Malaysian History..

Ask any of our Malaysian student if they like History and most of the time you'll get an emphatic No! It is a subject disliked by many students for a simple reason. Cos one has to read! And read! And read! Rote kinda learning. And then there is also the perception that our history text books is biased, which I think is true. Many of the kids I know say History is boring too.

I think history as a subject is important. Of the many subjects taught, this is perhaps one of the few if not the only subject where one learns about life. Apart from giving us an intellectual run around, it also explains to us the whys and the hows of our identity. History has a civic function. It shapes us and prepares us for nationhood. Nationhood is not possible without the study of history. But to me, the most important thing one gets out of studying history is probably humility. We should be humbled by the the folly committed by Man over and over again, over the centuries. We should be humbled by the fall of great empires.. which seemed to be repeating itself without fail; Roman, Chinese, Turkish, etc, etc. History keeps repeating itself cos each generation lives life all over again. Only the wise learns to avoid the same mistakes... but there are few among us.. 8(

Studying history is like learning philosophy. You are supposed to learn from the mistakes of the past and avoid making them. But Man is foolish... we keep treading the same path. Think of the rites to adulthood and the inevitable - death... the rise (and fall) of an empire takes that same path. So, History as a subject in school should be interesting and fun.... cos we learn about life. But in our Malaysian schools it is not. It is a subject of regurgitation, one learns without much thought. It doesn't educate. It only fills the brain temporarily and then is disregarded after exam ends!

Recently Tun Dr. M has this to say about knowing your history to avoid making the same mistakes. But are our text books accurate? Do we teach history from a fair perspective? Our history is skewed, written to serve our political masters. When I was younger, we learned about Hang Tuah and his 5 friends, the Malacca Sultanate and so on. Then we find out that Hang Tuah may not have been who he was... whatever happened to all the romantic adventures that we grew up with? They're still there, only thing is we don't talk much about them these days cos the skin colour of the main actors have become somewhat lighter! LOL! If we are truly 1Malaysia we'd been proud of them just the same.

Similarly, we learned that JWW Birch was killed because he campurtangan dalam adat Melayu. And the children are also taught that the adat in question here enslaved people and Birch was trying to rid the system of that. Then we laud Maharaja Lela and his followers (who were doing the bidding of the Sultan) for having the guts to kill Birch because of his interference. Wasn't Birch trying to eradicate something bad? *scratch head*

In Form One, a student is taught that interpretation of an event is influenced by a historian's perspective. So, I guess our young kids are taught that killing Birch because he interfered with a bad practice was necessary because from that historian's perspective, it was the right thing to do. *scratch head again* What I find difficult to understand is why not give another reason for his killing?... unless of course, the orang putih actually weren't that bad. The power shift here seemed better for the rakyat. The rakyat did not do the murdering. We didn't read much about how the rakyat felt, the ground swell so to say. For all we know, the orang putih's interference may have been better for the average Ali, Ahmad and Ah Seng on the denai. After all, the pembesar had no more rights to take any pretty lass and turn her into his sex slave or any strong young fler to work his fields. Life became kinda nicer for these rakyat biasa, right? The plot to kick out the orang putih was done by the golongan istana. So what is right and wrong, here? Perspective plays a big role.

Hence the civic function of educating and shaping the young minds fall short of the moral absolutes.

Even in the run to the formation of the Federated Malay States, the role of the Sultans in the rebellions against the East India Company... the actual colonization which took place after the WW2, facts presented never seems quite balanced. We are reminded that the Brits were the colonialists. It was an era of making money... very much like our era now too. UMNO is also doling out contracts and tenders...

The tin mines and rubber plantations were money churning industries (these days, it's the APs, contracts, etc). They came, they plundered. What did the Sultans do? Gave in to the demands rather than fight. After all, that would enable them to continue living a good life in the palace. Meanwhile, the fight for freedom were led by the lower echelon leaders.... probably equivalent to grassroot leaders by today's definition.

But if you look around us, much of what was written in this era seems to be repeating themselves again too.. only this time all the main actors are local. But the plundering and pillaging still go on, albeit with more sophistication. Tun Dr. M is right, we should learn our history, and learn it the right way. Then each of us will truly benefit from the insights and wisdom gained and perhaps leave behind a truly worthy legacy....

So it's back to the Humpty Dumpty thingy... it's not what it's supposed to be but what I want it to be.... Anyway, I think how our history text book is written also reflects the true colour of the gahmen... when the learning of History unites and not divide, then maybe, just maybe, 1Malaysia, Bangsa Malaysia, Anak Malaysia... will work! My one sen!