By Clive Kessler | Oct 22, 10 8:52am | Malaysiakini
The nature of the current disagreement about “the social contract” should be clearly identified.
Nobody is seriously suggesting that “the social contract” be repudiated, set aside, rejected. Nobody is arguing that it is fictive, a pure fantasy, an illusion. On all sides, everyone in their own way is arguing that it should be honoured, respected and upheld.
People just need to be clear, and find a way to agree, what its terms were, what “upholding the social contract” means and entails.
People are broadly agreed that in the years between 1955 and 1957 certain basic inter-ethnic or inter-communal understandings were reached. Through them a national “accord” was solemnly affirmed and politically “enshrined” that made the nation possible.
Known informally in earlier times as “the Merdeka agreements” or “Merdeka understandings”, these were subsequently, in the 1980s, relabelled, or as people now say “rebranded” with a new identity as “the social contract”.
Embodied within the constitution, these agreements – this national “accord” or inter-communal “compact” – became the foundation of Malayan, and later Malaysian, nationhood.
Within the current debates, people on both sides of this question broadly agree on this.
There is basic disagreement, however, about what those agreements were, what they provided, what their terms precisely specified.
In retrospect, different parties have construed them differently and have, at times, enlarged or “inflated” the import of those parts of the agreements, or their preferred notions of them, that they found congenial, that seemed to their sectional political liking.
There is now an urgent need for people on both, indeed all, sides of this question – and all Malaysians generally – to understand what exactly those agreements now designated as “the social contract” in fact were.
Malaysians need to reach a historically well-founded consensus concerning “the social contract”, what its terms were at the nation’s formative moment and in its founding experience, and what it means today and for the future. The coherence, strength and political sustainability of the nation require no less.
‘Ketuanan Melayu’ not part of the deal
It needs to be widely understood that, whatever they provided and mandated, “Ketuanan Melayu” was not part of what those agreements enshrined.
Any suggestion that Malay political domination in perpetuity, continuing Malay “ethnocratic” ascendancy over other Malayans (and now Malaysians), was any part of those foundational agreements now designated as “the social contract” is simply wrong.
Those who argue to the contrary that Ketuanan Melayu is a constitutionally guaranteed “foundational” component of Malaysia’s national sovereignty and international public identity are disingenuous, mischievous, or simply ill-informed.
The attempt to “read back” subsequent notions of Ketuanan Melayu into ideas of “the social contract” and in that way to embed them within newly fashioned but quite dubious views of the constitution is simply an exercise in anachronistic revisionism.
It is the duty of serious historians and legal scholars to say so.
CLIVE S KESSLER is emeritus professor of sociology and anthropology at the School of Social Science and International Studies at the University of New South Wales in Australia.
New “SOCIAL CONTRACT” on seat allocation?
Umno has called on the party to review the seat quota allocation among Barisan Nasional component parties to ensure the coalition’s victory in the next general election.
Its representative, Datuk Jalaluddin Alias said if Malay candidates were popular in constituencies previously allocated to the other parties, they should be fielded by Umno to ensure the BN’s victory.
“As trade-off, members of BN component parties could be appointed as ministers or deputy ministers by making them senators,” he said.
So mca, mic, gerakan ect can expect to be allocated less seats. Their candidates should now join PR where they can have a chance to contest to really serve the people.
“Those who argue to the contrary that Ketuanan Melayu is a constitutionally guaranteed “foundational” component of Malaysia’s national sovereignty and international public identity are disingenuous, mischievous, or simply ill-informed.” -CK.
I doubt it. I doubt whether people like Mahathir, Ibrahim Ali, Redhuan Tee, Awang Selamat, Muhyiddin, 2 racist principles, BTN, Utusan, Perkasa, UMNO understand what you are talking about. They will turn around and argue that you are the one who’s disingenuous, mischievous and misinformed. As long as we have these people around and in control, we still have a long way to go in moving forward.
Pardon my ignorance, can someone tell me where I could get a copy of the ” Social Contract ” that we are all talking about. Also can anyone show me where in our constitution does it states that Malays are must have 30% of the economic pie? I just could not find it. Please help.
No, I am not questioning it. Thats another issue. I just cannot find it stated in our constitution.
It is time for MCA and MIC to pull out and help PR to win the next GE and to save the country from its imminent downfall, and becoming bankrupt in 2019.
If you truly love the country … “THINK POSITIVE”
If you truly love the country … “THINK PR”
If you truly hate the country … “THINK BN”
#3 //can someone tell me where I could get a copy of the “Social Contract” //
You have to wait until cintanegara finishes writing it. He is now busy writing it under his rambutan tree. Then only will he backdate it to the year 1957.
“let no one ever raise the ‘perlembagaan issue’ again” ( DPM )
Wow, it’s ok for him to raise the issue but not ok for others !
What kind of logic is this? Then again, politicians are known for having loose screws.
Just looking at his face make me want to throw out. That’s why I seldom watch tv while having my meal…
///Nobody is seriously suggesting that “the social contract” be repudiated, set aside, rejected. Nobody is arguing that it is fictive, a pure fantasy, an illusion. On all sides, everyone in their own way is arguing that it should be honoured, respected and upheld.///– Clive kessler
It should be honoured, the original contract that is. Let us read the most important paragraph of the report of Reid Commission. It reads: {Although Tunku Abdul Rahman and the Malay rulers had asked the Reid Commission to ensure that “in an independent Malaya all nationals should be accorded equal rights, privileges and opportunities and there must not be discrimination on grounds of race and creed,” the Malay privileges, which many in the ruling United Malays National Organisation backed, were cited as necessary by the Reid Commission as a form of affirmative action that would eventually be phased out.}
Two important facts should be noticed. Firstly, the Rulers and UMNO leaders at that time wanted “in an independent Malaya all nationals should be accorded equal rights, privileges and opportunities and there must not be discrimination on grounds of race and creed”. The Rulers and UMNO leaders did not think about or wanted ketuanan Melayu. Secondly, Reid Commission decided that the Malays should be placed into a special position but that should eventually phase out. Indeed as an indication that the special position was based on needs, the original pre-1971 constitution provided that Article 153 was subject to review after 15 years. That was why the special position extended to the natives of Sabah and Sarawak on the formation of Malaysia in 1963 was subject to review after 10 years, from 1963. That would tie in with the review of the position of Malays in Peninsular Malaysia, a few months’ extension for Malays in the Peninsular.
But then Razak had to camouflage the coup d’etat as jealousy of Malays against others and he chose to make article 153 permanent and any change to it subject to decision by the conference of Rulers. Had Razak lived to 1990 NEP might have been removed if we expect him not to go against his own words. But judging by his son’s records; who knows? What is certain is that if Razak was not around in 1969, there would not be May 13. Even if there was, Mamakthir would not have been able to make a come back to haunt the nation.
/// Rafizi said it was the first time he had heard of a government endorsing a two-generation loan, adding that it has never happened in the USA, Europe or even in the South East Asian region. ///
This is nothing new in Malaysia. Remember the “social contract” that was verbal and unprovable? Even if there was a social contrade, a trade off giving first generation non-Malay Malaysians citizenship and Malays’ special rights – shouldn’t this be restricted to the first generation? Subsequent generations are Malaysian born of Malaysian parents – what trade off do these 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, umpteenth generation non-Malays get from the Malays?
The mortgage has already been paid in full by the first generation. Or is this a perpetual mortgage – not just a 2-generation mortgage?
Ketuanan c.ck is what they mean to rob as their profession knowing that it is against their religion belief but pretend to be tuans dan puans and yet to beg for handouts from non-malays-immoral and really stinky mentality of humankind.Tuans and puans should set highest examples of moral and dignity as they claimed they are but unfortunately in this bolehland,actually semua bagus tak boleh kecuali bodoh,no-class ect semua boleh.Hip Hip hurah!
ANTS and GRASSHOPPERS
Universally accepted version
An ant worked hard in the sweltering heat all summer, building its nest and laying up supplies for the winter.
A grasshopper thought the ant was stupid not knowing how to enjoy life. It spent its days laughing, singing and dancing under a rambutan tree thoroughly enjoying the summer.
Came winter, the ant was warm, comfortable and had no shortage of food.
The grasshopper had no proper shelter, no stored food, and couldn’t find anything to eat from the snow-covered ground. So it died and the story ended.
MORAL of the story: Be responsible for yourself!
ANTS and GRASSHOPPERS (continued)
UmnoB version
An ant worked hard in the sweltering heat all summer, building its nest and laying up supplies for the winter.
A grasshopper thought the ant was stupid not knowing how to enjoy life. It spent its days laughing, singing and dancing under a rambutan tree thoroughly enjoying the summer.
Came winter, the shivering grasshopper called a press conference and demanded to know why the ant should be warm and well fed while he was cold and starving.
Utusan, TV1, TV2 & TV3 showed up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper alongside to a video clip of the ant in his comfortable home with a table full of food.
The majority of the Malaysian parliamentarians were stunned by the sharp contrast. How could this poor grasshopper be allowed to suffer?
Khairy n Rice staged a demonstration in front of the ant’s nest.
Moo, MMK, n BRAhim went on a hunger strike along with other grasshoppers demanding that they be relocated to warmer climate area during winter.
The govment (UmnoB, MCA, Gerakan, MIC, PBS, etc + Perkosa + so-called independent toads) immediately passed a law forbidding all ants from working hard in the summer so as to bring about equality of poverty between ants and grasshoppers.
Kerishamudin increased ‘More Special Reservations’ for grasshoppers in educational institutions & in govment services….
The ant was fined for failing to share 30% of his food with the grasshopper. The Pee Em announced that this was part of the NEP. No ant should question it. (Don’t forget, Tax Audits were introduced and targeted at certain individuals who were eventually penalised heavily for not contributing enough to the well-being of the grasshoppers).
Many years later…
Some ants migrated to the US, Australia, China, India and set up multi-billion dollar companies there.
Hundreds of grasshoppers still died of starvation despite the ‘More Special Reservations’.
Losing significant number of hard working ants and free loading the grasshoppers, Malaysia remained a developing country, about to bankrupt, despite its abundant natural resources.
All because the remaining ants were still doing their work………………………..
Latest finding showed that almost all the grasshoppers in the political arena and civil service were hoarding corrupt wealth which they refused to share with fellow grasshoppers.
MORAL OF THE STORY: Be careful how you vote in the next GE which may be held in 2011
Even though the constitution provides for support to grasshoppers, now UMNO has turned the grasshoppers to refer to their members. They are also inclusive in allowing grasshoppers of mixed bloods to be called bumi grasshoppers and they carve out the lion shares to be fought among themselves. Other grasshoppers, may be of the pure breed, are allowed to have unfair advantage over the ants. They cherish those advantage since being hard-ups, those little crump make them forget their religious belief of equality among human beings. The club-grasshoppers never forget to brainwash the ordinary grasshoppers that for the pride of the grasshoppers union, they have to ensure that the club remains in power, and that it would be better off for grasshoppers if the ants are not around.
we only have So-sial contract from mamak. it doesn’t exist in writing but only verbal. it is called so-sial mamak contract. it can be amended anytime when mamak feels like it. from time to time he can conveniently forgot about what is verbally said and have it twisted.
this so-sial mamak con-tract is making malaysial.
UMNO 46 represented Malays. New UMNO or UMNO Bahru of 1989 represents NEWMalays. NEWMalays include mixed-bloods of all types. Hishamuddin said at the just concluded UMNO GA that UMNO was inclusive to accept not true Malays as Malays. He called out the names of those who had mixed blood. So the Turkish Najib and Hishamuddin, Mamak Zambry and Mamak Wanita Chief, the Lanun vice President, the Bugis-Javanes Muhyiddin are NEWMalay leaders for NEW-UMNO. So the true Malays really have a dilemma. The number of Malays increases with the wannabes, and it helps in voting. These wannabes not only dilute the share of benefits and assistance that should have been directed to true Malays they hijacked the ‘privilege’ to loot and blame it on the true Malays that they were placed in the special position because they were weak. Mamakthir recently said that there is nothing to be ashamed off to be looked at as weak. That differs markedly from what the late Tun Ismail thought about the pride of Malay race. Obviously race is personal to holder. The NEWMalays are happy to be included in the Malay club to enjoy the special position without the cost of feeling small, since the indignity is born by true Malays.
Hishmuddin was happy to declare that he is different from the ordinary Malays, blood relation wise. He is announcing that Malays may be weak, but as NEWMalays he is not. By announcing the names of the NEWMalays, he has succeeded in telling everyone that he does not belong to the weak and yet he enjoys the benefits meant for Malays. Now ordinary Malays have no means of forsaking the image that they are crutch bound because those who do not bear the stigma are enjoying the perks. Poor Malays, the true and genuine one, we pity you. But as Hishamuddin has converted the definition of Malays in the constitution to UMNO members, for Malays to reclaim their dignity, they have to get UMNO defeated.
No where in the constitution is a provision made to make any community rich. The 30% share ownerships target is for the rich. Ask non-Malays how many among them own shares. Ask too the questions to Malays. Those who own up to 30% of the company are rich. There are many Malays who own up to 30% of an entire company. But the government wants these Malays to own more companies. Would ordinary Malays go to May 13 incident again just to make a few Malays own more companies? NEWMalays thought that since the larger number of Malays, the genuine one were fooled to support UMNO; they would go all the way to respond to UMNO call for a repeat of May 13. The greedy people always have high hopes.
UmnoB Malays owned >30% of d national economic pie over d years
They owned d >30% wealth, sold them 4 hugh profits, owned again, sold again, they kept recycling d various wealth instruments
Then they kept saying no, no, not yet, n they wanted more, Never Ending Parasitism
//Nobody is seriously suggesting that “the social contract” be repudiated, set aside, rejected.//
I guess I am not this ‘nobody’ person. I am seriously questioning this social contract. Where is this contract? Can anyone give me a copy of this contract. And who signed this contract on behalf of my family? If that even legal.
Don’t the Malays have any obligations to the country and non-malays. I want to renegotiate this ‘imaginary’ contract.