Nationalism should not be exclusive

20 March 2008 0745 hrs (SST)
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/analysis/view/336173/1/.html

SINGAPORE: The price of global city status is an enlarging overseas Singaporean community, which has profound repercussions for a nation-state of only 3.5 million citizens and Permanent Residents (PRs).

According to recent revelations, the country loses about 1,000 educated Singaporeans each year. In addition, there are an estimated 150,000 Singaporeans working or studying abroad, a good slice of whom will not be returning.

The inescapable truth is that the overseas Singaporean community, per capita, is one of the highest in the world and will get bigger.

So, the Singapore government has imported foreign workers, not just to replace departing Singaporeans, but also to meet industry demands.

By offering a conducive environment for work, family, arts consumption and the odd topless cabaret, the idea is to turn the little island into one giant Baskin Robbins — you are bound to find a flavour you like.

Singapore welcomed 14,600 new citizens last year, a 10-per-cent increase from 2006. To put it in perspective, 2001 to 2004 saw an average of 8,000 new citizens per year. Applications for PR status have also been increasing. In the first nine months of last year, 46,900 foreigners were granted PR status, compared to a total of 57,300 in 2006.

Quite clearly, the flight of educated Singaporeans, economically speaking, poses no short-term problems for Singapore. For every person who leaves, 14 others come to permanently take his place. As a solutions-oriented approach, the open-door migration policy is a resounding success.

Still, emigrating Singaporeans are framed as a problem, and the government's response has, so far, been either to woo them back or, in the not-too-distant past, to demonise them.

In wooing them back, the government takes a pro-active approach to reach out through organisations like Contact Singapore and the Singapore International Foundation, and with "soft power" vis-à-vis Singaporean-theme festivals in major cities around the world.

This is getting more play with the set-up of the Overseas Singaporean Unit, which is trying to connect the Singapore diaspora through its portal (www.overseassingaporean.sg) and initiatives such as Overseas Singaporean clubs.

When it comes to demonising Singaporeans, labels like "quitters" and people who are "rootless" were at one time bandied about with ease.

If one accepts that this overseas community is here to stay and will grow, then there is a need to re-examine our concept of nationalism in the global city.

Labels like "quitters" are designed to arouse Singaporeans' sense of nationalist indignity. They suggest a betrayal or abandonment, and mobilises nationalist sentiments against the emigrants.

But if we are willing to accept into the national fold PRs who have not yet forsaken their original citizenship, there is no reason to exclude overseas Singaporeans, both of the quitting and rootless variety.

Why embrace PRs who straddle two societies while cold-shouldering Singaporean "quitters" whose memories will always be rooted to this "little red dot"? The time has come to rescue nationalism from exclusivity.

Scholars are already talking about the "long-distance nationalism" of ethnic and religious diasporas that still hold political and cultural influence over their country of origin from afar.

Perhaps, Singaporeans should start thinking of a "situational nationalism" that accepts that nationalist sentiments are ephemeral.

A situational nationalism describes how nationalist sentiments are dynamic, never constant, and articulated as the subjective experience of the individual.

For example, it describes how Singaporeans overseas tend to be more patriotic than those in Singapore. It describes how this patriotism fades when they return and fall into the rhythm of local life. It accommodates PRs who proclaim a great fondness for Singapore without wanting to give up their citizenship.

Until the exclusivity and authorship of nationalism can be fragmented, we will find it hard to accept new citizens.

Foreigners take up citizenship not because they love the land (or lack of) or because of childhood memories, but because they love the green environment, the political stability, the economic opportunities and the family-friendly conditions. New citizens love the "Singapore System", while Singaporeans born and bred have more intimate ties to the land. To prevent this from being a discriminating factor, the exclusivity of nationalism has to be eradicated.

Situational nationalism also addresses the subjective interpretation of national events. For example, the National Day Parade can fill some Singaporeans with unbearable pride and others with utter cynicism.

Situational nationalism does not make you feel guilty for tuning out the ceremonial fireworks and other grand displays of public affection for the nation.

Situational nationalism is the most democratic form of nationalism because it is subjective and refuses to adhere to definitions by governments and the cultural elite.

It is the only way Singapore emigrants may remain Singaporeans and new Singaporeans can become nationalists.

The writer is a research fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.

- TODAY/so

Wind of change in Malaysia

The Malaysian people have chosen. http://elizabethwong.wordpress.com/

I am disappointed that our fellow Singaporean citizens however have fallen asleep. Instead of asking more questions about important issues like implementing annuities, Advanced Medical Directive and the great (unbelievable) escape of Mas Selamat, the population has decided to 'buzz' a little and then shut up again.

Say NO to CPF 60k and comulsory annuity

http://www.petitiononline.com/annuity/petition.html

Robbery conducted in broad daylight

A robbery took place in broad daylight in a sunny island on the southern tip of a peninsula. As a result, many persons on the scene developed bizzare behaviour.


According to the local law enforcers, many eye-witnesses were present but no one intervened or help the victims. 66% of the eye-witnesses claim that they had no idea but cheered the crime anyway. The rest felt helpless and resorted to wearing black to mark their shame.

Many present at the scene of crime suffered from post-trauma illusions after witnessing the incident. According to doctors, patients admitted at a local hospital could not recall the details of the incident. Many arrived penniless and could not remember when they lost their money. After interviewing the patients, a panel of experts arrived at the conclusion that the patients displayed the following symptoms:

• Could not recall whether they were victim or onlooker.


• Did not remember why their money was missing.


• Had the distinct impression that the robber(s) was someone familar but could not remember who.


• Held the robber(s) in awe and agreed that he was from an exceptional family.


• Had the impression that there might be more that one robber. One was an old man with a rat-like demeanour and a younger man in a pink shirt.


• Empathised with the robber(s) and agreed that the crime was justified.

Post-trauma IQ test on the patients (many were highly educated individuals holding local degrees and worked in MNCs) suggest all were short on the CS (common sense) quotient.

After release from the hospital, observers claim that many developed sheep-like attributes that including excessive head-nodding and requesting for haircut.

Govt's call for greater civic role has clear limits

ST Forum > Story
Sep 1, 2007
Govt's call for greater civic role has clear limits

I REFER to the reports on the parliamentary sitting on Aug 27. The responses of both Minister of State for Education Lui Tuck Yew and Senior Minister of State (Law and Home Affairs) Ho Peng Kee suggest that the Government's calls for greater diversity and inclusiveness stop short of allowing genuine political debate and contestation.

Rear-Admiral (NS) Lui's reply to questions on why the Ministry of Education (MOE) rejected playwright Alfian Sa'at as a relief teacher was disappointing. While he may have been right to say that Parliament is not the right forum to discuss the personnel issues of any one individual, for him to suggest that Mr Alfian 'engage MOE directly' is inappropriate.

Anyone who has followed the online discussion on this knows that MOE has consistently refused to give Mr Alfian the real reason for its decision.

Unlike most developed democracies, Singapore does not have a Freedom to Information Act that requires a government to provide information to individuals who seek it unless doing so is against the public interest.

In the absence of such a legal requirement, our governance system is dependent on individuals and institutions making decisions that can stand up to public scrutiny.

Without external checks on the Government, the virtues of integrity, transparency and objectivity have to be imposed from within and practised by all public officers. If not, what assurance do we have that officials do not make arbitrary decisions, or decisions that serve only narrow party interests rather than the public good?

Associate Professor Ho's reply on why the Workers' Party was not given a permit to hold an outdoor event also stretched the incredulity of thinking Singaporeans.

Even if we gave Prof Ho the benefit of doubt and assumed the worst of Singaporeans - that open-door political events increase the risks of conflict - one must seriously question whether the strategy of avoiding conflict might not stunt society's maturation.

Both responses by the ministers show that the Government's call for greater civic engagement and participation has clear limits.

While the Government subscribes to economic openness and liberalism, its distrust of and discomfort with real political contest means that it will try to keep Singapore politically conservative.

Low Tzer Kai

See you there *080907*

8th September 2007
4pm at Centrepoint Shopping Centre

See you there!

There are of course those who do not want us to speak. I suspect even now,
orders are being shouted into telephones, and men with guns will soon be on
their way. Why? Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation,
words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for
those who will listen, the annunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is
something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice,
intolerance, and depression. And where once you had the freedom to object,
think, and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of
surveillence coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did
this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible
than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if
you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you
did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be?

Corruption of Values

By Grey Steppenwolf
(Letter rejected by ST forum)
http://www.newsintercom.org/index.php?itemid=545

Now that most of the dust from the NKF debacle has settled, most think it is time to forget the whole episode. I think not. The issue at the heart of the whole matter has scarcely been dealt with, and now with our fast-paced mindset, we are thinking of putting it behind us.

The case has been dealt with legally, but the heart of thematter has little to do with law, but with what is right. The former is the letter of the law but the latter is the spirit of the law. The heart of the matter has to do with values. Values drive behavior, and behavior can be judged legally, but the source and crux of the trouble is not behavior but values.

Therefore, I propose a mindset change in the way we perceive corruption. Corruption is now being rigidly defined as a matter of bribes and misuse of public funds. However, the fact that we were outraged by the NFK has little to do with the legalities of corruption but with the corruption of values in an institution using public funds.

If we don't call this perversion of values corruption we can call it decadence, and it is no less reprehensible, and all institutions of public character must be under scrutiny for it. It is an affront to common human decency for public institutions to subvert their values, such that they become bureaucratic self-serving places of decadence.

We need an active vigilant citizenry not afraid to speak up, a mass media not afraid to publish wrong-doing and a government that does care and listen and which investigates all credible reports and not sweep things under the carpet when it is convenient. We have a long way to go on all threeaspects.

Grey Steppenwolf
greysteppenwolf[at]yahoo[dot]com

Compulsory Annuities

Dear Singapore Government,

I protest. You want more money? Tell us where our CPF is.

Human live gone like this and kids made motherless

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCr1ZoC_qYE&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fsingaporemind%2Eblogspot%2Ecom%2F

While our ministers are collecting top pay and dancing hip hop, it seems that all the bureacracy has made Singapore a place with no heartware.