Talk:Bumiputera (Malaysia)

message: I don't have citations for the places that are tagged "citation needed," but I would suggest Lim Kit Siang as a good source for an assertion that Malaysian government policies have been racist, and Tunku Abdul Rahman or Tun Abdul Razak as sources explaining what they saw as the need for racial preferences.
Michael 11:53, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: So David, are you saying the non-bumiputras are not citizens of Malaysia but rather a Permanent Residence of Malaysia?? In other words, non-bumis are 2nd class citizens? --Zack2007 (talk) 11:35, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations for "Controversy" Section

message: A suggestion/comment: The following paragraph, in the Public Questioning of Rights section, desperately needs a reference or source. It's a bold statement, and left unsourced makes the article sound biased. 
At the 55th annual general assembly of the largest political party in Malaysia, the United Malays National Organisation, the deputy chairperson Badruddin Amiruldin cautioned against questioning the Bumiputra's special rights, and was met with approval from the delegates: "Let no one from the other races ever question the rights of Malays on this land. Don’t question the religion because this is my right on this land."
Paperdoll51 03:49, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference

message: [Quote from below]
DISCLAIMER:
I do not wish to express my opinion like others did to this page, because this is an encyclopaedia. If I did, I shall fall into the endless cycle of waiting for the other party to come up with new but seemingly feeble argument and then pointlessly disputing it, like everyone here did. Please be aware that the other party is clung to his/her beliefs as strong as you do. You will never be able to change his/her mind with your mere arguments.
I made no stand (as that will spark off another debate), thus I suggest we observe the present society and trend and contemplate deeply. Whatever conclusion you have, please keep it to yourself. We have seen the past few decades' progress, and we will observe the next two decades' progress. You will know whether you are right at the end of the day, and snigger to yourself for the other party's losing position in his/her point of view pertaining to this matter as well as his/her reluctance to accept the fact.
[End Quote]
203.173.177.143 08:19, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Nice Quote

message: To those who think the NEP or its successive policies sucks, please learn how to speak proper Malay and engage the Malays in a frank discussion for it's rescindal. If they disagree, ask them for a timeframe. If they are still adamant, it proves only two things: they are 'hooked' on hand-outs, and they have no intention of giving it up any-time soon. Too bad there are no 'Grey Fox' or 'Gray Ghost' among those whom who opposes NEPisms. All of them are too pre-occuppied with mindless 'Wah Lau Toi' and watching their wallets bulge even bigger. Babyrina2 08:19, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: This talk page is going nowhere

message: I removed the link to Apartheid from the Bumiputra article. Seriously, I get people from South Africa asking me "where is Apartheid in Malaysia?" Generally, the Chinese in Malaysia are far superior and ahead of the blacks in South Africa (even better than Malays in Malaysia). So obviously the person who put the link has no inkling about the meaning of Apartheid.--User:naisi
I've restored it, but I won't do it a second time. I've justified it with Apartheid outside South Africa and the mention of Malaysia. Elle vécut heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 02:24, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of Link to Apartheid Laws 

message: I've removed the following paragraph from the article:
However, none of these purported foreign interests actually suffered any consequences from the NEP, instead leaving smaller ethnic groups in Malaysia to bear the financial and regulatory burden associated with the NEP.
Where has it been stated that the goal of the NEP was to reduce the percentage of the economy owned by "foreign interests"? Are Chinese and Indians foreigners to Malaysia? If so, the latter paragraph implies they were left untouched, leaving smaller groups such as...well, it's quite hard to think of any racial groups in Malaysia other than the Chinese and Indians who aren't Bumiputras.
:Actually, the NEP was to increase the Malay share of the national pie. I have re-wrote it to reflect this. As for the "foreign" thing.... let's just say its not relevant here.--Malbear 08:00, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry not "definition". Let's change that to "in practice"--Malbear 08:00, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  References, please 

message: The following paragraphs were removed; please attribute them to a source so they can be added back in conformity with Wikipedia's NPOV policy.
:- a failure of the scholarship system in identifying talent and intelligence. Although this is unconfirmed,rumours that the government is trying to repress talent of certain races are especially prevalent among the non-bumiputra community.
:A majority of Bumiputeras believe that any questioning of their special rights is taboo. They perceive that Non-Bumiputeras are dwellers and second-class citizens, even though most Non-Bumiputeras were born in Malaysia and second or third generation citizens. The Internal Security Act effectively quashes any real opposition that Non-Bumiputeras might have in questioning these special rights - leading to a build-up of unhealthy tension between the Bumiputeras and the Non-Bumiputeras.
In addition, are there quotas related to employment in the civil service or some other form of disadvantagement to non-Malays there? Because I can't for the life of me see how the following is directly related to the subject of Bumiputras:
:Preferential hiring in the civil service has led to less non-Bumiputras applying, yet proportionally more non-Bumiputras are accepted.
: As reported by the Public Services Commision - of 350,000 applicants annually for civil services jobs, less than 5% were from non-Bumiputras. The PSC employs 40% of the 1.2 million civil servants in the country. Despite the low application rate, non-Malay applicants make up  around 13% of the civil service. For the Chinese community in particular, 2% of the applicants are Chinese but they obtain around 8% of the positions in the civil services.
Johnleemk | Talk 13:17, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed unsubstantiated POV material 

message: Is this article about the NEP or Bumiputras? I know in Malaysia we commonly link the two together, but right now it's hard to tell what's the real subject of this. I think this article should summarise the pro-Malay affirmative action as a whole and then we can use summary style to branch off into other related articles. Johnleemk | Talk 13:17, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Scope of this article

message: Okay, this is a fascinating discussion.  I'm a White Briton reading this but my girlfriend is Malaysian (Chinese ethnicity).  She handed me a news feature (David Cyranoski, 2005, "The valley of ghosts" Nature, p620) that suggested Malaysia's lack of momentum in biotechnology is fuelled by these racial recruitment policies.  The intended Biovalley is but one example of this, a project that has been downgraded and downgraded to account for ever lower international interest.  The social pros and cons of discrimination of one race against another can and should be argued, but the immediate competitive advantages of discriminating only on the basis of ability are obvious.  Any country or company that adopts a purely meritocratic approach will outperform those that do not, all things being equal.  Thus the economic consequences of a racially-focused policy would almost inevitably be negative.  This might not be so apparent in areas like the civil service where people are recruited from within a country and there is a monopsonic market, but in a globally-competitive field like biotechnology, the effects will probably prove far more obvious.  From all accounts they have. --82.38.226.155 22:12, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting opinion there... A bit problematic, however, seeing as this talk space is appropriated for discussing this particular article, and not its subject. If you're honestly interested in continuing this discussion, it might be appropriate to continue it at one of the Malaysian-populated forums on the net, or a news-site/blog like Malaysia Today (warning; some comments are very vitriolic, especially when Westerners butt in). Johnleemk | Talk 14:20, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

text: This interpretation is rather hard to defend however; Wikipedia does not report interpretations of events unless widely accepted by the public and/or are particularly well-known. As such, it is difficult justifying its presence in the article, unless a prominent, reliable source has come to such a conclusion. (An example would be a news outlet printing an editorial pointing out the Biovalley's failure as an example of race-based affirmative action failing.) As such, like I said, it's interesting for a discussion, but otherwise, not of much encyclopedic value. As for the "butting in" comment, that's how many, particularly Malays, would view you; they have little respect for non-Malays championing things like a free press or even equal rights, calling them Westernised Chinese who will wreck the country (there's not much love for the West in Malaysia). Johnleemk | Talk 15:00, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Biovalley 

message: The article says:
In Malaysia, by convention, it is generally considered that all Malays are Bumiputras and that all Bumiputras are Malay. This is technically incorrect, as there are cases of non-Malays declared as Bumiputra, and similarly of non-Muslim Malays who are considered Bumiputra.
Later on, the article discusses the constitutional definition of a Malay, which includes the profession of Islam ... so, should that last clause read "and similarly of non-Muslim Malays who are not considered Bumiputra"? --Jfruh 01:55, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this a typo? 

message: This is in reference to the following sentence under "Controversy":
"Others argue that the Malaysian situation at the time the policy was introduced, where a minority, immigrant ethnic group controlled the financial sector of the country due in no small amount to colonial legacies which had assisted Chinese migrants to become dominant in the business sector to the point where Malays were largely excluded from economic life, was an unusual and deeply unstable situation."
I'm reluctant to edit this article if there is a consensus behind designating the Chinese community in Malaysia as an "immigrant" group, but my understanding of the word "immigrant" is that it refers to someone who moves from one land to another, not to their children, grandchildren, or other descendants who are native-born. Another viewpoint is that everyone is an immigrant, with some people arriving earlier than others and the Orang Asli having shown up earliest in the Peninsula, but I think this somewhat confuses the issue. I understand that this sentence explicitly describes one particular viewpoint, but I still think it would probably be clearest and most NPOV to state that most(but by no means all) of the Chinese community arrived in what's now Malaysia within the last 130 years or so and then discuss how many Malays still consider the Chinese and Indian communities to still be immigrants and not fully Malaysian.
I also question the assertion that the local Chinese community "controlled the financial sector of the country." Does this refer to banking only, or to the economy in general? I wrote the following in a term paper back in 1984:
"It should be emphasized that 90 percent of the wealth of Malaysia is not in the hands of the local Chinese population, as Mahathir claims on pp. 46-47 of The Malay Dilemma. On the contrary, while 60 percent of the major share capital is owned by foreign concerns, only 20 percent is owned by local Chinese (Bedlington 1978:194)."
The reference is to Bedlington, Stanley S., Malaysia and Singapore: The Building of New States. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1978. I don't have the book at my fingertips, but I figure that Bedlington was citing economic statistics from the mid-1970s. If any of you are really enterprising, you could look up the book and check on my citation. But unless someone can document the assertion that Malaysian Chinese controlled the financial sector of the country in 1969, that text should be edited to read that members of the Chinese community controlled most of the locally-owned sector of the economy.
Michael 18:01, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no real consensus for this, and I suppose it'd be POV to call the Chinese immigrants (although I'm biased). It is normal to call Chinese from this period immigrants, however -- for much of the early and mid-20th century, non-Malays had their hearts in China and India, not Malaya/Malaysia. So although strictly not immigrants, they could still be said to have strong ties to their ancestral homeland. Note also that Chinese immigration did not really stop until the 1930s, when the British passed a law controlling immigration. As for the wealth controlled by the Chinese, yes, that is a glaring discrepancy. I think it's just a common misconception, since none of the sources I have mention this. Sigh. Sometime I'll have to get around to cleaning this article up. Johnleemk | Talk 20:33, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Immigrant" ethnic group? Control of financial sector in 1969?

message: Under that section, Caste system and Transmigration Program are included. Bumiputra isn't a caste system while transmigration has no meaning in Malaysia. I'd even go as far as saying, Malaysia hasn't seen any active intra-state migration program that in the end displaces the local or resulting in Indonesian-style centralization. If it were about migration-related, then maybe I could accept since this Bumiputra status was more of a reaction to massive foreign labors inflow into Malaya in the 18th and the 19th century. I'll remove it if there's no objection. __earth (Talk) 03:32, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  See also section 

message: I think the definition should be rewrite, all i had read is about the history of the creation of bumiputra, but not the definition. Have u ppl read the constituition article 160?--Towaru 13:42, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  misleading the article? 

message: There should be a section here on bhumiputra ideology in Sri Lanka - the identity of Sinhalese as 'sons of the Buddha' and 'sons of the soil'. I'll add this myself if no one else has in a few days (got a paper due). Joechip123 04:26, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That is irrelevant to this article. Addition on Sri Lankan context should be done on a new page, perhaps, Bhumiputra, if it hasn't been one. __earth (Talk) 07:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sri Lanka 

message: Anyone think this is NPOV? Especially because this is not a direct quote?
The reason for that is that even though the Chinese and Indian students are marginalized by the examination systems, those that come through are FAR superior than that of the local Malays. They dont rely on handouts, no special priveleges and as a result they are hardworking and willing to push themselves to excel. The Malays are taking for granted that the Government will give everythig to them on a silver platter. Let us hope that after the recent elections , the Malays will start to work hard at all levels and the NEP will be abolished.
Can somone fix this?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.208.60.88 (talk) 04:37, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV section? 

message: Much of the article is unsourced, and I agree it is filled with POV.  There should be some attempt to describe the policies, then various opinions of them, all sourced.--Parkwells (talk) 15:22, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources and POV

message: Probably redundant so I apologize beforehand and if incorrectly placed, by all means remove my comment. I suppose, this has nothing to do with the Indonesian version of Bumiputera? A racial (and legal) classification imposed by the Dutch colonialists to identify the "locals" in the lowest hierarchy of legal status after Europeans (Eropa), Middle Eastern and Chinese descendants (Timur Asing). This (now revoked) law exists in the Indonesian Civil Code (Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata/Burgerlijkwetboek) Book 1 on Persons (Buku Pertama tentang Orang). Thank you. --Dewa Indra (talk) 20:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The meaning of the Bmiputra here may be similar to the Indonesian term, but this article is about Bumiputra  in the Malaysian legal and social context. Also in Malaysia we didnt have the stratification of race as you have described. ќמшמφטтгמtorque 06:46, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Understood. Terima kasih.--Dewa Indra (talk) 20:22, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: The spelling and capitalization of the word (i.e., bumiputera vs. Bumiputera vs. bumiputra vs. Bumiputra) should be consistent throughout the entire article.  Any alternate spellings should be listed just once in the lead (of course, don't change direct quotations).  I have literally no knowledge of this subject, so I have no input to offer on which spelling and capitalization is correct, but we should use whatever the majority of reliable English language sources use, if that can be determined. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:48, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I cant find any legal document using this term but it seems like most of the government websites use "Bumiputera". So i think it should be this, with a capital "B". ќמшמφטтгמtorque 02:53, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization and spelling 

message: I don't have time right now to do a fine-toothed job, but I had to remove a bunch of uncited, highly negative and/or contentious information that was uncited.  First off, we may never, under any circumstances, have quotations without a citation.  Second, we may never have negative information about a living person that is uncited, per WP:BLP.  Third, any information which may be challenged, especially if negative, may be removed if uncited, per WP:V.  I'll try at some point to go at this in more detail, but I felt that our core policies required the information removed ASAP.  Qwyrxian (talk) 13:18, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reverted your removal -- as you could have found out with about 2 seconds of Googling, the quotes in question are trivially sourced (and I've done so), since they're both taken word for word from Lee's autobiography, The Singapore Story.  I've also restored the last paragraph since I see nothing contentious in it, do you? Jpatokal (talk) 07:05, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for sourcing the top 2; I figured they could be sourced, but wasn't able to do it. The third paragraph is actually the most contentious part, so I re-removed it.  It blames, without a source, a particular party for creating racial tensions.  Furthermore, it uses clear original research language, by stating, "It soon became clear that..."  If it can be sourced, it does need to be re-written neutrally. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:08, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removals 

message: An image used in this article, File:OUM bumiputra.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 3 December 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:06, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:OUM bumiputra.png Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: 1. This article reads as if the native Malay's are some oppressed minority when they make up over 50% of the population. Thus a majority of the population gets employment, housing, and economic benefits that the minority do not. If that is not analogous to Apartheid I don't what is.
2. There's a big difference between what's in a constitution and what's actually practiced. In practice bumiputera is for Muslims only.
3. The entire system is a modern version of the jizya tax where non-Muslims must pay for the privilege of existing in a Muslim society without being killed or (forceably) converted.
GlowBee (talk) 01:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Three overlooked points

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Bumiputera (Malaysia). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090302051938/http://www.themalaysianinsider.com:80/index.php/malaysia/19428-nik-aziz-says-bumiputera-term-is-racist to http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/index.php/malaysia/19428-nik-aziz-says-bumiputera-term-is-racist
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:26, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Bumiputera (Malaysia). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091101102147/http://www.theborneopost.com/?p=60757 to http://www.theborneopost.com/?p=60757
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120205100541/http://www.online.uitm.edu.my/takrif_bumi.cfm to http://online.uitm.edu.my/takrif_bumi.cfm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121030162537/http://www.apec.org.au/amfta-Mansurpaper.pdf to http://www.apec.org.au/amfta-Mansurpaper.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160527063738/http://www.observerindia.com/cms/export/orfonline/modules/issuebrief/attachments/malaysia_1203067850658.pdf to http://www.observerindia.com/cms/export/orfonline/modules/issuebrief/attachments/malaysia_1203067850658.pdf
*Added  tag to http://marranci.wordpress.com/2010/01/18/the-allah-case-in-malaysia/%2C
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:57, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bumiputera (Malaysia). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2006%2F8%2F30%2Fnation%2F15280966&sec=nation
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060128131642/http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2005%2F12%2F23%2Fnation%2F12943878&sec=nation to http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2005%2F12%2F23%2Fnation%2F12943878&sec=nation
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:47, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified