European Intrusions Into The Malay World
[After last weekend's mass protest against the nation's entrenched
corrupt and incompetent leadership, I reflect on a moment in our
colonial history. If Merdeka has any meaning it is this - our freedom to
express our views. We have to remind ourselves and our leaders of this,
and often, lest it be forgotten. As we celebrate the nation's 58th
anniversary of independence, I salute those brave Malaysians of Bersih
4. May you succeed! Your courage humbles and inspires me.]
The Europeans entered the Malay world a few centuries after the arrival of Islam. First were the Portuguese in 1509, followed by the Dutch and finally the British.
Unlike those early Muslims, the Europeans came not to trade, at least initially, but as explorers during their Age of Discovery. Only when they saw the abundance of the rich natural resources of the land did they go beyond mere exploring.
With their primordial form of capitalism of the heartless and
exploitative variety so well captured in Dickens’ many novels, it did
not take long for their greed to manifest itself and be all-consuming.
Like all capitalists, they were obsessed with domination, and that
quickly expanded beyond mere trading. Colonial aspirations soon
followed.
Preoccupied with commerce, those ancient Portuguese were not
interested in converting the natives though that was the penchant with
old-world Catholics. Yes, there were priests hauled along to bless their
mission, if nothing else. Consumed as they were with profits they could
not be bothered with the salvation of the heathens. Either that or
those Europeans were aware of the fate of the crusaders and knew better
than to try and convert the already Muslim natives.
The Portuguese did try, and suffered the consequences. Their
brief stay in Malacca was characterized by frequent warfare with the
natives there and elsewhere in the region. It spilled over even to
faraway China where the Portuguese also received a far-from-warm
welcome. The Spaniards had better luck in the Philippines.
Capitalism was a far more powerful cause and master than
spreading their Catholic faith, the crude and bumbling initial attempts
by the Portuguese excepted. Those Europeans were not at all interested
in the natives except when they interfered with trading. Then they were
removed in the most brutal and efficacious way.
Thus began European colonial rule, initially more as a scheme
to increase trade and less at empire building. Colonization was an
extension of their capitalistic and exploitative culture.
It is in the nature of humans to carry things to extremes, to
test the outer limits. So it was with the capitalistic exploitation by
the early Europeans. Slavery was very much an integral part of that,
limited only much later when it shamed their Christian sensitivity. That
dampened their activities somewhat, only to be resurrected under a new
guise, the banner of the “White Man’s burden.” In their fervent belief,
Almighty God had imposed upon them the divine mission to salvage the
lot of “Your new-caught, sullen peoples, Half-devil and half-child!” to
quote Kipling' s poetry.
With their ethnocentric worldview and confident of their own
sense of God-given superiority and entitlement, those early Europeans
were not in the least interested in learning the ways and cultures of
the natives or in any way interacting with them.
As a consequence, the impact on and reaction from the Malay
society to the arrival of the European traders could not be more
different than with the earlier Muslim ones. While Malays readily
welcomed the Muslim traders and embraced their faith, treating them more
as enlighteners, in striking contrast our ancestors had nothing but
contempt for the European colonizers. No doubt the feeling was mutual.
A measure of contempt for those European
traders-turned-colonizers, especially the Dutch, can be gauged by such
expressions as a “Dutch deal.” Legend has it that an early Dutch trader
was bargaining to buy a piece of land from a native. “Only the area
covered by this piece of buffalo hide!” the foreigner pleaded.
The trusting native readily agreed; after all he could do
without such a small plot of land. Imagine his horror when the trader
began slicing the hide into a long thin strip and then began laying it
over the property and claiming everything within it! Not even the most
crooked lawyer could have thought of such a sly scheme. In Malay culture
such a deed was considered duplicitous if not outright fraudulent and a
breach of faith. To the Dutch and perhaps also in a few other cultures,
it was a shrewd if not brilliant move.
If you visit Malacca today you can still see the distinctively
red-colored museum and other buildings, remnants of the earlier Dutch
settlement. It is said that the red color is due to the permanent stain
of the betel nut juice those ancient natives contemptuously spitted on
those buildings, a measure of their scorn for the Dutch.
While those early Dutch traders obviously thought they had the
better end of the deal – they did, at least in the short term – in the
long-term, well, those red buildings are perpetual reminders of the
natives' contempt for them.
There are others. The best is reflected in the expression, Bini Belanda
(Dutch wife), referring to the long white fluffy bolster found in the
bedrooms of Malays, only good to rest your legs on and the occasional
cuddle when you are lonely, but not much else! Then there is Orang Belanda (Dutch people), the proboscis monkey with its distinctive large white nose.
Both Islam and Christianity are known for their proselytizing
zeal. The ancient Muslim traders by not focusing on converting Malays
but only on being good Muslims in their trading activities and other
dealings with the natives ended up being effective propagators of their
faith. Meanwhile the Catholic Portuguese and Protestant Dutch, otherwise
and elsewhere famed for their equally fanatical zeal at conversions,
forceful if necessary, ended up merely being the butt of cruel Malay
jokes.
The credit should not all go to the Muslim traders or the
blame entirely on those early European colonizers. The large and as yet
unexamined question is why did Malays react warmly to and be so
welcoming of the Muslim traders but became downright hostile to the
later European traders? Here I attribute the differences in attitudes
and behaviors between the Muslim and European traders to account for the
varying receptions of the natives.
Viewed from another perspective, what is it about Malay
society which before the coming of Islam was so welcoming of foreign
people and ideas while after adopting Islam became so hostile to the
Portuguese, Dutch, and other foreigners.
There is a price - and not a small one - to be paid later for
that general hostility to foreigners and foreign ideas when Malaysia
fell under a less malevolent colonial power. I will explore that in my
analysis of our responses to British intervention in our affairs.
This antipathy towards foreigners and foreign ideas still
persists to this day. This insularity is a major handicap for us in
facing up to the challenges of and seizing the opportunities afforded by
this era of increasing globalization.
Next: Soft Spot For The British
This essay is based on the author’s latest book, Liberating The Malay Mind, ZI Publications Sdn Bhd, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia , 2013.
posted by M. Bakri Musa | 9:53 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home