FROGS, DONKEYS & MORONIC OXEN:

A Third Force in Malaysian Politics?

By Dr Kua Kia Soong, 23 Dec 2009

“Politicians were mice (politikus)

and the rakyat were bosses

once upon a time –

And now it’s back to same old same old…

That’s twice upon a time!”

Events since the Malaysian peoples’ tsunami on 8 March 2008 have led to a sense of frustration over the performance of Malaysian politicians on both sides of the political divide. All over cyberspace, agitated Malaysian bloggers are questioning the differentia specifica of BN Cola and PR Cola and pondering the necessity for a Third Force in Malaysian politics.

It is tragic yet inevitable that Malaysian politics should so quickly deteriorate into the political circus we see in the West where the voters are given the choice of Democrats or Republicans, Labour or Conservative. As the song goes,

“Laugh about it, shout about it,

When it’s time to choose –

Anyway you look at it you lose!”

Soon after the political tsunami, I wrote about some of the inconsistencies of Malaysian politicians during those days of hope (See Malaysiakini, “Days of Hope: A Checklist for Reform”, 13 March 2008; “MB Squabbles”, 14 March 2008; The Day of a Thousand Apologies, 25 March 2008; Party Hopping, Seat Grabbing and the Politics of Opportunism”, 18 April 2008; “Pointers in the Days of Hope”, 1 May 2008; “Where have all the Principled Politicians & Activists gone?”, 26 August 2008).

Since then we have seen PR frogs jumping into the BN and turning into moronic oxen (“BN leaning independents”!). Another latter day Malaysian oxymoron makes out that May 13 was “naturally orchestrated”! Where do you get these guys!

The latest travesty of the people’s trust was seen when twenty PR Members of Parliament were missing in action when they could have voted out the BN’s budget Bill and won a vote of no confidence against the BN government.

BN now has two KPI ministers! The idea of a minister in charge of KPI is totally laughable since the CEO or head of any organisation is supposed to overlook the KPIs of his or her officers in the first place! Pray, tell me which cabinet in the world has got a KPI minister? First they had a Chinese KPI minister but later they had to have another Malay KPI minister. Will the BN need to have a Malay minister for every other Non-Malay post in the Cabinet?

And who’s watching the KPI in Pakatan Rakyat? That’s what concerns us more since we created the political tsunami that brought them in the first place…

Who Lost the Roadmap to Local Council Elections?

“To bring back elected local councils” was an important plank in the Pakatan Rakyat election manifesto and a popular demand of the Malaysian electorate in many elections including the 2008 general elections. A conference on the Roadmap to Local Government Elections was held on July 26th, 2008 to expedite local government elections through institutional reform towards a democratic system of locally elected representatives. Participants at the one-day conference adopted the following resolutions:

“1. the restoration of local elections constitutes an important step forward in reviving democracy, improving the standard of governance and checking the scourge of corruption, excesses and mismanagement presently plaguing the urban population in Malaysia;
2. the restoration of local elections lies clearly within the jurisdiction of the state government, as provided for by the Article 113(4) and Item 4, List II, Schedule 9 in the Federal Constitution. State governments, especially the Pakatan Rakyat ones which have made election promises on reviving local elections, should take immediate steps to formulate state laws to such effect;
3. the Federal Government should, at the same time, initiate consultations with the general public and hold negotiations with the state governments to formulate a comprehensive plan to have local elections that are clean, free, fair and representative.” (The Malaysian Bar)
We’ll soon be into 2010 and there is still no sign of this roadmap to local democracy in either Selangor, Penang, Kedah or Kelantan. We now hear there are component parties in the PR which are against elected local government! Could the culprits please come clean without us having to rely on a Freedom of Information Act?

Whither the Freedom of Information Act?

The reforms we had hoped for are being dragged by politicians’ ponderous feet through the mud of excuses. The Penang Chief Minister tells us they cannot introduce a Freedom of Information Act in the state since their legal officer has advised against it, saying it is ultra vires the Federal Constitution.

Now we know election manifestoes and convention declarations are easier said than done! But since when did the buck stop at a nameless state legal officer? Are not election manifestoes and convention declarations scrutinized by the leaders in the parties before they are heralded?

Thirty Per Cent Women Representation?

The recent PR Convention has called for thirty per cent women representation in parliament. Is this credible when the PKR woman president had to resign recently from a parliamentary seat in order to force a by-election for another man to take over her seat?

Why couldn’t one of the male Chief Ministers in PR resign instead so that Anwar could get back into politics? What makes these male Chief Ministers think they are so indispensable they have to be in the federal parliament as well? Couldn’t they let a woman politician or some other budding leaders have the opportunity to take part at the federal-level politics instead? It reflects the feudal male grabby instinct so prevalent in Malaysian political parties that needs to be reformed.

And when are the component parties in PR going to implement the rudimentary democratic practice of fixing the term of office of their leaders as is done in other democratic countries and even the MCA? Come on, PR parties must surely be more progressive than the MCA!

A Third Force?

Malaysians who have lived under BN authoritarianism for more than fifty years will no doubt rejoice over the peoples’ victory in cutting them down to size. At last! We now have a two-front system. This two-front system is a transitional necessity that civil rights activists had advocated way back in 1986 and almost achieved in 1990 when they entered the political arena.

Those who are familiar with the West will also know that the British and the US people have been going through a political circus rotating Democrat/Republican or Labour/Conservative governments for donkeys’ years. Thus, the Labour Party under Tony Blair implemented the Conservative Party Margaret Thatcher’s economic and social policies and even supported the Iraq war alongside George Bush. The Democrat Obama has sent more troops into Afghanistan than Republican Bush ever did while unemployment in the US also surges. Wherein lays the difference?

Do Malaysians have to go through the next fifty years of this kind of political circus, with BN Cola and PR Cola giving us renditions of the same neoliberal policies?

The euphoria after the 2008 political tsunami is quickly giving way to a realisation that the peoples’ agenda can only be won through a Third Force - an activist movement that continually makes demands outside Parliament in order that the peoples’ interests will be served.

Besides political consistency, this Third Force must champion economic and social policies that benefit the people rather than suck up to big business; policies through which working people can become masters of their fate and not just tools of production; a democratic social order in which workers have a say and control over production and their livelihood.

It is now widely accepted that it was the financial liberalization that led to cross-border speculative capital outflows which have caused the recent international financial crisis. In the West, this financial crisis has resulted in the nationalisation of the big banks and financial institutions, an act which has once and for all exploded the myth that financial institutions need to be privately owned and free of regulation. Likewise, it is a neoliberal myth that all land and industries need to be under private control.

Thus, this Third Force cannot accept the economic policies that perpetuate the sale of national industrial and public resources. It was the repressive rule under Mahathir that cleared the way for the neo-liberal policies that privatised state functions during the Eighties.

Towards Greater Democracy!

This Third Force must reclaim our public domain; nationalize the major means of production under democratic control of the people; universalize citizens’ rights; enlarge our democratic space and support the resistance to neoliberalism by our indigenous peoples, workers and other marginalized groups. Only through democratic planning and control over the allocation of social surplus will we be able to meet the basic needs of all sectors of society and a better standard of living for the 60-70 per cent of the population.

Only then will this Third Force have a zest that is different from BN Cola or PR Cola. Go for it!

HEAVEN ON EARTH: The Joys of Bird Watching

HEAVEN ON EARTH: The Joys of Bird Watching

By Dr Kua Kia Soong, 17 Dec 2009

With the climate change conference going on in Copenhagen, I have decided to take a break from writing on politics and social issues and instead write about another passion of mine, which is environmental protection. I was going to call it “The birds in my life” but had second thoughts since readers might think it’s the confessions of Tiger Woods!

When I was small, the pictorial images of heaven invariably had humans surrounded by wild animals, birds and exotic flora. Having always lived close to the jungle ever since my childhood, I have come to associate the closeness of animals, birds, butterflies and beautiful flora with heaven. I would not want heaven to be any more than this and for me, the guzheng composition “Jackdaws on a wintry lake” is my idea of classic heavenly music.

Wild animals are more difficult to come by these days after the Bukit Sungai Putih forest reserve behind our house was destroyed by developers. We used to wake up to the soothing whoops of the gibbons in the misty canopies of the forest, just ten minutes from the capital Kuala Lumpur. During the Eighties, the very rare serow was spotted in the area. Cobras, pythons, water monitor lizards, shrews，civet cats still come by our backyard every once in a while. They must sense we are naturalists…

Thankfully, birds still come round to our backyard because they are freer and more mobile. There is still plenty of foliage in our neighbourhood and we have planted trees and plants to attract birds into our garden. The jungle – what is left of it – is still within flying distance for many species of birds. Thus, apart from the ubiquitous sparrows, myrnas, magpies, we have frequent visitors including sun birds， flower peckers, peaceful doves， tailor birds and bulbuls。

I have to give it to our magpie robbins for being the most voluble among our backyard Malaysian birds. The British and Australian magpies are huge but rather mute by comparison. I enjoy our “dueling whistles” whenever they choose to start their songs. It’s amazing how the little tailor bird can make such a loud call when she wants to. Then there is the sunbird that continually flits to the side mirror of our car to admire himself. And who would hurt the adorable peaceful doves with their misty blue plumes and dainty gait?

Recently, we were deeply honoured by the visit of a malkoha to our garden. It was a day we will never forget for she stayed long enough for us to photograph and admire her bewitching eyes, chestnut breast, lime green sheen and magnificent tail. Occasionally, woodpeckers would make their sudden appearances, uplifting our spirits no end with their crimson backs and their ridiculous Mohican haircut! Drongos, orioles and koels delight us with their calls. The munirs in their droves swaying on the tall grasses outside our study window make soothing calls like wind chimes. Once upon an evening stroll, we came across a buffy fish owl by the stream that runs through our housing estate. My heart nearly missed a beat!

Enhancing our Sensory Acuity

I am often baffled by people who do not notice a wild fowl flying across the highway, the cattle egret in the wasteland in the centre of town or the nightjar on the telegraph pole outside their house at dusk. It would be interesting to conduct a survey to find out how many different common birds people can identify. Why is this of interest?

As human beings, our senses are our means to savour the wonders of the universe. To the Renaissance person, ‘sensazione’ is the continual refinement of the senses as the means to enliven experience.

Sensory acuity is the sharpening of one’s responses to the world around us; it involves refining our awareness of the environment - the pleasure we get from the myriad sounds and changing hues of nature, the fragrance of flowers. The more aware we are of our surroundings, the greater our discriminating ability. Besides being able to tell the difference between the call of the golden oriole from that of the koel, can you distinguish the fragrance of the “seven li fragrance” from that of jasmine?

Many people are of course pretty discriminating about food. But how discriminating are they about the different grades of teas and wines? Connoisseurs need to have good sensory acuity.

Information is potentially available to us through all our five senses. Alas, through habit we tend to notice only a small part of what is all around us! By amplifying our sensory awareness of our surroundings, we enrich our experiences and widen the scope of information available to us.

Sensory acuity is best inculcated at a tender age when, children are still uncontaminated by rigid school curricula and modern life. I remember when we used to have “Nature Study” and “Music” as part of our primary school curriculum. My love of bird watching started at a very young age when exploring the countryside was one of my favourite past times. Enhancing our sensory awareness also improves our EQ and the intuition we need to get on in personal relationships as well as in our working lives. In the process, we enrich the pleasure we get out of life, learn better and become better people.

The Ancient Fascination with Birds

The sages of old always had a keen eye for birds. Birds have always featured in Chinese paintings and literature since time immemorial. These are a sample of bird stories and songs of ancient China:

- The quail ridicules the roc, The Book of Zhuangzi；

- The turtledove and the owl, Speaking of Gardens;

- The snipe grapples with the clam ，Strategies of the Warring States;

- The kingfisher and its nest，Ming Tales；

- The discerning seagulls ，Liezi ；

- The swallows，Book of Songs;

- The bustards’ plumes， Book of Songs；

- The golden oriole sings， Book of Songs；

- The owl，Book of Songs.

Love Birds, Love Nature

We can get so much pleasure out of backyard bird watching. Once your passion for birds has been fired, you will want to venture out to the wetlands and national parks to wonder at the magnificent native and migratory birds that can be found in our country. We can start by creating more bird-friendly spaces around us by planting trees and plants in our backyard to attract birds and butterflies. By so doing, we can each in our individual urban green spaces, actualize “heaven on earth”.

MALAYSIA’S SODOMY LAWS: PROGRESS WITH THE TIMES!

By Dr Kua Kia Soong, Director of SUARAM, 12 Dec 2009

Ever since the political trial against Anwar Ibrahim for sodomy in 1999, I had been hoping that the gay community in Malaysia (“the pink brigade”) would have spoken out against our antiquated sodomy laws and fought for equality of treatment for all consensual sex between adults. I have always believed that the rights of any section of our community must be fought for and led by that particular section, for only then can the exploited and those transgressed against be empowered in the process.

All over the world, not just in the West, the times are certainly changing. On 2 July 2009, the Delhi High Court delivered a historic judgement to amend a 149-year-old colonial-era law and forthwith decriminalised private consensual sex between adults of the same sex. India became the 127th country to take the guilt out of homosexuality. Only rape and paedophilia remain offences under the law.

Inclusiveness

The Delhi bench invoked Jawaharlal Nehru's politically resonant theme of inclusiveness:

``If there is one constitutional tenet that can be said to be (the) underlying theme of the Indian Constitution, it is that of inclusiveness…

``Those perceived by the majority as `deviants' or `different' are not on that score excluded or ostracized.'' (The Times of India, 3 July 2009)

Equality

The Delhi High Court further ruled:

``Indian constitutional law does not permit the statutory criminal law to be held captive by the popular misconceptions of who the LGBTs (lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders) are. It cannot be forgotten that discrimination is the antithesis of equality and that it is the recognition of equality which will foster the dignity of every individual…

``There is almost unanimous medical and psychiatric opinion that homosexuality is not a disease or a disorder and is just another expression of human sexuality.''

Article 8 of the Malaysian Federal Constitution guarantees the equality of all persons. If this is not specific enough, the Malaysian Charter on Human Rights by Malaysian Civil Society in 1994 spells this out more specifically:

“There shall be no discrimination in the rights and privileges of persons based on their ethnic origin, class, social status, age, sex, mental and physical being, language, religious belief, sexual identity or political conviction…” (Article 8: 2)

Recently, Judge Jonathan Heher of the Johannesburg High Court struck down South Africa's sodomy law on the grounds that it violated the nation's new constitution which bars discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation:

“To penalize a gay or lesbian person for the expression of his or her sexuality can only be defended from a standpoint which depends on the baneful influences of religious intolerance, ignorance, superstition, bigotry, fear of what is different from or alien to everyday experience and the millstone of history."

Just a few months earlier Ecuador's Supreme Court ruled that nation's sodomy law unconstitutional. And Romania's new prime minister recently promised to repeal his nation's sodomy law to bring it in line with that of the European Union.

Pragmatism

Even closer to our shores, the attitude of our southern neighbour, Singapore, to homosexuality is also changing. In April 2007, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said in a Reuter’s report:

"If in fact it is true, and I have asked doctors this, that you are genetically born a homosexual -- because that's the nature of the genetic random transmission of genes -- you can't help it. So why should we criminalize it? …Let's not go around like moral police ... barging into people's [bed] rooms. That's not our business… So you have to take a practical, pragmatic approach to what I see is an inevitable force of time and circumstances."

Lee said Singapore should no longer discriminate against homosexuals but must take a pragmatic approach. Lee's comments came at a time when many groups, such as The Singapore Law Society, are clamouring for a review of antiquated British colonial laws against homosexual sex, which they view as outdated and archaic.

Humanity

The plight of Malaysian transsexuals such as Fathine, is but the latest in a litany of woes suffered by lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders (LGBT) in this country. For a society that claims that our Asian values are far superior to Western values, such demeaning treatment of our LGBT community is unacceptable. What has happened to that slogan by the BN government to create a “masyarakat penyayang” (a caring society) ?

Stand Up For the Rights of all LGBT

On the grounds of inclusiveness, equality, pragmatism and humanity, it is time for all progressive Malaysians, political parties and organisations to stand up for the rights of all LGBT and to call for the abolition of our outdated sodomy laws.

RACISM IN MALAYSIA: TOWARDS YEAR ZERO!

RACISM IN MALAYSIA: TOWARDS YEAR ZERO!

By Dr Kua Kia Soong, Director of SUARAM 9 Dec 2009

Finally, we have heard it from the horse’s mouth (“Ma” in Mahathir means “horse” in Mandarin): “UMNO, MCA and MIC are all racist parties…Get out of these racist parties if you are anti-racist!” Mahathir retorted after Nazri had called him a racist for supporting the discredited BTN.

This is the first time we are hearing an open admission by a BN leader that the component parties in the ruling coalition are all racist. It slipped out from the mouth of the man who had written “The Malay Dilemma” after he had been baited by an UMNO detractor for being a racist.

Barisan Nasional is Basically a Racial Formula

The “Alliance Formula” at Independence was really a racial formula pregnant with contradictions which could not be sustained. The Barisan Nasional cobbled together after May 13, 1969 was basically the same racial formula enlarged, with the same contradictions intact. The only difference was that after May 13, UMNO presented the other component parties with the fait accompli in which UMNO ruled supreme.

In my book on “May 13: Declassified Documents on the Malaysian Riots of 1969”, I have described the rise and rise of the Malay capitalist class after it had deposed the Tunku and its use of the populist ideology of “Bumiputeraism” to win over the Malay masses since the Seventies. This class then introduced the hitherto unheard-of notion of “Ketuanan Melayu” (Malay Dominance), insisting it was part of the “Social Contract” at Independence.

Mahathir’s “Malay Dilemma” akin to “Mein Kampf”

Dr Mahathir’s “The Malay Dilemma” shares the same paradigm as Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” in the sense that they analyze society from the perspective of “race”. His book was the clarion call of this ascendant Malay capitalist class after May 13, prodding “the Malays” to rise against “the immigrant races”. Is it surprising he does not find the BTN propaganda racist?

Dr Mahathir is obviously not familiar with the philosophy of the social sciences otherwise he would have known that “Race” as a concept has been discredited in social science for years now and any social scientist worth his/her salt would not dare to air such racial theories in respectable centres of learning.

The New Economic Policy has provided the means through which this Malay capitalist class and their subordinate Chinese and Indian capitalist class (facilitated by the Barisan Nasional) have amassed great wealth all these years since 1971. “Bumiputeraism” has worked as the populist ideology in winning over the Malay masses to some extent, but the contradictions inherent in capitalist exploitation within this racial formula has led to more and more disenchantment by the Malay masses against the status quo in recent years. Thus, we have witnessed the advent of the political tsunami in 2008.

UMNO Floundering Since the Political Tsunami

Since the trouncing of the BN in the last general elections, UMNO has been floundering, unable to decide whether to be more racist or more liberal – such is the nature of the contradictions inherent in the BN’s “racial formula”.

Sooner or later, the race-based parties in the BN will have to face this hard reality that our nation can only progress when we get to YEAR ZERO – the year when race-based political parties are completely outlawed and we are rid of racism, racial discrimination and other related intolerance.

UNTENABLE PREJUDICE AGAINST CHINESE SCHOOLS

UNTENABLE PREJUDICE AGAINST CHINESE SCHOOLS

By Dr Kua Kia Soong, 3 Dec 2009

Prof Khoo Kay Kim recent contention that the Chinese education system produces “copycats” through it rote-learning methods needs to be examined. He challenges his detractors to refute his claim by asking how many scholars of world calibre the Chinese schools have produced and how many students from Chinese schools have obtained scholarships from the Government. His underlying motive is not clear – is he calling for Chinese schools to be closed down or to be improved?

Chinese schools in general or Malaysian Chinese schools?

In the first place, is Prof Khoo saying that Malaysian Chinese schools produce copycats or that education in the Chinese language produces copycats? As an educationist, I am sure he knows the difference. If he is saying that education in the Chinese-language produces copycats then he implies that the education systems in China, Taiwan and Hong Kong also produce copycats. Do I then have to produce examples of Nobel Prize laureates from these Chinese-language countries to rebut his argument?

- Lee Tsung Dao (Physics, 1957)

- Yang Chen Ning (Physics 1957)

- C. C. Ting (Physics 1976)

- Lee Y. T. (Chemistry 1986)

- Edmond Fischer (Medicine 1992)

- Daniel Tsui (Physics 1998)

- Gao Xingjian (Literature 2000)

- Charles K. Kao (Physics 2009)

Perhaps Prof Khoo will protest and say he was only referring to Malaysian Chinese schools. But what’s the difference? Is he saying then that the Chinese schools in China and Taiwan are not copycats? Surely the key issue revolves around the quality of education, not the medium of instruction.

The early curriculum of the Chinese schools in Malaysia, like their counterparts in China was based on rote learning. But after the “Thought Revolution” of the May 4^th Movement in 1919, this was replaced by a modern curriculum in China as well as in the Chinese schools in Malaya. This situation was by no means perfect. How could it be?

As a historian, Prof Khoo will no doubt be aware that while the English schools in Malaya were nurtured by the British colonial power, the Chinese schools were totally neglected. The Chinese schools in this country had to rely on self-help to survive in sharp contrast to the British-supported English schools. Up to the present day, they still have to survive through the sacrifice of the community to support the 1280 Chinese primary schools and 60 Independent Chinese Secondary Schools.

The earliest record of Chinese schools dates back to 1815 in Malacca (See Kua Kia Soong, “The Chinese Schools of Malaysia: A Protean Saga”, New Era College 2008). The colonial government rationalized their lack of financial support for educating the Chinese masses in this way:

“British colonial administrators were so impressed by the high level of community organization among the Malayan Chinese that they left them virtually alone to manage their own affairs.” (Enloe, C.H. “Multi-ethnic politics: The case of Malaysia” quoted in Kua 2008: 16)

If Prof Khoo cares to research the anti-colonial movement in Malaya, he will be aware that large sections of the anti-colonial movement were products of Chinese schools. Let us ask for the statistics on all the political detainees of the British colonial power from colonial times right up to Independence and note the proportion of Chinese-educated anti-colonial fighters.

Prof Khoo will say No, that’s not what he’s talking about. But as a nationalist, is not anti-colonialism, equality, justice, freedom and democracy as important as “creativity” and international scholarship?

English Schools or BM Schools?

The scholars of international renown cited by Prof Khoo are almost all products of the colonial era, products of the elite schools in which the medium of instruction was English. Is that surprising? We do not doubt that the students who have been educated in elite schools in Malaya and gone on to the Ivy League institutions have turned out to be luminaries in their fields. This is the case in every society where privilege prevails, whether in China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Britain, US or wherever. It does not matter whether the medium of instruction is in English or Chinese or Malay.

But what about the post-1971 generation when the medium of instruction was totally in BM? Have we produced any scholars of international distinction, despite the existence of these traditional elite institutions? If we haven’t, then are the National schools teaching in BM also producing copy cats? If not, why not? Why is Prof Khoo only casting aspersions on the Chinese schools?

Prof Khoo may not be aware that the Chinese schools in Malaysia (including the Independent Chinese Secondary Schools) have been following the National Curriculum ever since the 1961 Education Act. If the Chinese schools are producing copy cats, then so are the national schools!

Chinese School Kids Getting National Scholarships?

Prof Khoo shows his unfamiliarity with the national education policy and the Chinese school system when he challenges his detractors to show him how many Chinese school kids have won national scholarships.

First, he must know that at least 90 per cent of Chinese kids go to (partially assisted) Chinese primary schools but only 10 per cent of these go on to Independent Chinese Secondary Schools. Thus any Chinese student who wins a national scholarship is quite likely to be from a Chinese primary school background, or at least there is a 9:1 chance of that. If too few Chinese students are getting national scholarships that is surely an issue for a SUHAKAM commissioner to answer!

On the other hand, if you ask why no student from the Independent Chinese Secondary schools has won a national scholarship, it is because of the simple reason the Malaysian Government does not recognize their Unified Examination Certificate! The National University of Singapore has been poaching our students for years – at one time they wanted 1000 of our students a year! I suggest Prof Khoo uses his influence to get the statistics from NUS to find out how many Malaysian Chinese school students have won NUS scholarships through the years. Be surprised! Be very surprised!

Don’t we recall the case of the prodigy from our Independent Chinese Secondary School in Seremban who was admitted to MIT with a scholarship in the Eighties? There have been many other cases highlighted in the Chinese-language press. We have a recent case of Pan Jian Cheng, the inventor of the pendrive, who is a product of our Independent Chinese School in Klang and is now a very rich young entrepreneur in Taiwan. There are numerous Nanyang University graduates who are luminaries in their academic fields in universities in Malaysia, Singapore and abroad. They are all products of our Chinese schools. My good friend and colleague, Dr Tang Hai Chang, a product of Nanyang University was a research fellow in nuclear physics at the Rutherford Laboratories of Manchester University, UK in the Seventies.

Our own son and daughter are graduates of the Chinese schools. Our daughter did not gain a national scholarship but she was awarded a UK National Health Service Bursary to study medicine. Like other Chinese school students, they are both fluent in Mandarin, English and BM. Our son is also conversant in French and Spanish and can banter in Tamil. Copycats they are not.

Excellence and Mediocrity in Chinese Schools

My rebuttal to Prof Khoo by no means argues that the Chinese schools of Malaysia are all excellent. There is a vast diversity throughout West and East Malaysia - large and small Chinese schools, rich and poor, mediocre and excellent, depending on the locality, school committee, and awareness of the community. The problems they face stem from lack of state support for teacher training and insufficient schools resulting in gross over-crowding.

Their existence stems from the historical fact that the early Chinese Malayans – like their Malay and Indian counterparts - wanted education in their mother tongue. They have sustained the schools for nearly two hundred years, surely a feat all Malaysians can be proud of. And when the government works out how much the Chinese community has subsidized the education budget since Independence, they will realize that the bill runs into the billions of ringgit. Then think of the contribution of our Chinese school graduates to the national human resources all these years. Foreign universities, including those in the West often acknowledge the positive values, such as discipline, eagerness to learn, selflessness that our Chinese school graduates impart into their campuses – how do we measure such qualities?

There have been efforts at education reform in the Chinese schools but this has surged and waned with the calibre in leadership of the Chinese education movement and limited resources. The present leadership of Dong Jiao Zong leaves much to be desired. The point I want to stress is that despite the odds and gross discrimination in financial allocation and teacher training, the Chinese schools of Malaysia have survived a veritable “protean saga”. Calling them copy cats is an old nineteenth century story.

Let me end here with a snippet from an old correspondence I received from the world-renowned writer, Han Suyin, dated 12 March 1983:

“…the English-educated (in Malaysia) were also the worst enemies of Nanyang University. They knew only English and fought to retain their supremacy through English, knowing well that the Chinese education in the Chinese medium was totally adequate and in some ways a better type of education than that dispensed by the English schools.”

Well, that’s her opinion…

INTEGRATING OUR SCHOOLS: Red Herrings & Sensible Solutions

By Dr Kua Kia Soong, Director of SUARAM, 5 November 2009

Single stream schools for promoting integration have commonsensical logic to them. They were officially proposed by the British colonial Barnes Committee in 1951 although they were then intended to be single-stream English schools. Ever since the Razak Report of 1956, it has been “the ultimate objective” of UMNO policy to have only single stream schools.

At Independence and even at the time of the Education Act of 1961, “single stream” in fact meant English stream. Since the seventies, single stream has come to mean education in Bahasa Malaysia. But by a twist of irony created by flip flopping politicians, we may be moving back to a single stream in the English language!

The racial politics throughout post-Independent Malaysia has revolved around this intractable problem. Recently, Professor Khoo Khay Kim and former Prime Minister Dr Mahathir have once again called for single stream schools in order to integrate Malaysians. Single stream of course means the abolition of Chinese and Tamil schools.

Prof. Khoo’s line of thinking is understandable for a Malaysian who did not undergo mother tongue education but that is his problem. Dr Mahathir’s attitude toward the Chinese-language schools is well-known – throughout his 22-year reign as prime minister he did not entertain a single cordial dialogue with the Chinese educationists. In 1975, when he was Education Minister, he threatened the leaders of Dong Jiao Zong with dire consequences if they went ahead with the Unified Examination Certificate of the Independent Chinese secondary schools.

Dr Mahathir further provoked the 1987 crisis by sending non-Mandarin qualified teachers to the Chinese schools which then allowed him to unleash Operation Lalang and the subsequent assault on the judiciary. The Chairmen of Dong Zong and Jiao Zong, in their sixties and seventies respectively in 1987, were detained under the Internal Security Act together with me.

During the interminable interrogation sessions while under solitary confinement in 1987, the Special Branch operatives kept badgering me about why I couldn’t be more like Prof. Khoo Khay Kim in my thinking. My deadpan response was: “You already have one Khoo Khay Kim…Why do you need another one?” (See Kua Kia Soong, “445 Days Behind The Wire”, 1989: 42)

A 200-Year Heritage to be Proud Of!

Chinese schools of Malaysia represent a community-based heritage that goes back nearly two hundred years. They have helped to nurture Malaysian talents and subsidized the national education budget many times over. The pen drive you use has been invented by a graduate of the Malaysian Independent Chinese Secondary Schools. These are achievements all Malaysians can be proud of.

The “Fifth Happiness School” in Penang was founded in 1819. Chinese and Tamil schools thrived largely on self-help during colonial times:

“British colonial administrators were so impressed by the high level of organization among the Malayan Chinese that they left them virtually alone to manage their own affairs.” (Kua Kia Soong, “The Chinese Schools of Malaysia: A Protean Saga”, 2008: 16)

Not many people realize that at Independence, there were more Chinese and Tamil schools than there are today! Yes, in 1957 we had 1,342 Chinese primary schools and 86 Chinese-stream secondary schools for an ethnic Chinese population of 2.3 million in the peninsula alone. Today, we only have 1,280+ Chinese primary schools and 60 Independent Chinese secondary schools for an ethnic Chinese population of more than six million throughout Malaysia. The statistics for Tamil schools show the same decline from more than 700 in 1957 to just more than 500 today. That’s how far we have regressed!

Far from being segregationist, Chinese schools of Malaysia have been steadily attracting non-Chinese pupils even as the Government has restricted any further increase in the number of these SRJK schools. There are now more than 60,000 non-Chinese pupils studying in Chinese schools, adding to the critical shortage of space in these schools.

Grossly Overcrowded Schools

The overcrowded conditions in many of these SRJK schools have been created by a vindictive government policy that will not allow any further increase in the number of these schools. My children went to our local Chinese New Village primary school that enrolls more than 2000 pupils in one acre piece of land! Fifty pupils in one class are not abnormal in the Chinese schools. Is this the enlightened education policy the BN government talks about? It is a marvel that such schools still manage to produce professionals for the country but for sure there are even more sacrificial lambs that end up at the bottom of the heap.

There is no racial discrimination against any ethnic community even though the competition for places in Chinese schools is keen because of the desperate shortage of Chinese schools especially in the urban areas. The Chinese school at Frasers Hill is almost wholly filled by ethnic Indians while the Chinese school at Hulu Langat provides assistance to the Orang Asli children!

In contrast, we have national institutions such as MARA science schools and UiTM supported totally by public funds which discriminate against Non-bumiputras. Are these not single stream institutions and do they promote integration? Somehow, we do not hear the strident condemnation of such blatant racially discrimination and segregationist policies by Prof Khoo or Dr Mahathir!

A Sensible Solution to Integrate Our Schools

The right to mother tongue education is an internationally recognized human right. The UN even recognizes “International Mother Language Day” on February 21^st. Knowing the protean saga these Chinese schools of Malaysia have been through and having been part of this movement for nearly thirty years, I dare say UMNO would be dicing with political suicide if they persist in their quixotic “ultimate objective”. If UMNO’s “ultimate objective” to have only a single stream in the education system of Malaysia ever comes about, MCA and Gerakan would be totally irrelevant, if they are not already!

So why don’t we put our energies into more sensible solutions rather than destroying another Malaysian heritage that has served the nation well and creating another crisis such as we saw in 1987 and at other junctures in our history?

The efforts to promote integration among the peoples of Malaysia must never cease. During the Eighties, the Chinese educationists agreed to an “Integrated Activities” programme among the different streams but then the Mahathir administration conveniently ignored the initiative after it had been agreed upon.

The Chinese educationists opposed Mahathir’s “Vision Schools” mainly because these put the three language streams under the hegemony of the Malay-language school. The Chinese and Tamil schools in these “Vision Schools” were strictly relocated schools and were by no means new schools.

Let Local Education Authorities Decide

A sensible solution would be to build more new schools for all streams. At Independence, we had elected local government which solved educational needs at the local level through “local education authorities”. That way, we can take politics, especially racial politics out of education policy. The local education authority surveys and assesses the objective needs of the community and allocates appropriate funding for the various school streams through the local government budget.

Integrated School Complex

In order to promote integration and to make the most of scarce resources, the different streams could be built close to each other so that they can share scarce quality resources and facilities such as library, playing field, park,

sports complex, stadium, computer labs, etc. The annual sports day and other competitions could be jointly organized. The same can be done for artistic and cultural events. This will not only promote integration but will surely improve the quality of our athletes and performing artistes.

This concept is very different from Dr Mahathir’s “Vision Schools”. Each stream in the “Integrated School Complex” maintains its autonomy, with its own administration and each school in this complex is a new school, not a relocated school.

It is time that the Government starts treating the Chinese and Tamil schools as part of the national education system and not their fabled step children. We have wasted years of neglect of these schools mainly because of the currency of the now discredited “Melting Pot” thesis practiced in the United States in the past.

UMNO has to come round to the fact that the Chinese and Tamil communities will not be duped by slogans such as “1Malaysia” so long as they see continual unfair allocation for Chinese and Tamil schools by the Government. Nor are they amused by yesterday’s men throwing up old red herrings about Chinese and Tamil schools being segregationist.

1 MALAYSIA – BEYOND THE HYPE

1 MALAYSIA – BEYOND THE HYPE
by Kua Kia Soong, Director of SUARAM, 20 October 2009
The defensive stance of Najib at the recent UMNO general assembly was not lost on most observers. He started off by saying, “We are not racist…” Since the launch of “1Malaysia”, the prime minister has asked for suggestions on how we can attain this elusive objective – what I call Malaysia’s “Year Zero” target.
Towards Year Zero
I often say that we in Malaysia have not even reached “Year Zero” for real nation building to begin. We have to first reach Year Zero when race-based political parties no longer exist in this fair land of ours before we can develop as a nation. Successive Barisan Nasional governments have dreamed up one caper after another to justify their racialist rule and the latest “1Malaysia” is yet another hollow hype.
Everyone can see that the race-based political parties in the Barisan Nasional are the biggest anachronism in a country that claims to aspire to be “1Malaysia”. Where else in the enlightened world community do you find political parties that discriminate against other “races” such as we find in UMNO, MCA and MIC? The floundering of these race-based parties since March 8^th 2008 is an indication that the hour of their extinction is nigh…
Can a Chinese Malaysian join UMNO? No! Can a Malay Malaysian join MCA? No! Can a non-Indian join MIC? No! Is this not racial discrimination?
But can a Malay Malaysian enroll in a Chinese-language school? Yes! Can a Chinese Malaysian enroll in a Tamil school? Yes! And there are more than 60,000 non-Chinese in Chinese primary schools of Malaysia today. The Chinese primary school at Fraser’s Hill is almost all Indian! There is no racial discrimination in these schools.
Do you remember the UMNO Minister of Higher Education who told the UMNO general assembly a few years back that as long as he was the minister, he would not allow a single Non-Bumiputra to be admitted to UiTM? That’s blatant racial discrimination in 21^st century Malaysia. Has this policy changed at UiTM with 1Malaysia?
Ratify the Convention against Racial Discrimination (CERD)
A simple test of whether or not the latest “1Malaysia” slogan is just another BN caper is for the Government to ratify the International Convention against all forms of Racial Discrimination. For a country that has chaired the UN Human Rights Commission and now espouses a “1Malaysia” slogan, there should be no problem for the government to take this first step on the path to non-racial redemption.
Racism and racial discrimination have been part of Malaysian political, economic, social and cultural realities ever since colonial times. Today, race has been so deeply institutionalised that it is a key factor determining benefits from government development policies, bids for business contracts, education policy, social policy, cultural policy, entry into educational institutions, discounts for purchasing houses and other official policies. Practically every aspect of Malaysian life is permeated by the so-called “Bumiputra policy” based on Malay-centrism. This is unabashedly spelled out by political leaders in the daily mass media in Malaysia.
Racism is an integral part of the Malaysian socio-political system. The ruling coalition is still dominated by racially-defined component parties, the United Malays National Organisation, the Malaysian Chinese Association and the Malaysian Indian Congress. These parties compete for electoral support from their respective “racial” constituencies by pandering to “racial” interests. Invariably, their racist inclinations are exposed at their respective party congresses.
Some opportunistic Opposition parties likewise pander to their constituencies using racialist propaganda to win electoral support and they have also contributed to the vicious circle of racial politics which has characterised Malaysian politics all these years.
UMNO, the ruling party continues to insist that “Malay Unity” and even “Malay Dominance” are essential for National Unity. “Malay dominance” is invariably used interchangeably with “Malay Privileges”, which these ruling Malay elite justify in the Malaysian Federal Constitution.
Would the UMNO leaders continue to use such racist concepts such as “Malay dominance” once we have ratified the CERD? Maybe that explains why Malaysia has up to now not yet ratified this basic international convention.
Consequently, we have witnessed the periodic controversies over the alleged “challenges to Malay Special Privileges” every time sections of Malaysian society call for non-racist solutions to Malaysian problems.
Class Interests in Affirmative Action
The ruling party UMNO prides itself on the supposedly “successful” affirmative action in favour of ‘bumiputras’. This has been the cornerstone of development plans since the New Economic Policy which started in 1971.
Consequently, while this populist “bumiputra” policy has been applied to the benefit of “bumiputras” as a whole, the new Malay ruling elite is strategically placed to reap the full benefits of this racially-based policy. Totally committed to capitalism and to privatisation, this policy has ensured that the Non-Malay local and foreign elite have also gained from the New Economic Policy since 1971. This class cohesion among the Malaysian ruling elite underpins the racialist politics which has characterised Malaysian society since Independence.
Non-discriminatory basis of the Constitution
It is time for Malaysians to reaffirm the non-discriminatory basis of the Federal Constitution and to uphold human rights principles which are strictly anti-racist.

Article 8 (1) of the Malaysian Constitution clearly spells out the principle of equality of all Malaysians while Article 12 (1) allows no discrimination against any citizens on the grounds of religion, race, descent or place of birth.

Article 153 on the special position of Malays was inspired by the affirmative action provisions of the Indian Constitution to protect the minority under-privileged class of harijans. Ours is fundamentally different from those provisions because the ethnic group in whose favour the discrimination operates in Malaysia happens to be the one in political control, the Malays.

At the time of Independence in 1957, four matters in relation to which the special position of Malays were recognised and safeguarded were: land; admission to public services; issuing of permits or licences for operation of certain businesses; scholarships, bursaries or other forms of aid for educational purposes.

The Federal Constitution certainly does not adhere to any notion of “Ketuanan Melayu” (Malay Dominance), which is a totally racist concept.

When the Constitutional (Reid) Commission was considering whether such a provision should be included in the 1957 Constitution, it made the following comments:

“Our recommendations are made on the footing that the Malays should be assured that the present position will continue for a substantial period, but that in due course the present preferences should be reduced and should ultimately cease so that there should be no discrimination between races or communities.” (Report of the Federation of Malaya Constitutional Commission 1957, Govt Press, para 165, p.72)

The UMNO leaders have often tried to accuse critics of the New Economic Policy of being against Malay special privileges. In fact, they are ignoring the fact that these racially discriminatory policies did not exist in pre-1971 Malaysian society even though Malay special privileges were in existence between 1957 and 1971.

Affirmative Action Must be Transparent and Accountable

After the Tunku was deposed in 1971, the new Malay ruling elite felt that adequate opportunities had not been made available to them, especially in education and that there should be a larger proportion of Malays in the various sectors. Thus, in 1971 and under Emergency conditions, Article 153 was duly amended to introduce the quota system for Malays in institutions of higher learning. Clause (8A) specifically provided for the reservation of places for Bumiputeras in any University, College and other educational institutions.

Nevertheless, the quota system was not intended to be the totally non-transparent and non-accountable and unfair system we know it today:

Firstly, Article (8A) makes it clear that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong can only order a reservation of a proportion of such places for the Malays. It would therefore mean that the quota system is applicable only on a faculty basis and more importantly every faculty or institution should reserve places for students of every race. No faculty or institution under this provision could cater for the Malays alone to the exclusion of the other races. The existence of institutions such as UiTM and other junior colleges which have been practicing blatant racial exclusion is actually a wild aberration from Article 8A.

Visu Sinnadurai (“Rights in respect of education under the Malaysian Constitution” in Trindade & Lee edited ‘The Constituion of Malaysia’) has observed:

“Years after the implementation of this racial quota system, there was no trace of any such order being made by His Majesty nor was there evidence of any such order having been gazetted. Such a directive would thus seem to have been made by the officials of the Ministry of Education.”

Thus, it is not clear whether the quota system is made applicable on an institutional basis or on the basis of the total number of places available in a particular course of study of all the universities in the country. To apply the quota system on the total number of places available in any particular university will again be a wrong interpretation of the provisions of the Constitution.

Article 153 (8A) does not authorise the administrators of any university to refuse admission to any student of a particular race. It only allows a proportion of the places to be reserved for Malay students. On such reasoning, the constitutionality of institutions like UiTM, the Asasi Sains in the University of Malaya or Kursus Sains Matriculasi Sidang Akademik of the Universiti Sains Malaysia which cater only for Bumiputra students is doubtful.

From the above, it is clear that the question of the constitutionality of the quota system as it has been practised since 1971 especially in totally Bumiputera institutions has never been tested.

Affirmative Action Not a Carte Blanche for Racial Discrimination

We know what the original intentions of the “Malay Special Privileges” provision in the Merdeka Constitution were, but to maintain that it is a carte blanche for all manner of racial discrimination as we have witnessed since 1971 is a violation of the spirit of the Malaysian Constitution.

International law sets major limits on affirmative action measures. Notably, affirmative action policies must be carefully controlled and not be permitted to undermine the principle of non-discrimination itself nor violate human rights. Holding the equality principle uppermost, the raison detre and reasonableness for differential treatment must be proven.

Another important criterion to ensure successful affirmative action and synonymous with international law is that such special measures should be introduced for a limited duration as was suggested by the Reid Commission in its Report of the Federation of Malaya Constitutional Commission in 1957.

A consequence of the so-called affirmative action policies up to now is that for the poor of all ethnic communities, including the indigenous peoples in Malaysia, these objectives of wealth redistribution for their benefit have not been met. Worse, the poorest community remains the Orang Asli of Peninsula Malaysia, the Original People of Malaysia who are not even considered “Bumiputra” under the Federal Constitution.

Just 10 years after the NEP was implemented, the 1980 Census showed that more than 80 per cent of al government executive officers were Malay; Malays held 75 per cent of the publicly-funded tertiary education places; and 96 per cent of FELDA settlers were Malay. By 1990, it was widely held by observers that the wealth restructuring policy objective was very much on target if nominee companies listed under “other Malaysians” were analysed. It is also well-known that many of these nominee companies have been formed by the bumiputra elite.

Elite Cohesion in the Barisan Nasional

All the same, these figures showing ownership of equity capital, however distorted, also reveal that the rich Non-Malay elite have done quite well under the NEP. This perhaps accounts for the elite cohesion which has held the Barisan Nasional coalition together for so long. The evidence further shows that the NEP’s “wealth restructuring” has mainly resulted in increased wealth concentration and greater intra-ethnic inequality.

By the mid-Eighties, it was found that the top 40 shareholders in the country owned 63 per cent of the total number of shares in public companies; the top 4.4 per cent of investors in the Amanah Saham Nasional had savings amounting to more than 70 per cent of ASN’s total investments.

By 1990, the realities of the racially discriminatory quota system in education were as follows: An average of 90 per cent of loans for polytechnic certificate courses, 90 per cent of scholarships for Diploma of Education courses, 90 per cent of scholarships/loans for degree courses taken in the country, almost all scholarships/loans for degree courses taken overseas were given to Bumiputeras. Regarding the enrolment of students in residential schools throughout the Eighties, 95 per cent of these were Bumiputera. The enrolment in MARA’s Lower Science College, Maktab Sains MARA was almost 100 per cent Bumiputera throughout the Eighties.

Racial discrimination in the realm of culture is seen not only in education policy but also in the discrimination against Non-Malay cultures and religions in the National Cultural Policy. Non-Muslims face obstacles in their freedom to build places of worship and access to burial grounds, among other complaints.

Policy Proposals for 1Malaysia

Racism and racial discrimination have dominated Malaysian society for far too long. Now that the Malay ruling elite has clearly gained control of the Malaysian economy, it is high time for a new consensus based on non-racial factors such as class, sector or need to justify affirmative action.

It is time for all Malaysians who hunger for peace and freedom to outlaw racism and racial discrimination from Malaysian society once and for all and to build real unity based on adherence to human rights, equality and the interests of the Malaysian masses.

These proposals which I submitted to the World Conference against Racism and Racial Discrimination in Durban, 2001 are still applicable today, an indication that we have not yet reached “Year Zero”:

· Non-Racial Solutions to Malaysian Political Institutions

1. Political parties formed on the basis of “race” to further the interests of their respective “races” should be outlawed as such practices are inconsistent with international conventions against racism and racial discrimination;

2. Ratify all the international covenants and UN Conventions that have not been ratified by the Malaysian Government to ensure that all legislations in the country abide by international human rights standards;

3. Enact a Race Relations Act and institute an Equal Opportunities Commission to combat racism, racialism, and racial discrimination in all Malaysian institutions;

4. Delineation of constituencies must be based on the principle of “one person, one vote” and there should not be wide discrepancies between the number of voters in different constituencies;

5. Reintroduce elected local government so that problems of housing, health, schools, public order, etc. can be solved in non-racial ways;

6. Ensure that there is no racial discrimination in the Civil and Armed Services and every ethnic community has equal chance of promotion;

7. Establish an Independent Broadcasting Authority which is fair to all ethnic communities in Malaysia;

· Non-Racial Solutions to Malaysian Economic development

8. Full transparency and accountability to ensure that contracts and shares are not dispensed on a racial basis through nepotism, cronyism or corruption;

9. No bailing out of failed private businesses under the guise of affirmative action;

10. Reduce income disparity between the rich and poor regardless of race, religion, gender, disability or political affiliation;

11. Develop small and medium industries, the backbone of national industrialization without racial discrimination;

12. Support all sectors including pig farmers during times of crisis;

13. Distribute land equally to farmers of all ethnic communities;

14. Replace the racially-based quota system with a means-tested sliding scale mechanism to award deserving entrepreneurs;

Ø Non-Racial Solutions to Malaysian Social Development

15. Modernise the 450 or so New Villages in the country which have existed for more than 50 years, in which many of our small and medium industries are located and where basic infrastructure is inadequate;

16. Improve the living conditions (eg. a guaranteed minimum monthly wage) and basic amenities such as housing, education and health facilities of plantation workers;

17. Ratify the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and members of their families;

18. Set up an Equal Opportunities Employment Commission to address all forms of discrimination in the workplace;

19. Gazette all communal lands of the Orang Asli and other indigenous peoples so that they can control their own land resources and choose their own way of life;

20. Enact laws to confirm the rights of urban settlers and obligations of developers to provide fair compensation and alternative housing to urban settlers;

21. Cater to the special needs of women, children, senior citizens and the disabled;

22. Provide more recreational facilities for the youth regardless of race to allow them to develop positive and healthy lifestyles and to encourage tolerance and awareness of cultural diversity and equality;

23. Establish a housing development authority to direct construction of low and medium-cost public housing for the needy irrespective of race;

24. Poverty eradication programmes to benefit the poor of all ethnicity;

Ø Non-Racial Solutions to Malaysian Education

25. Special assistance based on NEED by under-privileged sectors and CLASS and NOT on race;

26. Institute a means-tested sliding scale of education grants and loans for all who qualify to enter tertiary institutions regardless of race, religion or gender;

27. Recognise educational certificates, diplomas or degrees based on strictly academic grounds and to be dealt with by the National Accreditation Board and not politicised;

28. Build more schools using the mother tongue of Malaysian minorities as long as there is a demand for them in any catchment of these ethnic communities and provide financial allocations to these fairly;

29. Establish a long-term solution to the crisis of teacher shortage in the Chinese and Tamil schools;

30. Amend the Education Act 1996 to reflect the national education policy as originally stated in the Education Ordinance 1957 ensuring the use, teaching and development of the mother tongue of all Malaysian ethnic communities;

31. Make available compulsory Pupils’ Own language (POL) classes within the normal school curriculum as long as there are five pupils of any ethnic community in any school;

Ø Non-Racial Solutions to Malaysian Cultural Policy

32. Promote knowledge, respect and sensitivity among Malaysians on cultures, religions and ethnicity;

33. Gazette all places of prayer and worship for all ethnic communities in their areas of domicile free from any encumbrances or arbitrary restrictions;

34. Include all works by Malaysians regardless of the language in which they are written in national artistic and literary awards and scholarships;

35. All ethnic Malaysian cultures to be fairly represented in official cultural bodies and the media.