The mood changed after August 9.
SG50 had culminated in a spectacular show of fireworks and nostalgia, but now the nation’s joyous jubilee celebration would make way for equally fervent political discourse.
No one knew when Parliament would dissolve, but we all knew it would be a watershed year for local politics. After all, this is the first election since the passing of former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew and the air was pregnant with anticipation.
It wasn’t long before the barrage of online posts about Singapore’s changing political landscape came fast and furious. From regaling personal stories about meeting their personable and humble MPs, to articulately listing the pros and cons of having a multi-party government, it seemed everyone was now a political pundit and had something to say about something or someone.
For someone who has never been well-versed in, nor cared much for, politicking, covering the GE forMothership.sg helped me make sense of the online discourse I was seeing. There were two major camps: the conscientiously-researched commentaries, and the ones loosely strung together, just to jump onto the bandwagon and garner Facebook likes and shares. Still, I took them all in – besides, the more poorly structured debates there were, the more the genuinely intelligent ones stood out.
Then, there were the vocal minority who, upon seeing netizens engage in political discourse, call it hypocrisy because such debate only happens during the GE. This reaction was apparently similar to the online sentiments when Lee Kuan Yew passed. Back then, my Facebook feed had been divided between those praising his deeds and those calling the former hypocrites when they hadn’t extolled him previously.
And therein lies the main gripe I have with our political discourse, and ultimately, our system – it doesn’t allow for nuanced views.
If we’re pro-PAP, we’re Yes Men who can’t think for ourselves; if we’re pro-Opposition, we’re unappreciative ingrates. Likewise, call ourselves politically apathetic and we’re irresponsible; have strong views and we’re getting caught in the hype.
This clear dichotomy between differing views leaves no room for contradictions and grey areas, both essential parts of simply being human, to co-exist – therefore unnecessarily limiting discussion to extreme opinions. The truth is Singapore is a stable and comfortable society, but that incredible safety should not be an excuse to breed complacency and entitlement, whether with regards to opinions or material goods.
No matter the news we wake up to on the morning of September 12, what I most want to see is significant progress towards cultivating creativity, open-mindedness and a sense of ruggedness in our youth. Provide room and reason for them to grapple with the various degrees of breadth and depth in the nation’s pertinent issues. Challenge our youth to question their own beliefs and ways of life, and in the process, develop more robust and individualistic points of view.
And perhaps this starts with understanding the beauty of democracy. Knowing the power to change things can lie in a single vote, this heady responsibility can force even the most politically apathetic to keep themselves abreast with the latest happenings, and to remain discerning and well-informed. With an inevitable overload of information, it also means that we learn not to engage with every opinion that we see, but nonetheless appreciate the diversity for keeping our minds sharp and aware.
There’s nothing hypocritical about deciding to educate oneself on the political scene, nor to want open and candid discussions about your future in this country. We are a highly educated workforce; let’s speak and behave as such – so that it no longer has to mean that if we’re pro-something, we’re automatically anti-something else.
Because frankly speaking, it’s no longer cool to just care. It’s how we care that makes all the difference.
Source: http://mothership.sg
