THERE IS SOMETHING very exclusive about research institutes and think tanks in Malaysia. This stems from the control over the academic world that was deemed necessary in the early stages of nation building. The need felt by early leaders to steer the flow of public information was a strong one, and that led to central control over the mass media, especially since journalism was the natural calling for the better educated from all ethnic groups.
Sadly, the academic world was also an arena where dissenting views would come into expression, and it therefore also had to be controlled.
Thus, since independence, practices and policies fabricated to dampen dissent and disagreements have been in abundance, mainly due to the need to limit inter-ethnic strife and to strengthen the ambition to build an ethnocentric nation.
Public intellectualism over the decades, trying to survive in such an atmosphere, has had to find space for expressionism, however cramped that space may be, in NGOs and so-called “think tanks”. Careful and respectful advocacy of limited issues became the domain of the educated Malaysian.
In fact, the “social contract” that made the first government possible, can be fruitfully perceived as a construct meant to keep disagreements behind closed doors, to be debated cautiously by political parties who all had a stake in keeping the sitting government in place. This Alliance model was further enhanced through its expansion into the Barisan Nasional in the early 1970s.
As with most policy matters, we tend to err on the side of caution. Calls for reforms are always considered a much more dangerous challenge than they may in fact be. Policies tend to stay in place for too long. That is the nature of power… and of governance as well. This marks the importance of open discussion so that policies can adapt to new times and new challenges.
This is most problematic when it comes to policies meant to limit public discussions. How are such policies to be changed when needed in the next phase of nation building? More succinctly, how do we reverse their detrimental effects, be these collateral in nature or purposely done. Can the culture of pervasive fear and evasive thinking be reversed?
As with most things, change is generational. Change is most possible when timed to be driven by the energy and the idealism of the young. Taking seriously the fact that Malaysia is being run by a unity government, one that chooses to sloganeer itself as a “madani government” dedicated to progressive values, there should be space for young Malaysians today to learn to be as constructively expressive as possible, and to be inclusive and objective in their analysis of how Malaysian society is to progress, cognisant of the changing conditions in the world.
While most Malaysians are literate, meaning they are able to read most public messages without much trouble, the standard of the country’s educational system has been questioned for decades.
Along with the limitations put on public expression, and along with the politicising of most public discourses along the way, Malaysia as a country suffers from a literacy problem. Being technically literate is one thing, being creatively articulate is another.
What this article wishes to highlight is exactly this. No matter how right or wrong the country’s policies have been when it comes to freedom of expression, it has discouraged our young for at least a couple of generations from appreciating literature, and through that, from understanding the need for knowledge to be as rounded as possible. And from realising how vital articulation is to social life and to the ability to think creatively.
As my old friend E. T. Tan, until recently the CEO of the Penang Skills Development Corporation (PSDC) would say, “The ‘A’ in STEAM, should not merely signify ‘the Arts’, but ‘Articulation’.”
Since 2008, after the electoral tsunami that may sadly be fading out of Malaysian consciousness today, Penang’s new government decided to invest in developing a think tank to assist its attempts to govern more effectively and inclusively. “Penang Institute” came into being, along with many other agencies that were meant to carry out specific functions. They were hopefully also meant to develop into brain trusts for their specific areas.
Penang Institute, apart from its Public Policy research, found it necessarily to organise evening seminars open to the educated public during which all types of discussions could take place. It also founded, under strong prompting from Liew Chin Tong, now the Deputy Minister for the Ministry of International Trade and Investment, Penang Monthly, a magazine acting as a platform for attention to be given to various aspects of Penang life.
These initiatives are part of what we call Public Engagement.
There is a logic of reform in this spontaneous development of public engagement. Democracy cannot function well unless voters are used to listening to knowledgeable people in their society articulate diverse matters affecting their lives.
Early this year, Penang Institute requested for the 14-year-old George Town Literary Festival (GTLF) to be handed over to it to organise for the next few years. The Penang State Government agreed. And so, from 29 November to 2 December this year, George Town’s heritage quarters will host a range of international and local authors as they discuss the world of literature to a crowd of Malaysians and international visitors.
Why a think tank like Penang Institute so passionately wishes to promote literature—meaning teach, especially to the young, the importance of reading, writing and publishing, of discussing and debating, and of rounded thinking—lies in its strong conviction that the basis for civilization and for civil — ‘madani’ — behaviour in general, relies on society becoming more literate, articulate and communicative.
Developing a mature and confident society requires enhancing a culture of reading, writing and communication on all matters affecting human life. Just developing policies and masterplans, no matter how professionally these are done, is not good enough. The culture of empty talk that many accuse Malaysia of cultivating, will paradoxically weaken if and when members of society as a whole become more boldly and civilly articulate, knowledgeable and communicative.
Datuk Dr Ooi Kee Beng is the Executive Director of Penang Institute, His latest book is “The Reluctant Nation: Malaysia’s Vain Search for Common Purpose” (Gerakbudaya), to be launched at the George Town Literary Festival (GTLF2024) this year. Homepage: wikibeng.com.
By OOI KEE BENG, for The Edge Malaysia, Picking on the Present column, 2-9 November 2024.
Source: https://theedgemalaysia.com/node/732595
Download the article: Penang Institute Nurturing a Bold and Articulate Population as Part of the ‘Madani’ Agenda