The term 'Bangsa Johor' re-entered the spotlight when former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad said on Wednesday that promoting Johor nationalism is unhealthy for Malaysia.

He said that while it is within the Johor royalty's right to promote the concept, Malaysia could only prosper through unity.

This prompted Johor Sultan Ibrahim Almarhum Sultan Iskandar to respond the next day by saying that Mahathir should keep silent on the matter.

The sultan said the term 'Bangsa Johor' was coined by his great-grandfather in 1920 to unite all races in the state for "greater cooperation, harmony and peaceful existence".

With this contention over the concept, Malaysiakini spoke to people on the street to get their thoughts about 'Bangsa Johor'.

The reactions were mixed, with some thinking that the concept had some basis, while others believed having national unity was better than focusing on state-level unity.

'National unity should come first'

Mohd Auzan said he was fine with the idea of each state having its own stand, but maintained that national unity is important for a country.

"With (national) unity, we can encourage the spirit of cooperation so that the country will become better and more peaceful," he said.

Kanesh Varan said there should be no sense of separation between the states, and focus should instead be on nationalism.

"The transformation of the country should come on a national level, not just from state level," he said to Malaysiakini.

Nur Amalina and Mohammad Rafie both brought up sports as an example of unity as well as non-unity.

"At the Olympics, everyone regardless of race or ethnicity were all united in supporting Malaysia," said Nur Amalina.

She dismissed as unnecessary the tendency among some Johor people to think only about their state, and their desire to break away from the rest of the country.

Mohammad Rafie said that the concept of 'Bangsa Johor' could potentially cause problems, pointing to fights that have broken out after football matches between states.

'Bangsa Johor has its merits'

Mohd Shah Radzin felt there was some truth to what Mahathir said, but added that the Johor sultan also had reasons for pushing the 'Bangsa Johor' concept.

It is just a difference in opinions between Mahathir and the Johor sultan, he said.

Iman Firdaus defended the sultan, saying that it was His Highness' royal duty to unite the people in the state.

"He doesn't want there to be too much separation between the Malays, Chinese and Indians.

"So even though there are Malays, Chinese and Indians, they are all united under the banner of 'Bangsa Johor'. That's what he meant," Iman said.

Alwish Al-Ghazali had a similar opinion, saying that the 'Bangsa Johor' concept allowed people to overlook differences in race, making them more united.

"It's like if we have Bangsa Malaysia, it should be Bangsa Malaysia. When you say Bangsa Malaysia or Bangsa Johor, we don't see all the differences within that. So to me, it makes things more united," he said.

Ahmad Abdul Arif, meanwhile, chose to be more neutral, saying that the 'Bangsa Johor' concept has its pros and cons.

As long as one knows the limits of such a concept, it should be fine, he said.