I refer to the letter Ketuanan Melayu above all. It never ceases to amaze me, the thought process that is of a person like MALAYsian which is as much revolting as it is ludicrous. Two notions, incompatible with a matured and civilised mind, were propounded by the writer ie, (1) views contrary to that held by oneself should not be published and (2) the supremacy of one race and religion over all others.

As food for thought, the Prophet (pbuh) himself had encountered similar views during his lifetime especially during the genesis of Islam which makes one wonder what would have been the state of development of Islam if the majority of the people then were of MALAYsian's mentality.

Rudyard Kipling wrote the poem 'White man's burden' as a form of encouragement to the US to ensure the supremacy of the Christian Empire over underdeveloped countries. Essentially, non- European cultures were viewed as demonic hence the need to civilise them. In this regard, it would be extremely interesting to note how someone like MALAYsian would react to an equally constricted Eurocentric individual, for instance.

In a world with seven to eight major religions and many other religious beliefs, imagine the chaos if all hold the view that only theirs is the best. What would become of this earth if each of the six billion people has differing views as to what is best and supreme and each attempts to impose their belief on the rest of humanity? The Palestinian-Israeli impasse in the Middle East is but one example of 'my view is the only view that matters' and has resulted in decades of bloody warring.

Racism does not only refer to the physical abuse of another race. Ethnocentric concepts like Ketuanan Melayu are very much racist in that it is premised upon the belief that one group is the centre of everything against which all other groups are judged. Consequently, this leads to the notion that one group is the most important and aspects of its culture are superior to that of other groups.

Though Bee Fong Han prefers to portray it subtly, the concept of Ketuanan Melayu was a direct reaction to the perceived immigration and economic augmentation of the 'pendatang asing'. A rallying cry during those days was 'Malaya for the Malays'. Syed Jaafar Albar, the secretary- general of Umno in the 60s, in an apparent swipe at Lee Kuan Yew over the latter's incessant call for a Malaysian Malaysia, referred to the Malays as 'masters of the house' whose hospitality was being abused by the 'bangsa asing' and 'orang tumpangan'.

It must be noted that both Umno and PAS are proponents of Ketuanan Melayu. Affirmative action policies derive their legitimacy from Ketuanan Melayu. The constitution of the country, hence, the social contract reflect these aspirations. Unfortunately, only one side of the concordat has been strictly adhered to over the last 50 years since independence as evidenced by the fact that the constitution has been amended 42 times in the last 48 years (up till 2005).

The fact that Malaysia is not a signatory to the International Convention on The Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Cerd) is in itself telling.