IS good better than best? Are these mere categories of thought, or really variances on value appreciation, or life-based judgments?

I remember once meeting with the late Professor Syed Hussain Alatas at his home, to invite him to speak at our 4th National Congress on Integrity, or NCOI. We exchanged some stories about these two core sets of ideas, of the good v the best.

He related a story to me about when he was Universiti Malaya vice-chancellor while I was overseas. When it came to the Chancellors’ Best Student Award, the nominated candidate was a Chinese student who had the grades and met the criteria.

But, when he presented the idea to the then board/council of the university, they wanted a Malay student to be given the same, or similar, award. He argued against that, suggesting that they instead give another award for the best Malay student and call it another name. He wanted to distinguish between the good and the best.

The best NEP!

I call the New Economic Policy (NEP) the “GEM of Malaysia”. It highlighted our clear and good development approach, premised upon the Malaysian Growth with Equity Model, or MyGEM.

From 1970 to 2010, a period of 40 years, we had consciously and purposefully grown a positive, affirmative and discriminatory model that highlighted development in favour of a Bumiputera policy.

Sadly, and unfortunately, the policy execution was abused in the last 20 years or so, a period extending well beyond the original NEP period. Nonetheless, on record, and in terms of the United Nations Statistics for Global Development, Malaysia is one of the most successful countries that had systematically mobilised a group, through affirmative action, into the new global economy.

Malaysia successfully progressed the Bumiputera community away from an agricultural starting point into the modern STEM industries of manufacturing and ICT, or new value creation. Tomorrow, it will be related to artificial intelligence. It has successfully reduced poverty to a very low level, and mobilised the majority of Malaysians away from low value-creation arenas.

GE14 and our paradigm shift

The government pre-14th general election deployed all authority and power abusing “due processes of electoral and financial prudence to cheat, steal, and lie”. Therefore, the peaceful change of government was truly by the people, for the people and of the people. Credit must be given to the original three “opposition parties”, and they have been amply rewarded by their newfound leadership.

Major appointments and concessions recognise the effect of the tsunami of change. We now have non-Malay leaders taking on significant portfolios, which has never happened since the riots of May 13, 1969.

Such a major and significant change is a paradigm shift – a fundamental and radical change happens when the usual way of thinking about or doing something is replaced by a completely new and different way.

Malaysia 2.0

I argue that Malaysia 2.0 is not just a “New Malaysia”, but also a nation with the same operating system called the federal constitution, with some key but fundamental differences. These are:

1. The same federal constitution, but states do not mean 14 of them, but rather, three core ex-colonial states, as complete and equal entities.

2. The federal constitution must be interpreted not just in social construct terms of Malayan Merdeka, but also in Malaysia Day agreements with Sabah and Sarawak.

3. Consequently, the “Ketuanan Melayu” mindset must go and be replaced by a “Malaysian First” mindset that the majority voted for.

4. While Malaya is first among equals, the rights and privileges of Sabahans and Sarawakians cannot be neglected at whim and fancy, as if they are the only natives of Malaya called Orang Asli, and not accurately as Orang Asal.

5. The Orang Asli of Malaya, and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak are Orang Asal in all three states.

May 13 this year will mark the 50th year since the worst racial riots that the nation-state has ever seen. It was also a breach of the foundation of Malaysia 1.0. We need to get rid of the ghost of May 13, but more than that, we must declare that the new development agenda should be focused only on the needs of the bottom 15% for the next 50 years. – January 27, 2019.

* KJ John worked in public service for 32 years, retired, and started a civil group for which he is chairman of the board. He writes to inform and educate, arguing for integration with integrity in Malaysia. He believes such a transformation has to start with the mind before it sinks into the heart!

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.