TABLE OF CONTENT
1.0
INTRODUCTION
2.0
HISTORY LEADING TO AFFIRMATIVE
ACTION
2.1
THE AFTERMATH OF MAY 13 RIOT
2.2
HOW DID THE NEP FARE?
3.0
THE ETHICS OF NEP
3.1
DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE
3.1.1
STATISTIC
3.2
COMPENSATORY JUSTICE
3.3
ARGUMENTS AGAINST NEP
3.4
IS THE NEP ISLAMIC?
4.0 CONCLUSION
3.0 The
Ethics of NEP
In Defence of Affirmative Action
3.1 Distributive Justice
Affirmative actions are often defended on the ground
of distributive justice. In essence,
it requires that society benefits (and burdens) be distributed equitably
amongst the races and/or groups. As a result of past discriminations by the
British colonials, Malays and other natives have been denied of their fair
share of opportunities. The British colonial has a divide-and-rule policy in
bringing the Chinese and Indian labourers to Peninsular Malaya, and it had
served their agenda, politically and economically very well.
During the British rule, there exists an irregular
infra-structural development that benefited certain groups while neglecting
others. The distribution of wealth was not equitable. There was inequality in
sharing the growing economic pie between Europeans and Asians (Malays and
non-Malays), immigrant (Chinese/Indians) and indigenous (Malays) population,
between Chinese and Indian immigrants and between Malay aristocrats and the
Malay peasants. These gaps were incidentally part of the divide-and-rule policy
of the British.
Entrenched and subtle policies perpetuated by the
British colonials, continuing the tradition of the Portuguese and Dutch
predecessors, have denied the Malays and other native populations their fair
share of the economic cake, leaving them out of the equation totally, isolated
from the rest of the economic activities that were taking place under the
British rule. While shutting the door on the indigenous Malay, the British
pursued a policy of encouraging labourers from China
and India
with totally alien cultures, languages, and religions from the native
population.
Can the distributive justice be used to justify the
NEP? For that we need some hard evidence on the condition of the Malays prior
to the implementation of the NEP.
3.1.1 The
statistic never lies
Let’s take a peak at the economic and social
conditions of the Malaysian society prior to the implementation of the NEP and
see if a pattern can be seen to justify affirmative actions for the Malays.
This can be see from the table below.
Table 1 The Mean Income of Households
by Ethnic Groups 157-1970[1]
1957,
$
|
1967/68,
M$
|
1970,
$
|
|
Malays
|
144
|
130
|
172
|
Chinese
|
272
|
321
|
294
|
Indian
|
217
|
253
|
304
|
Others
|
NA
|
839
|
813
|
It can be seen that comparatively
Malays are significantly less affluent compared to the other races. This is
despite the fact that they are the biggest race group in 1970. It should be
noted that even after more than 10 years of independence, in spite of the
government development programs, the economic plight of the Malays had hardly
improved.
Table 2 Communal Electorate Composition
in the Federation of Malaya
Community
|
1955
|
1957
|
||
Malays
|
1,078,000
|
84.2%
|
1,217,000
|
56.8%
|
Chinese
|
143,000
|
11.2%
|
764,000
|
35.6%
|
Indian
|
50,000
|
3.9%
|
159,000
|
7.4%
|
Others
|
9,000
|
0.2%
|
4,000
|
0.2%
|
Table 3 Total Graduates by Community (1959-1970)
Malay
|
Chinese
|
Others
|
||||
B. Arts
|
1369
|
1404
|
603
|
|||
B. Science
|
69
|
1448
|
150
|
|||
B.Engineering
|
4
|
408
|
41
|
|||
B.AgriScience
|
40
|
162
|
21
|
|||
MBBS
|
12
|
108
|
9
|
|||
B.Economics
|
112
|
185
|
31
|
|||
Within a decade of independence, Malay
students constituted only 20 percent of the enrollment in the 1962/63 session.
The figure was even worse in the context of Science and Engineering faculties’
enrollment (only 4.6 percent). The ratio of science graduate of Malay to
Chinese was 1:20, Medicine 1:9, while in engineering 1:100 can be seen from the
above table. Similar disparities in the racial composition of the teaching
staff at the university can also be seen with
only 51 Malays, 143 Chinese, 75 Indians, and 119 others.
Table
Membership of Registered Professionals by Ethnic Group 1970
Profession
|
Bumiputra
|
Chinese
|
Indians
|
Others
|
Total
|
||||
Architects
|
12
|
224
|
|||||||
Accountants
|
40
|
387
|
|||||||
Engineers
|
66
|
643
|
|||||||
Dentists
|
20
|
579
|
|||||||
Doctors
|
79
|
954
|
|||||||
Veterinarians
|
8
|
6
|
|||||||
The
gap between Bumiputra and non-Bumiputra professionals was also yawning. While
Bumiputra constituted more than 50 percent of the population, in term of
percentage, they constituted only 4.9 percent of professionals.
The
economic disparity can further be highlighted by the following facts:-
· The value of property in Kuala Lumpur owned by the
Malays was less than 5% whereas the Chinese owned more than 75%
· Ownership of public listed companies
listed on the Stock Exchange was 1.3% by the Malays and 89.2% by the Chinese
· Capital ownership in limited companies
was 1.5% by the Malays and 22.8% by the Chinese.
Another
important statistic that can paint a clearer picture of the imbalance between
the races is pertaining to the poverty amongst the races. Of the Malays, 65
percents were poor, whereas 26 percent of the Chinese and 39 percent of Indians
were poor. In other words, Malay accounted for 74% of the poor, followed by
Chinese 17 percent, and Indians 8 percent.
Thus
from the above statistic it was clear that Malays were pretty much lagging
behind other races when it comes to economic affluence. Such a gap between the races was one of the
major factors that caused the eruption of the May 13 riot in Kuala Lumpur in 1969. Such an incident could
probably have be prevented had such distributive justice be implemented prior
to the NEP
[1] Fridaus Haji Abdullah, Affirmative Action Policy in Malaysa: To
restructure Society, To Eradicate Poverty, Ethnic Studies Report, Vol XV, No.
2, July 1997
No comments:
Post a Comment