"Rakyat Malaysia", a nation of diverse people who live together under the banner of unity in difference. Having this spirit is recently highlighted by MCA president, Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting, as being of utmost importance to ensure our nation´s prosperity. Our colourful history has left us with the legacy of a multi-racial society; Malaysians can be Indian, Orang Asli, Chinese, Kadazan, Malay, Eurasian, Murut or anyone from a range of ethnicities. This heterogeneity is often forwarded as one of our strengths, and multi-culturalism is often touted by politicians as a valuable asset to nation-building.

However, the propounding of our differences on the basis of ´race´also means we are confined by the boundaries of their definition. In other words, even as we speak of unity, we are aware that the meaning of this is based on an understanding of apparently stark contrasts. Our political parties are formed on the basis of race instead of the more usual line of political ideologies, and we have lived in relative comfort in the knowledge that our individual racial identities matter in civil life. For example, until recently, entrance into national universities is based on racial quotas and affirmative action for bumiputeras textures significantly on our economic interactions.

We think of ´race´ as something indivisible - a natural biological fact that can be traced from our genealogies. From here, we draw from a network of associations to make sense of what it means to be from a particular racial descent. This includes tradition, culture, looks, religion, food and so on. Who we are and how we interact with each other is made intelligible through an understanding of ´race´ and our subjective ideas about it.

Yet we know that living with ´race´ as part of our identity can be a risky thing. We have had our share of history where the ´balance of interest´ seems to have tipped over and caused great dissatisfaction. Looking at experiences of racial relations across the globe, we seem to be perpetually treading on a tension - the recognition that our individual racial differences matter to our sense of identity and self, as well as the need to overcome these distinctions when building a common ideal. This can be a tricky terrain to negotiate, and often can be accompanied by periods of struggle and suffering.

How do we attempt to come to terms with this? Racism and prejudice on the basis of ethnic descent is a painful reality that many people face, especially those who belong to minority or marginalised groups. Sometimes we do not bother to take the time to know a person as a person, and instead, rely on easy stereotypes that are based on crude ideas about racial difference. Sometimes, the stereotypes themselves prevent us from wanting to know, either through fear, disdain, dismissal or awe. Claiming that race does not matter is also not a solution. Often this hides unequal power relations and privileges instead of helping to build an better understanding of ´race´in our daily lives.

After all, it is near impossible to be ´colour-blind´when how we are approached, what we can do and what is expected of us is in the main organised around the notion of race.

Perhaps we can start by imagining ´race´to be nothing more than an idea. There is nothing inherent about being born Chinese, Indegenous or Eurasian, but rather, most of our perceptions are framed around cultural or traditional variegation. After all, we all have different physical appearances; defence for differential treatment or expectations cannot be adequately built from subtle generalisations drawn from physique. In fact, much of our interpretation on physical differences is drawn from contextual understandings of socially relevent distinctions in identity, and this reflects the prejudice of our time. For example, scientific drawings of the human anatomy in the 17th century made falsely exaggerated differences between the bodies of ´white´and ´black´women to support the colonial treatment of ´slaves´ at that time.

As such, it is important to see ´race´as something with a traceable point in history, and recognising history as something that is constantly changing.

For example, being known as an Indian in 1937 in Malaya has very different implications from being termed as a Malaysian Indian today. We are continually in the process of defining and redefining our identities, cultures, histories and traditions, and strive to make sense of things which are relevant to our daily lives in accordance to changes in our experiences and new knowledge. To limit ourselves to a fixed comprehension of ´race´not only stunts our ability to grow, but can serve to solidify our differences without any real opportunity for constructing unity through mutual effort at understanding each other.

In short, we cannot afford to make assumptions about particular racial identities. We need to open up the whole idea of ´race´and create spaces for dialogue. What does it mean to be Indegenous, Eurasian, Chinese, Malay, Indian and so on in Malaysia today? How has the meaning of these racial categories shifted? How would we like it to change to create the vision of a multi-racial and equal nation? In what way can we understand the complexities and richness of our relationships to each other that emphasise respect, yet does not pretend to sweep over differences with only lip service? How do we ensure that we do not close down the building of a dynamic country that genuinely seeks to make ethical sense of our differences without the appropriating or silencing less powerful groups?

We need to deal with these difficult questions and allow the space for more to surface in our efforts to address the needs of a multi-racial society. Only then will the heart of "Rakyat Malaysia" beat with the strength of a truly united nation.

Jaclyn Kee
17 October 2004

Talk Back to wao@wao.org.my
Fortnightly Column by WAO on Sunday Mail