It seems to be frequently acknowledged that the academic community (comprising lecturers and students) play a crucial role in the well-being and development of society. Whether the academic community really performs this function or not seems not be the main consideration.

It is the expectation or potential expectation that has given the academic community much respect and dignity in the eyes of the society. Since the academic community is the most active when it comes to teaching, research and related activities in comparison with other segments, it is quite natural for society to think highly of it.

Thus, in order for the academic community to perform its functions, it is important that it operates in a particular environment that is conducive and free from political control. In fact, the pursuance of knowledge is very often predicated on the grounds that there should not be any political interference in the functioning of the academic community.

It is not that the community should be totally cut off from the general public, but there must be some semblance of distance between the community and those persons who wield political power.

Crucial distance

Without the autonomy and freedom, there are chances that those who wield political power might be tempted to bring the academic community under their influence for the purpose of regime legitimating.

While it is crucial for the academic community to distance itself from some segments of the public, it cannot divorce itself form being responsible and accountable to the larger public, in other words, society.

The academic community emanating from universities and other institutions of higher learning are constituted part and parcel of the larger society in which it functions. The manpower requirements, funds, and others are drawn from society.

While it derives its sustenance from society, it has to reciprocate in terms of producing knowledge for the further development of society. So there is dialectical relationship between the academic community and the public and society; each nourish the other in different ways.

Without this dialectical relationship, there will be a tendency on the part of the intellectual elite to engage in activities that might not bring about the organic relationship with society. If the academic community for one reason or another develops an ivory tower attitude, there are grounds for it to become divorced from society. As such, the academic community might loose its significance in terms of societal development.

The mere presence of an academic community does not mean that it has a particular relationship with society. Whether the academic community plays a meaningful role in the affairs of society will depend on a host of factors.

Critical or conservative

The nature of politics, who is in control of power, levels of social and economic development, the nature of civil society, the presence of democratic values and practices, the autonomy of institutions of higher learning and many others, will determine to what extent the academic community will partake in the affairs of society.

In this respect, despite the theoretical expectations outlined above, there is no one model that will best describe and explain the interaction between the academic community and society.

In some political situations, the academic community can be seen to play a vigorous critical role; but in other instances, one might encounter a very pliant or conservative academic community.

Notwithstanding the interactive nature of the relationship between the academic community and society, the factors that determine whether the community is vigorous or not will depend on political, economic, and social factors.

Refusal to consider the interplay of these forces will not enable us to understand why some academic communities function differently from others.

It cannot be argued that the academic community is the pliant recipient of signals from other levels of society. If we consider the relationship between the community and society as a dialectical one, one influencing the other and vice versa, then it is possible for us to have a dynamic picture of the community.

This means among other things, that the community itself through criticisms and self-reflection, undertaking pro-active measures to change some aspects of the reality that are not in conformity with progressive views and democratic values.

High expectations

It is here that the society might expect a bit too much from academicians to be objective, impartial and not the least, to be fair in their analysis. Of course, the subaltern segment of society might want to go one step further by asking the academic community for the proposal of an alternative order.

In the Malaysian context, the development of the academic community like other segments of the larger population has been influenced by a number of developments, both historical and contemporary.

The colonial and post-colonial experience, the development of strategies to defeat the left-wing struggle, the nature and manner of capitalist development, the nature of ethnic governance, the multi-racial atmosphere, the rise of the authoritarian regime, promulgation of laws necessary for political control and others, have impacted the development of the academic community in a myriad of ways.

The above charting of the ideological and political map of governance of the country provided the necessary stimulus for the organisation of universities, the nature of student composition, the structure and context of academic programs, the laws governing universities, the absolute power resting in the hands of politicians, academic programmers being more market driven and lately, the initiative of some universities to adopt the academic restructuring exercise.

These elements along with macro policy decisions have contributed to the development of a particular nature of civil society in general and the particular sub-segment of civil society in which academicians and students operate and function.

Academic dissent

Thus, given this top-down approach on matters relating to the function of universities, the regime in power has ensured that academic dissent would be kept at a minimal level. If things really get out of control, the various legislation and related regulations would be invoked to nip whatever troubles in the bud.

It is not just political control and administrative aspects of universities that have affected the qualitative development of the academia. One must also understand that the very process of socialisation induced to large extent by the prevailing ethnic atmosphere, racial polarisation, competition between Malays and non-Malays and others, plays a pernicious role in depriving the academic community of a vitality that is necessary to deal with the national and global changes.

While we can blame the regime's political hegemony for stunting the progressive development of the academia, it should not be forgotten that there are sections within the larger academic community who not only condone the politics of the regime but also adopted measures for the hegemonic set up of civil society.

So, contrary to the liberal prognosis, it not that the civil society acts as a buffer between the state and the public, but rather it is terrain that is open for different political and ideological contestations.

In this respect, apart from some individual academics here and there and some sections of the student body, there is little input from the academic community as a whole to contest and redefine the nature of civil society in Malaysia.

Either by our actions or inactions, we have allowed the state and the political parties that sustain such an apparatus, a free hand in defining and articulating the basis of our society. Of course, this articulation only serves the status quo that is bent on preserving power on the basis of a particular racial ideology predicated on a certain feature of capitalist development.

Racial hegemony

So measures and policies adopted by the regime in power to solve economic, political and social crises are very much in tune to prop up this particular politics of racial hegemony. Of course, this racial hegemony is spelled out to the public in terms of racial unity for the purpose of the derivation of political legitimacy.

But there are already cracks appearing in the particular nature of civil society that the present ruling coalition wants to maintain. While oppositional discourses are exploiting these to suggest an alternative brand of politics, it is not very clear whether and to what extent this alternative political articulation would be able to go beyond the present hegemonic order.

Political, social and economic crises affect all individuals and groups in differing ways and the responses may also widely vary. The academic community is affected in varying ways, although the responses might differ from person to person and group to group.

Of course, our response to deal with these will be determined by what is termed as our prevailing mental map - that is how we interpret and analyse the events in the backdrop of our political and ideological socialisation over the years.

In this regard, there will be a tendency on the part of some to support the arguments of the state and there will tendency on the part of some to take a critical perspective on the sources and solutions for these crises.

It is not that we should celebrate differences like the post-modernists, but to see to what extent our analyses helps resolve the problems of the exploited and marginalised.

Complex challenge

The challenge of the academic community in Malaysia is a complex one. As an advantaged community in terms of relative freedom and a slightly better material stake, it should adopt a activist posture in influencing the direction of Malaysian society in a progressive, democratic and egalitarian direction.

This would ensure among other things the following. First, an attempt should be made to de-hegemonise the present ideological and political system to expose its unequal and unjust manner of control and domination.

Second, to what extent have universities and other institutions of higher learning become agents of socialisation that serves the status-quo? Third, what is the role and function of the administration in stifling dissent and counter-hegemonic response?

Fourth, how and in what manner has the recent administrative organisation and reformulation of departments, units and faculties affected the production of knowledge? Fifth, the relationship between the adoption of market-orientated reforms and their relationship to the development of an intellectual environment in universities.

The examination of the above questions is not a mere intellectual exercise, but an exercise that has wider societal implications. It will among others indicate to what extent the academic community is prepared for far-reaching societal changes and to what extent that the present regime is capable of bringing about changes that are badly needed.

Beyond, it will provide some kind of indication on whether the academic community is prepared to place value on the badly needed progressive changes to bring about a more tolerant, just, democratic and egalitarian society - a set-up that will move away from being pre-occupied with ethnicity.

In the final analysis, the academic community in Malaysia cannot leave the domain of politics to politicians whether they are in ruling coalition or the opposition. The arena of politics is too murky and too wide to be entrusted to those who think they have the best interests of the society at heart.

Four decades of political governance is more than enough for us to come to the conclusion that all is not well in the political front. A counter-hegemonic discourse from academicians will provide some substance for institutions of higher learning to be reconstituted on a high moral and intellectual ground for the derivation of a meaningful change in society.

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. He has written quite extensively and is currently focusing on conflict management in Sri Lanka.