Skip to main content

''Singaporeans' are rude, arrogant, filthy'

The following is an excerpt from a post which was brought to my attention, via email, by a disgruntled singaporean Indian.

ed's comment, as posted on the relevant site, but with further elaboration here, follows the excerpt.

“Yup, the locals are not clean at all, they live like filthy rats. Just check out the coffee shops, it is dirty, not even a dog would eat at that place. If there were no slave laborers, this place would be a bigger dump.
The locals are just rude, guess its part of their upbringing. After all the parents don’t know shit either on how to raise their lazy brats.
There is no animal you can compare the locals too, it would be an insult to the animal kingdom. Even in the animal kingdom there are social rules…..let other come out first before you can get in. But these rice bangers don’t get that concept yet. They are as dumb as a bucket of shrimp.
You want to find selfish, arrogant and filthy motherfuckers in Asia…..you are at the right place.
I just walk out and push my way trough the MRT. I step on shoes, rip open plastic bags and just keep walking.
Oh yeah and the trick with reserving a table with a fucking napkin pack….will not fly here. I sit down anyway, and I also keep the napkin pack.
And a message to the fat hippo population….loose some fucking weight.” - singaporeans are rude, arrogant, filthy...


ed:

Let's be more accurate here shall we. It's not 'the locals', but rather, 'the chinese'. When we lump everyone together with the term 'locals', we tend to discount the lessons the chinese can learn from other 'locals' whom aren't chinese.

I'm not saying the Malays or Indians are perfect. Far from it. But it's just that their contradistinguishable perfections can cancel out each others imperfections - if the chinese had not been taught that as 'the majority', they need not bother with the perspectives of the non-chinese, which, unfortunately, has been the case for the last couple of decades.

The essence of china's culture lies in its ability to bring out the worst in people so that the government can do their best to exploit the people with impunity.
You could say, because of that, there are greater similarities between the local chinese and the chinese from China, than there are between the local chinese and the Malays and Indians in Singapore. That is why when the xenophobic Temasek Review, amongst others, started terming the local chinese, amongst others, as 'native borns' to rally support against 'foreign talent', i found that laughable. The local chinese are more like 'nurtured by china in a foreign land - singapore' - through the government sponsorship of china's culture in singapore for a few decades now. There is nothing Malay or Indian about them. They have neither the communality and vibrancy of the Malays, nor the analytical-mindedness, intellectual individualism, or the multicultural appreciation that the Indians of singapore-past had.

To local chinese, you ought to stop being 'chinese' and start being 'Singaporean' through the appreciation of other cultures, instead of just practicing 'tolerance', which is akin to 'living side by side with something whilst ignoring it's difference'.However, given the unfortunate hegemony of subservience and self-absorption inducing 'china culture' in singapore, the Malays and Indians - the latter especially, given their culturally accommodating character - are becoming more 'chinese', and thus, today, aren't as able to teach the chinese as much as they could a couple of decades ago. But then again, given the preference given to the chinese and chinese culture, the chinese aren't inclined to learn from anyone anyway. Hence, their 'stupidity', 'rudeness', 'arrogance', 'shallowness', 'self-absorption', etc, etc, etc. Can happen to any 'preferred' people whatever the race. In that, the local chinese are victims themselves. But, via china's culture, they have, unwittingly, become victimisers.


The essence of china's culture lies in its ability to bring out the worst in people so that the government can do their best to exploit the people with impunity. As I've stated before, the practice of a culture borne of oppressive circumstances will tend to replicate similar oppressive circumstances within relatively democratic climes. That's been the case since 221 b.c. I prefer multicultural egalitarianism myself, and which is more so the case in India than it has been in China. To local chinese, you ought to stop being 'chinese' and start being 'Singaporean' through the appreciation of other cultures, instead of just practicing 'tolerance', which is akin to 'living side by side with something whilst ignoring it's difference'.

ed





Comments

  1. Local Chinese do not act like Chinese at all. The author is clearly biased in his stand.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's either, 'like that one lah', or 'not like that one lah'.  Not much of an argument either way don't you think.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

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.

Popular posts from this blog

Is singapore a tyranny, or are people to dumbed down to feel it?

The following is a consideration of the perspective posted at the site, 'article14'. The site, in discussing the so-called 'Black Sunday movement' whose members wear black and congregate at Starbucks - perhaps they have an unstated desire to boost Starbucks sales of overpriced beverages, or perhaps Starbucks is paying for their black garments...silly people - to express their support for the freedom of expression - brought up certain points that seem to be commonly held by the 'singaporeans' of today.

Manifesto Against Same-Sex Marriages and Homo-Promotion

My stand against homosexuality is based on the following.  It is a logical, rather than a personal, decision.

Under the slogan, 'the freedom to love', it in principle justifies incestuous, group, etc, marriages.  All it requires is 'consenting adults', without an inquiry into what it means to be an 'adult' in intelligent, moral, and introspective terms.

This in turn encourages a ‘go with your feel’ tendency, which in itself gives rise a myriad of tendencies that go unquestioned.  Right and wrong ceases to matter, and even if something is illegal, one can still view it as society just having its own bias against it, just as it once had a ‘bias’ against homosexuality.

‘Nothing is natural.  Everything is just a matter of preference.’  That is the basic thrust of this unfortunate situation.  In fact, having a preference is in itself seen as evidence of one’s intelligence.  No attention needs to be paid to intellectuals, thinkers, philosophers, sages, religious te…