Photo source: Upper Secondary Social Studies -
Express/Normal (Academic)
A passage in a new social studies textbook for upper
secondary students about the 2013 Little India riot, has raised
eyebrows among netizens, with some accusing authorities of
simplifying or even whitewashing the incident.
On 8 Dec, 2013, some 400 foreign workers of mainly South
Asian origin rioted over the accidental death of a fellow worker.
Fifty-four police officers and other first responders were injured
in the ensuing mayhem, and more than $530,000 worth of government
property damaged.
It was the first riot in Singapore in more than 40
years.
“What a rosy look at the
Little India Riot.”
The new social studies textbook is divided into three
broad themes: Exploring Citizenship and Governance, Living in
a Diverse Society and Being Part of a Globalized World, followed by
a Skills Chapter.
It includes discussions of hot-button issues such as the
Little India incident, which is discussed in a chapter titled “How
Can We Work for the Good of Society?”, under the theme of Exploring
Citizenship and Governance. It is presented as “one example of the
government maintaining the internal order of Singapore”, and comes
after an explanation of how internal and external security are
maintained by various agencies in Singapore.
The passage notes, “Within minutes, the Police Force was
informed of the road accident and the Civil Defence Force was
activated. When some members of the public in the area became
rowdy, the Special Operations Command (SOC) was activated. After
the arrival of the SOC, the crowd dispersed and suspected rioters
were arrested.”
Prominent blogger mrbrown was among the most critical of
the passage, commenting dryly on social media on 7 January, “What a
rosy look at events like the Little India Riot in our new textbooks
for kids.” Other netizens like Colin Chee lamented in a Facebook
comment, “They continue to publish material that gives children the
1 out of 360 degree perspective of things and then tell the public
that they aim to broaden the children’s minds to see things
differently.“
Discussion questions that follow the Little India
passage. Photo source: Upper Secondary Social Studies -
Express/Normal (Academic)
Students, historian
critical of new syllabus
Students and a historian that Yahoo
Singapore spoke to questioned the portrayal of the
incident. Final-year polytechnic student Nurul Nadhirah, 21, who
took social studies back in 2012, says, “I feel like they touched
more on the government’s response, rather than what actually
happened. The passage itself keeps saying how the government did
this and that.”
Her course mate Belle Sim, who majors in creative writing
for television and new media and is also 21, adds, “As I read it, I
feel very underwhelmed by it — it feels like a super small
incident. It’s as if they know that they can’t not include it in a
textbook, but at the same time, they don’t want people to read too
much into it.”
Sim is uncomfortable with the placement of the incident in
the text, noting, “One detail you cannot escape when you talk about
the Little India riot is race. But why don’t they want to talk
about race? Why is it that, even though we live in a racially
harmonious society, we can’t talk about race?”
yahoo