This article is not so much about the nature of the intra-problems of Indians in Malaysia, but rather about trying to locate and understand the external source that stands in the way of their advancement in years to come.

In this respect, the article goes beyond the usual mundane framework by boldly suggesting that Malay hegemonic state is the source of fundamental problems for the advancement of Indians and other ethnic segments of the population.

Although there is need to examine Indians from a multitude of perspectives, there is, however, a more pressing need to focus on an area of concern that has been neglected or ignored for various reasons.

It will be argued that Malay hegemonic state embodied and manifested in the politics of Umno and endorsed by certain component parties within the present ruling coalition is the root source of political, economic, social and cultural problems for Indians and other social segments of the larger population.

Therefore, until and unless, the root cause of the present malaise is identified, debated and articulated, national groups such as Indians cannot make much headway in the country.

Politics of Malay hegemony

The political, economic, social and cultural problems of Indians cannot be resolved within the present framework of organisational politics. In a very specific sense, hegemonic politics organised and perpetuated on the grounds of ethnicity and religion to the overall benefit of one particular segment of the population on the basis of certain historical factors constitutes the fundamental obstacle for the advancement and progress of numerically inferior non-Malay communities.

Unless and until the organisation of mainstream politics is based on democratic, universal and egalitarian considerations, ethnic segments like Indians and others might face problems in participating effectively in the macro political process of the country. In brief, it could be said that in the absence of a level-playing field, it would be impossible for Indians to reap the larger benefits of development.

Sad to say, despite the rise of democratic and other kinds of leveling forces in the larger global political arena in the past two decades or so, Malaysia seems to be unaffected by these currents. While it is often acknowledged that country should meet the global challenges, however, there is nothing concrete to state the present political elite is serious about the need to reconstitute politics on the basis of certain universal and democratic values.

On the contrary, there is ample evidence to indicate that those in control of political power are more bent on strengthening Malay political dominance and prioritising Malay political interests to the exclusion of the interests of other social segments of the nation.

Political survival, infatuation with the existing ethnic model, the absence of tolerance, the bias against democratic norms and values are some of the reasons as to why the present political leadership is trying to move the nation as whole in a retrogressive direction.

A democratic, universal and secular solution to the political and economic woes of Malaysians presupposes a vigorous critique of the politics of the Malay hegemonic state. It is the politics of Malay hegemony perpetrated and sustained by Umno, the dominant partner within the existing multi-racial coalition that actually stands in the way of the democratisation and secularisation of the Malaysian society.

It is the dominance of this particular variant that has served to divide and antagonise various segments of the Malaysian society against each other. Thus, without this particular brand of politics and the way it has been sustained by the nature of civil society, the politics of Malay hegemony would not have reached the present stage.

This political practice is not extremely exclusive as it allows for the participation of non-Malay groups in a limited way. Furthermore, the support that Umno obtains from non-Malay political parties in return for some minimal concessions provides the impression that the political model of Malay hegemony has general acceptance in the society.

The politics of Malay hegemony sustained by the present government and Umno in particular simply means that the interests of Malays will be prioritised over the interests of non-Malay groups on the grounds of certain historical givens (natives of the soil, constitutional agreement, etc).

Over the years, the practice of Malay hegemony has meant among other things the following: Malay control of the government and the bureaucracy, constitutional safeguards of Malay special rights, language and religion, domination of the public sector in terms of employment, special privileges for Malays in educational institutions, governmental directives in improving Malay participation in the private sector, special allocation of contracts and tenders for Malay companies and restricting non-Malay participation in the private sector.

Differential impact

The impact of pro-Malay policies has a differential impact on various non-Malay ethnic groups. While Chinese and some other small groups have been affected by the politics of Malay hegemony to some extent, their economic and entrepreneurial skills gained over the years have been utilised to mitigate the ill-effects of racial policies to some extent.

While the Chinese community might not be happy with the level of their participation in the private sector, their concern is primarily directed at removing obstacles in the political, social and cultural realms. Absence of ethnic equality in the political sphere, the fear about their vernacular school system and certain specific cultural concerns have pre-occupied the minds of members of the Chinese community. It is not that the politics of Malay hegemony have not affected the community, but because of their superior material position, the effects have to some extent lessened.

But nonetheless, the Chinese are not happy with events in the country over the last decade or so. Recent attempts made by some Chinese organisations to call for the abolishment of Malay special privileges is testimony to the regressive and one-sided nature of politics practiced by those who hold the powers of the government and the state.

Unlike Chinese, Indians in the country are in the most unenviable position, politically, economically and socially. Their small size, shrinking population, weak material position and others have contributed to a situation where they are unable to deal effectively with the pro-Malay policies of the regime.

The lack of a level-playing field affects communities like Indians more than Chinese simply because they do not have an economic or political advantage.

While on-going efforts in educational and economic realms should be continued, however, it must be remembered that these by themselves are not sufficient to propel the community to greater heights. The main stumbling block for the progress of the community must be located in the political sphere.

In a very specific sense, it would be futile to think and act in the interests of the overall community if we are going to ignore the political marginalisation of the community under the present government.

More importantly, unless and until all Malaysians are prepared to confront and question the racial policies of the present regime, the situation of Indians would not register any improvement. On the contrary, under the existing political formula, Indians face the dim prospect of further marginalisation, exploitation and immiseration.

The struggle against ethnic and cultural injustice perpetrated by the present government under Umno and supported by certain non-Malay political representatives is not just a mere Indian concern. On the contrary, it should be the concern of all Malaysians, Malays, Chinese, Indians, Kadazans, Ibans and others.

Although the present pro-Malay ethnic policies are being differentially felt among ethnic groups, it is clear that these are not in the overall interests of any ethnic group. What these policies have done is to introduce some form of competition and conflict among various ethnic groups so as to sustain the decadent political formula of the present government.

Although we do admit that rhetoric of Malay dominance has allowed the present government to gain some legitimacy as the representative of Malays, but the actual situation on the ground would provide a good indication that not all Malays have benefitted from the policies of Umno or the government.

The real beneficiaries are those who have close connections and ties with those in the leadership. But we have to admit the sad truth that apart from certain sections of the Malay community, years of socialisation, the presence of inter-ethnic rivalry and conflict, the propagandist policies of the regime, and the nature of political control have not allowed major sections of the Malay community to look for some non-hegemonic political options.

For Indians, there all kinds of options being made available by all kinds of groups and associations. Some of these groups are doing excellent work and they contribute in their own ways for the betterment of the community.

However, the fundamental problem with the role of these organisations is that they are not prepared to question the political reality of this country. For various reasons, they shy away from talking about politics and would prefer to come out solutions and options that would be accommodated with the present political reality.

But, however, we realise that fundamental solution to the problems of Indians and other non-Malay nationalities must be located in the political realm. In other words, it would be futile to talk about problem and solutions if we do not honestly and sincerely question the present political practice of the government that discriminates Malaysians on the grounds of ethnicity and religion. Unless and until we confront this particular problem, it would be pointless to discuss about solutions to the woes of the community.

Implications

In the case of Indians and other segments of the Malaysian population, the political agenda to promote Malay dominance has meant the following. First, Indians are denied effective representation by forces that have a broad platform to articulate a wide variety of issues pertaining to the general welfare of the community.

By ensuring that Indians would only be represented by those conservative and chauvinistic political parties that generally subscribe to the ethnic vision of Umno, the question of a democratic and progressive representation is denied. Second, the promotion of Malay hegemony has meant that the public sector consisting of government agencies and quasi agencies would be under the complete monopoly of Malays; non-Malays are provided with a token participation here and there.

In this context, it would very difficult if not impossible for Indians to make much progress in the public sector. Since the control and domination of the public sector in the hands of Malays, it would be difficult for Indians to seek employment and to gain equitable admission into institutes of higher learning.

Third, the political control of Umno has also meant that Indians and other non-Muslim communities have to put up with various measures of the government to promote the cultural and religious dominance of Malays.

Fourth, in the economic realm, the focus of the government is not so much general well-being of the entire population, but how to promote and sustain Malay entrepreneurship. Such a move has put number of obstacles for Indians to take advantage of economic opportunities. In this respect, licences, contracts and tenders have gone beyond the reach of ordinary Indians. Although some businessmen have made it, their role has not made much impact on the community in general.

If Indians have superior entrepreneurial skills and a good economic base like the Chinese, it is possible for the members of the community to lessen the impact of pro-Malay policies. Since the community is materially and politically weak, it is not in a position to take up the challenge of Malay dominance.

Furthermore, since the present nature of political representation is predicated on building close ties with Umno and others, there is little or nothing the present framework of formal representation can do to alter the structural condition of the community.

Of course, there is leadership for the community formally constituted in some political parties, but then, this kind of leadership is totally inadequate to meet the challenges. Having accommodated to the designs of Umno, they are hardly in a position to provide alternative visions for the community. The function of the present leadership is merely to prolong the existing political structure, a structure that cannot envision a proper role for the community in the larger multi-ethnic Malaysia.

Democratisation of politics

For the advancement of Indians and other nationalities, there is an urgent need to democratise the society from many angles. First and foremost, there is a need to build up coalition forces with other progressive sections of the society to dismantle the present hegemonic political system that has tunnel vision of the society.

In a more specific sense, Malaysians who love freedom, dignity, equality and fraternity must oppose the Malay hegemonic system that is sustained by the present government. Unless the playing field in the political realm is level, there is no way for nationalities like Indians to have equal opportunity.

Second, the dismantling of the present hegemonic system means among other things that progressive forces must oppose the racial policies. Sooner or later, the so-called much abused principle of affirmative action must be opposed and removed from the Malaysian scene. In this respect, there are many Malays who would also support such move from a progressive point of view. Third, the declaration that Malaysia is an Islamic state must be opposed. It has created much fear and anxiety among Malaysians particularly those who profess faiths other than Islam.

The political struggle against Malay hegemony is not a struggle against individual Malays but directed at the Malaysian state and its agencies, those crucial to the general and specific sustenance of racial policies. Furthermore, the struggle against Malay hegemony as embodied in the political agenda of Umno is not a racial one or motivated to resurrect the ethnic or cultural identities of some other social segments of the Malaysian society. On the contrary, it is democratic struggle to ensure that the Malay state does not use ethnicity or religion of Malays to oppress other nationalities.

Political vision

Opposing and removing the provisions of ethnic discrimination promoted by the state must be counterbalanced by the future of a vision society for all Malaysians. For the general betterment and progress of all Malaysians, the future Malaysian society should be based on the ideals of democracy and racial equality. These ideals should ensure the following:

a) Malaysians regardless of their ethnic or religious affiliation must enjoy an equal status guaranteed by the highest law of the country;

b) that no persons shall be discriminated on the basis of religion, ethnicity or class;

c) that there should be respect and dignity accorded to cultural attributes of different ethnic communities;

d) all religions should be accorded equal status and protected by the state for the purpose of general societal harmony and integration;

e) for those groups or segments that have been marginalised, assistance should be provided on the basis of need and not on the grounds of certain historical givens;

f) and not the least, effort should be made to organise society on sound democratic, universal and egalitarian values and norms.

This broad vision basically underlines the position that the struggle of the Indian community should not be any different from the struggles of other segments of the society. But given the different perceptions on the nationality question, tactical pressures would necessitate that each community undertake specific tasks to lessen some of the worst effects of ethnic and religious discrimination.

The most important and fundamental task before us is whether we are in a position to organise, question and remove the diabolical nature of institutionalised racism in the county that has reared its ugly head for the last four decades. This is the primary question for Indians and others who value human dignity and progress.

P RAMASAMY is a professor of political economy at the Political Science Department, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, and has academic interests in Malaysian politics and labour.