林德宜：大马种族难题和受害者文化

在马来西亚，种族主义的主要驱动者，以种族偏向来曲解社会的经济、教育、文化，甚至政府的政策。在标志马来西亚分水岭的1969年513事件发生之前，这些种族主义的措施已被推行。513事件改变了国内的政治动向，并建立起完善的机制，进一步地巩固国内种族主义和偏见。在某些方面，这些政策变得更加僵化，这解释了为何国内的种族主义情况没有得到改善。

他们把这些种族政策的依据，结合上：《宪法》第153条文；强调种族之间存在收入差异；社会契约下所谓以经济平等来换取政治平等；以及需要缓解族群间紧张关系。

为合理化这些种族歧视的措施，在多数族群的领导人心态上总认为，他们的族群是英国殖民和独立后发展下的受害者。因此，需通过给予一些国人特权和不同的权利，来纠正这种情况。

尽管马来西亚已独立了超过半个世纪，同时也有许多学者和观察员对这样的种族偏差政策，给予严厉的批判和谴责，但种族主义的思想观念不仅仍然盛行，甚至还得到了强化。

最近在面子书上有一则评论，将美国目前正在发生的“黑命攸关”（BlackLivesMatter）运动与我国的种族政策进行了比较。

该文章是根据作者的实际经历而写的：“我对美国的左派社会运动特别关注，尤其是在20世纪末和21世纪的发展，如今更发展为反法西斯主义运动、“黑命攸关”等。1980年代，我在相对较不富裕的佛罗里达州阿拉卡瓦县（Alachua County）地区居住了5年，自此我就对社会发展有所关注，我不禁看到黑人社会和我们马来社会之间的相似之处。有著受害者的心态，对所谓“他者”的“领导人”衍生出一种反感，一种倒退的文化结合著盲目宗教狂热，固打制和扶弱政策无可避免地，成了通往地狱之路。但是，嘿！别只怪别人而不自省。不谈自己本身造成的问题，而这问题比别人可能对您所做或未做的事情要严重得多。转移视线。只关注你情绪的看法以及他人对你的行为。永远都是别人的错。”

作者呼吁友人和其他人，听一听美国非裔经济学家托马斯‧索威尔（Thomas Sowell）的意见，托马斯‧索威尔一向来是反对基于种族划分的扶弱政策。据这名面书作者，在youtube上传的托马斯‧索威尔的访谈中，“可让您对黑人社会有所不同的洞察，与当前主流的黑人是“受害者论述”有所不同……如果您把托马斯‧索威尔论述里的“黑人”，以“马来人”取代，在头10分钟内，他谈论的可能就是马来西亚。”（托马斯‧索威尔的访问连接：https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lAIC0nhzbo&feature=youtu.be）

“扶弱政策”数点总结

托马斯‧索威尔的研究不仅限于美国黑人的社会。他的开创性著作《全球扶弱政策》中总结了他对印度、斯里兰卡、马来西亚、尼日利亚，以及美国，基于种族的雇用和晋升，以及其他类似政策的研究，发现这些扶弱措施对所要协助的群体，带来的影响是微不足道的。”

在他的研究中，一些结论也适用于马来西亚，这包括：

1.他们鼓励非土著，甚至土著中的非优先关注群体，重新定义或强调自己是土著，以利用种族的优惠政策。

2.他们的重点往往在于让优先关注群体中（例如中上阶层和上层阶级的土著）的幸运儿和机会主义者（包括有政治关系者）受益，从而损害了非优先关注群体中真正需要援助的不幸者。

3.种族政策降低了获优待和没获优待群体发挥最佳潜能的动力，对前者言，他们根本不须要这样做，而后者则多努力也是徒劳的，从而对整个社会造成损失。这种行为破坏了打造绩效社会的努力，在讲求绩效的社会里，经济产品，社会经济流动性和／或政治权力是根据个人的才能，努力和成就分配，而不是取决于财富，政治立场或社会阶级。

最后，在托马斯‧索威尔的研究中最重要的发现也许是，在美国，如其他国家也一样，最初制定种族扶弱政策理由与它实际实施方式，没有多大关系。在种族扶弱政策下，地位优越，富裕的黑人与处于低下阶层黑人，所获得的利益不成比例，进而败坏扶弱政策的精神。

如今在马来西亚，声称受害者或采用受害人心态已不仅仅是一种文化。这已发展成为一个“行业”，让“从业者”从中获利。吊诡的是，扶弱政策下受益族群的一些领导人，包括受过良好教育的人和那些利用“受害者”地位实现最大社会经济阶层流动的人，却最能接受这种现象。

两周后的文章，我们将探讨拥有这种文化和思维方式的主要领袖，以及这样的论述在国家政策和治理中是否依然合情合理。

《大马种族难题和受害者文化》Malaysia’s Race Conundrum and the Victimhood Culture）原文：

The main driver of racism in Malaysia, has been racially skewed socio-economic, educational, cultural and even governance policies. These policies have been pursued even before the watershed event of May 1969  which altered the political dynamics of the nation and set in place enhanced institutional mechanisms to entrench racial stereotyping and racism in the country. In some ways, these policies have become more rigid which explains why racism in the country has not improved.

The rationale for these policies have ranged from their linkage with Article 153 of the constitution; the racial disparity in income; the so-called social contract providing for political equality on the condition of economic equality; and the need to defuse inter-ethnic tension.

Explicit in whatever justification has been developed to support racially skewed outcomes has been the mindset of leaders of the majority community that their community is the victim of British and post Merdeka development. Hence this needs to be remedied or corrected by differential privileges and rights accorded to the citizens of the country.

That such a mindset is not only still prevalent in Malaysia more than half a century after independence but has actually been strengthened has been critically appraised and condemned by many scholars and observers. A recent Facebook posting is the latest critique by comparing what is presently taking place in the United States with the Black Lives Matter movement with our own situation with respect to race based policies. The posting based on the writerˇs lived experience explains:

¨I am thoroughly fascinated by, especially late 20th and 21st century, leftist social movements in the US that today has blown into antifa, BLM etc. Having lived in the relatively less affluent part of Alachua County in Florida for most of my 5 years there in the 80s and never stopped my observations since, I cannot help but see the similarities between what happened in black society and our own malay society. The victimhood mindset, the resentment sown by its so-called "leaders" of "others", the regressive culture intertwined with blind religiosity, quota and affirmative actions that inevitably paved the road to hell. But hey! Blame others instead of looking at the mirror. Don't talk about problems caused by your own kind which is much much worse than what others may or may not have done to you. Deflect. Focus on what you emotionally perceive and what others do to you. It is always the fault of others.〃

The writer also called on his friends and others to listen in to Dr Thomas Sowell, an African American economist who has been one of the most consistent opponents of racially based affirmative programs. According to the FB writer, the youtube interview
¨gives you an insight into black society unlike the present victim narrative.You could replace ¨blacks〃 with ¨malays〃 at every point of his discourse. The first 10 minutes he might as well be describing Malaysia.〃 

Check out the interview here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lAIC0nhzbo&feature=youtu.be

Sowellˇs work has not been limited only to his own community.

In a path breaking book, Affirmative Action Around the World, Sowell concluded from his study of race based hiring and promotion and other similar policies in India, Sri Lanka, Malaysia and Nigeria as well as in the United States that "[s]uch programs have at best a negligible impact on the groups they are intended to assist."

Among some of the other key findings of his study that apply to Malaysia are:
1.They encourage non-preferred groups among the non-Bumiputras and even within the Bumiputras to redesignate or to emphasize themselves as members of Bumiputras to take advantage of race preference policies
2.They tend to benefit primarily the fortunate and opportunistic (including the politically connected) among the preferred group (e.g. upper middle and upper class Bumiputras), to the detriment of the least fortunate among the non-preferred groups
3.They reduce the incentives of both the preferred and non-preferred to perform at their best - the former because doing so is unnecessary and the latter because it can prove futile - thereby resulting in net losses for society as a whole. This behavior undermines the creation of a meritocratic society in which economic goods, socio-economic mobility and/or political power are vested in individuals on the basis of talent, effort, and achievement, rather than on wealth, political affiliation or social class.

Finally, perhaps the most important of his findings is that, in the United States as in other countries, the original rationale for race based affirmative action has little to do with how it actually is practiced. The disproportionate benefit that well-placed, affluent blacks receive, with little if any going to those who continue to suffer the most, has discredited the ethos of affirmative action.

Today in Malaysia, the claim of victimhood or adoption of a victim mentality is not only a culture. It has grown into a veritable industry which is very profitable to its practitioners. This phenomenon paradoxically is most embraced by some leaders of the beneficiary racial community including the most educated and those who have achieved the greatest socio-economic mobility by taking advantage of their victim status. 

In the next article we shall look at the main leaders of this culture and mindset and the validity of the arguments for its continued relevance in the policies and governance of the country.