The real problem in “balik Cina, balik India” not solved
She had “melatah” as is said in Malay. The words used do show some “racism” at the back of the mind. It was not right to scold the children that way, with words tainted with racism. To think of it, if the children were really to go back to China and India, that would leave the Malay children behind. How would she then tackle the indiscipline among the Malay children, or are only the non-Malay children who are indisciplined?
Ravinder Singh, TMI
Yati Dani, the principal of SMK Alam Megah has apologised. This must have been a very humiliating experience for her as the children before whom she stood to apologise are not a well-disciplined or well-mannered lot.
Does it mean the children who were so misbehaved do not have to apologise to all their teachers for their unbecoming behaviour? However, those who raised a furore are happy. But has the real issue been addressed, let alone solved? Did anyone even notice the real issue? This is an excellent example of not seeing the wood for the trees.
The real issue in this case is not racism. The principal had not pre-planned her outburst and what to say. It was a spontaneous reaction on the spur of the moment occasioned by the unruly behaviour of the hundreds of children before her (while the national anthem was being sung, as she alleged).
She had “melatah” as is said in Malay. The words used do show some “racism” at the back of the mind. It was not right to scold the children that way, with words tainted with racism. To think of it, if the children were really to go back to China and India, that would leave the Malay children behind. How would she then tackle the indiscipline among the Malay children, or are only the non-Malay children who are indisciplined?
The principal claims she also told the Malay children to go back to Indonesia. That would leave the school deserted and all the teachers jobless. This I do not believe. This afterthought statement sounds very similar to the way the principal of SM Ibrahim in Sungai Petani who had called the non-Malays “pendatang” at the assembly, turned it into “pedagang” when confronted by the non-Malay teachers after the assembly (read my earlier article).
Compare this with the Seri Pristana case where there was pre-planning and other hands involved. The PTA is said to have made the decision. If this is true, then the headmaster was only implementing the decision of the PTA. If he had not complied, and the PTA chairman was a “somebody’, or had connections to the politicians in power, the headmaster could have been transferred out of that school for defying the PTA decision.
Therefore, in this case, the “innovative” action of putting the non-Muslim children in the toilet-canteen is un-apologise-able (following Mahathir’s style of governance) as there was a motive for making and implementing that “innovative, religiously correct” move. The real culprit it would seem is the person who controls the PTA.
While I do not condone Yati Dani’s use of racial slurs and the outburst, I fully empathise with her. Some will be quick to ask why?
I had faced a very similar situation at the SMK Batu Maung in Penang on 28 May 2004. I had been invited to give a talk to the students and teachers at this school, which at that time had 699 pupils and 40 teachers.
The students were seated on the courtyard floor and about 20 of the teachers were present, including the discipline master. They were seated on chairs on the raised platform where I was given a chair also. I was introduced and called on to take the mike.
I was surprised that I had been invited to take the mike without first getting the children prepared to listen by getting them to keep silent. To the teachers, it seemed such a normal thing. So this is how children behaved at assemblies and no corrective measures had been taken. The children were in control of the assembly as the teachers showed they could not control the behaviour of their charges.
I took the mike, but did not start the talk as the children were making so much noise chatting with each other. While I stood silent, neither the students (this is a secondary school) nor any of the teachers, let alone the discipline teacher, got the message that I was waiting for the children to stop talking and start paying attention.
So I had to decide whether to start talking to children who were not paying any attention and who were showing scant respect to an invited guest, to walk off from the scene and not just from the mike, or take it upon myself to bring some order before proceeding even if that embarrassed the teachers
I decided on the last option. Very firmly I directed the prefects who were standing calmly around the perimeter of the courtyard to do their duty, i.e. to go in among the students seated on the floor and identify those who were making the most noise. This was accompanied by an impromptu ‘lecture’ on showing respect to anyone who was speaking to them by keeping quiet. If not interested to listen, it was better to leave the assembly. It took a good 10 minutes to get the children to stop talking after which I proceeded to give my talk.
At the end of the talk, as I walked back to my seat, I could see the embarrassment on the faces of the teachers. I don’t know whether it was a lesson for them in any way.
