The Standard for an "Involved Civic Society"

Taken from: http://www.p65.sg/2008/04/01/mas-selamat-memorabilia/

Mas Selamat memorabilia

While the whole Singapore is on a massive manhunt for fugitive Mas Selamat, some people have taken it on in a different spin, by producing and selling memorabilia with Mas’ face on mugs, T-shirts, caps, bags etc.

Some people have criticised it as distasteful, insensitive, making a joke of a serious matter and cashing in on a national threat. Others thought it is creative, entrepreneurial and helps to heighten awareness of the search.

Both have its valid points and I think it is good that people are expressing their views and making their stands. Instead of dividing the society, I think this will lead to better understanding of an alternative view and the acceptance and appreciation of a diversity of opinions among people. This is all part of a more involved civic society.

Posted by Baey Yam Keng

My first reaction to this was -- a feeling of insult. He makes it sound as if Singaporeans are that incapable of engaging in mature discussion that even an issue as minor as the one above would lead to "better understanding of an alternative view and the acceptance and appreciation of a diversity of opinions among people".

"I think it is good that people are expressing their views and making their stands." -- Now he sets this example as the standard for "expressing their views and making their stands" Someone here seems oblivious to the governmental repression on the mainstream media in Singapore. Someone is clearly unaware that our main source of news is a state-controlled one, that leaves no room for "expressing views" or "making stands" on a significant enough platform that the internet simply cannot provide.

One word for Mr Baey - Sneaky. This is an attempt to veil the truth, an attempt to lead people to think that freedom of expression is already being protected in our society. Bullshit. Only when people are allowed to openly discuss unfair electoral policies such as the GRC system, or biased lift upgraded schemes, can we then say "I think it is good that people are expressing their views and making their stands."

"I think this will lead to... the acceptance and appreciation of a diversity of opinions among people" Hah. I don't see any acceptance of my opinion that ministers should not be treated like gods.

And the best quote of the day. "This is all part of a more involved civic society." So, an involved civic society simply means that you and I talk about things like selling Mas Selamat shirts. Matters of little importance on a national level. If this is the standard, then why is Singapore ranked 147th by Reporters Without Borders.

More importantly, my comment for this quote is -- Sneaky. Yes, i'm using the same word to describe this statement. But what else is there to it? It implies that all we need is people who are concerned about Singapore's future. But what is the use of this if our government does not engage with the people? What point will there be if ministerial pay hikes continue despite widening income gaps and rising consumer prices? What use will "civic involvement" be if the government continues to gerrymander and keep opposition voices in parliament squashed?

Ministers were voted in to solve problems, not to shift the burden of solving problems onto citizens, and certainly not to tell them what a "civic society" should be like. We voted you in (technically), so it's our general will that should decide what is done, not you telling us what to do.