Amidst the chorus of angry protests against Singapore Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew's recent remark that Chinese Malaysians have been marginalised, can the protesters answer a simple question?

If there has been no racial marginalisation in Malaysia, why has the word 'meritocracy' been taboo in politics ever since the race riots of May 13, 1969 ?

This is the only country in the world that has virtually banned the concept.

Other questions come to mind.

Why has there been a massive and unrelenting brain-drain ever since the debacle in 1969, resulting in a countless number of Chinese Malaysians excelling in many fields in foreign lands?

Why has there been a virtual monopoly by one race - numerically as a whole as well as in the top hierarchy - of the entire spectrum of the public sector, namely, the army, police, civil service, judiciary, public universities, semi- and quasi-government bodies, and government-controlled financial institutions and enterprises?

Why has there been, year after year, the spectre of top Chinese Malaysian students being barred from universities, only (for some) to be admitted later upon begging by Chinese ministers in the cabinet?

No doubt Lee may be faulted for lacking diplomatic niceties, but he has spoken the truth. And I think every Malaysian irrespective of race knows that, at least in the deepest part of his heart.

Yes, we have been practising racial discrimination, which is a zero-sum game. When race A is barred so that race B can get in, it is one side's loss to another side's gain. It is sheer dishonesty and hypocrisy to deny that any race has suffered disadvantages as a result of this policy.

Fallout from NEP

But the real question is whether such policy is justified. To answer that question, we have to go back to where such policy started - the New Economic Policy (NEP), formulated after the 1969 race riots.

It is necessary to refresh our memory of the original concept of the NEP, since it has almost become a dirty word by now, having been hijacked by politicians for self-gain and to perpetuate political hegemony.

The prime objective of NEP was to achieve national unity, through a two-prong strategy: to eradicate poverty irrespective of race, and to restructure society so as to eliminate the identification of race with economic function.

There is nothing wrong with such an affirmative action policy, but the tragedy is that over the years, through racial hegemony, it has been transformed into a policy synonymous with racial privileges, and forgetting the over-arching objectives of national unity and eliminating poverty across racial lines.

Through two decades of dictatorial rule by former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the NEP was blatantly abused to justify uncontrolled corruption, cronyism and nepotism, which have continued to rage unabated under the current prime minister.

There is no question that, in spite of these abuses, the NEP has achieved its limited objective of having elevated the status of Malays in the economic and educational fields to a respectable level, compared to those of other races. But the fallout of such abuse is devastating - nothing less than the drastic plunge of the ethos of the Malaysian society and tantamount to a virtual breakdown of morality and law and order.

The chief setbacks are rampant corruption and cronyism, worsening racial polarisation, unrelenting brain-drain, a warped educational system, thwarted economic competitiveness, ineffectual bureaucracy, retarded economic growth and perverted social values.

Such an anachronistic and regressive policy has no place in the globalising world, or for that matter, in any civilised society. As it is, the pressure to dismantle such policy does not come from within the country - as the deprived races seem powerless to redress this wrong - but from the whole wide world who are our trading partners.

Our trade negotiators should be able to testify how tough the going is when it comes to negotiating free trade agreements with foreign parties whether it is regional marketing pacts or bilateral agreements such as those involving Japan, US, Australia, China and India (through Asean), due to Malaysia's race-based protectionist policies.

Invariably, the NEP-inspired policies are stumbling blocks to a wider window being opened for two-way trade and investment. World trade liberalisation is a one-way road and there is no turning back, whether we like it or not. So, how long can Malaysia buck the world trend without causing unacceptable damage to its own economy?

Enforced silence

Even worse than the anticipated trade frictions is the loss of Malaysia's economic competitiveness in the face of heightening competition from abroad.

Our prime minister has correctly diagnosed this malaise as the prevalence of a Third World mentality, but he has done nothing to correct our uncompetitive culture or to stamp the worsening racial and religious

dissension.

In fact, he has done the opposite by intensifying the imprint of the perverted NEP philosophy on our economic plans, and prohibiting inter-religious and inter-racial discourse which would otherwise have contributed to greater understanding and harmony.

Lee's comments have understandably riled many Malaysian leaders particularly those in the ruling coalition, but he should also have struck resonance among many who have silently put up with these unjust policies all these years.

As for the great silent majority in this country, they should now ponder over what would serve their interests best: to save face by angrily rebutting Lee or to stare at the ugly truth bravely and institute changes that will put the nation on the right path.

I think we have reached a stage in our history that is critical enough to warrant caution in putting too much trust in the incumbent leaders. The people of Malaysia have traditionally placed much trust in the ruling power, perhaps more than they should, as evident from the flagrant abuses by the authorities.

The fact that we have scraped through as a nation in the past, despite such serious misrule, does not guarantee that we will be similarly lucky in the future. This is due to the fact that both internal and external circumstances have so radically altered that we can no longer commit such major errors in policies and in the choice of leadership without putting our future in peril.

Looking from this perspective, Lee's bitter medicine may yet work to our advantage if we are humble and brave enough to take this as a challenge to carry out serious introspection that may eventually lead to our common good.

KIM QUEK is a retired accountant.