Calling May 13, 1969 ‘sacred’ is sacrilegious

by John Baptist
The Malaysian Insider
November 11, 2010

I read with disgust Zaini Hassan describing in the Utusan Malaysia the tragic May 13, 1969 incident as “sacred”. The Oxford Dictionary defines sacred as either “connected with God or a god; considered to be holy” or “very important and treated with great respect.”

From general reading, the incident involved carnage, destruction of private and public property, ruining of families, instilling of fear, the destruction of years of trust between the races built by our forefathers and the maligning of our nation in the eyes of the world, setting us back years in the terms of our economic potential.
I need take only carnage to exemplify that it is prohibited by all religions and hence cannot sit comfortably within the first definition of “sacred” by the Oxford Dictionary.


Let us then consider the second definition given by the same dictionary which I fervently hope that Zaini was referring to. Was May 13 an important event? It certainly was! Is it to be treated with great respect? In my humble view, the answer to this question would depend on the perspective one takes on the incident.

My personal view of the incident is this — a small group of individuals, claiming to be representatives of their entire race, feigning concern for their welfare and ignoring the precept that “the means we use should be as pure as the ends we seek”, resorted to violence as Cain did Abel, to advance their personal agendas. These same individuals would today shamelessly tell us not to take to the streets in peaceful demonstrations of our grievances, though constitutionally guaranteed, but to resort to the ballot box!

Forty-one years later, having held the reins of government in the intervening period, they have all but admitted their failure to truly address the woes of our Malay sisters and brothers. Whilst on this point, it is imperative to note that not every Malay took to the street on the day of the incident, neither did they endorse the conduct of those claiming to be their representatives, whom I prefer to remember as agent provocateurs.

The main lessons I would take from the incident are that as a nation we must never resort to violence to address our grievances, preferring peaceful discourse only, and that we must never allow any Malaysian to languish in poverty unless it be a personal choice. Regardless of whence or whom the call for violence may come, we must resolutely oppose it. Save for these lessons, I call for the complete exorcism of the ghosts of May 13, 1969!

I would like to end this article by contrasting Zaini’s view with that of our beloved first Prime Minister, Tunku Abdul Rahman, who said this of the incident — “…. it really pains me as the Father of Merdeka to have to relive those terrible moments. I have often wondered why God made me live long enough to have witnessed my beloved Malays and Chinese citizens killing each other.” The late Tunku, I reckon, would have died a second death after reading Zaini’s view.