this published entry was submitted as a partial requirement for the blogger's course.

Constructing Identity: To be heard as a Malaysian

When discussing the notion of constructing one’s identity, it would be much more practical to see the issue through examples drawn from the current situation surrounding us which would eventually helped us to evaluate in a manner where we have tangible examples and evidence in the discussed notion. Therefore, for the purpose of this paper, our group have chosen to see the construction of national identity in the proposal of the current Prime Minster of Malaysia, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, of 1Malaysia. It is still a debatable notion in a sense that the concept is still at its infant stage therefore it welcomes constructive discussions to make it more ‘matured’, for that matter.

When the concept of 1Malaysia was first announced by the current Prime Minister of Malaysia, it brought up many perceptions not forgetting assumptions along; be it from the citizens of Malaysia itself or from others reciting in Malaysia. Some say it was just a slogan, while some described it as a new termed coined from other previous ones, and others say that 1Malaysia was also seen as a concept which brings about more complications in the racial unity spaghetti of this country rather than unravelling them. Somehow, 1Malaysia may have opened the formal path for the construction of a shared Malaysian identity, but on another tangent, it was also seen as a removal of the defensive mechanism from the majority race in this country to make them equal amongst others, so to speak. 1Malaysia does not only cater for closer integration amongst all races in this country, but also for equality in terms of the economic jargon as well. It strives to reduce the income disparities amongst all, which through this lense, it is also expected to make all citizens of Malaysia unite and come together.

The foundation of 1Malaysia is indeed a concept to achieve equality amongst and not between all races in this country, but for some obvious yet subtle reason , not each and every citizen or rather every race in Malaysia would agree to this; especially for those who had been enjoying the 'benefit' (which is less controversial than 'privilege') of being the majority race in this country for more than fifty years now.

The identity that were ought to be constructed by this concept is founded on the theme that citizens come first, where at the same time, the nation's achievements are also the top priority. This is how equality should be perceived or at least 'seen as' - the fact that the citizens' interest; not only closer integration per se, but also in terms of economic integration, to work hand in hand for the prosperous future of this country. For this matter, integration has always been present in this country, also dubbed 'unity in diversity' by the Prime Minister himself, and it is important that this integration should be preserved (not as preservatives though) but to be prolonged and continued as generations passed on. This is also one of the reasons why 1Malaysia came into 'force'. Therefore it is insignificant to question why it was only brought up today and not years before, or rather it is 'replica idea', but it is more practical to question, how it could help foster (in a much better way than years before) the values it proposed to, at least for integration and equality to come closer amongst its citizens.

When constructing identities, whether at the individual level or the national or regional level, certainly one has to consider which would work better; a federalist or a functionalist approach, or both simultaneously, to address the practicality of 1Malaysia. These two approaches were considered simply because it would be less complicated to define between a top-down and a bottom-up methodology for the construction of an identity i.e. 1Malaysia. While we have witnessed so far that it has been rather a top-down approach where the elites of the government have taken charge of the concept of 1Malaysia rather than the citizens itself, it is never wrong but actually has always been the case. A transformation or rather reformation in the integration architecture of Malaysia will not only involve the amendments of several government policies, but also making at par the benefits shared amongst all races in this country is not a task which can be initiated by the people but more of the government's role, in this case. But certainly, this process of constructing identity could be further developed through a bottom-up approach where the active participation of the citizens becomes the major component for progress.

Eventually, we would realise that, to be heard as a Malaysian, is actually not an easy task at all. The paragraphs above have described the pre-process of constructing a national identity, and the complications that follows as well. It is again crucial to remember that - to be heard as a Malaysian, or rather to amplify the identity constructed within us to others (who do not belong to the same 'group', so to say), is certainly not a two-minutes task but it works the other way round; consists of the continuous effort to sustain the constructed identity perceived by others, providing them the opportunity to have a clear notion of the identity that has been constructed.

Some graphs and figures for your eyes:
Najib at 100 days: Strong Job Approval Rating on Economic Measures