Marginalisation of Tamil Culture: Do Something or STFU

In recent days, many in the Tamil community have had their panties in a bunch because some shopping centres and even Changi Airport have started putting up Christmas decor even though Deepavali is right around the corner - in other words, not a single F was given for this festive occasion. While there is good reason to feel marginalised by this callous attitude in multiracial Singapore that champions racial harmony - complete with a special day each year to wear 'costumes' and 'celebrate', I am surprised that anyone is surprised by this.

நான் இந்த விளையாட்டுக்கு வரவில்லை

As a second class citizen myself, I'm sure there are many Tamils who have grown accustomed to this and some of those would have even followed Halloween traditions more closely than their own cultural protocols. And I'm certain that the very people who now 'cry mother, cry father' on social media will tomorrow visit these same establishments "because they have the best deals", "because it is my _____'s birthday", "because it's just this one time", because... a thousand irrelevant reasons.

I am pretty confident too that close to 70% of those fuming at this (with 99% confidence in those venting online) don't have the passion and commitment to their culture to turn all this grumbling into real, concrete action. None of them will truly boycott these establishments to show their stand against being marginalised. In reality, these people are just making a mockery of the Indian culture and the Tamil community by being whiny little b**ches online - complain about marginalisation but 'ownself damage' the standing of the community through inaction and apathy.

வாயை மூடிகிட்டுச் சும்மா இருங்கடா

Many of these 'deeply aggrieved' Indians will no doubt conveniently overlook WHY the shopping centres and even Changi Airport didn't bother to recognise the festive holiday linked to one of the four official languages in Singapore. It's obvious that these people don't see the irony of now demanding tokenism be practised by commercial entities - which would just continue to trivialise the larger issues of importance. Once again, this subset of Singaporeans fights over the scraps instead of climbing up to the table to demand a share of the real deal.

As much as you would like to believe otherwise, the larger community is not going to understand what the furor is about because they haven't felt the pain of being scheduled for some unnecessary thing (that could have been done earlier or later) during their important festive period. Deadlines almost never fall on Chinese New Year eve and assignments are hardly made due on any of the first fifteen days.

அவனை நிறுத்தச் சொல், நான் நிறுத்துகிறேன்

The point is that if all those who now make so much noise had actually bothered to stand up during all these occasions (and I guarantee you every working Tamil in Singapore has suffered such an experience), we wouldn't have to embarrass ourselves with this petty behaviour. There is no point being indignant about a practical consequence, really. Nobody cares about your culture because YOU don't care about your culture. You are not willing to get your hands dirty to fight, so why are you now surprised that they couldn't be bothered about what you believe in?

So please, STFU and live with it quietly. Or... get up and do something about the indiscretions that happen everyday around you, at work, with your non-Indian friends, in your everyday lives. And if you start to think that this sounds quite inconvenient - well, that's precisely what a cultural struggle looks like, not your Facebook posts about the decor at Metro.

Burning Down the Columbarium - The Power of Citizen Journalism

Anyone in Singapore knows that the business-government relationship is stronger than any marriage can ever be, and it is seldom the case that the government backs down on big-ticket deals related to infrastructure. For example, the casinos Integrated Resorts (IRs) faced a severe backlash from many Singaporeans who grew up with the notion that gambling was the devil's work. Since our government doesn't practice having a referendum on such major decisions, the deal was already signed even before the backlash took form. And in spite of everything that was said and done by the people of Singapore, the IRs became a reality and today, have become part and parcel of our life.

Having such strong bonds between business venture and government support, it has always traditionally been difficult to get the government to call off deals that appears to be to the people's detriment, primarily because it feels that it has made the best decision but also perhaps a little over-confidence that it wouldn't make major mistakes.

Citizen Journalism in Action

And thus the Sengkang Columbarium Saga happened, where a site next to a new housing estate was revealed to be won through tender by a private company that intended to build a columbarium facility there. When the news broke in late December, it understandably sent homebuyers into a frenzied state of anger and panic as they sought clarification and details.

Following this sizeable backlash, a dialogue session was held on 4 January 2015 between the affected homebuyers, the developer, the authorities (HDB and URA) and the MP of the constituency where assurances were made that HDB and URA would look into the concerns of these soon-to-be residents of the estate.

However, just two days later, on 6 January 2015, a joint press release was issued by the authorities to affirm that there would be no change to the situation and that the private company would be allowed to carry on with its plan for the site.

Over that same period, I had started looking closely at the company involved and its background, and discovered that the company had a very dubious layout. Using publicly available information from various sources, I pieced together the convoluted money trail and established just how far the rabbit hole went insofar as this company that won the tender was concerned. The article I prepared was then published on The Online Citizen on 9 January 2015.

And then subsequently, there was little activity on the mainstream media about this issue until it was announced in parliament by Dr Khaw Boon Wan on 29 January 2015 that the tender had been revoked.

My take is that the obvious negative outlook of the company on account of its layout and funding sources made it too unsavoury for the government to be involved with. I would even go far as to suggest that if not for my article spelling out just how questionable it was, I don't think the tender would have been revoked.

Truth Prevails

Now, the naysayers will naturally say that I am just full of it and that it was all just coincidence, not causation. Yes, that is surely a possibility. But, can you really say with definitive authority that the article did not force the government's hand in any way at all? 

The fact is many members of the mainstream media follow The Online Citizen (TOC) and the article was extensively shared on many other platforms. It is therefore hard to imagine that no decision-maker involved had been informed of the findings in my article.

And that's the point I'm driving at. As long as the possibility is there, we must continue to believe that our efforts to unearth the truth will bring about justice - even in a place as squeaky clean as Singapore. Instead of making blanket statements based on half-truths, choose an issue you believe in and tear it down with evidence and established facts.

If you're not good with words, you can still pass on the information to sites like TOC which are committed to getting reliable information out to the people. If that too isn't an option for you, then support those who are actually putting in the effort in seeking the truth. You've seen these people and have benefited from them, but have you actually recognised their efforts well?

Donate money, share their work and refer people who can contribute information to them - do something. Because citizen journalism is a movement, not just pockets of individuals. And everyone can be part of this movement towards truth.

Apparently Town Councils are Political, and PA is not

An interesting exchange happened this week as I met up with a Youth Executive Committee member of a Constituency Club (CC) located in an opposition ward. The meeting itself was with regard to a school project that I am undertaking but as we discussed the possibilities, he mentioned that using services and venues that come under the purview of the Town Council would be problematic. While he admitted that the Town Council would largely accede to the request, it was not with the same frequency and almost-hassle-free manner in which it could be done under a PAP Town Council.

To this gentleman, the People's Association was non-partisan and focuses on community engagement, while the Town Council was an extension of the political party controlling the institution. He shared that PAP Town Councils work closely with the People's Association and offer many privileges such as the complimentary use of venues like void decks, or at a nominal fee.

source: Singapore Infopedia

It was amusing to me because of two realities. One, the People's Association has a much more closer relationship to the PAP than Town Councils. And two, Town Councils are municipal services that ought to be part of the government machinery - even if it is through an elected representative from the opposition party.

In fact, I would even go as far to say that it is precisely BECAUSE the Town Council is non-political, that there is no preferential treatment for services offered to the People's Association. The Town Council's primary role is to address the residents' basic needs in terms of their living space and manage the services provided properly. To me it makes sense to allow residents more leeway in paying their conservancy fees than to offer nominal fees to community engagement activities.

To use an analogy, if one business charges the same rate to strangers and friends alike while another charges a lower rate for those it considers friends, which would you consider was being professional in its dealings? The friends enjoying the preferential rate would of course describe the other flat-pricing business not as good, but in the larger picture, who is really being fair?

source: CIA

In another observation as the friendly conversation progressed, the gentleman took pains to clarify that the Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS) were conducted near a block of flats across the road from the CC, and not within the CC itself - "because the MPS is political". I nearly laughed out loud at that because a Member of Parliament meeting the constituents he or she is representing to address their issues is anything but political. The fact that the MP belongs to one political party or another is merely a statement of fact, not implication.

I have no doubt the people volunteering their time through the People's Association have the best intentions to serve the community - after all, I was part of this at one point in my life, not long ago. But to buy into this propaganda that the People's Association is non-partisan in practice and that Town Councils are politically motivated is really sad.

Yes, the political rhetoric can be twisted to suit each party's agenda, but the proof is in the pudding. Who are the ones being invited to People's Association events without fail? And who are the ones NOT being invited - even to the extent of being actively avoided? Who are being appointed as advisers - sometimes with the oversight that supersedes the power entrusted to the parliamentary representative elected by the people?

As I've said many times before - and something in which I believe very strongly - once the elections are over, everyone in parliament becomes the government and should work towards progress for the nation, betterment of society and improvement in the citizens' lives. Some citizens getting penalised for their choice of parliamentary representative is deplorable and is a very dark stain on Singapore's reputation.