At Breaking Point...Almost

From where I was seated at Central Forum reading about how the haze situation is as much a result of the political failings of ASEAN as it is with the Indonesian government, my gaze trailed onto the nicely trimmed grass patches, the public bus system and the sporadic hoards of students chasing after buses at 9-ish on a nice chilly Wednesday evening.

Then I wondered how much would that scenario change or whether this scene would be possible at all, had Singapore embark on a decidedly more democratic route post independence. Could Lee Kuan Yew accomplished such economic development by doing it any other way?

Honestly, I could not answer that question.

While I would like to think my dilemma is arch typically representative of the average Singaporean - brought up in a paternalistic shrould of soft authoritarianism that has transformed Singapore in a matter of 40 years, but yet at the threshold of the 21st century, grapple at the tenets of the whole Asian values argument; I think otherwise.

Partly because of their apathy, but mainly because they are not convinced that being bothered and socio-politically aware carries more importance than being economically secure.

"Just as long as the gah-men does their job well lah," this is what many people in the past have said and continue to mindlessly utter those words today.

But what if they inevitably do not? Not always because they are corrupt or incompetent, but just because they are human beings prone to error? Because they are not perfect?

Talking to a female political science major friend on Monday night, it became immediately clear that she is relatively pro-LKY because she thinks "he had done a great job".

I took offence at her defensive stance not because I was anti-LKY, but mainly because I was aghast at her implicit assumption that just because LKY had done a good job in the past, does not mean that his party, the venerable PAP would continue to do so in the future.

The reason is plain for all to see - Lee Kuan Yew is only human and PAP is more than just about their founding father alone.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong himself acknowledged this fact when he said at the Foreign Press Association luncheon a fortnight ago, that although "a self-perpetuating system" has been put into place, there is still no guarantee that Singapore would continue to succeed.

Yet, more than just putting into plans to diversify and all the associated ideas of hard-ware management and planning, there lies a greater need to realise that the government is elected by the people and therefore controlled by people, and not the other way round.

This would lead to related issues of the degree of press independence and rights of free speech and association in Singapore.

I am purplexed because while I am decidedly pro-Singapore, it does not mean I am decidedly pro-PAP. But because I am relatively thankful for being born in this part of the world, it would only naturally lead that I desire the best for my home.

This is home, surely; but do I have a stake in its future?

I cannot reconcile the fact that democracy is a Western idea. How can democracy be a Western ideal that works only in the West when we see for ourselves, how America is crumbling and becoming increasingly divided under the George Bush Junior's Republican administration?

I mean, look at how our writers at The Straits Times lamblasted the outgoing American ambassador for his hypocrisy and implicitly America's, for pointing out Singapore's failings as a democracy.

But does the failing of a set of values like democracy devalue the set of ideals in any way? Does it dilute the essence of the importance of maintaining an independent press?

I am more inclined to think that it does not. It does not mean that it failed elsewhere, that it will not work here. More than anything eles, it just means that the people there are corrupt and are selfish - and may I add, very humanistic traits.

In fact, I think if the essence of democracy is super-imposed on a Singaporean context, I dare think that it may even be a blueprint of how democracy should be. We will not go the American route if we choose not to.

We have a semblence of racial harmony, but to make it really really happen, we need more honest dialogue and actually translate those words about integration into action. While a line should be drawn at racist comments, dialogue is the only way forward.

Call it youthful idealism or whatever. I am Singaporean and short of sounding cliche and repeating propaganda, this is home and no matter where I go, I will never be fully comfortable being in my own skin. However you put it, going anywhere else is running away, but yet it may be something that may prove to be necessary in time to come.

But in my own home, I want to be able to talk and engage in issues without fear of a possibility of a lawsuit or the ISA ensuring that I disappear without a trace. How can I call a place home when I cannot even be honest under my own roof?

For a house to be considered home, analysing issues and talking rationally about issues should not be miscontrued as being an advocacy of anti-government sentiments. Public opinion on the ground should be taken into account, the political elite should not assume that they know everything at the grassroots level.

The Cold War may be long and over, but its characteristic paranoia that films such as A Beautiful Mind captured with beautiful subtlety still remains. Paranoia that the status quo may be upsetted. Fear that the power would be disrupted. Not only in Singapore, but the world over.

I want to be able to breathe with ease. I want to know that the peace beneath the beautiful, cool and tranquil weather like it was tonight, is based on something concrete, rather than a product of coordinated hegemony. An Asian democracy is possible, but not on the current tenets of the Asian values. We can be honest and responsible at the same time.

I stop and look back into my notes, hoping to drown myself in the monotonous drone of the tons of readings that I still have to negotiate before the night is over.

Perhaps it is to drown my sorrows because it occurred to me that the Singapore I would love to live in, is something that is conditioned in my mind. The panacea and utopia that is the Singapore imagined in my mind is nothing but a figment of my imagination.

I would just have to snap out of it. But not now, maybe after I am done with the examinations in a month's time at the earliest. I promise to do what's good for me. Bah!