Since National
Day has just passed, I thought it might be worthwhile to talk about the topic
of patriotism or the love of one’s nation. If you look at the rise of hard
right snake oil salesmen that have been popping up all over the place in the
last half decade, you will realise that we are living in a time when the term “patriotism”
has been sorely abused.
Patriotism or
love of the state has always been a virtue for as long as humans have organised
themselves into societies. If you look at who becomes a hero, you’ll notice it’s
inevitably been people who have sacrificed their individuality and even their
lives for the rest of us. We think of the ideal as set out by the late President
John F Kennedy who told the young of his era, “Ask not what your country has done
for you but what you can do for your country.”
While many of
us grew up encouraged to have develop “patriotic” ideals, there has been a
trend towards abusing ideal of patriotism. This abuse is best summed up by
former US President George W Bush when he said, “You are either with us or
against us.” This became most pronounced during the Trump Presidency when everyone
was either cheering in delusion or foaming in the mouth whenever his name was
mentioned.
As always, whilst
America and the rest of the Western World gets stuck in a debate on
personalities, Singapore practices a more subtle but probably more effective
form of abusing patriotism. The most visible example is over the debate on the
death penalty. The activists make one consistent tactical error, which is to
write to the rest of the world about Singapore hanging people. Look at the last
incident when Sir Richard Branson got involved in airing his views on the death
penalty.
It is a
tactical error because the government inevitably moves the discussion away from
the death penalty and the chap waiting at the gallows to a question of “outsiders
versus Singapore,” and suddenly anyone who anti-death penalty gets labelled as “anti-Singaporean.”
Hence the guy’s fate is inevitably sealed because, well its no longer about
whatever the guy was carrying but Singapore standing up to the rest of the
world on a certain political position.
As mentioned in
my previous posting, patriotism is an emotion and when an emotion is stirred up,
logic and rationality go out the window. I think of the 2005 hanging of Van
Tuong Nguyen, an Australian citizen who was caught carrying drugs. There was a
lot of diplomatic noise and an Australian politician mentioned something about
banning SQ from Australian airports. Speaking as someone who sees himself as educated
in the West and rational, my instinct was – we should not only hang the guy but
ensure that the Australian High Commissioner witnessed the event. The emotion
of sticking the middle finger at the “imperialist” bully when we are trying to
apply our laws was strong enough to overcome whatever feelings I might have had
towards the death penalty.
This is not the
only example of how the debate has shifted from being about issues to being
about “us-versus-them.” It has become all too easy to label anyone who
disagrees with you as “unpatriotic.” Patriotism is the blanket used to suppress disagreement.
However, as
anyone who has had kids will tell you, like and love do not go hand in hand. As
I have said to my kid on a few occasions, “I’ll always love you, but I don’t like
certain things that you do or believe in.”
Singapore is my
home, and it is the place where I have been trying to raise a family. There are
reasons why I chose to do it here and not elsewhere. However, when it comes to
the things that I do not like about the place, I express myself and hope that
one day someone with the capabilities of bringing about change will do it and
make it a better place.
I do not think
this feeling is unique to me. There are, as they say distinctions between
Singapore the country and the Singapore government. There are distinctions
between disagreeing with certain things and wanting to destroy them.
We need to
remember this when we look at people like opposition politicians and activist of
certain causes. Just because we do not agree with them all the time, it does
not mean that they are less patriotic than the rest of us.
This was a
point that was ironically brought home to me by a young man who was active in
the PAP grassroots. He was talking about Dr. Chee who has been a proverbial punch
bag for the powers that be. His argument was that when you look at Dr. Chee and
all that he has endured, it is a miracle that he stays and remains active in the
political sphere. This is a man who cold easily have packed his bags and moved
elsewhere to make a more comfortable living. He has no reason to stay and like
the place. Yet he stays because he must clearly believe he’s got something to
contribute.
We need to
remember this. People who love the country do not have to like everything about
it. People who are critical are not necessarily against the system but hoping
to make it work for them. Not everyone can be a superscale wage earner but most
of us have to live here and make it work for us. If we remember that
disagreement is not unpatriotic, we can sit down and discuss the ways to make
things better for everyone. However, we can only do that when the people we
disagree with feel confident enough that they won’t be labelled “unpatriotic”
for holding different views.
2 comments
Very well said, loving SG does not necessarily mean having to like or agree with the government. Two entirely separate issues.
But imbeciles can't stomach any criticism of the PAP, they always ask dissenting voice to leave SG for another country. They can't distinguish between loving SG and speaking up for justice
Post a Comment