The big news on the international stage is the choice of Ms.
Kamala Harris to be the Democratic Party’s choice for Vice-President. Ms.
Harris, who is currently the junior senator from California will be the first “woman
of colour” (her father is black Jamaican and her mother is Tamil) to be on any
primary ticket. Of the four running for office this November, Ms. Harris stands
out as something refreshing (the other three being crusty white men) and she’s
helped electrify the campaign with Donald Trump calling her mean (she won’t
sleep with him) and she’s made the elections interesting beyond America’s
borders:
https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-53750619
While Ms. Harris has proved herself to be a capable
politician in her own right, the truth is that she was chosen because of her
gender and bi-racial roots. The Biden Campaign’s strategy in choosing a “woman
of colour,” is obvious. If the Trump-Pence Campaign is all about getting old
white men out to vote, the Biden-Harris campaign is going to be about getting
women and “people of colour” to vote.
Ms. Harris isn’t the only politician in the world to be “helped”
by her gender and race. Like it or not, the world is simply not colour blind
and what you have between your legs counts when it comes to the polling booth. As
much as we like to think of ourselves as “progressive” and being blind to
colour and ethnicity, we’re not. It took America, the land that gave us a
constitution based on individual happiness and liberty took more than two hundred
years to elect a man who was slightly darker than pink (and let’s not forget
his mother is white) and then promptly reversed that by electing his successor
who decided that America needed to be more White than White and while it’s
taken two hundred years to elect someone darker than pink, America has more
famously never elected a woman to be president or vice-president (by contrast,
the more “sexist” societies of the Muslim parts of South Asia have put four
women into power).
People generally like people they are comfortable with. Unfortunately,
comfort usually means people who are most like them and in a democratic society
that happens to be ethnically and religiously homogeneous, leaders tend to look
pretty much like the rest of the electorate. However, in diverse societies, the
politics like business becomes a question of target markets. In American
Presidential Campaigns, a presidential candidate looks for a running mate who
can compliment him (most of them being men). The most striking example being
the young and black Obama choosing an old white man called Joe Biden.
If the divisions in a society are particularly deep, you
might find a case of certain political offices being reserved for certain
communities. In Lebanon it was understood that the President would always be a Maronite
Christian, the Prime Minister a Sunni Muslim and the Speaker of Parliament
being a Shia Muslim.
Singapore did have something similar in its presidency. Lee
Kuan Yew states very clearly that he needed to show the government in KL that a
Malay could rise up in Singapore and so he chose Yousof Ishak to be Yang De
Pertuan Negara (Malay for Head of State, a title conferred on the Malaysian
Sultans, though Ishak was to be a non-Royal head of state. The title was
changed to President once we became an independent republic).
In our early days it was understood that the Presidency
would be reserved for ethnic minorities as it was understood that as the Chinese
were the majority, it was more than likely that the government and Prime
Minister would be Chinese.
The rationale for reserving the presidency for ethnic
minorities was clear. This was to preserve ethnic and religious harmony and it was
a valuable symbol for ethnic minorities.
However, by 1985, it was obvious that the government felt
that race was no longer a thorny issue and Mr. Wee Kim Wee (obviously ethnic Chinese)
became our President. Then towards the end of Mr. Wee’s term, the Presidency
moved from being about racial harmony to being about looking after our savings.
The Presidency became an elected office in its own right (even if two
Presidents have had their elections fixed).
The evolving nature of our presidency should be the story of
our progress in race relations and this was a government that felt the need to
reserve the head of state role for ethnic minorities. This is a government that
is known to read the ground and plan carefully. So, when Mr. Wee Kim Wee was
appointed to be President in 1985, they must have felt that it was no longer
necessary to reserve the office for ethnic minorities because our race relations
must have improved.
Singapore’s government also acts tough of “racist” or “acts
that disrupt racial harmony.” I, like many Singaporeans grew up with the
message drummed into our heads that racial harmony was something special.
Yet, while successive Singapore governments have done so
many right things in the name of promoting racial harmony, they’ve also been
playing the “race card” in a rather ingenious way.
The first step was to return the presidency to being about
race and the rather clumsy attempt to arrange the winner (fix being an ugly
word). The most embarrassing moment came from our Minister of Trade and
Industry, Mr. Chan Chun Seng, who said “An Indian Muslim is a Malay,” which any
half-educated Western Expatriate could tell you is not true. The nicest thing you
could say about the Ministers comments is that our management of race relations
must have been so successful that he couldn’t tell the difference between an
Indian Muslim and a Malay.
One has to question why the government felt it was necessary
to play the race card with the presidency when it had felt it was no longer
necessary to do so back in 1985. Are we to say that race relations have worsened
in this supposedly more “liberal” age and if the rights of ethnic minorities has
become worse or at least so much so that you have to make the presidency about
race again, what does that say about the government’s management of race
relations since the 1980s?
Instead of having a candidate that could appeal to all
(Malay, Muslim Lady), what we got was a presidency that lost its legitimacy
before it even began.
The other point of convenient racism came when the party
kept insisting that “Singapore is not ready for a Chinese Prime Minister.” This
is despite the fact that the most popular member of government happens to be from
an ethnic minority. While, Senior Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam has said that
he’s not interested in the job, one has to ask which part of Singapore is not
ready for an ethnic minority to be Prime Minister when the Senior Minister is
considered a “dream candidate” for so many.
To make matters worse, the newly appointed “Leader of the
Opposition” or leader of the only other party to win seats happens to be an
Indian. If the electorate is willing to support “non-Chinese” party leaders,
where does the government get the idea that the nation is not ready to be led
by a non-Chinese? Is the government still stuck in the politics of the 1960s
while the electorate has moved on?
A government that has worked so hard to create a society
that is “regardless of race” has to understand that it cannot no longer
micromanage race relations or impose yesterday’s fears on today’s population.
Talk to many local Chinese and you may find that they’re more comfortable with
their Tamil and Malay buddies than they are mixing with Mainland Chinese. You
need to address current issues rather than dig up old wounds. When the incident
with Ramesh Erramalli broke out, Singapore’s Tamil population sided with an old
Chinese security guard rather than with their “own kind.”
When the electorate gives a party led by an Indian more
seats after you’ve said that they’re not ready for a “Non-Chinese” Prime Minister,
the message is clear – Stay Out of Race Politics.”
No comments
Post a Comment