LETTERS: The problems of academic fraud, poor peer review and poor scholarship published in predatory journals are global and not confined to Malaysian academia.
I am referring to the journal article The Jongs and the Galleys: Traditional Ships of the Past Malay Maritime Civilisation written by Malaysian researchers. Locals have been interpreting and reacting to the issues and allegations raised by French historian Serge Jardin that the article contains mistakes.
Malaysians want to know if the researchers have apologised for their alleged mistakes or if any disciplinary action was taken against them by their institution. They also want to know why the researchers chose to publish in such a journal to begin with.
Such questions are justified. Malaysians have a standard of excellence and they want to see those standards met. They want to be reassured that those teaching in Malaysian institutions of higher learning deserve to hold those positions.
Malaysians want to see good and correct academic practice in action.
If, according to the writer of a recent letter, "Malay academicians are viewed with suspicion and prejudice by those who believe in supposed Malay academic inferiority and incompetence", it is because Malaysians are not used to a culture of meritocracy and fairness, and not because they see Malays as inferior or incompetent.
We need to remember that Malays did depict themselves as inferior. Two examples are Revolusi Mental (1971) and The Malay Dilemma (1970).
The first scholar to critique them was sociologist Syed Hussein Alatas in his book, The Myth of the Lazy Native (1977).
Of Revolusi Mental, Alatas said: "This book which is a chaotic amalgamation of sound common knowledge of no depth, and absolutely ridiculous inferences, is perhaps the most naive, the most simple and the least well-defined philosophy of capitalism, while claiming to represent the modern and indigenous philosophy of the Malays."
Of The Malay Dilemma and its author, Alatas writes: "(Dr) Mahathir (Mohamad) believed in the racial inferiority of the Malays without actually specifying in detail where that inferiority lay.
"He did not say that the Malays were incapable of becoming good businessmen or professionals, but he invoked a general racial explanation to account for the lag in capitalist development amongst the Malays."
One invaluable lesson to learn from The Myth of the Lazy Native is that good critiques aren't built on the ethnicity or nationality of the author of the work being critiqued.
Good critiques are constructed on the content of the work.
So yes, if we consider ourselves natives of the countries we live and work in, the "lazy native trope" is indeed relevant to Malaysia and global academia today, especially if one considers lack of academic rigour a form of laziness.
And also if one considers taking the quick, easy, backdoor way to publication a form of laziness too.
MASTURAH ALATAS
Kuala Lumpur
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect those of the New Straits Times