That is a great example. I guess it didn't help if they feel like there's no one else in their corner, like dog owners stopping to use their business because the fascists were loud 😕 ETA: especially since those dogs and their owners have every right to be there, and the fact the vet wanted them to also use their services despite the stereotype that Muslims can't touch dogs in any situation so in their own small way they're living their life and de facto resisting. But no one's there.

tbf this is the job of the government, i don’t think it’s any private citizen’s burden (regardless of race) to uplift poor individuals from poverty. by right, if you pay your taxes you have already done your part.

I absolutely agree on the obligations of the state and the purposes of taxation, and I'm noting even yourself complicated the opening position that it's not any private citizen's burden with your following paras. BUT-- while economic class is absolutely a complicating factor here, my main argument is on racism (both bilaterally between the main majorities but also unilaterally from those with institutional power). Wealth has managed to shield to a certain extent the effects of these encroachments (to keep within the Muslim-Malay world; how can certain royals can have wine in KL hotels and some random people will get arrested for drinking beer in Setapak? and of course, no one bothered that Malays are being arrested by the religious police, until these moral vanguards decide to make it everyone's problem by bullying your 7-11s and Famimas to change their cold drinks inventory).

Part of the valid reasons for affirmative action was because European/Asian colonialism (Britain and Japan to a large part of the country; Dutch and Siamese in certain territories) left native & indigenous groups poor while the migrant populations were oppressed and dikerah tenaga in a different way and they're told to be satisfied that they're serving an extractive economy because at least "we work hard, not like those natives who live in the kampungs". I can see you also agree how racist and divisive this is. I bring this up, because the Chinese-community charitable works are great and no reason to discontinue them (and not to mention, in the absence of institutional support that's where charity comes in, but it shouldn't be pervasive and neither should it replace institutional support). But (small but) that ability to economically empower ourselves has been uneven (and note in this exchange I'm not even touching the situations of the Indian and OA communities respectively who have even less communal wealth to go around), and this unevenness arguably contributed to the lack of solidarity and the don't-bother/tidak-apa attitude.

my big thing is basically this: i love that we have a very mixed, diverse, and heterogenous society, that is still, just like other post-colonial states, is trying to make its way forward. But does that fact hinders solidarity? I don't think it should and it's not like the 1960s & 70s didn't exist (and if it stopped existing, it required a lot of uh, state action). How is it PAS boleh naik minyak complaining about Pesta Songkran when it shouldn't be their business to complain? Well, because they had practice - and that supposed almost 60% of bumiputera population also includes... Borneans, so it wasn't much of a demographic majority either, what more an economic one, because mana Melayu at the time between 1970s to the 1990s that was wealthy enough to seed the schools, the papers, the magazines, the theatres, the cultural troupes to push back? (ETA: and takkanlah kaum bukan Cina yg lain don't have a cultural code that values education and cultural continuity?) So kena telan, kena tahan, and then nowadays kena kecam, for not trying hard enough at being moderate.