Petition HuiHui citizenship
By Aloysius Chia
Not one month goes by where no petition is written about some current event or another.
First, we have the petition to remove Tim Pei Ling as a Member of Parliament.
Then, we have the petitions in support of and against the repeal of 377A.
Afterwards, petitions for MDA not to censor a film.
Now, to take it to the extreme, a petition to revoke Han Hui Hui’s citizenship.
What’s next? A petition to remove petitions as a means of petitioning?
Let’s be blunt about this. A petition is an attempt at sanctioning another idea, event or person, without recourse to reason, argument and debate.
It is an attempt at using force through numbers, in order to change the course of events. The objective could be to maintain the status quo, such as the petition not to repeal laws; or it could reflect a desire for change, such as to bring down an organisation or website.
But a petition to revoke another person’s citizenship is taking it to another level.
On what basis and reason should we do so? By sheer numbers?
That’s like a group of youngsters playing at the playground who didn’t like one girl who was too rough, and deciding to sanction her by keeping her out of it altogether.
By sheer numbers it worked.
Is a petition representative of a large majority of the population?
Given the fact that there are so many who do not use computers at all, and even if they do, do not take part actively in such petitions, or may not even see them, or did not care about them, how can anyone say that petitions are representative, or democratic?
How about the possibility that someone signs a petition twice using two email accounts and identities online?
Or the fact that there are those who have seen it, but have not read much about the debates from various points of views, yet decide to throw their names into the fray?
Online petitions give a semblance of democracy, but it is not, because it does not attempt to reach out to all and mobilize people to vote. There is no threshold for majority. There is no agreement on what the issue is all about. Only numbers matter, and even so, not clearly in opposition to what.
Numbers don’t tell much about whether doing something is right or wrong, reasonable or not. They don’t hold up to the test of reflection, or the challenge of other ideas. Online petitions merely represent sentiments taken to a group level in a group of people who more or less already feel strongly about the issue.
Does a petition allow you to say ‘No’? How then does it represent those who disagree with it?
By all means the petitions that are proliferating are a testament to the state of our democracy. Petitions are reflective of those who feel and want to act about social issues (rarely are there any economic related petitions out there). It reflects a desire for active democratic participation.
But truly active democratic participation requires a lot more work than a click of a mouse and typing some paragraphs. It requires the organization of groups; effort at mobilizing and encouraging people to vote; translating discussions into many languages, and a press that is free enough to reflect various points of views. More importantly, it requires respect among all for the outcome of the vote, and a respect for other people’s decision in their choice of vote.
Democracy is hard work, because it cannot be detached from the larger social system that requires the activity of all.
Online petitions, on the other hand, as much as it may be a part of democratic culture, do not require much work to have it posted online and shared among various people. Due to how easily it can be posted, it can be made public on short notice, and the momentary feelings that surge outward just as quickly are reflective of the little thought that has been put into it.

Subscribe
Notify of
2 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Lee Hsien Yang’s statement raises questions about PM Lee’s intention to resolve dispute between siblings

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said that he is not sure if the dispute with…

PAP Murali: “I am not a perfect father”

An online post surfaced after Murali Pillai was confirmed to be People’s…

Conspiracy against Singapore – MM Lee

There is a conspiracy to do us in. Why?… They see us…

害怕失业被遣返回国 大部分女佣难拒绝“额外工作”

虽然清楚了解自己的权利和工作准则及合约规定,但是许多外籍女佣仍在被强迫进行“额外”工作时,不敢拒绝雇主,更别说向人力部或相关单位投报。 本地数家非政府组织在接受《亚洲新闻台》访问时指出,外籍女佣清楚了解自己的权利、工作准证和合约规定的工作,但是在面对雇主要求做出准证以外的工作时,她们就算知道不该,却也不敢拒绝或投诉。 受访组织包括有情义之家(HOME)、外籍女佣援助与技能培训协会(FAST)和新加坡劳务中介协会(AEAS)。 FAST协会高级执行员Seira Ong指出,协会每月会接到月200至300通投诉电话,比疫情前的投诉电话多了一倍多,有近三成被转介到人力部。而该协会所接到的求助电话中,有低于两成是和额外工作或工作量过多至无法应付有关。 她指出,较多女佣在被迫进行“额外工作”时不敢拒绝雇主,因为担心会被雇主认为他们是在偷懒,而不敢拨电投诉或求救,则是怕会被遣返回国,尤其是在受到疫情影响的现在,要回到我国觅职就更加难了。 而情义之家的个案经理Jaya Anil Kumar也有同样的答案,即女佣害怕在做出投诉后会失去工作,或者自己反成为被调查的一方。 “向情义之家求助的女佣中,每四人中就有一人表示曾到住家以外的地点,或被载到雇主的公司工作,但是只有小部分案件交给人力部调查。当局多年来都接到相当数量的投诉案件。” 工作界线模糊 AEAS主席K…