The True Fathers of Malaysian Independence

Malaysia Today posting

28/08: The true fathers of Malaysian independence
Category: General Posted by: Raja Petra

by Anti-Jihadist

When Malaysians take time this upcoming Friday to reflect on the meaning of (what is widely referred to as) the 50th anniversary of Malaysian independence (a.k.a. Merdeka), they should spare a moment to thank one of the men who helped make it possible—Adolf Hitler.

That’s right. Adolf Hitler and his fascist allies, in an ironic twist of history, are in many ways the true fathers of independent Malaysia. Without their actions, Merdeka would have taken, at the very least, many more years if not decades to come to pass. Remember, in the years preceding World War II, Malaya’s status as a British colony was not seriously opposed by anyone, especially inside Malaya itself. British rule of the colony was unchallenged. And a unified Malaya not run by Britain was all but unthinkable.

The actions of one man thousands of miles away would change this status quo forever. It was Hitler’s Germany that launched war in Europe in 1939, and whose forces directly attacked the British homeland soon after. It was Hitler’s Afrika Korps and Italian allies who attacked British forces and possessions throughout the Mediterranean, and attempted to seize the British protectorate of Egypt and the vital Suez Canal. These assaults on multiple fronts concentrated British forces and planning on these theatres of war, and turned London’s attention away from Asia. The British Empire in 1940 and 1941 (when they did not yet have an official ally in the US) was stretched to the limit and fighting for its life.

Left all but forgotten at this critical juncture were the British possessions in the Far East—Hong Kong, Malaya, Singapore, North Borneo, and Burma. Stripped of military units that had been hurried westward to fight the Germans and Italians, these areas were tempting targets.

Such an opportunity was not to go unnoticed, especially by Hitler’s other ally—the Empire of Japan, who had been planning their so-called “Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere” for some time. Seeing that the chief colonizing power in Southeast Asia (the UK) had its hands full fighting the Germans in North Africa and elsewhere, the Japanese militarists carefully planned their coup de main. Germany’s conquest of Western Europe (and the fall of other colonial powers France and the Netherlands) also made for other ‘ripe pickings’ in Southeast Asia.

On December 8, 1941, Japan decisively struck the Malayan peninsula and landed a sizable invasion force near Kota Baru (on Malaya’s northeast coast). The few British units still left in Malaya resisted valiantly, but were outmaneuvered and overwhelmed in short order. Japan’s ‘jungle blitzkrieg’ succeeded enormously, and the seemingly ‘invincible’ British quickly surrendered in all of Malaya.

The resulting Japanese occupation of Malaya was humiliating as it was brutal. However, it did demonstrate to everyone (in particular, the Malays) two vital lessons that cannot be underestimated, and that ultimately paved the way for Merdeka. One, the British were clearly not unbeatable. And secondly, it could now be shown conclusively that a Malaya without British rule was possible.

When the British returned to Malaya in 1945, they did so as victors, but in full awareness that continued British rule in Malaya would not, and could not, continue as it had before. The British had won the war, true, but their victory over Hitler and fascism had bankrupted them, and they had lost much of their desire for empire as a result. Their soon-to-be former subjects, the Malays, knew that the genie was out of the bottle, and realised that they had to finagle the most favourable terms possible from the soon-to-depart British.

It was merely a question of time, of process, and of form, but thanks to the schemes of the Nazis and their friends, Malayan independence had become inevitable.

Remember that this week when you display your Jalur Gemilang.


Comments

TheWrathOfGrapes wrote:
.More like surrogate fathers.One Fuhrer with his Lebensraum, and one Emperor with his Greater East Asian Co-Propsperity Sphere, resulting in the dismantling of the old colonies.Some good coming out of something bad..
28/08 15:29:43

rakyatmalaysia wrote:
good one joe, but that does not mean i will look hitler as my hero but a blooody bastard who massacred million of jews.
28/08 15:31:22

theantijihadist wrote:
I couldn't agree more with that assessment of Herr Hitler. May he burn in Hell for eternity.
28/08 15:36:28

WanSinga wrote:
Hitler! How I adore him very much. Not because of his cruelty but to his inflence & absolute power.Think again.Jews were shot dead. So be it. But why? Because they are weak, like the rest of us.Think again.Every history has a lesson...
28/08 15:46:52

ShyteStirrer wrote:
Anti-Jihadist, please do not fall into the trap of all the apologists of the Nazis and the Fascist Imperial Japanese when they say that their actions precipitated the independence movements in Asia. It is true that it may have been a unintended by-product. However, do not forget that the Nazi's and Japanese were inperialists who wanted domination of peoples and raw materials. Please also do not forget the millions of people that perished because of their imperial dreams. They never intended freedom for anyone - they only wanted complete domination. Please do not twist history.
28/08 15:52:43

shardik wrote:
'Mein Kampf' becomes bestseller in Turkey
Publisher: 'The times we live in have a definite impact on sales'http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43380
28/08 15:55:55

cheekhiaw wrote:
The victors had conveniently blamed Hitler for WWII. But history shows that the seeds of WWII was sowed by the victors of WWI i.e. the British, French and Americans.

The Versaille Treaty for Germany's surrender in WWI exacted huge reparations (contrary to expectations set to the Germans by the Americans) that resulted in super-high inflation.

John Maynard Keynes the famous economist who represented the British Exchequer in that event resigned in compassionate protest over its unreasonableness. The super high inflation arising from that and the great depression set the ground for extreme German views/actions.

Germany fought WWI because she was a new nation and wanted a share of the colonial pie dominated by the older powers. By end 19th century, Germany was only 30 years old but its economic might (along with US) was second only to Britain.

Lord Balfour the British Foreign Secretary in WWI was recorded to have suggested years before to the Americans that they should start a war with Germany so that they could 'maintain their standard of living' i.e. to whack Germany to keep it from challenging them.

During WWI the same Balfour (a Jew) issued the Balfour Declaration on behalf of Britain which made public the British government's support for the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine in return for financial support for the war from the Jews. That 'letter' was addressed to a certain Lord Rothschild of the financial world.

According to historian Paul Kennedy, access to cheap financing is 1 of 3 key factors that decide the outcome of modern wars. This is why the Germans hated this other group of people so much.

Thus the final collapse of the British empire was partly the result of their own insidious actions and not just the challenge of upcoming powers Germany and Japan.

We should therefore thank the British themselves.

The Israelites do that. Which is also why they can afford to be so arrogant towards the Palestinians.
28/08 16:01:34

cruzeiro wrote:
Hey AJ,I think it was rather unfair.

You should've said that it was Roosevelt, as the British could've easily held on to Malaya with all it's riches. There were enough turncoats who benefited directly or otherwise from the colonization, to perpetuate it. After all, the questions of Malayan Union, and the muted resistance, came about after WWII, becos of the conditions imposed on the British by Roosevelt and Gang!So it was Roosevelt, AJ. Or else, we might be worshiping the Hirohito, and saluting Japs today.As an alternative, you could probably thank and give some credit to the Jewish lobby/ bankers who had vested interest in an open market!
28/08 16:01:36

farouk wrote:
You mean to tell me, the British DIDN'T give us independence because they thought we were matured and capable of running a soveriegn state? ;)
28/08 16:01:55

shardik wrote:
In any case the Brits were bankrupt, sapped up and their manpower drastically reduced after the war. They did not have the energy to hold on to their colonies. They needed to rebuild the home country and it made more economic sense to decolonise.
28/08 16:03:51

cheekhiaw wrote:
To see who we should really thank for the outcome of WWII, we should compare the price each country paid in lives of its people.

3 nations had more than 10 million casualties each (Russia, Germany, China)

The Americans, British and French had about 1 million in total between them or about 2% of total global war casualty. [My original comment as pointed out by another blogger is incorrect:'The Americans, British and French had less than 100,000 each.']

The Americans and British sat out of most of the war and pretended to fight Germany in Africa, and moved into Europe only after the tide of war there had already changed. Thanks to the East Europeans/ This is why world leaders had the 60th anniversary of the end of WWII in Russia 2 years ago.

As to Asia, China paid the highest price and the Americans won it on the cheap via the bomb. During most of the war, China was left pretty much to its own. Those who brandish small crooked knives around town here should note this.
28/08 16:13:47

cruzeiro wrote:
Shardik,I don't think they would've, had they not been forced to do so by "Roosevelt"- what more, when they needed even more wealth to rebuild their economy!In fact they were looking for reasons not to give the Independence.Malaya with its tin and Rubber which were prime commodities, would've helped a lot, with little cost on their part.
28/08 16:14:05

theantijihadist wrote:
Cheekhiaw's WW2 casualty stats are a little off.The UK's casualties for WW2 are estimated to be 450,000. The US is a bit less (~420,000) and France 562,000. These stats include both military and civilian deaths.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties#Casualties_by_country
28/08 16:18:39

shardik wrote:
In fact they were looking for reasons not to give the Independence.Malaya with its tin and Rubber which were prime commodities, would've helped a lot, with little cost on their part.
________________________________________

Even after independence, they were able to hold on to these through the various companies. Only after `69 were things to change.But by giving independence they were able to concentrate on developing the home country. Though the emergency and konfrontasi did hurt some in addition to keeping the Overseas Forces in M`sia.If they had to monitor the whole country their expenses would have been much much greater.In fact the pullout of Allied Forces in `67 hurt the m`sians much more. States like Malacca/Negeri Sembilan/Penang suffered badly.
28/08 16:22:43

rakyatmalaysia wrote:
anyhow, this bastard did talk something sense here. Maybe its an advice to the malaysian.

“We have only to kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down.”— Adolf Hitler
28/08 16:25:27

shardik wrote:
Recurrence of the night of the long knives?
28/08 16:28:27

shardik wrote:
and moved into Europe only after the tide of war there had already changed
____________________________________

And what changed the tide of war?
28/08 16:30:25

cheekhiaw wrote:
Russia since it is still not obvious.
28/08 16:46:40

shardik wrote:
How silly of me. N the allies were just as you obviously put it `sat out of most of the war and pretended to fight Germany in Africa`.
28/08 16:59:15

cruzeiro wrote:
Even after independence, they were able to hold on to these through the various companies. Only after `69 were things to change.
============

Of course.I was talking about the events prior to Merdeka ..... the Malayan "resistance/ independance" movement was virtually non-existent or puny at best, compared to that of countries that had to literally fight for it to the very end, like India.They could've held on if they wanted to, without breaking sweat - but with India gone, it (the refusal for independence) probably just wasn't worth it anymore.The trouble of 5.13 was an event that was anticipated by the British, in their absence. They were quite aware of the workings of the "powers" in the alliance, that took on the role of the "new Tuans".But that's another story .....At the end of the day "we" reaped the harvest, of a series of world events without paying a price (relatively speaking).That is why, some people are today quite while stupidly arrogant about "supremacy", demand to rob the nation blind, using all avenues at their disposal - and the real victims, in their ignorance, are actually cheering them on as the true champions!
28/08 17:17:11

cruzeiro wrote:
shardik wrote:How silly of me. N the allies were just as you obviously put it `sat out of most of the war and pretended to fight Germany in Africa`.
=============

Yes shardik - the Nazis despite having some "bite" when they faced US/UK, were already quite a spent force by then after the Russian campaign. The US/ UK forces were largely against the "kids" on the western front, compared to the Eastern front - but they were still quite potent ....
28/08 17:23:54

LChuah wrote:
cruzeiro wrote:> the Nazis despite having some "bite" when they faced US/UK, were already quite a spent force by then after the Russian campaign.]]Stalingrad - the mighty struggle of the Soviets will be remembered for all time. Sitting out "of most of the war" was the West's strategy: American opinion shapers were openly calling for the Germans and Russians to finish each other off.
28/08 17:36:07

shardik wrote:
I think it was the Russian winter that really wrought havoc. The allies in that sense learnt from Napoleon`s similar disaster in Russia.Also on the Western front the only country left was an extremely weakened Britain. In fact, if I remember correctly the Treasury was empty, cept for 50,000 pounds of gold belonging to the Belgian Govt. which was borrowed by the Brits.Things only began to change when the US declared war on Germany in Dec.`41.As for the Desert Campaign I hardly think it was just a simple matter of `sat out the war`. There were British/Indian forces for instance in the siege of Tobruk and other battles.It was attrition on a massive scale which depleted the German forces (despite Arab assistance).There were the Desert Rats operating behind German/Arab lines. Then of course there was El Alamein. So slowly the Germans were rolled back.
28/08 17:39:37

cheekhiaw wrote:
Sowly is the keyword. That's another way of saying what we meant.
28/08 17:45:22

shardik wrote:
cheekhiaw:If you go to the top [navigation] click `admin` n then click `browse your comments`, you can edit or delete your comment.
28/08 18:02:48

cheekhiaw wrote:
shardick, thanks. take care.
28/08 20:35:25

007zain wrote:
.Deii!!! India also!! Indonesia, too!!=>
BIG DEAL!!!!!!!
GOD SAVE MALAYSIA!!!.
28/08 21:33:54

suv wrote:
Ya,in a way,Hitler helped to destroy Imperial Brits,
butwe must oso remember Brits gave dominion status to Ireland well before WW11(which led to full independence),

and Brits were willing to give dominion status to India oso (Stafford Cripps mission) but Gnadhi as usual f*ked things up
28/08 21:45:33