In recent discussions about the New Economic Policy (NEP) and New Development Policy (NDP) o­n malaysiakini , it often seems to me there have been major differences of opinions.

I shall focus o­n just o­ne aspect - that is, how the differences between social and economic performances arose in the first place, and are perpetuated.

My Chinese Malaysian friends justify the existence of the NEP and NDP o­n the basis of the differential rates of development between the ethnic communities. What they believe have given rise to these differences differ considerably from reasons cited by writers like R Sharif (See Is meritocracy the right medicine for Malaysia?

)

My Chinese Malaysian friends cite culturally ingrained attitudes and behaviours.

The Southern Chinese are extremely preoccupied with economics and finance. They are tireless and indefatigable in the pursuit of money. They rarely rest except for public holidays. They are innovative, proactive, daring and highly individualistic in their business activities. They have a strong and vibrant tradition of entrepreneurship. In adversity they live o­n little and are noted for their determination and perseverance. When times are better they spend little, live frugally, and save much. They are obsessed with securing a good education for their childern.

These traits and attitudes have characterised the overseas Chinese whichever country they have adopted including North America, Europe, Australasia, West Indies, Africa or Southeast Asia.

My Chinese Malaysian friends tend to believe it is these attitudes and behaviours towards work, money and education which have contributed most to their success.

They do not see themselves as having been favoured by anyone during the British colonial administration or the present government. Their forebears were simply grateful for the desperate opportunity to get out of China to somewhere, anywhere, to work and earn a living. Many went abroad with nothing more than the shirts o­n their backs and a straw mattress for a bed. The early coolie trade was little more than a form of slave trafficking.

The Southern Chinese who supplied the bulk of China's immigrants to countries elsewhere generally instinctively avoid contact with government and officialdom. After hundreds of years of dealing with corrupt officials from China, the overseas Chinese tend to regard their wealth and persons as being safer by not contending for power.

Their avoidance of officialdom and poltical activities is such that they are regarded as being some of the most apathetic voters in the world.

The Chinese in Malaysia in particular have always deferred to the primacy of the Malays in the realms of politics and government, having regarded them as first amongst equals from the time of arrival of the first Chinese person o­n Malaysian shores. Sadly this has failed to avert the tragedy of 1969.

Many Chinese Malaysians blandly accept that the NEP is here to stay. Presently the system does not particularly support a meritocratic society although attempts are being made to improve the competitiveness of Malay Malaysians.

It would seem to me that both Malay and Chinese Malaysians agree that a laissez faire meritocracy will favour the latter.

In my opinion, until Malay Malaysians become more competitve the NEP will continue in some way or form for a very long time.

In the meantime, it is to be hoped that many disadvantaged non-Malay groups such as Orang Asli and rural Indian plantation workers can be included in future affirmative action initiatives.

Discriminating against an advanced trading minority is a very different proposition altogether from neglecting the already poor, disadvantaged and needy, whatever their ethnic affiliations.

One for all and all for o­ne.