IS Malaysia an “exceptional” country in the way the United States famously regards itself? What does it mean and what does it take to be exceptional in any case?
In essence, taking the US as an example, it just means how the citizens see themselves; based on the national narrative drummed into each American as he or she enters school, or upon being inducted as a new citizen. The American narrative holds that the country is a “melting pot” of immigrants from all over the world, and all drawn in by its ideal of liberty, which serves as its “secret sauce” that unleashes the potential of each individual citizen to the fullest and that, in turn, collectively makes it the greatest country on earth. Hence, the “exceptional” bit.
American exceptionalism is, of course, hyped. President Barack Obama was rather heavily criticised when he once hinted that he did not regard his country as “exceptional”. There is something to that rare display of humility from an American president.
The US likes to project its “values” abroad, suggesting that any country can become as exceptional as it has become by adopting those same values, somewhat too conveniently forgetting that some rather unsavoury bits of history contributed much to what it now regards as it being exceptional.
Interestingly, the Australian author Hugh White suggests that China, too, regards itself as “exceptional” as it starts laying claim to its “destiny” as a great nation again. Only that the Chinese, perhaps too honestly for their own good, regard their exceptionalism as unique to China alone.
Malaysia is, of course, far from seeing itself as a global power in the making. But it has a surprisingly enduring and successful national narrative. First, the Alliance, and now the Barisan Nasional government, that has governed continuously since independence not only espoused this narrative but both the narrative and the government mutually reinforce each other to such an extent that they are regarded as one and the same.
Such fusing of national narrative and government offers both benefits and some pitfalls. The benefits to the government are clear when the narrative helps propel the country to heights which are rare globally as an economically vibrant, Muslim-majority, but multi-racial democracy.
The pitfalls come when certain aspects of our national narrative become contentious over time and the government gets blamed for it.
Just what exactly makes our national narrative contentious?
Most fundamentally, as it rightly should, it goes to the very heart of how we organise ourselves politically. That we are a multiracial nation, no one disputes it. In dispute is the sort of multiracial society Malaysia is or should be.
Singapore’s short-lived stay as part of Malaysia brought this dispute into sharpest relief. The late Lee Kuan Yew argued for a “Malaysian Malaysia”, essentially along the lines of America’s “melting pot”.
The Alliance of Tunku Abdul Rahman favoured what Canadians would call a multi-cultural “mosaic”, wherein the distinctiveness inherent in its people is recognised and accepted as part and parcel of the colourful national fabric.
Such contention would probably not be so explosive and ultimately destructive had it not become (perhaps inevitably) seen that Lee was fighting the corner for non-Malays. Lee argued that he was in fact fighting for equal opportunity for all Malaysians.
That goes to the very crux of what may be regarded as Malaysian exceptionalism. Many Malays, even today, will argue that if equal opportunity for all is the issue, what explains the fact that the Chinese still control much of the commanding heights of the national economy?
That economic control will likely not be an issue (as it is not in neighbouring Indonesia and the Philippines) if the Chinese are numerically insignificant enough to not pose questions of political control as well.
The emergence of Pakatan Rakyat with its strength greatly boosted by Chinese voters who apparently united behind DAP revives many of the same old issues from when Singapore was in the federation.
It fell again on Lee, now viewing Malaysia from the outside as a disinterested, but still keen observer after his last extensive tour of the country and not coincidentally covering all the Pakatan-controlled states, that the national narrative he so vehemently opposed will still survive even if Pakatan is to capture Putrajaya.
That should provide a reality check to those who question the enduring relevance of our national narrative; that any call for change involving jettisoning it wholesale will not only likely be futile but hugely destabilising to boot.
The writer is a Kuching-based journalist.