[TinyRedLeaf]

Originally Posted by MUAHAHAHAHAHA

Some foreigners I have met in the UK actually argued with me that Chinese ppl exist only in China, and Malay in Malaysians only refers to the Malay people. I gave up trying to explain to them.

I encountered similar confusion years ago when I was studying in Britain. My British friends just couldn't wrap their heads around the idea that I could be Chinese and Singaporean. For them, you have to be from China to be Chinese.

To be sure, the "culture shock" cuts both ways. It is difficult for non-Europeans to appreciate the original definition of a "nation-state". A modern state, in European historical experience, is made up of a group of people with a shared ethnicity. Hence, it takes a nation of English to make England, a nation of French to make France, a nation of Germans to make Germany, and so on.

In the popular experience of Europe, there is little distinction between a nation and a state. National groups that clamour for independence would break away from larger hegemonic states to become states in their own right.

In that sense, to an European, a "state" is made up of people of one primary ethnicity. The concept of a diaspora, like those of the Jews and the Chinese, never quite took hold. (Indeed, the Romani nation was often scorned for their lack of a state, a country to call their own.) To the European mind, it seems, it doesn't matter whether you're originally Chinese, Irish or Polish — once you've settled down permanently in the United States, for example, you effectively become American. In other words, there doesn't seem to be any separation between ethnicity and nationality. They are one and the same to an European.

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

I'm pretty sure that prior to independence, the primary language of Indonesia was called Malay too.

Anyway, the borders in South East Asia are fairly artificial. They're based on the British and Dutch Colonial Empires, and not on any actual nation states. For instance, if the Malay peninsula, or Malaysian Borneo been part of the Dutch Colonial Empire, they probably would have ended out as part of "Indonesia" too. Likewise, if the British had owned Sumatra, it would have ended up in Malaysia.

It is slightly more complicated than that, in a way that is largely unrelated to colonial power arrangements. Among other constitutional definitions, a Malay in Malaysia must also be Muslim. Yes, as far as Kuala Lumpur is concerned, a Malay must be Muslim. One cannot renounce Islam and still remain Malay. Doing so makes you an apostate, and that's a serious matter that will be brought before the Syriah court.

Many Singaporeans, who are mostly Chinese in ethnicity, are often confused about this. When they see Malay-looking Indonesians eating pork, they wonder what's going on. They don't realise that a good number of Indonesians are actually Christian or Hindu. For these Indonesians, pork is not haram.

In this regard, I'm sad to say that many Singaporeans are woefully ignorant of history and geography. (Try asking a Singaporean to name the states of Malaysia, our immediate neighbour. I'm ready to bet that most will not be able to identify all 13, let alone place them on the map.)