Race and Culture in the Making of Malaya - The Case of the British Management of the Indian Plantation Labourers -

Abstract

This paper explores the way in which the issues of race and culture were manipulated by the management on the rubber estates in Malaya after the World, War II, expecting that the analysis would explain the longevity of the distinctive social hierarchy in the estates. In doing so, I have paid particular attentions to the social stratification on the estates, to the paternalism from the higher participants towards the lower participants, and to the cultural interactions between them. My findings suggest that the social stratification of the European-owned rubber estates much resembles that of the multi-racial Malayan society under the British administration. The British colonial authorities and the management on the estates built the social stratification in their own respective domain on the basis of racial and cultural hierarchy. Moreover, paternalism was used as an equipment for control. As the British colonial administration used paternalism towards the Malays in order not to disturb the production of strategic materials, and interrupt the future self-government process, the managers manipulated the Indian culture of paternalism as a way to keep their superordination upon their subordinates. As a result, the estate became a big extended family in real term, and the labourers were hardly aware of their status as a wage-earner, but regarded themselves related to the management. The analysis undertaken in this paper concurs the majority of the Malaysian Indian scholars who have argued that this psychological ‘captivity’ explains the comparatively poorer state of the Indians in the contemporary Malaysia. It seems that the exhaustive stratification of the people on the plantations based on the company chart left little room to manoeuvre by all classes. Therefore, it is not exaggerating to argue that while British colonialism created the extractive industries in Malaya, the British divide and rule policy adopted by the management on the estates was the reason behind the continuous political and economic marginalization of the Indians. Moreover, there is no evidence to suggest any cultural interactions between the racial groups in the estates, apart from the gatherings during the annual religious festivals organized by the Indian labourers, where the manager was present as their beloved father. The managers strategically distanced themselves from the subordinates to maintain their authority. Under the circumstances, it is apparent that the annual gatherings could hardly be sufficient for these two parties to interchange each others’ cultures.