Last week the headlines in almost all the newspapers read, \’Give a heart!\’. Just about everyone understood that the need was for a heart donor for teenager Tee Hui Yi, who has been surviving on a mechanical heart.

Education Minister Hishamuddin Hussein was quoted as saying: \”Sometimes, we look at every issue from the perspective of race and religion. But when it comes to life and death, when there is a child on the operating table, it doesn\’t matter whether it is a Muslim heart or not.\”

The Sun in an editorial headlined \’Politicians should stop appealing to religion and race\’, concluded: \”Maybe it is time politicians start thinking seriously and honestly about abandoning communal politics in the interest of a united and prosperous Malaysian nation. If the country\’s politicians are able to do this, some day Malaysia would be even a greater success story.\”

I concur.

I hope and pray Hui Yee will grow up very Malaysian knowing that, when it really matters, Malaysians have a heart – they care about human dignity and saving lives, regardless of race or religion.

Nonetheless, let is get back to my central thesis. I am not being petty or obnoxious here in aiming my comments directly at Hishamuddin and his lack of integrity in what he said. After saying we should not make every issue about race and religion, he goes on to declare that the (first) donated heart is a \”Muslim heart\”.

My critique is also about the mindset of Malaysian politicians – it is very coloured and blinded by race and religion.

In every language, I understand that linguists struggle to find a translation for the word \’heart\’ – it is the organ that pumps blood in the body and also the central system for human life.

\"\"

Hishamuddin makes a Freudian slip when he equates the word \’heart\’ to the \’faith of a Muslim\’. The disembodied heart cannot have any faith, if I may say so. Neither is faith centred in the heart.

How do we get out of intended or unintended generalisations about things of the heart? The heart of the matter has become the matter of the heart – always defined in terms of race and religion. This is now our No 1 national problem.

Therefore, Gerakan Youth was not too far wrong in suggesting that Barisan Nasional (BN) begins to think about how they can become one big family and then a political party. They may even want to call it Parti Barisan.

Malaysian Agenda

Before the 1999 general election, it was speculated that a well positioned RMC Old Putera could become the candidate for a state seat, perhaps even he menteri besar of the state. I wrote to the individual, advising him to become a member of the Barisan Nasional Direct Membership, and not be a proxy Umno member and then a confederate BN member.

Was my idea outrageous? Actually that has been my attitude all the time I was a member of the public service of Malaysia. I was by extension a member of the government of the day, but never a member or even a supporter of any political party.

The government would prefer members who are blind supporters of a specific party\’s agenda. Slowly but surely, therefore, top public servants are being drawn into the mainstream of a particular political party. Very often, they lose the objectivity and professionalism that the public service was famous for. Slowly but surely, they become an accomplice to wrongdoing that goes on in the name of party interests. The Public Accounts Committee meetings have confirmed this.

So, based on Gerakan Youth\’s appeal, why shouldn\’t Malaysia be ready for multi-racial parties? Currently, Gerakan is probably the only party which is truly attempting to be multi-racial although even that is somewhat limited and filled with tokenism.

\"\"

When Parti Keadilan was formed, it found support from many in the younger generation because of its multi-racial character. Slowly but surely, the Ketuanan Melayu syndrome exacted a toll and many members have left the party that was formed by ex-Umno types. Slowly but surely, PKR will become a copy of Umno and then the BN, with its Islamic credentials intact; with race-based parties in the vicinity; and with even PAS a useful ally.

Can\’t we have a truly multi-racial party? Could PBS or PPB become a multi-racial bumiputera party for all those born in and under the jurisdiction of Malaysia and who are only Malaysians?

After all, the term or concept of \’bumiputera\’ is not found in the Federal Constitution. It was a term of convenience used by political manipulators in evolving the Malay Agenda, post May 13 1969.

The root words, in Sanskrit and in Malay, are bumi and putra . Together, they \’prince of the earth\’. Isn\’t every Malaysian born after 1963 a son of the Malaysian soil: a prince under the Malaysian sun? Why is the word reserved for Malays of the peninsula; who are really second-generation Bugis, Sumatrans or Javanese?

Therefore, is it not fair to ask the government, how many bumiputeras from Sabah and Sarawak live in Putrajaya? If they cannot afford housing, could we give them a special bumiputera discount?

How many bumiputeras of Sabah and Sarawak are holders of Approved Permits; are secretaries- general or vice-chancellors of public universities? How many federal directors-general are from Sabah and Sarawak? Why should Kelantan or Johor or Kedah have a monopoly over such posts?

We need to get rid of archaic thinking and move towards a truly Malaysian Agenda for all Malaysians, just as Hui Yi became a Malaysian agenda. The objective of saving the life of a Malaysian took on national fervour.

She may be able to live because many ordinary caring Malaysians have rejected the racial and religious politics of divide-and-rule. All Malaysians were glad that Hui Yi will make it; just like all Malaysians are proud that we will have Dr Sheikh Muszaphar Shukor – one of us – in space this week.

They are both extensions of us as Malaysians. Their race and religion do not matter in the slightest bit, unless race-based politicians make an issue of it! God Bless Malaysia.