The demystification of intellectualism

Over the weekend, I decided to be adventurous and travelled a little further to seek unexplored avenues of knowledge.

In my quest, I visited the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM)’s campus in Kuantan to attend a seminar on the intellectual discourse of the late Syed Hussein Alatas.

The event was a series of lectures which featured historian Professor Mat Rofa Ismail from Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), poet Yang Mulia Raja Ahmad Aminullah (Pak Engku) and sociologist, Syed Farid Alatas, son of the late academician who just like his father, is now based in the Malay Studies Department of the National University of Singapore (NUS).

Syed Hussein was a Malaysian sociologist and a politician. He served as the Vice Chancellor at University of Malaya (UM) in the 1980s and founded his own political party, Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia.

Much of his scholarship focused on the topics of corruption, multiculturalism, imperialism and post-colonialism.

What I found most intriguing was his thoughts on the implications of post colonialism on intellectual captivity which he famously termed as “the captive mind”. Much of the discourse presented by Syed Hussein remains prevalent in today’s developing nations.

Hence, my heightened curiosity about post-colonial scholarship was stemmed from an increasing consciousness of his philosophical deductions of the common and central plagues of society.

Since the 50s, Syed Hussein had taken notice of the lack of intellectuals in Malaysia. In his context, an intellectual is someone who contemplates on ideas and non-materialistic issues with their thinking capability.

In exploring these concepts, he authored the book titled “Intellectuals in Developing Societies”. However, the most well-known of all his books is “The Myth of the Lazy Native”.

The promotion of intellectual behaviour lies in the incessant need to break away from “the captive mind” because without intellectualism, it is to simply deny any prospects for growth evidently.

Such attitude allows people to be easily influenced by opinions that can be deemed “regressive”. As a result of such conditions, institutions of knowledge can be transformed into embodiments of fear and anxiety.

The maintenance of religious hegemony is a great testament. Where the politics of faith are manipulated and abused by certain members of society as a convenient apparatus of governance.

Nevertheless, Syed Hussein perceived intellectualism as the ultimate cure to combat the “jadong” phenomenon. A term coined by him to describe the characteristics of the most dangerous members of society if passed the baton of leadership – jahat (evil), bodoh (bigoted) and sombong (arrogant).

Based on the media statements made by particular parties of late, perhaps it was about time we start popularising the usage of the word “jadong”, to complement “kipidap”!

As a result of the dwindling intellectual culture, the progress of society would be governed by the “orang-orang bebal”, otherwise known plainly as fools – in fact, he even called it a revolution of foolishness!

In the eyes of Syed Hussein, fools constituted of an inability to analyse and solve the problems that face them, have difficulty in learning what is needed and a denial of their ignorance.

Strangely, most of these understandings perfectly articulated and illustrated the picture of the Malaysian socio-political sphere.

Yet, not many of us seem to be aware, or recall the impact of Syed Hussein’s work more closely today.

Which is why it marks an emphasis on the importance to include an alternative discourse in Malaysia’s intellectual history as there are plenty of narratives that have been silenced by more extreme measures of imperialistic forces.

Unfortunately, it has bred too much familiarity and we are left to feel that some of these thoughts have been devalued – so much so our minds were blinded from enlightenment.

It is often seen as a difficult task to encourage the perpetuation of intellectualism in our society. Mostly, it is inhibited by a mentality that somewhat paints discrimination on public intellectuals being either riddled with elitism, and detached from the ground of reality as narrated by the views of gender or culture.

Upon reflection on the biases made by ourselves, Syed Hussein identified the significance of knowledge to be autonomous, independent and free from bias.

This is especially true as we witness the never ending conflict between the superiority complexities of the occidental and oriental schools of thought, promoting exclusivism in social constructs.

Particularly the vocation of “Asian values” and ethno-nationalistic sentiments that are often used as a reason to demonise liberalism and real democracy.

On the other end of the spectrum, the “war against terror” is regarded as a response to the “clash of civilisations” when really, there is a far more complicated observation of ideological disparities.

At least according to Syed Hussein there are definitely ways for us to create the normalisation of an intellectual society in this country.

In his book, “Cita Sempurna Warisan Sejarah”, he highlights how the alleviation of language can revitalise inquisitive minds. It is certainly that we ought to see linguistics beyond being a medium of communication.

Language carries a corpus of values and principles based on our culture. Due to this, whatever knowledge is not just translated for the sake of understanding but also undergoes a process of assimilation that acts inclusively binding communities together.

As Nelson Mandela said, “If you talk to a man in a language he understands, it goes to his head. If you talk to him in his language, it goes to his heart.” I suggest this is why it is important for us to strive for freedom of knowledge against the boundaries of censorship.

Without it, it is tantamount to achieving intolerance of differences in our society - whether is it about the choice between Pepsi and Coke in our politics, or the manner in which we express ourselves.

Ideally, I strongly believe that one of the most crucial elements for us, a civil society is to invigorate an attitude of reclaiming public spaces.

Efforts like Buku Jalanan and Universiti Terbuka Anak Muda (Utam) are just a couple of examples to testify great impact that can be made through public, informal gatherings to discuss topics such as philosophy, sociology, history and so on, even in Malay, regardless of who and where the proponents of such concepts come from.

The point is that one should be able to engage and indulge in intellectualism without fear of persecution. The reclamation of public spaces is symbolic of reclaiming the narratives of intellectual discourses for ourselves.

In order to unwind ourselves from the tyrannical clutches that have deviated ourselves from the road towards a progressive nation, it requires curiosity, passion which soars towards great heights of not only morality, but also our collective identity as a nation.

If the words of Syed Hussein remain as an unachieved aspiration for Malaysian society, it is evident that we should reflect, the lamentations of how far have we come since early post colonial days. – November 28, 2015.

* This is the personal opinion of the writer and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insider.