business, a status which the Malays previously lacked. Because of their position, these people can have access not only to the various business set-ups in this country, but also to

various Government departments whose officers were wont to turn up their noses at aspiring Malay businessmen." Malay capitalists are then identified as a key element in Malay nationalism; 'The money which they have acquired has become an asset to the Malays as a whole because by and large, these Malays do have a sense of obligation to their country arid their people.' It is argued that the success of government policy to boost Malay economy depends on them: 'Besides, in cases where the Government indicates that it intends to favour Malay enterprise, it is these wealthy Malays who

must be relied upon to contribute whatever capital and know-how that may be found among the Malay community. Without them the

new attitude of the Government towards Malay business would cone to nothing. The number of Malay business concerns resulting from Government policy and the new availability of Malay capital and know-how has resulted in a greater diffusion of wealth among the Malays.'" The fallacies in the above arguments are quite evident. Firstly, the Malay capitalists do not acquire their wealth and capital in a vacuum. They draw it from the rest of society. Their accumulation of wealth means a draining of resources and Capital from the rest of

society. On the ,whole, capitalistic ventures are heavily subsidised by society, such as in the construction of infrastructures. Therefore, 147

MALA Y IDEAS ON DEVEI.OP.;~l/IENT it is valid to question if it is not more the case that society is

subsidising and supporting capitalists rather than the other way round. This is particularly the case where the government officially backs capitalism. Secondly, it is more a case of the nationalist movement being used by Malay capitalists for their ends rather than Malay capitalists helping nationalism to achieve its own ideals. Thirdly, §§not so much that the success of government politics depends on the wealth of Malay capitalists as that the capitalists depend and benefit from government policies. Without government patronage, Malay capitalists would not be rich in the first place.

On behalf of Malay capitalists, Mahathir advocates a special kind of government policy. This is formulated in terms of capitalistic nationalism: Where necessary, laws must be promulgated in order to render effective whatever economic policy may be considered necessary. Harsh punitive measures should be meted out to those who impede the elevation of the Malays to an equality with the other laces. 516 The cause of the capitalists is thus compounded with 'Malay riationalismi This line of reasoning has dominated the thinking of the elite until today.

148

CONCL USION

Our focus has been the dominant values and ideas of development portrayed in the Malay records and expounded by prominent

Malay writers, thinkers and personalities. By 'dominant values and ideas of development', we do not mean only purely economic values and ideas. We included in that category non-economic values and ideas which nevertheless influence significantly the development of the Malays in the widest s of the word. In analysing the thoughts of those concerned, we enquired into the ideals and goals of development they set for Malays, by whi they measured the success and failure of the comnlunity. The va-l-ues and ideas they propagated indicate their understanding of the problems besetting Malay development.

one

co

In the first two chapters, we portrayed the values and ideas of the

Malays during the pre-colonial days, We can say that there were two systems of values co-existing- Gn the one hand, there were the

feudal values upheld by the ruling class, and on the other, we had a system of values based on Islam which represented the aspirations

of the Malays outside the court. Chapter One discusses some aspects of feudal values upheld by the Malaccan court as portrayed by the Sejarah Melrzyu. In our survey, we note that such a system of values emphasised wealth, grandeur, power, position and military might or prowess. The ethics of t ruling class Mere authoritarian in nature and emphasised social inequalitv- Society was hierarchic and rigid.

n

is

Central to that hierarchic -_ructure was the interplay between

patronage by superiors and the blind loyalty of subordinates. The 149

MAIQA Y IDEAS O N DEVELOFMEN'1`

attitude towards Islam was characterised by a preoccupation with

miracles, superstition and ritual. In Chapter Two, we portrayed a contrasting system of values and ideas enjoined by the Malays outside the feudal court as represented by the works of Abdullah bin Abdul KaClir Munshi, particularly his Kesah Pelayaran Abdullah- Abdullah based his

values and ideas on Islam. Among the negative values he rejected were traditionalism and superstition. He criticised the self~ complacency and narrowanindedness of the Malay nobles, as well as their refusal to learn from the outside world. He advocated learning and regretted what he saw as the lack of interest among the Malay nobles. He considered it a great loss that the nobles failed to encourage Ehe development of the Malay language, literature and meaningful religious learning among their people. In line with his Islamic tradition and values, Abdullah pointed out the importance o goodlcadership in society. He censured the nobles for failing to live up to the ideals of good leadership as enjoined by their religion Islam. Instead of being preoccupied with vice and unproductive activities, Abdullah suggested that the nobles should engage in useful or beneficial activities which would lead to the progress of the Malays. Abdullah noted that Malay feudal societies were generally backward due to the abuse of power by the nobles, social inequality, political and social disorder, vice and a state of general ignorance. In line with this analysis of Malay problems, he advocated values like social justice, social equality, respect for

individual rights and dignity, the rule of law, security for life and property, order and stability, and social education. He felt that only with such values could the Malays attain progress. In Chapter Three, we discussed the meeting between Malay feudalism and colonial capitalism as.a historical background to the future changes of values and ideas of development among the

Malays. It is suggested that although colonial capitalism did in many ways as it served government of conflict,

undermine the feudal structure, it did so only in so far its interests. Where it suited its interests, the colonial maintained and reinforced feudalism. Outside the area there was an area of mutual cooperation and a

balancing of interests between the traditional elite and colonial

capitalism. 150

Conclus:lot1

The traditional elite were primarily concerned with maintaining their power and status, while the colonial government wanted to facilitate and boost its capitalism. Both considered it necessary and desirable to keep the Malay peasants on theland in the traditional s rural economy, separated and isolated from capitalist L... urban sector of the economy. The Malay and colonial elite were aloof, elitist and not sympathetic to the problems and interests of the masses. The meeting and balancing of interests between the two

Z

- n - u - .

led to a kind of dualism, with the survival of many aspects of traditional Malay society on the one hand, and that of the colonial capitalist sector on the other.

Chapter Four discusses the influence of capitalism on prominent Malay writers and thinkers. For the purpose of analysis, I selected the works Uganda Islam dan Algal (Islam and Reason) by Seed Sheikh Alhady and Kemisleinmz Orang Malaya (Tls-e Poverty of' the Malays) and Perangai Bergarztung Kappa Dirt Sendai lTl9e Habit of Self-Reliance) by Z,a'ba. In Uganda Islam dan Anal, capitalistic values and ideas of development influence Syed Sheikh Alhady's interpretation of Islam. He emphasises a rational orientation towards life, the rationalisation of the economy, the idea of economic competition,

economic. individualism and the doctrine of a calling and worldly asceticism. In line with this, he criticises and rejects traditionalism, blind faith and other-worldly asceticism. In the type of capitalistic development he advocates, some positive values like discipline, frugality, a moderate lifestyle and honest work are emphasised. In Kemislzinan Orang relays, capitalism has influenced Za'ba in a different way. Where Syed Sheikh Alhady was influenced by some positive values and ideals of capitalism, Za'ba was influenced more by the prejudices and biases of colonial capitalism, which in turn coloured his Tudgment of the Malays, their problems, and his recommendations for their redress. As a consequence, Za'ba's views on Malay development are characterised by a somewhat negative and condescending attitude towards the masses. He resorts to the Darwinian idea of the survival of the fittest to explain the failures of the Malays and the success of the non-Maiays in the economy. He stereotypes the masses as completely tact