The Concept of the Pan-Malay Union: A discussion

[tonyget]

I also come across Malay posters that says that they deserve these privileges since Malaysia gave so many Chinese citizenships at independent (Which is also true). At independent Malaysia's Chinese population was 35%. Together with Indians and other minorities we made up 50% of Malaysia.

What? Chinese population was 35% (is that including Singapore)? And with this number Chinese still couldn't manage to gain power, that's a real shame, it just shows how useless and submissive Chinese were, didn't have any rebellious spirit.

 

[Nan Yang]

What? Chinese population was 35% (is that including Singapore)? And with this number Chinese still couldn't manage to gain power, that's a real shame, it just shows how useless and submissive Chinese were, didn't have any rebellious spirit.

Yes, we Chinese are so weak because we cannot unite. We are split into so many useless parties its unbelievable. The opposition DAP is the largest Chinese based party (But its an opposition party), then we have a few Chinese based parties within the Government, MCA and Gerakan. Sometime these Chinese based party has to contest in majority Malay area to win !!!!! Then in East Malaysia we have yet another Chinese party.

We also lost Singapore and millions of Chinese voters. Which turned out to be good. Malaysian with the right qualification can work and live in Singapore. Looking at Singapore we (Including the Malays) can see how much Malaysia fell behind.

For the Malays for a long while they only have UMNO. But now they are also split into UMNO and Party Keadilan Rakyat.

But for state elections Chinese can still win. Like in Penang a Chinese majority island state and the base of the DAP oppostion.

Maybe. I do feel the Chinese would crush Malays in a fair fight in economy and education. My concern is Malay household debt is incredibly high. I saw many of their payslip, loans application especially government servants.

True, If the Bumis gives up their privileges, Chinese will take over. If the Bumis hang on to their privileges they will become even less competitive and useless.

Either way they will lose.

You probably heard about Kampong Bharu. This Malay village used to be at the outskirt of KL in the 60s. But as KL grew Kampong Bharu became engulf. Its location is now premier. But its Malay land and can only be sold to Malay so cannot fetch a high price. OTOH Chinese will pay 10X the price. So these Malay landowner just hang on until a day come the land can be sold to the Chinese. They are still waiting and the land get split up to the next generation and next.

 

[Aepsilons]

I guess this is Malaysia's retribution for the botched 1968 Operation Merdeka which was exposed by none other than Pres. Benigno "Noynoy" Aquino III's father, former Sen. Benigno "Ninoy" Aquino, Jr., which in turn is the son of a World War 2 collaborator.

Also, we already had the ARMM which was made possible by the 1976 Tripoli Agreement and the 1996 Final Peace Agreement (with the MNLF), both were interceded, ironically by Muammar Gaddafi. The thing is, the MILF seceded from the MNLF and their objective is to continue the fight for a Philippine-free Bangsamoro... which, as the saying goes "History repeats itself", a splinter group from the MILF, which is the Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters (or BIFF) broke away from the MILF with the same objective the MILF had when it broke away from the MNLF and there are some news that states that the BIFF and MNLF join forces and recently, the BIFF pledge their allegiance to the ISIS/ISIL.

So the former Sen. Ninoy Aquino Jr, was the son of a World War II collaborator ? I do understand that his father, Mr. Benigno Aquino Sr, worked with the government of President Jose P. Laurel, the President of the Philippines during the Japanese occupation. But why should there be a negative connotation linked to the fact that he served in government during the time of occupation? Afterall, irrespective of Japan's military occupation, the civil government of President Laurel ensured a systemic administration throughout the local government units, right? I think he is judged unfairly for this, given he had served as representative since the 1920s, and spearheaded the Philippine Commonwealth Government since its infancy.

I understand that Filipinos will have some angst towards the Japanese occupation period, but the Philippine Government during that time was necessary , else there would have been total pandemonium and anarchy during the occupation. And that would have been met with greater, more severe response from the Imperial Japanese Army onto the Filipino population.

 

[Cossack25A1]

So the former Sen. Ninoy Aquino Jr, was the son of a World War II collaborator ? I do understand that his father, Mr. Benigno Aquino Sr, worked with the government of President Jose P. Laurel, the President of the Philippines during the Japanese occupation. But why should there be a negative connotation linked to the fact that he served in government during the time of occupation? Afterall, irrespective of Japan's military occupation, the civil government of President Laurel ensured a systemic administration throughout the local government units, right? I think he is judged unfairly for this, given he had served as representative since the 1920s, and spearheaded the Philippine Commonwealth Government since its infancy.

I understand that Filipinos will have some angst towards the Japanese occupation period, but the Philippine Government during that time was necessary , else there would have been total pandemonium and anarchy during the occupation. And that would have been met with greater, more severe response from the Imperial Japanese Army onto the Filipino population.

Technically, during those times, a collaborator means someone working for the Japanese...though this is from the point of view of those who are sided with the Americans, thus it can be also used to describe people working for the Americans.

The thing with the Aquino is that Aquino Sr. worked with the Second Republic (which is a bit a source of angst for some Filipinos), Ninoy Aquino was the one who exposed Operation Merdeka to the world which then led to severing diplomatic ties between PH and Malaysia for some time.

 

[Aepsilons]

Technically, during those times, a collaborator means someone working for the Japanese...though this is from the point of view of those who are sided with the Americans, thus it can be also used to describe people working for the Americans.

The thing with the Aquino is that Aquino Sr. worked with the Second Republic (which is a bit a source of angst for some Filipinos), Ninoy Aquino was the one who exposed Operation Merdeka to the world which then led to severing diplomatic ties between PH and Malaysia for some time.

What I am impressed with is the direct link both the Aquinos and the Marcoses have. It is through President Jose P. Laurel. Aquino Sr. served under Laurel, the Philippine President during Japanese Occupation. Interestingly enough it was President Jose P. Laurel who said the following about Marcos, "That man, someday, will lead this nation".

I'm just very curious about the history of the region, friend. I've read into the lives of the local leaders in Southeast Asia during Japanese occupation and despite the fact that they did cooperate with Japanese forces, they also did much good for their own people during the inter-war years. Given, the war and fighting was not an environment for growth and development...still they tried. In regards to Laurel's Government, they tried the best they could.

The thing with the Aquino is that Aquino Sr. worked with the Second Republic (which is a bit a source of angst for some Filipinos), Ninoy Aquino was the one who exposed Operation Merdeka to the world which then led to severing diplomatic ties between PH and Malaysia for some time.

Indeed. This may be considered a blessing and a curse. A blessing because it prevented a war between Malaysia and the Philippines. A curse because it exposed Marcos' interventionist plans, and doomed Philippine plans to acquire Sabah.

But given the British, and Australian response to aid Malaysia during the Indonesian-Malaysian Konfrontasi, I think it would have been against the Philippines' interest to have had a war with Malaysia.

 

[Cossack25A1]

What I am impressed with is the direct link both the Aquinos and the Marcoses have. It is through President Jose P. Laurel. Aquino Sr. served under Laurel, the Philippine President during Japanese Occupation. Interestingly enough it was President Jose P. Laurel who said the following about Marcos, "That man, someday, will lead this nation".

I'm just very curious about the history of the region, friend. I've read into the lives of the local leaders in Southeast Asia during Japanese occupation and despite the fact that they did cooperate with Japanese forces, they also did much good for their own people during the inter-war years. Given, the war and fighting was not an environment for growth and development...still they tried. In regards to Laurel's Government, they tried the best they could.

Well I can't say much about the history of the PH during those times but Marcos did lead the nation but sadly it didn't turned well during the 80s (the 60s and 70s were the high-point of his administration despite that in 1972 he declared Martial Law).

 

[tonyget]

Yes, we Chinese are so weak because we cannot unite. We are split into so many useless parties its unbelievable. The opposition DAP is the largest Chinese based party (But its an opposition party), then we have a few Chinese based parties within the Government, MCA and Gerakan. Sometime these Chinese based party has to contest in majority Malay area to win !!!!! Then in East Malaysia we have yet another Chinese party.

We also lost Singapore and millions of Chinese voters. Which turned out to be good. Malaysian with the right qualification can work and live in Singapore. Looking at Singapore we (Including the Malays) can see how much Malaysia fell behind.

For the Malays for a long while they only have UMNO. But now they are also split into UMNO and Party Keadilan Rakyat.

But for state elections Chinese can still win. Like in Penang a Chinese majority island state and the base of the DAP oppostion.

None of these mean anything as long as you can't prevent yourself from being repressed by Malays

 

[Aegis DDG]

I am not talking about you, specifically.

The fact is that there is racial animosity between Malays and Chinese, but the fault goes both ways.

The Chinese in Malaysia (and Indonesia) ensconced themselves into a position of elite minority by a combination of hard work and rampant ethnic nepotism. They look down upon the natives with a rancid racism that would make the KKK blush! They have their own racially pure schools, discourage intermarriage with the natives, and generally hold themselves aloof.

The Chinese are not unique in this. The same elitist racism pervades the affluent Indian minority in Africa.

All these minority groups came during the colonial era, when the natives were subjugated, and identified themselves more with the colonialists than with the natives. No surprise, then, that that natives reciprocate the racism back to these elitist communities.

The Malays are trying to reclaim control of their land and redress the wrongs of the colonial era.

This comment one thousand percent true. This is an common trait in British colonialism where Anglo-Saxons don't form an nucleus in an colony's society (e.g. can't be settled like temperate Americans, Australia). They either do divide and conquer of the indigenous when the demographic map suits then (like the British Raj after the 1857 mutiny or the Tutsi/Hutu division where Europeans used the Physical Caucasian features to justify elevation of the Tutsi in colonial society) or settle railway building/mining coolies in regions where the native population are fragmented and isolated to make an impact (like Uganda) and thus those coolies can be in position of power because of lack of European populations to disturb them (the Indian minority in S.Africa never grew into such an strong political power because an hostile native white population who fear competition and White Australia policy prevented Asian immigration in 19th century for fear of being dominated by E.Asian and South Asian merchants and business like in SEA and beyond). The native population get's marginalized and their descendants follow an stereotype threat that makes them decline in economic affairs aided by colonise policies (like the ban of Native Kenyans doing trade and Sunni Syrian in French rule where sidelined for Christian Merchants and civil servants who were loyal to Paris). The once poor and humble Coolies with an few generations join the colonial power and become part of the elites and excludes themselves from the population and form ethnic enclaves and support each other's business via Ethnic Despotism which breeds resentment amongst people in Indonesia/Malaysia/Uganda/Kenya etc. When colonial rule ends, these model minorities may end up becoming the informal power behind the nations economy (malaysia or Kenya) or face dangers which form them to flee the nation or become politicly quite (Indonsia in 1998/Uganda expulsion of Indians in 1970s). But there always exceptions, for example after the Somalia civil war broke out in 1990s, Somali migrants become the dominate economic power in E.Africa/Kenya/Uganda and even in the Gulf States at the expense of S.Asians.

 

[INDIC]

They either do divide and conquer of the indigenous when the demographic map suits then (like the British Raj after the 1857 mutiny or the Tutsi/Hutu division where Europeans used the Physical Caucasian features to justify elevation of the Tutsi in colonial society)

British were indeed into divide and rule but 1857 revolt wasn't that thing, it was a revolt that actually unified many in India. British were mainly into Hindu vs Muslim and North India vs South India, first one Hindu vs Muslim repeated lots of fruits for them. Incidents like Partition of Bengal in 1905 and introducing communal electorate after World War 1 was the part of that policy only, while the invention of the Aryan invasion theory by Max Mueller(A German with British nationality) and hypothetical Aryan and Dravidian races was the part of dividing North and South India, although it failed to bear any fruits for Brits. (Germans invented the Aryan race but Brits made a full use of it in India to divide North and South India).

 

[Aegis DDG]

@al-Hasani What your opinion the Somali minority the Gulf nations? Why are they treat more with respect then the Ethiopian/habasha groups in SA, UAE etc?

British were indeed into divide and rule but 1857 revolt wasn't that thing, it was a revolt that actually unified many in India. British were mainly into Hindu vs Muslim and North India vs South India, first one Hindu vs Muslim repeated lots of fruits for them. Incidents like Partition of Bengal in 1905 and introducing communal electorate after World War 1 was the part of that policy only, while the invention of the Aryan invasion theory by Max Mueller(A German with British nationality) and hypothetical Aryan and Dravidian races was the part of dividing North and South India, although it failed to bear any fruits for Brits. (Germans invented the Aryan race but Brits made a full use of it in India to divide North and South India).

Hence why I mentioned the 1857 revolt. The British saw how united India became and wanted to fragment the nation via religious and racial division.

 

[INDIC]

Hence why I mentioned the 1857 revolt. The British saw how united India became and wanted to fragment the nation via religious and racial division.

British never imagined 1857 Rebellion was coming to them that screwed the East India Company. Although after the revolt they did came up with more divisive measures so that such thing never happen again.

 

[Aegis DDG]

British never imagined 1857 Rebellion was coming to them that screwed the East India Company. Although after the revolt they did came up with more divisive measures so that such thing never happen again.

Before the revolt, the EIC was quite moderate to Indians in terms of racism but was economically and politicly reckless (e.g. pig and beef cartilages for musket balls in the Indian army). Only After the revolt and the crowing of Queen Victoria's crowing as Empress of India, did the British actually put large scale officials from Europe and settlers to keep an eye on everyday affairs and used Race as instrument not only to divide the sub-continent but also to place Anglo on top the racial ladder to segregate Indians from public building (no White-Woman-Indian man marriages, Some Top hotels in Bombay said 'No Dogs, No Indians' etc)

 

[al-Hasani]

@al-Hasani What your opinion the Somali minority the Gulf nations? Why are they treat more with respect then the Ethiopian/habasha groups in SA, UAE etc?



Hence why I mentioned the 1857 revolt. The British saw how united India became and wanted to fragment the nation via religious and racial division.

What is the Gulf? Do you mean countries on the Arabian Peninsula or Eastern Arabia? There is nothing called "Gulf Arab". It's a new inaccurate description that has arisen in the last few decades. The only thing that resembles that is an Arabic dialect which is called Khaliji. That dialect is only spoken by about 200.000 people in KSA out of close to 35 million nowadays. Exclusively in the Eastern Region bordering the Gulf. Similarly when it comes to the music genre of the same name. Basically what you mean with "Gulf" and "Gulf Arabs" is the historical and ancient region of Eastern Arabia. It stretches from Southern Iraq in the North all the way down to Oman in the South. It covers Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Eastern Region of KSA (only coastal!) and UAE. Once again mainly coastal. The cultures of those countries/regions all differ from each other although they have many similarities. For instance the cultures of Bahrain and Oman are traditionally vastly different from those in Kuwait and Qatar for instance. Just to make one example.

Eastern Arabia was home to many ancient civilizations (Semitic in origin mostly) such as the Dilmun which was a trading partner of the neighboring Sumerians in the North and the Indus Valley Civilization across the Arabian Sea in what is now Pakistan. Likewise the Sumerians considered Eastern Arabia their homeland and even wrote so in the Epic of Gilgamesh.

Here you can get a short overview.

Eastern Arabia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am for instance from Hijaz which is across the Arabian Peninsula next to the Red Sea. It's a LONG way from the Gulf or Eastern Arabia as it is more accurately called. Our culture is very similar to the nearby Shami (Levantine), nearby Egyptian and in the South to the nearby Yemeni one. All 3 are again distinctive depending on the region.

To answer your question.

First of all I am not sure what you mean with "respect". In the Arab world there are quite a few million Afro-Arabs. I think that they make up 2-3% of the entire 500 million big Arab population. That's 10-15 million people. Probably a bit more even if you include those that are mixed with Afro-Arabs. In KSA alone they make up 10% of the population.

Somalians are mostly Cushitic people unlike half of the Ethiopians and Eritreans who are Southern Semites or at least they speak Southern Semitic languages. What is special with Somalia is that there is a sizable Arab community and many Somalians have Arab ancestry (especially from nearby Yemen) and many of the tribes if not most trace their ancestry to ancient Arabian families, clans, dynasties, tribes etc. Whether this is correct or not we cannot know with certainty. Moreover Somalians are exclusively Muslims almost while Habesha people (despite having closer ties in terms of ancestry and history) are not necessarily Muslims but Christians too. Also they speak Arabic as a second language and have done so for over 1 millennium. Somali itself has many Arabic loanwords like most languages in the Muslim world.

You should really ask such questions on the Arab Section of the forum (where you will get a reply from more people) or the ME/Africa section of the forum although it is full of trolls.

This thread is good for such questions:

Arabic Coffee shop | Page 270

You are Ethiopian right? There are two Ethiopian users here who have very good ties with us Arabs. @ebray @Belew_Kelew

Sorry Belew Kelew is Eritrean.

Secondly outside of a few Ethiopian troublemakers in KSA (mainly one neighborhood in Riyadh) there are no problems with Arabs and Habesha people whatsoever. In fact most of our Afro-Arabs come from the Horn of Africa or at least many do. You can even see that by their facial characteristics as Horners are distinct from other Africans.

Anyway funny that you mention me in a thread about Indonesians/Malaysians just while I had a discussion with my Indonesian brother @Indos in the "Arabic Coffee Shop" thread.

We don't bite. Arab and especially Arabian hospitality is world-known for a reason, you know?!

I might as well use this thread as an opportunity to extend my greetings to the millions of Arab-Indonesians and Arab-Malaysians out there and you can do the same vice versa in terms of your communities in the Arab world, especially, Hijaz. Also greetings to the Arab community in Brunei and Singapore and all the best of successes to South East Asia as a whole!

@Indos @Wahhab2701

 

[Nike]

This comment one thousand percent true. This is an common trait in British colonialism where Anglo-Saxons don't form an nucleus in an colony's society (e.g. can't be settled like temperate Americans, Australia). They either do divide and conquer of the indigenous when the demographic map suits then (like the British Raj after the 1857 mutiny or the Tutsi/Hutu division where Europeans used the Physical Caucasian features to justify elevation of the Tutsi in colonial society) or settle railway building/mining coolies in regions where the native population are fragmented and isolated to make an impact (like Uganda) and thus those coolies can be in position of power because of lack of European populations to disturb them (the Indian minority in S.Africa never grew into such an strong political power because an hostile native white population who fear competition and White Australia policy prevented Asian immigration in 19th century for fear of being dominated by E.Asian and South Asian merchants and business like in SEA and beyond). The native population get's marginalized and their descendants follow an stereotype threat that makes them decline in economic affairs aided by colonise policies (like the ban of Native Kenyans doing trade and Sunni Syrian in French rule where sidelined for Christian Merchants and civil servants who were loyal to Paris). The once poor and humble Coolies with an few generations join the colonial power and become part of the elites and excludes themselves from the population and form ethnic enclaves and support each other's business via Ethnic Despotism which breeds resentment amongst people in Indonesia/Malaysia/Uganda/Kenya etc. When colonial rule ends, these model minorities may end up becoming the informal power behind the nations economy (malaysia or Kenya) or face dangers which form them to flee the nation or become politicly quite (Indonsia in 1998/Uganda expulsion of Indians in 1970s). But there always exceptions, for example after the Somalia civil war broke out in 1990s, Somali migrants become the dominate economic power in E.Africa/Kenya/Uganda and even in the Gulf States at the expense of S.Asians.

Indonesia? are you sure? Indonesia was part of Dutch colonial not the Brits, 98 riots and the cahoots aftermath has nothing to do with the ethnical division as it was an leftover of Political chaos left by Soeharto administration. As i was stated in my previous comments in other threads, it was Javanese and Madura peoples who got killed and their properties got burned and looted at most than the Chinese ones (98 student Shooting and chaos, 99 Aceh, 99 Sambas, Ambon riots, and other riots in Indonesia you should look them as a chain of event not as a single occasion to understand what happened in Indonesia at the times and how we can still standing today almost untouched).

 

[Nan Yang]

Indonesian perceives the term of Malay (Melayu) more as cultural identity of some ethnic group of people live in Western part of the country. The rest of us like the Javanese, Sundanese, Balinese, Timorese, Bugis, Minahasa, Papuan, etc never considered themselves as Malay.

What about Minangkabau ?