June 2005

Manufacturing Dissent – The Fast & Furious New National Pastime

A ‘scary' headline spotted one Saturday morning after the national nod to Integrated Resorts and casino here: “Injecting fun into ‘Dullsville Singapore'” (Straits Times, Apr 30, 05). Singapore – dull? Of course, that is only so when the press says it is such to help fulfill a newer agenda. Otherwise, endless justifications that Singapore is NEVER dull. In fact, on May 15, 05, a feature in The Sunday Times says - “Surprise! Singapore is hip” and “Singapore Swings”. So, are we dull or swinging? Depends on the agenda we're propping, lor . So, what's a whine like me compared to transparent hacks like them?

A siow friend says that all this so-called ‘surprise' provocative-ness on our shores is all about manufacturing dissent now. After all, we ain't got any, not even with Speakers' Corner, and not even with the arbitrary suspension of the ‘party whip' on infringing OB-markers! That's how successfully regimented we've been. For a start, the fact that this writer's work is never quoted anywhere near the official press says a lot about the provocative ‘dissent' that you get nowadays. From this year's Labor Day forum on workplace injustice to the panel of petitioners opposing a casino in Singapore…. Let's just say that in the past, you wouldn't even hear about them from the word-go cos they would have been crushed! Unlawful assembly, for a start! (Sing Cramps, sing – “Do the hammerlock… Do the crusher!” Gee, I'm so ‘school of rock', it just comes gushing, I can't help it!).

Bold headline on May 5, 05: “Beware politicians spinning economic yarns” . On that subject, you have to be thinking of overseas or opposition-party politicians. Our noble ones that run the country here don't need yarns when they can simply hold your industrial peace !

In late April, the humanitarian group FOCAS took on the noble task of pleading for Presidential clemency for a condemned cannabis trafficker. Understandably, the head that runs the organization is an ang-moh , not a ‘hammer-locked' Singaporean who knows these things from the gut – what price clemency or mercy when weighed against example-setting NATION-BUILDING?   I'm happy for FOCAS that, at least, its head is not one who already feels gutted! Only such a one could have come up with the audacious contention for FOCAS: “Dissent is democracy”. We suspect she truly believes it without an iota of ‘dulled' cynicism. Anyway, in Singapore, what dissent can one possibly affect? Except for the ‘approved' kind. Now, you're getting the picture.

Clemency for traffickers? Let me remind all - If we give way to you, others (here) will most certainly take advantage (chapter 70 of my book Attack Of The SM Space Encroachers). Yes, we have long accepted kiasu -ness as an unquestioned part of nation-building. (And still we pine to be a gracious society!) Can't be helpched! Besides, you forget that we are BEYOND Amnesty International. When the international organization issued a statement that we have the highest execution rate per capita in the world (-fact, babe!), our Master's reply was   “The death penalty is not a burning question” (ST Jan 31, 04). Now, we all know that to be true, don't we! Of course, it's not a ‘burning question' in NATION-BUILDING, or our Master would have dealt with it for the grand sake of industrial peace !

Sometimes even those agenda-propping daredevils seem to be nothing but disposable pawns. Look what's happened to Tan Sai Siong (where is she now, after I called her my ‘darling Sai'?) and Koh Buck Song. Koh, famously re-quoted again and again by yours truly for saying that Singapore was “once repressed” before the Remaking Singapore regiment, now writes for The Straits Times, not from. But then, we're sure he has greener pastures to graze at some bishop's gate. Look! Even he has come right out to say - “One of the most surprisingly unique things about this country is its ability to have its cake and eat it” (ST, Apr 27, 05). O, you betcha! What do you think win-win means, honey? I should dedicate my next book to his unrepressed innocence.

Controlling Singaporeans is surely a piece of cake now. Let other countries scratch their heads in wonder. We all know the hell-to-pay rationale that goes by the argument of - even I loathe to repeat it again – industrial peace . Not that other countries don't know the term, they just don't know how to use it – with a specially quai-quai (obedient) media to hold an industrial- peace of international standing. That's how.

Injecting fun into Dullsville Singapore? Without a tinge of irony, on that same day (Apr 30, 05), The New Paper had this headline “Erotic drink too sexy for Singapore”. (Based on a Govt. directive, the name ‘Peep One Erotic Drink' tagged with the word ‘Stimulation' had to be changed to ‘Peep One Exotic Drink', with ‘Reloading' replacing ‘Stimulation'; some ingredients were also replaced.) We can't even handle an erotically named drink, what kind of fun can we talk of injecting? Stepford-styled injection, perhaps.

Ms. Chua Mui Hoong wrote in the ST on May 13, 05: “Many Singaporeans have clamoured for more political openness, greater guarantees of political freedoms or changes to electoral laws. Many of us are content to just point out the flaws, without taking action.” No wonder Singaporeans are so torn with wordless frustration. Agenda-propping Chua takes such liberty to rub salt into a wound that dares not speak its name. What makes her think that Singaporeans can do more than “point out the flaws”? Just cos foreigners don't know the Singapore story well enough doesn't give her the ‘editorial right' to make us commoners look useless and petty. Besides, we all know that Singaporeans know better than to behave like me. Mind you, she is a senior political correspondent and an Insight columnist. I guess she's ‘insight' to foreigners and the foreign market, lor ! You say cough blood or not? No lah , I super happy to take note and fill up space in my essay. In fact, I always say - gimme more. More outrageous, the better!

“Beware what you ask for” – the headline of a ST essay on May 18, 05 from Tan… gasp! Sai Siong who suddenly springs back to life after I've drafted this essay! (Just goes to show, how under-handedly they read me!) Beware of long lay-offs – would be my reply – they make you sound cranky, darling! Let's not even get into her arguments (which I did bother to read but not to remember).

“Las Vegas casino mogul: S'pore officials are issuing too many rules…” (ST, May 15, 05). No worries, we really want the casino. So don't be surprised how we can bend backwards three-folds in time. Meanwhile, just keep reading Chua ‘til you come here and learn for yourself, hor . BTW, the attorney for the condemned cannabis trafficker has been censured by “his peers” that his plea tactics are “quite senseless” (ST, May 15, 05). Take action, lor . See, how well you look in the public's eye. “It was cruel to give false hope to condemned man and family” – was another quoted censure. And you thought I'm being cynical about these things. Guess I've not been cruel then, in not joining the petition.

In case you haven't noticed, rubbing it in our face comes fast and furious of late . Blink a day without the papers, and you will miss a whole chunk of surreptitious nation-building. Understandably, it's all about making our nation-building success appear even more successful in these new-leader times of majestic open-ness and desperate success-signals . How well mentored, I am. I've learned from Chua.

On May 14, 05, the sidebar headline of the ST front-page: “No place in film for party politics”. This came as a response to a group of local film-makers who wrote in asking for clarifications of the Films Act, after aspiring film-maker Martyn See made a documentary ‘Singapore Rebel' on opposition party leader Chee Soon Juan and was found to have violated the Act. So much for Singaporeans trying to ‘take action', babe. Darling, there's no point in even questioning the whole issue of the Films Act! Despite See withdrawing his film from the Film Festival where it was to be shown, he was still interrogated by the police almost two months later. Solid proof that, as the siow friend remarked, the more things seem to change, the more they stay the same. Anyone for taking action, still? I oso can tell you Singapore has no place for ‘political' films. We may be powerless but some of us still know redundant. Let's hope Chua gets more fast and furious. I sure do.

But here's the most audacious bit of rubbing it in our face….

“Let Singaporeans have say on design of the Integrated Resorts,” another senior political correspondent Lydia Lim wrote in the ST on May 6, 05. I know Lim means well, but look at it this way – I ask you for your opinion about building an object outside your front door. Your answer is – please don't. I decide it's for the better that it's built anyway. Then, I suggest you help me design the very thing you objected to. Have the cake and eat it too? I think it goes more than that. More like fearlessly shameless. But no worries, most Singaporean will not dare say that. Why else the urgent call to ‘take action' and speak up?

Allow me to have my cake and eat it too, by saying – boy, do I feel I super relevant… STILL! In fact, I'd say - more than ever. I hope I sound equally fast and furious. Equality, let's just say, is always hip and never dull. What a whine, I hear you say. Ah, but then? My integrated generosity says I'll leave it to you to go try some real dissent. Cruel? See! – X'Ho