By Ghui

Patriotism and a sense of identifying with one’s “home” country are certainly not straightforward issues. This is especially not clear-cut in the age of globalisation. Singapore has seen its own share of immigration. Indeed, this is a worldwide phenomenon and immigration to Singapore is a sign that Singapore has joined the ranks of global cities, which are seen as favourable cities in which to live.

In any scenario, there are always pros and cons. In the Singapore example, the boon of global recognition as a sought after city had the accompanying bane of perceived overcrowding. It has also forced us to confront the issue of our own national identity. What makes one Singaporean? What constitutes distinctly Singaporean characteristics?

Feng Tianwei’s recent triumph at the Olympics has sparked another controversy on “Singaporeanness”. While some were proud of her victory, others were more reticent, believing that her achievements were not the achievements of Singapore because she was originally Chinese. I do not know Feng personally but I can imagine that this would be a bitter pill to swallow. An Olympics medal is the culmination of years of blood, sweat and tears. It is no mean feat. The public see only the elation of the victors and the disappointment of those who underperformed. They do not see the years of training and sacrifice that go on behind closed doors regardless of the eventual result.

Of course, there is no denying that if she won a medal, she would be handsomely rewarded and now that she has indeed triumphed, I have no doubt that her bank account has received a healthy boost. However, it is important to bear in mind the unpredictability of winning. Even if she had not won the sought after medal, she would still have had to put in the same amount of effort sans the monetary reward of victory.

If Feng had failed, we would have said she was a complete waste of time and resources but now that she has finally brought home an individual medal, we begrudge her the success she is due. In short, she can never win. But is it about her? No, not really – it is about our own tussle with national identity that has brought the issue of her victory to the forefront.

Do other countries suffer from the same quagmire? 

When Mo Farah, who is Somalian by birth, won the 10,000 metres for Team GB, he knelt on the floor in a prayer of thanks before draping the Union Jack across his tired but victorious shoulders. For all the British who were watching, that was a momentous moment for he had managed to retain his cultural roots while still embracing “Britishness”. He was living example of acceptance and integration.

When asked if he would rather be representing Somalia, his simple response spoke volumes. ‘Not at all, mate. This is my country.’.  Has anyone ever asked Feng the same question?

While Mo may have embraced his adopted country, he has also set up The Mo Farah Foundation to support victims of drought in the country of his birth. Clearly, one can embrace both British and Somali values at the same time without conflict. Can Feng not be a Singaporean who cherishes the opportunities of her adopted land without relinquishing the fact that she was once a Chinese citizen? The two are clearly not mutually exclusive.

As the country comes to grips with the impact of mass migration, coupled with the government’s lack of adequate planning, there will no doubt be hurdles to overcome. But, let’s not miss the forest for the trees. This is not about individuals but a collective national identity. Perhaps, we should think about what makes us Singaporeans as opposed to singling out non- Singaporeans.

Singapore is a country built on the toil of our forefathers, many of whom were immigrants. With their industry and hard work, a nation emerged from a tiny fishing village. Perhaps then, the qualities that make one Singaporean are drive, perseverence, a willingness to work hard and a commitment to put down roots rather than arbitrary standards of “Singaporeaness”.

Are the British more willing to accept Mo more than we are able to accept Feng because the British are more secure in their national identity? I do not know but I do know that xenophobia does not solve the problem.

The government has to do its part but we too have to give some thought to what makes one Singaporean before attacking anyone perceived as foreign.

You May Also Like

公积金和公共组屋的计时炸弹

人民之声党成员毕博渊(Brad Bowyer),将我国中央公积金制度,和德国及丹麦的养老金制度作比较。 他指出,德国的养老金基金总额达到2千680亿美元,虽然略低于我国,但该国有8千240万人口,其中25巴仙超过65岁。 “虽然人民平均的储蓄缴交率只有18.7巴仙(而且还是雇员和雇主对半),德国养老金仍能至少给出1千175欧元(约1800新元)的入息。” 毕博渊质疑,何以比我国规模稍小的德国养老基金,却能回报给更多会员们5-6倍的回酬? 至于丹麦人口有575万,和新加坡差不多。不过他们的养老基金只有1千600亿美元。当地雇员一方面缴税,也要缴交平均12巴仙的养老金。但是退休雇员至少可以领回每月4千元的入息。 《财经时报》前总编提醒部分公积金转到房产上 毕博渊的观点一出,也引来正反双方网民积极参与辩论。有者感谢毕博渊道出了我国公积金制度的不足,不过《财经时报》(Business Times)前总编Mano Sabnani则提醒,公积金的终身入息只是一小部分,事实上,公积金的储蓄很大部分也倍转换成房地产–被用来买房子。 Sabnani指出,公积金会员在55岁可以提出最低储蓄额以外的钱,但是如果会员还有买房子,那么留在公积金里的储蓄就更少,如果如此可以领取的终身入息也不会很多。 他也提及,也有一些低收入劳工或家庭主妇的公积金积蓄也相对较低。他不认同把我国公积金和德国、丹麦养老金一概而论,因为他们把所有储蓄都放在退休金里,而不是像我国国民需要用在房屋、健保储蓄等用途,自然退休后领取的入息就较高。…

Straits Times spins story about LHY into one that he is never returning to Singapore

The Straits Times article on Lee Hsien Yang’s recent Facebook post is focused on the ongoing police investigation into him and his wife. The article also mentioned Lee Hsien Yang’s guilty verdict for lying under oath and his intention to run for the upcoming presidential election. However, the article did not include LHY’s accusations against the government and PM LHL, alleging attacks on him and his family for standing up for his father’s promise to ensure that their family house at 38 Oxley Road is demolished after his death.

The Invisible Hand does not Produce Social Culture

(Charles Barsotti’s Comic of the “Invisible Hand” of the market) By Aloysius Chia…

Scoot apologises for mistakenly sending emails about COVID-19 testing to passengers who are not on China flight; says “no data breach” involved

Singapore’s low-cost airline Scoot has issued an apology for mistakenly sending emails…