The issue of race is never far from the social/political fabric of our society. Even though our pledge extols the virtues of “regardless of race, language or religion…”, I do think that we have somewhat fallen short.
In my opinion, “regardless of race” only rings through if race is of no consequence whatsoever. In other words, we should only see each other as people and fellow Singaporeans – not Malay or Chinese or Indian or anything else. Yet, we persist in drawing attention to the issue of racial differences. This comes from top down at the governmental levels. For instance, every official document requests us to state what race we are. The government also uses “race” to justify certain controversial decisions. An example of this would be the walkover appointment of our current President on the grounds of race.
On the one hand, the government is saying that they need to ensure the delicate racial balance in Singapore but on the other hand, race is being perceived to be used as a way to manipulate a given situation. Does this not send mixed and confusing signals to Singaporeans on the issue of race? If authorities are seemingly using race as a political pawn with the minority races in power seemingly acquiescing to such machinations, doesn’t this encourage the majority race in Singapore to treat the issue of race callously?
The recent “brown face” saga is but the latest example of shocking racial ignorance. For those who have had their head buried in the sand, this saga erupted as a result of an E-Pay advertisement which saw actor Dennis Chew portraying various races in Singapore (replete with brown face paint).  I appreciate that creative agency Havas Worldwide has apologised for this fiasco.
However, I query how they could not have known that an advertisement like this could be insensitive to begin with? That ignorance is pretty shocking in itself. Despite our government sanctioned “racial harmony days” and the like, are we still so ignorant?
In its apology, Havas has said that they are sorry “for any hurt that was unintentionally caused.” But how can an advertisement like this be anything but offensive? Their inability to see that in the first instance is what beggars belief. This advertisement is for E-Pay which many government agencies use. How can the government have let this through? And why have they not apologised? Aren’t they complicit too?
The racially inappropriate advertisement might not have garnered as much criticism if siblings Preeti and Subhas Nair had not published a spoof You Tube rap video in response to the advertisement. Yet it is strange that while Law and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam criticised both the ad and the video – he had criticised the video more harshly. Why?
Surely, they deserve some credit for flagging this inappropriate advertisement to the wider public and forcing us to have a much needed public discussion on race? Having watched both the video and the advertisement, I can hand to heart say that I find the advertisement so much more offensive. The advertisement had the benefit of the resources of E-Pay and media creative agencies. It was a statewide campaign.
In other words, it ought to have known better. Preeti and Subhas, on the other hand, are just two private individuals trying to make a point. In my opinion, Mr Shanmugam should never have criticised the siblings. Rather, he should have acknowledged that race requires an honest discussion in Singapore and careless racism within the authorities and their affiliates should be curbed.
Why is race such a hot button issue? Is it because the government is inadvertently making it one?
 

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

Tan Chuan Jin splitting hairs by trying to differentiate between bad living conditions and people living in close quarters

Speaker of Parliament Tan Chuan-Jin has said that the outbreak of the…

Singapore Democratic Alliance issues elections manifesto ahead of Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC contest

It has been announced on 30 June that Singapore Democratic Alliance (SDA)…

国大本月落实加重惩罚新框架 如何重获学生、受害者信任?

新加坡国立大学此前饱受宿舍偷拍事件困扰,学生们人心惶惶。为了杜绝这些违法行为,该大学自本月起,落实对性相关不当行为加重惩罚的新框架,且即日生效。 但是,专业辅导员则提醒该大学,必须确保提供受害者所需要的支援,重新获得学生的信任。 国大检讨性相关不当行为纪律处分框架委员会,提出有关的新惩罚,其中包括了至少停学一年,且记录在毕业成绩册中,毕业三年后才能够消除;如果屡次犯案或触碰到受害者私处等严重行为,犯案者将立即被开除。 10建议三个月分阶段落实 国大校长陈永财教授昨天做出宣布,该委员会于周一公布的10大建议将在接下来的三个月,分阶段落实。 他也向学生、职员和校友发出通知电邮。 同时,从本月起,国大将为第一时间提供支援的人员,提供培训,包括保安和宿舍人员。 校园的所有保安措施也将在今年内,逐步到位。 校方本月将增设不少于300台闭路电视,并且为宿舍厕所的门锁换新,还有增加宿舍保安人数和校园巡逻次数。 除此之外,校方也将于10月前,为宿舍和体育设施内,超过860件浴室隔间安装上方或门下的隔板。 设受害者关怀组 而将于下个月生效的新纪律程序会,将给予受害者更大的权益,包括为受害者及时提供事件调查进展,并让受害者在特殊情况下,能够要求纪律委员会或纪律上诉委员会重新审查结果。有关的特殊情况包括了事后有新证据出现等。…

AGC will take no further action against Alan Shadrake

by: Jewel Philemon/ Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) has decided not to take any…