The Malay Reservation Enactment 1913 and the padi farmers trapped in poverty
Ahmad Faezal uses AI to bring to life the story of Malay padi farmers in 1934, and argues that British policy made sure they stayed poor.
In an article in The Patriots on 13 June 2023, Ahmad Faezal takes readers "back" to 1934 in an unusual way: he uses the AI tool Midjourney to picture the lives of Malay padi farmers in the colonial era. He also uses AI to colourise real photographs from Kedah of that period.
Kesum's story
To tell this history, Ahmad Faezal created a character called Kesum, a widow forced to work in the padi field even though she did not like the work. Her husband had died, leaving debts, and their padi land had been put up as collateral. In the writer's story, Kesum's husband was always under pressure and short of sleep from worrying about the debt, until one day he collapsed and never got up again. If the debt was not paid, the land, the only inheritance for her child, would be lost.
Kesum is an imagined character. But according to the writer, her fate represents that of many Malay women of her time.
An enactment that looked protective
To explain why so many padi farmers were caught in debt, Ahmad Faezal points to the Malay Land Reservation Enactment 1913 (Enakmen Tanah Rizab Melayu). According to him:
| Fact | As stated by the writer |
|---|---|
| Selangor, 1909 | More than 1,500 plots of land mortgaged |
| Perak | 90% of Malay land mortgaged |
| Official aim of the enactment | Stop Malay land falling into the hands of other races |
On paper, the British appeared to be protecting the Malays. Ahmad Faezal calls it benevolent colonization: generous on the surface, but restrictive in reality.
Stuck in the padi fields
The enactment gave the Resident the power to set aside certain areas for padi. At a time when rubber prices were soaring, according to the writer, Malay padi farmers were not allowed to switch industries. They were tied to subsistence farming.
The result was a glut of rice. Under the law of supply and demand, prices fell. Padi farmers took the losses, while the British got a cheap supply of rice without having to import it from Siam. Padi was not profitable, the farmers fell into debt, and in the end the land was lost.
Ahmad Faezal also stresses that although the moneylenders were often Malays themselves, the real cause was the colonial system. He sums it up like this: the British put rubber and tin first, and the Malays were given the job of growing food for the miners and rubber tappers. According to him, the British only changed their approach after the Second World War.
Ahmad Faezal ends his piece with a promise to depict more of the history of British colonial rule, because to him the suffering of our grandparents and ancestors must keep being told.
The full article, including the images he generated and colourised with AI, is on The Patriots.
Pasukan editorial odyc
