by: Joshua Chiang/


There were two moments in my life when I was exceedingly self-conscious purchasing from bookstores.

The first was when I had to buy a copy of the Kama Sutra as a wedding gift.

The second was when I purchased a copy of Dr Chee Soon Juan’s Your Future, My Faith, Our Freedom: A democratic blueprint for Singapore.

Like many people then, I didn’t think highly of Dr Chee. What I knew about him was from the local newspapers and television. I thought his constant focus on human rights issue grating to my ears. I remembered gloating over his loss at the 1997 elections chanting something akin to a Hokkien expletive that also rhymes with ‘good-bye’. Above-all, I felt he was self-serving and attention-seeking.

Well he got my attention.

When I saw the book sitting on a shelf in the bookstore some time in 2003, I knew I had to read it. But little did I know how much of an effort it would be to simply walk over to the counter and pay for the book.

See, I was afraid that people would mistake to be a fan of Dr Chee. Or worse. A supporter of the Singapore Democratic Party. Those losers who only got 20% of the votes at the 2001 elections!? Not me! So I tucked the book under my arm, making sure that the cover faces inside, and made my way to the cashier, all the while rehearsing what I would say if the cashier asked me why I wanted to buy the book.

It was for research purposes. You don’t actually believe I was enamoured with Chee Soon Juan do you? Heh heh…

Of course, with the clarity of hindsight now, I realized what I was fighting back then was internalized fear. The inner policeman shaming me for even having a passing interest in what Lee Kuan Yew would call a political dud.

When I express disdain, even disgust with the strong words that Dr Chee used to describe the PAP, little did I know it was because I was afraid to feel the same emotions. It was the inner policeman saying that politics should be about pragmatic bread and butter issues. Not ideals.

——–

If I were to be truly objective, there are probably many other people who have done more to shape Singapore’s socio-political landscape during the 2000s then Dr Chee. Workers’ Party Secretary General Low Thia Kiang, for instance, has probably done more than any other opposition politician to show that opposition parties can become credible alternatives. Or veterans Chiam See Tong and Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam for persevering even as they age caught up with them. Or even Lee Kuan Yew, who by his mere persistence in staying on as the Senior Minister, and then the Minister Mentor just goes to show how much overdue change is needed to the system.

But I was asked to write a personal piece, not an op-ed. And for me, Dr Chee had more of an impact on shaking me out of my political apathy than any of the above-mentioned.

Correction: it wasn’t so much a shake as it was a slap across the face, a dousing of ice-cold water on the head, a kick in the groin.

I finished Your Future, My Faith, Our Freedom in one sitting. And when I finally closed the book, I wished I had not read it. I had never been a big fan of the Establishment but I had never really stopped to ask why.

What I felt towards the Establishment wasn’t even the kind of resignation that goes like: “Ok so we don’t exactly have this thing called democracy but at least we have safe streets and roofs over our head.” I simply acted as if the system never existed. It was much less painful for example, to accept that the press model we have in Singapore is a socially responsible press (which was what we were told by our university lecturer) instead of a State-controlled one even if its by a few degrees of separation. Ignorance is bliss, so they say. Unfortunately curiosity had always been my curse. Your Future, My Faith, Our Freedom was my red pill moment. (It wasn’t the only one of course, in the subsequent years I would pop more red pills – The Hatchet Man, Lee Kuan Yew: The Beliefs Behind the Man, Lee’s Law, A Nation Cheated, Once A Jolly Hangman, etc)

Your Future wasn’t exactly Das Kapital. There wasn’t anything written inside that was truly shocking. But when I finished the book, I felt something towards the Establishment  which I hadn’t felt since I first learnt that I couldn’t keep my hair long because of the annual In-Camp Training. (I wanted to be Bono then, and Bono had long hair).

I felt anger. I felt robbed. I felt I had to share the book with someone else so that they would know as well – which I did. I never got the book the back. Perhaps the borrower feeling the same as I did, passed it on to someone else.

My anger wasn’t so much caused by what Dr Chee wrote about the Establishment. But because of the lengths it would go through to deny people like Dr Chee or JBJ the platform to reach out to as many people as possible with what they had to say.

I remembered thinking, “Why can’t we decide for ourselves whether what they said makes sense or not? Why do you have to keep telling us that they’re dangerous people not to be taken seriously?”

But for a few years after that, I continued to hold a negative opinion of Dr Chee. I accepted that what he wrote made sense, but I still found his methods of engaging the State too confrontational. I thought he was wasting his time with all those civil disobedience stunts. I found myself wishing that he would just stop with the publicity gimmicks and tell the people what he wrote in his book, without realizing of course, that he couldn’t even if he wanted to.

But as those acts of dissent continued, something changed in how I viewed them. I stopped thinking, “Why are you doing this again?” and instead began wondering – how can the State treat its own citizen the way it treated Dr Chee?

I couldn’t believe my eyes when I saw an online video of how Dr Chee and his sister Chee Siok Chin were followed by two men throughout his round-island walk to raise awareness of poverty and underpaid workers in Singapore. I actually found myself feeling indignant for Dr Chee when he was stopped from starting a march from Speakers’ Corner at Hong Lim Park by the police who formed a human barricade around him. I thought it was remarkably petty how the State wouldn’t even allow a private screening of One Nation Under Lee – which didn’t exactly say anything new that people didn’t already know to begin with.

At some point, it dawned on me that Dr Chee must be doing something right for the State to be doing something so wrong.

It dawned on me too the reason why I disliked him so intensely in the past. It went beyond the media-portrayal of Dr Chee as a raving sociopath. JBJ and Chiam See Tong weren’t exactly darlings of the Establishment but back then they were talked about in a less derisive tone than Dr Chee was often spoken of. I remembered attending a dialogue session for young adults hosted by a Minister where one of the participants – a teacher – gleefully recounted how even her students thought Dr Chee was a laughing stock.

The Village - Horror flick or political allegory?

Dr Chee wasn’t just content to speak up for the people. He was the guy who constantly and deliberately ran into the electrical fence to remind us we were prisoners. I resented him for it because I would rather pretend the fence was there to keep us safe. You know that M. Night Shyamalan movie The Village? It is far more comforting to know “Those We Don’t Speak Of” were real and not the village elders dressed up in rubber suits.

I began visiting the SDP website Singapore Democrat – and got my first taste of alternative news. For someone whom by then had grown tired of making excuses for the mainstream media – I worked in Mediacorp for two years, and some of my friends were, and still are working at Singapore Press Holdings – it was the breath of fresh air I had been waiting for.

Years later, I found myself sitting face to face with Dr Chee at an ice-cream parlor a stone’s throw away from the SDP office. I had taken on the role of Editor-in-Chief for The Online Citizen (a post which I held until April this year) and one of the first tasks in preparation for the General Elections was a series of interviews with the leaders of the opposition parties. Naturally, I made sure I get to conduct the interview with Dr Chee. Dr Chee had intrigued, baffled and frustrated me for a good part of the last decade. It was time I got to ask him the questions I’ve always wanted to ask. More importantly, I wanted to give a fair representation of the man whom the mainstream media had vilified throughout most of his political career. When I finally published the interview (you can read it here), I added what the mainstream media would probably never publish – a picture of a smiling Dr Chee.

It was my own gesture of thanks for the red pill he had given me way back in the 2003.

Happy National Day, Dr Chee.

 

The writer presenting a token of appreciation to Dr Chee for being a panelist at TOC's Face to Face Forum

—–

This article is part of a series where contributors were asked for their personal take on who shaped the decades. Dr Chee Soon Juan is the man who shaped the 2000s, according to this writer.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

工人党公布宣传短片 佘雪玲、李丽连等女将露面

续昨日发布预告短片,揭露12张工人党成员面孔后,今日该党发布宣传片,由该党成员阐述他们参与工人党的看法。 依序出现在短片镜头的,就包括:阿裕尼集选区原议员毕丹星、林瑞莲、原非选区议员陈立峰、拉依萨(Raeesah Khan)、佘雪玲、榜鹅东区前议员李丽连、Jamus Lim、法德利(Fadli Fawzi)、罗秀雯、育滴提拉(Yudhishthra Nathan)符策涫和贝理安。 短片12人中,包括林瑞莲在内就有五名女将,不过,四名工人党原议员却没出现在短片内,包括刘程强、陈硕茂和费沙,以及后港选区原议员方荣发。不过尚未知该党会否进一步揭露该党排兵布阵。 李丽连2006年6月加入工人党,在2013年榜鹅东补选代表该党参选并胜选,不幸在2015年大选落败。不过近期她积极协助毕丹星处理友诺士区事务。 佘雪玲则曾在2011年大选,代表国民团结党出征马林百列集选区,当时年仅24岁的她就立即备受选民瞩目,成为选举中的人气王之一。2017年初,就开始协助工人党走访东海岸集选区。 罗秀雯则在上届选举,则在上届选举代表工人党出战义顺集选区。 至于27虽的拉依萨,则是女权组织“Reyna Movement”的创办人,但她在短片中也分享,自己协助工人党聆听居民心声,了解居民面对的问题。

Singapore construction firms seeking advice on force majeure amidst Covid-19

Singapore construction companies are seeking advice on the possibility for them to…

New northern hospital – public transport concerns

Construction of the new $400 million, 400-beds Alexandra@Yishun hospital is now underway,…

黄循财:未来再无分流制 转型科目编班全面计划

教育部长兼财政部第二部长黄循财表示,未來将会移除分流制(streaming),在中学全面实施科目编班全面计划(Full Subject-based Banding)。 黄循财于今日(4日)在脸书上发文表示,要从分流制转换到科目编班全面计划的确是非常重大的工程,尤其是对于教学和课程安排上。 前教育部长王乙康,是在去年3月作出宣布,本地中学生的普通和快捷源流之区分,将在2024年结束,正式宰了落实近40年的分流制“圣牛”。 他也指出,日前曾到访试点中学立德中学(Riverside Secondary School),其中有许多来自不同背景的中一学生,他们除了共同学习品格与公民教育课程(CCE),其他科目如英语、数学或科学都会根据他们的学科群分组学习。 经视察后,黄循财表示,其效果确实非常正面,从教师中反馈中可得知学生能够根据自己的节奏,并在没有任何偏见底下安心学习,加强自己的强项,同时也能够在小班课程建立稳固的同侪关系。 “有一位老师告诉我,在年头(疫情爆发前),学生参与了为期一周的培训课程,他们一同生活在一起,有助于建立稳固的友谊,让他们进入下一个课程。在科目比较强的同学能够协助较为弱的同学,而且每个人都有自己的学习节奏,又不附带任何标签学习,亦能够融入班级中。” 基于种种可见的好处,黄循财表示,将决定在明年推广新的教育改革,逐步改善学校的教育制度。 科目编班计划是在2014年推出,当时有12所中学试行,让普通源流学生从中一起就根据个人强项修读程度较高的科目。计划取得良好成效,去年已扩大到所有提供普通源流的中学,但学生目前可选的科目只限于英文、母语、数学和科学。…