This article first appeared in Forum, The Edge Malaysia Weekly on September 17, 2018 - September 23, 2018

This year’s general election more than ever signifies the far-reaching changes that had been set in motion for some time now. The proper context to view the rise of the former opposition parties to the status of ruling coalition is the widespread perception of corruption, mismanagement and inefficiency of the Barisan Nasional-led government.

The rise of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who was backed by Pakatan Harapan, took place amid desperate calls among Malaysians for a new Malaysia — Malaysia Baru. This may remind some Malaysians of the call for the “new Malay” (Melayu Baru) in the 1990s to lead Malaysia towards developed nation status by 2020.

At the inaugural meeting of the Malaysian Business Council on Feb 28, 1991, Mahathir presented a working paper entitled “Malaysia: The Way Forward”, in which he urged that the “ultimate objective that we should aim for is a Malaysia that is a fully developed country by 2020”. He stressed that development should be understood in the broader sense of the term to encompass not only economic progress but also national unity, social cohesion, justice, political stability and spiritual development.

The road to a fully developed status was, however, barricaded by a number of central challenges, he said, one of which was that of creating a “psychologically liberated”, secure, confident and independent-minded people. Such psychological prerequisites were vital, he added, if the Malays were to play a key role in the consolidation of a united Malaysian nation (Bangsa Malaysia).

Mahathir subsequently reiterated this point in his presidential address at the annual Umno general assembly of Nov 8, 1991. It is this challenge that has got so much to do with the notion of the new Malay that was widely used during those days.

For Malaysia to maintain its high rates of economic growth and pace of social and political development, the attitudes and mentality of the Malays must be reoriented to create a society that is scientific in outlook, mindful of a need to preserve progressive values and driven by the pursuit of excellence.

It is this kind of change that the Umno leadership of the 1990s claimed they wished to bring about. History would prove that these were empty words and slogans. The more than two decades that have passed since then have painted a picture of a crass capitalist-oriented party that in practice failed to promote the kind of values needed for a progressive society.

Today, we hear the call for Malaysia Baru. Many Malaysians think that we have indeed begun our journey towards achieving a new Malaysia. In order for this ideal to be realised, however, it is important that we do not lose sight of an important dimension or component of the new Malaysia, that is, the new Malay.

Although the idea of the new Malay was rhetorically thrown around for special effect by many politicians, it was first discussed in a serious fashion by Syed Hussein Alatas, former vice-chancellor of the University of Malaya and former head of the Department of Malay Studies, National University of Singapore.

Some 40 years ago, he expressed the idea in terms of the more general concept of the “new man” in developing societies in his 1977 book, Intellectuals in Developing Societies. In another work entitled Kita Dengan Islam (Islam and Us), Alatas drew on examples from the modern history of Indonesia to suggest that the type of man needed to lead Muslim societies towards a progressive era was one with an open mind, religious in outlook and well versed in the modern sciences.

Alatas made specific references to the new Malay in 1989 in a speech in Melaka commemorating the death of Munshi Abdullah. Later on, the theme was taken up by political leaders and scholars, and has become a frequently uttered phrase in today’s political vocabulary.

The concept of the new Malay is understood in the context of the continuing industrialisation of Malaysia and the quest for developed nation status. Economic theories and policies alone do not guarantee development. What is required is a certain outlook on life that suppresses greed, extravagance and indolence.

The new Malay is one whose sense of purpose is subordinated to a set of value postulates that stress economic growth only as part of an overall agenda of political, religious and cultural development. Above all, the new Malay is liberated from fundamentalist and narrow-minded ideas and is at home in the modern world.

The idea of the new Malay is indeed laudable. It must be a part of the idea of a new Malaysia. This means that the new Malay must believe in the call for the narrowing of ethnic income inequalities so that economic backwardness will no longer be identified with race.

The new Malay must believe in the need to eradicate corruption and racism from our society. He and she must be committed to the dramatic escalation of human resource development programmes. Although the new Malay has an ambitious but realistic growth target, he is also mindful of the need to balance growth with political stability and the quality of life.

As the Pakatan Harapan government leads the country towards 2020 and beyond, an issue it will have to confront is that of corruption and money politics. Let us remember that Umno politicians in the past had warned of the dangers of money politics. Both sides of the Umno divide in the 1990s — such as Najib Razak, who was in the Anwar Ibrahim team, and the then foreign minister and party vice-president Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, who opposed Anwar — had acknowledged that money politics was creeping into the party and should be checked. Abdullah had warned of the danger of Umno being manipulated by its enemies if money could be used to influence the process of decision-making in the party.

The Sun reported on Oct 21, 1993, that Mahathir had admitted he had evidence of certain groups resorting to buying of votes. A political party driven by money politics can spell ruin for the country if the same party forms the government. If money politics is allowed to become pervasive, it could sabotage policies and programmes to achieve Vision 2020 and suppress the emergence of the new Malay.

The consequences of money politics on socioeconomic development are far-reaching. The government’s role as a provider of the good life can be thwarted by the predominance of money politics in which the party and state officials subordinate the interests of the public to their private interests. Development policies get distorted, capital will be concentrated in the hands of a few and there will be a loss of government revenue. The effect that money politics has on development is difficult to quantify.

Nevertheless, leaders and the elite in Malaysia have expressed concern over the growing influence of money on the outcome of decision-making. If money politics predominates, the kleptocratic behaviour of party and state officials will retard growth and development.

Today, the Pakatan Harapan government says it is committed to eradicating corruption and eliminating money politics. Malay leadership, more than ever, is crucial to the successful governance of Malaysia. And, the real challenge for the new Malay and, for that matter, new Malaysia is to keep the kleptocrats under control, if not eradicate them altogether.

Syed Farid Alatas is professor of sociology at the National University of Singapore

Save by subscribing to us for your print and/or digital copy.

P/S: The Edge is also available on Apple's AppStore and Androids' Google Play.