Is Nation-building a PAP Ploy?

This post is from a series prompted from a course on Nation-building in Singapore at the National University of Singapore:

In my coursework I was given a prompt that deserved some thought:

“The ‘imagined’ Singapore nation is an institutional construct that has little basis in history or relevance in an increasingly globalized world. The belated initiatives of the ruling PAP government to inspire a Singaporean nationalism should be seen, not as a reactive response to preserve indigenous identity and culture, but as a rear-guard attempt to insure the government’s ongoing hegemony over the state.”

The two premises of this prompt are (a) that the concept of the Singaporean nation is imagined, without basis in history, or relevance to the future of globalization, and (b), that nationalism is more adeptly understood as a means of the state to maintain sovereignty, rather than an attempt to preserve identity or culture. Though the analysis of nationalism as a vehicle of the government is an interesting take, the picture is incomplete, largely because of a faulty first premise, that the concept of the Singaporean nation is imagined. The struggle to peg down nationalism in all its forms relative to the structure of political society does not support the view that there is no inherent Singaporean nation. Rather, it demonstrates the necessity to focus on nationalism as a function of political society, rather than in the context of political societal structure. Stressing the political culture aspect of nationalism does not preclude nationalism being a vehicle of the government in its ends, but does raise a very critical question: to what extent nationalism can be function of political culture only, or of government policy?

The case for nationalism as a function of political society comes from an understanding first and foremost, that political society is nothing more than a sum of its parts, individuals, their interactions, and the institutions that those interactions constitute. In this structural-functional analytical framework, nationalism only has a place in the framework as a part of political culture. In public policy, the regime can effect nationalist sentiment, and may have motive for one reason or another, but does not plan nationalism any more than it would emerge from political culture only.

Now that the first premise has been deconstructed, and the the “imagined” Singaporean nation is put in the context of a figment of political culture and not a structure of political society, the second premise may be addressed. In the readings, a quote by politician S. Rajaratnam gives strong support to the thesis that regime has in fact motivated nationalist sentiment as early as 1959, before either the merger or independence from Malaysia: “designed to combat the chauvinism of the different ethnic groups in Singapore as part of PAP’s campaign against communal politics.” The same source later describes how Singapore sought to emulate the Israeli Defense Force, as they “had used military service to help create an Israeli identity in their own small country”. From this evidence, it is clear the PAP was motivated to instil nationalist sentiment in Singaporeans, and towards the end of consolidating social cohesion, though this does not prove that any national sentiments were necessarily the consequence of those policies.

Thus, inquiry from this prompt does show that nationalism in the context of Singapore has had more to do with state building rather than the preservation of identity or culture, but does not show that nationalism is a vehicle of the state. Nationalism can be pursued as a policy, but its existence is not dependent on the fact that the PAP willed it.

National Day Parade from a Critical Eye

Went to the National Day Parade with a project to photograph the most clear expression of Singaporean national unity in diversity. In doing so I took in the National Day Parade, or NDP, from a more critical angle than the average spectator — though I have never seen so many amateur photographers or DSLRs in one place at one time.

The NDP was set in the heart of downtown Singapore, situated between the Central Business District, the touristy Boat Quay, and the Marina Bay Sands Resort. A stage and grandstand was set up for the celebration on one side of the marina, but for a kilometer in any direction the whole of Singapore came out for the celebration.

The whole event really did bring the country together. Since I arrived in Singapore, I’ve been open minded, but also mindful of my sensitivities to national hubris, yet I was happy to find everything in taste. Paratroopers parachuted trailing lines of red smoke, jets flew above, chinook and apache helicopters swept down just above where I was standing.

The People’s Action Party, Singapore’s ruling party for thirty years running, even had a contingent march in their characteristic white uniforms, yet, somehow, it was all in context. Think children painting their faces with Singaporean flags, not grown men dressing in Uncle Sam costumes singing “God Bless America”.

Singaporeans love that their country works. They won’t be driving with country music blaring and over sized flags fluttering, but they are not going to have a 14% approval rating of their legislature either.

Bikeabout

Bought a Aleoca Trizion with a Shimano 18 Speed shifter, Alloy rim and V brake today, and consequently rode twelve miles across Singapore guessing my way home. The public transit in Singapore is so comprehensive and taxis are relatively so inexpensive I was concerned I wasn’t going to see enough of Singapore block by block.

Bicycles are not allowed on public transit in Singapore, except for a contraption that comes across as uniquely Singaporean — the folding bicycle. I was not bold enough to buy one, besides having a bike that could be brought on the MRT or bus system would kind of side step my initial reason for a bicycle. Since I couldn’t carry my bicycle on public transit, I took the opportunity to ride the sucker home. Totally happy with the decision.

 Lotus-shaped ArtScience Museum in Marina Bay.

Porn Paper Published

My paper On Liberty, Community Standards, and Porn just got published in the Journal of Liberty & Society. The Journal of Liberty & Society is a project of Students for Liberty. Here is a link to the publication. Below is the abstract of the paper. Enjoy.

The defense of liberty does not necessarily mean the defense of the libertine. When the libertine does not, however, infringe on the actions of others, classical liberals have a commitment to defend them, if not as acceptable, then as permissible. The following essay provides a defense for the permissibility of pornography. In doing so, it strives to prove a larger point on the liberty of action and community standards. The defense incorporates the writing of John Stuart Mill, showing the proper reading of his work supports the permissibility of pornography. Lastly, the relevant legal precedent is discussed.

 

Speak right, lah.

Singapore is a language connoisseur’s fine Belgian chocolate shoppe, expect far less delicate and far more rich. Though close to 75% ethnically Chinese Singapore does not have only one national language, but four. Additionally, the language preferred for government and commerce, English, is casually spoken in a creole — a language born of two or more parent languages — called Singlish. Bring in expatriates, international students, and guest workers to the mix and you have a spoken experience like none other.

The four national languages of Singapore are English, Mandarin Chinese, Bahasa Malayu, and Tamil. Chinese being widely spoken among the super majority of the population. Bahasa Malayu being the ethnic language of the country on the other side of the Johor Straits, Malaysia. Tamil the language spoken by the Indian minority brought to Singapore by the colonial British, but now citizens of Singapore. And lastly, English which was chosen as the language preferred for government and commerce as a neutral tongue for all of the different ethnicities in Singapore. While I am in Singapore, I will be undertaking coursework in Bahasa Indonesia — which is closely related with Bahasa Malayu — and in Mandarin Chinese.

Wa lau eh, Singlish damn cool, lah. I have only just been introduced to the local English creole in Singapore, Singlish, but it is damn cool. It combines vocabulary mostly from Hokkien Chinese, Malay, and English. Its grammatical structure is more like Chinese than English. I will have more posts in the future as I get more of a grasp of the language, but for now, I can say already that it is a blast to learn. Haven’t gotten the accent down straight yet though, a couple of Singaporeans have asked if I am Hawaiian when I have tried out what I learned so far.

Lion City

Singapore gets its name from the Malay Singapura, or Lion City, and at first impression, the name is fitting. I am told this city has only been on a substantial growth track since 1965, yet at first impression it is as modern and clean as any city I have ever been in, and is booming. In fact, official figures claim it grew at almost 15% in 201o. That number can not be explained as catch up either, Singapore surpassed the United States in Gross Domestic Product per capita last decade. Something is going right here and I am honored to be here to study and research that question. I will be conducting research over the next year in the Political Science Department of the National University of Singapore on the extent Asian identity and values has played a role in the policy and development of Singapore.

Air China over Kamchatka

Got into Changi Airport yesterday and am moved into my residence at the National University of Singapore. I flew Air China and got this shot flying over the Kamchatka Peninsula in Russia on a Boeing 747:

You Are Where You Eat

This post is from a trip to Israel earlier this summer on a Jewish learning program. This delicious salad was from a seafood restaurant in Akko. The Arab waiter called it “the Viagra of the Gods”. My female company was not impressed:

In Judaism, the commandments regarding what and what may not be eaten are called Kashrut, and those foods which are allowed are called kosher. For the good part of a month this summer I ate exclusively kosher food for the first extended time in my life. The lesson I learned from this experience: you are where you eat.

This should not come as that much of a surprise. Among the inputs to the body, diet is the only that can change so drastically in composition with changes in culture and climate. Besides the balance of carbohydrates to protein in the composition of the food, the combinations of flavors and texture are complex enough to require over 2,000 taste buds. The company that we keep and the customs we observe no less change with the culture we surround ourselves with.

The rabbis say the reasoning for Kashrut rests in this understanding of the potency of food, and an interesting connection between diet and spirituality. Food leaves such an imprint, its potential to sync mind and body with culture is obvious. If the object is religious learning, then the importance of syncing with Jewish religious culture is even more important. Where choosing not to eat pig or shrimp might seem arbitrary outside of our context, it makes a lot more sense with the understanding that you are where you eat.

Next time you travel, or explore your own culture, go out on a limb and eat what they eat. It will do more than you think to help you grasp where you are at.

Another Year of Study Abroad

A poster advertising study abroad for high school students in Hong Kong:

Notice anything particular about the kid on the far left? This photo was taken while I was a high school exchange student in Austria, and the fellow to my left in the photo came across this poster in his old high school. Incredible that over four years later I am preparing again for another year of study abroad, this time in Singapore. I leave in less than two weeks and intent to blog regularly of my travels, experiences, and research while abroad. Hope you stay tuned in.

What Social Science Says About Libya

Stephen Walt at FP compiled a collection of academic papers on interventionism and regime change. If you are interested in a deeper understanding of the intervention in Libya, I’d recommend checking out to see if any of the articles strike your interest. The bottom line he takes is:

[Foreign imposed regime change] is likely to spur resistance and civil war in those countries where the United States and other advanced democracies are most likely to undertake such intervention [i.e., poor, weak states]; the situation is made even bleaker if war is needed to overthrow the existing regime. . .  [O]verthrowing other governments (and bringing new leaders to power rather than restoring previous rulers) is a policy instrument with limited utility because of its potential to ignite civil wars. These conflicts may in turn result in the imposed regime’s ouster or draw interveners into costly occupations.

This is the first instance I’ve seen of what should have been readily available since the beginning of the intervention in Libya: analysis of the policy from the literature, instead of from opinion. People have such a tendency in politics to stake a claim when they frankly don’t have a clue about the specifics or the generalities behind the policy. It is nice to finally have someone pointing to research.