COMMENT the Malaysian political and social system ripe for a major paradigm shift? Are there signs that the old paradigm of thinking and acting along ethnic and religious lines will give way to something that is new and progressive?

Can Thomas Kuhn’s theory of paradigm shift be invoked to explain the social and political changes that are taking place in Malaysia presently?

Paradigm shift or an epistemological transformation in the way we think and act in society comes by way of "revolution" according to the author of "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" by Thomas Kuhn.

While Kuhn directed his energies in examining scientific "revolutions" in science and technology, his concept of paradigm shift has gained popularity in the areas of religion, economics and the social sciences.

Scientific "revolution" takes place in the realm of science if a particular thinking begets anomalies over a period of time. As more and more anomalies are generated and that the particular approach fails to explain the anomalies, then there occurs a "scientific revolution" or epistemological crisis that questions the old paradigm and instead a new paradigm is brought into existence to explain the scientific phenomenon or phenomena.

With the emergence of a separate world view, the old paradigm or old way of thinking and explaining are discarded. The process of the rejection of the old and the acceptance of the new is actually a battle in the social, political, cultural and scientific realms.

Real transformation in thinking

Kuhn was of the opinion the transformation in the way we think and act was not merely a question of relativism, but signified progress and development. In other words, a new paradigm that comes into being will be definitely be more progressive than the old one.

The concept of paradigm shift has been invoked popularly in many quarters to explain all kinds of changes. In the business world, the concept is been used to explain new way of thinking and acting in terms of enhancing business opportunities. At the more general level, paradigm shift has been used to denote new ways of thinking in the social, political and cultural realms.

While there is nothing wrong in the application of this concept to a wide range of experiences, it should be borne in mind that paradigm shift cannot be reduced to simple and rudimentary ways of thinking.

In actual fact, true to what had been explained by Kuhn, paradigm shift should be invoked to understand broader and more significant changes to society and economy. In this way, the concept suggests “revolutionary" ways of comprehending reality.

In the case of Malaysia, Malaysian politics from the time of the colonial period to the present have been mainly explained and elaborated through the lenses of a dominant paradigm where ethnicity occupies a centre stage.

During the colonial period, the divisive nature of the plural society made it mandatory for the presence of a colonial power to ensure stability and peace. In the post-colonial period, the two successive inter-ethnic coalitions showed that only they could bring about stability and peace to Malaysia.

From 1957 to 1969, it was the Alliance coalition and following the breakdown of the ethnic consociatonal (inter-ethnic elite bargaining model) model in 1969, a new control model called Barisan Nasional came into being.

Birth of BN no paradigm shift

The passage from the narrow Alliance to broader BN inter-ethnic model was not a paradigm shift, rather it was enlargement of the ethnic coalition to ensure political stability.

However, the transition also masked the urgency on the part of Umno political elites to gain more control of the political and social arena. With the coming of the BN model, Umno became the preponderant power in the ethnic coalition and the non-Malay political parties lost all semblances of independence and dignity.

This unequal nature of power distribution in the BN coalition has major source of problems for ethnic communities like the Chinese and Indians. In the later years, both the groups have abandoned their support for this ruling coalition!

In the decades of the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s and 2000s, ethnicity came to dominate the political, social and economic landscape of Malaysia. The ethnic theme of bumiputera vs non-bumiputera became the subject of the dominant discourse.

The presence of three major ethnic groups came to be seen from the perspective of a zero-sum-game. However, in the course of time, the ethnic paradigm/approach to understand the Malaysian society began to falter. The dominant paradigm with ethnicity as the central theme was unable to explain or resolve numerous problems that arose as “anomalies”

Growing class problems, the economic and financial divide within races and between races, the problem of corruption, abuse of power, the lack of freedom and obstacles placed in the way of the advancement of democracy came to gain notorious significance.

Ethnicity or its approach could not just explain why these things were happening. What is more, the ethnic model as the dominant paradigm, was too stubborn to explain major divergences in the problems of governance.

The country that was described as a success in multiracial experiment soon came to be known as a nation beset with serious racial and religious problems, and not mention serious corruption in the ranks of politicians and civil servants.

Bersih broke ethnic divide

The rise of opposition forces on a multi-racial platform and the struggle premised on issues rather than ethnicity began to corrode the borders of the ethnic paradigm, the bastion of the BN ruling coalition.

The significant gains by the opposition in the 2008 and 2013 general elections revealed among others that the ideas, strategies of the BN ethnic model was becoming quite irrelevant to the needs and aspirations of all Malaysians, irrespective of their ethnic and religious origins.

As more and more Malaysian irrespective of ethnicity or religion abandoned the BN coalition and sought to embrace non-government organisations and opposition political parties, the ethnic model began to experience problems that were never imagined before.

In Kuhn’s words, these can be described as “anomalies”.

The rise of the Bersih movement that sought to capture the imagination of Malaysians in the four rallies that were organised went to complement those forces that sought to question and dismantle the ethnic model of governance.

It is becoming clearer to the vast majority of Malaysians that the country has reached a point of no return where the old must give way to the new. The BN model is not simply another model of governance; it is corrupt and subject to abuse. What is more, it has given rise to the issue of intra-ethnic and inter-ethnic serious class divides.

The model that is being suggested though not in formal terms is model that will move away from being pre-occupied with ethnicity and religion and to embrace diversity and creativity in Malaysia.

Battle just begun

An epistemological crisis of a sort is taking place in the realm of politics; however, the transition to a new model of political governance is not going to be that simple. It will require some major battles to be fought and won, before and during the general elections.

But one thing is certain, the new model to be envisioned must embrace diversity and creativity, essential ingredients to take Malaysia on the road to success and fame. The new non-ethnic paradigm does not do away with ethnicity, but it will merely provide an opportunity for groups and communities to move beyond the straitjacket of the old and archaic ethnic and religious thinking.

The epistemological battle looms in the horizon.

P RAMASAMY is Deputy Chief Minister II of Penang and the state assemblyperson for Perai.