The current incident when a 60 year old Chinese man chided a mixed Indian Filipino for marrying a Chinese woman is now the talk of the town. Racism in Singapore has been elevated a notch higher with all those that wanted to be heard taking out their biggest loudspeakers to say their piece. Racism is so serious in Singapore that several ministers must make known their stand or be seen to condone such a racist act. I wonder if they would say anything about people being beaten, violence, because of race?
Never mind, just say say only. Just make sure it sounds politically correct to whatever audience they wanted their message to be heard.
In any multi racial society, there are bound to be racism, many are pure animal instinct like a dog and cat relationship but the expression is just milder in form. Can racism be avoided, I think this is very difficult. The only thing to hope for is to minimise the outburst, clamp down on violence, stop it from spreading and have laws to criminalise such acts. At the same time, stop blowing your racism horns. The more and louder the horn is used, it is not going to help but to stir more anger and hate, like adding fuel to fire.
Theoretically, it may be a good balance for a country to have about equal numbers in racial composition, say if 4 major races, each has 25% of the population...and 4 heads of state, four of everything. Mathematically very balanced and should be fair to all. In really this is a hot potato, a tinder box waiting to explode. Any country with such a racial mix is going to be very very unstable.
In practical terms, a more stable multi racial country is likely to have a large majority and a much smaller minority and with the majority being benevolent and magnanimous to the minorities. Singapore used to be in this happy formula in the past, a magnanimous majority with plenty of room and generosity to share with the minorities, and inter racial problem can be kept from blowing up.
The USA is a good example to apply this formula and for the world to learn. Between the Europeans and the native Americans, there is a clear majority against a practically non existence minority, terminated through years of massacres and genocides. The majority became so small, almost non existent that they could be ignored and dumped in some uninhabitable land and forgotten. The majority needs not even have to be generous or magnanimous, just treat the native American minorities as transparent and forgotten. This balance is very stable. The minorities would be so insignificant that they know their fate and nothing they do would change anything.
Another combination in the US is the whites versus the blacks, a fairly large black minority coexisting together in an uncomfortable existence. The blacks are large enough to be in the face of the whites wherever they go. The whites were benevolent on paper, after the abolishment of slavery, but not in real life. The blacks were constantly discriminated because of race and were only kept in place by a white biased govt and law enforcing institutions that would not allow the blacks to raise their voice too loudly. It is a forced balance with a white majority literally sitting on the back of the blacks with little resistance. It does not fit the ideal model of a magnanimous and benevolent majority being kind and sharing with the minorities.
The closest one could get to a peaceful balance is in East Asia, in China, Japan and Korea when the absolute majority could be generous and magnanimous to the small minorities and both co exist without imposing on one another, and the minorities given some added privileges as minorities.
What kind of combination is Singapore in today and where is it heading? Is the balance going to be unbalanced or balanced in the future, leading to more outbreaks of racial intolerance and violence? An ideal balance on paper is different from a functional balance in reality. It is like the evil Americans everywhere talking about the balance of power in the world and how it is being threatened by China, Russia or Iran and North Korea. The ideal balance of power to the evil Americans is one where they own all the guns, all the nuclear weapons and no one else should have any to upset them, and they being overwhelmingly powerful, could whack any country they like without anyone being able to hit back.
The Americans would never accept a balance of power where China or Russia or any country could be as powerful as them, ie parity in the possession of weapons and unclear arsenal. That is not balanced to the Americans, a very unstable balance. They are now very unhappy as they are no longer in a position of unchallenged superiority and could do anything they want, to whack anyone they want, to call the shot and everyone must obey.
Racial balance of a country is a very sensitive balance and only fools would meddle with it to make it worse while thinking or unthinkingly thinking they are doing the right thing, to achieve a right balance. What is right on paper is dangerously wrong in the real world.
Turn on your loudspeakers and blare. The louder the better, to denounce everything as racism and racism would disappear. Twits.
10 comments:
Our clinical analysis of Singapore over the past 6 decades reveal that original true blue Singaporeans were all along very tolerant of each other of different races. We play plastic football on HDB void decks together, go to school together, catch spiders in the fields together, catch guppies in big longkangs together, live happily as neighbours with each other and exchange goodies during our yearly new-year celebrations.
The rot started after 2004 when the population size of 4.0 million consisting of 3.5 million original Singaporeans and 0.5 million permanent residents was increased abruptly to a total population size of 5.7 million today with the addition of another 1.7 million foreigners and many new citizens who've never lived with other races together.
So who to blame for the current rise in racism in Singapore? - they're the new citizens, the foreigners, and last but not least, the PAP elites whose open-door FT policies diluted the Singaporean identity.
"A case of the pot calling the kettle black" - TRE post by Foong Swee Fong
It’s a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
On the one hand, the Chinese man feels strongly against an Indian man courting a woman of his race, ie, Chinese. On the other hand, many people, supposedly the majority, as well as the government, feel strongly against the Chinese man for his racist instincts.
But did the Chinese man harm the supposed victim? All he did was tell him that the Chinese don’t like him courting a Chinese girl, and he showed great restraint in expressing an opinion he obviously feel strongly about.
However, the Indian man, in posting the video and calling on netizens to make the Chinese man “famous”, has done the latter harm. For one, the Chinese man’s reputation has taken a beating, he will be subjected to public scrutiny and condemnation and finally, he may lose his job.
So, who is the victim here?
I am all for inter-racial relationships, but I would not condemn a person who is against it. Live and let live, after all, he only spoke his mind and did not hurt anyone. If the Indian man did not like what he heard, he could give the Chinese man a piece of his mind and walk off; end of story.
The Chinese man is not tolerant, but neither is the Indian man, as well as all who condemn or take action against the Chinese man.
Being free to voice our opinion is a fundamental human right. I am not saying spreading lies or verbally bullying or taunting someone, I am saying we should all be free to express our opinions. And if we believe in that, then we should believe in that especially if someone expresses an opinion that is deeply offensive to us. Otherwise, we are just hypocrites.
Anon 10:12 fully agree with what you said. all this race thingy happen because of the pappy..since lky time..where he advocate highly educated people to marry among themselves, malay not trusted in giving them access to all military position. have special school for so call gifted student (what have all these students contributed to the country after all those years of special education??)
having different class of hospital bed..(illness don;t care whether you are rich or poor)..then come the import of million of foreigner who don;t buy in to the racial harmony of our earlier years..lastly..politician who jump in at every opportunity to make a preach about racism...sad
racism will be around no matter what the gov do.. just live and let live with tolerance..
If you are a Chinese, an Indian,a Malay or any other race, I am
sure you are proud and happy for being such because it is only natural
and you would not want to have it any other way. So if I want a life
partner I would naturally choose one of my kind. No one should say I am racist unless I go out of my way just to court someone of another race.
In that case it would set people's minds wondering what is the real reason
behind my choice.
Ya, noticed no PAP MP or minister would say anything to condemn the act whenever angmoh FT hammered Singaporean. Why huh ?
I do not agree with what the Chinese man did but I agree that he is the victim. The vindictiveness and self righteousness of the Indian man and his making a mountain out of a mole hill is disgusting. Would Shanmugam be so quick to jump up and condemn if it had been an Indian man berating a Chinese man?
Did anyone condemn the Malay man that beat up the Chinese man in the train?
In this case everyone in politics, opposition camp also, must come out to make a stand.
Who is the bigger racist? Who is the victim?
DOUBLE STANDARDS !!
The biggest racist leaders in Singapore are the ones that said Singapore is not ready for an Indian Prime Minister.
Why then reserve a President Seat for a Malay?
Why in the past there are non-Chinese Presidents?
The man was exercising his personal opinion on an Indian-Chinese couple and ST has been goning overboard in hyping this as a horrendous racist incident with multiple articles and even featuring Chindian couples in its report. ST even vox the man by bringing up a former muslim student of his accusing him of maligning her faith. What I read from the article he was having a discussion about Islam with her. Insensitive some may feel these incidents are but why does ST need to frame these as racial and religious hates ?
Can't anyone talk openly and sincerely about these issues without being attacked as a racist? Yes, he was obnoxious and insensitive but just that.
Also who has been the provocative one? That Chindian couple videoing the whole confrontation and uploaded on social media to blow up the issue rather than telling him so STFU, none of his business and just walk away? Now even the higher up has weighed in and chastised the man as if its an incident in comparison with the NZ Christchurch mosque attack.
Post a Comment