Despite everything, Malaysian politics remains deeply rooted in the language and discourse of race, religion and ethnicity. Worst still, these distinctions have come to serve as boundary markers in a politics of communitarianism where difference is seen in oppositional terms and dialectics remains the order of the day.
The saddest thing about the present state of affairs in this country is that we have not been able to work towards an all-inclusive and accommodating politics of national consensus, and the project of nation-building remains a pipe dream at best.
When the leaders and ideologues of PAS began talking the language of democracy and human rights in the late 1990s, many of us (myself included) felt that a major paradigm shift had taken place in the party.
Many Malaysians hoped that PAS would discard its culture of takfir and demonisation of the Other for a more inclusive form of democratic constitutional politics that would be good for the country as a whole.
But events of late have given us more cause for concern, as they seem to suggest that in its heart of hearts, PAS has not really changed and the long-awaited paradigm shift was merely a chimera.
Christian connotations
The opposition allegedly distributed anti-government leaflets during the recent by-elections in Kedah, some of them carried images of an Umno leader dressed in the garbs of a Christian priest.
This in turn raised a host of questions: What is the subtext here? That to be a Christian was a bad thing? That Christians were the enemies of Muslims? For how would the leaflets have the intended propaganda effect if the underlying message wasn't that Christians were somehow bad in themselves? The fact that this was meant to be read as an insult to the prime minister also meant that the figure of the Christian priest was somehow meant to carry a pejorative meaning attached to it as well — though it only helped to shore up the Christian non-Malay vote in favour of the Umno candidate.
One should note, however, that the opposition parties are not the only masters in dirty politics — if they had indeed produced the leaflets. Some might recall the fact that the establishment has also resorted to such tactics before, as was the case when Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah (while he was in opposition) was photographed wearing a Kadazan headdress that allegedly had a crucifix on it.
Here again the same chain of associations was being made: to be identified with the non-Muslim other was a bad thing. What, in turn, would this do to inter-religious relations in the country?
The bottom line is that despite decades of nation-building and attempts at creating a united Malaysian nation, we have not achieved much success. This has been partly due to the ethno-nationalist communitarian politics that we practise in this country, which has blighted every party in the country across the board. It has also meant that our understanding of race, religion and cultural difference remains predicated on a form of oppositional dialectics.
In and out groups
Apart from introducing the necessity of opposition and confrontation, oppositional dialectics also introduce violent hierarchies between the Self and Other, those from the in-group and those of the out-group. This in turn complicates, and at times renders impossible, the creation of a plural democratic politics where those of the out-group can be interacted with in a meaningful way and on equal terms.
Such an outlook has made it practically impossible for PAS to reach out to the broader Malaysian electorate as a whole, or to help it maintain its instrumental alliances with non-Muslim parties and NGOs (as the pull-out of the DAP from the Barisan Alternatif alliance testifies).
The irony behind it all is that while PAS' use of oppositional dialectics may have helped it consolidate its hold on its natural constituency of Malay-Muslims, it has also alienated it from the rest of mainstream Malaysian society, where more then 40 percent of the population happen to be non-Muslims.
Likewise Umno's natural constituency remains the same one as PAS': the Malay-Muslims. Neither party (and no party in the country in fact) has managed to put forth a new form of politics of national consensus, and they all remain captives to their own narrow constituency bases.
Furthermore, it could be argued that by introducing such violent hierarchies between Self and Other, Muslims and non-Muslims, PAS and Umno have also denied themselves the opportunity to advance towards a politics of democratic pluralism on Islamic terms.
'Tauhidic' approach
Yet there have been many Islamist thinkers who have argued that for the Islamist project to get off the ground and achieve any degree of political success, it is precisely such dialectical thinking that has to be jettisoned first.
Islamist intellectuals like Rachid Ghannouchi, for instance, have called for Islamists to adopt a 'tauhidic approach' to politics, which stresses the unity and commonality of origins and purpose between all human beings, as God's fellow creatures here on earth.
Others like Abdulaziz Sachedina have argued that Islamists need to return to the Islamic roots of democratic pluralism, grounding their understanding of democratic pluralism on solid Islamic discursive resources.
The challenge before Islamists today is to communicate the message and concerns of Islam and Muslims to a broader audience that comprises of Muslims as well as non-Muslims. The only way that this can possibly succeed is if this active engagement is predicated on an ethics of recognition and respect which affords the Other with the same rights, dignity and status as Muslims expect for themselves.
As Sachedina puts it in his book The Islamic roots of democratic pluralism (2001):
"Religious pluralism calls for active engagement with the religious Other not merely to tolerate, but to understand. Toleration alone does not require active engagement with the Other. It makes no inroads on mutual ignorance. A morally and spiritually earnest search for common understandings within our particular religious traditions can lead the way for society as a whole. Religious pluralism can function as a working paradigm for a democratic, social pluralism in which people of diverse religious backgrounds are willing to form a community of global citizens."
Demonised demoniser
But it is here, in the search for common ground with the non-Muslim Other, that PAS has failed the most.
From its scare-mongering campaigns in the 1980s to its support for the Taliban in 2001, PAS has consistently played to its own gallery and by doing so marginalised and alienated the non-Muslims in the country. It is doubly ironic that the party that has demonised non-Muslims so also happens to be the one that is most vocal when condemning the demonisation of Islam and Muslims by the Western media and governments.
In its effort to out-Islamise its nemesis Umno, PAS has often adopted a confrontational stance towards the non-Muslim 'threat', both real and imagined. This has, unfortunately, robbed the party of a vital avenue for political action and mobilisation and has brought it no closer towards a meaningful form of democratic pluralism which has to be the goal of any party aiming to gain power in a multicultural society like Malaysia's.
Dr FARISH A NOOR is a Malaysian political scientist and human rights activist. 'The Other Malaysia' tries to unearth aspects of Malaysia's history and culture that have been erased or relegated to the margins in order to remind us that there remains another Malaysia that is often forgotten.