Kuala Lumpur / The Contested city
Kuala Lumpur in 1984
Malaysia is a major Southeast Asian and East Asian countries in its low population density, is unique. Kuala Lumpur is the same to its low urban density is unique. China is also distinctive, but not unique in its retention of the rural population and lifestyle. Although there has been a lot of rural-urban migration, which is mainly in the satellite city of Kuala Lumpur. Other cities grew more slowly in rural areas, wages still exists. Strong rural to urban migration in China in the 1950s and 1960s, was forced to move to a new link countryside, so by 1969, Kuala Lumpur almost entirely sinicisation might have been predicted. Decline in Chinese rural residents have had to reduce the flow of influence, while the Malays movement in the city increased. Population and space debris of their national identity also followed the history of the city. For such disconnected ethnicity in the 1980s. However, citation analysis, showed a consistent trend to increase in ethnic diversity of Kuala Lumpur from 1891 to 1970, including in the intercensal periods 1947-57 and 1957-70. The only period when it did not increase was during the economic crisis years of 1921-31. “Within the city , however, ethnic segregation remained Based on data from the 1970 census -. thus presumably picturing the city of the 1969 riots – and aggregated at an enumeration-block level, only 7.3 per cent of Kuala Lumpur’s 997 EBs were racially “integrated “.Within the context of that segregation, however, it seems that the ethnically more mixed middle- and upper-income areas were expanding in that era. It also seems that class was becoming more salient in the fracturing of the society and that in a few places ethnic distancing was breaking down. Much of the increasing diversity was related to Malay rural-urban migration, the growth in middle- and upper-income Malays, and in those with aspirations and expectations to join such strata related to the areas of employment newly opened to then.