by Khairulanwar Zaini

‘There is a widespread perception – or at least until recently – that politics is not where things are happening. Whereas for many the political kingdom once held prospects for change, it has come to be associated with closure.’ – Phillip Darby, Rethinking the Political

What is the ‘political’? The Boon Lay Youth Club (BLYC), a co-curricular society with links to the grassroots network in the ward, is in the centre of this storm, after former Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) Siew Kum Hong pointed to the impropriety of its partisan links. The Ministry of Education has however defended the club’s status, since its activities ‘instill a sense of civic duty and community bonding’.

But one would be hard-pressed to accuse the MOE (or the BLYC, for the matter) of abetting a partisan conspiracy. Despite its origins, the BLYC is not a party proxy. Neither would any overt recruitment for the incumbent party prove tolerable for the students. It would be a discredit to these students to suggest that they have been reduced into unwitting partisan pawns. That the club is oriented towards community engagement is clear. However, there is a nagging sense that the BLYC remains a political appendage of the government, even if not in the traditional sense of being a youth affiliate of the ruling party.

Source: ONE@Boon Lay

As Siew Kum Hong pointed out, Singapore had a rich history of student activism during the pre-independence years, foremost amongst them the Chinese middle school students and the Fajar Generation of the then-University of Malaya Socialist Club. The potency of such activism was not lost on the PAP government, leading to schools (and arguably, even politics in general) being evacuated of its political potential. The dearth of political consciousness however rebounded against the state, as generations of students consequently grew up detached from their immediate community. We could marvel about the irony of the government bemoaning against youth apathy since their indifference is nothing but the product of the government’s systematic depoliticization of society. But in truth, we should worry – because the government has astutely manipulated this particular problem of its own creation to entrench itself further.

So, here’s the crux of the matter: it is not about the BLYC being a covert party apparatus, but that the government has contrived a new understanding of community service and civic participation: one that is intricately interwoven with statist interests. The problem is really how civic initiatives inevitably gravitate towards partnership with – or even under the complete guidance of – the government. This is not surprising, because the political vacuum of society has found itself occupied by the bureaucratic apparatus of the state. With such a monopoly, it is merely a matter of semantics to collapse all civic efforts into endeavours that maintain the government’s perpetuity: witness how the National Youth Council enables youth participation in public life, but in a particular direction that refines and ultimately affirms the status quo. We can discern this distinct state-approved ethic of civic participation in the Youth Olympic Games and the annual National Day Parades: ritualistic mobilization of the youth population in ‘safe’ and politically-legitimizing pursuits in the name of service to the community and nation.

Hence, the fundamental problem is that we have no sense of the ‘political’ to speak of. MOE could blithely assert that the BLYC is not ‘political’ because civic participation in Singapore functions merely as initiatives of improvement, not of change. To put it simply, community engagement, shorn of its radical potential, will never be political.

Hence, the idea then is to counter the diminution of such ‘prospects for change’: instead of trying to expunge all hints of the political from schools, we should valorise and nurture it – but in a manner that is fair and accessible to other political orientations other than the ruling party’s. It is the parity of political opportunity that should inform our concern, not the eradication of politics. The move by MOE to approve the BLYC is laudable, but this is merely a baby step that holds the promise for other cause-based societies that are affiliated to organizations beyond the party or state.

Read also “The real lessons of BLYC

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

运输受阻大量宠物死在包裹内 中国网民冀停止网购宠物!

中国河南漯河市召陵区的一家物流园区,数千只宠物包裹遭倾倒弃置,其中大部分宠物已死亡! 事后有动物保护人士到现场进行查看,发现很多动物已经死亡,并对已呈奄奄一息的动物进行急救,更呼吁民众不要透过网络购买宠物,避免悲剧重演。 据大陆媒体综合报导,上周二(9月22日)有网民爆料,被送往安徽的大量宠物,包括有兔子、猫、狗和荷兰猪。因种种原因,载送这些宠物的车辆被迫滞留在漯河。漯河当时也有数日雨天,导致昼夜温差很大,大部分动物又缺氧、缺水和缺量而大量死亡。而死亡的动物,无论是商家或养殖基地都不愿意接受。 有动物保护志工人士在接获通报后,到现场发现大批快递包装的宠物,因有宠物已经死亡,现场尸臭熏天。他们急忙将车内上存活的动物救出,经过清点明确包存活的动物不到包裹的三分之一,只有1074只,包括200只兔子、20只猫和狗,已被热心的民众领养。就连该物流公司的职员们见状也于心不忍,纷纷自掏腰包,找地方找人照顾这些小动物。 快递公司声称被冒用 基于被遗弃的部分包裹上贴有韵达快递公司的面单,该快递公司也被召见以参与调查。快递公司相关负责人于9月30日指出,公司快递服务网点之前的客户预留面单被他人冒用,而该公司是不允许运输动物的。目前,韵达总部仍对有关事件的具体情况进行进一步的调查和了解。 车辆司机未经批准  半夜到物流园卸货! 据《新京报》报导,漯河召陵区商务局副局长杨爱华指出,宠物快递分别来自江苏徐州和河南商丘,运输车辆抵达河南后,在郑州和楼和的中转站被揭发载有活体动物,因此拒绝接收。而车辆司机在没有获得批准之下,半夜将这批快递在漯河东兴物流园卸货。 中国《邮政法实施细则》有明确规定,禁止快递行业运送活体动物,但是仍然有不少店铺进行活体宠物售卖,还提供包邮服务。

SAFRA poster criticised for being sexist and distasteful

A promotional poster by SAFRA – or SAFRA National Service Association –…

Grabtaxi: New regulatory policy will not affect its operations

The Third-Party Taxi Booking Service Providers Bill was passed in parliament on…

新加坡外交部吁国人挪后往香港行程

新加坡外交部吁请国人,如非必要宜挪后前往香港行程。 该部在脸书发文指出,有鉴于香港自6月以来,大规模集会示威仍在持续,示威活动可在毫无预警之下发声,且有转变为暴力的可能。 该部称,在12日及13日在香港机场的集会,也导致许多航班被取消,游客滞留机场。 对于已人在香港的国人,外交部重申宜保持警惕,关注香港警察脸书专页并留意最新局势进展。 该部再次呼吁人在香港国人到该部官网登记,方便外交部在必要时与他们取得联系。 如需驻港领事馆或外交部协助,可联系: 新加坡驻香港总领事馆 电话: +852-2527-2212 或 +852-9466-1251 (下班时间之后)…