出处 ∶星洲日报英文版
原题 ∶Rewriting History?
中文出处∶星洲日报
作者 ∶莫辛阿都拉（MOHSIN ABDULLAH）
发表日期∶08.04.09
翻译 ∶赵雪芬
（西西留注：译者并没有将全文精髓译出，可能出自编辑的压力，只选择性的对某些段落译出，因此在此贴出全文以充对照。）
我之前已问过了，现在再问一遍：我们的歷史教科书需要重写吗？有必要重写我们的歷史吗？
我第一次公开发问，是在去年11月这份报纸的专栏里。那时我的专栏固定於每週日出现，鉴於当时前首相阿都拉建议从小学开始教授歷史课，因此我才提出这个疑问。阿都拉固然有他的理由，不过教育界人士似乎对此献议毫不感兴趣。不过，这已然成了歷史，我们也就无谓再討论。
让我们来谈谈『真正』的歷史，尤其是和国家独立有关的。最近，马华总会长翁诗杰表示，在学校里教授的歷史教科书，稀释了华社为国家独立而奋斗的事实。换言之，他意指华族在爭取独立及建国方面的贡献被『淡化』了。
对其批评者来说，当翁诗杰提及华社时，他其实是在指马华。就如同每当巫统领袖说是马来社群努力取得独立，他们意味的是巫统。
替翁诗杰说句公道话，他说，之所以发表这番言论，乃源自与他有同感的各个华人团体发出来的『抱怨』。因此，可见也有非马华的华裔认为，马华以外的其他华人也在爭取国家独立中扮演了重要的角色。
陈禎禄最早率领马华单独爭取国家独立，是一个不爭的事实，可是马来亚共產党却也经常主张要从英殖民地主手中，把国家解救出来。当时华裔共產党主要由陈平领军，他们皆视自己为自由斗士，而非『土匪』。他们说，土匪是英国人给他们贴上的標籤。
当时的歷史课本是由英国人撰写的，而那都是我在多年前上课时读的书。我也像歷史教科书上所说般，称他们为『土匪』。现在的孩子也称马共为『土匪』，纵使他们现在的课本已改由马来西亚人所写，而非英国人。结果，两者皆有异曲同工之妙。
读了马来西亚版本的歷史教科书，现在的学生都把马哈拉惹列拉视为勇於向英国人抗爭求取国家独立的英雄。如果你清楚歷史，一定知道马哈拉惹列拉和其隨从在霹雳州的巴西沙拉刺杀毕治。毕治是驻英殖民地的参政司。
英国军队以叛逆英国君主罪名，逮捕了马哈拉惹列拉和他的手下。最终他们全被施以绞刑。
我在学生时代读到英国人版本的歷史教科书，马哈拉惹列拉和其隨从都是『土匪』，或我们现在所称的恐怖份子。可是，根据马来西亚人版本的歷史教科书（大多数是马来人撰写的），马哈拉惹列拉则是一位想从英国人手中解放祖国的大英雄。
如之前所说，巫统对於独立而『索求全部的功劳』並没有感到一丝疑虑。不过，回教党声称他们的领袖也曾和英国人抗爭，当时同样也有其他马来组织这么做。不过，对回教党而言，他们和其他人在爭取独立上的角色不仅被『淡化』，甚至被『抹煞』了，全然不在歷史教科书概括的范围內。和马华一样，回教党也在叫屈。而这两党的『抱怨』却不期然地相同。
所以我再问一次？我们的歷史教科书需要重写吗？
如果答案是『要』，那么我再问这：谁將是作者？
（作者莫辛阿都拉是NTV7和八度空间新闻时事总编辑）
原文：
The PM wants history to be taught in our primary schools. Some folks in the education fraternity are saying: let's not rush things. They have their reasons. The PM has his.
But to me the most important question is what we teach our kids. History of our nation of course. But we have heard for so long that our history has been presented according to the British "perspective," simply because many of our history books were written by British historians--the colonial masters. If this is true, are we to use the same books to teach our kids?
When I was in school years ago (and I really mean many years ago), I read history books "proclaiming" CPM leader Chin Peng as a bandit. So too were Rashid Mydin, Abdullah CD, and Shamsiah Fakir. But, there are many who see them as freedom fighters. They were fighting the British for Malayan independence. They are telling their side of their story in books easily available in any bookstore. As the books are not banned by the government, can the content or part of it be "incorporated" into our history textbooks?
And what about the May 13 tragedy? We have read the "official version" of what happened and why. Now we're getting the "unofficial version." Will it make into our history textbooks?
Then there was the big UMNO fight of 1987, of which the aftermath could be "felt" right to this day.
And the present day political landscape can be traced back to the 1998 sacking of Anwar Ibrahim and the reformasi movement.
There are many more of course. Like it or not it's all part of our history. Will it be taught in schools?
In short, will our history books be rewritten? Is there a need to rewrite our history?
But first thing first. For starters, an independent body of historians must be commissioned to verify the truth, the half truth and the non-truth. We must then be brave enough to face the result and reality. We must learn from our history.
Which brings me to a book written by former politician Fan Yew Teng which I bought a long time ago.
The book was entitled The UMNO Drama. In a nutshell, it documented the many power struggles in the party.
I hope Mr. Fan would not mind me reproducing some paragraphs of his book here.
"The serious electoral setback of the Alliance coalition government under the leadership of Tunku Abdul Rahman and the subsequent May 13 riots and paramilitary rule under the so-called National Operations Council left the ruling Alliance in political if not organisational shambles. Deep seated differences in UMNO, dormant under a deceptive Calm, erupted into fierce and open antagonisms. The Alliance had lost its two thirds majority in the Parliament, although it still had a comfortable majority.
"A formidable challenge was mounted against Tunku by a combination of Malay intellectuals, Malay university students and some UMNO personalities including Dr. Mahathir, Musa Hitam, Syed Jaafar Albar.
"On 17 June 1969, Dr. Mahathir wrote a letter to Tunku Abdul Rahman, making scathing attacks on the Prime Minister and UMNO President. Apart from accusing Tunku for being too soft on the Chinese, it also suggested that Tunku should step down as Prime Minister and UMNO President.
"Mahathir also referred to patronage as a significant factor in UMNO's intra-party politics. He accused UMNO leaders of having succumbed to the disease of dispensing patronage and believing that they no longer needed the opinions of their supporters. They disregarded them at every turn.
"He (Mahathir) also claimed that the government was apparently oblivious to what went on around it."
Sound familiar? Save for the main characters, the May 13 tragedy and some other events, the paragraphs above could very well be used to describe the current situation in this beloved country of ours.
There are lessons to be learned today from yesterday for a better tomorrow. After all, history they say, repeats itself. (By MOHSIN ABDULLAH/MySinchew)
(MOHSIN ABDULLAH is the Editor-in-Chief for News and Current Affairs of Ntv7 and 8TV.)
没有评论:
发表评论