In death, I exist

On Descartes’ body-subject dichotomy:

In the Cartesian sense, the human body is simply meat or corpse, and its the mind that makes the body an entity that is being thought of as “alive”.. And the mind is, as we come to know,is  a “site” where we come to get our sense of Self.. The act of constant self-communication through language (the all- powerful social tool) gives us this conception.. Inter-subjectivity then comes into play .. As it is, reality exists insofar as one conceives it to be.. And that reality, in all its objectivity, is arbitrary.. (Read: Social Construction of Reality)

In effect, what we come to know as objective is rather the result of inter-subjectivity.. I see a tree (signifier) and know that it is a tree.. However, that signifier (in objective reality) would not stand if you do not see it as a tree also (similar to what I have in my mind).. That being said, what then is reality? Does it really exist? In the same vein, does the Self really exist, when reality is in itself, doubtful? It casts a considerable doubt on us “being alive”.. Thus, in order to “be dead”, we have to “be alive” in the first place.. But, as I have already discussed, since reality and the Self is pretty much doubtful, then “death” can also be considered as a doubtful phenomenon.. I ask myself: How do I know that I’m “alive” now, and not “dead”? What if “death” is, by default, the meaning of being “alive”, and vice-versa? After all,  ”we have no alibis in existence.”

Pink buds: The “abominable gays”

Hong Lim Park turns pink

Sat, May 16, 2009
The Straits Times

By Nur Dianah Suhaimi

THE greens at Hong Lim Park were awashed in pink on Saturday when nearly 500 people turned up to participate in Singapore’s first ever outdoor gay protest.

Pink Dot Sg, a gay interest group, organised the event.

The group was lobbying for a ‘more inclusive Singapore’ as well as the freedom to love, regardless of sexual orientation. (taken from www.asiaone.com on 16/05/09)

The intense debates on the repeal of Code 377A (of which the State maintained its stand) reminds us of how homosexuality (or “alternative lifestyles”) is still being frowned upon in a relatively “straight” society. In the light of such constraints, the most surprising fact is that this event was actually given the “green light” to proceed. I make my stand clear: I am NOT an advocate of the alternative lifestyle, nor do I oppose it. As members of the human race, everyone has the right to choose the path that one feels one should take. To quote from Edward Sapir: “Genuine culture is one that gives the individual a sense of spiritual mastery.”

In this sense, if one feels that the alternative lifestyle appeals to his/her psyche, it is genuine beyond the shadow of a doubt. Proponents argue that alternative lifestyles erodes the values of society; values derived from the incredible consensus of individuals living within any societal context from time immemorial. However, as other scholars, notably Michel Foucault, Antonio Gramsci and Pierre Bourdieu have noted, the seemingly “unquestioned truths” that we know of today are remnants of the all powerful discourse, language being the most effective vehicle  to disseminate these “truths” (or what Foucault referred to as the Power of Discourse). In this respect, what then is the extent to which these “truths” (that homosexuality is a deviation from normalcy, or in short, “abnormal”) are really “truths”? Reality, in all its objectivity, is really arbitrary. It exists insofar as one perceives it to be existent. The reality that one perceives are merely products of discourse and social construction (Read: Berger and Luckmann: The Social Construction of Reality). Durkheim, in his article “The Normality of Crime”, has noted how normality is itself a relative term. In order for normality to exist, there is a need for the existence of its antonym: abnormality. Again, the way in which normality is derived from is through the social construction of reality. In other words, normality is merely a constructed truth, disseminated through the everyday discourse.

With reference to the topic of alternative lifestyles, gender and sex are not the sources, but rather, the products of social interation and discourse. Judith Butler argued extensively on this, to the extent that the sexed bodies are products of discourse. In this sense, where there exist gender ambiguity, the issue at hand is not on the ambiguity as such, but rather on the existing discourse (in this case: males/females and masculinity/femininity dichotomy). As discussed in the preceding paragraph, the normality of  gender and sex, in this respect, are constructed truths, thus making followers of alternative lifestyles, deviants. But whose to say that the mainstream rhetoric is “the only truth” and that any deviations are, in this sense,wrong? It is precisely due to the default cognitive framework of today’s society, which perpetuates mainstream school of thoughts and ideologies, that deviations are thus seen as incorrect/”untruths”.

Along a similar vein, Gellner argued on the supposed divide between “primitive” and modern modes of consciousness. The former is thought of as “primitive” as a result of the malevolent translations done by individuals whose modes of consciousness are invigourated with ideologies of modernity and rationality. Either way (“primitive” or otherwise), modes of consciousness are institutionalised patterns of thinking, requiring a high degree of perpetuation through education, both formally and informally. To the extent that there is the insistence on the “correctness” of one mode of thought over the other-mainstream heterosexuality over alternative homosexuality- acceptance of diversity still remains to be seen.

Democracy and Human Rights: The Singapore Model (Part 2)

I refer to my article written in September 2008. ”The PAP has remained in power largely due to the its ideological efficacy (Chua,1995), and the remarkable results it has achieved. In other words, the PAP is there because people want it to be. In a strict sense, that is democracy, as the PAP is voted by the people, for the people.” Such is the pre-requisite for an unspoken social contract. The words in bold marks what Weber referred to as formal rationality. More recently, the State passed a new legislation (The Public Order Act) which bestows upon her police offficers with more powers. The political fiasco in Thailand was used as a point of reference, thus legitimising such laws. Singaporeans, marked by their incredible formal rationality, would certainly find such legislation “necessary” for social order. But with such formal rationality and the already internalised “generalised morality”, I argue that new forms of legislation are unnecessary. Thus far, Singaporeans have “follow(ed) law by law”( Just Follow Law, 2007), so why the worry? Could it be that the ideological hegemony (Chua, 1995) has waned in its effect? Or just merely ”playing it safe”?  After only 9 months, the promise for greater democracy seems far fetched now.

Energy,Ecology And Society:The Tripartite (dis)Agreement.

In the light of globalisation, the issue of energy and ecology has become increasingly important for it presents a myriad of problems, which will ultimately alter the lives of the future generations. As such, it is imperative that a more profound understanding of the effects of societal energy demands and its impacts on our ecology is acquired to galvanise us out of our “comfort zones” and see the effects that we, ourselves, are doing to our own ecology. This post will thus discuss on the daily demands for electricity, in addition to the Clean and Green Singapore campaign that has been implemented in an attempt to make Singaporeans more “eco-friendly”. In particular, I will discuss on the idiosyncratic nature of our daily lives and inherent contradictions of the above-mentioned campaign.

In a post-industrial and modern society like Singapore, our daily lives seem to depend on one critical source of energy: electricity. From the storage of food, to the apparatus required in education, most of these appliances require electricity for them to function. A common sight in our own campus, be it in the libraries, canteens, and even the lecture theatres, is that of students “optimising” the power plugs available to run the seemingly most crucial appliance in the academic field, i.e, the notebook computer. Imagine the amount of electricity used if, say one hundred students, were plugging in at the same time. This is just one of the many appliances that we use in our daily lives that puts a demand for electricity. I am sure that most of us know on the harmful by-products of electricity generation and its effects on our ecology. The issues of global warming and sustainable resource extraction are all too familiar to most of us. But are we really doing our part to help reduce the usage of, and therefore the demand for electricity? When the haze hit Singapore, most of us would grumble at the ignorance of the rural Indonesian villagers and simply point our fingers at them for causing air pollution. But have we actually thought of the possibility that our continual increasing demand for electricity may very well contribute even more to the pollution of our ecology? Not only does this increase in demand contribute to the pollution of the atmosphere, it also puts a considerable pressure on the natural resources, such as coal, natural gas and oil, of which are being extracted, or rather exploited, out of nature at a rate which is faster than the replacement rate. Ironically, in an educated society like Singapore, there seem to be a need for ”special reminders”  to be put up in rooms, reminding us to switch off the lights and other electrical appliances when not in use. Have we ever thought that our continual demand for natural resources to produce electricity is causing others to be marginalised, even in their own country? The fact that I would like to point out here is that if ignorance (out of the lack of education) contributes to the degradation of our ecology, sounds bad enough, it is much more worst for an educated and well-informed society to know about the harm that we ourselves are causing, be it to the ecology or the lives of millions in the regions where the resources are being exploited, and not doing anything about it.

In tandem with international calls for more “eco-friendly” measures to be put in place, the State has implemented several campaigns, in an attempt to curtail and, if possible, mitigate the harmful effects of our actions to the ecology. One such campaign is that of the Clean and Green Singapore Campaign, organised by the National Environment Agency. Of the three key emphasis of this campaign, one of it is that of the issue of “Energy Efficiency and Resource Conservation”. (http://app.nea.gov.sg) The rationale behind it is because: “Reflecting global concerns, there is a need to broaden current perspectives to include energy efficiency, waste minimisation, recycling and water conservation. All these will ultimately help attain the long-term goal of environmental sustainability. This year’s Clean & Green Singapore focuses on energy efficiency.” (ibid)  Through media, this campaign is advertised to promote awareness amongst Singaporeans. One of the advertisements, which I am sure that most of us have seen, is that of a scene of a father entering his daughter’s air-conditioned room, only to find her shivering. The scene then goes on with the father raising the temperature of the air-conditioner. The advertisement ends with the father holding several electricity bills, and smiling, implying that he has made substantial savings on his electricity bills. Another advertisement would be that of Jack Neo promoting a Mitsubishi air-conditioner. Again, the advertisement ends with Jack Neo holding on to some electricity bills. The focal point of these two advertisements is that of the savings that one can make through prudent practices or the usage of ”energy-efficient” appliances. Herein lies the contradiction: The focus on “energy efficiency” is that of economic rationalisation, as opposed to the harmful effects that the continual increase in demand for electricity has on our ecology and the lives of others in countries where the resources are exploited to meet our voracious demands. From my perspective, the gist of this campaign should be that of the illustration of the ill-effects of the continual increase in demand for electricity, rather than just mere economic rationalisation. Only then will the true message of the campaign be imbibed in the masses, i.e, a Clean and Green and truly “eco-friendly” society.

It should be obvious by now that there is a three-way relationship between society, energy and ecology. As illustrated in the preceding paragraphs, the demand for energy by societies in developed countries, such as Singapore, is causing pressure on the ecology of the very Earth that we live in. In addition, this demand is also causing others to be marginalised, who ironically, are the rightful owners of the resources. As such, the fate of the ecology, and quite possibly, the lives of the millions of people in regions where natural resources are being exploited, rests in our hands. The knowledge of these ill-effects is more than just mere educational information; it is a call for action. Perhaps, it is about time that we ask ourselves this question: “How much can one Planet take?” (Sernau, 2006: 323)

 

 

References:

1) Sernau, Scott. (2006) .Global Problems: The search for Equity, Peace and Sustainability. Pearson Education Inc.

2) “Clean and Green Singapore 2007″. News Release No: 47/2007. Retrieved from http://app.nea.gov.sg/cms/htdocs/article.asp?pid=2977 on 01/11/2008.

Technology and Global Society: Rise of the Silent Technology.

Technology has, by far, been one of the biggest influences in shaping today’s societal patterns. This post will thus discuss on the implications of technological changes in the development of societal changes. In particular, I will draw attention to the effects of the text messaging capability of mobile phones on social interaction and religious practices, to illustrate the above-mentioned implications.  

If on the one hand, technological change is the result of changing social conditions, technology, itself, on the other, changes the the prevailing social conditions. Take the mobile phone, for example. Long gone are the days when one would carry with him/her extra change or a phonecard for the purpose of using the public phone. Mobile phone ownership, as at 2008, was 1225 phones per 1000 residents, which is equivalent to 122.5%.(www.mcys.gov.sg) The advance in this sector of the telecommunications industry is pushed by the demands of society seeking convenience. What is interesting is the change that this technology has brought about in society. While it is true that mobile phones have made communication between individuals much easier, thereby increasing the inter-connectivity of individuals in society, it has also altered the notion of personal interaction. To quote from a personal experience, there was this once when I was having lunch with a group of army buddies, whom I have not met for a long time. Throughout the whole whole duration, I couldn’t help but notice that one of them was incessantly texting away on his mobile phone. Jokingly, I told him that he should concentrate on the present conversation instead of the text messages. His reply: “Nothing can pry me away from my girlfriend.” Literally, it should be: “Nothing can pry me away from this piece of device, ie, the mobile phone, which I am using to interact with my girlfriend.” As mundane as this event sounds, it illustrates the change in personal interaction between individuals in society. On the one hand, it has facilitated in the non-physical interaction, in this case, between my friend and his girlfriend. On the other, however, the physical interaction between himself and the rest of us was reduced. It seemed as though he has “alienated” himself from real-time interaction. I am sure that most of us, if not all, have been in this situation before. One can only wonder how such a small device can actually alter the course of interaction of society. Such is the effect of a silent technology on society.

The effects of such a change in technology is also being felt in the religious domain. One such instance is the case of a Muslim man in Malaysia divorcing his wife through text messages. Under the Islamic law, a “talak” (an arabic word meaning “to divorce”) is official under three circumstances, firstly being the intention to divorce, second being the proclamation of the “talak” itself, and lastly, the presence of two adult Muslim male witnesses. “Traditionally, this has meant a face-to-face verbal exchange, but new technology has led to Islamic scholars seeking fresh interpretations.”(http://www.zdnetasia.com) After careful deliberation, it was decided that the divorce was official for it has met the 3 above-mentioned criteria. There was certainly an intent, on part of the man, and the text messages would suffice as the proclamation of the intent. The last criteria is met through the act of the text messages being made known to other parties, apart from the two parties involved. Such is the implication of the change in technology, in this case, the rise in the usage of text messages as a form of communication, in altering the context of religious practices in society. Also, herein lies the paradox of such a technology. If it has, on the one hand, increased the connectivity between individuals in society, thereby increasing the chances of bringing individuals together, it has also, on the other hand, facilitated in the separation of individuals. The ease at which separations can occur through the usage of technology is a stark reminder of the darker side of technology.

Another effect of such a technology, ie, text messaging through mobile phones, on religious practices is the usage of it during the weekly Friday prayers. A hadith (verse) in the Holy Qur’an explicitly states that talking amongst the congregation is strictly disallowed when the imam (religious leader) is on the dais delivering his sermon. The practice of listening to the sermon with full concentration, is by itself, an act of good deed. As such, talking would dilute this act, on part of the individual, and is also a distraction for the other congregants listening to the sermon. Quoting from a personal experience, I have observed, on several occasions, that quite a number of the congregants, particularly the teenage ones, were busy text messaging during the delivery of the sermon. There was one occasion when, after the prayers, I went up to one of the teenagers and asked him whether he knew that talking was disallowed during the delivery of the sermon. His reply was simple: “Well, the hadith only states no talking, texting is not a form of verbal communication right?” Technically, he was right. Verbal communication, as the name implies, requires a person to talk, i.e, to produce sounds with his mouth. In this respect, text messaging does not fall under the category. However, the hadith itself, as with every other verses in the Holy Qur’an, should be read metaphorically, not literally. In metaphorical terms, talking constitutes the intent to communicate with someone else, be it verbally or non-verbally. With the rise of secularisation, which, more often than not, is accompanied by technological advancement, religious texts are interpreted literally, as opposed to metaphorically (the way they should be interpreted). In this respect, technology is being used to circumvent the “constraints” of religious practices (which is an intrinsic part of most societies), thereby greatly altering the original meaning of the practices themselves.

It is apparent that there is a cyclical relation between technology and society. The change in social patterns and demands have led to the development of new technologies, which is turn develops new patterns and demands, and the cycle continues. Ostentatiously, technological advancement is welcomed by many for it illustrates the notion of “progress”. The clandestine effects of such advancements should not be overlooked either, for it presents a myriad of changes that has, and will continue to, alter the social patterns of societies. In this respect, the rise of the silent technology speaks volumes of its capability to greatly alter such patterns in the societies we live in.

 

References:

1) “Singapore Social Statistics in Brief, 2008″, retrieved from www.mcys.gov.sg on 05/10/2008.

2) “SMS hits marriage traditions in India, M’sia”, retrieved from http://www.zdnetasia.com/news/communications/0,39044192,39143660,00.htm on 28/10/2008.

Population & Health: In the nick of time.

In this post, I will discuss on issues of access and availability of health care facilities in rural areas. In particular, based on my own personal experience, I will put forth the case of a rural settlement in Wonosari, Central Java, to illustrate the inherent inequality in the above-mentioned issue.

During my stint in National Service, I held the vocation of a medic. I was lucky to have been selected to participate in Exercise SAFKAR Indo-Pura in 2006, an annual bilateral military exercise between the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) and Tentera Nasional Indonesia-Angkatan Darat (TNI-AD), or the Indonesian National Armed Forces, which was held in Wonosari, Central Java. A socio-civic mission team, which comprised an 8-man medical team, was also included to provide basic medical and dental care to the villagers of a village in Wonosari. As soon as we finished setting up our make-shift clinic in an old community centre, patients started pouring in. The ailments ranged from mild cough and flu, to more severe cases such as asthma and pneumonia. One particular case had a lasting impact on me, hitherto. During the second day of the four-day mission, a lady in her 30s, came to our clinic, carrying her two year old son, who was panting profusely. Immediately, the medical team sprung into action. The Medical Officer ordered me to prepare the nebuliser, a device which is used to administer a solution of drug in the form of a fine mist, for the patient to inhale. The toddler was suffering from an asthma attack. After about an hour on the nebuliser, the toddler’s vital signs (his pulse, breathing rate and blood pressure) returned to normal. The gratitude that we received from the lady was really heart-warming. In her tears, she profusely thanked us for saving her son’s life. In a brief conversation that I had with her, her response really shocked me. “If it wasn’t for you guys (the medical team), my son would have died, just like his sister did a year ago.” she said. As it was, the village lacked in medical facilities. The only facility available was that of an old village clinic, which clearly lacked the equipments to treat life-threatening cases such as asthma. Also, the nearest hospital was several kilometres away, in the city area. As we transferred the toddler to the dispensary section (I was in the treatment section), one thought lingered in my mind. Asthma is a chronic disease. Without proper long-term medication, the condition will only worsen. As luck would have it, we were in the right place, at the right time. But what would happen to the toddler should he suffer another asthma attack? Would he end up the way his sister did, owing to the lack of emergency medical facilities? In contrast to our lives, where one could easily dial 995, and an ambulance would transfer a casualty to the nearest hospital, where he/she would be taken care of by certified physicians, the situation in the village was not as convenient. The chances of survival is greatly decreased, owing to the distance of the village to the nearest hospital. Neither do they have the luxury of aerial medical transportation services, which would greatly reduce the travelling time of a casualty to the nearest hospital, thereby increasing his/her chances of survivability. In a rural life of poverty, an old and ill-equipped village clinic was their best chance of survivability, no matter how bleak it may sound. Even with such a facility, most of them could not afford the cost, as I was told by the patients that I helped to treat during the four-day clinic sessions. Such was the inequality in the provision of and access to healthcare facilities that I observed during my stay in the village.

Also, the village lacked in proper sewage and sanitation facilities. Drains were clogged, with a pungent mixture urine and faeces. Such stagnant waters provide the perfect breeding ground for mosquitoes, which carry with them tropical diseases such as malaria and dengue. As we went around treating the patients, immuned against malaria due to the mandatory mefloquine (an anti-malarial drug) pills that we took, in addition to the thick layers of mosquito repellant we applied on our bodies and uniforms, these villagers were clearly susceptible to this disease. The danger is part of their everyday lives. Also, the sewage is a ripe environment for the Vibrio cholerae bacterium, a bacteria that causes cholera, to thrive in. Should it seep into the soil and contaminate the wells, which was the main source of water supply for the villagers, a cholera epidemic is inevitable. The inequality in the provision of proper sanitation and sewage facilities also adds to the susceptibility of these villagers to disease outbreaks. As the children played dangerously close to the drains, with some even in the drains, it shows the level of ignorance of the villagers towards the dangers that lie in wait. By and large, this ignorance is due to the lack of public health education. The provision of these facilities and education should be undertaken by the government, but sadly, the resources weren’t made available to them.

In the words of Sernau(2006:287), “Health care must be made available and affordable to all.” As the resources are diverted away to the urban areas, the only people who bear the brunt of this diversion are the villagers themselves. In a world filled with inequalities, perhaps it is true that “only the poor die young.”(Sernau, 2006:253).

 

References:

1) Sernau, Scott (2006) Global Problems: The search for Equity, Peace and Sustainability, Pearson.

2) http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cholera, retrieved on 18/10/2008.

Urbanisation: Re-development of Geylang Serai: Culture for Sale?

In this post, I will discuss on issues of urbanisation. I will use the re-development of Geylang Serai as an issue in the application of the concept of urbanisation. In the course of discussion, I will also attempt to delve into this issue from two perspectives, i.e. the top-down and bottom-up perspectives.

In tandem with the State’s policy of multi-culturalism, Geylang Serai was preserved as part of the Malay cultural heritage. (Cornelius-Takahama, 1999). In the light of this policy, “a one hectare site called the Malay Village (bordering Sims Avenue, Geylang Serai and Geylang Road) was set aside to showcase a replica of a Malay kampong and to promote traditional Malay handicraft and cultural activities.” (ibid). Thorough the years, Geylang Serai, more notably the Geylang Serai Market and its immediate surroundings, has been identified by both Malays and non-Malays alike,to be an area that depicts an enclave of Malay culture and heritage.

In 2003, the State has identified the Geylang Serai Market and Blocks 1 to 5 of Jalan Pasar Baru (a street immediately beside the market) as one of the sites to undergo the Selective En-Bloc Re-development Programme (SERS). The market and the block of flats were to be demolished to make way for the re-building of a new two-storey market and new blocks of flats to replace the old ones by the National Environment Agency (NEA) and the Housing and Development Board (HDB) respectively. However, this programme was met with some resistance, particularly from the residents. They saw the programme as a threat to diminish their way of life and were concerned on the dispersal of the community. From a bottom-up approach, Park(1914), quoted in Sernau(2006:241), captures the gist of this. In his theory, the stage of “resistance” is when “the established group attempts to defend its territory and institutions.” Having been to Geylang Serai myself, I find that this area has a truly “kampong” feel, captured in the every day life of the residents. The “community spirit” is evident amongst the residents. In this respect, a solidarity has been forged amongst the residents. As mentioned in the lecture, there is a two-way relationship between space and society. Space determines the interaction between the individuals, and vice versa. On the one hand, the physical space of this area allows for the formation of solidarity amongst the residents, while on the other, social interaction amongst the residents gave rise to the distinct feature of this urban space; an urban enclave which depicts the culture and heritage of the Malays. Moreover, the Geylang Serai Market has become an icon amongst the Malay community in Singapore. Come the festive seasons, this market has become a “mandatory place” to visit to purchase necessary items, such as food stuffs and traditional Malay wear, just to name a few. The small-scale retailers that offer personalised services; from flowers to herbs, to traditional garments and Islamic books, and the business ethics of these retailers reflects an aura that is distinctly Malay. In fact, it has become more iconic than the Malay Village in reflecting the culture and heritage of the Malay community.

From a top-down approach, in can be inferred that the re-development programme is seen as a neccesity, to rejuvenate the dilapitated urban space, in favour of a new one. As it was, the Geylang Serai Market has been in a run-down state, with zinc roofs that increases the risk of fire, and the dirty drains that are infested with rodents and germ-spreading insects such as cockroaches. Thus, the new Geylang Serai Market will incorporate a Civic Centre, and boasts new and cleaner urban space for people to dine and shop, while at the same time, retaining the distinct culture and heritage of the Malays, through the architecture of the buildings. The ”valid argument” put forth for the re-development is that the rejuvenation serves to benefit the Malay culture and heritage. This is in tandem with the policy of multi-culturalism and the “return to roots” approach of the State in order to promote multi-ethnic living. (George, 2000) However, Geylang Serai, as an ethnic enclave(or a preserved site for the cultural heritage of the Malays, as the State puts it), is being marketed to boost the tourism industry. As such, it makes perfect sense for this urban space to be re-developed in order for it to remain attractive to the tourists. Such economic rationalisation leads to (at least from my point of view) a very disturbing notion; a culture for sale.

This is the inherent problem of the re-development programme. Will it really preserve the culture and heritage of the Malay community? Real culture and heritage entails more than just aesthetics, more than just the ostensible architecture. It is the way of life that makes it distinct. In this case, it is the way of life of the residents that portrays the culture and heritage of the Malay community. In the words of Marshall(2001), quoted in Sernau(2006: 251), “Critics contend that new urbanists are too concerned with appearances..” The questions remain: Will this re-development will see to the retention of the former way of life of the residents of Geylang Serai? Will such a solidarity, that has contributed to the culture and heritage of the Malay community, be prevalent in the re-developed urban space? And will the re-developed market include the small-scale retailers that once lined the alleys of the market?  Or will this re-development just see to a greater commercialisation of the Malay culture and heritage, thus eroding its credibility and authenticity?

 

References:

1) Cornelius-Takahama, Vernon (1999). “Geylang Serai”. Architecture and Landscape:Singapore Infopedia. Retrieved from http://infopedia.nl.sg/articles/SIP_747_2004-12-09.html on 09/10/08.

2) George, Cherian (2000).“Neglected Nationhood:Singapore Without Singaporeans?” in Singapore, the Air-conditioned Nation, Landmark Books.

3)  Sernau, Scott. R (2006). Global Problems: The search for Equity, Peace and Sustainability. Pearson.

4) “Geylang Serai Market to close, rebuilt by late 2008″, retrieved from http://app.nea.gov.sg/cms/htdocs/article.asp?pid=2699 on 09/10/08.

5) “New Site Identified for Selective En Bloc Redevelopment Scheme and Hawker Centre Upgrading Programme at Geylang Serai”, retrieved from http://www.hdb.gov.sg/__4825703800337EDD.nsf/0/0B72BDA57A0AB2D04825707300204494?Open on 09/10/08.

Politics of Identity & Globalisation: On being a Singaporean Malay.

In this post, I will discuss on issues of ethnicity as an identity. In particular, with the aid of several articles and anecdotal experiences, I will discuss the stereotypical traits that has been associated with Singaporean Malays.

Multi-racialism has been one of the State’s core policies since independence in 1965. In the light of this policy, all races (hereinafter referred to as ethnicity) are equal before the eyes of the State, and in no way shall any of the ethnic groups receive any forms of preferential treatment. Reflected in the National Pledge; “regardless of race, language or religion”, this policy aims to create a cultural melting pot of diverse cultures, and more importantly, the presence of people from different ethnic backgrounds living harmoniously, under the banner of a collective identity called Singaporean. However, George(2000) describes the State’s return to roots approach emphasis on the country’s component Asian cultures as being part of a trend towards greater ethnic polarisation. This rings true as Castells(2004) states that one of the building materials of identity construction is the power apparatus, i.e. the State. The juxtaposition would be that of, in the attempt to create a diverse nation of different ethnic cultures under a collective banner of identity, the inadvertent result would be the identification of oneself along the lines of ethnicity, thereby re-enforcing solidarity within that ethnic group, and at the same time creating a boundary between “us” and the “others”.(Castells, 2004).

As a Singaporean Malay, I have heard of several pejorative terms, one of the them being the labelling of Malays being lazy and too laid back, thereby contributing to the economic backwardness of the community. Whilst it is true that the Malay community has seen major progress from the 80s, hitherto, the final results still leave much to be desired. In a survey conducted in 2006, by the Ministry Of Community Development, Youth and Sports(MCYS), the number of Malay secondary school dropouts, as of 2005, was 7.3 students per 1000 students. Although this is a drastic drop from 1980, which was 24 dropouts per 1000 students, the figure still exceeded the national average, which was 4.2 dropouts per 1000 students.(http://www.mcys.gov.sg/MCDSFiles/download/ProgressofMalayCommunity.pdf). From personal experience, I have seen how this stereotype has affected even the Malays. More often than not, my deep and profound interest in certain areas, such as studies, has been met with sniggering remarks from my friends, who are ironically Malays themselves. To quote one of them, “You are truly a Malay only if you are laid back, and take things easily.”  This is just one example of how certain traits are closely, and if I say so myself, loosely, being attached to a particular ethnicity, in this case, the Malays in Singapore as being lazy and too laid back. I find pride in the success of Malay students, such as Natasha Nabila, the top Malay student in the 2007 PSLE. However, scores of social problems that hit the front page of newspapers has made me think how certain problems are “uniquely Malay” in Singapore. One of them being the number of teenage births. In the same survey, the number of teenage births amongst the Malay female population was 10.6 births per 1000 female Malay residents, a figure which far exceeded the national average, which was 3.5 births per 1000 female residents.(ibid) To quote from another personal experience, there was one instance when I was sitting down at a food-court, enjoying my lunch. Seated at the table next to me was a Chinese lady and her son. A young Malay lady, presumably in her early twenties, was holding on to the hand of a young girl, who called the lady “mama”, and was queuing near the table where I was seated. The young boy suddenly said to his mother, “Ma, how come that jie-jie got daughter one?” The response of his mother made me gasp in disbelief. She said,” Haiya, ah boy, Malays like that one. Young-young already have children. Don’t know whether married or not. ” One can only imagine my agony upon hearing her remarks. In no way did I take that remark as being a racist one, for it does reflect, to a certain extent, the reality of the Malay community in Singapore. However, her statement bears testimony to the dangers of identifying oneself to a particular ethnicity, which often leads to the stereotyping of certain traits to certain ethnicity.

Singapore has seen tremendous social order ever since her independence in 1965. Upheavals and conflicts based upon ethnicity is a rarity, and I can safely say, is absent. This is owing to the various legislation and laws put forth by the State to prevent such conflicts from occuring. However, what is of great concern would be that of ethnic polarisation,thereby the attachment of certain stereotypes to particular ethnicity. This is an inadvertent result of the multi-racial policy, whose main aim is to create a diverse nation of different and colourful ethnicities, living under one collective identity. In the light of the diverse ethnicities, and more so in the face of globalisation, it is all too easy to fall into the mindset of identifying oneself in accordance to his/her ethnicity as the main form of identification.To quote George(2000), (e)thnicity is, to most, a precious source, providing them with identity, culture and self-respect.

 

References:

1) Castells, Manuel, 2004, The Power of Identity, 2nd Ed, Blackwell.

2) George, Cherian, 2000, “Neglected Nationhood:Singapore Without Singaporeans?” in Singapore, the Air-conditioned Nation, Landmark Books.

3) “Progress of Malay Community”, data retrieved from http://www.mcys.gov.sg/MCDSFiles/download/ProgressofMalayCommunity.pdf, on 05/10/2008.

Democracy & Human Rights: The Singapore Model

The issue of democracy in Singapore has long been debated, given the political sphere being ruled by a single party,ie, the People’s Action Party (herein after referred to as PAP). In this post, I will attempt to discuss the effects of the seemingly “authoritarian” rule on the citizens and also the recent changes that was announced, which could be viewed as a response, on part of the State, to calls by Singaporeans for greater democracy in Singapore.

In its simplest form, democracy would be that of a state that is built for the people, by the people. The PAP has long been in power, even before Singapore’s independence in 1965. Since then, no other opposition party has come close to beating the PAP in the General Elections. Chua (1995) attributed this hegemony, and the continual legacy of the PAP, to the successful ideological trajectories put forth by the party. The PAP has no doubt created a miracle in building Singapore to what it is today. It is the ability to emulate the US, in less than half a century,is what that makes this party remarkable. Economically, the PAP has built a cosmopolitan city from Raffles’ child, surpassing its neighbours. In this respect, the success of the PAP in the development of Singapore’s economy has contributed to its continuing rule. However, the interventionist approach of this party has received criticisms, particularly from advocates of democracy from the West. A Singapore-born British writer, John Kampfner, recently wrote an article in The Guardian, a well-circulated British newspaper, labelling the Singapore’s model of authoritarian government as being an assault to modern democracy. The authoritarian government, he claims is providing a modicum of good life, and a quiet life, the ultimate anaesthethic for the brain. (Kampfner, John, ”A Modern Authoritarianism”,The Guardian, quoted in Today, The Daily Newspaper, MediaCorp Press, Singapore, 07/07/2008).  In almost every aspect, from where its citizens live, to how they behave, the state has had a say. Even MM Lee does not deny this. He said,”I have often been accused of interfering in the private lives of citizens. Yes, if i did not…we wouldn’t have been here today…And i say without the slightest remorse, that we wouldn’t have been here today, we would have not made economic progress, if we(the state) had not intervened on very personal matters..”(then PM Lee Kuan Yew, The Straits Times, Singapore Press Holdings, 20/04/1987). How has this State interventionist approach affected the rapport with its citizens? And more importantly, is it true that it has been an “ultimate anaesthetic to the brain”?

A recent BBC survey on the US presidency election campaign showed remarkable results. 29% of the Singaporean respondents choose Barack Obama, and 7% chose John McCain. 64% of the respondents fell under the “Either, Neither, No difference, Other, Don’t know/NA” category. (The Straits Times, Singapore Press Holdings, 10/09/2008). Singapore respondents scored the highest in this category, as compared to respondents from countries like the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, Indonesia and China, who were more decisive in their responses. Has Singaporeans become politically apathetic? To a certain extent, this view is tenable. Given its legacy, it has come to a point whereby the terms “PAP” and “the government (the State)” often refers to the same entity. The PAP has, hitherto, successfully improved the quality of lives of its citizens. So, based on logic (and more so, the tight legislation, and the seemingly invisible viable opposition), there wouldn’t be a need for a revamp in the political sphere. Even if there was, how sure are Singaporeans on the credibility of the opposition in delivering the same results that the PAP has? Also, Chua (1994) aptly describes the daily lives of Singaporeans as being directly or indirectly tied to the functions of some state agencies or apparatus. In other words, it would be a dangerous affair to voice out, much less meddle, in the political sphere, without substantial evidence being put forth to support an argument. The ramifications seems to outweigh the possible advantages. The solution: to remain apolitical.But has Singaporeans become so obedient and law-abiding (or apolitical) to the point of being anaesthetised? In other words, have we lost the ability to think, following blindly to the directions given by the State?

In claiming the Singapore’s model of authoritarianism as being an assault to democracy, and being “an ultimate anaesthetic for the brain”, Kampfner is directly insulting the intelligence of Singaporeans. To be apolitical does not mean that Singaporeans are incapable of voicing out their desires for a greater democracy. The establishment of a Feedback Unit demonstrates the desire of Singaporeans for a greater say in the decision-making process (Chua,1995). Also, the recent escape of ISA detainee, Mas Selamat Kastari, highlights this desire. The escape sparked massive calls from the public for a greater transparency from the state pertaining to the details of the escape. More evidently, the recent announcement made by PM Lee Hsien Loong, during the 2008 National Day Rally Speech, can be seen as a response to the call for greater democracy by Singaporeans. The State would allow peaceful demonstrations, and in a symbolic move, hand over the purview of Hong Lim Park (Singapore’s one and only Speech Corner) from the Police to the National Parks Board. The state would also allow the airing of podcasts and vodcasts containing political messages to be uploaded on the Internet during the election periods. However, these new changes are still subjected to certain Out-Of-Bound markers (OB markers as they are colloquially known). Regulations aside, the changes illustrate the more educated and affluent Singaporeans’ desire for greater democracy, and in so doing, it also demonstrates the effects of the “authoritarian” rule of the state.

In hindsight, the continuing legacy of the single ruling party has had its effects on its relationship with its citizens. On one hand, it creates political apathy, and on the other, it creates a desire for a greater democracy. The PAP has remained in power largely due to the its ideological efficacy (Chua,1995), and the remarkable results it has achieved. In other words, the PAP is there because people want it to be.In a strict sense, that is democracy, as the PAP is voted by the people, for the people. The lack(and quite possibly the total absence) of viable oppositions also limits the choices that Singaporeans have. Viable here refers to a party that is able to deliver the same results that the PAP has, if not better. Also, will the relaxation of rules see to a greater democracy? Only time will tell.

References:

1) Chua, Beng Huat(1994). “Arrested Development: Democratisation in Singapore”, in Third World Quarterly, Vol 15, No 4, (Dec 1994), Taylor & Francis Ltd, retrived from www.jstor.org.sg on 25/09/2008.

2) Chua, Beng Huat(1995). “Ideological Trajectory: From Authoritarianism to Communitarianism”, in Communitarian Ideology and Democracy in Singapore. London: Routledge, pp 9-39

3) Kampfner, John. ”A Modern Authoritarianism”, in The Guardian, quoted in Today, The Daily Newspaper, MediaCorp Press, Singapore, 07/07/2008

4) The Straits Times, Singapore Press Holdings, 20/04/1987 & 10/09/2008.

War & Terrorism: The Jihadists’ Manifesto.

This post discusses on issues of terrorism. In particular, I will examine the various social and political issues that has led to the rise of this phenomenon, and link these issues to two individuals; Osama Bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri, in an attempt to comprehend the root causes of terrorism from a sociological perspective.

The issue of terrorism has received tremendous media limelight, in the wake of the 9/11 attacks on the US. The attacks were linked to Al-Qaeda, an Islamic militant organisation, with the prime suspect being Osama Bin Laden, the allerged leader of this organisation. Osama Bin Laden (herein after referred to as Osama), was “the seventeenth of over fifty children fathered by billionaire Mohammed Awad Bin Laden…who made his fortune in a construction business based in South Yemen, sponsored by the Saudi royal family.” (Globalisation & Terrorism: The Migration of Dreams and Nightmares, Jamal R. Nassar, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc, 2005). Osama “studied economics and management at the King Abdul Aziz University in Jeddah…receiving a degree in public administration in 1981.”(ibid) His ”Lieutenant”, Ayman al-Zawahiri (herein after referred to as Ayman) is a qualified physician who “was born in 1951 to a middle-class background in Cairo, Egypt.”(ibid) He later headed the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, a militant organisation, before joining the Al-Qaeda, becoming one of the main leaders of the organisation. As such, any attempts to link terrorism as a response to economic marginalisation would be highly inaccurate. Born into the better off backgrounds,and receiving high education, one would wonder how such talented individuals could lead the organisation in committing acts of terror aimed to oust US presence from Islamic states.

The anti-American ideology that Osama gained was based on radical thoughts of religious oppression which stemmed from colonialism. The rise of the West is seen as the continuation of “a project begun during the Crusades and colonial periods of denigrating, dividing and humiliating Islam.”(Al-Qaeda, Jason Burke, Foreign Policy, No 142, (May-Jun 2004), Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, retrieved from www.jstor.org). Ayman, on the other hand, “joined the Muslim Brotherhood, an organisation devoted to removing the foreign influences from Egypt” (Globalisation & Terrorism: The Migration of Dreams and Nightmares, Page 96, Jamal R. Nassar, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc, 2005) when he was fourteen. By using verses from the Holy Qur’an (often parts of it, disregarding the verses as a whole), the acts of terror were legitimised and justified, as these militants were waging a war on the enemies of Islam. The main aim of these militants, or jihadists (Muslims who undertake the sacred duty of fighting against the oppressors of Islam) is to achieve matyrdom. In the Islamic context, anyone who dies in the course of a holy war would have a place in Heaven reserved for him/her. To note, this radical ideology is socially-constructed, by radical clerics who seek to justify their actions through the misinterpretation of the verses from the Holy Qur’an. As such, it can be inferred that exposure to this radical ideology has led to the involvement of the two individuals in terrorism, providing Al-Qaeda with the much needed funds and leadership that they need to continue the holy war against the West, colloquially known as the Infidels, in the jihadists’ context.

Moreover, both Osama and Ayman had been actively involved in attempts to overthrow the Saudi Arabia and Egypt governments respectively, governments whom they viewed as being “undesirably” secular, a product of Western influences. Their main aim was to establish a system of governance based on an Islamic discourse, which they believed to be the ideal form of governance for the rest of the Ummah (global Islamic community). Frustrated by their failure to achieve this aim, which is a form of political inequality for them, they began targeting the Westerners, hoping to achieve their ultimate goal by eliminating all outside influences that were impeding their success. This political inequality is another factor that has led to the rise of terrorism.

In hindsight, these individuals were socialised in an environment where radical ideologies prevailed, thereby exposing them to these ideologies, which emphasised on fighting the perceived continual oppression of Islam by the West. Over time, these ideologies were internalised and became a norm for them. Also, given their affluent backgrounds and high education, they had higher desires and aspirations for an Islamic political framework to be implemented in their countries,if not on a global scale. Due to frustration of their failure to change the status quo, they reverted to violence as a means to achieve this objective. A combination of the social and political factors collectively forms a cause for retaliation for these two individuals,in the form of terrorism, which culminated to the institutionalisation of violence through the formation of Al-Qaeda, an Islamic militant organisation. From a Conflict Theorist’s perspective, terrorism is the product of strategic and tactical decisions made owing to the inequalities that exists. In this respect, these two individuals felt that violence was the only way to achieve equality, in terms of religion and politics.

References:

1) Al-Qaeda, Jason Burke, Foreign Policy, No 142, (May-Jun 2004), Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, retrieved from www.jstor.org.

2) Globalisation & Terrorism: The Migration of Dreams and Nightmares, Jamal R. Nassar, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc, 2005.