January 2006
Maverck Agenda # 103: Let’s Organize Dissent!
Here’s to a smokin’ new year of growing economy, flag-flaunting transparency and creativity overdrive. Cos all that can only serve to benefit me as an un-Singaporean Singaporean.
On Oct 23, 05, the Senior Minister of State for Health – Dr. Balaji Sadasivan announced that “a total ban on cigarettes may increase smuggling, affect the income of some people, and keep tourists away” (IS magazine #279). See, I was right about why there’s no absolute ban on smoking, I cited those same reasons to some pals too; unlike my siow friend who says it has something to do with the General Election. So not true, right?!
“Sports is the perfect solution for young Singaporeans” - Senior Minister of State for Law & Home Affairs said in the Nov/Dec issue of Home Team NS magazine. And why is that so? “Otherwise, young Singaporeans can be too individualistic or computer-oriented” – was the answer! We surely don’t want that, do we! In view of that objective, imagine how much more ludicrous it is to accept some local organization (FOCAS)’s motto that “Dissent is democracy”! So why can that motion still thrive in our strictly regimented Singapore when even four quiet protesters flashing placards can be arrested for disturbing the peace, and when being too individualistic and computer-oriented can’t be condoned? No need to wonder, cos we Singaporeans don’t. We are one big happy dodo family, don’t you know?
Don’t get me wrong, I totally respect what FOCAS does in its humanitarian pursuits (yes, I do, and I’m not being condescending!). What I’m skeptical about is why the authorities’ ‘resigned’ acceptance to its motion that “dissent is democracy”? As the Malays might say – tak gel, leh! While the dodo public chooses to remain mum on the obvious, allow me to spell it out loud and clear for you – it’s the new Remaking Singapore way of having ‘organized dissent’! You think out of the box, they just box you in lor. As they’ll no doubt say in the press these days – you don’t expect us to sit back and let you disrupt, right? But encouraging ‘dissent’ is something else altogether. It’s for… economic peace! And that’s oh-so justified.
To think that all the poor dears – from Lion City indie-rockers to subterranean station’s earnest artists – are falling for the all-new ‘organized dissent’ agenda lock stock & barrel does make one wonder if being a dodo is a prerequisite for Singaporeans to consider themselves human. Ah well, what do I care, especially when Big O can’t even publish my new book nor can it comment anymore about the Singapore system in its weekly e-mailer Update! I mean, do you care? Exactly. I oso lor! “I happy dodo, you happy dodo, we all happy dodo, like one happy dodo… You got remember to watch channel 8 or not?”
Ignatius Low, the ‘new generation’ pawn-columnist (in my eyes anyway), who wrote about “Pop culture – don’t look for a formula” a few months before, had a whole column in The Sunday Times (Nov 13, 05) dedicated to Annabel Chong. Coming from him, you jolly well know what to expect and the point of it all. Back in 1995, Annabel put Singapore on the unthinkable map for holding the record of having sex with 251 men in 10 hours. Of course, she did it in America, darling, or she’d have been held under lock and key, and lobotomized by our people-loving, moral-hoisting authorities. Low was her former class-mate, see. And besides, we’re so maverick and so much ‘younger’ now to remember the feat, it doesn’t really matter if we chime in a good word or two about Annabel these days. Just as along as we still reinforce the message that she is really no role model for Singaporeans by our national standard.
“My hope is that the next generation will invoke Annabel’s spirit more, not less. And that society will have the grace and maturity to accept this,” Low wrote. Why next generation? Isn’t this male Annabel here with pants on not good enough for you? Oh I see, no ‘world-class’ coverage, yeah? And are we sure you mean society and not authority? Same thing in Singapore? Ah, but of course. 1984, let’s not forget, calls for it to be so. Don’t think even in these funky ‘Remaking Singapore’ times, we can really officially explain the ‘depth’ behind Annabel’s point of the feat. Well, let me bring out a quote from my second book, one spoken by Annabel herself, to highlight that.
‘Singapore lives in the year 1984… In Singapore, pornography is filth. That’s okay. To do pornography is to be against the collective agreement of what it means to be a Singaporean. Fuck ‘em. They can lick my ass,” the lady herself had said. So, I propose that in invoking the spirit of Annabel’s dare – and doing it not less, but more – do give yourself a good long lick, all you repressed and dodo Singaporeans! You need to, if just to invoke MORE. After all, the whole point of the essay was shamelessly declared in its agenda-propping headline – “Doing the unthinkable”. Well, Low…
You mean to say that my X’Ho-Files essays are ‘thinkable’ enough to be published in the national press, hence they can’t make the cut to help invoke the unthinkable? Or is controversy absolutely required to validate me? The same controversy that requires Big Brother’s approval? Maybe I should ask Big O, not that their silence means anything to you and the dodo moral majority. So what sort of unthinkable can we think of doing? The same one that’s approved by Big Brother to not have a formula? You can see that rhetoric means a bundle to me. I only sound like I disapprove of your views, actually I love them more than you can imagine. You have no idea how validated I feel by them, in effect. Why else did I declare myself a Gov. Pawn Star?! I admit I’m only zircon, unlike you – the real 24 carat!
O, how the outsiders (foreigners) don’t know the wool that’s pulled over their eyes! There is this full-page ad of The Straits Times celebrating its 160th year. It shows a man leaning against a taxi (presumably his, hence the impression that he’s a cab-driver), happily reading the day’s paper. In the background is the Esplanade -- home of the arts in Singapore. The caption in the ad says: “My daily fix. So I can talk about anything to anyone.” Really? Because not long ago one cab driver said: “When foreigners ask me about Singapore, I tell them what I know, but when they discuss politics with me, I tell them I don’t know and cannot comment. We were told during (cab-driving) courses that we are drivers not politicians, and should not discuss politics” (ST, Sept 19, 04).
So, “talk about anything”? Oh yes, I forgot about maverick agenda #23, we have absolute free speech.
Just don’t say anything bad about the government. – X’ Ho
