Sharing the nation or renting the nation?

While I am very much aware that at this moment the Anwar sodomy case is very hot, I am diverting my attention to the social contract.

Currently reading Sharing the Nation: Faith, Difference, Power and the State - 50 Years after Merdeka by Norani Othman, Mavis C Puthucheary and Clive Kessler, I was enlightened by the fact that in the original agreement there was no such thing as the special rights for the Malays. It was special position of the Malays. The other point that struck me is that the special position had a time limit as in a contract. However UMNO has altogether changed the concept to special rights. The chapter by Dr Puthucheary also revealed how the concept of bumiputera came to be used and included Sabah and Sarawak native people. This has, over the years, created sentiments among the non Malay, non Muslims in Malaysia as they have continued to be seen as immigrants.

Interestingly if a non – Malay non Muslim converts to Islam and practices Malay lifestyle as prescribed in the Federal Constitution, he or she would be identified as Malay Muslim and enjoy privileges meant for the bumiputras. An example would be Malaysia’s well known political scientist, Dr Chandra Muzaffar. He was active in leftist politics via Parti Keadilan Rakyat rallying for Anwar Ibrahim. Though he is an Indian converted to Musllim faith, he was never seen as representing the Malaysian Indian members of the party.

Based on the above points, the question for the minority Malaysian Chinese and Malaysian Indians would be; Are we sharing the nation with the Malay Muslim majority or are we renting the nation from the Malay Muslim community? At what cost is it? Over the years the younger generations of Malaysian Chinese and Malaysian Indians have sought greener pastures in foreign lands. They wanted to share the nation not rent.

On an addition, it is noteworthy to mention here that the MCA has defended the Bar Council for organising the forum on social contract.