In the run-up to the European Parliament elections on June 4, there has been concern over the potential rise of far-right parties which have been gaining foothold in European countries. In cash-strapped UK, the whites-only, anti-immigration British National Party has been channelling public anger over Labour’s mismanagement of the country’s economy towards its hope of securing seats to the European Parliament. This is a party whose constitution declares to “stand for the preservation of the national and ethnic character of the British people and is wholly opposed to any form of racial integration between British and non-European peoples. It is therefore committed to stemming and reversing the tide of non-white immigration and to restoring, by legal changes, negotiation and consent, the overwhelmingly white makeup of the British population that existed in Britain prior to 1948″. In plain terms, if it was given the power, it would drive out all those people unfortunate enough to be born with colour from Britain. “Legal changes, negotiation and consent” really mean, by hook or by crook.
Even in Switzerland, a country typically associated with measured, rational thought, the ultranationalist Swiss People’s Party has emerged to become the country’s most popular party, keen to rid the nation of its pesky immigrants, imaginatively portrayed in a campaign poster as a black sheep being kicked off the Swiss flag by a white sheep. There seems to be an overwhelming desire to recreate the comforting, picturesque vision of rose-cheeked Swiss farmers milking cows on lush alpine mountains like the covers of Swiss chocolate wrappers. The message to foreigners seems to be, by all means, munch on our delightful milk chocolate, but stay away from our land.
But Belgium takes the cake for the abject pettiness of its squabbling citizens who intend to split the country into two after failing to resolve linguistic differences between Dutch and French speaking Belgians. Decades of feuding between the two tribes over the cultural and linguistic superiority of each other has reached melting point, with Dutch-speaking mayors boycotting the European elections and the Francophones mocking their neighbours with shouts of “Comprends Pas!” (Don’t Understand!)
We Malaysians, with our almost infinite array of racial profiles after generations of inter-marriages, may be less paranoid than the Europeans but we are not immune to the kind of prejudice and hatred that accompany racial bigotry. We have seen over the past couple of years, a breakdown in race relations, particularly between Malays and the Chinese and Indian communities over the long-standing preferential socioeconomic policy which most Malays still see as being vital to their progress but which non Malays perceive as being discriminatory.
The government didn’t help matters by refusing to address the concerns of the people, Malay, Chinese or Indian, choosing instead to stoke anger and anxiety among Malay constituents and giving mixed signals to non-Malays, in a political manoeuvre that is reminiscent of the ‘divide and conquer’ strategy employed by British colonialists.
Thankfully our mighty oil corporation Petronas is here to save the day. In the absence of any significant cultural entity to serve as a mirror to our society, Petronas has assumed the mantle of Unofficial Cultural Agency, besides being the country’s chief money-making machine. During special holidays – Aidilfitri, Chinese New Year, Merdeka – Petronas would commission TV ads that are less public service announcements than award winning short films. This Merdeka Day ad features two primary school friends being interviewed, presumably to assess their potential as spelling bee participants. Against a backdrop of a typical school canteen, the ad brings back memories of growing up in a country blessed with people of so many different shades, colour and character. What makes Malaysia so special is the wealth of cultural heritage which we have accrued over the centuries, making us accustomed to people of different backgrounds while some Europeans are still coming to terms with the idea that a brown person can marry a white person and live happily ever after. Racial diversity is the basis of our national character and collective identity. Take that away and we end up being a poorer version of one of those racially paranoid European countries.
Continuing with our special focus on Sweden, a liberal Scandinavian nation with a strong social democratic background, we explore the contentious issue of corporal punishment of children. Apart from having an Ombudsman for Children, Sweden leads the world in child advocacy by being the first country to ban corporal punishment of children, in 1979. Although offenders are subject to prosecution, the country relies more heavily upon the pedagogic effect of the legislation, and has set in place a thorough education campaign and support services to minimise family stress and conflict.
In Malaysia, although the level of corporal punishment is not as severe as in the past, it is still considered normal and acceptable for parents to spank or cane their child. Many a parent have provided the oft-used excuse that they do it out of love, and ironically, we have heard many adults themselves saying the spanking they received in childhood moulded them into the fine, law-abiding citizens they are today. Could it be possible that they have turned out that way in spite of the tight slaps they received? Would other, less violent forms of discipline have failed them? We are not at all disputing the parents’ love for the child, but could it be possible that they struck at their kids mainly because they were physically capable, and that it was socially appropriate to do so?
We, too, were subject to corporal punishment as children, and although we acknowledge that this method of guidance may have been acceptable in the 20th century, we strongly believe that in the present, and more so in the future, corporal punishment is an outmoded form of discipline. Caning and other forms of physically-intrusive discipline are increasingly being viewed, by parents and educationists alike, as archaic, ineffective and abusive. As the traditional Asian family dynamic of strict, tough-love give way to a more collaborative form of parenting, adults are finding that it is much more effective, humane and even normal to guide a child by engaging in, among others, age-appropriate conflict resolution and mediation skills. Verbal parent-child interactions not only enhance a strong, trusting bond between the two, it also develop a child’s cognitive ability.
Suffice to say, these skills need to be properly learned and cultivated in parents, as they require a strong level of emotional and intellectual maturity to be properly implemented. Parents and school authorities who continue to spank and slap their child at this day and age, are taking the easy way out, and in the long run their actions are more likely to damage the child’s development and the relationship between them and their child.
Two of Europe’s biggest design powerhouses are Italy and Sweden, and although both are renowned for quality workmanship and an obsession to detail, the two are extremely divergent in terms of philosophy and attitude. Italian establishments, the likes of Fendi, Armani and the showy Versace, lavish the eyes with grandeur and avant-garde creations, while Swedish designers adopt a much more sensible approach, favouring function over form in accordance with Scandinavian minimalism.
This pragmatic approach is best projected by the giant interior design chain IKEA. Its no-nonsense, blue and yellow bold-type trademark which greets potential customers from across the highways is symbolic of its thrifty, prudent and neutral image. IKEA’s low cost, mass produced, flat packed DIY furnishings may appeal to the efficient ideals of capitalism, but it is in fact a materialisation of socialist fundamentals that demand uniform, affordable and practical furniture for all sections of society. In essence, it is egalitarianism built and firmly nailed into interior design.
The Malaysian concept of interior design is one which is traditionally extravagant, adorned from top to bottom with ornamentals, perhaps influenced by the Asian fear of empty spaces. The Malays, Chinese and Indians are all proud descendants of a heritage of elaborate floral motifs, intricate wood and stone carvings of statuary and geometric patterns. In a modern interpretation of this celebratory take on interior decoration, Malaysian houses are cluttered with cheap bric-a-bracs, miniature wooden carvings from amateur sculptors and adorned rather unfortunately with oversized artificial flowers, filled in even bigger vases (or is this just a style favoured by my dear aunts?). Small terrace houses are supported by faux Greco-Roman pillars, its walls painted with garish and unimaginable colours that resemble a really bad procession of a Warna-Warna Malaysia parade.
At its best, Swedish minimalism, with its clean, straightforward lines, basic colours and a complete banishment of clutter, can arouse an almost Zen-like serenity, a sensation of calmness that is the perfect antidote to the stresses of daily life. But it can also be cold, uninspiring and just plain dull, incidentally attributes that have often been stereotypically tagged to the Swedes, unfairly or otherwise. The rich, cultural and elaborate design heritage of Malaysia, when left to the wrong hands, is often reduced to a gaudy display of kitsch. If properly done, as can be seen in the emergence of the New Tropical Asian movement, it is at once breathtaking in its opulence, yet still manages to retain the earthy, humble character that forms the hallmark of Southeast Asian culture.
