I agree with Index on Censorship's chief executive John Kampfner who says that the "sentence once again shows Singapore's desperate difficulties in dealing with criticism and free expression."... As Justin McCurry points out, Shadrake's trial has reignited debate over Singapore's use of contempt laws to stifle dissent and punish journalists deemed to have insulted the authorities.- two articles: here and here
the first is more critical while the second is more optimistic. but either way, I feel very confused about this issue. like I have to sit down and split a paper into two columns labelled "pros" and "cons" before I can say much about it. but one thing I do agree with is that the pap's attempts to restrict this kind of dissent so that 'heretical' ideas are not propagated is quite unnecessary. the pap themselves should know that majority of Singaporeans hardly care... majority of the ones who should care, don't. they would have been better off letting the book pass and sit lonely and dusty amidst the discount section. furthermore the topic? capital punishment. point: nobody is going to care... Singaporeans are essentially do-gooders and an obedient people. we hardly know people who are capable of facing capital punishment because we are the privileged of society, unassociated with such disdainful acts. let your average Singaporean take a look at it, and he/she will say in the way that ahbengs and aunties do: "orh."
we are a society the pegs two things inversely against each other: comfort and freedom. more ironically, we find comfort in freedom and freedom in comfort. what do I mean? we feel happy and free and (you could almost say) numb when we are in comfort. we have the money, the italian leather sofas, the condominiums and the cars. there is a certain freedom in that, that we are not constrained by the belts of poverty or constant riots and protests. yet in the quest for freedom (freedom as in freedom of speech/expression/communication/etc), we find comfort. we find nobility and we find validity in reclining on the said italian leathered sofas and complaining about the unfairness of it all. do you see the problem? they are like two ends of a rubber-band that eventually come slapping back together
comfort and freedom are inversely related when you consider the initial stretch: if you want freedom, get ready to give up your comfort. if you want the comfort, don't argue about not being free. ostensibly what I see is the pap trying their best to upkeep the comfort for a society that embraces it. everyone knows unorthodoxy is the spark and soon there will be a fire. except here there is nothing for the fire to keep burning. we are pieces of metal that get fired up, become so burning to the touch, but eventually cool down without destroying anything. these so-called heretics will speak, and Singaporeans will say "He's right!" and go back to shopping and eating.
I realise the focus of this whole debacle is the pap's supposed incapability in dealing with criticism and supposed need to quash all unorthodox theories and mindsets. but beyond that I think it's shown that there's hardly anyone other than the pap who really cares. Singaporeans themselves have hardly spoken up regarding the issue; no one has really taken a strong stand against it besides Shadrake himself. (interestingly, neither has the British government) I do not fancy myself as one who is convicted in the cause of letting Shadrake go free. I wish I was, because I think that governments must be open to criticism and feedback, but I do not have the balls to be honest. I am limited by my own fears. but it saddens me to think that everyone is like me. or am I limited by my fears, while others are limited by simply not caring? is there a climate of fear? perhaps, but to a greater degree maybe there is a climate of apathy. Singaporeans are best at... no points for guessing, No Action Talk Only. I've always been trying to figure out if this is because the majority of them are fearful or apathetic.
the problem is too much comfort. we've grown way too numb to the complexities of an ideally free society. we've adjusted to the standards of a materialistically free society like ours. everyone can sit around complain about the pap's overbearing insecurity, but what will everyone do if one day the pap is really gone? that's the stupid thing. where's the solution? maybe it's not stupid, maybe that's the stump. I don't know what the solution is either. I feel like the moment the pap is gone we will become like America. dangerous, up to our eyebrows in debt, disappointed in politicians and in the way things become.
someone must come up with a solution. and we must be willing to give up this comfort. I don't think even the pap would refute that. Singaporeans must give up the comfort. but who really would, right? I have problems even just thinking about it. but we need someone with a good, constructive solution that will not dissolve society like acid. am I naive in thinking that with a really constructive, solid and founded suggestion for improvement, the pap will consider it? perhaps.
I'm probably rambling. I'm still confused. I really do want to kind of compartmentalized what I'm thinking/feeling and articulate it well enough for people to understand and follow. whether or not I'm making a good point. just knowing people get what I'm saying seems good enough, haha. also, I hope I don't get arrested
No comments:
Post a Comment