by Rosalind Yang Misieng
June 16, 2010, Wednesday
ON my recent trip to Kuala Lumpur, I had an interesting experience that sparked off some thought on the much talked about, lauded, criticised and debated 1Malaysia concept.At one point, my fellow travellers needed to call for two taxis for a trip to the airport and for this we requested our regular taxi man, a Mr Lee* to call for one of his taxi driver friends to provide the additional taxi. It seemed very natural for us to expect a Mr Lai or a Mr Lim to appear with the second taxi, but instead we got a Mr Maniam*. It was a pleasant surprise.
Knowing how competitive the taxi service in the national capital could be, and knowing that trips to the airport are often coveted by taxi service providers, one can surmise that Mr Lee and Mr Maniam must be really good friends to be able to work together. It didn’t matter that Mr Lee spoke English with a mild Chinese accent and that Mr Maniam’s Bahasa Malaysia was tinted heavily with an Indian one. They worked well with each other. It also didn’t matter that we spoke Bahasa Malaysia with a heavy Sarawak Malay accent and, we couldn’t immediately get used to Mr Maniam’s accent — they were happy to provide us service with extra smiles. Such a casual incident makes you think about being Malaysian.
In one of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak’s recent speeches on 1Malaysia, he called for society’s “total acceptance” of Malaysia’s diversity. He stressed that Malaysians should not merely tolerate each other’s different cultures but accept them if true social harmony and unity is expected.
This shift from “mere tolerance” to something that’s more substantial such as embracing others’ different cultures is more crucial than many Malaysians may think.
Rhetoric aside, the Prime Minister’s statement actually represents a significant progress in attitude and conviction for Malaysia – on which the future security and prosperity of Malaysians may hinge on heavily especially when economic survival and progress may prove to be insufficient to hold a society together in challenging times. As such, it is wise that the people, regardless of their backgrounds, be at least united in acknowledging and championing this conviction.
Sarawakians today are fairly confident that as a people, we have always been ahead of most other states in accepting others’ differences; that most of us see ourselves as Sarawakians first, before we see each other as Ibans, Malays, Bidayuhs, Chinese, and so forth. This is today. How about 10 years from now or even five years from now? Are we confident that we can maintain our harmonious co-existence and even seamless assimilation far into the future?
Are there any cracks in social harmony among the younger generation, especially at home and in schools? Are parents and teachers vigilant enough to make sure that young Sarawakians are inclined towards respecting and accepting others’ different values rather than the other way round? Do today’s parents and teachers even care?
At the state level, much effort has been put into securing long-term social harmony particularly through the five yearly state-level Cultural Symposiums (introduced about 25 years ago) which uphold the ideal of “confluence of cultures”.
More recent exemplary actions could be seen at the recent state-level Tilawah al-Quran in Kuching, where the organising chairmanship was shared by a Muslim and a non-Muslim senior government officer, while the closing ceremony was officiated at by a non-Muslim deputy chief minister. A friend remarked that this sort of harmony seems only readily possible in Sarawak. No stress, no fuss. This demonstrates that we are able to transcend above matters of less significance because our common goals are larger and more noble – religious development for one of our communities, the Muslims, and the healthy overall social development of our entire society.
A traditional festival such as the recent Gawai Dayak is also a good time to reflect and count our blessings as a multi-ethnic community. It should be a time for us to renew our commitment to not only preserve our local traditions but also as a unifying factor, a symbol of pride and dignity as a multiracial society.
In the past, Malaysians have mainly tolerated others instead of appreciated, which does not make a very sound foundation for long-term social solidarity. Thus, it is refreshing to hear the Prime Minister calling for the shift from mere tolerance to full acceptance. He said, “if we accept this totally, we would have moved to a higher level. To build a harmonious nation, Malaysians could not leave it to chance but should be serious in their deeds. Such actions must be on a basis that ‘what is good for my community is good for all communities’.” These are words that could bring Malaysia out of unhealthy social discord, but can Malaysians rise to the occasion?
*Names have been changed.