By Fazly M. Fauzy | June 01, 2011
The Malaysian Insider
JUNE 1 — The New Economic Policy has often been described as biased to Bumiputeras in terms of education and economic rights given to them under the policy. Critics of the NEP believe that it is crippling Malaysia by rewarding those who they feel to be “undeserving” of these rights because it is not based on merit but instead on their preferential status as Bumiputeras.
I would contend, however, that while meritocracy is a noble ideal in that it rewards those who have truly earned their due but at the same time, it also unfairly undermines those who they have deemed unworthy due to their perceived lack of merit.
This hypothesis that I’m presenting is not something that is radical or new but in fact has been discussed quite extensively in many articles, books and journals. My goal here then is to highlight to those who would suggest that we abolish the NEP in favour of a meritocracy; that in a meritocracy only those who are in position to succeed will always win while those unfortunate will always be left behind and this I feel is an injustice.
The NEP which is essentially an affirmative action policy was initiated in 1970 in order to bridge the wealth gap between the then predominantly rural Malay population and the urban Chinese population. The NEP did succeed in uplifting the economic position of the Malays as evident in the increase in the number of registered Malay professionals and the emergence of the Malay middle-class between 1970 and 1990. While the NEP did succeed in alleviating the status of the Malays by reducing poverty and increasing their earning power, the wealth gap amongst the Malays themselves began to widen.
This paradox was raised by A.H. Roslan, an Associate Professor of Economics at the Universiti Utara Malaysia. In his paper, “Income Inequality, Poverty and Development Policy in Malaysia” (http://mimbarselangor.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Income-Inequality-Poverty-and-Development-Policy.pdf), Roslan mentions that, “the success of the NEP has resulted in the Malays to become no longer economically homogeneous as before.
There has now emerged for example, a Malay urban working class, a Malay middle (professional) class and also a Malay business (capitalist) class.” Roslan further adds that, “the ethnicity-oriented policy in essence becomes incoherent” because, “for the policy to be coherent there must be a coherence of interests among its members. This implies that the Malays must not be deeply divided — be it socially economically or politically.”
So, if the NEP is no longer coherent because the Malays are no longer homogenous economically, does this mean that it is also irrelevant? To answer this question we now need to address this issue of meritocracy.
The definition of meritocracy in the Merriam-Webster dictionary is: “a system in which the talented are chosen and moved ahead on the basis of their achievement.” It is interesting to note, however, that the term meritocracy which was coined by British sociologist, social activist and politician, Michael Young in his 1958 essay, “The Rise of the Meritocracy: 1870-2033: An Essay on Education and Equality” was not meant to have such a positive connotation.
Young’s intention in this satirical commentary that portrayed a 21st century Britain that put extreme emphasis on one’s intelligence as the marker of success, was to warn that a society that aggressively promotes achievement will result social inequity.
In an article published in the Guardian on 29 Jun 2001 entitled, “Down with Meritocracy” (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2001/jun/29/comment) Young had said that, “It is good sense to appoint individual people to jobs on their merit. It is the opposite when those who are judged to have merit of a particular kind harden into a new social class without room in it for others.” With this statement in mind we can now explore if Young’s assertions can be applied to Malaysian society.
Even after 40 years since the inception of the NEP economic disparities still exists amongst the Malays, Indians, Chinese and other ethnic minorities. According to the “The Report: Malaysia 2010” by the Oxford Business Group, between 2004 to 2009, the mean monthly gross household income for Bumiputeras increased by 5.6 per cent from RM2711 to RM3624.
For the Chinese the increase was at 2.5 per cent from RM4437 to RM5011 and for the Indians it was 3 per cent from RM3456 to RM3999. It is also stated in the paper, “Ethnic Heterogeneity in the Malaysian Economy: A Special Reference to the Ethnic Group Participation in Financial Planning Activities” published in the Journal of International Social Research. (http://www.sosyalarastirmalar.com/cilt2/sayi8pdf/shafii_norhasni_ahmad.pdf)
In 2005, the Chinese own nearly 70 per cent of the business complex in Malaysia reflecting the Chinese control over the business establishments around the country. This is regardless of the percentage of Chinese population of around 30 per cent, according to the latest statistics on population described earlier in the article.
The trends persist for other types of commercial buildings and premises. The Chinese, on average own 71.9 per cent of commercial buildings and premises. In comparison, only nearly 12 per cent of them owned by the Bumiputeras regardless of about 60 per cent of the population consist of the Bumiputeras.
The same phenomenon can also be observed to the trends of commercial buildings and premises by the Indians. On average, only 1.5 per cent of them are owned by the Indians although the Indians form eight per cent from the total population.
This implies that in terms of capital owned and wages earned the Chinese are still outpacing not just the Malays but also the Indians and other ethnic minorities. This higher comparative wealth also means that the Chinese can afford a better quality of living in terms of education and housing.
We can attribute the economic success of the Chinese to their business acumen and emphasis on education and hard work but at the same time is it okay to dismiss the Malays as lazy and stupid for not being able to compete?
Since we Malaysians are football fanatics let me try to use the EPL as an example to demonstrate that the bottom team’s failure to rise up the ranks is not due to their lack of endeavour but due to the unfavourable odds that have been stacked against them from the beginning.
It’s no secret that the top teams in the EPL are also the wealthiest in the league. Teams like Manchester United, Chelsea, Arsenal and Manchester City are able to draw in more revenue because they can collect more ticket sales from their larger capacity stadiums compared to the mid-table and lower rung teams. The popularity of these clubs also means that they can attract much more lucrative sponsorship deals and are able to leverage on their merchandising too.
These teams are then able to reinvest their earnings to buy better quality players, hire the best coaching staff and provide much more sophisticated training facilities to continue cementing their position at the top.
Now what about the teams that season after season continue to languish in the mid-table or are fighting for relegation like Everton, Wolves and Blackpool? Are they where they are in the table because they are not as competitive as the teams at the top?
From watching the games we can honestly say that whether you’re at the bottom or the top, the players are out there playing to win. The difference is the top teams are be able to attract the best players like Rooney, Torres and Tevez because they can meet their wage demands but the Evertons, Wolves and Blackpools of this world can’t afford such luxuries.
What this tells us is that teams like Manchester United are successful not just because they play the best football but also because they have the financial resources to keep them at the top. The inability of the mid-table teams to break into the top tier also cannot be blamed on their lack of trying. They train just as hard and play just as hard but at the end of the day the gulf in quality (that money can buy) will continue to assert the status quo.
This, in a nutshell, is the problem with meritocracy. A meritocracy will inevitably result in social stratification. The “haves” will continue to dominate the “have-nots” and regardless of how much the “have-nots” tries to catch-up the gap will just grow wider and wider. We don’t have to look very far to see consequences of a meritocratic society than our neighbour in the south, Singapore.
Singapore has often prided itself for being a wholly meritocratic state, but at what cost? In the book, “The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger”, by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Picket, Singapore, in terms of income gap between the richest 20 per cent and poorest 20 per cent, was ranked first amongst the 23 rich nations surveyed. These rich nations included the US, UK, Australia, Germany and Japan to name a few.
This issue of income inequality was also raised by Kenneth Paul Tan, an Associate Professor at the National University of Singapore. Tan had written a paper in the International Political Science Review entitled, “Meritocracy and Elitism in a Global City: Ideological Shifts in Singapore “ (http://www.slideshare.net/motochan/meritocracy-and-elitism-in-a-global-city-ideological-shifts-in-singapore) and in it alluded to the fact that, “To ordinary Singaporeans, the widening income gap and the conspicuous lifestyles of wealthy and elite Singaporeans as well as the expatriate class of “foreign talent” are making equality of opportunity seem like a naive expectation that can no longer advance beyond mere platitude.”
The inherent problem with meritocracy is that ignores the fact that not everyone is on equal footing. As Tan also mentions in the same paper cited above,
Meritocracy, in trying to “isolate” merit by treating people with fundamentally unequal backgrounds as superficially the same, can be a practice that ignores and even conceals the real advantages and disadvantages that are unevenly distributed to different segments of an inherently unequal society, a practice that in fact perpetuates this fundamental inequality.
In this way, those who are picked by meritocracy as having merit may already have enjoyed unfair advantages from the very beginning, ignored according to the principle of non-discrimination.
This is the point that needs to be remembered by those who would advocate for a meritocratic Malaysia. We can’t ignore the fact that there still exist economic disparities across racial lines and a corrective mechanism is required to reduce this disparity. So to answer my earlier question, is the NEP still relevant despite the fact that the Malays are no longer homogeneous economically? My answer is yes, but with a few qualifications.
To start we need to go back to the original objective of the NEP that is to eradicate poverty amongst all races and remove the identification of race from economic functions. We must remove the association of the NEP with it being a Bumiputera policy. The most crucial part, however, is to ensure that only those who qualify, i.e. those who can’t afford to pay for the education of their children should be able to get scholarships and financial assistance.
With regards to the Bumiputera discount for properties, we can apply an income cap in order to qualify for the discount and open the discount to all Malaysians. The bottom line is we should maintain the NEP but with stricter requirements and enforcement so that those who can afford it shouldn’t benefit from it.
It should also be noted that some concessions have already been made with regards to Bumiputera equity quotas in IPOs.
Whereby a 30 per cent Bumiputera equity stake was required for listing before, today in the event that the 30 per cent allocation is not fully subscribed the company will still be eligible for listing. Also the My First Home scheme that was recently launched is also a step in the right direction to assist first time house-buyers in purchasing a home and this scheme is open to all not just Bumiputeras.
It will take time before we can reach the goals set in the NEP but steps have been taken to diminish the need for affirmative action but until then we must not let this issue divide us.
We need to instil empathy within our multiracial community so that we can help each other to become better rakyat. We should not prey on the weaknesses of others to bring them down but instead help to uplift them.
If the Malays for example lack in business or entrepreneurial skills, why can’t the Chinese businessmen help them to become better? Why not share with each other so that we can grow together? The same applies to the Malays professionals. Impart the knowledge and experience that you have learnt to train the next generation of Malay professionals.
I would like to conclude with a hadith from “The Book of Muslim Moral and Manners” by Imam Bukhari. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) had said that: “A believer will not eat his fill while his neighbour is hungry.” This is the message that we need to carry with us. We must be mindful of the predicaments of others around us and not be too engrossed with our own needs.
NEP only helps Malays because of race. It is not fair to use government funds contributed by all races to help only one race, even if it is properly carried out. It shows that Malays are superior to other races, when NEP is government policies.
NEP was meant to be for 20 years starting from 1970. The people then hoped that inequality would disappear after the 20-years period ends. But it is not to be. The powers-that-be have found new use in NEP; NEP helps them to become filthy rich, in the name of giving pride to the race, by squandering away government funds, and by playing God in distributing private wealth, such as the 30% equity requirement.
Meritocracy is not the alternative to NEP. The alternative to NEP is justice. Surprisingly the powers-that-be gave the impression that they are God fearing and religious, at least they appear regularly in the house of worship, yet they would not follow the religious teaching to be just, and not to discriminate against others based on race and religion.
NEP is the excuse for government to manipulate the vote banks what other democracies would not be allowed legally to do so. In fact NEP is not even included in the constitution. It is just the rule of those who have political muscle. In any case law means little to the present government. If sodomy is a crime and the government wishes to stop sodomy can we believe that over the past ten years only one person is charged, and twice at that. BN practises rule by law for others, and rule as it pleases without legal basis. Price differential for any commodity based on race is illegal, yet the government dictates that house prices for Bumi should be at a discount. It means non-Malay house purchasers pay more to the developers so that the latter could afford to offer discount. That is robbing one to pay another, sanctioned by BN government. That NEP made non-Malays suffer 7% more in their monthly housing mortgage, for 30 years. Thus NEP affects every non-Malays.
…even with 30% headstart in the EPL league, the NEP football team will be last at the end of the season.
so what next? Give 60% headstart? please la. take the bitter pills so that you can recover. Not sweet medicine and then have cavities later.
A very good debater by all means but his logic is flawed in many places. The writer pre-supposes that its possible to design a system where there is no unfortunate group. Its simply impossible. Life on earth is darwinian, its not possible.
That said, its not really the goal of systems to create equality. You want inequalities even constantly because its what drives endeavour and effort. The idea there is a stated bliss of equality is bumkum. What you really want to do is prevent marginalisation i.e., that no groups does not have a chance or shot at getting into the game NOT ensure equality at all.
The goal of affirmative action WAS never really equality. Its suppose to avoid marginalisation so that the different players are still in the game and will endeavour a different game to push us ALL forward.
Another thing. NEP is NOT affirmative action. It no longer is. Its legal discrimination bent on equality, a goal never possible with no amount of govt help. Like it or not natural selection will prevail no matter what we do.
Is there a place for affirmative action by social class? That is socialism – a policy already proven to be failed but these days, there is argument that building social safety nets has some merit to ensure we don’t lose diversity.
Yes, the EPL teams with the most money seems to be always on top for a long time. But who says its unfair? Who says the glory of being on top for such a long time is not an incentive for great innovation and ideas? I suggest he read the history of Brian Clough. Look what happening in Europe with Spanish Teams now bigger than England teams.
Like it or not, the fact is the NEP can never succeed. There simply is no govt system that can create equality. The laws of natural selection prevails, what the govt got to do is not allow it to prevent any group from moving forward – ultimately each group must do it on their own power, own their own merit – that is the reason for meritocracy. Its unavoidable..
Manchester United was relegated to lower division in 1974 and spend few sessions fighting the relegation zone before achieving success. MU don’t need the NEP tongkat or the 30% headstart in the EPL, only the best will win mentality. Please don’t insult the teams in the EPL by comparing them with NEP. They have the fighting spirit and the sear determination to win but not the UMNO’s Malay.
I think the writer has missed the whole point. I think no right minded Malaysian has thought ill of NEP and its noble objectives. It is the abuse of NEP that has been the point of contention of so many today. NEP, like so many other public policies, can not and should not help people so that they are super rich. NEP and public policies should only help those so that they are less poor and in time can break the cycle of poverty. Please look at the major abuses and major drains of resources of NEP. They are mainly confined to programmes and projects that aimed at making Malay millionaires. Seriously programmes and projects aimed alleviating poverty and providing fairer opportunity are very minimal and are well within the financial ability of the government to provide. Look at the abuses (and wastages) of major Ali Baba contracts, special share allocations for bumi, the grants to GLCS, the abuse of subsidies and compare these with scholarships for bumi, rural development and PNB (ASB and ASN etc) shares for ordinary bumi and you will know what I mean.
If the Malays for example lack in business or entrepreneurial skills, why can’t the Chinese businessmen help them to become better? Why not share with each other so that we can grow together?// the writer
This kind of talk is meaningless and I have heard it since young and now growing old. Look, the vibrancy of businesses and enterprises are very much dependent on the environment and the public sector has a major role to play to determine such an environment. Look at Malaysia today, who are those in the administration of justice, security, licensing, public infrastructure/amenities, public health, public cleanliness, environment, management of natural resources, human resources development, and to a great extent banking and finance? If all these are poorly planned and managed, how can our economy be thriving and competitive? Why can’t we allow more of these positions be filled by people of ability rather than just based on race alone. Ultimately, it is who can create more value that matters. We can all try to protect our turf but ultimately we shall all become poorer. I think the sooner the free “lunchers” see it, the better. I am not being greedy for saying all these. I too hate the dominance of any one race, but we should at least allow people of ability to create value faster for the prosperity of all.
/// that in a meritocracy only those who are in position to succeed will always win while those unfortunate will always be left behind and this I feel is an injustice. ///
What a topsy-turvy world we live in. By all means help those who are left behind – be they Malays, Chinese, Indians or Martians. You don’t need NEP to do this.
So, you feel it is justice to let those to let Malays with average results get the scholarships, while non-Malays with straight As are denied scholarships?
That incompetent Malays are promoted above non-Malays because of their race – is this your sense of justice?
I can go on and on, but you get the drift…..
Yes, meritocracy will result in income gap widening. What is your solution – let’s go the communist way? Equal misery?
Rich country will get richer and poor country will get poorer. What to do? Tell the rich country to stop being rich so that Malaysia can catch up? Or, better still, impose the NEP on the world and ask the rich countries to give 30% of their wealth to Malays?
Team Malaysia was for a long time an average Third Division team in the football league. Then came Manager Mamakthir, who thought that he could bring Team Malaysia into the premier division. The first thing he did was to buy all sorts of players in a hurry. He paid 50 million for average players like Proton simply because the agent for Proton was a crony of Manager Mamakthir. Manager Mamakthir also moved into a brand new stadium, built at inflated cost by one of his cronies. He forced sponsorship of the team and stadium through contracts with people like MAS, Telekom and others.
Mediocre players like Proton and Perodua were paid a bomb, and you could tell the lavish lifestyle that these players lived – helipads and private jets. Of course the performance on the pitch was mediocre, and soon the crowds thinned, and Manager Mamakthir was forced to give free tickets to civil servants and students to give the whole league the impression that support for Team Malaysia was still intact.
Soon Team Malaysia plunged from the Third Dvision to the Fifth Division, and Manager Mamakthir blamed it on the new ball, biased referees and linesmen and even the non-Malay waterboys for the demise of Team Malaysia. Everyone was at fault but not the Manager.
One by one, the sponsors abandoned Team Malaysia as it was not sustainable. Manager Mamakthir retired and in came Manager Najib who appears to be clueless as to how to bring Team Malaysia back to the Third Division. While the old Manager Mamakthir continued to prescribe his solutions in the local papers, Manager Najib came up with a whole slew of acronyms to confuse the supporters and the players alike. NKRA, KPI, NEAC, DODO are now chanted at every Team Malaysia game.
Bravo!bravo!The best only can bring out the best for the nation.It’s the same with a family:if you spent too much times and monies on one particular child over the others,the effect from your doing will serve your wrong purpose-resulting from your wastefull resourses to preserve your family(nation) wellfare.NEP is the long curse destroyer to this nation.Tak nak!
It is interesting that the writer chooses to use the English League as an illustration. He mentioned of the unfair advantage of Chelsea, Liverpool and Manchester United by virtue of their standing in the forefront because the English League embraces meritocracy. He only analyses half of the scenario. He should have extended a scenario where Chelsea, Liverpool and Manchester United are barred from playing in the first division. Since Evertons, Wolves and Blackpools are the weaker teams they should be given preference to play in the first division. Before the start of any game played by Evertons, Wolves and Blackpools they should be given a 3 goal advantage against any team, local or foreign. No timetable is to be given when Evertons, Wolves and Blackpools will stay in the first division and when this 3 goal advantage will be withdrawn to make it a level playing field. This scenario would be closer to the Malaysian scenario. From there on, the writer should analyze how this would impact football in England and whether he would still be interested to watch football at all in England.
well written article but I am not convinced
he did not quote his source that states Chinese owns 79.1 % of business premises. Is that a figure out of the blue? how creditable is that? what is his intention quoting such unsubstantiated numbers/
If the premises include small shoplots in Batu Pahat and Seremban compared to the gargantuan Menara KLCC, Menara Tabung Haji etc then I am not sure if the relative value of the property holding is really 70.1% Chinese.
By the way Everton finished aroud 7th in the BPL and appeared as FA Cup Finalist last year, they are not relegation candidates. As recent as 6 years ago they were in European Champions league.
He still longs for the continuation and strengthening of NEP. I have a new deal – NEP target groups must understand that the poorer you are, whether materially, skills and knowledge wise, the harder you work.
Many rich people on merit earned their fortune via hard work and or luck gained through hard work.
NEP has created a target group of seeking the easy way out and developed entrenched unhealthy work culture and ethics.
After 40 years of NEP, do we see a healthy, competitive and resilient work culture being developed? The basic flaw in the design and implementation of NEP is that it stress onhanding outs, not giving hard love to ensure the target group values hardwork, sacrifice, persistence etc
Frankly if I know I am weak, the only way is to redouble my effort, not blaming everyone else but myself
it is too late to change the mentality of the target group. It needs 2 generation of deprivation and hard training to mould the target group into one that values own initiative and achievement over handouts and rent seeking
I would like to relate a small incident regarding the issue: Why can’t the Chinese help Malays in business? There was this Chinese who wanted to get certain type of Gomen project which required at least 30% Bumi participation. Having observed Ali to be rather diligent, he gave 30% of his equity to Ali. the business grew reasonably comfortable. Eventually, he decided to go overseas to stay with his son; so he told Ali that he [Ali] should now control 70% of the business since he was no actively involved. It was agreed. Over the years, as he grew much older, he told Ali that he [Ali] should take over 100% as he had been away so often. Ali refused saying that since he had helped him in the past, his partner should continue to enjoy the 30%. This was a real incident; though man by nature would not generally behave in such manner. Here if both parties appreciated the real relationship between them, they had acted rationally. In the above general scenario, we have a central leadership enforcing a general system across the board and this was done in a lop-sided manner without giving any quarter; hence every party will feel agrieved especially when the poor gets porer while the elites richer. It wasn’t the policy per se that makes many Malaysians rejecting the NEP but the way it was implemented; serving the interests of a small minority! That was the issue. Had corruption not being the curse of this nation, the NEP wouldn’t look so ugly! the wanton way corruption has crept into the society is the main cause of all these frustrations!
You actually miss the point by say meritocracy is the cause of our everyday life! I would agree that meritocracy tampered with a good deal of socialism would be a better solution. Singapore may have caused some disappointment in applying its policy of meritocracy but it is still better than hundreds of other nations around the world!!!
In the era of globalization, this NEP shit just don’t cut it anymore. If you are a self-relying economy, you can do whatever shit to your own country’s policy and no want cares.
The NEP and issue of meritrocracy often look upon as indicators for foreign investment to invest in a country. Numbers show that FDI drop year over year for the last 10 years. Why? The answer is Malaysia is no longer attractive to them. If they are looking at FDI, there are other cheaper countries around us to invest into.
The country need to transform into the next phase. However NEP is often the obstacle into us transforming into the next phase. Take English language for Science and Math, it is a positive step to enhance our attractiveness and generation of local talents that are ready for the globalized world. But the Govt often contradict themselves and put on a reverse gear.
In the wide wide world out there, there’s only probably 3-4 countries that can use Bahasa. Why? Well, because to level the playing field with other races.
NEP will just slow progress. Why work that hard if things can be given to you? For non-Bumi, why going all the trouble of making your firm public and giving a large cut to Bumi directors who know nothing about your business BUT just because they are Bumi.
This is bad and this can’t go on any longer. How long more can you do this NEP shit. This is quite obvious a bad idea for any educated people. For the bumi majority with affirmative action, life is good, let’s continue with this NEP thing.
On the subject of economic pies, the study didn’t account for the billions and billions dollars moved out of the country during the past 15-20 years.
I think I should elaborate.
Firstly, the biggest argument against meritocracy here is the EPL example. ITS THE WRONG ANALOGY. The teams are not groups they are institutions. Its like saying you don’t want companies that keep growing for a long time. You want shareholders to change or the employees to change but you really don’t want to artificially change companies – its anti-competitive.
Even if you want to change the corporate landscape, the answer is NOT to say M.U cannot play in part of the league, or artificially handicap M.U. so that the selected teams rises (i.e.) The answer is to give access to the other teams the same great players and the same size markets. Its not NEP, its anti-discrimination, not a pro-discrimination system.
Just because the NEP worked to prevent marginalisation, the leap of logic that it will bring equality is nonsense. There is NO evidence to suggest it can. The factors to lead to competitive equality for an entire group IS entirely different. The Singapore example ONLY reinforces the fact is that the nation may be equal to others, and the elites may be equal to others BUT much of Singaporean are not equal to others EVEN when they have a competitive system. Govt intent fails unsurprisingly very often. If the Singapore system cannot bring equality to many Singaporean, our system is guaranteed to fail. The laws of natural selection prevails with the most brilliant of human endeavour.
No one in Malaysia is advocating a complete darwinian system. We are all advocating a dynamic one but it cannot come without recognising that there are winners and losers in building a dynamic one. What we want is to maintain diversity, to make sure that groups keep playing the game even if they lose i.e., prevent total marginalisation. But to built competitiveness for any group, we have to bend to the laws of merit i.e., the laws of natural selection.
This is a very complicated article.
Since the writer wrote about the Big 4 in EPL, he forgot to look into the full historical trend of the Big 4.
Let us just take one team as an example. Manchester United (Man U). Please bear in mind, when Ferguson became the coach of Man U in late 80s last century, he took over a very weak team. In fact the team was nearly sold away with merely a few hundred thousand pounds. But with his strong leadership, hard work, good strategy, outstanding team management skills, he created an outstanding Man U team. Only after he achieved outstanding results, the team became wealthier and become what you see today.
The moral of the story is that you need to work hard, dedication to get where you want to be.
Not daddy kasi or Tongkat policy. It will never work!
hi Fauzy….football is famous to be controlled by bookies.
Don’t bring football to support your nonsense.
Yes..nonsense it is…when you know UMNO B keep payig race and religion dirty politcs and apply double standards…governing Malaysians.
Anything good…UMNO B make sure race and religion politics will be involved and act…only how to get more votes….day in day out.
After 55 years…still want 55 year old man sucking milk like a baby?
You mean that 55 year old man….cannot stand on his own two feet and bring his children up without depending on special treatments?
UMNO B Malays members never change…and UMNO B never change too…and we keep talking about feeding 55 year old idiots and smart ones…should actually stay stupid all their lives…to balance things up for UMNO B dirty politics.
The problem with some Malaysians who love to discuss and talk to wild away their time or show how smart they are..totally forget their main objective is to vote a change in government.
Fauzy is smart to lure some.. to discuss what is good or bad for Malaysians….and some simply love to discuss..falling into his trap…ignoring the hands of evil doers and corrupted lot…purposely keep finished work…unfinished….simply solutions to problem…made complicated….therefore nothing ever finally have a conclusion.
That’s UMNO B style of governing is very famous……yet so many are so blind…including Fauzy?
///If the Malays for example lack in business or entrepreneurial skills, why can’t the Chinese businessmen help them to become better? Why not share with each other so that we can grow together? The same applies to the Malays professionals. Impart the knowledge and experience that you have learnt to train the next generation of Malay professionals.///–Fazly
The Chinese way is to have the right mindset. That is nobody owes anybody a living. One has to work hard to gain knowledge through experience, and with experience, skills developed.
NEP negates all the teachings Chinese could offer. Mamakthir made NEP the excuse to make Malays of his choice rich.
Irrelevant statistics showing how many per cents of anything owned by Malays or Chinese was advanced to imply that Malays and Chinese have equal share of whatever included in the target statistics. It is clearly not true. If the ordinary Chinese and Malays do not have any claim to the shares, equity wealth and whatnots owned by other persons who are similarly classed as Malay or Chinese, what do such property mean to them? Why then do we bother even to tally up what are owned collectively by persons classified by Malays or Chinese, or Mamaks.
Politicians used such irrelevant statistics to promote racist policies. Educated persons like the author fail to realize this basic concept. Has education been a waste, or was the author pretending to be naive?
55 years old Malays still have milk teeth! Hahaha!
Meritocracy does not equate to anti affirmative action. The author’s assumption or suggestion that meritocracy and affirmation are mutually exclusive is wrong. It is however unfair and unjust for the Malaysian style of affirmative action aka NEP and meritocracy to co-exist.
In a system where meritocracy and affirmative action co-exist, help is given to capable recipients of lower economic social status to help level the playing field without sacrificing meritocracy. In Malaysia, affirmative action is targetted solely at a single race, quite often to incapable candidates of higher economic social status at the expense of meritocracy.
The author also seem to suggest that if there is no affimative action, the less fortunate group(s) will continue to wallow at the bottom of the food chain while the richer group will get richer. Perhaps the author should be reminded that most “pendatangs” came to Malaysia virtually penniless and are still able to make good.
///(Note: the ethnic breakdown for Perak’s 2 million citizens is approximately 52% Malay, 32% Chinese, 13% Indian, and 3% others. CM Zambry is an ethnic Indian but is Muslim by religion. End Note.)
xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Within the PR, the Democratic Action Party (DAP) won 18 seats; the People’s Justice Party (PKR) won 7 seats; and the Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS) won 5 seats. Although the DAP earned more seats than their coalition partners combined, the position of Chief Minister went to PAS assemblyman Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin, because the Perak state constitution stipulates that only a Muslim can hold the position of Chief Minister (CM).
///-http://malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/40737-wikileaks-power-struggles-in-perak
Is Muslim non-Malay allowed to be Mentri Besar of Perak? If not why is Zambry allowed. Does membership in UMNO change the race of the member, and thus obtained unfair benefits at the expense of non-Malays who have to support one additional Malay?
The statement you made above confirms the perils within meritocracy that was highlighted in the article. It was mentioned in the article that, “In this way, those who are picked by meritocracy as having merit may already have enjoyed unfair advantages from the very beginning, ignored according to the principle of non-discrimination.”
yes the the immigrants that came here were just laborers and coolies but for the Chinese laborers in particular they were involved in the more lucrative tin-mining industry and as a result were able to accumulate more wealth than the Indian estate workers and Malay farmers. that is the “position of advantage” that you have conveniently ignored. The wealth of the Chinese is no more a product of the luck of the draw than it is to hard work.