Petition to the prime minister: repeal 377A
now
On the right is the Straits Times' story about the online petition
'Repeal 377A now'.
It was a pity that of all the things I said to the reporter, only
one line was used. He quoted me as saying that "online petitions do
not have a track record for effectiveness." I hope readers don't
think I was dismissing the value of such efforts.
If I remember correctly, reporter Chua Hian Hou had asked me
whether I thought such a petition would lead Prime Minister Lee
Hsien Loong's government to change its mind about retaining Section
377A of the Penal Code, which criminalises 'gross indecency'
between men. I gave him that reply as quoted, but at the same time,
I sensed the danger that such an honest opinion posed. Singaporeans
are apt to think that unless a move is guaranteed of success, it
would be better not to "take risks" and stay away from any activity
that could be seen as political dissent.
In my conversation with Chua, I immediately added that even if
chances are low, people should see signing petitions as normal
democratic participation. In any other country, people would do
this repeatedly for all sorts of campaigns. There shouldn't be any
fear about speaking up and signing petitions.
Alas, the situation in Singapore is anything but normal. Even
strongman Lee Kuan Yew noticed it after giving a talk at Nanyang
Technological University.
Three from China, two from India and one from Vietnam - these
foreign students lobbed six of the seven questions during the
allocated question-and-answer session last night.
Only the first question for Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew came from
a Singaporean.
But as the moderator began to wrap up the proceedings, MM Lee
stopped him and asked: 'Is there no Singaporean who wants to ask a
question?'
-- Straits Times, 5 October 2007,
Is there no S'porean who wants to ask a question?
I have observed the same phenomenon myself whenever I gave talks to
students at colleges and universities. Even when Singaporeans
outnumbered foreign students 10 to 1 in the audience, the majority
of the questions would still come from the handful of
foreigners.
In the Straits Times' forum pages of 10 October 2007, reader Danny
Lee Kwok Hoong wrote to give his analysis of the problem.
At the recent ministerial forum at Nanyang Technological
University, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew asked: 'Is there no
Singaporean who wants to ask a question?' (ST, Oct 5).
I attribute the dearth of questions to two factors. Firstly, the
education system in Singapore does not adequately promote
inquisitiveness and critical thinking. As a parent, I still find
that children are primed to absorb and regurgitate information,
despite changes introduced by the Education Ministry.
Perhaps the generation that current teachers hail from is one which
does not truly appreciate active engagement and expressiveness by
students. It is still a talk-down culture: teacher teaches, pupils
listen. If one questions too much, he is seen to be difficult or
trying to be too clever.
While the Education Ministry may say that the pedagogy today is
different, I would argue that schools in other countries have
progressed faster in this area.
Secondly, the political culture in Singapore does not encourage one
to speak up, let alone question. Due to Singaporeans' belief in the
efficiency and stability of the Government, most are wired to
accept that 'Government knows best'. The result is that we do not
question as much as others.
This is compounded by what I see as an unhealthy 'upward-reverence
culture'. One tends to 'revere' his supervisor or anyone seen to be
of a higher status.
This culture does not encourage the openness required for the
development of naturally inquiring minds. In fact, one who
questions runs the risk of being perceived as uncooperative, and
'going against the grain' of being cohesive and efficient.
Therefore, the unquestioning Singaporean public behaviour is not a
phenomenon. It is a culture characteristic of our nation. The
positive side of this culture is that we are a cooperative and
efficient people. We obey and move very quickly.
However, in the increasingly dynamic, highly competitive knowledge
economy, it will become a problem. Singaporeans will lose out to
their more expressive and confident foreign counterparts who would
speak up without fear.
The same strong leadership that had overseen the development of our
robust economy in the last four decades should now aim to maintain
Singapore's competitiveness by fostering a new brand of economy,
one characterised by open debate, lateral thinking and
creativity.
That way, MM Lee will be kept much busier by Singaporeans in future
forums.
Danny Lee put it very diplomatically -- "a culture characteristic
of our nation". The positive side, he said, was that we are very
capable servants. The downside, if I may paraphrase him, is that if
this habit continues, Singapore is finished.
I agree.
Needless to say, a great part of the blame lies at Lee Kuan Yew's
own feet. For 40 years, he's bludgeoned his political opponents and
stared down anyone who dared speak up in dissent. His generation of
Singaporeans -- the parents and teachers of today's students --
have internalised these conditions and are now passing on their
ingrained fear of sticking out, especially against political
authority, to the younger generation.
Our media have likewise done their part in cultivating a climate of
deference to authority, framing pronouncements from ministers as
pearls of wisdom for the benefit of the masses, and generally
giving scant space or airtime to opposing views.
Singaporeans are so unfamiliar now with the sound of dissent that
when we do hear it, we think it a signal to duck.
But the biggest joke of all is when I hear some of us cry out for
the government to let up, loosen up.... give us a sign that the
coast is clear, and that we can speak up. In other words, to wait
for the government to give us the 'OK'.
It won't happen. This government is not going to let go of its
worst instincts. They would rather drag Singapore down than trim
their own span of control -- in that way, they are no different
from the junta in Burma, just slicker economic managers.
The only people who can save Singapore are Singaporeans themselves.
We begin by seizing back our right to ask tough questions and speak
our minds. Overcoming our own fears. Standing up for what we
believe in.
Signing petitions anonymously doesn't meet this standard. If
anything, you become complicit in the spreading of fear. You signal
to others who chance upon your indecipherable mark that you too
think it unsafe to own up to your views, and you implicitly suggest
that others should think and do likewise.
Surely you can do better for the sake of your own country.
Sign the petition at www.repeal377a.com now. With your real
name.
http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2007/yax-794.htm
