right. enough of corny posts. i've been informed that corny people get killed by cereal killers (thanks Deanne...), so i shall attempt to post something that is
not corny.
so people were seditious in Singapore. now that is unfortunate. for a few reasons.
firstly... if those people really made those comments as what was reported, then they were really in the wrong. so some people, because of religion, do not like dogs and would rather prefer to not have dogs around or even be at places where dogs have been. is that really that big a problem? why must one group make silly remarks that shows a lack of respect to the other group? can't the 2 groups just sit down and sort things out amicably, with sincere mutual respect?
more importantly, what does this reflect of our society? that without big daddy G, we end up as little children, squabbling, making childish, irresponsible, disrespectful remarks about one another, rending the fabric of our society apart. it's as if our so called 'racial harmony' only exists because there are harsh laws that punish anyone who doesn't 'get along'. it's like that computer (or was it a show...) where it's against the law to be unhappy. is that really harmony?
when i was in UK, i had brit friends who would call me 'chink' and crack racist jokes and make racist remarks making fun of Chinese people and Singaporeans in my face. and i would do the same about brits. but it's fine. cos if push comes to shove, if the shit hits the fan, if there were really racial riots or whatever, i know those brit friends of mine will stand by me, protecting me, putting their lives on the line for me. i wonder whether i know any non-Chinese who would do that for me here in Singapore. or wheter enough of such relationships exist between the races.
because if there are, then a few silly remarks by a few silly people would not matter. because then both communities would know that these remarks by a silly few are not representative of what we think of each other. and these silly people would be castigated by both communities, castigated
directly by a united society rather than through the law acting as our proxy.
but no. we still need the harsh punishment of the law, the huge cane of big daddy G. before we know how to behave. so we are law abiding citizens only because we are afraid of punishment (or because we covet some rewards) not because it is
right to abide by the law. so we do not make racist remarks not because it is wrong, not because we truly respect one another, but because we fear the consequences. is that the product of all our efforts to build a multiracial, multireligious, pluralistic society?
to further illustrate my point, just a hypothetical situation, if, for some reason, china, malaysia and india all went to war with one another, would the chinese, malays and indians in singapore still sit around the same table and eat as friends? or would we need to have a law that punishes anyone who refuses to in order do so in order for that to happen?
but let's take step back. even in this peaceful times, i don't have many non-chinese friends. and i dare say that the same applies to many chinese in Singapore. and similarly, i think a lot of Malays don't have many non-Malay friends, etc etc. that is a problem. do we interact enough with people of different ethnicity? and by that, i don't mean cursory interaction, but the sort of interaction that develops a deep understanding and relationship with one another from different ethnic groups. if we do, then really, we would not need laws to make us live in harmony with different ethnic groups because harmony naturally exist amongst true friends.
so yes. while i lament the implication that Singaporeans have lost another avenue to express themselves freely, i lament more the implication that the racial harmony in Singapore might not really exist.
