~~~FOR 12 years in school, I memorised the lyrics of Majulah Singapura (even though I had no idea what they meant) and sang with gusto, the same way I recited the Singapore Pledge.During National Service, alongside fellow wide-eyed recruits, I pledged to lay down my life for the country — and I meant it.
Call it blind loyalty if you will. I'll call it the "Singapore soul", for lack of a better term. It's the same spirit that stirs me when things are not going right in this country.Just don't ask me to define it. I've not figured that out and I suspect many Singaporeans haven't either. But as the airwaves get inundated by chest-pumping National Day songs yet again as Aug 9 draws near, my mind — in part to seek solace from the cheesy lyrics — is invariably occupied by the question:
What is the Singapore soul? Surely, it does not reside in the double-digit economic growth, the skyscrapers, the durians or the char kway teow. I also do not think it's in the ties and kinship that would have been fostered just the same if I had been born somewhere else. Is it about the secure environment, which has given me ample education and employment opportunities? We all know how Singapore is clean, safe, politically stable and efficient — a businessman's paradise. But even companies try to go beyond the pay cheques. Money gets you mercenaries, not committed employees — much less loyal citizens.No, it's not the material comforts.
What about history and tradition? Singapore boasts neither. It's not even a nation yet, by conventional yardsticks.How about a set of common values? Since independence, Singapore has struggled to reconcile its version of capitalism with moralistic principles. The Great Confucian Experiment of the 1980s didn't connect despite the Government's best efforts. In 1991, a national committee — headed by current Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, no less — presented five "shared values" after an extensive study. But I doubt many even remember that initiative, let alone what those values were. Singapore's national ideology, or its lack of one, has fascinated academics for years.Various reasons were given, most notably the view that the values desired by our political leaders were out of sync with government policies.Singapore can't be exhorting family values when it implores its women to work, says American sociologist Joseph Tamney, an emeritus professor at Ball State University, in a 1997 book on The Struggle Over Singapore's Soul.Neither can its political leaders preach compassion while driving capitalism and meritocracy.
Back in 1970, former Deputy Prime Minister Goh Keng Swee had his own theory on why Singaporeans were unlikely to ever be preoccupied with the search for a national identity.It's just not in the Singaporean DNA to indulge in lofty ideals, he said. Said Dr Goh then: "The Singaporean ... is happiest when he is engaged in doing something. Not being of a philosophical bent, he seldom pauses for a moment to reflect on whether there is any point doing it. Instead, he applies himself with zest and energy, hoping to improve his skill or knowledge or to make money or whatever may be the purpose."But as Dr Goh had predicted, times are changing.
The mushrooming of civic organisations and political blogs has provided the perfect riposte to the stereotypically apathetic Singaporean.Still, the absence of unifying organisations to "defend and define" the counter-culture — which manifest in the arts, civic and opposition political circles — meant that any change would be slow, as Prof Tamney points out.
The next decade will be critical as Singapore approaches the half-century mark. It now stands on the cusp of what could be the second defining period of nationhood — the adolescence period of intense growing pains, if you will.Possible fault lines are plenty — be it between foreigners and locals, Singaporeans young and old, new and old media, rich and poor, liberals and conservatives.
Yet beyond these chasms lies a common point where the Government objective of unity meets the people's aspiration to be part of the decision-making process. The societal forces at work mean that for once, we do not have to talk in terms of the Government's preferred economics lingo. And the Government has also ceded more public space.
But a new culture has to be reinforced. Former journalist Cherian George takes a shot at defining it in his book, Singapore: The Air-conditioned Nation. It is a culture "in which Singaporeans know that they matter because everyone matters, that their views count because everyone's does", he writes.
Yet, to borrow one of Dr Goh's favourite adages: There's no need to reinvent the wheel. After all, Singaporeans of today are merely transferring the "can-do" spirit, inherent in our migrant stock, to a greater calling beyond their livelihoods.
Therein, perhaps, lies the Singapore soul — one that desires so fervently to shape the fortunes of a freak country faced with a perpetual, if justified, sense of insecurity.Close the channels to make a difference, and the Singaporean closes his heart to the country.
I wasn't quite sure what the Singapore soul was when I started writing this article. But I think I have a better idea now.It's right there staring us in the face — in our country's name. Maybe a certain Palembang prince in the 13th century got it spot on when he coined the name "Singapura" — "Lion City" in Sanskrit.Be it against the British colonialists, the communists, the challenges that globalisation brings or a possible rogue government in the future, the Singapore soul — or the spirit of courage and wherewithal embodied by a lion, and fuelled by a deep sense of justice and the knowledge that nothing can be taken for granted — will always rise to the occasion.
Then again, it could be nothing more than just my youthful idealism.
~~~~~~
No comments:
Post a Comment