Chinese Malaysians are now a “valuable commodity”.  When the former home affairs deputy minister (now natural resources and environment minister) was accused of racism, his defence was “how can I be a racist when my wife is Chinese and I have many relatives who are non-Muslims/Malays”. Please don’t get me wrong; I am not here to state whether the accusation against him were justified or not.  It was his answer that fascinated me.

More recently, our newly-minted deputy prime minister also said something similar when asked of his views on race relations in this country.  His answers were he speaks Mandarin and has a foster father who is a Chinese. According to him, he is still close to his foster father till today.

What exactly do all these mean?

First, I think we ought to differentiate between one’s personal experience and his views on others. The fact that one has a Chinese wife or speaks Mandarin or has a Chinese foster father does not ipso facto convey that he is non-racist. On the other hand, one could be inclusive and non-racist even though he speaks no other languages than his own and has a wife from within his own race/tribe.  

Racism is about non-tolerance and non-acceptance of others who are different from us.  Racism is stereotyping others for reasons of race, religion and culture. Racism is also an attempt to assimilate, dominate, and subjugate others. All these mind-sets can come about through indoctrination, misguided national policies and inculcation and nurturing using fear and insecurity.

Showing one’s racial tolerance and acceptance by being able to speak other languages or marrying a spouse of another race is only skin-deep. They convey nothing of his world view or racial orientation. Adolf Hitler kept his Jewish personal physician; does this mean that he was a non-Nazi and non-racist?

It is quite futile to claim that one is not a racist. It is akin to declaring that one is humble. Ultimately, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. I would prefer that leaders and those holding public office prove their worth by actions rather than words.   

As leaders and holders of public office, they must adhere to the principle that their personal prejudices or sentiments do not count. The moment they sit behind an official desk, they must be colour-blind whatever the circumstances.

They should ask themselves whether they have stereotyped certain community when contemplating a policy or when making a decision. They should critically examine national policies for their inherent racist elements and be sufficiently bold to correct and ratify them.

They should be principled enough to criticise and condemn racism within their own community, not just on others. They should not be prejudiced by their own bad experience with certain individuals and impute that experience to the whole community. If a Chinese Malaysian businessman cheated you, please don’t impute that all Chinese Malaysian businessmen are cheats.

If you encountered an Indian Malaysian road bully, please don’t impute that every Indian Malaysian is out to bully you.  If you have a problematic Malay Malaysian worker, please don’t generalise all Malay Malaysian workers are problematic.

While we may not be able to completely eliminate racial prejudices at social or personal level, it is the responsibility of the government to set the benchmark on zero tolerance on racism in the public domain. Public officials performing official duties but indulging in racism should be made to face the most severe consequences.  

If we are determined to adhere to this principle, the nation’s ethos will change in no time. On the other hand, if national policies condone racism, the whole nation will follow suit in no time, too.