Mahathir’s shattered legacy: how will historians judge him?

It soon became apparent, however, that the new administration wouldn’t go along with the promises made before the election. The administration failed on child marriage reform, refused to ratify either the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination or the International Criminal Court. It failed to repeal the Sedition Act and the Printing and Presses Act, which forces media companies to renew their licenses yearly.

Mahathir’s hand-picked education minister Maszlee Malik didn’t reform education, but pushed it further into the Islamic paradigm through appointments of IKRAM leaning people to key posts in public universities. The Universities and University Colleges Act 1971, which made it illegal for students being politically active in society was never repealed. The Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012, replacing the notorious ISA, wasn’t abolished but instead used against a number of DAP members.

Mahathir’s appearance at the Malay Dignity Congress in October 2019, standing with other ultra-Malay leaders, and his avoidance of the issue of the handover of power to Anwar, led to great dissatisfaction within Pakatan Harapan. This was leading to the inclination by many, that Mahathir had not changed at all, although the PH leadership did nothing about the situation. The Harapan government’s failure to deal with these issues, along with widespread concern about the economy, blighted its promise.

That all ended in February 2020 when Mahathir first appeared to go along with a cabal of Malay supremicists to form a new government that would deny a role to minority ethnic political parties and enshrine the Ketuanan Melayu doctrine, then backed away and resigned as prime minister without consulting any members of the Pakatan Harapan government he had headed. The result is the “backdoor” government that has paralyzed politics to this day.

The Malaysians who voted for Pakatan Harapan in the 2018 general election hoped for a new Malaysia, equality of all races, equal opportunity in education, the end of race-based politics, the abolition of tolls, the end of cronyism and the disassembly of the kleptocratic state. That all came to an end with Mahathir’s resignation, which handed government back to the Malay elite in the form of Muhyiddin’s Perikatan Nasional coalition, which is struggling to survive.  That has led to a feeling of deep betrayal and disappointment. Scorn for Mahathir is still strong among those who voted for PH last election.  

Mahathir’s convictions and actions spanning 75 years have been consistent. As a ‘young Turk’ within UMNO in the 1950s, he opposed non-Malay citizenship of Malaya. In 1972, Mahathir was one of the instigators in the fall of Tunku Abdul Rahman as prime minister, taking away UMNO’s moderate approach to multiculturalism, and giving birth to the New Economic Policy, the ideology behind Ketuanan Melayu.

Together with Anwar Ibrahim, Mahathir Islamized the civil service, putting the secular Rukun Negara on the back burner as the nation’s secular guiding principle. Mahathirism has become an ideology that has led to the formation and growth of repressive organizations like the police’s Special Branch and the Department of Islamic Development Malaysiawith growing repression even seen within public universities.

Mahathirism has been about maintaining Malay-dominated governance. It has replaced colonialism with kleptocracy that has promoted a neo-feudal society. There is an illusion of racial division within Malaysian society, but what has to be realized is that the real division created by the doctrine of Mahathirism is a three-tier class society – the Malay elite, the wealthy rent-seekers, and the rest.

Going back to his manifesto, “The Malay Dilemma”, which was banned in Malaysia until he became prime minister,  Mahathir has always portrayed the Malays as lazy, and in need of being protected. This has always been unfair, and an excuse for domination by the ruling class. The imposition of an Arabist version of Islam, and ‘look east’ has implied that the Malay psyche doesn’t have its own virtues and ethics. The very substance of Malay culture itself has been suppressed by Mahathirism.

The prime symbol of Mahathirism is Putra Jaya, the gleaming center of Malaysian government, dominated by Arabist architecture but without a people’s parliament located within it. Mahathir’s legacy is a near totalitarian state, driven by slogans to suppress any semblance of individuality, as individuality is a danger to the status quo.

Mahathir altered the trajectory of UMNO. He moved it from moderation to an extremist position. Mahathir has been responsible for all the party’s splits and splinters. He sent it to the wilderness. At this point it is difficult to see historians being kind to Mahathir.