Culturally diverse countries face far greater challenges in nation-building than homogeneous societies. Malaysia and Singapore, both multicultural in composition, had embarked on vastly different paths. While Malaysia chose affirmative action along racial lines, Singapore opted for meritocracy that gave every citizen a fair go regardless of ethnicity. Some scholars even consider the Malaysian model of multiculturalism a form of apartheid. Malays as the dominant race which has grown to almost half the population, enjoy preferential treatment in university admission, public service jobs, grants for business ventures and stock options. The main justifications being the Malays are "sons of the soil" (which is not entirely true given they came from southern China earlier than the Chinese and Indian settlers) and that the Malays lag behind the other races (another fallacy as there are poor non-Malays too). Discriminatory policies in Malaysia created a sense of dependency among the Malay community. Though this reliance mentality is also evident in the cases of handouts to blacks in the US and aborigines in Australia, none can be compared with the all encompassing race-based policies in Malaysia. Hence, a Malay who does well would not gain the same respect as one would confer to other races. Unfortunately, the aims of uplifting the poor Malays has not been achieved after more than three decades of implementing the discriminatory New Economic Policy by the Malaysian government. The wealth is increasingly concentrated in the hands of the Malay elite and their cronies while the majority of the Malays are still trapped in poverty with piecemeal monetary help to placate them. The country's interest is clearly at stake. The human resource shortage in Malaysia has been exacerbated by the incessant brain drain of educated ethnic Chinese, Indian and Eurasian Malaysians migrating to greener pastures in Asia, Australia and US. On the other hand, Singapore has strived to achieve equality for all races with institutional, constitutional and legal safeguards. Being a small nation struggling for economic survival in a region plagued by political instability in the 1960s, no time and resources could afford to be wasted. Singapore detractors point to the elitism of meritocracy. However, in real life there is no perfect political system that can eradicate even the subtlest forms of discrimination. At least, minority rights in Singapore are protected by law in contrast to Malaysia, where none exists. Malays in Singapore are not forgotten as they are given free education up to tertiary level if they could make the grade. There are some social programs to help the underachievers be they Malays or other races from poor backgrounds. Instead of handouts, the Singapore government entices the poor to use education as a means of social and economic advancement. Singapore sought to integrate the diverse ethnicities through a common and neutral language English while allowing the use of Malay, Chinese, Tamil as official languages in notices and announcements alongside each other. Its goals are international rather than inward looking. It is apparent which of the above reflects a fairer multicultural system. Malaysia may showcase all the trappings of a progressive economy with modern infrastructure symbolized by the Petronas twin towers, airport, hi-tech industries and affluent living standards. However, in practice, it is still an underdeveloped society where injustice and inequality are rife. Despite being perceived as a moderate Muslim state by many western countries, the discriminatory policies in Malaysia have in recent years emboldened radical Muslims to agitate for stronger shariah laws. Unless concrete actions are taken to institutionalize equality for all races, Malaysia will have to live with limited secondary options that compromise on standards and impede its progress.