Malaysia and the Myth of `Tanah Melayu' (Part I)
Written by Farish A. Noor Wed, 22 August 2007

We are sustained by myths only as long as they are empowering,
inspiring, instrumental and serve our interests; yet when those very
same myths provide us with little else than the false comfort of an
unreconstructed nostalgia for a past that never existed, then they
turn into cages that imprison us for life. The myth of a unique
European `civilisational genius' has only helped to parochialise
Europe even more; the staid discourse of `Asian values' merely denies
the fact that Asian civilisations would not have developed as they
did without contact with the outside world; and the myth of a pure
and uninterrupted development of Indo-Aryan culture has only opened
the way for the rise of right-wing Hindutva Fascists in the Indian
subcontinent. Notwithstanding their claims to standing proud and
tall, the demagogues who utter such pedestrian nonsense remain
stunted, as their logic, on the stage of global history: testimony to
the claim that those whose confidence is founded in stilts can only
remain handicapped for life...

A nation that is grown up is one that is mature enough to realise
that it can dispense with such myths, particularly when the honeyed
nectar of mythology reveals itself as nothing more than poison. Yet
poison has become our draught, and this nation of ours is ailing to
the core by now.

The symptoms of the malady are all around us these days and we see
them readily enough: As the asinine debate over a rap rendition of
the national anthem turns bilious and takes on an increasingly
racialised mien, forcing all sides to retreat to the hallowed
sanctuary of communal and racial identity, the nation's attention has
been diverted from truly pressing issues concerning the economy and
the spate of potentially explosive legal cases currently being fought
out in the courts of the land.

The vernacular press assumes the role of champions of each respective
community, and racial overtones are clearly seen and felt in the
language of national politics. Yet nobody points to the real issue at
stake, even if we need to discuss the rap video rendered by the young
Wee Meng Chee, which surely should be this: If a young Malaysian has
seen fit to deliver his tirade against all that he sees wrong in the
country in terms that are racially-determined , is this not a
reflection of the racialised and divisive politics that already
reigns in Malaysia, courtesy of the ruling National Front coalition
led by UMNO in the first place? The racialised logic that rests in
Meng Chee's rap is only a mirror reflection of the racialised
politics already at work in Malaysia already. So are we Malaysians so
ashamed of ourselves that we can no longer look at ourselves squarely
in the face and accept the monstrosity that stands before us today?

Yet the editorials in the vernacular press are baying for blood and
Meng Chee, they insist, must be brought to book. Amidst this furore
of chest-thumping theatrics and protestations of communal insult and
outrage, we hear the communitarians among us blare out again and
again: `Jangan tunduk', `Defend our pride', `kurang ajar' and so
forth. No, reason and rational debate are no longer welcomed in
Malaysia that is `truly Asia', and this homeland for some will demand
its pound of flesh from others. Meng Chee is not the first and
certainly will not be the last to suffer from the slighted
sensitivities of those whose comfort zones and essentialised
identities are sacrosanct and inviolable. Previously others have also
been brought to the village tribunal of the mob for allegedly
insulting race and religion as well. (Here I write from bitter
experience myself.)

Yet the irony of ironies behind this tableau of flaring tempers and
heated emotions is the skewered (and now silenced) appeal for us, as
one nation, to remain united and to respect the diversity among us.
The sonorous voice of the state trembles and falters as it mouths
this language of double-speak that fails to convince: On the one hand
we maintain the lie - and it is a lie, let us admit that at least -
that this is a happy land of multiculturalism and diversity where
every shade of colour in the pluralist rainbow is represented and has
its place. On the other hand the very same mouth that utters these
sweet platitudes tells us that not far beneath the diversity and
pluralism that rests on the scratched surface of Malaysia is the
understated understanding that some communities - or rather one in
particular - deserves a better place in the sun; namely, the
Bumiputeras. Why?

Have we become a schitzophrenic nation blissfully unaware of the
contradictions that have become so heartbreakingly apparent to
others? Meng Chee's unpardonable `offence' was to have slighted the
pride and identity of one community which claims to be part of
Malaysia and yet remains strangely aloof from the rest of us. The
great act of treason he is accused of committing - offending the
dignity of a specific community and its creed - rings hollow when we
consider the bile and vitriol that has emanated from the leaders of
that community itself, ranging from the drawing of daggers in public
to the language of blood and belonging that has been repeated, time
and again, by its leaders. The soap box orators of UMNO and its Youth
Wing in particular have demanded that others respect the special
rights and privileges of the Malays, while forgetting the fact that
for the past five decades we - Malaysians - have had to put up with
their own brand of small town politics incessantly.

Yet this discourse of communal pride and identity is sustained by one
crucial myth: that this land of ours is a competed and contested
territory where two nations are in constant competition: The nation-
state called `Malaysia' and the mythical land called `Tanah Melayu'.

Tanah Melayu Revisited

The skin of the demagogue is ever so sensitive, so fragile, in the
face of the sound argument. As soon as the mention of a contrary idea
is made, it bristles and reacts; the hand reaches for the keris; the
foot steps on the soap-box; the mouth opens to utter the word `May'
to be followed by the cryptic number thirteen...

Perhaps the sensitivity we see can be accounted for by the fact that
the corpus of postcolonial ethno-nationalist politics in this country
is sustained by the singular myth that this patch of God's earth was
and is a land that `belongs' to one community in particular. From
that myth issues forth the other related claims to special
privileges, special rights, special allocations and entitlements.

The myth is sustained by the idea put forth that prior to the coming-
into-being of this nation called `Malaysia' there was once this
mythical land called `Tanah Melayu'. Yet the historian would be hard
pressed indeed to find a source to back this claim, for the
embarrassing thing about our epic histories and hikayats of old is
that there is scarcely a mention of the word. For years - if not more
than a decade by now - I have been looking for this mythical land so
loved and cherished by the young bloods and hotspurs of UMNO, yet I
have never discovered it. The Hikayat Merong Mahawangsa (written in
stages between the late 17th to 18th centuries) does not mention it;
nor does the Hikayat Patani, the Taj-us-Salatin (Mahkota Segala Raja-
Raja), the Hikayat Shah Mardan, Hikayat Inderaputera, Silsilah Bugis,
Hikayat Pasai, Hikayat Siak, etc.

And finally one day while trawling through the flea markets and
antique bazaars of Europe I came across a dull and worn-out copper
coin with the word `Tanah Melayu' stamped on it, dating to the late
19th century.

Having taken it home, I looked it up in the reference books I had
only to discover that it was one of those hybrid coins of dubious
worth that were used in the trade between European colonial companies
then stationed in Singapore and Malacca with Malay traders from the
(then weakened) Malay sultanates on the Peninsula. Used as loose
coinage in commercial transactions that were at best unequal and at
worst exploitative to the Malay traders then, the coins had a
decidedly counterfeit feel to them, and while registering the
lightness of its weight in the palm of my hand, the thought came to
me: That this coin, with the word `Tanah Melayu' stamped on it in
Jawi alphabet, sums up the irony of the past and the painful
realities of colonialism then. The Malay kingdoms had been colonised,
sidelined and diminished, and all that was given back to the Malays
was a dull copper coin with the myth of `Tanah Melayu' stamped on it
in so casual a manner.

Colonialism had robbed the natives of Asia of their lands, their
history and culture; introduced the divisive politics of race and
ethnicity as part of the ideology of divide and rule, and had created
a plural economy where the colonial masters reigned supreme. In the
decades and centuries to come the colonised subjects would be doubly
colonised again as they internalised the logic and epistemology of
Empire, thereby completing the work of the colonial masters who had
colonised their lands, stolen their resources, but not altered their
minds.

Today, as race-based ethno-nationalist politics prevails in Malaysia
and while our communities remain divided along sectarian race and
religion-based lines, we lament the loss of the Malaysian ideal that
was perhaps never there in the first place. The hounding of bloggers,
activists and students like Meng Chee is a reminder that the
frontiers of race, religion and ethnicity remain as permanent scars
that have disfigured the landscape of our nation, apparently
permanently.

And as the virulent voices in the vernacular editorials of the local
press call for vengeance against Meng Chee, perhaps they should ask
themselves this simple and honest question: For half a century now
the so-called `non-Malays' of Malaysia have been asked to attest
their loyalty and commitment to the Malaysian idea and ideal; to
relegate their cultural history to the background; to adopt the
national language, culture and even dress in an attempt to assimilate
to the reality of life in Malaysia.

But tell me, dear reader, how many Malays in Malaysia are truly
Malaysian; and how many Malays think of themselves as Malaysian and
are committed to that very same ideal of a Malaysian Malaysia? Are
the Malays Malaysians who live in Malaysia? Or are the Malays still
living in the mythological land of `Tanah Melayu', an idea dreamt of
by Orientalist scholars and administrators during the colonial era,
as a worthless compensation to a people who had been colonised and
whose pride was reduced to the worth of a copper coin?

----------------------------------------------------------------
This e-mail has been sent via JARING webmail at http://www.jaring.my