这里还有几个简单的问题。
为什么自1969年的事件后，便出现大量人才外流的现象？其结果是不计其数的马来西亚华人在外国的各个领域取得出类拔萃的表现。
为什么一个种族——在人数和最高等级上——完全垄断了整个公共部门，包括军队、警察部队、民事服务、司法、大学和由政府控制的金融及商业机构？
为什么年复一年，马来西亚的顶尖华族学生都被禁止进入大学，直到华人部长在内阁为他们求情，才有一些能被录取？
李光耀只是实话实说。我想所有马来西亚人，不论来自任何种族，就算表面上不说，内心里也很清楚。
是的，我们一直都实行种族歧视政策，而这是个“零和游戏”。一个种族失利便有另外一个种族获益，就是这么简单。坚持没有任何种族因为这种政策而处于不利的地位，根本是自欺欺人和虚伪的做法。
但真正的问题是，有没有理由实行这样的政策？要回答这个问题，我们得回到政策的源头——在1969年种族暴乱后所制定的“新经济政策”（New Economic Policy）。
“新经济政策”的主要目的是团结国家。它有个双管齐下的策略：不分种族地铲除贫穷，和重组社会以消除种族和经济之间的密切关联。
这样的“平权”政策并没有错。不幸的是，因为种族霸权主义，政策在多年后已经同种族特权画上等号，完全违背了当初的目标。在前首相马哈迪20年的独裁统治期间，“新经济政策”被公然的滥用，作为到现在阿都拉首相继位后依然猖獗的的贪污和朋党主义的借口。
政策是被滥用，但也毫无疑问的达到了它有限的目标，在经济和教育两个领域，提升了马来人的地位，让马来人在同其他种族相比之下，取得了尚可的表现。不过，政策被滥用的结果却有巨大的破坏性，马来人社会的文化精神急剧丧失，道德和守法的观念几乎完全崩溃。
滥用“新经济政策”所带来的主要问题是贪污猖獗和朋党主义、日益严重的种族分化、人才继续外流、扭曲的教育系统、经济竞争力衰退、没有效率的官僚政治、缓慢的经济增长和败坏的社会价值关。
在全球化的世界和任何文明社会，这种落伍和倒退的政策都不应该存在。事实上，废除这种政策的压力不是来自国内——被压迫的种族没有能力改变现状——而是同我们进行贸易的整个世界。
我们的贸易代表的经验可以证明，马来西亚以种族为基础的保护主义政策，让同其他国家商谈自由贸易协定的过程困难重重。新经济政策所衍生的措施，毫无例外的变成为国家增加双边贸易和投资机会的绊脚石。
不管我们喜欢与否，世界贸易自由化已经是不可逆转的趋势，在还没有对国家经济造成不可接受的破坏之前，马来西亚还能够继续违反潮流多久？
更严重的问题是，面对海外的竞争，马来西亚的经济逐渐失去竞争力。首相阿都拉虽然正确的指出普遍存在的第三世界心态是弊端，对纠正没有竞争力的文化和制止日益严重的种族和宗教分歧，却没有作出任何努力。
李光耀的言论让许多马来西亚领导人，尤其是执政的国民阵线领导人感到恼火是可以理解的。但是，这些言论也应该会在长期保持缄默、忍受不公平政策的马来西亚人中引起共鸣。
至于国内沉默的大多数人，他们应该思考的是怎么做对他们才最有利：为了保留面子愤怒的反驳李光耀，还是勇敢的面对丑陋的事实，并实行可以让国家走上正轨的改变？
马来西亚的发展已经来到关键时刻，我们应该警惕自己，慎防过于信任执政者。长久以来，马来西亚人都非常信任执政者，从政府公然滥用权力的情形来看，或许我们是太过信任他们了。
的确，尽管政府严重治理不当，国家到现在还安然无恙。但这并不表示我们将来依然会同样幸运。因为内在和外在环境的剧烈改变，我们已经不能在不危害国家前途的情况下，在政策和选举领导人的问题上再犯下严重的错误。
从这个角度来看，李光耀的言论可以是对我们有利的苦口良药，如果我们能够谦虚和勇敢的接受挑战，认真的进行反省，最终可能从中获益。
● Kim Quek(金格)
·原载MalaysiaToday网站，文章原题Better to call a spade a spade。
叶琦保摘译。
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Better to call a spade a spade
Sunday, September 24, 2006 MalaysiaToday● Kim Quek
In the chorus of angry protests against Singapore Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew’s recent remark that Chinese Malaysians have been marginalised, can these angry protesters answer one simple question? If there has been no racial marginalisation, why has the word meritocracy been a taboo in Malaysian politics ever since the racial riot of May 13, 1969 – the only country in the world doing that?
A few more simple questions:
Why have there been massive and unrelenting brain drains ever since the infamous debacle in 1969, resulting in countless Chinese Malaysians excelling in many fields in foreign lands?
Why has there been a virtual monopoly by one race – numerically as a whole as well as the top hierarchy – in the entire spectrum of the public sector, namely, the army, the police, the civil service, the judiciary, public universities, semi and quasi government bodies, government controlled financial institutions and enterprises?
Why have there been, year after year, the spectres of top Chinese Malaysian students being barred from universities, only to be admitted later (only for some) upon begging by Chinese ministers in the Cabinet?
No doubt Lee Kuan Yew may be faulted for lacking diplomatic niceties in his remarks, but he has spoken the truth. And I think every Malaysian irrespective of race knows that, at least in the deepest part of his heart if not outwardly.
Yes, we have been practicing racial discrimination, and that is a zero sum game. When race A is barred so that race B can get in, it is one side’s loss to another side’s gain, as simple as that. It is sheer dishonesty and hypocrisy to deny that any race has suffered a disadvantage as a result of this policy.
But the real question is: is such policy justified?
To answer that question, we have to go back to where such policy started – the New Economic Policy (NEP), formulated after the racial riots in 1969. It is necessary to refresh our memory over the original concept of this NEP, since it has almost become a dirty word now, having been hijacked by politicians for self-gain and for perpetuating political hegemony.
The prime objective of NEP was to achieve national unity, and the strategy to achieve that was two-pronged: to eradicate poverty irrespective of race, and to restructure society so as to eliminate the identification of race with economic function.
There is nothing wrong with such an affirmative action policy, but the tragedy is that over the years, through racial hegemony, it has been transformed into a policy synonymous with racial privileges, totally forgetting the over-arching objective of national unity and eliminating poverty across racial lines. Through two decades of dictatorial rule by former premier Mahathir Mohamad, the NEP had been blatantly abused to justify uncontrolled corruption, cronyism and nepotism, which have continued to rage unabated under the present prime minister.
There is no question that in spite of these abuses, the NEP has achieved its limited objective of having elevated the status of Malays in the economic and educational fields to a respectable level, compared to those of other races. But the fallout of such abuses is devastating indeed, which is nothing less than the drastic plunge of the ethos of the Malaysian society tantamount to a virtual breakdown of morality and law and order.
The chief setbacks of the abuses of NEP are rampant corruption and cronyism, worsening racial polarization, unrelenting brain drains, warped educational system, thwarted economic competitiveness, ineffectual bureaucracy, retarded economic growth and perverted social values.
Such anachronistic and regressive policy has no place in the present globalizing world, and for that matter, in any civilized society. As it is, the pressure to dismantle such policy does not come from within the country - as the deprived races seem powerless to redress this wrong - but from the whole wide world who are our trading partners. Our trade negotiators should be able to testify how tough the going is when it comes to negotiating free trade agreements with foreign parties whether it is regional marketing pacts (Afta, WTO) or bi-lateral agreements such as those involving Japan, US, Australia, China and India (through Asean), etc due to the presence of Malaysia’s race-based protectionist policies. Invariably, these NEP inspired policies stand as stumbling blocks to the opening of a wider window for two-way trades and investments for this country.
World trade liberalisation is a one way road, and there is no turning back, whether we like it or not. So, for how long can Malaysia buck the world trend without causing unacceptable damage to its own economy?
Even worse than the anticipated trade frictions is the loss of Malaysia’s economic competitiveness in the face of heightening competition from abroad. Our prime minister has correctly diagnosed this malaise as the prevalence of our third world mentality, but he has done nothing to correct our uncompetitive culture or to stamp the worsening racial and religious dissension within the country. In fact, he has done the opposite by intensifying the imprint of the perverted NEP philosophy on our economic plans, and prohibiting inter-religious and inter-racial discourse which would otherwise have contributed to greater understanding and harmony among the races.
Lee Kuan Yew’s comments have understandably riled many Malaysian leaders particularly those in the ruling coalition, but he should also have struck resonance among many who have silently put up with these unjust policies all these years.
As for the great silent majority in this country, they should now ponder what would serve their interests best: to save face by angrily rebutting Lee Kuan Yew or to stare at the ugly truth bravely and institute changes that will put the nation on the right path?
I think we have reached a stage in our history critical enough to warrant caution in putting too much trust in the incumbent leaders. The people of Malaysia have traditionally placed much trust in the ruling power, perhaps more than they should, as evident from the fragrant abuses of government authorities. The fact that we have scraped through as a nation in the past despite such serious misrule does not guarantee that we will be similarly lucky in the future. This is due to the fact that both internal and external circumstances have so radically altered that we can no longer commit such major errors in policies and in the choice of leadership without putting our future in peril.
Looking from this perspective, Lee Kuan Yew’s bitter medicine may yet work to our advantage if we are humble and brave enough to take this as a challenge to do some serious introspection that may eventually lead to our common good.
No comments:
Post a Comment