One People
Unity in Diversity, not Homogeneity; Lowering the Cost of Participating in Public Service
The most popular alternative “news” channels in Singapore these days are the ones that post the most vitriolic content, because few things more effectively solicit reactions than words that stir anger and resentment.
This is not unique to Singapore, of course. Jon Stewart’s Daily Show brings in viewers by the millions. The formula is simple: make fun of other people. Show how stupid they are. Simplify complex decisions by focusing solely on a single perspective, ignoring all others, and show that decision-makers are dumbasses because they don’t “get it”.
Light that match, and watch the hate and anger catch fire.
Don’t get me wrong. I am a huge Jon Stewart fan. Let me rephrase that: I used to be a huge Jon Stewart fan. He seemed so smart — always able to cut through the bullshit and say it like it is.
Until one day, it hit me: what he does resembles the work of a douchebag. He makes a living by mocking people who have chosen to make themselves accountable for the well-being of people under their charge. Sure, they screw up from time to time, but doesn’t everybody?
Let’s follow the white rabbit: what happens when we continually demean officials elected to serve the people? What happens when we harp endlessly on out-of-context soundbites that perpetuate the worst possible impression of them? What happens when we start to fabricate falsehoods about their character, simply because it’s popular to do?
Now I’m not saying there should be no checks to power. I think if anything our system should function on the assumption that people are flawed, and a system of checks and balances, especially on oneself, should be a prerequisite of good governance.
But what if we’re hell-bent on finding fault with the people in power because it is entertaining?
We disempower ourselves
In our quest to blame them for everything, we absolve ourselves of responsibility. What is even more damaging is that we strip ourselves of power. If we refuse to believe that our current unsatisfactory state has anything to do with our own actions or choices, we also reject the possibility that we can shape our own future.
We will not exercise our power to find innovate solutions to our problems. You find this in almost all the comments: VOTE THEM OUT!
While voting wisely is an important responsibility of all citizens, checking a box every 5 to 6 years shouldn’t be the only power you have to change the course of the country you live in.
We become stupid about issues
Many online criticisms of policy over-simplify issues, concentrating on a single truism and pointing out how decision-makers failed.
For example, Workers in low-paying jobs ought to receive higher wages. The plight of individuals, and how the government has failed these people is often highlighted. What isn’t always mentioned is the most obvious of solutions: let’s pay them more. Because this would actually involve you and me paying more for their services, which would lead to the other often-quoted bugbear: rising costs.
Truisms are undisputed, but reality always pits two or more of them together and forces us to make the hard choice. Ignoring the competing forces effective delivers the punchline: those people are so stupid.
And after a while, we no longer look at the issues, choosing instead to believe that whatever the people in power does is wrong, and no amount of validation, external or external, will change that ironclad belief.
We create a toxic environment for any form of public service
Receiving public criticism is par for the course for any person taking up public office, but it is time we had a more constructive brand of politics.
If we value diversity in perspectives and believe that we need more ideas rather than less in this increasingly complex global environment, we need to lower, not raise, the cost for people stepping up to serve the public.
The incumbent party needs to understand that heavy-handedness on people brings a very short-term gain at an extremely high long-term cost.
When Yaw Shin Leong left his post unceremoniously due to his marital indiscretions, members of the ruling party smelled blood in the water and were quick to jump in for the kill. When their own Michael Palmer confessed to his own indiscretions and stepped down, they played a vastly different tune. I won’t elaborate since this is not the main point of this post, but everyone saw the inconsistency in treatment.
The main point I wanted to make was this: the strategy of making it extremely costly and hazardous for anyone to join an opposition party needs to stop. In an act to balance this perceived injustice, most views expressed on the internet are extremely unforgiving of the ruling party and anyone associated. The government, local newspapers, national telcos and even local universities all fight an uphill battle for public support, simply by association. There is little sense to the madness, and everyone and everything is thrown into the fray.
Now it has become too costly for anyone to join any political party, and this platform for serving the people grows more empty by the day. If this keeps up, the people we need to run the country — our best, brightest and most altruistic of heart — will choose other less hazardous avenues. Or other countries.
We have created an environment that is toxic to public service. No one in their right minds would choose this life, not if they valued their sanity, their family’s well-being or their friends. It is a spectacle, and in the end we are worse off for it.
We’ll get the government we deserve, not the one we need.
It has been said that Singapore is too small for multiple political parties to exist. And yet here we are, people from all over the globe, working and living together. You cannot sell the vision of a global city while insisting on political homogeneity.
The cost of not involving more people in the building of our nation is too great to bear. Not only do we deprive ourselves of ideas, but being opaque stunts the development of the people. We need to know how decisions are made, how complex they are, and how we came to our conclusion. On top of running the country, the maturation and resilience of our people should also be the mandate of our decision-makers.
Inspire us with vision, equip us with knowledge (and data), and allow us to do the same for you.
There are those among us who want good, constructive engagement without having to put on the white pants and buy into everything that is being sold. We might disagree on points, but we are mature enough to look at the overall picture, and decide for ourselves if this is the place we want to create for our children. We would like to be able to participate in finding solutions to help fellow citizens.
Where would we sign up?
