Looking at how the government reacts to things like rock concerts in Singapore, it would seem like the government is either fearful of its people at best or at worst, thinks we are extremely dumb and naive. Neither is very reassuring for a developed country who is actively trying to create the international metropolis image globally.

On the one hand, Singapore wants to be seen as the modern, savvy and advanced city state while on the other hand, it wants to enforce controls on its citizens as if we were some kind of cultural backwater whose inhabitants are backward and ignorant. Which is it? You can’t have both. You either embrace all the trappings of a liberal first world country or you don’t. It is really that simple.

Minister for Law K Shanmuggam (Shanmuggam) has recently spoken up about the cancellation of a concert by Swedish black metal band, Watain, on the premise that it was “anti-Christian”. I had never even heard of this band until they were banned. I would therefore argue that the potential group of people that could have been offended by their concert would not even have realised that a concert had taken place but for the publicity that surrounded the cancellation.

This begs the question – can offence be caused if no one was even really aware of the concert? What is the point of a ban that creates publicity for the very thing that the government is allegedly trying to prevent? Much ado about nothing on the government’s part it would seem!

Singapore wants to be seen as a cultural venue but yet sees fit to unilaterally terminate contracts to perform at the last minute. Surely that doesn’t set a very good precedent for the way we do business? Secondly and more damaging, does it (rightly or wrongly) send out the message that the government is terrified of its people and how they can be influenced (however remotely) to rise up against the authorities because of a rock concert that may be anti establishment?

Can this be construed as using the protection of Christian sensibilities as an excuse to ban a concert that could challenge established governmental authority? As said above, Watain is a very niche group with a limited following. Most Christians would have been none the wiser on the concert but for the cancellation which in turn makes the religious argument put forth my Shanmuggam weak.

Why is it that after more than 50 years, the government still appears fearful of its people? Why is it that after more than 50 years, the government still potentially thinks if us as weak minded fools who will mindlessly rise to arms because of a rock concert?

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

国家元首委任 慕尤丁成马国第八任首相

马来西亚国家元首苏丹国家元首苏丹阿都拉宣布,丹斯里慕尤丁成为马国第八任首相。 慕尤丁是原内政部长,原希盟成员党土著团结党(BERSATU)党主席。 慕尤丁将在明早(3月1日)10时30分,在国家皇宫宣誓。 国家皇宫总管阿末法迪尔署名文告称,国家皇宫接获朝野政党党魁提名的首相人选,包括独立国会议员,最后确认慕尤丁获得多数议员的提名。 国家元首根据联邦宪法第40(2)(a)以及43(2)(a)条文,委任前者出任马国首相。 元首认为,委任首相事宜不宜拖延,国家需要政府确保人民与国家的和谐。 慕尤丁则在住家向媒体发表谈话,呼吁各界尊重最高元首的宣布。  

Government accepts all data security recommendations by review committee; to roll out 80% by end 2021

The government will be rolling out recommendations from the Public Sector Data…

陈川仁转发视频 呼吁国人”保持警惕、坚定、团结“

国会议长陈川仁针对近期的新马海域争议,呼吁国人保持警惕、坚定立场和团结,并认为新马之间的对立”可能会持续一段时间,大家加油”。 陈川仁在上周五(7日),在个人脸书分享了一段两分钟半、有关新马海域争议的视频,呼吁国人了解此课题。 视频中提到新马之间的海域界限、实里达机场管理权和新马水供课题。 视频称,马国已超越自己在1979年单边划出的领海范围、14艘马国船只入侵我国领海;实里达机场的ILS系统不会影响巴西古当发展;以及在水供课题方面,马方已在1987年放弃检讨水价的权利。 视频吁国人“作长期抗争心理准备” 视频也质疑马方借近期课题转移内部焦点,或对我国新领导层施压。 视频最后呼吁“从容以对,见招拆招”,“力挺武装部队和内政群英”,并做好“长期抗争的心理准备”。 在帖文中,陈川仁呼吁国人继续为武装部队和内政团队祈祷,因为在海上进行近距离的行动,对双方来说都是非常危险的。 “所以对方必须离开属于我们的领海。你不能跨过自己所划分的界限,然后做出不正确的声明。” “有些人说,双方应该坐下来好好谈判,但请记得,一直以来我们都这么做,可惜成效不大。但我们还在尽力。” 陈川仁也坚称,如果对方跨过了自己较早前宣称的界限,那很显然的就是违反条例。”同时,这些年来两国之间的领空交通管理权也没有更动,没有人想挑战他人的男子气概或主权。” “如果你选择相信对方的说辞,随你意。但是不要以谨慎和平衡的名义自我掩饰。”…