If one had arrived a few minutes late to the session, he/she would have been among the many struggling to find a seat behind the last row of chairs. While absorbed in the discussion about the Myth of the Lazy Native, the doors to Nusantara Books were opened wide to house more foldable chairs. It was heartwarming witnessing the crowd, growing by the hour. Given the flawed colonial ideologies that continue to bleed silently in former colonised states, it is no surprise that people are gathering to engage in discussions on the impact of colonisation. Now that we are past the introductions, we discussed the heart of the matter that we all have been waiting for, as identified by Professor Walid Jumblatt in the previous session.
The relevance of The Myth Of The Lazy Native
The relevance of the book in today’s context cannot be further questioned. While colonisation has left us imprinted in world history, its impact still pulses in our identity. Firstly, the nature of colonisation underlies the prevalent European concept of ‘ideology as a race’. The far right discourse in Europe believed in a ‘civilising mission’ by framing colonised subjects and reducing them to fit within the logic of European superiority. For instance, the myth of natives being lazy was racialised and moralised, becoming a justification for why they deserved to be disciplined through European governance. Alatas argued that these ideas were so pervasive that they came to be accepted by both colonisers and the colonised, persistently internalised and reproduced in postcolonial societies. Secondly, the process of colonisation should be noted and understood for its pervasive impact. According to Alatas, many natives were excluded from the main production processes of materials that were important for the economy. In return, these natives were accused of being unproductive for not contributing to the economy. Hence, such a process creates a self-fulfilling prophecy that natives are indeed inherently lazy, despite the fragmented economy. These prophecies and myths still live in our communities today.
The persistence of the colonial mentality today
Furthermore, the prophecy persists among native collaborators with colonists. Mat Kilau, a prominent patriotic Malaysian film, highlighted how native collaborators enabled the British colonists to control the natives and convince them of their weakness. Prof. Walid noted that such collaborators were evidence of ‘local ideological colonisation’, particularly the idea that natives were unproductive participants to colonial economic plans. The kicker? According to Syed Hussein Alatas, the lack of struggle for an independent Malaysia meant that there was no “intellectual break with British ideological thinking” – allowing its adherents to proceed as Malaysia’s founders. This is exemplified in “Revolusi Mental” (1971) that was produced by the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), the ruling party upon Malaysia’s independence. According to Alatas, the book is filled with assumptions promoted by colonial capitalism. Colonial capitalism “weighed the value of a community according to the degree of its serviceability to the group interest”. The book adopted the same metric by asserting that Malays lacked effort in all pursuits, dismissing the contributions of the Malays in administration, enforcement and as rulers in colonial Malaysia (where the book centered). It instead glorified the image of wealthy businesspeople like “John Paul Getty, the American billionaire” as the marker of hard work and success (page 149). Alatas dedicated Chapter 10, “Mental Revolution” to debunking UMNO’s book, calling it “a distorted ideology of a Malay ruling party sharing the false consciousness of colonial capitalism.”
Mahathir Mohamad, known as the trailblazing 7th prime minister of Malaysia and member of UMNO since 1964, published “The Malay Dilemma” in 1970 which mirrored UMNO’s “Revolusi Mental”. His book, which attracted both praise and criticism, highlighted how ‘cultural influences’ such as fatalism and communal living hindered the Malays from individualism and an entrepreneurial spirit. In the Myth of The Lazy Native, Alatas also stated that Mahathir’s book “added the hereditary dimension” to explain Malay behaviour and lack of success. According to Prof Walid, Alatas predicted that Mahathir would further reinforce his ideologies as he rose to power, explaining how the colonial mentality persists in present-day politics. The mindsets of UMNO and Mahathir can be understood better under the light of Alatas’ statement, “Their emphasis on the individual as the dominant agent for change without sufficient consideration of the system reflected their powerful position.” Zooming in on Singapore, colonial capitalism has also been raised by local politicians. One example was Yaacob Ibrahim, former Minister of Muslim Affairs, who in 2019 alluded to how Singapore had yet to reckon with the effects of colonialism on the Malays. Since 2019 was the year of the “Bicentennial” or 200 years since Raffles landed in Singapore, this comment highlights the ongoing and more nuanced discussion about colonialism and the natives by politicians.
Colonial Capitalism
The session further explored the concept of colonial capitalism where some communities were often sidelined from national development processes. Many participants raised the question that it is difficult to escape such an enduring concept when it is grounded in Singapore’s statehood. Prof. Walid acknowledged the struggle and further explained the landscape of capitalism. He used the analogy of a celebrated Hollywood film, Barbie, to illustrate the ironies that warp our criticism of a capitalistic world. While the movie critiques capitalism and discusses the evolving expectations of gender norms, the movie was produced in a capitalistic film industry that preys on sensibilities and identity politics. Another insidious way colonial capitalism continues to affect us is by seeping into the way we think. It created the language of “deservedness” which negates the inherent worth of a human being to basic benefits such as free healthcare. Hence, a local contemporary example of colonial capitalism would be the myth of meritocracy. Meritocracy is defined as “a social system, society, or organisation in which people get success or power because of their abilities, not because of their money, or social position” (Cambridge Dictionary). While meritocracy aims to equalise the playing field regardless of social positions, it overlooks other transparent factors that have accumulated over the years of practicing meritocracy, such as gross household income and social networks.
Prof. Walid cited Karl Marx’s concept of alienation to illustrate the estrangement caused by capitalism. Marx believed that the working class participating in capitalistic production would be alienated in several aspects: their control over their own labour, the products of their labour, autonomy over working arrangements with fellow workers and finally, their own essence as a human. Additionally, Prof. quoted Max Weber’s Iron Cage theory that views capitalism as a rationalised mode of production. Rationalisation is a historical drive towards a world where one, in principle, can master everything by calculation. It thrives on rational structures and mindsets, using logical reasons behind every action and decisions. Hence, people become stuck in this iron cage of self-rationalisation in their conduct and are unable to determine an endpoint to their desires. The emptiness of capitalism coincides with the rise of secularism. Secularism neglects the soul, often in “(separating) religion from other realms of human existence”. Hence, people cope by turning to spirituality in the modern world, even if people do not deem themselves religious.
Such theories are so relevant today that Prof. Walid’s ensuing question seemed natural:
“What are we living for?”
Moving forward & changing
As a society
As we grapple with how to define our lives, the dynamic between individual conscience – which forms civil society – and government decisions may become more prominent to us. Prof Walid raised the different yet harmonious functions which civil society and the government can play. He stated that we cannot expect change from within institutions as they are “limited and limiting”. Civil society is better positioned to campaign for certain issues and make larger demands; in this regard, we expect unrealistically from politicians at times. However, as politicians are usually recognised and have public trust, they can become the figureheads of campaigns (without marginalising the victims of issues) as it may be more effective to gain support for change. Furthermore, by branching out to meet and understand people of varying identities – like in political beliefs, races and generations – we may see more success in advocating for social improvements.
As individuals
Tuning into ourselves is also important. Prof Walid reminded us to be careful not to criticise our own community, especially if we are from among the minority race. Context determines whether jokes and self-deprecation do more harm than good; we must ensure that we do not contribute to the negative views which people have of our community by using stereotypes as jokes. For example, a Malay bringing up the ‘janji Melayu’ (directly translated to ‘Malay promise’) stereotype when he/she comes late for appointments could land as a shared joke with fellow Malays, but represent one’s community as lacking seriousness and punctuality in other situations. He also shared the principle that “if you punch down, you must also punch up”; if one can make fun of someone who is less influential and powerful, one should be willing to do the same to someone of high social status. This could circle back to how UMNO and Mahathir portrayed Malays negatively yet made no break with their former colonists in their lines of logic.
Circling back to the quote by Yaacob Ibrahim mentioned earlier, the call to address history’s impact on us is accompanied by another phenomenon – historical amnesia. When people discover the below articles of Singapore’s constitution,
they are often surprised, associating this with Malaysia instead. Yet, is it really that shocking, given that our national anthem is in Malay and our national language is Malay as well? Prof Walid pointed out that this was cognitive dissonance at work. While we know the popular narrative of Singapore’s independence, we could superimpose this with the new historical events (#oxymoron!) that we have uncovered, to gain a more nuanced understanding of our country and its people. Nonetheless, prof was quick to remind us that in addressing historical injustice, we must ensure that we do not create a new racial hierarchy – we would be no different from the colonists if so.
Be Strategic In Confronting The Myth
Moving forward, we need to respond and interact with one another strategically, without solely relying on our moral voice. Alatas did not challenge just the colonial powers, but also how postcolonial societies respond to injustices that they have inherited. This can be seen when Alatas critiques the failures of local intellectuals and leaders in Southeast Asia to confront colonial myths that haunt the different racial groups. Instead, they channel the rigour and planning into institutionalising those myths. Hence, it is insufficient for moral outrage alone to dismantle deeply embedded ideologies that have been cultivated for decades. While moral conviction may inspire awareness, we need to operate with a clear strategy and structural awareness of how we interact with one another. Our actions and speech have to be strategic – how we confront the myth, who confronts the myth, in what context did we confront the myth – when we actively attempt to correct misconceptions. Otherwise, we risk our efforts becoming solely performative and easily absorbed into the status quo, or inflammatory which could repel more people from seeing a fairer perspective. Whatever our role in society might be, we will always be engaging with power structures and other citizens who might reinforce these institutionalised myths. To visualise this framework, Alatas questioned the lenses that were used to frame social issues in post-colonial states. For instance, the notion that challenges faced by the Malay community are culturally rooted or internally caused clearly mirrors the colonial thinking that pathologised the community. Such lenses isolate the issues as ethnic-specific rather than the broader structural issues such as class, access to resources and cultural capital. Challenges such as housing insecurity and academic underperformance faced by other non-Malay communities are often more readily accepted as national concerns and less racialised. Thus, Alatas invites us to reframe such challenges as national issues that require collective responsibility and policy attention. By extension, we can also regard suicide rates and the negative effects of social media as national rather than personal problems. Perhaps as long as there is a section of the population struggling, the whole cannot be seen as perfect, and taking on the perspectives of others (especially those less fortunate than you) is the first step to a better society for all.
Quick Links
- Buy the book from Wardah Books.
- Read part 1 of Our Personal Reflections on Seekers Book Club Deep Dive – The Myth of the Lazy Native by Syed Hussein Alatas
Credits for this article:
Written by Nurainun Mardhiyah Binte Khairullah and Wan Nur Zafirah Binte Wan Zaini