Some governments built unity around the culture of the majority. This could create a strong identity, but minorities often felt shut out.
In a dominant culture approach, the state promotes the language, religion and customs of the largest group as the national culture. Minorities are expected to adopt it.
Thailand made the Thai language and Buddhism central to national identity. Chinese residents were pressed to take Thai names and attend Thai-language schools, and most assimilated. Malay Muslims in the south resisted, and a separatist movement grew.
In Burma, U Nu made Buddhism the state religion in 1961. Christian Kachin and other minorities saw this as forcing Burman culture on them, and the Kachin rebellion spread.
Under Suharto, Indonesia banned Chinese-language schools, publications and public festivals, and pressed Chinese Indonesians to take Indonesian names. Yet anti-Chinese violence returned in May 1998.
Malaysia gave Malay culture and the Malay language a special place. Malay became the sole national language in 1967, and the National Culture Policy of 1971 was based on Malay culture and Islam. Many Chinese and Indians felt like second-class citizens.
- Thailand
- Thai language, Buddhism and the monarchy at the centre.
- Burma, 1961
- Buddhism made the state religion.
- Malaysia
- Malay the sole national language from 1967.
Worked example: Judging the dominant culture approach
Did it unite or divide?
- Thailand: the Chinese assimilated; southern Malays resisted.
- Burma: forcing Burman culture fuelled ethnic wars.
- Indonesia: assimilation did not end anti-Chinese violence.
- Judgement: it united willing groups but alienated those who saw it as a threat.
Watch out for this
The dominant culture approach always failed.
It worked with groups willing to assimilate, such as many Chinese in Thailand. It failed where minorities had a strong separate identity, such as the Malay Muslims of southern Thailand.
Check your understanding
Why did Burma's 1961 state religion law worsen divisions?
- Christian and other minorities saw it as forcing a Burman Buddhist identity on them.
- It banned Buddhism.
- It gave minorities independence.