Ethnic Relations and Nation-Building in Southeast Asia

6. Texts and Collective Memories: The Construction of “Chinese” and “Chineseness” from the Perspective of a Malay

109 1: Chinese Ethnicity in New Southeast Asian Nations ฀฀฀Chapter฀6 Texts and Collective Memories: The Construction of “Chinese” and “Chineseness” from the Perspective of a Malay SHAMSUL A.B. The present chapter, I believe, is one of the few attempts in the field of Malaysian studies, especially in the sub-field of ethnic relations in Malaysia, to make a comparison as to how Malay and Chinese ethnic identities have been formed in the Malaysian context, both from authority-defined (read: texts) and everyday-defined (read: memories) perspectives. The novelty of this attempt perhaps lies in the fact that it is viewed from the objective and subjective perspective of a Malay person, namely, the author. It goes without saying that the chapter is also an invitation for a critical discourse on the theme, which to this very moment has been a source of continued contestation both in the academia and the realpolitik contexts in Malaysia. I am referring to the hot public debate being conducted in the mass media in Malaysia at present on the issue of the teaching of Mathematics and Science in English in Chinese- and Malay-medium schools. Reproduced฀from฀Ethnic Relations and Nation-Building in Southeast Asia: The Case of the Ethnic Chinese, edited฀by฀Leo฀Suryadinata฀(Singapore:฀Institute฀of฀Southeast฀Asian฀Studies,฀2004).฀This฀ version฀was฀obtained฀electronically฀direct฀from฀the฀publisher฀on฀condition฀that฀copyright฀is฀not฀ infringed.฀No฀part฀of฀this฀publication฀may฀be฀reproduced฀without฀the฀prior฀permission฀of฀the฀Institute฀of฀ Southeast฀Asian฀Studies.฀Individual฀articles฀are฀available฀at฀©฀2004฀Institute฀of฀Southeast฀Asian฀Studies,฀Singapore Shamsul A.B. 110© 2004 Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore In the first part of this chapter, and in the subsequent second and third parts, I shall present an authority-defined perspective of the construction of the social categories “Malay” and “Malayness”, as well as “Chinese” and “Chineseness”.The discussion emphasizes the defining role that British colonialism had played, in particular, through its “colonial knowledge”, in the construction and consolidation process of these categories, hence identities. I contend that colonial conquest was not just the result of the power of superior arms, military organization, political power, or economic wealth. It was also the result of a cultural invasion in the form of a conquest of the native epistemological space, or the dismantling of native thought system hence disempowering it of its ability to define things and subsequently replacing it with a foreign one, through a systemic application of a series of colonial investigative modalities. As a result, I would further argue that the history of the much discussed contemporary Malay identity and Malayness as well as Chinese identity and Chineseness, which is largely a colonial-orientalist construction in the Malaysian case, reflects the identity of the overall history of Malaya and then Malaysia, one that was dominated, shaped, and “factualized”, culturally, by colonial knowledge. In short, colonial knowledge has not only enabled the conquest of British Malaya and the Malays as well as the immigrant population (including the Chinese) but also was produced by it, as much as by the more obvious and brutal modes of conquest that first established colonial power in the Straits Settlements and later in the Malay states. The second part takes a brief look at how the construction of Malay and Malayness, that is, the creation of the pillars of Malayness, namely, bahasa, raja dan agama (literally: language/Malay, sultan/Malay, and religion/Islam), and Chineseness, namely, education, language, and culture, came to be officialized and instituted during the colonial period within the framework of colonial knowledge informed by a mixture of Social Darwinism and colonial investigative modalities. It also examines how this process which gave rise to the modern idea of a Malay race and nation (bangsa) as strongly reflected in its nationalist and anti-colonial movement, and the modern idea of a Chinese race, already established in mainland China (Dikotter 1992) but embellished and localized by 111 6: Texts and Collective Memories© 2004 Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore the British for its immediate ideological and materialist interests in British Malaya. The third part examines briefly the evolution of the Chinese as a social category in Malaysia and how Chineseness emerged as a result of contestation within colonial Malaya as well as by events in mainland China in the 1920s.The critical watershed of the change in the Malaysian Chinese position vis-à-vis the state...