I did not take this election seriously when it was first announced.
I assumed the PAP would still get a majority, and it would be a better mandate compared to the 2015 elections.
I felt they have handled the Covid-19 very well to the best of their ability, relied on scientific sources and the feasibility of the nation despite some unfortunate consequences.
They shown that at a times of crisis, they have shown that our sinking fund which they have fought so hard to keep was there to keep us afloat.
Many things could have been done better, like the miscalculation of the severity of the dormitory infections.
Further more, I was never a fan of the Worker's Party because I never related to Low Thia Kiang - I did not think he represented the Singapore I recognised. It could be because he related to the hokkien community and I preferred a politician who had a better command in English. Reading the manifesto, although I recognised that they have addressed many social issues that were present in Singapore, the solutions to these issues were not ideal and I would have rather stuck to the existing policies PAP had in place until we had a solution.
I was so sure that PAP had the upper hand and wouls sweep the entire country.
However on Nomination Day, it was announced that Sengkang shall form its own GRC, with the following contestants:
Image from Channel News Asia
Jamus Lim
This candidate basically felt like he was my guardian angel. Everything he has spoken about Sengkang was what I felt Sengkang needed. He spoke about introducing hawker centres that were the identity of many heartlanders. To introduce PWD streets and cycling paths, neighbourhood shops that generate social spaces among the residents.
He was well spoken and handled the debate with Vivian Balakrishnan well despite being a new comer. He has a very personal touch on his social media, as compared to the social accounts by PAP candidates, where their social accounts were obviously handled by an assistant or an activist. There was a touch of humbleness to Jamus that I appreciated.
Ng Chee Meng and his Team
After looking into NCM, I did not take a liking to him at all. Firstly, he can't enunciate, and it was a nightmare hearing him speak. Then again, having been preceded by Chan Chun Seng, I should not have expected much. I read that he is the secretary general of the National Trade Union Congress which was an association to tackle issues such as job re-creation, raising the effective retirement age, skills training and upgrading of the workforce, promotion of fair and progressive employment practices, and a flexible wage system, among other labour-related issues. However, since I see no upgrades or improvements in the construction industry, so, I guess I don't know how to judge his ability. It would have been easier if we had someone like Tharman, Lawrence Wong or Tan Chuan Jin contesting in Sengkang. In NCM's speech, he spoke about initiating "Sengkang Together" campaign, which just tells me that he and his team have no idea what Sengkang needs and only intend to start looking into it when elected through a resident forum. Is it just me, or is it right to say that if residents knew what they needed, they would not need a town council? Anyway, the on-going developments they speak of are so small that it doesn't make a difference to the lives of the residents. Based on word of mouth, he does not seem to produce results to residents' feedback.
The Dilemma
Jamus presence in Sengkang GRC seem to have drawn me to the Workers Party. I started asking myself if we were missing out on a good candidate all because of his association with the party. I related to him as a person, and felt he knew the ground better than the PAP candidates contesting in Sengkang.
There were other things that annoyed me about the ruling party despite being a strong supporter of them. I was annoyed that some activists were so hell bent on winning that they would have done anything to win but listen to the people's voices. I am annoyed that some of them are not even putting in any effort to appeal to the younger generations. I am uncomfortable with Ho Ching's involvement in Temasek Holdings. Despite being a modern woman, I see some things traditionally - I preferred our "first lady" to stand behind her man rather than work along side him, like how the late Kwa Geok Choo stood behind our founding father, Lee Kuan Yew. I am embarrassed by the fact that our Prime Minister cannot keep his family matters within the family. I am sad that the attitudes of Lee Kuan Yew only exists in a handful on ministers, and last of all, I am disappointed, that Tharman Shanmugaratnam is not our Prime Minister.
However despite all the above, they are the better choice. They are practical. And praticality is always better than ideals.
The Decision
Things got a little easier when the posts of Raeesah Khan emerged. Sure, everyone has a past, and opinions of their own. But I cannot and am against a Singaporean Politician to have such views that could potentially influence the way she would govern. (I mean, this is why never want to be an MP because I used to hold very discriminating views on certain nationalities.) She has refered to malays as brown, which has never been used to describe a race in Singapore as far as I am concerned. Heck, I have never been refered to as yellow. Her posts spells out resentment to Chinese community and pushing for racial decide amongst Chinese and minorities in Singapore. I won't deny that there are still hints of racism that exists, but we have managed to create a multi-cultural society that is more integrated than most democracies. Lee Kuan Yew has worked so hard to help form this multiracial society and I'll be damn if it will all go to waste due to one inconsiderate tweet. Furthermore, her views reeks of American far left politics which I detest and do not want any chaos in Singapore like what you have now in America. One could argue that they could question the virtues of some PAP candidates, like how people have accused Heng Chee Swee Keat of being racist by saying Singaporeans are not ready for a non-chinese Prime Minister. While it may sound ridiculous to most millennials, let me share with my personal encounter.
Last week during campaign week, I was at a block visit where my senior MP was doing an introduction of the new MP taking his place. At one household, I happen to be standing between them because the corridor was narrow, and I was tasked to record residents feedback so had to stand close to the MPs. The resident who was an older Chinese resident mistakenly thought I was being introduced as the new MP. The resident thought I was Malay or mixed, and said in hokkien "huh, why didn't you chose a Chinese successor?"
That experience alone showed me that there are singaporeans who are not ready for a non-chinese Prime Minister, given that we have a majority Chinese population.
Of course, I could give Raeesah the benefit of the doubt that she would not cause divide in Singapore, but I would not like to take that chance until I'm proven wrong.
Ultimately, after 10 days of going back and forth on possibly giving Jamus Lim a chance to prove his worth, I have decided that a useless PAP puppet is better than a potentially dangerous far left politian. Of course, if Raeesah Khan stepped down, I would still be in a dilemma 😆.
Updated: Jun 18, 2020
Racism. This is the trending topic taking over the social media channels after what happened with George Floyd. I am not going to speak about him today in this post, because he is irrelevant. While I am still appalled by how he was mishandled by the police, he was a horrible human being to begin with and should not be regarded as a martyr.
However it was because of his death , sparked a hidden resentment to the white community, and people have used this opportunity to expressed the truth on how they have felt as a minority within a white community.
One can argue that "well if they're unhappy they can leave," Well then well done for the hostility despite the hospitality that was given to your fore fathers during the colonial years. Now moving on...
Some of you would probably think I would have no right to have my say on the matter, given that you think I belong to a relatively privilege race married to a caucasian and would never have experience any sort of discrimination that could have prevented me from opportunities.
Having brought up in Singapore and lived in the UK for my University years, it is not hard to imagine how a minority can feel resentment within a white community. Now, I am not even talking about being called names like "chinky" in the streets - because if someone had the audacity to point out your differences just to make you feel bad or excluded, they are either uneducated, drunk, high on drugs or just being an asshole. By that, it is silly feeling insulted by such ignorance.
To me, racism becomes a problem when a community feels excluded from the status quo; when they are treated as a figure, a number to fulfil, an obligation. And yes, I felt that by my tutors in University. It is when the leader of a community has made a judgement on your character based on where you're from and assumes the worst without getting to know the individual. I was classified as a "international student", but they did not bother to understand the struggles I had to endure to be in the UK away from friends and family to pursue an education, and judged that every mistake I did was because I was a bad person, incapable of being like the status quo. However being the level headed Singaporean that I am, I knew I was not bad - I was different. I could give them the benefit of the doubt that they could have been ignorant of their actions, but the bottom line is that it did resulted in making me feeling excluded.
Being asian not born in the UK in an all white community meant that I was assumed to not fit in, despite speaking their native language. I got friendly with a mix of Indians, Sri Lankan and middle eastern friends in my class and by the end of the year, and my tutor refered my group of friends and I as "The Indian Mafia" although out of the group of us, only 1 of us was Indian. This however did not bother me - I knew I was there for one purpose, and that was to get my degree. Getting offended by such remarks due to ignorance would have been silly.
But enough about me - back to the issue. Racism, the tagline going around is that it is not enough to not be racist, but you have to be anti-racist. Is that true?
No.
It is only natural for humans to protect their own kind and form their own enclaves - think about how have humans evolved since the beginning of the human race, we were in tribes, clans, kingdoms, etc and would have done anything to protect our own.
However we have come a long way since then and unless we educate ourselves, we will never evolve. Is it possible to tweak the way they live, mingle and even the way of life, to force different cultures to mingle on a daily basis to the point it becomes a norm?
Yes! But if we were to rely on the natural instincts of our population, that will never happen. It is up to our politicians - the people that we have voted to stay in power because we trust they understand every aspects of the communities that exists within the population. The people who are educated enough and are equipped with the knowledge and understanding to integrate different communities for them to live in harmony.
Proclaiming that you are an anti-racist society, handing out benefits that are equal to the rest but not understanding the needs of a particular culture that exists within the population is in my defination, still considered, a racist community. Because then, you are treating people who are different no different from how you would treat an animal - feed them, and leave them alone in a neighbourhood that does not allow them to integrate with the rest of the population - caged up like an animal.
One may argue that there are so many communities that it is so hard to keep up. But I'm not speaking about new communities. I'm talking about the communities that have existed for decades. Take for example, the UK, having lived there for 5 years, I can roughly say that there are 5 main races; Caucasian, Africans, Chinese, Indians and Middle Eastern. How well do politicians understand the needs, wishes and goals of the respective cultures? Because I assure you they would be different as no man is build to be equal to another.
Forced Integration
In Singapore, we have 4 main races; Chinese, Malay, Indian, and Eurasian. As a result, we have 4 official languages; English, Chinese, Malay and Tamil. Based on data on the demographics of Singapore by platform.globig.co in 2014, we have a total of 76% Chinese, 14% Malay, 8% Indian and 2% Eurasians and others.
This ethnic ratio is consistent in every neighbourhood in the country, to maintain an equal distribution of race. This is done by what the western world would classify as undemocratic forced integration against basic human rights, via our Ethnic Integration Policy. This was introduced in 1989 to ensure a balanced mix of ethnic groups living in housing estates, so as to promote racial harmony and strengthen social cohesion. It applies to the sale and purchase of all new and resale HDB flats, and is implemented for all ethnic groups.
For example, if you are a Malay wanting to purchase a flat in a block of 10 units with 2 Malay families already living in 2 units in that block, you will not be allowed to purchase said flat.
Many may argue this would be against their rights to chose where they want to live, but one cannot deny that this has helped formed integrated communities throughout the country (the debate of integration between upper class and middle/lower class shall be reserved for another post). As a result, kids of different cultures and background go to the same school, until it becomes a norm to see a face that is different to yours.
Understanding the People
To improve integration, you need to understand, what is important to these respective cultures? What is important to a Chinese family is different to that of a Malay, or a Indian or a Eurasian. It is important that these factors are taken to account in social policies to ensure that their needs are looked after, intead of demanding for the minority to go with the majority. Ultimately, as different as we are, people in general only want 3 things; employment, a home, and safety for family. When these things are taken care of it is very difficult for the general public to be excluded from society.
Racism will never go away. They are natural instincts of the human race, and as much as we educate ourselves, there would be fragments of negative racism that would linger within society. However by then, it will not be as bad a social issue as it is now in the west. As society matures, speaking and poking fun at friends of another race would not be as taboo as it is in the western world. Infact it is acknowledging that we are all different - that we have cultures that maybe some of us don't even understand, and it's ok. For example, till this day, I will never understand why some white families wear their shoes in the house, and my husband will never understand why chinese singaporeans can't keep a toilet dry 😆.
Updated: May 30, 2020
Recently, I have started running from from tanjong pagar back home to balestier. Trying shed some pounds as my wedding will be in six months, and the quickest way is definately to run home, since it takes the same amount of time for me to get home by bus.
And boy, is it a pain. The running is the easy part. It is the minimal amount of space available for a decent amount of pedestrians to be on the same side walk as the shoppers on the streets. Roads are so wide and generous for the automobile, but not for the pedestrians. Not to mention the amount of smoke I breathe in whenever I approach Balestier. Was the city built for the people or for the vehicle?
Thus begins my arguement about cars in the city. Dont get me wrong, I completely understand the convenience of the car; although as someone practicing architecture I die a little inside when clients have to forgo clean and fresh public space in order to provide for carpark spaces according to building regulations. The car is reliable, especially for business users and families.
However, cars weren’t in such a high demand in the olden days. How is it we were able to get around without the aid of the automobile? Like an addiction, we grew to be reliant on the vehicle. As a result urban planning ways changed to adapt to the shift of lifestyle, people hardly walked or cycle, we took the car. Propably explains the rise of overweight Singaporeans throughout the years.
I often get into arguements with the laymen that if Singapore were to try reduce the usage of the car or limit the ownership of the car, the elders wouldn’t be able to move about. What caused it in the first place? The dependence on the car, just like how alcoholics are dependent on alcohol to get them through the day. If my grandfather can work and move about without a car (because the japs seized his car back in the 60s), I don’t see why I can’t. My dad is one fine example. He has always been overweight and can’t move about because he was so reliable on the car to get around. And now, everywhere is too far from him.
There is only so much space we can free up for public space through expanding the building by height. In fact, our now shrinking HDB apartment buildings would be much larger if we didn’t need to provide for carpark spaces. This fact pisses me off.
We can’t compare with car dependent countries in Europe, because it is irrelevent. Singapore is a small city state, and everything is so near! People often have their jaws dropped when I told them I run home from work, though through my experience running Tanjong Pagar is not even that far away from Balestier.
City Planners shouldn’t reduce building setbacks to provide for larger pedestrian walk ways, but reduce the road space for the automobile to give way for pedetrian paths. This is OUR CITY. Why should we design around the vehicle? Make driving a car difficult. Increase on COE fees AND road tax on private cars. Provide subsidy for business owners who have proof they require a car for their daily use, families who need it and elders who really can’t move about.
Infact, why can’t HDB use the HDB home ownership method to restrict car ownership? Just a thought.
Bottom line it starts from matter of choice. I decided to chose a healthier lifestyle to keep my body moving. Does the government want people to avoid taking a healthier lifestyle to give way for the automobile? I am not going to let the automobile stop me from doing so. INFACT, I am going to make sure they don’t get in the way.
