In Part 2 of an hour-long interview with Seelan Palay, TOC asks about his relationship with the SDP, and what he thinks of public perception of his activism. You can read Part One here.
By Joshua Chiang
Seelan next to his art pieces at the recently-concluded Non-Dominant Discourse exhibition at Post Museum
People often associate you with the Singapore Democratic Party. Are you a full-fledged member of the SDP?
No I never was. Various political parties have asked me to join them, but I didn’t all these years simply because I don’t feel a need to yet, I think it’s great that other people join political parties, but I think where I am, I’m in the arts community and the activist community and I’m just doing my work there, and I try to help out people, I don’t feel a need to enter politics in that manner.
But there’s the sense that you identify more with them than other parties.
Of course I do. Because I found out about local politics through the Internet back then, when I was 18. I went to meet JB Jeyaretnam; I got his book and I asked him to sign it. I stood there and I asked him how I could help him. He kind of thought I was too young maybe. And it’s okay that he thinks that way.
After that, I went to meet SDP, and Dr Chee, and I read his books and everything. I like the ideas expressed in them. That’s why I identify more with them as compared to other political parties. Also because beyond politics they are also now my friends, and also my family friends.
You have heard of Dr Chee before you read his books. At that time there were already a lot of bad publicity about him. So what got you interested to check out his books?
I always believed in a free market of ideas. It’s the main thing that I advocate. The time I got to know about Dr Chee, I already knew that there’s not much of a free market of ideas in Singapore. It’s mostly government controlled or largely government induced/influenced. I kind of viewed Dr Chee and JBJ in the same light. I didn’t let any of the bad press affect my judgment of him. I told myself, if I’m going to judge him, I’m going to have to meet him and talk to him myself. I’m going to read his books first. I’m not going to read the Straits Times’ version of Dr Chee or the Newpaper’s version of Dr Chee.
So when you read his books, did it change any of your perspective?
It’s not about changing perspective. I was never influenced by the mainstream media’s impression of him. It was more like, when I read his books, I know the substance behind the man. And the kind of socio-political, and also economic ideas that he has. I find my own views to be very in line with his. And so I think his books were the things that made me understand him more.
They (the mainstream media) like to promote the idea that he’s just doing demonstrations, like to cause trouble. The thing is, from a young age, I didn’t find anything wrong with demonstrations. They’re fine. So when the media try to tell me that Dr Chee is bad because he does demonstrations, I didn’t see the connection. ‘Cos I would do that if it were me.
What do you think is the public perception of activists like you and Dr Chee?
Sometimes I ask long time friends of mine from school. They know what I do, and almost all of them support what I do. And I think that’s cause they know me as a person. They saw me growing up, they know my values from the start. So none of these mainstream media influenced their perception of me. And after that, as I got more into it, I asked them what their friends and families think of what I do. They all give me different kinds of answers.
There’s actually one quite racialist answer. I have an equal number of Chinese, Malay and Indian friends. But some of these Indian friends I have – the older uncles and some of these friends of my friends. They ask ‘why Seelan wants to get involved in all this? Dr Chee is a Chinese. Lee Kuan Yew is a Chinese. Let them whack each other and die lah. This fella, he’s an Indian , he’s a minority. Just ask him to cover his own backside, make his living and just get on with life.” This may seem quite controversial but this the hard truth. This is what some people say within the Indian community.
Some of the feedback I’ve received… the perception is that you guys are standing up for a cause. It’s a good thing. However at the same time, it puts them off somewhat – what they perceive as this negativity, this anger…
When my Burmese activists friends, all they do is speak up for Aung San Suu Kyi, against the brutal regime in Burma and they are kicked out of the country (Singapore) and they are thrown into countries like Cambodia because they can’t go back to Burma. And they’re left with zero, nothing in their lives. What do you want me to do? Not get angry? If everybody is going to keep quiet and not get angry or upset about these kinds of things… I did that demonstration outside MOM because I was totally disgusted with the way the Singapore Government is doing this to people that I know.
And there are also many people I’ve spoken to who said that they support the idea of demonstrations and they would participate in the ones we’ve organized if they didn’t fear or have to face so much persecution.
One trivial question. Malcolm X or Gandhi.
Gandhi. But I generally don’t look up to figures in that manner, in the sense that I just like reading what they write. There are so many other inspirational figures. So many in South East Asia that are even more inspirational than Gandhi in a sense ‘cos they’re so close to our history. And I feel that we should also look that these people.
But wasn’t Gandhi’s methods less confrontational, more ‘gentle’?
I think we have had gentle protests as well. I don’t know what degree of gentle is. Gandhi during his time was considered a radical as well. They thought his ideas were mad, that he was an angry man with nothing else to do but complain about everything. That’s what his contemporaries thought.
I just don’t look at Gandhi. I look at protests happening around the region. I’ve participated in protests around the region, and I don’t find anything wrong in holding a placard and saying “someone is really not respecting human rights.” I see an event, and I feel, as a human being, I’m going to make a placard, I will write what I want on it. Of course I’m not going to make it defamatory or racially or religiously insensitive. I’m just going to hold it, and I’m going to show that person. They can do whatever they want. They can arrest me they can ignore me. It’s okay. But to me as a human being I’m just expressing myself in that manner. And these people who don’t like it, disagree or feel uncomfortable, there’s nothing I can do. I’m not at your house showing it to you. You’re not the person I’m addressing. So if you don’t like it, that’s fine, but I’m still going to do it.
And at the same time I also organize forums, exhibitions, film screenings. I post articles on my Facebook, I write articles for TOC (The Online Citizen), for my blog, I also write articles for socio-political publications, and all of these are the other activities that make up what I do. How many demonstrations have I done compared to the advocacy work that I do everyday? Compared to the video editing I do everyday. Compared to the art process I do… I took three years to do this piece of artwork (a piece of collage work that was recently exhibited at Post Museum). People don’t see this side of me and I don’t blame them for not seeing that. They only see the demonstrations because those are the things that get the media attention. And it’s just what happened with Dr Chee Soon Juan. Like people don’t see how he interacts with his family. People don’t see what he has to do everyday. And they only know him based on what the media has showed them.
Do you think it’s the media’s influence, or it’s human nature to fear and reject what they do not understand?
I think both. You can’t say it’s only the media. It’s also because it doesn’t happen enough often so it’s this fear of the unknown, so they don’t know what to expect.
After doing activist work for eight years, are there any encouraging signs? What do you see happening right now.
I think the Internet has provided the kind of space to express themselves or let off steam. That’s the most positive thing. Many years ago, you might guess that there are so many people reading the forum, but thanks to Facebook you can sort of gauge how many people there actually are. The numbers of blogs have increased. The number of online activities that translate into offline action has also increased. Like for example the campaigns that TOC has taken up. The campaigns that other organizations have taken up. So it’s very dynamic… ever-growing. There are positive things that have happened. All is not lost.
So what about the people sitting behind their desks and typing, do you think this is the first step towards something, or is it more like – this is it?
I can’t say if this is it, but that depends on people’s conscience, the socio-political climate, Lee Kuan Yew’s existence. (laughs) I mean it’s a very real concern people have. And I would think that it’s more… It’s just positive. It’s good that people are writing online whether it’s anonymous or not, it’s good. I’d rather have that than eight years ago, I Google-searched for Singapore human rights, all I get is the Think Centre, now I’ve got so much other stuff to read. So many people’s opinions. It’s good, you know.
What about the quality of the content? On one hand you have your intellectual posts and on the other hand, ranting.
I appreciate both. The former, it makes you think. The second, makes you laugh. I just like it that people express themselves, because I always feel that a lot of times… when I go other countries, even amongst Asians, I always feel that Singaporeans express themselves less. It’s partly due to the climate and social conditioning. And I feel that if more people express themselves, then we have a free market of ideas, and more people stand up for what they believe in. That can only be good in my view. Especially if you are going into a knowledge-based economy, and that’s where we want to go, then having such an environment would be good.
But on top of the fear of repercussions, there’s also this aversion to messiness, which many feel may threaten the stability.
I hear that from some people. But I’m not the government, I’m not going to decide on how much freedom of speech you’re going to have. If you want freedom of speech in Singapore, you gonna have to decide how much you want and take it for yourself. And you’ve got to know the consequences when you go about it.
As for how the system will change… by the time you get a democratic society where we have freedom of expression, the entire economic system in Singapore might collapse, because of the CPF (Central Provident Fund) bubble exposing itself to be a sham, and everybody loses their CPF money, and HDB devalues, and the whole system might implode with the PAP in power and without freedom of expression. To me that’s even worse. That’ll be like back when Suharto (President of Indonesia) was in power. But if we have a free market of ideas and open debate, when there are real problems like that there can be different voices heard and proposals considered, and there can be a solution found, together, rather than dictated by one person who might be wrong all over again. What he calls himself… the ‘Forecaster’.
With regards to activism, what is the achievement you’re most proud of?
- Seelan outside MOM building in Jan 2009 protesting against the expulsion of Burmese workers who took part in the 2007 protest
Personally I would think, the demonstration that me and my friend Kai Xiong did for the Burmese who were expelled, mainly because after that demonstration, it seemed that none of our other Burmese friends were expelled. I feel like that might be my greatest achievement because through that act of civil disobedience it seemed we could really stop such injustice.
This was after the Burmese demonstration at Orchard Road in 2007. (more about the demonstration here)
Yes. But you can’t say it was inspired by them. Cause their demonstration was completely different it was for democracy, asking ASEAN to stand up for Burma. Which was another thing, because they investigated a lot of them, they started expelling them, which is why we got so… we felt this great sense of injustice being committed. C’mon so many Burmese all over the world are speaking up for their country, and these people are stuck here – what do you want them to do? Sit down at home and just watch Channel Newsasia?
So your demonstration was in response to how they were unjustly treated.
And the high-handed manner which it was carried out.
- ‘Changes’ by Seelan Palay
Last question – What about your future?
My future. Of course, as an artist, what I consider to be my profession first and foremost – I just had another exhibition; I’ll do more. That’s really what I see in my life. I really want to develop my art process more, develop my output, and have more exhibitions. That’s what I really want to do. Other than that there’s freelance video-editing to help pay some bills… a lot of people they think that activism is the main thing is my life. But Art is the main thing in my life. Ever since I was ten years old I already knew I was an artist. I told my mother when I was ten years old, I said one day I was going to grow up to be an artist. Up till now I still believe that. And so on my blog I always put ‘artist’ then ‘activist’. Art is still the most important thing in my life.
Why not just stick to being an artist?
When sometimes at a demonstration, anywhere in the world, there might be a taxi driver who participates… you could also ask him why not just stick to (being a) taxi driver. For me I would answer the same way. I’m an artist, I’ve a conscience, I feel some kind of social responsibility. If I feel something is wrong, I’ll speak up. That’s it.
_____________________________________________
All the best to you and your endeavours Seelan!Thank you for daring to stand out!
I remember the 400 frowns campaign back in 2006. It was done by Seelan as well.
http://www.thinkcentre.org/article.cfm?ArticleID=2791
Hi Seelan, I recommend you also read Dr Martin Luther King’s autobiography, specifically his “I have a dream” speech and also Nelson Mandela’s “Long Road to Freedom”.
I looked up Pramoedya Ananta Toer after you mentioned him yesterday and came across the following quotation which I though very apt for Singapore and Singaporeans:
“Just as politics cannot be separated from life, life cannot be separated from politics. People who consider themselves to be non-political are no different; they’ve already been assimilated by the dominant political culture–they just don’t feel it any more”.
Finally, its worth noting this remark by Catherine Lim from yesterday’s article:
“Instead, everything is now on the Internet, which I am wary of, because there is a lot of scurrilous rubbish online under the cover of anonymity”.
The question is, how many of these internet warriors will be willing to drop their pseudonymous armour and join you and others like you in the real world?
Good luck!
KEEP IT UP!
Bravo Seelan,but why the attention seeking physical act? if its not a political agenda.
Unlike Cathrine,she takes on the whole system with her vocal and writings in MSM,her blog and interviews with BBC, CNN and reputable media without having to wave placards and fast to attract attention.
Like JBJ use to say Quote”Come clean” unquote.
This is one Indian who is solidly behind your efforts Seelan. Keep it up and show them how it’s done.
>>But wasn’t Gandhi’s methods less confrontational, more ‘gentle’?
Does the interviewer even know his history at all? He should at least read a bit about Gandhi before asking such questions.
Historian,
As the interviewer, I hope having reading Gandhi’s autobiography count, although admittedly, it would have not been enough in you eyes. If you have been following the questions closely and seen the interviewee’s response you would understand why the question was asked. The issue wasn’t whether Gandhi’s methods were provocative or not- they certainly were to the British – but in our times if you ask the common folk – who are not as historically knowledgable as you, we seem to have forgotten that. When people revere Gandhi and yet disapprove or even condemn the demonstrators back home in the same breath, they are quick to forget that Gandhi himself, in Seelan’s words – is an angry man. If Gandhi were a Singaporean living now, and doing what he did, he’d have been seen as a troublemaker as well.
@Historian
Having said that, your questions do reflect your belief that people are not well-read or well-informed enough. We share your views too, which is why one of our missions is to inform and educate people on what the MSM isn’t saying. We could certainly do with more people like you. Do write to us at theonlinecitizen@gmail.com and we’ll see how we can do with your extra help and knowledge.
Joshua, chances are, the guy won’t email you at all. Heh.
While both the Ghandian movement, as well as the SDP adopted civil disobedience tactics, there are inportant differences between the two circumstances, note the word circumstances, that the two were operating in.
1. The British largely maintained the rule of law but the PAP does not. That enabled the Ghandian movement to make advances that the SDP continue to remain hampered by, such as the courts themselves refusing to submit that they are aiding in the PAP’s lack of rule of law.
2. There were far more ordinary Indians who were knowledgeable about the rule of law. Singaporeans are sadly lacking in this regard and are therefore less supportive of the SDP’s civil disobedience than Indians were of Ghandi’s.
Thus, the SDP should be lauded simply for sounding the alarm on the lack of rule of law in Singapore. That alone is an a major achievement.
Also, most people have a very romantic view about how events unfolded in India prior to Independence. Ghandi was no sweet talking pacifist; he was a pacifist but he was very firm with his demands.
He was hated by the British.
And another thing was that theSDP’s civil disobedience has been extremely, extremely mild by any standards and most of all by the pre-independence standards of India. It is the reactions by both the authorities as well as other Singaporeans, including opposition supporters, that has been completely out of proportion. Maybe the focus of discussion on civil disobedience should be on this instead because I am sure we will discover just how fear-ridden Singaporeans are.
@Nas
Thanks. That is a good start. But I was hoping Singaporeans will be curious enough to read history for themselves. About Gandhi and also about Singapore.
Now, the latter is a lot more tricky. Unlike Gandhi’s story, which is well documented by impartial historians, ours is dominated by whitewashed accounts such as school textbooks, Man in White and Memoirs of LKY.
Interested readers might get bits of alternative insight by looking up books such as Comet in the Sky, No Man is an Island, Fajar Generation, Said Zahari, Michael Barr, etc.
the world have to line drawn but on the map it has all the line to divide the earth and call individual by names, the world belongs to all human man kind and do we need visa and passport to travel to this earth? why we need a nation? what is nation called? why we need politician? why we need one human to control another human and drain him out of his freedom? we need freedom that comes naturally and each of us should live the life given. we don’t have to work for anyone or to serve anyone as a slave or be it a citizen but we need to help one another and admire the beauty of live and species living among us. god bless
Hi Temujin
We are sorry that we have deleted your posts as they are irrelevant to the discussion at hand. While we are a firm believer in allowing alternate voices to be heard, we do not allow for any soliciting for any political parties on our website. Please refrain from doing that here in future.
That goes out to you too Bernard Chan
Point taken, stay non partisan
I greatly admire this young chap.
He articulates his thoughts well,is very politically aware given his young age..
As an Indian “uncle ” myself, I would say his elders didnt want him to cross swords with this oppresive regime.Being a young man they simply would have wanted him to do the usual Things in life IE, find a good job , get a wife and so on. Perhaps they couldnt put it across well so they chose the “racist ” way.
Just what they did to JBJ ,Francis Seow ,Chee ?
In any case it takes Guts to Stand up and demand to be heard by this regimes who doesnt care a hoot for what the people say.
So Hats off to Seelan !
It takes liitle drops to collect and form a torret to wash away the Dirt on the Landscape.Seelan is the first drop.
Wish him the Best.u have my support .
@NAS,
It is “Gandhian” and not “Ghandian”.
With all due respect to CSJ – he is no where as close to Gandhi in terms of his leadership quality. And mind you Gandhi’s opponents (British) were far more ruthless than PAP.
Koko said “And mind you Gandhi’s opponents (British) were far more ruthless than PAP”.
How do you know? Are you able to substantiate your claim that the British were far more ruthless than PAP? If you can’t than what you said is no different from my fart.
@Koko,
agree with you CSJ cannot come close to Gandhi. but to be fair, how many leaders, past and present can also come close ?
by the way, i don’t quite agree the British who occupied India during that era were far more ruthless than the PAP.
firstly the British were the invaders. on the other hand, CSJ plus other victims and those in the PAP are all citizens of Spore. so in reality, not quite apple to apple comparison.
if the British were really ruthless, Gandhi would have spent a much longer time in detention than Chia Thye Poh.
mind you 32 years and i am pretty sure this is one record that is hard to beat.
secondly, the British would have threatened to shoot 200,000 civilians to ensure 100 years of stability for India.
they could have easily done that, but did not.
and frankly, the British should have no qualms then, simply because they are technically not shooting their own people, so less emotional stress on their soldiers, right ?
somehow all this sounds eerily familiar.
who was it that boldly proclaimed not too long ago that he will shoot 200,000 students to ensure stability for China ?
come to think of it, what kind of human will want to do that ? mind you, unarmed students, fellow citizens !
They ask ‘why Seelan wants to get involved in all this? Dr Chee is a Chinese. Lee Kuan Yew is a Chinese. Let them whack each other and die lah. This fella, he’s an Indian , he’s a minority. Just ask him to cover his own backside, make his living and just get on with life.” This may seem quite controversial but this the hard truth. This is what some people say within the Indian community.
……………………………….
now,this is one sinkie i call SINGAPOREAN.
try harder. i’m voting PAP.
Ever heard of the British and the ‘THE BLACK HOLE OF CALCUTTAR(PRESENT KOLKOTA)’
What LKY did is a walk in the park compared to the “BLACK HOLE”
bleh,
I will vote for any opposition hence my vote will cancel out your vote for the pap so it stands now at 1 – 1.
@ spirit of saddam
Gandhi’s place in history is secure because of the outcome. Similarly, Deng Xiao Peng’s place in history, as well as Martin Luther King’s (he was instrumental in bringing equality to blacks in America in the 1960s, nearly a 100 years after slavery was abolished, it took that long) and Mandela’s.
Singapore’s story is still playing out. Lets reserve our judgements and accolades until after the curtain comes down.
And, by the way, the British ruled India for two centuries with just a handful of British subjects (not more than a few hundred thousands). Most of the soldiers in the Indian Army were Indian, so no emotional connection between the soldiers and the people?
P S Having said that, there was one instance at Jalianwallah Bagh where a British commander ordered his troops to open fire on an unarmed gathering of men, women and children. The order was to shoot to kill, not just injure and round after round was fired (the incident lasted about 10-15 minutes). Casualties were estimated at 1500 with 1000 killed. It was the worst (and probably the only) instance of this type of atrocity in the history of British colonialism in India.
@ Peters Sellers,
thanks for the reminder about Indian soldiers serving the British.
nevertheless, if there were at least 100,000 white men in the British army, then i presume most will be in the front line to do the shooting.
and with rifles in hand, taking out 200,000 unarmed indian civilians was definitely achievable.
therefore, our despot was not exaggerating when he proclaimed he will shoot 200,000 students. it is so much easier now with the kind of modern weapons in hand and our despot knows this.
by the way, i agree singapore’s story is still playing out, but i wonder about your interpretation of “until after the curtain comes down”.
to me, the story should become more interesting when the curtain comes down….for one despot.
about time ordinary singaporeans use their votes to decide outcome of the story.
As you can see Seelan, there is something in the Horizon.
There is hope.