Week 9 – Ethnicity

Ethnicity, nationalism, what’s next?

An identity is important to an individual. It tells him what he is and what he’s not. It used to be the area you were born in that was most important. People from the same ‘hometown’ become closer than blood even if they had just met for five minutes. This is because the particular area that you come from identifies you and gives you a particular characteristic. For example, Hakka families have to have soup for dinner every night. A meal without soup is never complete. And it also differentiates you. Italians never open presents when they receive them, whereas Egyptians never fail to do so.

Ethnicity used to be the way people were grouped and separated. When the Raffles and company took over control of Singapore and the migrants poured in, they divided the island into little territories so that every group has its own place to have. The Government, of course, had its own land around Fort Canning area. The Europeans had the southwest bank of the Singapore River. The Chinese was southwest of the European area. The Malays was given land near Panglima Prang, which grew to form Kampong Glam. The Indians, too, had their share along the Singapore River. (Tan, Bonny (2002) Raffles Town Plan, http://infopedia.nl.sg/articles/SIP_658_2005-01-07.html). Clear lines of demarcation were drawn, and infringements were unacceptable. Not only were they separated into the different countries that they came from, the Chinese were even more particular. They further divided themselves into their dialect groups, with the Hokkien and Teochew clan becoming rather powerful. They enforced this unwritten demarcation with gangs.

After achieving independence, the ruling party PAP had different ideas. Rioting had turned Singapore into a warfront for different ideologies, racial unhappiness and regional instability. The Indians and Malays got along rather well generally, but the Malays didn’t like the Europeans and this escalated and erupted in the Maria Hertogh Riots in 1950 and 1951. The Chinese, on the other hand, had quarrels with everyone and even among themselves, over racial, religious and political issues. These, PAP claimed, were instigated by pro-Malay UMNO in Malaysia, the European-hating Indonesians, and the communist Chinese trying to take over this part of the world.

PAP couldn’t allow this to carry on. And if they could not reconcile the racial and religious differences, they had to create another identity for the people to be united. Thus, nation-building exercises became priority. Nationalism was a tough thing to do. Singapore, as a nation, had only recently achieved independence. A newborn compared to the millennia-lasting China and India, and the Malays from Malaysia. They uprooted everyone from their little territories and made them share everything, in their HDB flat policies. Every incident of note became a chance for a nation-building exercise. The age-old, and some say aging, mantra that Singaporeans have to stay united, regardless of race or religion, was repeated throughout, even till now, in the recent cases of SARS and terrorism.

Nationalism had to replace ethnicity as the unifying cause, because Singapore was birthed out of nowhere. A little red dot in a sea of green, as a Minister said. And also, the differences Malaysia had with Singapore meant that Singapore could not allow the local Malays to side with the other Malays on the other side. The same goes for the Chinese who might identify with their Communist motherland.

But now, things are changing again. In the face of globalization, nationalism is running thin. ‘Rent-a-citizen’ policies have become rather popular. This is most evident in the sporting world. Brazilian soccer players were offered citizenships to play in and for Singapore. But as they grew older and retired from playing, they chose to renounce their citizenship and return to where they came from. Singaporeans Li Jiawei and her fellow paddlers received a mixed reaction when they won the silver medal in the recent Beijing Olympics, where every other national table-tennis team sported a China-born player. Some derided the paddlers, saying they are not Singaporeans, and it’s a shame to have to depend on ‘outsiders’ to win. Others ‘protected’ them, saying they won us a medal, so we should be proud of them.

To me, the two seems the same. They were recruited because of their talents, nothing else. And they chose to be recruited because of the monetary gains, nothing else. It smacks more of a business deal rather than national pride. Citizenship is freely granted to ‘deserving’ individuals who bring value to the country. As time goes by, these ‘citizens’ might decide to bring their value to other countries, which offer a more deserving pay for their talents. Citizenship seems nothing more than a perk or benefit from a corporation.

Nationalism seems to be going the way of ethnicity, with something else coming on to replace it. I’m not too sure what it is. But one thing is for sure, not even a citizenship can ensure a person’s loyalty anymore.

Advertisement

~ by chuangbinghan on October 13, 2008.