Oct 13, 2011 - ST Forum
IN THE past week, the local media broadcast documentaries on the
role of ethnic Chinese in colonial Singapore in ending 2,000 years
of feudalism in China, to commemorate the centenary of the 1911
revolution that overthrew dynastic rule.
The eight visits here by the father of modern China, Sun Yat
Sen, to raise funds for the revolutionary movement were given prime
prominence. The Balestier Road villa where he stayed has been
transformed into a historical monument ('Historic Sun Yat Sen villa
reopens'; Sunday).
Visiting politicians, prominent businessmen and academics have
called on Singaporeans to remember the contributions of Nanyang
(overseas) Chinese to the villa.
While I do not discount the significance of the revolution, I am
uncomfortable with how our local identity and history remain
subordinated to foreign history.
Although Sun was an important figure, his stay here was
extremely brief and his interest in Singapore, probably
peripheral.
Yet, the villa where he stayed is preserved while the graves of
prominent pioneers of Singapore like Lim Nee Soon, Chew Boon Lay
and Ong Sam Leong are not.
The Bukit Brown Cemetery where these sons of Singapore are
buried must make way for redevelopment ('Bukit Brown to make way
for housing'; May 30).
In the rush to celebrate the first milestone of modern China on
Oct 10, 1911, we have forgotten a local incident of immense
historical significance, especially close to the hearts of older
Singaporeans, which took place on Oct 10, 1943.
This was the Double Tenth Massacre, a tragic day when the
Japanese military police arrested and tortured 57 people they
suspected of being involved in an allied raid that sank several
ships at the Singapore harbour in World War II. Fifteen of them
died later. This date does not even rate an annual mention.
In an era of nation-building where we should regard ourselves as
Singaporeans first and profess loyalty exclusively to Singapore,
the assertion of Chinese pride by some Chinese Singaporeans on
China's 1911 revolution is disturbing.
As Singapore approaches the bicentenary of its founding in 1819,
the emphasis on writing our history and preserving our heritage
should not be expended disproportionately on prominent foreigners
who happened to pass through.
Our emphasis should be firmly focused on Singaporeans who helped
shape the history of this little red dot.
Liew Kai Khiun
