APABILA SISTEM PENDIDIKAN TERPISAH, PEMAHAMAN RUKUN NEGARA JUGA AKAN BERBEZA

APABILA SISTEM PENDIDIKAN  TERPISAH, PEMAHAMAN RUKUN NEGARA JUGA AKAN BERBEZA

Oleh: Dr Armin Baniaz Pahamin

(English version at the bottom)

“Dalam sebuah negara yang dibina di atas kerangka Perlembagaan Melayu, Islam dan institusi Raja-Raja, sistem pendidikan bukan sekadar tempat untuk melahirkan tenaga kerja. Ia juga menentukan sejauh mana generasi baharu menghayati identiti nasional, memahami  keseimbangan sosial dan sejarah yang membentuk negara ini, serta menghormati asas pembentukan negara.”

1. Kebelakangan ini, beberapa kenyataan dan tindakan pemimpin tertentu daripada DAP terhadap institusi Kesultanan Selangor sekali lagi menimbulkan persoalan yang lebih besar daripada sekadar perbezaan pandangan politik.

2. Persoalan yang semakin timbul ialah sama ada sistem pendidikan yang terlalu terpisah dan berorientasikan identiti etnik akhirnya mewujudkan sebahagian elit politik yang kurang menghayati asas budaya dan sejarah nasional Malaysia.

3. Malaysia mempunyai model kenegaraan tersendiri yang berbeza daripada kerangka sekular liberal Barat sepenuhnya. 

4. Malaysia dibentuk di atas kerangka Perlembagaan yang jelas, dengan kedudukan Melayu dan Bumiputera sebagai teras sejarah pembentukan negara, Bahasa Melayu sebagai bahasa kebangsaan, Islam sebagai agama Persekutuan dan institusi Kesultanan Melayu sebagai payung kestabilan negara.

5. Ini bukan sentimen perkauman. Ini ialah struktur asas negara sebagaimana termaktub dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

6. Namun, apabila sebahagian pemimpin politik dilihat berulang kali mempertikaikan titah Sultan, memperlekehkan sensitiviti masyarakat majoriti atau menggunakan pendekatan politik yang terlalu konfrontasional terhadap perkara-perkara berkaitan hak Bumiputera, persoalan mengenai proses pembentukan pemikiran mereka tidak dapat dielakkan.

7. Sistem pendidikan memainkan peranan besar dalam membentuk orientasi budaya seseorang.

8. Sekolah yang terlalu terpisah daripada arus perdana kebangsaan berpotensi mewujudkan generasi yang lebih selesa melihat Malaysia melalui lensa komuniti sendiri berbanding kerangka nasional yang lebih luas.

9. Apabila interaksi sosial, sejarah nasional, simbol kenegaraan dan penghayatan terhadap kerangka budaya nasional tidak benar-benar diintegrasikan dalam proses pendidikan, maka jurang psikologi terhadap identiti kebangsaan boleh menjadi semakin besar.

10. Pemerhatian umum terhadap kepimpinan utama DAP menunjukkan representasi yang ketara daripada latar pendidikan vernakular Cina dan sekolah persendirian Cina, walaupun data lengkap semua pemimpin tidak sentiasa tersedia secara terbuka. 

11. Corak ini tidak semestinya membuktikan hubungan sebab-akibat secara langsung terhadap orientasi politik mereka, namun ia menunjukkan kewujudan ekosistem sosial dan pendidikan yang berbeza daripada arus utama kebangsaan.

12. Sebagai contoh, ADUN Seri Kembangan, Wong Siew Ki dilaporkan menerima pendidikan rendah di SJK(C) Poi Lam Ipoh sebelum melanjutkan pendidikan menengah di SMK Poi Lam dan ACS Ipoh. Bekas EXCO Selangor, Ronnie Liu Tian Khiew pula diketahui aktif dalam DAP sejak zaman sekolah menengah, namun rekod pendidikan sekolah beliau tidak dapat disahkan secara terbuka setakat ini. 

13. Manakala Tony Pua Kiam Wee secara umum diketahui berasal daripada latar pendidikan Cina dan kemudiannya melanjutkan pengajian tinggi di luar negara, walaupun rekod lengkap sekolah rendah dan menengah beliau juga tidak dinyatakan secara terperinci dalam sumber awam yang boleh disahkan. 

14. Perbahasan sebenar bukan soal menolak pendidikan ibunda atau kepelbagaian budaya, tetapi persoalan sama ada sistem pendidikan yang terlalu terpisah akhirnya mewujudkan jurang identiti nasional yang semakin melebar.

15. Akibatnya, sebahagian elit politik dilihat semakin sukar menghayati sepenuhnya keseimbangan sejarah, struktur Perlembagaan dan asas kenegaraan Malaysia.

16. Dalam konteks ini, kebimbangan sebahagian rakyat terhadap orientasi sesetengah sekolah vernakular dan sistem UEC tidak boleh terus dilabel sebagai ekstremisme atau rasisme secara simplistik.

17. Ia adalah perbahasan tentang integrasi nasional.

18. Negara-negara lain juga memahami bahawa pendidikan ialah instrumen pembinaan negara. Jepun, Korea Selatan, Indonesia dan Thailand meletakkan identiti nasional sebagai komponen utama dalam sistem pendidikan mereka.

19. Malah di banyak negara maju, penghormatan terhadap simbol negara, bahasa kebangsaan dan institusi tradisi dianggap sebahagian daripada pembentukan warganegara.

20. Malaysia tidak boleh menjadi kuat jika generasi masa depannya membesar dalam ekosistem pendidikan yang terlalu terpisah antara satu sama lain sehingga gagal membina identiti nasional bersama.

21. Ini tidak bermaksud budaya atau bahasa ibunda perlu dihapuskan. Kepelbagaian budaya ialah kekuatan Malaysia.

22. Namun kepelbagaian hanya mampu bertahan jika terdapat satu identiti nasional dominan yang diterima bersama sebagai asas penyatuan negara.

23. Hakikatnya, identiti nasional Malaysia lahir daripada sejarah, peradaban dan tradisi Melayu yang menjadi asas pembentukan negara serta kerangka kenegaraan Malaysia.

24. Atas sebab itu, proses integrasi terhadap asas budaya dan kerangka kenegaraan Malaysia sepatutnya diperkukuh, bukannya semakin dipinggirkan.

25. Jika tidak, kita akan terus melahirkan elit politik yang melihat segala-galanya semata-mata dari sudut tuntutan komuniti masing-masing tanpa memahami keseimbangan sejarah yang membentuk Malaysia sejak merdeka.

26. Akhirnya, isu ini bukan soal membenci mana-mana kaum atau sistem sekolah tertentu.

27. Ia ialah persoalan sama ada sistem pendidikan negara hari ini benar-benar berjaya membentuk rakyat Malaysia yang berkongsi rasa hormat terhadap identiti nasional, institusi monarki negara dan asas pembentukan negara.

28. Kerana tanpa asas bersama itu, perpaduan nasional hanya akan tinggal sebagai slogan politik semata-mata.

~ Dr Armin Baniaz Pahamin

ENGLISH

WHEN EDUCATIONAL SYSTEMS BECOME TOO SEGREGATED, THE RUKUN NEGARA MAY BE UNDERSTOOD DIFFERENTLY

By: Dr Armin Baniaz Pahamin

“In a nation built upon the constitutional foundations of Malay civilisation, Islam, and the institution of the Malay Rulers, the education system is not merely a mechanism for producing manpower. It also determines the extent to which future generations internalise national identity, understand the social and historical balance that shaped the country, and respect the fundamental principles upon which the nation was formed.”

1. Recent statements and actions by certain DAP leaders towards the Selangor Sultanate institution have once again raised questions that go far beyond ordinary political differences.

2. An increasingly important question is whether an educational system that is excessively segregated and heavily oriented around ethnic identity has, over time, contributed to the emergence of segments of the political elite who are less connected to Malaysia’s national historical and cultural foundations.

3. Malaysia possesses its own unique nationhood model, one that differs significantly from a fully secular liberal Western framework.

4. Malaysia was formed upon a clear constitutional structure, with the Malays and Bumiputera forming part of the historical foundation of the nation, Bahasa Melayu established as the national language, Islam recognised as the religion of the Federation, and the Malay Sultanate institution serving as a pillar of national stability.

5. This is not a matter of racial sentiment. These are the foundational structures of the nation as enshrined in the Federal Constitution.

6. However, when certain political leaders are repeatedly seen questioning royal decrees, dismissing the sensitivities of the majority community, or adopting highly confrontational approaches towards matters related to Bumiputera rights, questions surrounding the formation of their worldview inevitably arise.

7. Education plays a major role in shaping an individual’s cultural orientation.

8. Schools that remain overly detached from the national mainstream risk producing generations that are more comfortable viewing Malaysia primarily through the lens of their own communities rather than through a broader national framework.

9. When social interaction, national history, civic symbols, and appreciation of the national cultural framework are not meaningfully integrated into the educational process, the psychological gap towards national identity may gradually widen.

10. General observations of DAP’s senior leadership also indicate a significant representation of individuals from Chinese vernacular and Chinese independent school backgrounds, although complete educational data for all leaders is not always publicly available.

11. This pattern does not necessarily establish a direct causal relationship with their political orientation. However, it does suggest the existence of social and educational ecosystems that differ from the national mainstream.

12. For example, Seri Kembangan assemblyperson Wong Siew Ki was reportedly educated at SJK(C) Poi Lam Ipoh before continuing her secondary education at SMK Poi Lam and ACS Ipoh. Former Selangor EXCO member Ronnie Liu Tian Khiew is also known to have been politically active since his school years, although his detailed educational background cannot currently be publicly verified.

13. Similarly, Tony Pua Kiam Wee is generally known to come from a Chinese educational background before pursuing higher education overseas, although detailed records of his early schooling are not comprehensively available in publicly verifiable sources.

14. The real debate is not about rejecting mother tongue education or cultural diversity. The larger issue is whether an excessively segregated education system has gradually widened the national identity gap within Malaysian society.

15. As a consequence, segments of the political elite may increasingly struggle to fully appreciate the historical balance, constitutional structure, and nationhood foundations that shaped Malaysia since independence.

16. In this context, concerns expressed by sections of society regarding the orientation of certain vernacular schools and the UEC system should not be simplistically dismissed as extremism or racism.

17. This is fundamentally a debate about national integration.

18. Other nations also recognise that education is an instrument of nation-building. Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, and Thailand place national identity as a central component within their education systems.

19. Even in many developed nations, respect for national symbols, the national language, and traditional institutions is regarded as part of responsible citizenship formation.

20. Malaysia cannot become a strong nation if future generations continue growing up within educational ecosystems that are excessively segregated from one another to the extent that they fail to develop a shared national identity.

21. This does not mean that mother tongue languages or cultural traditions should be abolished. Cultural diversity remains one of Malaysia’s strengths.

22. However, diversity can only endure sustainably if there exists a commonly accepted national identity that serves as the foundation of national unity.

23. The reality is that Malaysia’s national identity emerged from Malay history, civilisation, and traditions, which form the foundation of the nation and Malaysia’s constitutional framework.

24. For that reason, the process of integrating citizens into Malaysia’s core cultural and constitutional foundations should be strengthened rather than gradually marginalised.

25. Otherwise, Malaysia risks continuing to produce political elites who view national issues solely through the lens of communal demands without fully understanding the historical balance that shaped the nation since Merdeka.

26. Ultimately, this is not about hatred towards any race or any particular school system.

27. It is about whether the country’s education system today is genuinely succeeding in producing Malaysians who share a common respect for national identity, the constitutional monarchy institution, and the foundational principles upon which the nation was built.

28. Because without that common foundation, national unity will eventually remain nothing more than a political slogan.

~ Dr Armin Baniaz Pahamin