Blog

  • Misunderstanding Led To One-Armed Runner Adam Kamis Dropping Out from Subaru Challenge

    Misunderstanding Led To One-Armed Runner Adam Kamis Dropping Out from Subaru Challenge

    SINGAPORE: One-armed athlete Adam Kamis has dropped out of the MediaCorp Subaru Challenge and all because of a misunderstanding. He was one of about 10 people who had gone past the 72-hour mark in the annual endurance challenge.

    Adam had moved his hand to scratch his nose as he thought the challenge was “temporarily halted” after the marshal told him: “You just need to hold this position temporarily”.

    “My nose was itchy and I only have one arm, so basically I literally lifted up my left arm and I scratched my nose. They told me: ‘You can’t do that – the challenge is ongoing’,” Adam told Channel NewsAsia.

    “I just accepted it, it’s just a human mistake. It’s a bittersweet experience for me – I am able to do something beyond my own expectations, but because of how I left the whole challenge, it’s a bit sad,” he added. His official timing was 72 hours and 44 minutes in the competition before dropping out.

    He added that he was “happy and grateful” to show others that “disabled doesn’t mean unable”.

    A contestant from Thailand dropped out about the same time as Adam. Nine people – including the last female participant, Analiza Mokhtar – are in the running to win a 2-litre Subaru Forester worth S$85,000, excluding COE. This is Ms Mokhtar’s eighth time taking part in the challenge.

     

    Source: www.channelnewsasia.com

  • Xenophobic Singaporeans and What We Can Do About It

    Xenophobic Singaporeans and What We Can Do About It

    Xenophobia is on the rise in Singapore. After a wealthy Chinese expatriate crashed his Ferrari into a taxi and killed the driver and passenger in May 2012, and Indian migrant workers rioted in response to the death of a fellow employee in 2013, racist comments have become increasingly prevalent on online social-networking platforms. 80% of participants in an online 2012 Yahoo! poll agreed that “Singaporeans are turning xenophobic.” But something strange is also going on: even though xenophobia seems to have increased, 6 out of 10 Singaporeans still agree or strongly agree that the country is free from both racial and religious tension.

    Is there a contradiction here? What’s happened, and where are we going?

    Paul Chu examines this question in his dissertation, titled “Migration and the Politics of Multiculturalism in Singapore“.

    What’s Going On?

    The Chinese-Malay-Indian-Other model has framed our understanding of race since the colonial era, when the Jackson Plan of 1822 first segregated Singaporeans by ethnicity. But the huge wave of immigration has stretched the model, and it isn’t flexible enough to cope.

    1. The CMIO model is struggling to cope with recent challenges

    The Singapore state is what academics call “corporatist”. This means that a strong elite sets social norms and has firm political authority to achieve harmony. The CMIO model was the chosen norm. It has maintained racial harmony in three ways:

    1.De-politicizing ethnicity
    2.influencing people to turn ethnic-based loyalty into a civic-based one
    3.promoting the principle of equality across all ethnic groups

    While the model has worked for a long time, it is facing a challenge unlike any it has seen before because of the unprecedented levels of migration since 2005. The graph below shows this rapid increase in the migrant population:

    2. Singaporean society does not understand race like the CMIO model

    One major reason why CMIO racial categorization cannot cope with migrants is that it conflates race, ethnicity and culture. Society, on the other hand, seems to distinguish between the three ideas.

    For example, a 2013 IPS-OnePeople.sg survey of over 4000 Singaporeans showed that while 93.8% of non-Chinese respondents were comfortable with a Singaporean-Chinese boss, this figure dropped by nearly 20 percentage points if he was Mainland-Chinese. We see this also with other races. In the curry feud in 2011, a Singaporean-Chinese woman defended a Singaporean-Indian family, and was “incensed with a People’s Republic of China family telling my fellowmen not to cook curry”, suggesting a redefinition of “us” and “them” that was along cultural rather than racial lines.

    3. Relying on the government to solve the problem is part of the problem

    The corporatist model that underlies CMIO also creates a larger problem: it has made citizens rely too much on the government to determine racial identity. When citizens are resentful about immigrants, they look to the state to solve the problem. But given that Singaporeans are increasingly skeptical about central authority, they also reject the state’s solutions. Ultimately, this leads to greater dissatisfaction with both the state and immigrants, thereby completing a vicious downward spiral as shown below:

    Spiral

    What can we do?

    1. Recognize that race is not the only identity marker.

    Integration will not happen just because migrants share the same race as Singaporeans. Racial categories such as “Chinese” or “Indian” are complicated by class and nationality. While the government has officially dialed down overt race-based categorizations, the narrative of the CMIO model still influences society’s understanding of race. Instead, we should encourage a broad understanding of our national identity as Singaporeans, yet also recognize our migrant roots so that even new migrants can integrate.

    2. Be more transparent.

    We as Singaporeans need to take charge of integrating foreigners. Increasing transparency around discussions about migration and ethnicity will make it easier for us to do so. For example, if citizens were able to access public information about the non-residents living around them, or knew more about the procedures behind PR and citizen selection, we would be more likely to own the problem than to see this as an issue that the government must solve.

    3. Realize that citizenship is not just about economics.

    The state needs to show that they appreciate the emotive aspect of citizenship, instead of justifying migration entirely on economic grounds and demanding compliance. The citizenship naturalization process should be more rigorous to ensure better integration.

    4. Strive for encounters, not just physical co-existence.

    Different cultures and races should not just exist side by side, each in their own bubble. That is a holdover from the colonial idea of segregation and with it the CMIO model. Instead, the goal should be to have different cultures and races interact constructively with one another.

     

    This article snapshot was prepared by the editorial team. It was based on a final year dissertation at the University of Cambridge written by Paul Chu, who received First Class Honours for his work and presented the paper at the IRiS-University of Birmingham International Conference 2014 on Superdiversity. For more insights and nuance, please see the full paper.

     

    Source: http://singaporepolicyjournal.com

  • “Halal” Butcher in Switzerland Sold Pork to Muslims for 3 Years

    “Halal” Butcher in Switzerland Sold Pork to Muslims for 3 Years

    A “halal” butcher has been taken to court after selling pork to Muslim customers for over three years.

    According to Morocco World News, the Swiss butcher reportedly sold 3.1 tons of pork to his Muslim customers, telling them it was halal and trying to pass it off as calf meat.

    Upon inspection of his facility, it was discovered that what he was selling as calf meat looked nothing like it should.

    “If customers had known it was pork, they would not have bought it because Islam forbids the consumption of this type of meat,” the prosecutor handling the case said.

    Now, the man is facing six months of jail time and is being fined 18,000 Swiss francs, which equates to roughly £11,880.

    He was charged with “fraud and misrepresentation.”

    As Morocco News noted, the butcher was engaging in two-fold deception in selling pork as if it were veal.

    Firstly, Muslims were buying and consuming pork, which is against their religion.

    Secondly, he was making higher profits since pork is cheaper than calf meat.

     

    Source: www.5pillarz.com

  • Man Leaves Wife And Their 10 Children To Fend For Themselves

    Man Leaves Wife And Their 10 Children To Fend For Themselves

    A single mother and her 10 children are struggling to survive after their father left them for another woman two years ago.

    Over the past year, debt collectors – both legal and illegal – have gone to Madam Rafeah Abdul Kadir’s three-room flat in Hougang to look for her estranged husband, Mr Mazlan Abdul, 37.

    An arrest warrant was also issued for Mr Mazlan after he defaulted on maintenance payments since April this year.

    Meanwhile, he can be seen on Facebook posing for selfies with his girlfriend and dancing with her in a Bollywood club.

    Said an upset Madam Rafeah: “He goes out with his parents and girlfriend to eat at nice places. He’s clearly having a good time. What about his children? What are they supposed to eat?”

     

    Source: www.tnp.sg

  • PM Lee: “Realistic and Correct Salaries” = Clean Government

    PM Lee: “Realistic and Correct Salaries” = Clean Government

    SINGAPORE: Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong indicated that Singapore would like to be a conduit for a Maritime Silk Road, mooted by Chinese President Xi Jinping. In a half-hour interview with Yang Lan on Beijing Satellite TV that was broadcast on Monday (Nov 10), he said the world is watching China’s anti-corruption drive as it could be a tremendous boost to its development and stability, and described it as an admirable effort.

    He also addressed the notion of clean government in Singapore. He said it is not about high salaries, but ones that are “realistic and correct”, in order to find the right people who are “most capable”, and “most trustworthy”.

    Here are some excerpts from Mr Lee’s interview, aired while the Prime Minister is in Beijing for the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation (APEC) summit.

    ON REGIONAL COOPERATION

    Q: In the Asia-Pacific region, there are many bilateral, multi-lateral, regional and sub-regional trade agreements and mechanisms of cooperation. For example, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) which is supported by the United States, and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), which China is involved in. Do you think there is an element of competition between these two groupings?

    A: Of course there is some element of competition and overlapping, but that cannot be helped. Because the most ideal way to cooperate is to do so on a global basis, which involves all economies. It becomes a multi-lateral agreement, such as through the Doha Round of negotiations. But the Doha Round involves many countries, so it becomes difficult to reach an agreement. In the Asia-Pacific region, we hope that if fewer countries are involved, that makes it less difficult and we can get things done faster.

    So for APEC, we have a voluntary method of cooperation, and we have already made some progress. The TPP and RCEP are both recognised as pathways to achieve free trade in the Asia-Pacific. Our economies are in different stages of development, and our different mechanisms for cooperation need to adapt to these realities.

    Q: One reality is that Singapore is very much involved in these various trade agreements and cooperation mechanisms. How does this reflect Singapore’s view of itself? What does globalisation mean to Singapore?

    A: We have no choice. We are a very small country, with a very open economy. If we are not outward-looking, then we have no way to go. In countries such as China, the US, and Japan, the domestic economy is already huge, the domestic demand is sufficient. We do not have that – if we rely on domestic demand to boost manufacturing, I think very few companies will come to Singapore. If we rely on our own farming to supply all our food, then I think we will starve. So we have to look outwards. If there is an opportunity, we will try our best to take part in these negotiations for free trade agreements, and try our best to cooperate with other countries, to deepen our relationships; enhance our mutually beneficial work.

    THE NEW MARITIME SILK ROAD

    Q: President Xi Jinping has proposed the idea of developing a new Maritime Silk Road. In such a scenario, for the relevant economies, in terms of infrastructure – including information networks and the internet, and other network systems – there can be improvements. Does Singapore see an opportunity and role for itself in such a scenario?

    A: The idea of a Maritime Silk Road – it can deepen our cooperation with neighbouring countries, and strengthen, especially, trade and investment from China and its neighbouring countries. So of course, we hope that some of these services can be supplied through Singapore’s port, airport and networks.

    MAINTAINING INTEGRITY IN GOVERNMENT

    Q: Economic reform, the creative economy, and urbanisation are some of the topics up for discussion at APEC. Another important theme is anti-corruption. What are your views on the relationship between anti-corruption measures and economic development? In the past, people have viewed this as a political issue and a social issue. 

    A: In the long term, anti-corruption measures are necessary for economic development. In Singapore, we feel anti-corruption is very important. Since the People’s Action Party became the ruling party, its 55 years – we have always stood firm on maintaining a clean and corruption-free Government. Of course, sometimes some people may break the rules, or break the law. No matter who is involved, we deal with this very strictly according to law. So I admire Mr Xi’s anti-corruption drive in China.

    Q: So you have been paying attention to the anti-corruption drive?

    A: I think the whole world is paying attention. Because if China can succeed in this, I think it will be a tremendous boost to China’s development and stability.

    Q: In China, particularly at the government level, the topic of Singapore’s clean government is often discussed. But very often people attribute its success to high salaries for office-holders. Do you think it is that simple?

    A: I think the topic of high salaries can cause a sharp reaction. In principle, we are not talking about high salaries, what we want are realistic and correct salaries. We want talent, we want morally upright people, and we want the right people for the right jobs. The most important job must be done by the most capable, the most trustworthy person. If we want the services of such capable and trustworthy people, then we must treat them fairly and equally. We must have a practical system – a realistic salary.

    At the same time our requirements are strict – your performance must be good. Legally, you absolutely cannot do anything you are not supposed to do, and if that happens, you will be punished under the law, and the punishment will be severe. So this is not just a question of salaries, it is also a matter of the system, an issue of transparency, and our whole culture.

deneme bonusu