in comment, Singaporeans ‘one of the most tolerant people in the world’? Nonsense.

The following comment was posted at TR, aka, Temasek Review, aka, Totally Reprehensible, but was automatically rejected. Perhaps it’s some browser problem.


Wong Kan Seng urged Singaporeans to be realistic and more tolerant of foreign workers

"After opening the floodgates and allow Singapore to be swarmed by foreigners without any proper screening or planning, Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng is now urging “Singaporeans to be realistic and more tolerant of foreign workers....Mr Wong should be more realistic and not expect Singaporeans who are one of the most tolerant people in the world to make unnecessary sacrifices anymore to pay for the juvenile mistakes made by the PAP."



You must be joking. Singaporeans are generally self-absorbed, self-interested fascists and racists. There is a world of difference between 'tolerance' and 'appreciation-cum-appreciation'. The fact that it has moved from a Malay, to a multicultural, and finally to a confucian state 'swarmed' by local chinese - in view of the stated policy to maintain a racial balance in favour of the chinese - vindicates the aforementioned perspective. And if this isn't enough, the failure of the people and the opposition to take issue with that which compromises the interests of other minority groups consistently is further indictment of the fascist and racist state of the people.

I don't know what standards you are using, but perhaps you ought to take a look at the UK where the people are not only 'tolerant' but highly aware and active in the promoting egalitarian multiculturalism. In comparison, i've never met a single singaporean who isn't a narrow-minded, self-absorbed, fascist and racist twit (not only in terms of what they say or feel, but what they don't say or feel when they ought to). If truth be told, one might as well call singapore, ‘new Xinjiang’ or ‘new Tibet’. The methods used may be different, but the end-result is identical. When the opposition themselves fail to notice these things, all is lost.


ed

5 comments:

  1. Wow.. highly charged comment... "NEVER met a single a single singaporean who isn't a narrow-minded, self-absorbed, fascist and racist twit (not only in terms of what they say or feel, but what they don't say or feel when they ought to)."

    you are sounding more lie the "boy wo knew too much" when he makes sweeping statements on Singaporeans i general...

    Jus wonder who the people and Singaporeans are in company with for you to project such a sense of biasness? I may be wrong and am not in your shoes for you to state in such absolute terms.

    "but perhaps you ought to take a look at the UK where the people are not only 'tolerant' but highly aware and active in the promoting egalitarian multiculturalism."

    Are you kidding? using the UK as an e.g?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Instead of discounting the above statement on the basis of it being 'sweeping', what the people here, including yourself, consistently fail to ask is if it could be true. It is the absence of this critical introspective ability that further renders plausible the aforementioned statement, along with founding the bases for it.

    As for whom I keep company with, i'm not biased. I personally know and interact with people of all ethnic groups, walks of life, socio-economic status, educational levels, faiths. It is from a decade of systematic observations, in addition to a recollection of interactions from decades past that makes it highly irresponsible of myself if i did not make such a statement. I would also suggest you look at your argument and see if it is merely dismissive as opposed to being logically argued. You will find that it is typical of the approach of people in SG, and of everyone i've encountered, without exception. Try to be objective, instead of defensive. You'll see far more than you otherwise would Soo Jenn.

    However, one has to be quite the contrast to the singaporean of today in order to deem something grossly amiss. As a friend once stated, in the land of blind, the one-eyed wo/man is deemed to be handicapped. Similarly disabled might tend to view the relatively able as a discountable anomaly.

    And perhaps you could forward a logical reason as to why comparisons between SG and the UK may not be made. Two different species perhaps? I may have to agree with you on that.

    ReplyDelete
  3. MMm.. defensive? just because it is a different view... there may be Singaporeans who fits your category.. but I believe there are others who are not. I have met quite a few who are objective, open minded.

    The people in UK "tolerant".. I beg to differ. It has perhaps gone to the other extreme of being overly sensitive of minorities at the expense of the majority. I have lived in the UK for quite a fair bit of time. If the people in the UK are "toleant" as you put it, why the need to have laws to restrict racists remarks & behaviour.

    ReplyDelete
  4. As i have said. Judge not by what is said but what is left unsaid.

    The people in the UK aren't 'tolerant', they are 'appreciative' and highly activist in the face of discrimination. I have to wonder why you haven't noticed these things - I myself have been involved in these, and have learnt much from the experience along with a sociological-psychological study of 2000 years of racism in quite a few climes. The need to have laws to restrict racist remarks & behaviour is to contend with the rise of fascism in the face of an extremely strong and vocal egalitarian movement. It is not a perfect society, but the means to address its imperfections in this context are certainly in place. Ask yourself if that is even remotely true in the case of singapore.

    I advise you to study representation in the media, governmental policies, the existence of organisation to address the slightest instances of bigotry, the existence of unions to protect foreign workers like even filipina ‘maids’, student unions throughout the country inciting awareness of egalitarian multiculturalism, a central location like trafalgar square hosting celebrations of all cultures, etc, etc, etc. Ask yourself if this is true in the case of singapore. Then ask yourself if your failing to appreciate this should not cast doubt on your claim to identify ‘objective and open minds’.

    You might have met a few whom are 'objective, open-minded', but as you are part of the 'preferred', and given the 'preferred' are hardly, if ever vocal about blatant instances of bigotry, one cannot but wonder after your idea of 'objective and open-minded'. There is a world of difference between 'being tolerant' and 'being appreciative', and paying lip service to egalitarian multiculturalism as opposed to noticing at least most instances where that isn't observed, and taking vociferous issue with it. Again, that is far more true in the case of the UK, but, again, the inverse is true of singapore. I can cite many instances. But can you cite even a third as many instances in the case of Singapore?

    Your previous comment wasn't 'a different view' but evidence of your mistaking a dismissal for an argument - most common amongst Confucians. That is obvious enough.

    Finally, my statement above is a direct challenge - albeit not stated - for singaporeans to prove that it is not true. And one has to, again, wonder, why you did not take issue with the highlighted statement by TR - and especially since the inverse is more true.

    I have, however, exaggerated. I have met objective individuals in singapore whom aren't the usual off-the-shelf self-absorbed, self-centred etc. That amounts to the grand total of 2 in a decade. I suppose that throws out my allegation.

    You can attempt to hide an elephant behind a lamppost, but you cannot expect it to remain hidden.

    Anyway, think about this Soo Jenn. If the UK was ruled by the BNP and the people were not unlike the singaporeans of today, there would be a quota system in place that might see you being turned away at the border for not being 'white'.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hello Soojenn - i have to say i agree with Ed. In fact, i would add that it is not just singapore but the chinese who are generally self-absorbed, self-interested fascists and racists, and i am a chinese. This comes from my personal experience living in Hong Kong and Shanghai for a few years , interacting with many people from Malaysia, Thailand, Philippines, India, Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan, Japan, Korea, Hong Kong, China and Singapore. Like you, i do know some people who show more interest in others but what i do observe is that this is done when it's convenient for them, doesn't take much time or efforts. However, when it comes to the crunch, they only care about themselves. They do not do any harm intentionally but like Ed says, it is not only what they say or do but importantly what they don't say or do that counts equally.

    Due to a job opportunity, i have been living in the UK for a few years now. i agree the UK is not a perfect country and has its own sets of issues and problems as in any country would have. Living here has given me a chance to compare and contrast the conditions in both countries. I hold a different view from you that the UK has 'gone to the other extreme of being overly sensitive of minorities at the expense of the majority'. If issues exist then they need to be addressed regardless whether it affects only the minorities. Everyone should be given the same/equal treatment in her/his country. It does not seem right that only the majority should be given the attention.

    What i love about the UK is the attempt for equal representation for each race be it job opportunity or telly representation.Though i am the only chinese in my company, i was pleasantly surprised at how i was treated by them and given equal job opportunity and advancement within the company as compared to my experience in Hong Kong and China when i was considered an outsider because i am a singaporean.

    ReplyDelete

The Inquisitive venture is a collaborative one. Let's collaborate.

Ad hominem is fine so long as it is accompanied with an argument, as opposed to being confused for an argument. In the latter case, deletion will follow.

Blogger Template by Clairvo