Benjamin Cheah / Senior Writer
On January 2nd, artist and blogger Seelan Palay held a hunger strike outside the Malaysian High Commission. He intended to protest against the detention of five leaders of the Hindu Rights Action Force under Malaysia’s Internal Security Act. Nobody realised that this would be the harbinger of things to come – a year marked by more active expressions by ordinary Singaporeans.
This article aims to review 2008 through the New Media framework, focusing on events in which users of new media have played a significant role as actors or commentators.
Mas Selamat’s Escape
In the afternoon of 27 February, suspected terrorist Mas Selamat bin Kastari escaped from Whitley Road Detention Centre. This sparked an unprecedented island-wide manhunt conducted by the army and police, which is still ongoing today, albeit on a much smaller scale. Singaporean bloggers, even those who do not normally blog about socio-political events, poured out their fears, anger and resolve on the Internet. But as the circumstances surrounding the escape gradually came to light, these bloggers, too, started to scrutinise the Government’s response to the escape. Inevitably, the questions that they raised were intertwined, rightly or wrongly, with criticisms of the workings of State.
Among the initial concerns was how the alleged terrorist managed to escape from a seemingly well-guarded prison facility, so low profile that many Singaporeans have not even heard of it. This was followed by a greater torrent of questions surrounding the four-hour time lapse between the escape and the notification of the mass media, as well as whether or not the Government would have informed the people had MSK been apprehended within these four hours.
Later, as the police released information about MSK, bloggers criticised the authorities for disseminating critical information, such as his clothing and his limp, a week after his escape, instead of immediately after. The final straw came when the Government organised a Commission of Inquiry (COI) to investigate the member, staffed by people with strong connections to the Government even though the Government branded it as “independent”. Blogger Gerald Giam summed it all in a single word: hubris.
The Prime Minister himself was showing signs of questionable leadership. Despite the severity of this incident, he made no appearances before the media until the 9th of March – some 11 days after Mas Selamat had escaped. On that day, his principal message was what would soon be an oft-repeated cliché: these things happen; close ranks; move on. Of the important questions that were asked, none were answered.
As March turned to April, the Government shifted its stance once more. Following the release of the COI’s report, the Government blamed Singaporeans for letting Mas Selamat escape, citing complacency and a dependency mentality, and said that the Government itself was not to blame. The COI was itself seen as less-than-independent; this move was perceived by bloggers as further deepening the divide between the Government and the people, and as proof that the Government sees itself accountable to no one.
Bloggers take action offline
The genesis of this trend was in 2007. The Government commissioned the Advisory Council on the Impact of New Media on Society (AIMS) to study New Media and determine how the Government could better utilise it in the future. In response, 13 bloggers stepped forward to propose their own recommendations to AIMS and MICA. (See TOC’s articles about AIMs here.)
The Bloggers 13, as they were known, crafted a proposal that focused on the deregulation of the Internet, with particular emphasis on party political films and censorship. Written, debated and edited entirely on Google Docs, this proposal was quite literally a child of New Media.
Bloggers 13 organised a press conference before submitting the proposal to the Minister of Information, Communication and the Arts in April. When AIMS unveiled its proposal in August, Bloggers 13 responded with its own press conference, highlighting its main concerns with the proposal. At this moment, Bloggers 13 is working out a key tenant of its proposal, namely the Internet Content Consultative Committee.
The Online Citizen also embarked on a similar venture in the field of public transport. As part of its Public Transport Week in September, TOC expanded upon and re-published a series of proposals designed to improve Singapore’s public transport system in February. This paper was sent to the Minister for Transport, in the hope that it would be considered. The Ministry responded to TOC with an email acknowledging receipt of the proposals.
In August, TOC conducted a street survey in Jurong GRC, following the death of one of the People’s Action Party’s MPs, Dr Ong Chit Chung. The results were brought to the attention of Parliament, during its August sitting, by Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP), Mr Siew Kum Hong.
TOC columnist Leong Sze Hian had written a series of letters throughout the years to the mainstream press. These letters focused on a series of pertinent issues, ranging from healthcare to accountability. Mr. Leong has since compiled these into a book titled, “Issues that matter – Uniquely Singapore: F1 or F9?”. The book has been published and is now on sale.
Greater Political and Media Liberalisation – almost
Traditionally, the mainstream media and bloggers have been portrayed as being at loggerheads. The Government, too, is seen as being ultra-conservative and authoritarian. But this perception was altered somewhat on April 16, when the Media Development Authority approved Speakers Cornered, a film by Martyn See, that has scenes of demonstrations and gatherings at Speakers’ Corner.
In July, MICA affirmed that it would continue with its “light touch” policy for New Media, and might consider a lighter touch. AIMS’ report in August was encouraging for socio-political bloggers, as it seemed to expand on this “light touch” policy, by narrowing the scope of prosecution for “party political films” and acknowledging that censorship was no longer an option.
The Government announced measures to liberalise Singapore’s political space in late August. Among these were a removal of the tacit ban on demonstrations and public speeches at Speakers’ Corner in Hong Lim Park. Activists soon capitalized upon the easing of regulations surrounding the use of Speakers’ Corner. This was demonstrated in October when four students from the Nanyang Technological University took to Speakers’ Corner to protest their school’s censorship of the coverage of the visit by the SDP’s Dr Chee Soon Juan. The students eventually created an indepedent online newspaper, The Enquirer, to circumvent such censorship.
The following month, November, it was the turn of polytechnic students who used New Media to organise a petition to call for fairer public transport fares for students from the polytechnics. Its Facebook group has to date attracted almost 13,000 members.
Taking the Government to Account
In September, Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy. Singaporeans who had purchased their structured products found their savings gone overnight. Mr. Tan Kin Lian, former Chief Executive of NTUC Income and avid blogger, organised a talk-cum-forum at Hong Lim Park regarding this issue, laying out ways and means to seek redress, and calling on the Monetary Authority of Singapore to “do the right thing”. This matter slow-boiled throughout October, with the Monetary Authority of Singapore doing little to reassure investors. Mr Tan conducted a total of six gatherings at Speakers’ Corner on the issue, all of which were organised and publicised through his blog.
November saw NMP Eunice Olsen asking about the Town Councils’ exposure to structured products. It was known that the Town Councils may invest up to 35% of its sinking funds, but the TCs did not reveal where the money was invested in. This sparked a wider range of questions from bloggers, demanding to know where the people’s money have gone to. While Minister for National Development Mah Bow Tan said that the Town Councils have the duty to explain how it invests its funds. The Online Citizen acted on November 25, issuing a call to demand answers from the Town Councils. On December 5, it was revealed that the Town Councils would not reveal any more information. On the same day, The Online Citizen conducted a series of speeches at Hong Lim Park about human rights and social justice, with a particular emphasis on the Town Councils’ lack of accountability, attempts by investors to seek redress, and other basic human rights Singaporeans are entitled to.
Trends and Directions
This year has seen the emergence of three distinct trends.
Firstly, online activists and socio-political bloggers are becoming more organised, confident, and assertive. Bloggers are also pressuring the Government for accountability and transparency, through letters, e-mails, petitions and speeches, on a larger scale than before. The demographics of these bloggers are also expanding, including amongst their number secondary school students and professionals in their sixties.
Secondly, bloggers and activists are going offline. Previously, the work of socio-political bloggers and activists were done online, through articles, petitions and papers. However, activists are now making bolder offline statements, by conducting mass actions to communicate their ideas. By going offline, activists and bloggers are creating a public image and identity for themselves, in order to amplify their message and improve their credibility. In doing so, they hope to solve the problem of reaching out to a wider audience, namely people who usually do not read blogs.
Thirdly, bloggers and activists are becoming one and the same. Bloggers seem to be coming to the realisation that they must press for the change they want to see in Singapore, instead of simply writing about what they want. Activists, in turn, are starting to use New Media as a means to reach out to a wider audience to spread their message, most commonly through blogs and social networking sites. The demarcation between blogger and activist is beginning to dissolve, and has, in fact, already become irrelevant for certain individuals.
Challenges for 2009
There are three main challenges bloggers and activists would face in 2009. The first is to reach out into the general public, as opposed to the Internet-savvy public. This entails meeting people who do not usually read blogs to answer their questions and understand their concerns face-to-face. This would in turn translate into bloggers and activists making offline appearances more often and on a larger scale, aided by Singapore’s recent political liberalisation.
The second challenge is to effect the changes they would like to see. With political power solidly in the hands of the Government, bloggers and activists must at some point actively engage the Government. Previously, bloggers have largely been preaching to the converted, telling the Internet community about their views but not approaching the Government with their ideas. Activists must focus on finding ways to break through to Singapore’s notoriously feedback-unfriendly Government in order to effect change.
The third challenge, especially for bloggers who engage in citizen journalism, is to maintain journalistic integrity amidst the activism. One of the fundamental tenants of journalism is to never, ever get involved in an issue. From a blogger’s approach, this means covering all sides of an issue and not pushing for any one side. While individual bloggers have the luxury of choosing to report a particular issue while at the same time pushing for a particular agenda, group blogs do not. Group blogs like TOC must find a way to maintain journalistic integrity should they choose to support activists of any stripe in any way. To fail to do so would risk being tainted by a critical brush, and irreparable blows to their reputation and credibility, and therefore effectiveness.
2008 has seen many changes. 2009 would not be any different. The online community should be ready to adapt to these changes, and meet the above-mentioned challenges. Now more than ever, it is up to the blogger-activist to effect the change he wants to see, as groups and individuals, with new Media as his most powerful tool.
It would be interesting to see how 2009 unfolds.
———-
96) patriot on January 1st, 2009 9.17 am
“We are all acutely aware that religions are sensitive matters because history has never fail to show that religions is divisive and have lead to much confrontations and wars. ”
No doubt about that. What I was saying is, a certain flexibility has to be allowed. Insomuch as discourses should be on the merits of logical arguments, we have to agree that a person has more than his rational side. Most people believe they have a ‘spiritual’ side as well. Consider one of the common angry comments we find here “God will punish so-and-so for his sins etc’ Would you think that is a ‘religious’ statetment? Or if I were to make a call for compromise. I might have quoted Jesus’s words about turning the other cheek, not because I am Christian, but because it is a very commonly understood term.
Yes, I do agree we need to draw a line. No one should be allowed to evangelize or engage in ‘my god is better than your god’ debate here. (I wrote that in my earlier post dunno if you saw that). No one should act in a way like he has the monopoly of absolute truth.
But say, if it’s hari raya, and someone posts a hari raya greeting quoting the Koran … what’s wrong with that? It is, after all, a very important day for muslims, and not just a secular holiday. Why should we muzzle someone sharing his wishes and joy in the way he feels most comfortable with, just because we don’t believe in his god? Religions are divisive only when we allow it to be. Only when we react too sensitively to stuff like these.
Religious tolerance, in my opinion, is not just tolerance between people of faiths, but also between people of faiths and people without religions. Insomuch as I feel strongly against shoving down one’s faiths upon people’s throats, tolerance also should extend to ‘aetheists’ and agnostics’ allowing people with religion to make the occasional reference to stories or characters in their faith. Otherwise it will become a tyranny of aetheism.
It is only partially true that I am speaking up for my occasional tendencies to quote various examples from the various religious scriptures. (i read alot of these kind of stuff) But I had been an aethist too, and for a long time, i was also piqued whenever people use references like this in a normal conversation. That is until I realized the intolerant one was actually me. You can’t stop a devout christian for eg, for giving thanks even outside the church.
I believe ultimately we are still seeking the same thing – freedom of expression done in a responsible way. We just differ on its boundaries.
cheers. :)
WKC
“I would like to express my disagreement with K Das’ opinion that Islam is a peaceful and beautiful religion. I get the impression that K Das must have read the Koran.
No religion, be it monotheistic or polytheistic, can lay claim to being a peaceful religion if it prescribes punishment for unbelievers, or believers of other faiths.
If I say God [Allah] is portrayed in the Bible as a genocidal maniac, would that be construed as blasphemy? Or should it be construed as mere textual evidence?
How would Muslims/Christians/Jews view my other descriptions of Allah or God, if I were to write about religion in terms of my perceptions, as an atheist?”
Tough question. Quite honestly, everyone will react differently. You can expect a certain level of very strong disagreements from some people. In my case, as long as you don’t rub it in my face too much, I’ll just take it as another perception that is probably good to mull over for a while instead of getting worked up.
But what you had written is, what i would consider, as something that is best left for other blogs and websites and not TOC.
Lastly, I know this is tough, but I hope some of you, who are wont to be worked up by WKC’s comments, to exercise some restraint. Not that I agree with his views, quite the opposite, but if you reply, it will ultimately be an exercise in futility, and we don’t wanna spoil anyone’s new year.
Hi Patriot # 74,
No big deal lah. Everyone has a style of writing. You have one, Andrew and Choo has it too.
Even the [capital letters] dark one has one. I dont know anyone else in the whole of blogosphere who can get away with 3 pages.
You should go down to the singaporedaily and check it out, I think he’s back.
Btw what has this thread got to do with faith? Dang la.
Dear WKC,
Please read my writings on apostasy in Malaysia. I have come up in support of the freedom of religion. I think that I have been very supportive of the aspirations of the Malaysian Chinese. I am very sad. however, that the Singaporean Chinese are not willing to hear out Malay Muslim issues. Apparently some of you want a one way street.
Anyone who has read my writings in Malaysian cyberspace – knows that I am a liberal, progressive and a toelrant plus moderate Muslim. No one doubts that. You can read my writings and come to your own conclusions – as others have.
If you want Malays to be supportive of your aspirations – the you must also be supportive of theirs.
There must be give and take.
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
Kudos to Andrew Loh for having to endure with different sorts of comment posters who appear very seasoned forummers but very over-confident in a way.
Tough job that takes up a lot of time & effort . Moderation of comments is good and necessary. some forums got destroyed literally by a group of dedicated ‘destroyers’. they just keep hijacking a forum and eventually many got turned off and the forum site was effectively ‘destroyed’.
hallo, none of my bisness, but Syed. I think most of the people who can talk to you are not around lah. I hope the really intelligent and tokong ppl have not left Toc for good. I hope they are still around somewhere Andrew & Choo.
Syed this one not to angkat you, but your subject so cheem. I dun even know why you bring it up here. I came here to talk about sg blogoland, instead we are talking about this. How far you think you can go with some of this people? No insult to them. Me included as well. I know nothing abt this. So very easy lor shut up lor.
Syed you talking over all our heads. we all dont understand, not you, but what you want to saying. I see only a few fellow here who tokong enuff to talk abt this without getting into hot soup. Balji, he know, as he used to be editor, so he know how to buang this and that and still balance, like ridding bicycle. Another one is tanlk, he used to running ntuc, so he very good with people complain to him. then sd, he was once parachuted to pally with gulf gamers and grow that market, so he must be good, as cheena to learn to speak their lingo not easy I think. Leong aso can as he is good to argue with facts. Then maybe other people like gemani, he work, I think in customer complrain. then who else? No more.
So why u even bring this subject up here syed? Aso I dun know. Who else some more?
Dear WKC, Just one correction. I did not say that Islam is a peaceful religion (not that it is not to the adherents though). What I said was that Islam is a beautiful and practical religion. Though I read quite a bit on all religions, my appreciation for Islam is based less on texts but more on what I see and perceive. The finer aspects (in my view) of the religion pertaining to communion with Allah (daily prayers on multiple times), giving part of income/savings to the poor/charity ( fitrah and zakat), respect for elders (it is a sight to behold to see tiny tots and full grown up adults paying obeisance to elders by holding and kissing their hands), personal cleanliness, and polygamy (yes polygamy!) are all attributes that facinate and attract me. Hopefully there will come another platform and opportunity for me to elaborate more on these views of mine. Regards.
Dear K Das;
Your positive response gives me a very happy start to Year 2009, thank You so much.
It is so kind of You to bury the hatchet.
It’s New Year’s Day today, let us have a new start and I wish Every One Well.
Yours Truly: patriot
Thank you Benjamin for this article, it will keep us all hopeful and motivated.
I made a New Years’ blog post referring to it, just letting you know: http://singaporeindianvoice.blogspot.com/2009/01/its-2009-now.html
Dr Syed Alwi,
I have shown you what I felt was wrong about your previous posts: your tone and how you ignored everybody else and instead pushed your own agenda. Instead of addressing my points, you chose to disregard me by saying that you see nothing wrong, before pontificating on subjects totally irrelevant to this article, and out of the scope of nearly everybody on TOC, writers and posters included.
Nobody here cares about what you have done. Nobody here cares about what you represent. Nobody here cares about who you are. Nobody here cares who is backing you. They only care that you are ignoring them and venting about some rather sensitive topics which not everybody can appreciate. That is my message. I urge you to pay attention to what we are saying to you, because people will only listen to you if you show that you are listening to them. I strongly suggest that you make amends by acknowledging the points everybody has raised and addressing them accordingly.
If you fail to do so, then I see no reason to continue conversing with you. For that matter, I also see no reason why everybody else should bother with what you write here, now and forever.
The choice is yours. Choose wisely.
Dear Seelan Palay,
Thanks for letting me know, and for the compliment.
K Das,
My apologies. Tks for pointing out. You are absolutely right.
rgds
Dear Benjamin,
Thats where you are wrong. You use phrases like “nobody here”. But what you fail to realise is that your readership is not homogeneous. Neither do they all simply agree with you. There are Malays out there for whom the issues I raised is fair and valid.
Nobody cares ? Malays care ! I have repeated myself over and over again. What I said was just simply this :
That TOC should publish more articles of interest to the ethnic minorities in order to get their meaningful participation. But obviously you are not interested.
What you and some of your friends here are saying is this – don’t talk about Malay-Muslim issues because we are not interested. Don’t talk about Islam because TOC must be religion free. Thats what you and your friends are saying to me.
Well say what you like. I have lived long enough to know that no one is beyond political realities. Maybe today – you and your friends might not care. But of tomorrow – I assure you – you will be humbled to know that you have to care…Sadly it won’t happen until the reality dawns upon you. Hopefully it will not be too late then………
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
Where are the rest? Maybe can talk with them. This one to cheem for me, ciah chen. bye bye. so long. selamat tingal
Editor TOC
I find the good Dr’s last paragraph highly threatening, as though he is privy to some dark clouds gathering. I pray that he does not teach in any of our institutes of higher learning. I suggest you take him off from this post henceforth.
K Das
Dr. Syed Alwi,
Yours words have proven my point. You have twisted my words to suit your agenda, and you have ignored my point that your aggressiveness and inflexibility is turning everybody off. You have further demonstrated that you are more concerned with haranguing everybody about the Malay Muslim community, an issue that has no connection with this article and an issue that almost nobody here is willing to discuss owing to lack of expertise, interest, and other such factors.
We have been very reasonable with you. But you have chosen to lash out at us every time we try to explain to you that this is not the time and place to discuss such matters, and you are showing us that you are not willing to listen to any of us anyway.
My patience is at its end. Henceforth, I will stop conversing with you. I also encourage all readers to ignore you from now on. There is no point adding fuel to a wildfire. Goodnight.
Syed Alwi,
There are so many people trying to reason with you in a nice manner and you are so aggressive….chill man….Who was it that started the hug campaign??? well,nvm, i will still give u a hug Syed Alwi to calm you down. now that the people have start to call for ignoring you, maybe you can do your part and rein in your temper. gosh, your post is just so aggressive and it is like hinting that…if you don’t do this, bad things will happen. that’s definitely not the way to grab positive attention
Mr Syed Alwi
Maybe you are right. But maybe so are they. The problem is most of the clever people who are best able to appreciate your rightness and discuss it rationally for some strange reason are no longer here or have decided not to post or whatever reasons. To me they just took off like a travelling circus. I dont even know why. Can anyone tell me? As I have been travelling lately. So even if you insist you are right, the current people engaging you may not be able to see your pov even if they wish too. That I fear may mean it may not be very productive for you or them either. Good night.
Dear Dr Chia Tin Lek,
Thanks for your advice. I am in agreement with what you say. 100% agree with you.
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
SZ, I started the hugs campaign. You can also read my post #76. I think everyone should take a chill pill. Dr Ayed Aiwi’s posts may be quite off topic by now, and his tone somewhat aggressive, but he isn’t entirely wrong. I looked back at Andrew’s comments on #3, and though I believe he didn’t intend it that way, it could also be misread as ‘condescending’. We all should always be mindful that online communication is not like face-to-face communication where you can get a better idea of the other party’s intent by tone of voice and facial expression.
Dr Aiwi’s points aren’t entirely new either. Back in university I had a Malay schoolmate, very smart, very well-informed, who also raised the issue of what he perceived as marginalization of Malay/Muslims in Singapore, or a really honest discussion of the Malay/Muslim issues in public. Whenever I could, I also spoke to my Malay friends to see if they felt the same way. Some do, some don’t. I don’t have enough statistics to verify. But the fact is, yes, we do have a segment of the Malay population who feel the same. The recent National Day article in ST by the Malay journalist proves as much. However, too bad they didn’t have a really honest discussion, and just put an alternate opinion by another Malay and left it at that.
However, for all your frustration, Dr Aiwi has to understand that many of the readers are possibly not Malays. Even if we do try to empathize, there is no way we can 100% identify with your genuinely felt agitation. This isn’t racism; it is a fact of life. I cannot make any claims, but I do believe that it must have been quite a challenge being in a Malay ‘peninsula’ and yet a minority, while at the same time having a faith that is largely misunderstood, or not understood in the historical context, by much of the world.. being seen as the Other. (just falling back on my shallow understanding of Edward Said) Correct me if I’m wrong. I have Chinese relatives living in Malaysia, and I can see their frustration living under bumiputra.
But you would also likely agree with me that it is a very very difficult topic to deal with. A discussion on race-religion issues require extraordinary patience and restraint, and a willingness to face the truth no matter how ugly. How many people are ready for that? Though I would also agree with you, that just because it is difficult doesn’t mean we should shun in. Shunning it in the past was what caused such touchiness in the first place (though you can’t really blame the PAPpies in lieu of what Lee’s generation went through)
I honestly do not think the TOC writers and editors intend NOT to talk about it at all. Like you said, and I do agree with you to a certain extent – the issue is there if we bother to look. I guess due to the recession and the perceived failure of the gahmen to deal with it properly, maybe that’s why such ‘policy-topics’ take precedence. Maybe in their haste to reply they didn’t take the sensitivity of the issue into account, and hence sounded dismissive to you.
I’ll share with you something that happened when I was in NS. Back then I found it fun to be slapping everyone’s head when they wore helmets. Then one day the inevitable happened – i whacked a Brunei-ian buddy on his head. And nearly got whacked in return. Only when I understood what getting slapped on the head meant for a Muslim did I understand his reaction.
As for the comments by the other readers, quite likely their response is not a result of your content, but your tone of voice. It doesn’t matter if you’re right or wrong. A person who is perceived as acting in an overtly aggressive way always gets the brickbats.
I dunno what is the Arabic word, (correct me if I’m wrong) I think it’s “ghufran” – forgiveness. Maybe we can all exercise a bit of ghufran here. Also, I believe, as TOC matures and grows in active members such that they have a similar Malay/Muslim of your intellectual calibre, there will be more space devoted to discussing the issues facing Malay/Muslims.
Ok? Is everyone fine with this? Can? Ready to hug?
To Dr Syed Alwi,
I appreciate some of your comments on this site and I do agree that there are certain specific problems within the various cultural communities in Singapore that are very difficult for others outside those communities to understand.
Instead of asking TOC to include more articles that highlight the issues that you concerned about, you could start your own blog and take the first step in sharing your insight.
And after you start, TOC might link and feature some of your posts now and then. Do not seek their patronage. Do what you know best, and do it alone.
Zelfy
A beautiful piece you have penned.
Subjects can be controversial or contentious but you can hold your ground and put across your hear felt views strongly and tactfully. I know it is difficult for the strong headed. But we must all try.
It is a tutorial for me too. Thanks a lot.
K Das
I am so sorry, It should be to Zefly
To Joshua,
“Tough question. Quite honestly, everyone will react differently. You can expect a certain level of very strong disagreements from some people. In my case, as long as you don’t rub it in my face too much, I’ll just take it as another perception that is probably good to mull over for a while instead of getting worked up.
But what you had written is, what i would consider, as something that is best left for other blogs and websites and not TOC.
Lastly, I know this is tough, but I hope some of you, who are wont to be worked up by WKC’s comments, to exercise some restraint. Not that I agree with his views, quite the opposite, but if you reply, it will ultimately be an exercise in futility, and we don’t wanna spoil anyone’s new year.”
Precisely, Joshua.
As I have stated, religion is a sensitive issue to some [or many?[ people.
People discussing religion must be aware there are lots of people out there who may have different beliefs, religious or non-religious. My post was, inter alia, a precautionary notice to anyone who are inclined to think religious or race issues should be discussed in open forums like this. When anyone expouses his/her religious views/beliefs he/she can expect rejoinders from others, including of course atheists/agnostics.
Your post in response to mine is a clear example.
WKC
I think perhaps, because the word ‘religion’ has so many connative meanings for everyone – some see it as the cause of millions of conflicts and sufferings around the world, some see it as having ‘saved’ their lives and given it meaning, most people would rather not talk about anything related to it at all.
However, there is a distinction about discussion of the validity of one’s religion, which, in my experience, leads nowhere, unless one is open enough, and discussion of how religion affects the socio-economic fabric of a segment of people for example.
You cannot have a satisfactory or in-depth discussion of the Malay/Muslim community without an understanding of how Islam affects their lives. Or how Islam is not only a way to conduct one’s personal life, but also has a economic-political element to it, maybe (based on what scant readings I make) more so than other faiths.
Or, for example, (I’m just posing a hypothesis) the role that Chinese folk religion (ancestral worship, belief in many deities, ‘taoism’ etc) plays in affecting the psyche of the average non-Christian, non-buddhist Chinese.. and if there is a correlation between this sort of belief and their socio-economic status?
Anyway.. at the end of the day, I always feel it’s not the topic, but rather people’s willingness to engage in discussions in a respectful tone. But this is just my opinion, and it’s open to be convinced of otherwise. i mean, no loss to me even if someone else manage to persuade me to change my mind. And here’s where I believe is what causes so many such unnecessary conflicts. We always feel as if we got something to loss if we concede to a stronger, better-argued point of view (when in fact the only thing we lose is our artificial mental boundaries) And that is where all the emotional stuff start coming in. And we all huff and puff and blew the house down.
K Das,
you’re welcome. I was just putting the overnight test to work. (see post 76)
WKC,
additional notes- I agree with you that it is difficult to discuss in an open forum. What is needed perhaps, is some ground rules, and someone experienced and ‘non-partisan’ to act as moderator. And maybe, just for the specific topic, a longer time-lag between someone submitting a comment and having it available for all to see. Yes, though not an advocate of censorship, in some cases it is necessary.
Dear Friends;
please bear with me here.
Kindly permit me to pen one last Statement Of Fact here and that is, Race(ethnicity) is predestined(natural) whereas Belief is an acquired(learnt) entity.
Although some religions are intricately linked to ethnicities, history does show us that Belief are changeable. Examples; the Chinese were(are) Ancestor Worshippers, when Buddhism(from India) was introduced, a large proportion of Chinese then became Buddhists and some embraced Christianity and Islam when these religions were introduced into China.
The Religious History of Indonesia is quite similar, originally Animistic, large section of Indonesia became Buddhist during the Majapahit Period when Indian Cultures were widely adopted. The Europeans came later and converted many to Christians. Later when the Middle-easterners came, majority of the Indonesians were converted to Muslims.
Throughout the changes of Faith, Race remains constant as it is non-changeable.
Due to the above, I opine that Ethnicity(Race) is of a totally different substance to that of religion. Lumping them together as one entity for open discussions will always result in very unpleasant developments as evidenced in the whole of Human History.
It is very unfortunate that Nature has created different ethnicities that divide/confuse the Human Race and the Races(ethnic) created religions to further complicate matters.
If only Humans can keep matters of the Heart WITHIN THEIR OWN HEARTS WITHOUT THE AMBITIONS OF INFLUENCING OTHERS, the WORLD WOULD BE BETTER AND NICER TO ALL.
I Maybe guilty of ignorance and being simplistic and I will also say that I lack the mental stamina to go beyond here.
Pardon me one last time.
patriot
And Dr Syed, here is something I came across in the SDP manifesto:
Respect, not manipulate, the ethnic minority
A concerted effort must be made to address the concerns of the ethnic minorities in Singapore, especially the Malays. Merely identifying high profile individuals within the Malay community and bringing them into the fold of the PAP is insufficient. If the ideal of multiracialism is to be realised, the PAP cannot galvanise anti-Malay feelings among the majority ethnic Chinese by raising the spectacle of communal politics every time the Malays call for an alternative form of leadership within their community. Such a tactic will only engender greater resentment and polarisation among the ethnic groups, and eventually back-fire on society.
Joshua [#125 & #127]
Tks for the feedback.
I am currently a member of of an Internet forum that is dedicated principally to discussions about God/god/religion – basically a Theism v Atheism website. Ad hominem is not encouraged and so is foul language. Aside from such proscriptions, anyone can say anything they want. This is the kind of forum that people should join if they are interested in discussing/debating questions about God/god and all related issues. One can criticize and may of course be criticized in return. Should anyone resort to language that is deemed unsuitable by the Adminsitrator[s] of the site, their message would be deleted.
I agree with you that some sort of censorship may be necessary.
BTW, I have a zest to argue on questions about God/religious issues, but on the side of atheism.
As much as I am tempted to reply to you about Atheism,
I shall not.
All it takes for people to continue talking about religion here is
for 1 reply about religion.
This can be a vicious cycle.
Yes, I agree that religion discussions should be conducted in specialised forums, not here.
WKC,
sounds interesting. I’ll pop by for a look. :)
Patriot,
I half-agree with you. But let me say the parts i disagree first. I disagree that race is a bigger determining factor in a community’s psyche than religion. You mentioned Malays. But did you know that the Fillipinos are also of Malay stock? But you would find they have less much less in common with Singapore Malays than with Indonesian or Malaysian Malays. The question I pose to you is – why? If ethnicity takes precedence over religion, then does the loyalties of JI lie with Islam, or with the Malays (from Indonesia, Malaysia etc) which make up a huge portion of it? Does a Christian Indian have more in common with a HIndu Indian than say, a Christian Eurasian?
But I would agree with you that perhaps not all are ready to deal with discussion of this sort in a open forum. I have explained, and reinterated – if religion is to be mentioned in any discussion, it should be used either as
a) a reference. Or as a quote to back up a point. Whether you believe in them or not, Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed, etc, always have something spot-on to say about human nature, and also about the potential of humans to do good. To steer clear of even any mention of them in the name of being religious-free is depriving ourselves from some of the most beautiful words ever uttered. Also, when you discuss policies pertaining to abortion, euthanasia, use of contraception etc… how do you hope to have a discussion even, when for some people it is predominantly a religious issue?
b) how it affects a community. How can you even hope to understand how another community thinks without delving into the thing that is closest to them? And maybe, maybe, it’s because of all these hush-hush that so much misconceptions of the religions of the others exist. How many of us know enough about the other religions to understand that what might be immoral and barbaric now made perfect sense in the community back in the days the religion was being established? How much of all these misconceptions is borne out of wilful ignorance and fear of knowledge, disguised as ‘preserving the status-quo’?
But I concede that you could be right. Even after I explained myself three times, I suspect many readers still think a topic on religion will be about ‘my god vs your god vs no god’, and nothing else. I’m interested in finding out about other people’s religion so I can understand them better. Not in a competition between Shiva and Moses.
Oh well. Calling it a day.
Shalom. God bless. Salaam. Ommm. Boyanbolomi (am I missing out some other words of well-wishing?)
To correct a point – when i wrote about JI “then does the loyalties of JI lie with Islam”.. I do not mean the Islam as practiced by many, but a perverted ideology pretending to be Islam. Apologies if anyone were offended on first reading.
The smartest and most disturbing comment I believe came from post 118 by a certain Dr Chia. He pretty much sums up my thoughts. Btw I also would like to know what happened to all the intelligent people who used to be here.
They seemed to have just evaporated or moved on somewhere else. Has anything else been happening somewhere else in the net? I also think we cannot make much head way without the intelligent people, so what is the point of all this?
just my 2 cents, if anyone cares to know.
Otterman,
I flunked my Mensa test. You won’t believe how bad. Apparently I am slightly better than a dimwit.
But I was thinking… how intelligent is an intelligent person if he can’t explain a concept in such a way that even a five year old can understand? I think Einstein said something to that effect.
Also, the PAP is filled with intelligent people. No, seriously. But that didn’t stop them from screwing up in the eyes of many.
There is also a difference between intelligence and wisdom. The really wise one respects everybody if those who disagree with him, and will not imply everyone here is stupid simply because they can’t see his point. It doesn’t need to take a smart person to know that.
Oh, but what do I know? I flunked my Mensa.
“The really wise one respects everybody if those who disagree with him” Wow! You know what. I agree with you. Perhaps If you r so smart then maybe u can also tell of us why recently all the smart and intelligent comments. I used to enjoy have all gone silent? Or maybe you prefer not to see the deficit or even ask yourself why. Maybe if you did you may see the flaws in what I just copied and paste here.
You talk about respect as if its given, well I have news for you, its earned with blood and sweat. Win people over with persuasion of your argument even if you defeat them fair and square, they will still hate you but at least they respect you, but instead what happened here, they cut and cut and cut and at the end of the day you cap it off with some nonsense about respecting people etc etc etc you reap what you sow.
Sumiko,
I don’t understand your point. You do notice that I am among the stupid ones here which otterman have lamented about… since, according to him and you, the smart ones have really gone away. So I while I appreciate the compliment that you think I’m so smart whereas I truly believe I am of average to below average intelligence, I have to say I don’t deserve it.
You talk about respect being earned with blood and sweat, as if you and you alone hold the absolute knowledge in your hands. Well, maybe it’s just my average middle class upbringing, but I was raised to believe that everyone has a point, and if you don’t even respect his point, because he obviously must be convinced of the validity of it if not he won’t be saying it out in the first place, you can’t persuade him no matter how valid your argument. The whole episode between Dr Syed and the rest of the people here is enough proof of that. Everyone has a truly valid point that requires deeper thought, but it seems that we all prefer to preach than to learn. And yes, my own fingers are pointing back at me as well.
I always believe that one’s intelligence is a gift to be used in the service of others.If you can’t even give respect to those whose intellect are perceived to be lower than yours, and you smugly post a comment making sweeping remarks about the dirth of intelligence here, than what use is your intellect? But then again, there are people who give respect to all people first, and there are those who believe they shouldn’t respect people until the persons have proven to be deemed worthy of their respect.
You may be very smart, perhaps… but it seems not smart enough to put your points across in a cool rational way. You seek to win people and defeat arguments with your rapier-intelligence; I simply prefer to find a common ground between divergent views so we all can move ahead.
So I can’t answer your question why the smart people have all gone away. But maybe instead of going away to some online ivory tower, you guys should just stay back and help contribute to a livelier debate here, even if the stupid remarks here drive you nuts. Seriously folks. In times like these we need all the smart people we can find. But the smart people have to understand that in for anything to move forward they have to work with the stupid people, and not make the stupid people feel worse about themselves by calling them stupid, and staying away. Afterall, the world will always have more stupid people than smart people. So contribute to raise the standard of intelligence here if you feel it has gone down. We all look forward to it.
Ok? Deal? :)
Hugs.
oi? What happened to sumiko’s entry? Die. I have a feeling my entry will be removed as well. Can please put her entry back? It’s ok if it’s out of point. Dun worry my feelings are not hurt.
hahaha, good on you gal! Zefly, You should not have replied so fast, that way maybe she wouldnt have been so convincing with what she said here hahaha
res ipsa loquitor.
haha,
I won’t be too happy if i were you though. If what Sumiko said was true, that all comments here are not intelligent, that sorta includes your entry too… :P
And next time, just say “the thing speaks for itself”. Not everyone understands Latin.
Dr Alwi is not asking that we tackle issues with the intention of taking the govt on.
I believe he is asking for the discussion of Muslim or Islamic issues so that the wider audience, that is Singapore of other races, come to understand why Muslims have to sometimes take a different stand to those subscribed by the mainstream. This is a good proposition insofar as it remains within the realm of civilised discussions without it degenerating into what the ob markers were placed there in the first place.
Looking at the comments posted here, the danger that such discussions might get out of control will most likely surface and is quite a forgone certainty. It is sad that such a good initiative can be misconstrued by our mischievous mindsets that tell us stories of doom once we open the legendary can of worms.
I think Singaporeans have to have the courage to take on issues that the govt has been telling us not to touch on. When can we grow to maturity if we are not brave enough to face these thorny issues head on? Here we have a Dr Alwi, a Muslim, and most likely, one who is well versed in the teachings of Islam, offering us his wealth of knowledge, to help us understand our Muslim brothers and fellow Singaporeans better; and what do we do? We run away as fast as we can, afraid that we are inviting trouble, afraid that TOC may be closed down and we will all be left high and dry after indulging ourselves in its sweetness.
We start making excuses that like why stop at Islamic issues? Why not gay issues? Why not women’s issues? Why not Chinese issues? Why not Indian issues? Why indeed? Why are we asking these questions in the first place?
Don’t you see how suppressed we have become when we ask these sort of questions? Do we need to take up arms and go to war by asking and discussing such issues? Because of one bad experience, we prevent, by all means, not to touch the same issue again? Is not history supposed to help us along for us to draw on its lesson so that we do not make the same mistakes that resulted in trouble? Or is history used to make us a repressive type of people who becomes cowardly and one with loads of excuses to run away from thorny issues?
I agree most with AhKao #7) that tacking such issues will be reason enough for the PAP govt to close down the blogsite but then again, how many blogsites does it need to close down before the people really get fed up with such bullying tactics? Do we sit by the side and wonder without ever knowing the answer?
My humble advise is for TOC to introduce ratings. Set up a corner for the discussion of such issues with a cautionary note to visitors, readers and comments to adhere to a code of conduct. Work on it. It can be done. And, don’t stop with Muslim issues.
Let us show the PAP govt that its hard work to create a more gracious and open society is bearing fruits. We can be the testament to such a success. There is no reason for the PAP govt to close anyone down.
Throw away your fears my friends.
I support Dr Syed Alwi views. TOC is a bit narrow in its representations as a blog for all S’poreans knowing full bloody well that 15-18% of the critical votes comes from Malay/Muslim brethens and sisters. Are there fears to touch on the subject? Are there a resignation of inadequate support and info on this subject? Can Dr Syed Alwi be drafted, hauled and invited on board? TOC, what say you people? Plse speak. Do some soul searching before rigidly defending with a brave front with mama reasons and brushing off suggestions.
To gemami [#142] and Oscar [#143]
Just a simple question: Are you saying that TOC should allow religious and ethnic issues to be discussed freely on this board?
“Are you saying that TOC should allow religious and ethnic issues to be discussed freely on this board?”
It just take one clown with his harmful and sensitive remarks (possibly anonymous from the establishment) to deliberately close down the whole TOC site. Do you really want to see head chop like those in Iraq ?
Let me recount a incident I see while travelling to Arab country. I remember someone reporting a headless AngMoh along the riverside which I was told that he was murdered as the result of insulting and blaspheming the ISLAM religion even though he may be right ! So if someone who do not really understand the religion and just wanna talk some nonsense, please submit your name and IC as well along with your comment, I won’t be surprised you will be living in fear in Singapore.
Having a debate on racist and religion are no problem until most of the comments are just ignorant and disrespectful of religion. Prevention is better than cure.
If someone want to talk about religion, setup his own blog and let the debate start from there, at least if thing run astray, can just shut down his blog and move on.
As I had stated in my posting. A matured and professional blog should cover not only common grounds and interests but also some areas particular to the thinkings to some ethic grps. This does not mean (narrow)religious matters. How about habits, customs(adats) and particular practices that can be raised to solve some of our present problems. That is why I urge TOC to invite Dr Syed Alwi to be one of the ocassional writer, vide articles and lent both pairs of his ears and eyes on Malay/Muslim matters which otherwise TOC will be hampered. We need wide angles to have better and deeper insights on things and subjects which some TOC wannabies, bongo, hanjo pucho, half-baked and half-past-six people are incapable of.
#144) WKC:
Just a simple question: Are you saying that TOC should allow religious and ethnic issues to be discussed freely on this board?
Allow me to make it very simple. First of all, TOC holds the discretion whether to allow discussions of such topics or not. What I am suggesting is that we do not shun away from thorny issues just because we have been made to believe that tackling such issues will lead to racial and religious riots.
There are many ways to go about doing this in a civilised and ‘controlled’ manner. By ‘control’, I mean, for each individual to take accountability and responsibility for the comments he/she posts.
How do we do this? I offer two areas of control. More can be introduced as and when it is deemed necessary.
a. Have a separate corner for racial (ethnic) and religious discussions.
b. Contributors to provide personal particulars so as to prevent mischief by those who may drop in with callous remarks and hiding behind the wall of anonymity.
Should discussions get out of control; close it down. At least we know we have tried and it did not work. So there is nothing to lose, and there is nothing to worry over sabotage.
Daniel: ….. at least if thing run astray, can just shut down his blog and move on.
If the govt wants to find fault with you, there is no way and no where you can hide even if you have a nice little halo over your head with white fluttering wings on your back. Taking you to task over religious, racial or even plain char kuey teow issues does not matter as long as they make out a reason for coming after you.
#146 & #147 [Oscar Choy and gemami]
Tks for clarifying.
I look forward to your contributions [articles/comments] on ethnic and/or religious issues, on assumption, as gemami suggested, TOC would establish a separate corner for such issues.
My hope is that people who are interested in such issues are able to discuss them rationally/philosophically, or with an open mind.
I feel that under ‘ethnic’ issues, we can divide into two broad catergories (though hard to really draw the line at times)
Intra-ethnic isses , and INTER-ethnic issues.
Intra-ethnic issues pertain to issues of religion for eg… syriah laws.. such things should be discussed within the ethnic community itself, and though i would be curious to sit in and watch, just for knowledge’s sake, i wouldn’t find it right to comment at all, and I would recommend that intra-ethnic issues be the strict dormain of the ethnicity involved.
Inter-ethnic issues are issues that concern society as a whole, for eg, if there is any ‘glass ceiling’ in certain sectors of the civil service, and reasonably if there are real concerns why such ceilings exist. Or something as mundane as, are there enough considerations for people of other faiths when designing towns and facilities? I find it strange for eg, why the issue of asking for Tamil signs in MRT and Bus stations was treated like a hot potato.
But yeah, of course there still need to be prudence when discussing such issues.
Many thanks to WKC and Joshua for agreeing that there is room enough for TOC to carry religious and ethnic topics for discussions.
I would like to reiterate that we must not shun away from such discussions if we expect to grow in maturity as a social, political and civil people .
Many have argued that because we are positioned amongst neighbours of various religious and ethnic compositions, we must stay away from touchy issues that might do harm to the harmony of co-existence. I beg to differ. I feel we must take the initiative to learn about each other and to know what are the reasons behind their beliefs, their culture and the taboos, their race, their history, their practices, everything that we are so ignorant about.
Can we claim to be living in harmony when we do not even know why the Muslims behave in ways very much dictated Islam & what actually is Islam, or, why the Chinese have their own perculiar practices, or, why the Indians do not seem to be a cohesive race; or; why the Eurasians do not feel they have a place in the country?
We have been co-existing without bothering to find the answers to these questions. It is time we take steps to, not only co-exist, but to really live in harmony, fully aware of each other’s race, religion and culture.
The problem is, who is dare enough to discuss such issues? I vouch, while speaking up for Dr Syed Alwi, that the Muslims are crying out to be understood. Many of us believe we understand where the Muslims are coming from but this is very far from the truth.
Let me relate a personal experience.
Last year, I wrote an article that I place in the department’s bulletin board. The article was about Ramadan and in it I detailed the observances and practices throughout the period of fasting leading to Hari Raya Puasa, the celebration.
The Chinese and Indians in the department were so taken in by the article that they begin to relate to the Muslims better because they now understood what the Muslims were doing and more importantly, why they were doing them.
Likewise, I did a write up for the same bulletin board, on the observances and practices of the Chinese in preparation for the Lunar New Year celebration. The same sentiments were expressed to me by the other ethnic groups and all were very appreciative of the effort to create harmony and understanding among the races.
Based on these experiences, I dare say, there is scope and space enough for such discussions. The trick is for contributers to be sensitive and to thread with care and caution.
No harm trying. Like I said before, close the thread down if it gets out of control. This is one good thing about blogs. The host can control what it wants to carry.