PROF DR MOHAMAD TAJUDDIN MOHAMAD RASDI is a 23-year veteran academic and teaches architecture at Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. He specialises in mosque and Islamic architecture particularly that which relates to Malaysia using a hadith-based and socio-cultural approach in order to create the total idea of built environment suited for a whole social structure.
Considering that immigration to the UK from the erstwhile colonies began in full steam from the early 1950s, and mainly in response to the post-war labour shortages, and was given an additional fillip by the movement of European Union nationals from the 1980s, the demographic shifts will be monumental. In just a century or so – a very small time in the history of nations – the Britain which we knew (and in many cases idolized) will be a completely different place. The “green and pleasant land” invoked by the hymn ‘Jerusalem’ will probably still be there, unless the property developers and road builders are given unlimited powers of desecration, but it will be littered with abandoned churches , pubs serving tepid bitter and samosas and its bustling markets filled with hijabwearing housewives. The England of P G Wodehouse, Enid Blyton, John Betjeman and Agatha Christie will be a thing of the past.
“Change? Why should things change?” Guy Burgess, the upper-class British traitor living in grey Moscow remarked in Alan Bennett’s celebrated play ‘An Englishman Abroad’ . It’s a question that many who were deeply influenced by the soft power of Empire often ask in exasperation when confronted by Caucasian waitresses for whom English is at best a fourth language.
“Change and decay” may well be all around we see but transformation is inevitable. Indeed, there is little point opposing it, demanding the return of the pre-decimal currency and the meat-and-two-veg diet that was a feature of the culinary wasteland. The real challenge is to manage change so that the future doesn’t break with the past and present entirely.
Fortunately, there are politicians whose vision doesn’t merely extend to the next general election. One of the most intellectually stimulating members of David Cameron’s government is education secretary Michael Gove, a man many commentators say could end up as a future leader of the Conservative Party.
What distinguishes Gove from the ‘modern’ Conservatives of the Cameron school is his innate distrust of fashionable theories and politically expedient choices. Gove has offended the powerful teacher’s unions by suggesting shorter holidays, longer school hours and tougher evaluation standards. He has called for a renewed emphasis on teaching grammar and encouraged the establishment of independent schools that put a premium on academic excellence. It would also be fair to say that Gove’s stress on raising standards has enjoyed the backing of parents with school-going children.
However, what has raised the hackles of the ‘progressives’ who have dominated the education establishment for very long is his proposal for a fundamental change in the teaching of history – an issue that remains a favourite with ideologically-driven politicians.
The changes proposed by Gove fall into two broad categories . First, he has sought the return of the traditional narrative history within a chronological framework. Therefore, rather than present history as a ‘fun’ exercise replete with fancy dress shows and allusions to popular characters from comics and Disney films, Gove has sought to reinject history teaching with the cultivation of lucidity, analysis and logically consistent thinking . Secondly, and this is important in the context of a Britain that is changing a bit too rapidly for anyone’s comfort, he has suggested that curriculum include a substantial chunk of British history.
The patchy syllabus of the past where familiarity with Tudor England was blended with an awareness of Germany’s Nazi experience has been attacked and sought to be replaced with a more thorough and chronologically flowing awareness of the British experience.
Predictably, Gove has been attacked for encouraging insularity and putting the UK at the centre of the world. There is merit in that charge. But when you consider that in the next few decades Britain will have a generation which lacks the moorings of the British oak, he is right to emphasize the importance of the national over the cosmopolitan.
When people make a choice to live in Britain, leaving the ‘old country’ behind, they also accept the obligations of citizenship. And these obligations are better appreciated by imbibing the essence of the entire British experience. If multiculturalism becomes a celebration of the ethnic menagerie, the next 50 years will see Britain undergoing a personality change. That, to me at least, would be undesirable.
Instead of a “national reconciliation” pronounced by the Prime Minister on the night of election, what we are witnessing today is the “national aggravation” of race-relations by all UMNO and BN-related machinery, particularly the Umno-owned Utusan Malaysia and Umno’s team of bloggers and cyber-troopers.
The situation, with absolutely no restraint from UMNO President, Datuk Seri Najib Razak himself, is spiralling out of control, worsening race-relations to its lowest ebb in recent decades.
Utusan Malaysia takes a completely racist position when defending UMNO over BN’s worst ever electoral performance in history, placing the blame squarely and entirely on the Chinese community. The newspaper kicked off its tirade with the inflammatory headline “Apa lagi Cina mau?”. It has since on a daily basis, inundated its readers with racist quotes from UMNO and NGO leaders chiding the Chinese for being ingrates such as the quote from Dr Mahathir who claimed that “the Chinese has rejected the Malays’ hand of friendship”.
Utusan Malaysia has gone on to attack the CEO of AirAsiaX, Azran Othman who had gone on record to say “I am Malaysian. I am anti-racism. I am disgusted by Utusan’s editorial stance.” Utusan Malaysia now accuses Azran of being “anti-Malay”, “having forgotten his roots” and an ingrate towards presumably Umno and Utusan, for contributing for his achievements today. It has become shocking how those who stand against racism are being vilified in the mainstream media owned by Umno and Barisan Nasional.
Boycott the Chinese
Now the Umno-owned media are playing up the call to boycott “Chinese-owned” goods and services by Umno bloggers, cyber-troopers and Umno-linked NGOs. Muslim Consumers Association Malaysia (PPIM) for example, had recently called for consumers to boycott or at the very least buy goods sold by Chinese companies last.
While the new Domestic Trade, Consumerism and Cooperatives Minister, Datuk Hasan Malek has stated that the Government will not endorse such a call, he has at the same time said that it is these organisations’ right to make the boycott call as it is a free country.
Such a lame response to a racist attempt to divide the nation certainly leaves much to be desired. It is certainly true that people can choose to be racist, but it is the moral duty of the Government to demonstrate leadership by discouraging and rebuking such racist actions and causes.
It’s not elegant silence from Najib but tacit approval?
Pakatan Rakyat call upon all Malaysians to not only frown upon racist calls – whether to boycott “Chinese” goods, or to discriminate against “Malay” companies – but to stand up against racism because regardless of whether the goods were produced by Chinese or Malays or Indians, we are all Malaysians.
Unlike the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak who likes to keep his “elegant silence”, Pakatan Rakyat leaders will not hesitate to condemn attempts to divide the country through racism or religious bigotry. We have proven that in the recently concluded General Election, Malaysians of all races have increased their support for Pakatan Rakyat, and not only the Chinese and we have called for the results not to be racialised.
Hence we call upon the Prime Minister to demonstrate his sincerity in “1Malaysia” by breaking his silence and condemn the racist developments in the country before his reign becomes recorded in history as the one which caused Malaysians to be the most racially divided.
Tony Pua
