This article discusses the impact of plurality on Malaysia-Singapore relations after the formation of
Malaysia on September 16, 1963. The establishment of the Federation of Malaysia agreement was
signed in London on July 8, 1963 by the representatives of the British government, the Federation of
Malaya, Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak. All parties agreed to the change in name from Federation of
Malaya to Malaysia. The declaration of Malaysia was made on September 16, 1963 simultaneously
throughout the country. This study uses secondary sources and library research methods. The findings
show that Singapore's existence in Malaysia was seen to have raised racial issues leading to the
separation of Singapore from Malaysia on August 9, 1965. Ethnic-related problems need to be
addressed wisely in order to not be a threat to racial relations among the plural society in Malaysia.
1Malaysia concept was introduced by Datuk Seri Mohd. Najib Tun Razak on April 3, 2009 with the theme, "People First, Achievement Is Priority", 1Malaysia seen as an attempt to foster unity among the various races in Malaysia with 8 important values as the catalyst for social transformation that leads to the growth and well-being of people. This descriptive study was conducted to investigate the source and extent of the understanding of 1Malaysia concept among the three groups of primary school (n = 100), secondary school (n = 100) and university students (n = 98). Data were collected through a survey method with the use of a set of questionnaires and were then analysed with SPSS software. The results showed that the main source of this concept for all three groups of students is through television, followed by the newspaper. For the understanding of the concept, it was found that almost 70% of the respondents do understand some basic aspects related to it. However, there are still aspects which respondents still do not know about. Thus there is a need for the educators to play an important role to explain in detail to the students so that the concept can be understood and appreciated, and that it is not misinterpreted to cause negative impact on race relations in Malaysia.
Most prior studies of the other-race categorization advantage have been conducted in predominantly monoracial societies. This limitation has left open the question of whether tendencies to more rapidly and accurately categorize other-race faces reflect social categorization (own-race vs. other-race) or perceptual expertise (frequent exposure vs. infrequent exposure). To address this question, we tested Malay and Malaysian Chinese children (9- and 10-year-olds) and adults on (a) own-race faces (i.e., Malay faces for Malay participants and Chinese faces for Malaysian Chinese participants), (b) high-frequency other-race faces (i.e., Chinese faces for Malay participants and Malay faces for Malaysian Chinese participants), and (c) low-frequency other-race faces (i.e., Caucasian faces). Whereas the other-race categorization advantage was in evidence in the accuracy data of Malay adults, other aspects of performance were supportive of either the social categorization or perceptual expertise accounts and were dependent on the race (Malay vs. Chinese) or age (child vs. adult) of the participants. Of particular significance is the finding that Malaysian Chinese children and adults categorized own-race Chinese faces more rapidly than high-frequency other-race Malay faces. Thus, in accord with a perceptual expertise account, the other-race categorization advantage seems to be more an advantage for racial categories of lesser experience regardless of whether these face categories are own-race or other-race.