Sinicization of Malaya


Malaya has undergone a long, almost hundred years of invasion and pillaging made by some of the Chinese clans. This colonization and looting can be called “Sinicization”. No doubt, it has given a great impact to the Malay civilization; especially to the downfall of the civilization and the loss of homeland sovereignty of the Malays. The effects of “Sinicization” can be seen in various aspects including politics, economy, social, demographics, language and religion.

The first wave of “Sinicization” known as “Nam Tien” which can be defined as “movement towards the south” refers to the movement of the Chinese clans to the Malay world which is located in the south[1]. The Nam Tien’s agenda covered almost 900 years long, it started when the Viet Chinese invade the Malay Champa kingdom in 982 AD. This era prolonged until the attack of Kedah by Thai Chinese troops in 1821 AD[2].

In the historical narrative, Nam Tien was originally used specifically to refer to Viet Chinese offensive operations against the control of the Malay kingdom of Champa in the area known as Vietnam today[3]. This movement does not only apply to the Malay kingdom of Champa, which was completely destroyed in 1835 AD[4]; it has also been applied to the Malay kingdoms of Patani, Senggora, Ligor, and Kedah by the Thai Chinese against the Malays. These all point out that Nam Tien is a planned “daylight looting” project.

The second wave of ‘Sinicization” was during the era of Francis Light in Penang. The arrival of Francis Light has greatly altered the demographics of the locals there. In a census made by Del Tufo in “Malaya: Reports on the 1947 census of population” shows that in 1812 AD, there were 7,558 Chinese compared to the overall population of 26,107 people, accounting for 28.95% of the total population. In 1833 AD there was a total of 11,010 Chinese compared to 86,275 total populations (12.76%). In 1851 AD, there were 24,188 Chinese compared to the total population of 107 914 people (22.41%). Finally, in 1881 AD, there were 67,353 Chinese compared to 188,245 total people (35.75%)[5].

Data 1931 census report also shows that in the Straits Settlements at that time (Singapore, Penang, and Malacca) the percentage of the Chinese more than the Malays. The Chinese were 663,518 people of the total population with a share of 59.6%, while the Malays amounted to only 285,316 people represent a share of 25.6% of the total population in the Straits Settlements[6].

A similar pattern can be seen in the Federated Malay States (Perak, Selangor, Negeri Sembilan, and Pahang). The proportion of the Chinese community was higher than the Malays. The Chinese totaled 711,540 people from the total population with a percentage of 41.5%, while the Malays amounted to only 593,731 people representing 34.7% of the total population in the Federated Malay States[7].

Rupert Emerson claimed that the number of Chinese and Indians in one state could be a relative indicator of the British foreign investment and rapid administration there. On the contrary, the number of foreign investments was very least with the primitive economy system was seen in a state where the majority were the Malay. It was also the attitude of the Malays themselves who do not want to be slaves to the British and Chinese capitalists in their own land, The Malaya[8].

The Exploitation of Economy

The Chinese initially did not have the mentality to integrate with the indigenous Malays when some see Malaysia as a temporary shelter, and they plan to return to their respective countries after successfully accumulating wealth in Malaysia[9]. On the other hand, The British did not want the Malays to compete with their interests in the local economy. Thus, they have formed various policies intended to ensure that the Malays are unable to compete with other races[10].

The wealth of tin ore industry in Malaya is one of the attractions to the Chinese immigrants and British to monopolize the wealth. Besides tin ore, rubber products are also the British’s “pot-of-gold”. These products account for more than half of the total exports of the Malay colonies[11] and was a major help to the British during their economic crisis post-war. In fact, it was the treasures from Malaya that funded the British during the Second World War[12].

In the year 1919, the amount of export industry in Malaya covered more than half of the world’s total exports of rubber and half of tin ore in the world. The income from these two industries has been so significant to the British that Malaya was known as the “Dollar weapon of the English Empire[13].

The richness of tin ore in Perak has resulted in the extraordinary migration of Chinese to Malaya where their population has increased twice between the year 1891 and 1901 (in 10 year’s time only) and has pushed the Malay to become the minority in their own land[14]. The establishment of the Straits Settlements and the escalating world demand for Malaya’s tin ore encouraged the Chinese to migrate to Malaya and engage in this lucrative industry (though it had been mined several centuries earlier by the Malays) to plunder 78% of the total production of tin in Malaya in the year 1910[15].

A lesson from The Lukut’s Crisis

Around 1824 AD, Lukut has become the prospect of a lucrative mining project and was cultivated under the hands of the Malays. Raja Busu was one of the earliest mining entrepreneurs, took the initiative to boost the mining business by bringing in groups of Chinese immigrants to work with him.

According to Raja Busu’s mining business policy at that time, all tin ores taken out from Lukut, shall be taxed 10% of the selling price. Raja Busu’s business was very well established; therefore, he tried to raise the tax. However, his decision has irritated the Chinese immigrants. As a result, 400 Chinese have come to Raja Busu’s palace to argue about the tax increment. Unfortunately, Raja Busu took no compromised and the situation became uncontrolled when Raja Busu said “Do whatever you wish! We Muslims do not fear death!” firmed. The story ended with the Chinese group eventually burned Raja Busu’s palace and his family burned to death[16].

The story of Raja Busu death was described tragically in Isabella Bird’s note in The Golden Chersonese. He stated that hundreds of houses were burned and Tengku Busu with his wife and son was burned alive, the Chinese managed to seize all the gold and gems and fled to Malacca and seek under the British protection[17].

“One dark, rainy night in September 1834 these miners rose upon their employers, burned their houses, and massacred them indiscriminately, including this enlightened rajah; and his wife and children, in attempting to escape we thrown into the flames of their house. The plunder obtained by the Chinese, exclusive of the jewels and gold ornaments of the women was estimated at 3500 Pound. This very atrocious business was believed to have been aided and abetted, if not absolutely concocted, by Chinese merchants living under the shelter of British flag at Malacca. With the death of Tuanku Bongsu all hope of prosperity for Selangor under native rule was extinguished”

The Involvement of the Chinese Secret Societies in Malaya Larut War (1872 -1874 AD)

Larut was an area rich with tin mines in Perak. Long Jaafar, a trader hired by the Sultan to collect paddy field taxes; is the person responsible in discovering the potential of mining in Larut around the year of 1850. After the death of Long Jaafar, his wealth was inherited by his son, Ngah Ibrahim. Born as the son of nobles, Ngah Ibrahim has developed Larut into a mining town. It was estimated that the wealth from Larut mine’s industry in 1871 AD, could produce a million dollars each year for miners while royalty money collected by Ngah Ibrahim at that time was around 276,000 dollars a year[18].

The news about the mining potentials of Larut spread so fast. Initially, it was only three Chinese were residing in Larut but in 1863 AD up to 1870 AD there were 20,000 Chinese compared to only 2,000 to 3,000 Malays. Of the total 20,000 Chinese at that time, 13,000 were members of the Hai San and Toh Peh Kong group and the remaining 7,000 were members of the Ghee Hin group[19].

The wealth of Larut not only brought fortune to the miners but also conflicts. In addition to the growing number of Chinese immigrants of 40,000 in Larut in 1871 AD, it also led to competition among the secret societies to gain a larger mine area. They (the secret societies) even compete in supplying opium to the Chinese miners. This competition intensified in 1872 AD when Lee Ah Kun, a member of the Ghee Hin group, was arrested by the Hai San group and placed in a bamboo basket which was normally being used by the Chinese community to lay pigs. Lee Ah Kun’s case became more complicated when he was drowned to death in a mine[20].

This event brought about major upheavals in Larut. Many mines were burned and fierce dispute between the two groups took place. Although Hai San dominated many mines in Larut, they failed to curb Ghee Hin’s strife, forcing them to retreat to Penang. There, Hai San tried to get help from the British. Ngah Ibrahim was made a fall-guy when accused of conspiring with Ghee Hin to attack Hai San. However, the attempt to won British aid failed because Larut was located outside the British government area of Penang. At the same time, Hai San also attempted an assassination against the head of Ghee Hin’s in Penang but their attempts failed.

The rivalry among the secret societies in Larut compounded when there is a battle for the throne of Perak. Sultan Ali died in 1871 AD, leaving a strong-backed heir among the Perak minister, Raja Ismail. Unfortunately Raja Muda Abdullah, son of the previous Sultan of Perak before Sultan Ali, Sultan Jaafar, wanted to seize the Sultanate throne of Perak. Raja Muda Abdullah received support from Ghee Hin by promising mines and other concessions, making the crisis in Perak mixed in between the battle for the throne and the competition among the secret societies trying to strengthen its position in Larut. The fight between the two secret societies continued until the end of 1872 AD with a series of attacks between the Ghee Hin and Hai San resulting in hundreds of lives succumbed in the battle to win over the mine in Larut[21].


The political party set up by the Chinese and Indians early in Malaya was not intended to protect the welfare and interests of the Chinese or Indians immigrants in Malaya but in furtherance of their home country political idea. Initially, the only social organization for the Chinese in Malaya was the secret societies where the chief of the group would be the head of the community and usually will also lead the Chinese business group.

“ke mana-mana sahaja kaum Cina pergi mereka akan membawa pertubuhan rahsia mereka bersama-sama. . . nyata sekali ini merupakan satu-satunya organisasi sosial yang diterima oleh komuniti mereka[22]”. (“Wherever the Chinese go, they will bring along their secret society identity with them… by far, this is the only social organization that was accepted by their community.”)

Newbold in his book mentioned:

“…di penempatan kami di Pulau Pinang pada tahun 1799, kongsi gelap sedang bersatu, undang-undang kerajaan sedia ada diingkari dan mereka hanya patuh kepada undang-undang yang dipantau dengan ketat. Menurut Major Low, superitendent polis di Province Wellesley (Seberang Prai), orang Cina di Batu Kawan berada dalam kumpulan kongsi yang sama, mereka dilengkapi dengan lembing kayu yang panjang, tombak bermata tiga (trident) dan parang bersaiz sederhana. Jika salah seorang daripada mereka terlibat atau dituduh melakukan jenayah, walaupun sekejam mana jenayahyang dilakukan mereka, pihak kongsi gelap yang dianggotai mereka akan sebulat suara membantu melepaskannya”[23].

(“… In our residence in Penang in 1799, the secret societies are united, the existing local government laws were denied and they only comply with the laws that were strictly monitored. According to Major Low, a superintendent in Province Wellesley (Seberang Perai), the Chinese in Batu Kawan are in the same group, they are equipped with long javelin wood, trident, and medium-sized machetes. If one of them involved or accused of committing a crime, despite the fact that the crime they committed, their secret society will unanimously try to help them.”)

Sun Yat Sen came to Singapore in 1905 to bring Tung Meng Hui to Malaya. Here in Malaya, he was assisted by his colleagues, Tan Cho Lit, Teo Eng Hock and Lim Nee Soon who were later successfully set up the movements in Seremban, Kuala Lumpur and Penang[24].

The establishment of the Tung Meng Hui in Malaya was a strategic move as it important in providing financial support to fund the revolution in China. Tung Meng Hui’s involvement became more aggressive when they robbed around Johor, Malacca and Selangor. A document found in Singapore showed that the secret societies in Malacca perform various robberies as to finance the revolution. This act, not only supported by the secret societies, Sun Yat Sen even receives financial aid and military recruiting assistance through a Singapore-based company called Chung-Hsin Rocky Mountain Company[25].

Tung Meng Hui was subsequently combined with Hung League and formed the Koumintang party. In Malaya in 1913, at least 36 Kuomintang Party branches were established with the state of Perak having the most divisions of 27 branches. The KMT also dominated nearly six Chinese newspapers at that time, Kwong Wah Yit Poh of Penang, Yik Khuan Poh (1919-1934), San Yit Khuan Poh (1935 – 1936), Malayan Chinese Daily News of Kuala Lumpur (1937-1941) Min Kuo Jih Pao (1930-1934), and Sin Kuo Min Press (1919-1941)[26].

The majority members of the Kuomintang Party are businessmen. They became the chief of Chinese communities by becoming sponsors of Chinese schools and members of the Chinese business cooperative. The good relations between the Kuomintang and the British during the Japanese occupation was somehow has built a reputation among them. Furthermore, Malaya at that time was threatened by the communist subversive attacks. The British realized that they have to separate the Chinese from the communist influence and thus suggested the establishment of the Malayan Chinese Association (MCA) through Henry Gurney in February 1949[27].

Many influential members of the Kuomintang Party were also the main leaders in the MCA and they execute an important position in the 50’s. At the same time, the movement of the Kuomintang Party faced a downfall era when China shifted its direction from the Kuomintang Party to the Communist government. Among the early generations of MCA were Tan Cheng Lock, Lee Hau Shik, Lau Pak Kwan, Ong Keng Seng and Wong Shee Foon. They hold important positions such as Finance Minister, Human Resource Minister and Minister of Internal Trade and Industry. Until 1975, a handful of MCA members remained under the influence of Kuomintang Party. This can be seen during the death of Chiang Kai Shek, more than 86 former members of the Kuomintang show their final ad honors in the Sin Chew Jit Poh newspaper, implying that they were still maintaining the culture, ideology and politics based on the Kuomintang Party that later fled to Taiwan[28].

In 1927, there has been a split between the Kuomintang Party and the Chinese Communist Party in China; this has resulted in the leftist split (consisting of the Communist Party) of the Kuomintang Party in Malaya, hence forming the South Seas Communist Party (SSCP)[29].

Malayan Communist Party (MCP) was introduced to Malaya by outlanders. Among their early leaders including Tan Malaka, a Comintern agent from Indonesia, and a Vietnamese, Ho Chi Minh. MCP has been sponsored and trained by the Communist Party of China (CPC). Their loyalty was to their home country which is China[30].

The loyalty of the Chinese community to the Communist Party of China (CPC) was so strong. This was evidenced when they did not respond to the local government’s call to fight against the communists for the reason that they were loyal to their families and tribes rather than to the nation. This confirmed the Malay suspicion that the Chinese were not loyal to Malaya[31]. The government’s attempt to attract the Chinese to joint defend the country against the communist was unsuccessful when only 200 Chinese youth joined voluntarily. The main reason behind their refusal to oppose the communists was because they never consider themselves as part of the Malaya residents, and it was not worthwhile to represent the “lower-caste-group”, The Malays[32].

In the Malayan Union issue, the Chinese showed maximum support especially in the aspect of citizenship as it benefited them even though they were expecting more advantages[33]. As reported in one of the Chinese newspaper (Sin Chew Jit Poh), the Chinese questioned the reliability and appropriateness of the sultan as the appointed individual consulting the British. They claimed that the Sultan represents only the Malay and has no right to represent the Chinese[34].

Education and Culture

Chinese schools are one of the soft power strategies (power-building through a very subtle method) in spreading the Chinese political influence over their colonies. Through historical research, evidently shows the fact of the existence of China influence on the Chinese education system in Malaysia. In 1891-1911 AD, Chinese schools were used as a propaganda weapon by the Manchu kingdom. In Malaya, the first Modern Chinese School established is the Chung Hwa School in Penang. This school was founded by one of the Qing government partisan, Chang Phi Shih. The Qing Government, as to maintain their influence in South East Asia, was providing financial support, qualified instructors while closely monitoring the education system. These schools are required to register directly under the Ministry of Education in Peking. From 1901 to 1909, the Qing government assigned a special Royal Commission to visit those schools regularly[35].

During the Chinese revolution phase (1911 – 1941), Chinese schools began to receive the influence of the Kuomintang. In 1929, all Chinese schools and teachers in Malaya were instructed to register with the Department of Education in Nanjing. Textbooks and education syllabus were taken all the way from China and was designed in such a way to support Sun Yat Sen’s revolutionary struggle.  Modern Chinese Schools became one of the channels to gain support from the Chinese in Malaya to support the transformation process of China by the Kuomintang[36].

If we study the long history, since the beginning, the establishment of Chinese schools has always aimed to lead and guide the agenda of the Chinese nation. Lee Ting Hui, in an article titled “Chinese Education in Malaya – Nationalism in the First Chinese Schools”: “Chinese education in Malaya was only a branch of education in China”[37].

The Approaching Third Wave of “Sinicization”

This monograph will focus on a set of data that provides clues to the question of whether “Sinicization” in Malaysia is just a fiction or reality and the extent to which it affects the sovereignty of our country. This book will begin in its first chapter discussing the influence of the Jews in the uprising of China. This is indeed a great premise that is proposed to understand the framework of “Sinicization” on a local or regional basis.

Professor Xu Xin, a Jewish researcher at Nanjing University, in his paper “Jewish Diaspora in China and Their Contributions” mentions that the history of the Jewish diaspora in China is 1000 years old. He divides the migration of Jews to China into two phases, before the modern Chinese era (before 1840 AD) and after the modern Chinese era (after 1840 AD). The year 1840 was chosen when China lost to the British in the Candu war, which brought to the sealed of the Nanxing agreement.

This has allowed thousands of Chinese diaspora (estimated around forty thousand people) coming to China. Professor Xu Xin divides this process into three waves. The first wave is pioneered by the Sepheradi Jewish group, originated from Baghdad and India. They then reside in Shanghai and Hong Kong. The second wave by the Ashkenazi Jewish group which came from Russia residing in Harbin before migrating to Shanghai and the third wave is by the Central Europe’s Jewish groups who escaped the Holocaust in German and Austria.

The massive influx of Jews to China has paved up ways for them to develop a strong influence there; in economic and political aspect. The clout can be seen even more significant after the modern China era (1840 AD). Besides, historical fact also showed how the influential Jewish Families like Sasoon, Hardoon, Rothschild and Rockefeller contributed to the rise of China. Almost certainly, the rise of China in this century to some extent helped by Jews. In a book written by Dr. Shalom Solomon Wald entitled “China and the Jewish People, Old Civilizations in a New Era” explains further on the role to be played by China in determining the fate of the Jewish in this century. It is seen to be very important in understanding the dynamics of world power movement, from west to the east.

The second chapter will be looking into the One Belt One Road project (OBOR). Whether or not this project is an agenda of China to be the new world power by proposing “Sinicization” tune around the world? To find the answer to the question, analysis will be based on the political ideas and philosophy that underpin China’s politics today. OBOR project is one of the strategies used by Xi Jinping in relinquishing the wish of “China Dream” in becoming the new world power.

By the year 2021, the China’s average income (GDP) is expected to double from China’s GDP in 2010. The idea is to build a rich society (Xiaokang shehui). The second goal of the project is to fulfill the dream of China (Zhongguo Meng) regain the glory of the Chinese nation as a “Middle Kingdom” (Zhonghua minzu weida fuxing) which is the axis of the world’s power.

The next highlight is on how diplomatic, economic and security policies are translated through the existence of institutions that fund and preserve the running of OBOR projects around the world, such as the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and Silk Road Fund.

The subsequent chapters illustrate roughly the implementation of OBOR projects around the world, as well as specific case studies in Malaysia. The evaluation was conducted to understand the impact of OBOR projects on the aspect of economy, culture, demography, politics and security.

The third chapter will focus on OBOR as a strategy to dominate the world’s economy and resources. This is based on observations of China’s investment projects that have been, are and will be running around the globe. Appropriate attention is given to OBOR projects in Malaysia. Writings in this chapter will include some brief analysis and conclusions based on Malaysia’s OBOR projects. This summarization will be further divided by region. The Northern region includes the state of Perlis, Kedah, Penang and Perak. The central region states include Selangor and Kuala Lumpur. South Region refers to the states of Johor, Negeri Sembilan and Melaka. The East Coast covers states of Pahang, Kelantan and Terengganu. Finally, East Malaysia encompassing the states of Sabah and Sarawak.

Chapter four examines on how China uses the Chinese diaspora in Malaysia as a method to expand the activities of “Sinicization” in Malaysia. The analysis is based on the networks that exist between the Chinese government, through the Communist Party of China and the Chinese Associations, Chinese Political Parties, as well as official bodies in Malaysia. Are they being used as the main target of China? This chapter will address the question whether the support, training and initiatives that have been provided either in the form of economy, education, culture, media and politics are China’s new approach to win over the Chinese ethnic in Malaysia?

In the last chapter, the discussion focused on how far “Sinicization” project through OBOR affects China’s military strategy in the world and Malaysia in particular. President Xi Jinping in a statement in April 2013 said the China’s navy will have to work hard to be “the strongest military force” (qiangjungmeng). In recent decades, the international profile of the China People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has significantly increased. The increase is due to the military diplomacy strategy which designed to support the strategic ambitions of China on the world, especially in the South China Sea issue  and One Belt One Road (OBOR).

According to the Chinese Military Diplomacy Report 2003-2016, the strategic and operational division has been carried out to support this objective. Strategically, diplomacy is used to broaden the goals of the Communist Party of China’s external relation. This is done by increasing the range of military diplomacy activities such as meetings and senior management’s visits, international military exercises, official visit to the harbor, dialogue and peaceful military operations. Operationally, with the objective of winning a war if applicable, various activities have been conducted such as surveillance operation, exchange of technologies and expertise in military action.

Data from the Chinese Military Diplomacy report (2003- 2016) shows that China’s military activity during those years (around 12 years) was much concentrated in Asia. Looking at a smaller scale, Southeast Asian recorded the highest percentage of military activities by 54.3% compared to other Asian regions. It appears that China is in the midst of a strategy to position their troops in the OBOR project investment areas. The closest example is the construction of China’s latest military port in Djibouti, which is located near the Strait of Bab el Mandeb, which was built to protect their interests (oil) from the Middle East. Similarly, in the case of the South China Sea dispute. China shows aggressive demands by demanding the area in the Nine-Break Lines as their territory. In a report released in the Financial Times entitled “Chinese purchase of overseas ports top $ 20 billion in past year”, CSIS analysts mention that strategically, port ownership opens up space to non-commercial activities such as center of military activity and surveillance.

In conclusion, this monograph is an observation and collections of initial data on “Sinicization” in Malaysia and around the world. This effort calls for more extensive research to be conducted in a way to measure the extent of implications in the future. What precautions can we take? Is this a speculation or cyclical pattern that we must look carefully into? Hopefully, this preliminary finding can trigger the awareness and urgency to explore even more under the topic for the betterment of the whole society.


Asyraf Farique
Chief Editor Sinicization of Malaysia.

[1] Zottoli, B. A. (2011). Reconceptualizing Southern Vietnamese History from the 15th to 18th Centuries: Competition along the Coasts from Guangdong to Cambodia. Lansing: University of Michigan.

[2] Musa, M. Z. (2012). Melayu Campa. In A. L. Bakar, Gagasan Melayu Serumpun (pp. 119-156). Tanjong Malim: Institut Peradaban Melayu Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Bougas, W. A. (1994). The Kingdom of Patani: Between Thai and Malay Mandala.Bangi: Institut Alam dan Tamadun Melayu, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

[5] Tufo, M. V. Del. (1947). Malaya: Reports on the 1947 cencus of population.

[6] Emerson, R. (1974). Malaysia: Satu Pengkajian dalam Pemerintahan Sechara Langsung dan Tidak Langsung. (Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, Ed.). Kuala Lumpur.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Gomez, E. T., & Jomo K. S. (1999). Malaysia’s political economy : politics, patronage and profits. Cambridge University Press.

[10] Teck Ghee Lim. (1977). Peasants and their agricultural economy in colonial Malaya, 1874-1941. Oxford University Press.

[11] Stenson, M. R. (1980). Class, race, and colonialism in West Malaysia : the Indian case. University of Queensland Press.

[12] Jomo K. S. (1986). A question of class: capital, the state, and uneven development in Malaya. Singapore ; New York: Oxford University Press.

[13] Stenson, M. R. (1980). Class, race, and colonialism in West Malaysia : the Indian case. University of Queensland Press.

[14] Muhammed, A. K. (2017). Antara Dua Darjat: Agihan Pendapatan di Malaysia (Edisi Bahasa Melayu – The Colour of Inequality). Bangi: Dubook Press

[15] Collin, E. R. A. (1997). Divide and rule : the roots of race relations in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: INSAN.

[16] Buyong Haji Adil. (1981). Sejarah Selangor. (D. B. D. Pustaka, Ed.). Kuala Lumpur.

[17] Bishop, I. L. B. (1883). The Golden Chersonese And The Way Thither. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.

[18] Azmi Arifin. (2012). Perak Disturbances 1871-75: British Colonialism, The Chinese Secret Societies And The Malay Rulers 1. Jebat: Malaysian Journal of History, Politics & Strategic Studies, 39(July), 51–74.

[19] Comber, L. (1956). Chinese Secret Society in Malaya : An introduction. Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, 5.

[20] Ibid.

[21] Blythe, W. (1969). Impact of Chinese Secret Societies in Malaya: A Historical Study. Oxford University Press.

[22] Skinner, G. W., & Purcell, V. (1952). The Chinese in Southeast Asia. The Far Eastern Quarterly, 11(2), 268.

[23] Newbold, T. J. and Wilson, F. W. (1841). The Chinese secret Triad Society of the Tien-ti-huih. Journal of Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

[24] Blythe, W. (1969). Impact of Chinese Secret Societies in Malaya: A Historical Study. Oxford University Press.

[25] To, L. L. (1987). The 1911 Revolution: The Chinese in British and Dutch Southeast Asia. Heinemann Asia.

[26] Ibid.

[27] Charles E., S. (2010). The Formative Years of Malaysian Politics.Xlibris.

[28] McKenna, C. F. (1990). The Kuomintang Movement in British Malaya 1912–1949. University of Hawaii Press.

[29] Cheah, B. K. (2003). Red Star Over Malaya: Resistance and Social Conflict During and After the Japanese Occupation of Malaya, 1941-1946. NUS Press.

[30] Muhammed, A. K. (2017). Antara Dua Darjat: Agihan Pendapatan di Malaysia (Edisi Bahasa Melayu – The Colour of Inequality). Bangi: Dubook Press.

[31] Helen, T. (2007). From Ketuanan Melayu to Bangsa Malaysia?: a study of national integration and identity in West Malaysia.

[32] Council, N. O. (1969). The May 13 Tragedy: A report. Kuala Lumpur.

[33] Skinner, G. W., & Purcell, V. (1952). The Chinese in Southeast Asia. The Far Eastern Quarterly, 11(2), 268.

[34] Ibid.

[35] Sua, T. Y. (2014). Pendidikan Cina di Malaysia: Sejarah Politik dan Gerakan Perjuangan.Penerbit USM.

[36] Ibid.

[37] To, L. L. (1987). The 1911 Revolution: The Chinese in British and Dutch Southeast Asia. Heinemann Asia.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Post

Laut China Selatan – China vs AS

Next Post

America retreats from Syria?

Related Posts
Skip to content