No such thing as 'social contract'?

For Royal Professor Ungku Aziz to say that there was no social contract between the founding fathers of our nation, this has put a nail in the coffin on those ultra-Malays who still see Ketuanan Melayu as a cornerstone for race relationships in this country.

While other matured and well-developed nations have put to rest the ‘master and slave’ relationship among the various races, it baffles the mind of thinking people why should such policy still remain relevant in this 21st century here in Malaysia. We might call our British colonial masters ‘Tuan’ or ‘Sir’ in the early days but after half-a-century of independence, don’t you think that such thinking is out of date?

Mind you, the United States who imported Negros from Africa a few centuries ago to be the white man’s slave might have a black man to be their next president if Barrack Obama wins the ticket to the White House in the coming US presidential elections.

Malay rights have been ensconced in the federal constitution and cannot be taken away unless by a two-thirds majority in Parliament subject to the Malay rulers approval. No one doubts that in the early days, the bumiputera, especially the Malays, needed affirmative actions to take them out of their cycle of poverty to be on par with other races, especially the Chinese. But the NEP has outlived it purpose and it should be replaced with a new policy which will eradicate poverty regardless of race and creed.

The playing field should be more even and let the best among the best compete among themselves in order for our nation to progress in the future. Why should rich Malays with their ‘right’ political connections obtain a big slice of the economic cake while the poor people are denied such opportunities to get them out of their cycle of poverty?

To be a respected race, the Malays must discard the notion that the government will always have to provide them with opportunities in studies and business as if it was their birth right. The Malays should be able to compete with the other races on an equal footing and work hard to improve their lot rather than expecting handouts from the government.

Ungku Aziz , a towering Malay whose intellectual thinking is way ahead of his time, has opened a Pandora Box’s with his outright statement that there is no written ‘social contract’ among the various races prior to independence. Umno politicians will now cry foul about his daring statement as they will always use the Ketuanan Melayu bogey to win the hearts and minds of the Malays to support their cause. .

But the Malays cannot be in a denial mode anymore. We must accept the fact that in the brave new world that we live in where people and capital move to places where no restrictions are imposed, the old way of doing business by having quota systems will drive capital away from our country and the people will suffer in the end if business opportunities pass our shores.

The Malays should look at their Singapore brethren who are no less the worse although unlike their Malaysian cousins, they does not have any NEP policy to get a leg up in society. There is no short cut for success unless you work hard for it. - MK.

*********

My 2 cents opinion,

It is absurd to deny that there was no social contract between the races in Malaysia eventhough such denial came from a much respected Royal Professor.

It is also absurd to say that provisions concerning special position and special privilege of the Malays as embedded in Federal Constitution were normal and natural provisions when Lord Reid drafted the Constitution.

Lord Reid's Commission used Indian Constitution model to draft the Malaya Constitution and it would be highly unlikely that the Indian's model had in it ready provisions for special position and privillege for the Malays.

So where did these provisions come from?

Records showed that numerous memorandum were sent by all races in Malaya in response to Lord Reid's draft Constitution.

Could a draft Constitution for Malaya be finalised if it was not acceptable by Malayan people who consisted of Malays,Chinese and Indians?

Only when Malayan people accepted the said Constitution, legally and socially, the Constitution became the Constitution of the Country.

When Malayan people accepted the said Constitution , were they not supposed to be bound by it and obligated to uphold it at all times

If this is not a social contract so tell me what it really is. A religion?

Would it make a Malay less recpectable because of his conviction in upholding the Constitution as demanded by Rukun Negara (the Country's idealogy)?

Quoting the words of a former Lord President in his book - "Costitution Law and Judiciary" (translation) - "Rukun Negara tidak mengenakan kewajipan yang lebih dan tidak memberikan hak yang lebih dengan apa yang sudah terkandung dalam Perlembagaan.Jadi, usaha untuk mematuhi Rukun Negara tidak lebih daripada usaha untuk mematuh Perlembagaan...."

My question is...

1. Would it make a Malay less respectable for upholding and abiding the Constitution of this Country?

2. Dalam hubungan antara kaum yang wujud di Malaysia pada hari ini, di mana yang Ungku Aziz sifatkan sebagai master and slave relationship? Siapa yang dia maksudkan sebagai hamba dan siapa pula sebagai tuan?

3. Selepas mencapai kemerdekaan terutama sekali apabila bermulanya era pembangunan di bawah kepimpinan Tun Razak sehinggalah ke hari ini, kita tidak pun lagi tunduk kepada British. Malah kita telah mengembalikan maruah Malaysia apabila Tun Dr Mahathir telah berjaya mengambil alih pemilikan Guthrie daripada British yang pada ketika itu telah membangkitkan kemarahan pemimpin-pemimpin Barat kerana telah dimalukan oleh bekas koloni mereka melalui tindakan bijak tersebut...

In making comparison, the very first rule that we need to observe is to ensure the fundamental issue of the two must be similar or at par...Comparing US and Malaysia will not result into a fair comparison. A lot of reasons for me saying that. Historical factor, political system, current economic system as well as the social demands in US and Malaysia are very much different...

If US really celebrates equality, why is it in its social system, discrimination still exist, proper education is not made available to the black communities even though the US government concedes to the fact that education is now one of the basic right that everybody in US should get...

The analogy with the Malay in Singapore really make me laugh! They even run to Malaysia to earn a better living and to get protection.

Birthright! Prince has right to claim the King's seat. Social contract is just like birth right. Malay has special right. Immigrants have citizenship rights. So we must respect with each others. We must know and understand the fundamental of the foundation of Malaysia. It's just that simple.

Agaknya, apa sebenarnya yang cuba dibuktikan oleh Ungku Aziz melalui kenyataannya ini?