The Olive Depression
“The army may have my body, but they will never have my mind.”
He disagreed with the idea of conscription, “Once you’ve learnt to accept conscription, you’ll learn to accept any injustice in this country” says the lead of his movie “The Olive Depression”, now playing at the Sinema. (The Olive Depression, a film in 8 parts, was originally scheduled to take its bow during last year’s Singapore International Film Festival. Out of the blue it got yanked from the schedule of the inaugural festival section called the Singapore Panorama)
But Joshua Lim did not stop at complaining. He stood up to the system. He stood up against remaining in OCS. He made a movie out of it.
I had the privilege of doing an exclusive interview with Joshua, via MSN, who now lives in California.
14/2/2009 2:49:58 PM mathia Joshua Lim so regarding your quitting ocs
14/2/2009 2:50:06 PM Joshua Lim mathia yeah
14/2/2009 2:50:06 PM mathia Joshua Lim who was it you talked to exactly?
14/2/2009 2:50:18 PM Joshua Lim mathia omg
14/2/2009 2:50:20 PM mathia Joshua Lim do you remember, in 2-3 lines, what you said ?
14/2/2009 2:50:21 PM Joshua Lim mathia u want the details
14/2/2009 2:50:28 PM Joshua Lim mathia i dunno if it’s military in confidence
14/2/2009 2:50:37 PM Joshua Lim mathia coz they bend the rules to let me out
14/2/2009 2:50:38 PM mathia Joshua Lim so how should i call him? should i just say superior?
14/2/2009 2:51:00 PM Joshua Lim mathia what are u trying to say
14/2/2009 2:51:09 PM Joshua Lim mathia superior is a general layman term that most will understand
14/2/2009 2:51:26 PM mathia Joshua Lim i just wanna capture your reason for dropping out, what did you say?
14/2/2009 2:51:51 PM Joshua Lim mathia oh hmmm
14/2/2009 2:52:00 PM Joshua Lim mathia i was very diplomatic
14/2/2009 2:52:07 PM Joshua Lim mathia i told them i was not patriotic
14/2/2009 2:52:21 PM Joshua Lim mathia if the govt needed me to lead soldiers in war, i would have a problem with that
14/2/2009 2:52:29 PM Joshua Lim mathia it’s bad enough i’m in the army
14/2/2009 2:52:42 PM Joshua Lim mathia so i asked if i could be a ‘follower’ instead of a ‘leader’
14/2/2009 2:53:01 PM mathia Joshua Lim if the govt needed me to lead soldiers in war, i would have a problem with that ==> why?
14/2/2009 2:53:19 PM Joshua Lim mathia i’m a pacifist firstly
14/2/2009 2:53:30 PM Joshua Lim mathia and to lead troops to death is painful
14/2/2009 2:53:35 PM Joshua Lim mathia and to kill
14/2/2009 2:53:39 PM Joshua Lim mathia another story
14/2/2009 2:53:46 PM Joshua Lim mathia that’s my official statement
14/2/2009 2:53:48 PM Joshua Lim mathia but really the truth is
14/2/2009 2:53:53 PM Joshua Lim mathia i wanted out of the brainwashing in ocs
14/2/2009 2:54:18 PM mathia Joshua Lim what brainwashing messages did you exactly want out of?
14/2/2009 2:54:25 PM Joshua Lim mathia my gosh
14/2/2009 2:54:26 PM Joshua Lim mathia so many
14/2/2009 2:54:30 PM Joshua Lim mathia example
14/2/2009 2:54:40 PM Joshua Lim mathia they would turn us out at 3am every night
14/2/2009 2:54:50 PM Joshua Lim mathia justifying their terrorising behaviour
14/2/2009 2:54:55 PM Joshua Lim mathia by saying that war can break out at 3am
14/2/2009 2:54:59 PM Joshua Lim mathia as leaders we should be alert and ready
14/2/2009 2:55:06 PM Joshua Lim mathia so this is part of a noble training
14/2/2009 2:55:08 PM Joshua Lim mathia when instead
14/2/2009 2:55:18 PM Joshua Lim mathia it’s part of a systematic scheme of impeding sleep
14/2/2009 2:55:34 PM Joshua Lim mathia so that we can change our mindsets as we are too tired to think/challenge
14/2/2009 2:56:11 PM Joshua Lim mathia but i didn’t tell them that of course
14/2/2009 2:57:47 PM mathia Joshua Lim ok. give me a nice line (like the lines you have in the movies), a statement, of what you would tell your superior, why you cannot continue in OCS
14/2/2009 2:58:27 PM Joshua Lim mathia haha sheesh i dunno
14/2/2009 3:00:20 PM Joshua Lim mathia that i don’t have the passion for it
14/2/2009 3:01:48 PM Joshua Lim mathia is it important?
14/2/2009 3:01:55 PM Joshua Lim mathia leave it ambiguous
14/2/2009 3:02:02 PM mathia Joshua Lim its impactful
14/2/2009 3:02:09 PM Joshua Lim mathia sheesh
14/2/2009 3:02:18 PM Joshua Lim mathia in bmt
14/2/2009 3:02:29 PM Joshua Lim mathia there is this thing called SIT Test
14/2/2009 3:02:33 PM Joshua Lim mathia and then at the end
14/2/2009 3:02:36 PM Joshua Lim mathia they interview u
14/2/2009 3:02:39 PM Joshua Lim mathia asking if u want to go to OCS
14/2/2009 3:02:43 PM Joshua Lim mathia i said, “no”
14/2/2009 3:02:47 PM Joshua Lim mathia they asked why?
14/2/2009 3:03:02 PM Joshua Lim mathia i said, “I don’t have a passion for this military”
14/2/2009 3:03:23 PM Joshua Lim mathia they seem to like my reason
14/2/2009 3:03:29 PM Joshua Lim mathia and looked shocked that i would say that
14/2/2009 3:03:33 PM Joshua Lim mathia needless to say
14/2/2009 3:03:38 PM mathia Joshua Lim they put you there anyway
14/2/2009 3:03:40 PM Joshua Lim mathia i was shocked when i was told i was going to OCS
14/2/2009 3:03:49 PM Joshua Lim mathia the bus ride there i was devastated
=====================
I loved this movie ( The Hours and American Beauty are 2 of my favourite movies, so if you’re going there for action, please don’t.) Unexpectedly, there was quite a lot of humour, but it was a humour that stemmed from the irony and tragic comedy of real life.
It’s a story about what it means to retain your humanity, your choice, your freedom, in an environment where these are crimes.
Sinema Old School
11b Mount Sophia, B1-12 Singapore
6336.9707
One of the characters decides to take up an overseas scholarship, so that he can disrupt. “But don’t you have to come back and continue anyway?”
“Yes, but they will never have me. I’m going to eat and eat and get really fat, and I’ll injure myself and then they will downgrade me”
“You’re willing to injure yourself? Is this worth it?”
“But why should I be fit when I don’t even believe in being fit?”
18th Feb 9 30pm
21st Feb 2 30pm
22nd Feb 6 10pm
It’s a story about loving without expectations , about rebelling without noncompliance, about living without compromise
Joshua Lim, in red
[...] Read more: The Olive Depression [...]
Finally, a movie about NS angst… There must be so many unexplored areas of the Singaporean psyche, all ripe for film-making. Jack Neo’s “I Not Stupid” series captured some of the angst that goes on in our Singapore education system. Hopefully this one can bring to life what goes through the mind of a conscripted Singaporean male. Among Singaporean men, NS is a subject that will bring out a torrent of (nowadays mostly negative) opinions.
Personally, I have very little to add to the debate, except to say that the following quote (paraphrased to some extent from Andrew Swofford, author of Gulf War memoir ‘Jarhead’) pretty much sums it up: “NS is necessary and may well have to be done, but that doesn’t end conscription’s waste”.
The above aside, today conscription is alive and well in a handful of countries, including Singapore, ROK, Switzerland, Israel and Taiwan. OK, scratch Taiwan because most countries don’t recognise Taiwan as a country. It would be very interesting to compare the relative attitudes towards conscription and examine how these governments approach the issue, as well as look at what the worldwide trends in conscription. We might learn a thing or two.
[...] Showing – Mathia Lee: The Olive Depression – Ian On The Red Dot: The Love Scene In Slumdog [...]
[...] Showing – Mathia Lee: The Olive Depression – Ian On The Red Dot: The Love Scene In Slumdog [...]
Quite a short interview.
Did he run away and get asylum there? My friend did, in Canada.
The worldwide trend in conscription is towards reducing or ending it. Except in countries like Taiwan and South Korea and Israel which have REAL enemies.
Nope, he did not run away, nor did he get asylum. He completed his NS proper, but I think he beat the system the way he wanted to.
It was a matter of rebellion without non-compliance
You don’t think Sg has real enemies?
rebellion without non-compliance – I can identify with that
Well, let’s see:
Taiwan – Has 1,500 missiles aimed at it. Is the target of constant sabre-rattling. Has a huge, relatively bellicose neighbor which has never renounced its right to invade and occupy it. Was last in active war in 1949.
South Korea – Has a capital which could be levelled in minutes with artillery from its neighbor. Has most heavily militarised border in the world. Has neighbor which regularly provokes it militarily and has kidnapped its citizens (incidentally, a Singapore citizen was kidnapped by them in the 70s or 80s). Was last in active war in 1953.
Israel – Surrounded by many countries which don’t recognise its right to exist. Was last in active war in 2006/2009 (depending on how you define that). Has been invaded 4 times. Is the active target of terrorist attacks.
Singapore – ???
[Ed: Spends more on defence than both its next-door neighbors COMBINED. Has larger total armed forces (including reservists) than either. Has never been at war.]
All countries have real enemies, but you don’t see many bringing back the draft. Or even if they do, it’s short (<1 year) and there’s usually provision for alternative service.
That’s definately worth a thought. Thanks for the info Agagooga! = )
http://edmw.sg/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=59435&p=2298760#p2298760
The film was discussed in the above forum, and I am putting my reply here
Hi , I did the interview with him
Nope, he’s not a scholar
He’s did a film degree in california, and the last I checked, the govt doesn’t give scholarships for that = )
I really admire him, because his A level grades could have easily got him into medicine or law etc etc
But he chose to resist walking the easy path for money, even though his classmates are now making the big bucks.
Instead, he’s doing odd jobs here and there, so that he can live his one and only life, doing what he truly wants to do.
He wants to make a statement about the injustices in society, and he chose the medium of film as his billboard.
Some additional comments.
The choice for Singapore is not between NS and no NS. Like it or not, we can’t just get rid of it so readily. Witness the administrative and bureaucractic chaos when we moved from 2.5 years to 2 years – our universities having to cater to a new April intake, people who thought they could disrupt but in the end could not, etc. Even if we decided to abolish NS tomorrow, we would still need a transitional approach to phase it out. There will be the usual complaints and dilemmas about fairness and equity of treatment.
I always think of it this way – the State is always far more powerful than the Individual. State policy, especially that of a strong authoritarian government, will inevitably take up most of the space in our society/lives. But that doesn’t mean we cannot maneuver, thrive and be happy in whatever spaces/pockets that are left.
“He’s did a film degree in california, and the last I checked, the govt doesn’t give scholarships for that”
Actually the government does give scholarships for film thru’ MDA’s media education scheme.
Singapore is a peculiar case. We are an accidental nation and we are so small and vulnerable. Look at the current recession, we don’t even have a big enough local market to bounce us off!
We need stability and peace in the country and Singapore needs conscription. We do not have enough manpower to form an army that comprises solely of regulars. Granted the government need to act fast to minimise freeloaders, wastage and uninspired regulars in the SAF, but National Service is a need and is here to stay. I’ve done my part, served my liability and frankly, and much as I dislike the regimental lifestyle, I will still go thru NS and support for it to stay.
Frankly, I’m very disappointed with the filmmaker’s remarks, though he is definitely entitled to his views. A war can definitely happen at 3am. Don’t see everything coming from the government and the SAF as just another attempt at brainwashing.
Hi Xiong, thanks for giving an alternative view.
Hmmm its good to know that MDA does have scholarships. I can only speculate that perhaps it wasn’t available during his time, or that he didn’t agree with the terms of the scholarship. Anyway, my saying that he was not a scholar, was a factual clarification, because someone on that forum claimed he was. The reasons why he is not a scholar — that’s my own speculation.
Someone once told me this theory ( coffeeshop-talk, not saying i agree):
Singapore has mandatory NS, primarily to control its own population (ie stability and peace), and secondarily for defense.
There’s a few ways of arguing that theory, in increasing order of the argument’s strength :
1. One way is that, the military is used in many countries to put down suppressions. So maintaining that military strength is key
2. If your whole population is involved in the military (involved, includes being related to military personel), it is less likey to rise up against military control, because, you ARE the military. A mother/sister/wife is unlikely to support an uprising that is being put down by the military
(I guess we have the foreign paid Gurkhas as a stand by in case the military rises up against the commanding centers. Interesting that in the terrorist holding centers, Gurkhas are used. My speculation? To prevent the local population from hearing the alternative views of terrorists)
* **3. It is hard to justify military control of the civilian population to the international community. But the intenational community accepts more authoritarian control of countries’ military forces. Given that half our population can be controlled military fashion, in the context of National Duty, it is easier to justify the use of militarian/authoritarian control of its populace, when/should the need arise. And since most of the other half is related with the military half, it can be easily controlled indirectly too.
But that doesn’t mean we cannot maneuver, thrive and be happy in whatever spaces/pockets that are left.
==> Agreed, Fargoal. We just have to exercise more creativty
The choice is not between Slavery in its current form and no Slavery at all. There is another option: reform of the current press-gang system.
I do not think it is entirely feasible to have a totally professional army, but forms of alternative service should be introduced, not least to provide space for conscientious objectors.
The fact that there’s no provision for alternative service tells you that the political purpose of Slavery is very important. I think more important than the 3 theories is that Slavery restrains the males’ revolutionary and protesting urges and inculcates in them a sense of helplessness and subservience.
The Media Education scheme involves working for a media-related company for 2 years.
Independent filmmakers do not like to be tied to companies.
Funz… I have a solution!!!
Well, since most countries (without “real”/immediate enemies) have a big enough population for a regular army, and we don’t, why not we give up our sovereignty and become part of either China or the United States? Nobody will dare to bully us!
Seriously, I’m all for this idea so that my children don’t need to do NS.
Putting things into perspective… We do hear, even in this modern days, about pirate attacks off our shores and along the Straits. Indonesia has a population of 230+ million.
If assuming we do away with NS and keep a regular army of 20,000 soldiers, and then 1 million Indonesians (<0.5%?) who are fed up with their country decides to come over. Do we have sufficient policemen and army men to do something about it?
So, either we choose to welcome an aircraft carrier and its battlegroup (what a sight to behold) anchored off our shores, or we do something for ourselves.
Being trained as a soldier doesn’t mean you have to kill (or lead people to kill), sometimes it is also about saving lives (or lead people to save lives). This is especially true in disaster management. When the police and civil defence do not have the manpower, the fastest way to get loads of manpower to the ground is by activating the army.
CM sounds valid to me. That’s the classic justification for NS isn’t it? Does CM believe that because it is truly rational and logical? Or is CM very well brainwashed?
Agagooga?
haha I will reckon CM is rational and logical =)
Yes, yes, I’m brainwashed.
Well, I suggested an alternative right? I don’t mind changing my pink card to a green/red card nation-wide. Do you? And I didn’t even discuss whether war will come at 3 am.
Now, tell me which of the commentors here offered any practical solutions if we were to do away with NS? NONE.
The older generation would have remembered the 1978 Singapore flood. The army and police were activated to help evacuate people from their homes. Singaporeans (conscript army men) helping Singaporeans (flood victims).
Dear Xiong,
“We need stability and peace in the country and Singapore needs conscription. We do not have enough manpower to form an army that comprises solely of regulars. Granted the government need to act fast to minimise freeloaders, wastage and uninspired regulars in the SAF, but National Service is a need and is here to stay.”
Seriously, does conscription = stability and peace?
You are saying that to avoid war, we need to prepare for it?
NS is indeed a need. A need to provide brain washing (the very efficient effects of it we are currently witnessing) and to keep our govt in power.
“Frankly, I’m very disappointed with the filmmaker’s remarks, though he is definitely entitled to his views. A war can definitely happen at 3am.”
If a war were to happen at 3 am, i am not too sure if you would ever knew what happened to yourself. Maybe buried at the bottom of the rubble of a HDB/Condo block?
Our country is so bloody small that if several missiles hit our flats, we would probably surrender on the spot. If the enemy is bent on just annihilating us, then probably we would be killed by an atomic/hydrogen/nuclear bomb.
I’m not disappointed with your remarks you know
i expected them actually.
Dear CM,
“Being trained as a soldier doesn’t mean you have to kill (or lead people to kill), sometimes it is also about saving lives (or lead people to save lives).”
Really? Do you know how much time we spent on training to kill vs training to save people in NS?
We know that the army is set up to kill the enemies to save ourselves, but the saving lives thingee is a pathetic justification for peace time conscription. Surely you dun need more than 5000 soldiers to be on stand by for disaster crisis in natural disaster free Singapore?
Is the above reason an excuse? Or the result of brain washing… i do wonder.
“Now, tell me which of the commentors here offered any practical solutions if we were to do away with NS? NONE.”
look. do we need so many soldiers? do we need NS?
Thus, that’s why NONE of the commentors bothered to offer any practical solutions when the answer is so obvious. JUST HAVE A REGULAR ARMY and spend the rest of the money upgrading our weapons to state of the art.
http://mollymeek.livejournal.com/216682.html
–She’s got a really humorous take on “What will you defend?”
——————————————————————————————————————
http://informationreadbyme.blogspot.com/2009/02/what-will-you-defend.html
– He’s an Ex-Regular, proud to be one. Patriotic or brainwashed?
Honestly, I do admire people like him, willing to sacrifice. But you see, the key word is WILLING to sacrifice.
I think my MAIN BIGGEST PROBLEM with conscription is this.
How can one person / persons (dictator/state) decide to sacrifice the life of another person, especially when the person is unwilling or does not even believe in what the war is being fought for?
It’s like saying “Oh look, there’s a child drowning in the water. You there! You, the person who voted me to power when you had a walkover in your constituency! Yes, you! Go jump into the water and save him! Risk your life to save him or go to jail!”
Mao is famous for saying that what China has are people to be sacrificed to win any wars others may wage with it.
Conscription , to me, seems to treat human lives as bullets, rather than as humans, who have only that one life, that one life as precious as any dictators.
———————————————-
Agagooga’s comment was from his blog here http://gssq.blogspot.com/
Hey Trev! Really happy to see you commenting here!!! Honoured!
Hey Everyone else, Trev here played a big role in providing inspiration for The Olive Depression!
In The Olive Depression, there was this line ” If you want to reap the benefits of a system, you gotta put up with its flaws.”
Taking it from this angle. Let’s say we agree conscription has its flaws. So the question is, are there any benefits we are actually reaping out of it? (whether or not these benefits can come from another source, is besides the point. Point is. What’s the benefit we’re getting? )
The benefits are greatly oversold.
And anyway, if you have no choice as to whether to reap the ‘benefits’, it isn’t all that much comfort.
Actually, the only benefits anyone will ever reap, are the people right at the top. As it is with any other countries. I wonder why we are the least corrupt country in the whole world!??!?!
Benefits of NS? Lets see – fitness, help boys mature into men, ability to overcome adversity, responsibility for oneself and for others, bonding/developing a sense of camaraderie, teamwork, discipline/respect for authority, nation-building, respect/tolerance for those of different race/religion/social & educational backgrounds, more campfire stories, etc.
The problem with the above argument is that you can arguably get all or at least some of these benefits through other activities (i.e. school, CCA, community service, church activities, volunteer work, NGO work, etc.) I don’t think NS was set up with all this in mind.
If I understood correctly, the main function of NS is, and has always been, to provide for our country’s defence through a thorough and blanket system of mass conscription. Its a very blunt instrument that tolerates very few exceptions. And it comes at a very high cost to the individual and to society. Does it deliver? Well, the fact that we have had no war or any serious threat to sovereignty since independence means that NS has at least fulfilled that part of its KPI, i.e. that’s the most visible and significant benefit. Can we maintain that same KPI if we gradually phased out NS? Can we rely only on a small but high-tech regular army, the skill and diligence of our frontline diplomats, our economic interdependence with our neighbours, and the sanctity of international law? Something to think about.
When the Japanese invaded Singapore, the British were unprepared and the people were subjected to the nightmarish occupation of Singapore. No one expect the Japanese to invade Singapore. No one did. But what the British boasted of Singapore as the impregnable fortress, we still fell to the Japanese.
Fast forward 20 years later, Singapore was threatened by the Communists, which continued into the 70s and 80s. Communists from Japan even hijacked a Singaporean ship off the coast. Of course in the new millennium, we saw a new threat that is terrorism.
As you can see, our country may have a very short history but threats have always been prevalent. By building up a good armed forces made up of modern war-faring technology and an available pool of battle-fit soldiers, Singapore is able to handle threats of violence that has always been unexpected in the history of mankind. It is shortsighted to say that Singapore has no imminent threat. The fact that we have a modernised fighting force with operational ready soldiers whose numbers put us second behind Vietnam as the largest armed forces in the region, Singapore can put up a good deterrent. We may not be able to win a long war but we can definitely make it so costly for any foreign invaders that they had better think twice.
Granted there’s nothing about Singapore that can benefit any other countries. We have no resources except people. But back in WW2, Singapore was still as tiny as it was and yet the Japanese saw the need to occupy Singapore.
Our country is situated in a volatile region. You never know when there rises a politician that may see the need to eradicate Singapore.
And don’t underestimate the intelligence and technology of the Singapore Armed Forces. A missile can be fired towards Singapore at 3am but it probably won’t destroy all the HDB flats in Singapore.
Since history, citizens from across cultures and continents readily defend their country with their lives. This is a sacred duty that still holds true.
Cheers
OOO Xiong just brought up SIngapore’s classic justification for NS. Is Xiong enlightened or brainwashed?
Xiong, one scenario I’ll like your opinion on. Let’s say Singapore goes to war with one of neighbours because they refuse to sell water to us at 20cents. They die die also want to sell to us at $2. Our (elected) politicions disagree, they all vote for war. Opposition party vote against war, but of course, the majority of parliament rules. I’ve always voted for Opposition, lets say. And I absolutely agree that $2 is the reasonable and fair price we ought to be paying, and I am willing to pay more tax or more utility bills for that, because I believe that is the right thing to do. But now that my (elected) politicians voted for war, I am called to my sacred National Duty, and to DIE for a cause I totally disagree with in the first place.
Now, if I were a regular, and I choose this sacred duty, it is good and very admirable. But as a conscripted personnel, I am forced to give up my life involuntarily, for something I am against.
Xiong, and everyone else reading, What are your thoughts?
(PS. Note that the above is completely hypothetical. No basis for the figures, or countries, or commodities involved. And I’m a girl. The only girl in this discussion. But I love alot of males who will have to die for the country)
(PPS. Xiong, on a completely off tangent and side note. I chanced upon your blogger profile. Just really found it interesting that you and Joshua Lim share the exact same favourite directors. In fact, i think he tried to model The Olive Depression after Hou Hsiao Hsien’s style)
Long post… For my edu-tainment purposes.
It seems like brainwashed pacifist and brainwashed military generals are no different from each other. Both are rigid and make poor policymakers. One dwells too much in ideals while the other dwells too much in history. Both do not offer practical solutions.
There really is no sense having any discussion with either of them.
—————————————————–
Now, for the broad-minded readers……
I gave a hypothetical scenario where if 0.5% (or >1 million people) of a population is simply not happy in Indonesia and simply wants to come here as they like. This is not even war. Let’s hypothetically say that the Indonesian authorities are more than happy to get rid of 0.5% of the population who are unhappy. So Trev thinks we can make do with 5,000 soldiers for such a non-war scenario. I didn’t know that was possible. Fantastic, I wish he is the defence minister.
I wonder. What kind of state of the art weapons is possible to equip 5,000 soldiers that can handle the work of a 400,000 soldiers armed forces? Is there some unknown super weapon that we can acquire?
I wonder. What can 5,000 soldiers do for 4.5 million people in any non-natural disaster scenario? That kind of army must be the best in the world.
“Our country is so bloody small that if several missiles hit our flats,
we would probably surrender on the spot. If the enemy is bent on just
annihilating us, then probably we would be killed by an
atomic/hydrogen/nuclear bomb.”
So, why not surrender way before hand? Give up sovereignty to a big superpower, like I suggested. See, I proposed a solution.
And why not go nuclear? Classic justification for going nuclear, right? See, another solution.
I wonder, if in the event that “several missles hit our flats”, shall we all agree to surrender? Or do we send in our wonderful 5,000 super soldiers? What solution do you have?
———————————————
As, it stands, given the various scenarios, NONE of the commentors here have offered practical solutions, unlike what I have suggested and willing to carry out.
———————————————
Think about this. Humans have been warring for thousands of years. Pacifists have also existed for thousands of years, yet we still have wars. Mad/ambitious men exist whether you like it or not.
Let’s consider a scenario at a more individual level (and I will use Mathia as our wonderful actress again).
Suppose you and Mathia were out late one night and suddenly threatened by a rapist. Do you…
1) Abhor violence. Hence decide to give Mathia a condom, and tell her, the pain will soon be over?
2) Grab whatever you can. Lunge at the rapist and give Mathia a chance to kick a few b*lls?
I would choose (2) even if I know I may suffer more than just a few cuts and also possibly killing the rapist accidentally. Would the pacifist choose (1)?
The NS policy is translating that personal level to a macro-level, which is especially relevant to tiny SG. At the heart of it, the NS policy is about organised defence for those people you care about. Usually implementation is the unpleasant part, and this is the part that I believe SAF should improve on (a lot).
———————————————–
Mathia, with regards to your hypothetical scenario. I only have this to say. It is cheaper to buy or produce (recycled) water at $2 than to start a war. Kekeke.
But to entertain you… Although I agree with the NS policy, I will desert (if conscript) or quit (if regular) the army, and also quit Singapore if our politicians are so incompetent to choose such a silly course of action.
And trust me, I will quit Singapore AND tell my children/grandchildren to desert a real operation if the nursing-homes-in-JB-for-SG-old-folks “option” turns into a “policy”.
————————————————-
What pacifist/military do not realise is the unique situation in SG and also that the military must evolve with the times. I have completed my 10 years of NS “liability” and my observation through the years led me to conclude that conventional warfare holds less priority for SG now. Security and non-conventional warfare are the new issues that the SAF has to deal with, period.
——————————————————————————–
Now, I’m sure I’m so brainwashed that I find it puzzling that
1) I don’t agree with what the government is doing with politics, housing policy, education, transport and R&D
2) I find the recent comments/speeches made by some of the ruling party’s MPs and ministers disturbingly silly
3) I’m thinking what I can do to fix (1) & (2)
CM, I will go for Option 2. Haha
I think CM has raised some good points.
I have a friend who detest NS but he told me one day that he may criticize the system but when war comes he will take up arms. how would he have the heart to see foreign invaders “raping my mother, my land and all my pretty girlfriends?”. i think many singaporean males will agree with him. i mean the point about taking up arms to defend singapore, despite disliking NS.
and Mathia to answer your hypothetical question… if my country goes to war for a truly unreasonable and aggressive reason, especially if it puts more risk on my loved ones, then i may probably not take up arms. but on second thoughts, ii dun have a definite answer for you in this though, =X
anyway thank you for providing a good platform to discuss this matter. i’ve ORD for 3 years now and i haven’t even started my reservist cycle yet, except for the annual ippt.
and yeah haha you’re good ah managed to find my blogger profile! i once tried to model a short film after HHH but only to have failed terrible.
CM: Re your last paragraph
You’ve been reading too many blogs lik mine lah. Kenna us brainwash.
oh btw , my grandma stays in JB!
Hey Xiong, you into making films too? Cool!!! I think you’re being modest = ) Don’t give up! One day when you have your movie, I’ll do promo for you too!!!
In the past decades, NS has played its part to “prevent” Singapore from invasion.
Is that the main reason or were there other reasons? America? Internal politics? Poverty? Communism?
We fast forward to today. Any war would destroy a significant amount of infrastructure in all warring countries. Considering the economic status of our neighbours, would they risk all their achievements and economic progress just to invade us? Would invading us make their country more vulnerable to their internal opponents or rather unite their country?
If a country is peeved and pissed with us, seriously, what can we do to stop say 10 million indonesians from marching (or swimming) onto our soils? Would having say 3 million Singaporean “soldiers” work? I supposed CM is right to say that perhaps going nuclear or having H2 bombs would work?
Consider this scenario: we know that taiwan has something like 1500 or so missiles pointed at it from China. Suppose if a neighbouring country were to fire say 300 missiles at Singapore (i believe this is where most wars will be like in the future) at 3 a.m. in the morning. I am 100% confident that if i know, i will just pray and hope that i dont kanna the bombs!!! (confirm not enough time to swim to JB)
Coincidentally, the British were AWARE that the Japanese were invading Singapore via thailand (Isthmus of Kras) and they launched an operation nicknamed MATADOR to stop the Japanese, but failed. To cover up their failure, the history books just conveniently said that they were taken by surprise.
I suppose if another country want to invade singapore and like kill our parents and rape our people, I would fight back. But with the number of soldiers that we have, the winning strategy would be for the enemy to bomb us until we cannot tahan. If that is the case, actually i dun think we have many people left for them to fuck, maybe just corpse. So i still dun think that we will actually get to like fight in the streets using hand to hand combat.
Anyway considering the number of people who chao keng, i think we will have something like 50% desertion rate (actually these are the smart people) cos we will probably be fighting a losing war?
CM:
“Let’s consider a scenario at a more individual level (and I will use Mathia as our wonderful actress again).
Suppose you and Mathia were out late one night and suddenly threatened by a rapist. Do you…
1) Abhor violence. Hence decide to give Mathia a condom, and tell her, the pain will soon be over?
2) Grab whatever you can. Lunge at the rapist and give Mathia a chance to kick a few b*lls?”
Actually this scenario is very easy for me to answer.
If the rapist is rather cute, i will definitely offer myself up for the rapist to rape instead of mathia, if not i will rape the rapist!!!
If the rapist is not so delectable afterall, i will ask mathia if the rapist is her type. Now if he is her type, then i will be like telling mathia to enjoy?
However, if the rapist is not so delectable to me and mathia, then i will bo pian threaten the rapist to fuck off if not i will bite him and give him AIDS (pretend i have AIDS lah!!!)
And oh do pardon me as i have the tendency to piss people off very easily
just ask mathia hahahahaha….
actually the number 5000 is used as i was estimating the number of planes, tanks, weaponry and missiles/bombs that we may possess (which is not a lot i think). On hindsight, perhaps we need 10,000 or 20,000 to operate these weaponry. But to begin with, do we have enough weaponry?
We spend most of our defense money on aircon, paying soldier’s salary, bonuses of all the officers, warrant officers, regulars, officer/sergeant messes, having stupid dinners several times a year, paying like 20 bucks or so for each individual soldier’s food. there are so many other silly things that our defense money go to instead of upgrading our weaponry that i wonder if we ACTUALLY spend the money on the weapons and training, we may have an even stronger SAF.
Trev I was ROFL!
I think you have a sense of humour, which is an acquired taste. Fortunately i’ve acquired that taste = )
Thank god, if anyone more others were to take offend with my vulgar humour/pissed off attitude… I dunno wat I will do!!!
From Martyn See http://singaporerebel.blogspot.com/2009/02/political-dwarfs-like-mr-lee-kuan-yew.html
Extracted from Parlimentary Debates of the Dewan Ra’ayat (House of Representatives)
Thursday, 19th September, 1964
…
Mr Speaker: You have one more minute left.
Enche’ Chia Thye Poh: I think one more minute is too short.
Mr Speaker: I will give you one more minute.
Enche’ Chia Thye Poh: I think it is most unfair for me to complete my speech in one minute. I beg you to …
Mr Speaker: No, I will give you one minute.
Enche’ Chia Thye Poh: Sir, when the Prime Minister talks of defending our country, we find it hollow. This Government has betrayed all the vital interests of the people to the British. It has no right to talk of defending the nation. This Government is oppressing the people; more than 200 political leaders and trade unionists are in the jails of Singapore. Our Secretary- General, Mr Lim Chin Siong, is in Changi and political dwarfs like Mr Lee Kuan Yew can strut around and talk big only when giants like Mr Lim Chin Siong are kept out of the political arena (interruption).
Mr Speaker: Do not disturb him.
Enche’ Chia Thye Poh: The Prime Minister has spoken about the communal riots in Singapore. He says that the Indonesians and the Communists caused it. We are from Singapore and we know that this is just to cover up the real culprits. The Prime Minister of Singapore is telling, in Europe, that the UMNO politicians have caused it. The UMNO in Singapore says that the P.A.P. has caused it. We who are in Singapore know that the communal riots were the work of the UMNO and the P.A.P. who were indulging in a bitter fight for power . All this nonsense about the Indonesians and the Communists causing these riots is just to hide the truth that the main culprits belong to the ruling parties.
SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS : Nonsense! Lies
Enche’ Chia Thye Poh : We challenge the Government to have a public enquiry into this. When the riots started . . . .
Mr Speaker : Order, order! Your time is up—it is already one minute.
———————————————————–
2 years later, at the age of 26, Member of Parliament for Jurong Mr Chia Thye Poh was arrested and detained without charge or trial. He spent a total of 23 years in prison and another 9 years under restrictive orders in Sentosa. Upon his release in 1998, he publicly called for the abolition of the ISA. He attained his phD recently, but his last known whereabouts is uncertain.
Tsk tsk… Why use vulgarities? Emotional perhaps.
I get the impression that surrendering our sovereignty is what Trev advocates. Noted your solution then. I wonder, red card? Green card? Malaysia boleh? Or Indonesia boleh?
Yes, yes. In the realm of politics, the NS policy is used for more than one purpose. I do recognise that.
That is why I put my stand across clearly (how many commentors actually do?) – Should the government use the conscript army for unreasonable aggression, then I’m not fighting.
By the way, desertion is quite a serious crime.
Is the desertion rate going to be 50%? Well, my ex-NS buddies, most of whom are married and have kids, they will not desert. To them and me, we are not taking up arms for the government or any silly politicians. We are taking up arms for our families and our buddies.
Seems like the “Olive Depression” is all in the head… Getting all depressed and negative won’t get you far in changing and creating new policies that benefit people.
That’s really sad for some of these intelligent people.
With reference to 1964 event…
I know many Singaporeans who understand the limitations of public policies – Public policies are supposed to benefit ~80% of the population. They can never be perfect, which means there will always be unhappy people around.
In their own personal capacities, these Singaporeans work around/within the system creatively such that their friends and the people who work with/for them have a happy environment. From within the system, these people work steadily to create changes and improvements to the public policies and benefit more people.
Politics is dirty. It is too bad that Mr. Chia Thye Poh chose such a silly course of action.
A similar tragedy will happen to Obama if he does not know how to play politics. If this comes to pass, the US would have lost a great leader.
———————————–
Coming back to topic…
If according to Mr. Chia Thye Poh, that the government has “no right to talk of defending the nation”, how about tiny me and my buddies and our families who wants to talk about defending the nation with organised defence?
I find it interesting that while CM and Xiong claim that they “support” conscription, they will choose to desert/ not to fight a Stupid War. Ie. they will not fight for a cause they cannot believe in.
THAT is exactly what the debate about conscription is about –whether or not you have the freedom to choose what you will die for.
Most of CM and Xiong’s points for supporting conscription, are actually about supporting the existance of military forces. I don’t think anyone will disagree about the benefits/ necessity of a military force. At least that’s not the point in question here. Its well and good and very admirable when people CHOOSE to fight for what they believe in / love ==> THAT’S not in question.
Conscription is a violation of human rights because it does not respect this CHOICE, because it FORCES you to fight for what you do NOT believe in, and what you do NOT love. (CM: what if I don’t have any family here and all I have are enemies in singapore?)
My solution? Sure maintain a military force. Sure provide mandatory military training (we should be empowered to defend when we so CHOOSE to). But we ought to have a CHOICE when the time comes for you to lay your lives down during a war. You fight and die when you WANT to.
Of course, I know the counter argument — that there will be freeloaders . So how do we tweak the system to respect human rights, while not rewarding freeloaders????? Any creative thoughts?
Hi CM:
The Olive Depression’s main message is not about getting depressed about the army.
i think mathia has already spoken about the message of the film.
in my opinion, the film wants us to consider the purpose of conscription and whether it is fair. even though, it speaks of depression, i feel it speaks of more of a dread to go for NS when you know that you have to waste 2.5 years of our precious adult life and we have no choice.
Trev
It is unfortunate that people choose to focus on unconstructive thoughts. I’m afraid the NS policy will continue its status quo because intelligent people did not choose to engage it in a practical way. Too bad then.
On a practical macro level, balancing the implementation of conscription and building/maintaining an armed force is tricky. It is simply not possible to build a credible army in a few years. From experience, I consider the 2 (2.5) years of NS as basic military training only. I’ve interacted with personel from regular armies in Thailand, Australia and New Zealand, the various systems required to run the military (including a conscript force) is really not as simple as you think.
On a personal level, when I was enlisted at 18 years old. I was simply a blur teenager. I didn’t know anything about politics, policies, etc. I didn’t care what happens to my friends and family, and I didn’t have a girlfriend. I was a virtual general (think ion-cannons, laser beams, light sabers) and all I could think about was having fun. And I was quite pissed that NS left me with less time for my fun and adventure on the PC.
If I had a choice back then, I wouldn’t do NS, simply because I know no better. Now at 30 years old, how do you expect me to train to be a soldier even if I choose to? So, is it practical to let people have a choice in this instance?
Mathia, your “solution” is no different that mine and xiong’s…… “…maintain a military force….provide mandatory military training…have a CHOICE when the time comes…” Let me tell you, no NSman will go fight and die for an unreasonable war. We talk amongst ourselves during our In-Camp-Training. We have all sorts of people here, bankers, managers, engineers, etc. At age 27++, everybody here knows where the flaws in the system are, and everybody knows what is worth fighting.
Mathia, if you don’t have family here and all you have are enemies, you can give up citizenship right? Does being a Singaporean matter so much to you? If it does, wouldn’t you go for NS? If it doesn’t, dump the pink card. Easy.
Mathia, I do not think the issue of human rights here is appropriate. Firstly, you can either blame your parents, divine being(s) or fate for being born here. Secondly, you do enjoy some benefits (not elaborating, this you should know better) as a citizen. I’m sure you will appreciate that you have a better life here than some war-ravaged/civil-disordered country in Africa.
By the way, I really would like to see how you are going to blame/curse divine being(s) for being born here.
Why think so negatively and dread NS? Isn’t it all in the head? Rumour has it that the current director of TMSI was caught catching butterflies during his NS. Mathia, you can check it out.
I have even seen business deals done and some job recruitment during my reservist days. Get depressed and dread, does you no good.
If war does break out (stupid war or not), quite frankly, the government of the day will probably cloak it in such stark patriotic terms so that we wouldn’t really know whether it is justified, reasonable, or otherwise. Truth is the first casualty in war. We can expect to be mobilised (probably at 3 am) and be told that our country needs us to take on a national security threat of the highest order. And we will follow orders. All warfare is based on deception, including deceiving ourselves. Check out “Gaza: The Lies of War” by Henry Siegman at http://www.palestinemonitor.org/spip/spip.php?article802
On the practical issue of conscription, I would tend to agree with CM that few at age 18 would choose to serve if given a choice. The straightforward (and arguably most equitable) way is to mass conscript every adult male citizen. The good thing about this approach is that it lessens the civil-military divide. Every Singaporean family with a son would experience NS. This will factor in our government’s calculations on the larger questions of war and peace. Gulf War II would have been very different if the US soldiers were all drafted and every family could potentially see their sons/daughters in Iraq. You can bet that Bush would not take the decision to invade Iraq so likely.
And here I would agree with Mathia that conscription does violate the individual’s human rights. The benefits come at great cost to the individual and to society. The only reasonable way to excuse it would be to say that it is a lesser evil. After all it maintains our KPI, i.e. we haven’t needed to go to war (so far).
Can NS be improved further? Most definitely. Many people have suggested alternative service for those who are not inclined to serve in a military capacity. Perhaps something like the US Peace Corps. Perhaps our young people could serve as manpower for technical assistance missions to our fellow ASEAN countries. The problem with this is that here we go against the principle of equity. How do we decide fairly who goes where? Also the main objective of NS is national defence. Once we add in all these complications, we might end up confusing the mission objectives. Not saying it can’t be done though.
Aha. Finally, Fargoal has brought in “the mechanics of war” and also that equitable implementation of conscription is a real pain.
Additionally, let me point out some general facts (there will be some exceptions, but let’s not argue over little stuff)…
1) The military is simply a tool of politics. War therefore starts from the minds of politicians. So, are pacifists barking up the wrong tree?
2) Pacifists must also understand that historically, countries/states/people who start unrighteous wars tend to lose in the end. This is because almost everyone prefers not to kill, especially for unreasonable purposes . The exception to this are wars that are inter-generation, this is where the wars become tit-for-tat squabbles.
Note: Righteous here is the “practical” righteousness. Not sure where to draw the line, but it has been working for thousands of years.
Deception is in the realm of politics (read – where are the WMD in Iraq?). That is why, I sincerely wish that intelligent people not focus on unconstructive thoughts, but rather focus on how to prevent deception (in whatever form of manifestation) from misusing the military.
As for human rights… After the Americans stomp (in various ways) on the sovereignty of other nations by giving lame reasons, I wonder what kind of human rights definition should we use.
By the way, “the benefits come at great cost to the individual and to society”… I wonder how great is the cost? Can elaborate? Back then at 18 years old, the “cost” to me was simply less game time. And although it was an extremely unpleasant experience, I actually benefited in character building, knowledge and skills, networking and understanding military, political and security issues.
Sure, CM. I will be happy to respond but it takes a while as I reside in a different time zone halfway round the world.
I will admit that I am not privy to the sensitive (and probably highly classified) considerations in our country’s defence policy. But at the same time, I do not believe in pacifism either. In the absence of better information, my overall gut feeling is that Singapore needs a strong military and that NS in the form of mass conscription is the most straightforward way of maintaining our national security. As a tiny sovereign island state among much larger regional powers, I understand and appreciate that Singapore has little choice but to be extraordinary. In any case, the historical track record of city-states is not good. Few city-states, i.e. Athens and Venice, survive for more than a few centuries as independent political entities on the international stage. So if we are to survive and thrive, I can accept intuitively that we must try to be above average in every sphere, including education, economics and defence. This is where I come from.
To respond to your first general fact, I don’t have a major issues with it. As you have pointed out, war is indeed politics by other means. But today, when war is perceived by a clear majority of countries as being anachronistic (and out of place in the 21st century), the decision to launch wars is a clear indication of political (and diplomatic failure). A few weeks ago, I had the pleasure of chatting with a couple of diplomats from Chile and Tanzania. The Tanzanian expressed his personal view that Hamas was wrong to launch rockets into Israel, and that Israel had the right to defend itself against an enemy that denied Israel’s right to exist. The Chilean, on the other hand, spoke about Israel’s disproportionate response. Just for the fun of it (and to elicit some response), I also chipped in to suggest that, maybe, just maybe, Hamas was being unreasonable and extremist because nobody would talk with them. The Tanzanian looked at us and said, let’s do a role playing skit. You (me) be the President, and he (the Chilean) be the Foreign Minister. Your neighbouring state just said you have no right to exist. And they are launching rockets at you. He asked the Chilean, what would you tell the President (me). The Chilean replied wryly that he would not want to be in that position. But he, as Foreign Minister would offer the President (me) his resignation. His reason was that crises do not happen overnight. The fact that things had evolved into a crisis of such proportions meant a clear failure of diplomacy on his part. What does all this mean? I think the key lesson is to stop crises before they happen. Pacifist or otherwise, people should create conditions and environments where disagreements can be handled in the realm of peace. This means creating business links, economic interdependence and exchanges at the individual level. Hopefully the economic, social and cultural links can outweigh the narrow political gains of sabre-rattling and conflict.
Your second general fact is interesting. It would indeed be gratifying if those who start unrighteous wars always lose in the end. Frankly, I don’t have the depth of historical knowledge to agree or disagree. I’m also not sure whether we have a practical definition of righteousness. It may be clear cut in some cases, but in others you find a lot of ambiguity. For instance, I think most would agree that WWII was a righteous war. Other cases may be less clear cut. And in any case, history is written by the victors. But I would gladly admit that I am not a student of history.
And yes, it does nobody any good to sink into depression. Much better, as you say, to become discerning and identify deception and possible misuse of military for selfish purposes. I wouldn’t say I am depressed. Pessimistic, perhaps. Realistically, it is very difficult for people outside the system to play check and balance. The military, all militaries, maintain a culture of secrecy. It is very easy to fall back on “need to know basis” and “national security”. That’s why I am fundamentally not optimistic that we will be able to tell whether its a stupid war or not, until after the fact when we have the benefit of hindsight.
On the definition of human rights, I would fall back on the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other relevant conventions. I am aware that there would be those who would dismiss them as idealistic, impractical or Western-oriented. Ultimately it is about striking a pragmatic balance, and not pursuing human rights to the exclusion of everything else. Even the United Nations, the world’s most foremost international organisation, has to strike a balance between its three pillars of human rights, development and international peace & security.
Lastly, on the costs of NS to individuals and society, from the economic point of view alone, I would just point out that the two years of NS lead to significant loss of economic productivity (both at the individual level and at the national level). Furthermore, when Singaporean men enter the workplace, they are disadvantaged vis-a-vis their foreign counterparts because their professional careers are often disrupted by the reservist call-ups. Sure, I have personally seen business deals struck during reservist. I myself benefited from interacting with my reservist mates. One even gave me good advice on the stock market. But I have also seen poor chaps rushing to book out in order to settle business at their workplace. Economics aside, military training also exposes oneself to the possibility of injury (or even death). Granted such incidents should never happen if people follow the safety regulations, but accidents do happen from time to time. Here we are mandating our young men to bear the risk of injury (or death). I’ll admit that I’m painting a broad brush. But these are blanket costs arising from a blunt instrument (of conscription). There are other costs that relate more to the implementation of NS (and which therefore hold the possibility of improvement) and I’ll not go into them. But as I said earlier these costs must be borne with the view that the country as a whole benefits from having a large conscripted force, i.e. it has kept us out of war.
The case of Israel and the Arab Nations is one exceptional case. Here we see some historical and religious issues being in the background. In addition, the conflict has become one that is inter-generation.
Years ago, I chance upon a documentary where Israelies and Palestinian children were put together in a programme. The programme was to let the next generation be friends with each other and ultimately put an end to the conflict. These children lived together for a few years and went back to their homes when they became older.
Later, when bombs and rockets started flying, interviews with these children found that they become no different from the adults. Possibly everybody has forgotten why the conflict started in the first place.
This is basically squabbling, no amount of diplomacy/politics will solve the issue, no easy solutions here. In addition, due to the length of the conflict and the involvement of foreign parties in various roles, certain groups/countries will always be looking out for opportunities to spark off something.
As for definition of practical righteousness and victory conditions, I do not think there is any clear cut definitions, rather context/circumstances dependent. Although this may sound vague, but I believe there is rough direction that everybody follows.
For example, Gulf War I was a righteous war. But Gulf War II is apparently not. The Americans are now clearly in a fix in Iraq unlike Gulf War I. While one may say that the Americans have military domination, have they truly won anything? With non-conventional warfare, America will face greater threats from terrorism.
In consideration of the fact that Singapore needs to be extraordinary to survive, aren’t we tweaking the definition of human rights so as to allow Singapore to take the necessary actions for survival? Let me link this to cost and benefit of NS. You stated some cost of NS to economic productivity. But I believe you left out a major calculation. I wonder, how many international companies and investors will leave (or not come to) Singapore if we did not have (or do away with) NS – since you have stated that the large conscript force has kept us our of war (I prefer the phrase, ensure stability)?
Years ago, Dr M made a remark about bombing Singapore. Of course, with the large conscript force that we have, we can laugh it off as a joke. But I don’t think it will be funny if our military is tiny, even if he had meant it as a joke. The video clip can be found on youtube (assuming still there).
Wanted to add this about the film-maker, since the title here is “The Olive Depression”…
Mathia mentioned “I really admire him, because his A level grades could have easily got him into medicine or law…… But he chose to resist walking the easy path for money, even though his classmates are now making the big bucks……He wants to make a statement about the injustices in society, and he chose the medium of film as his billboard.”
Sometimes I wonder, is that an effective way to contribute and move society forward?
I wonder, how many Singaporeans will even view his film? Will Singaporeans feel injustice over the NS policy? Or are Singaporeans feeling injustice over other more important things? How many Singaporeans, in terms of percentage of population and work force, will feel the “pinch” of the NS policy?
Assuming he had gone on to be a lawyer. He could one day be standing side by side with Sylvia Lim and Chiam See Tong. Lawyers tend to make better politicians because they are more careful with what they say and because of their profession, they tend to be good policymakers as well.
Now wouldn’t that be great?
Assuming he had gone on to be a doctor. He still could go into politics if he so chooses. Alternatively, he can choose to treat the poor people in some of the Asean countries, help in treating victims of natural disaster.
It’s not all about money, it’s about choices.
Well, it can be argued that he loves film-making (or is that only his billboard?), that’s fine too. But impact on society, well, not there. Look at Jack Neo, he doesn’t cross certain lines… And after his “I not stupid” film, increased public awareness was brought to issues like EM3 and ITE (It’s The End!!!). EM3 was scrapped and ITE occasionally have news articles that boost its image. Although “scientifically” we cannot credit Jack Neo for these events, but at the very least, lots of Singaporeans viewed his film.
12 years ago, I watched one of the best plays in my life. It was in junior college, those were just theatre students, and a 2-person propless, costumeless act.
The 2 characters marched in the shape of a square, each actor at a corner apart.
Through out the 5 minute act, they smiled happily, and spoke this line, in unison, continuously, rhythmically, in a very happy voice:
Happy! Happy! We are happy because we _SHOULD_ be happy!
Let me see how I can better organise my writing.
Israeli/Palestinian issue
Actually, in my opinion, the Israeli/Palestinian conflict ranks as one of the biggest political and diplomatic failure of all. I don’t disagree that perhaps at some fundamental level, they (as individuals) cannot get along because of all that historical baggage. But at the same time, the political failures were much more glaring. We see that on both sides, support for a two-state solution remains reasonably strong among the people. Many times, it is a case of the leaders not being able to broker the necessary compromises within and without. Israel’s settlement-building continues unabated and the government is not willing to take on the aggressive far-right. The two Palestinian factions are still unreconciled.
Still, there is some room for hope and political solutions. Israel did manage to conclude a peace treaty with Egypt in 1979 and with Jordan in 1994. And if the US, Syria and Israel play their cards right, Israel could forge a peace treaty with Syria (but Israel has to return the Golan Heights). I think political compromises and skilful diplomacy have helped to resolve SOME of the issues between Israel and the Arabs, especially when Arabs had strong leadership. Today, the prospects for peace remain very poor when both Israel and Palestine are led by weak leaders.
Well, this is not an Israeli/Palestinian issue post so I would just end here. Unless Mathia decides to post something on that.
NS/Human Rights
Every country tweaks the practice of human rights. To give an example, when a country signs on to an international convention, like CEDAW, it can choose to enter reservations on certain articles that it is unable to fulfil because of its circumstances. But ultimately, as I said before there is need for a pragmatic balance between human rights and other aspects of society/governance. So I would accept that Singapore, like any other country, adapts the practice of human rights to suit its own situation. In the process of adapting, we may inadvertently violate the accepted definition of human rights.
But to put things in perspective, I actually think Singapore’s overall human rights record is pretty alright, notwithstanding what the Western pundits say.
Of course, you have a point that multinational companies choose to locate here because of our stability. But NS would be just one factor in ensuring our stable environment. I believe that our pro-business environment, predictable economic policies, status as a transport hub, skilled labour, etc. all come into play.
And I would reiterate that I don’t advocate doing away with NS. Like it or not, we cannot get rid of it so easily. We can only fine-tune and improve it at best. Where I am coming from is this: Today, we have an NS policy that has certain costs to individuals and society. But overall, the policy also brings benefits to society at large. Both the costs and benefits, while they do exist, cannot be accurately quantified (i.e. how do you rate the performance of MINDEF, whose KPI is to keep us out of war? How much should you spend to ensure that you stay out of war? Its a bit like buying insurance. Sometimes you don’t really know how much you need. People end up over-buying or under-buying.) But while the benefits are real, the costs are not trivial either. Going forward, can we try to improve the system so that we reduce some of those costs, while maintaining the benefits?
Contributing to Society
Well, perhaps Joshua’s works might have limited impact now. But in 10-20 years, who knows? Everyone must start somewhere right? I wouldn’t prejudge what he can achieve at this point in time. I wish him every success in film-making. We could sure use more good Singaporean film-makers.
[...] Showing – Mathia Lee: The Olive Depression – Ian On The Red Dot: The Love Scene In Slumdog [...]
Why are women being seen as defenceless and in need of protection here? I suspect one of the reasons guys like Slavery is that it gives them a chance to be macho and to protect women.
Singapore has no strategic depth, like Israel. Which is why, like Israel, our strategy will be to wage pre-emptive war.
Wait, the silly course of action Chia TP chose was to question the government? Hallelujah, we live in a Great Country!
Dumping the pink card isn’t so easy. You can only do it at 21 – AFTER you’ve been enslaved for 2 years.
Claiming that having children who are press-gangeg soldiers reduces the chances of frivolous war is untenable, because the children of important people will be able to get non-combat postings. I remember reading somewhere that they found empirically that having children in the armed forces didn ot change politicians’ votes about war.
So how do we tweak the system to respect human rights, while not rewarding freeloaders?????
As I said, offer a choice for alternative service. But this will never happen.
The problem with this is that here we go against the principle of equity. How do we decide fairly who goes where?
How do we decide fairly who goes where now?! The definition of alternative service is that you let people -choose- it.
In any case, the historical track record of city-states is not good. Few city-states, i.e. Athens and Venice, survive for more than a few centuries as independent political entities on the international stage.
Misleading. Few political entities, period, have survived for more than a few centuries as independent political entities on the international stage. Even China, in the last millennium, has not been an independent political entity for more than few centuries – the Yuan and Qing dynasties surely count as foreign takeovers.
12 years ago, I watched one of the best plays in my life
Reminds me of motivational shit. Oh well.
International companies do not mention our stability in why they want to come here: http://commentarysingapore.blogspot.com/2006/05/oh-really.html
PS: Why do i only get comment notification emails when Mathia replies?
hmmm i’ve no idea how that works
To Fargoal:
Israeli/Palestinian issue
Another issue that was not mentioned… How do you have successful diplomacy when Arabs (Nations?) possibly do not recognise Israel’s right to exist? How prevelent is this thinking? I really don’t know. But I know that if Israel disappears right now, it does solve a lot of issues.
If not for the United States, being a crude oil guzzler and that Arab Nations have vast stakes and businesses in the US, I’m sure the Arab Nations would be capable of taking more drastic actions.
Cost/Benefit of NS
I have this equation (where ‘x’ equals multiply):
(pro-business environment) x (predictable economic policies) x (transport hub status) x (skilled labour) x (etc.) x (NS Policy) = Good location for MNC
Any one factor being zero, basically causes everything to be zero. Think about it.
NS/Human Rights
Since you accept that “Singapore, like ANY other country (~195 countries), adapts the practice of human rights to suit its own situation”, then really, why fuss over NS violating human rights?
Is it not better to press for Article 26, “……Education shall be free…..”? It is also odd that on the same Article 26, we have “… Elementary education shall be COMPULSORY…” So much for the Declaration.
Contributing to Society
I would prejudge regardless. Why? He is too “stubborn”. His focus now is to “make a statement about the injustices in society”. That does zilch today and also in the long term. If a person has passion in film-making then he truly will excel in that. So the questions to ask are really “did film-making came first or did trying to make a statement came first”, and “will film-making be dominant, or making statement about injustices in society be more important”?
These questions are really to help him, if he is as intelligent as Mathia puts it. And by the way, doing odd jobs here and there does zilch sometimes.
—————————————–
To Agagooga:
“Wait, the silly course of action Chia TP chose was to question the government? Hallelujah, we live in a Great Country!”
–> Indeed, it is a silly course of action. (1) Suppose Chia TP is after political power, then that was a strategically silly action. Look at LKY at then time – political dwarf? Now? (2) Suppose Chia TP is there to serve Singaporeans… Well, how much did he contribute? After he was arrested, who could the people turn to? PAP?
“Dumping the pink card isn’t so easy. You can only do it at 21 – AFTER you’ve been enslaved for 2 years.”
–> You can get out before age 11. When you are between age 11 to 18, you supposedly enjoyed substantial benefits. Perhaps publicly declaring that you will pay back the State for all the benefits you have received plus interest… That will sure help you get out – if you have the money.
“As I said, offer a choice for alternative service. But this will never happen.”
–> Never going to happen because it is not practical, not equitable, and leads to abuse.
“International companies do not mention our stability in why they want to come here: http://commentarysingapore.blogspot.com/2006/05/oh-really.html”
–> Really now, it is not professional for international companies to mention stability, especially during election times. Moreover, stability is almost a given in Singapore now. At such a stage, not many people are going to talk about it. That is why the Mas Selamat escape was most shocking and that was why many Singaporeans think the Home Affairs Minister was most incompetent.
CM – some brief comments in response to yours.
Israeli/Palestinian issue
Some Arab countries do recognise Israel. Egypt and Jordan have diplomatic relations with Israel. Oman has some ties with Israel as well. For all of Qatar’s rhetoric, it actually hosted an Israeli trade office until halfway through the Gaza crisis. Israeli FM Tzipi Livni even visited Doha last April for a conference. The Saudis, under then Crown Prince Abdullah, proposed an Arab Peace Plan in 2002 that offered full diplomatic recognition in exchange for Israel’s return to pre-1967 borders. Syria and Israel were having indirect talks via Turkey last year. PLO recognises Israel. Overall, the political picture we have today is that Arab-Israeli dynamics are more complex than we would ordinarily expect. Some piecemeal progress on the peace front is definitely within reach if there is political will.
And even if Israel somehow disappeared, I would bet money that we will still see lots of conflict in the Middle East. The roots lie in the post-World War I breakup of the Ottoman Empire and the failure of the British/French to carry out their grand design for the Empire’s broken pieces. Today, apart from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, we also have Sunni-Shiite rivalry (though some may call it Arab-Persian rivalry), Kurdish aspirations, factional fighting in Lebanon and Iraq, the rise of radical Islam, etc.
Cost/Benefit of NS
If I understand you correctly (and kindly correct me if I happen to be wrong), you are saying that without NS, the benefit becomes zero, so whether there are costs or not doesn’t really matter that much. And if I do accept the premise that Singapore adapts its own practice of human rights, I should just bite the bullet and not complain so much, since I am ultimately benefiting from the NS policy. Fair enough. Most folks who served (myself included) complained a lot but at the end of the day we still bit the bullet and got the job done.
Sure, we can all bite the bullet, serve our time and reap the benefits. The benefits that you (and me to some extent) have outlined in the preceding comments. We can of course discuss and debate the extent of these benefits (and I think that is where the disagreements are between the various people who commented above – but I won’t go into the details). But at the same time I would also argue strongly that our society needs to recognise the explicit and implicit costs – loss of economic productivity, the NSmen who lost their lives or are injured during training, the disruption to one’s education, the regular disruption to one’s professional career arising from reservist call-ups, reduced competitiveness vis-a-vis foreign workers, etc. We ignore and trivialise these costs at our own peril. That’s all I am getting at. And being the smart country (and people) that we are, we owe it to ourselves to consider ways to alleviate those costs, without compromising the benefits. For example, we may want to have a more comprehensive accident insurance coverage for our NSmen. We could encourage companies to pay those who served NS a higher starting salary (that’s being done for civil servants, but I understand that the industrial practice is rather uneven). We could give NSmen more NS credits. We could provide more flexible policies so that more servicemen who wish to disrupt for tertiary studies can do so. We could pay NSmen a salary that is more commensurate with what we are asking them to do (and be responsible for). I don’t think I am making a big fuss by drawing attention to the costs or by offering these suggestions.
Human Rights
The human rights conventions, treaties and other multilateral instruments are generally the outcome of much negotiation by diplomats and government experts. The final product is usually a finely-balanced document (so that everyone ends up equally unhappy), and may contain some constructive ambiguity. Often, the idea is to provide face-saving ways to bridge divergent positions. So I wouldn’t be surprised if the language of such documents seem odd or even self-contradictory in some parts.
Contributing to Society
Well, we can agree to disagree. I don’t know Joshua personally, and I have no idea exactly how intelligent or passionate he is (about film-making). What I know of him and his work, it’s through this blog and Mathia’s comments. I haven’t had the time or opportunity to see his film either. But I suppose being stubborn and uncompromising about one’s artistic vision, socio-political views and career path is the mark of an activist. Sure, we need the lawyer and diplomat types to forge compromises and make good policies. But I would propose that there is a role for activists as well in Singapore. It just seems like apples and oranges to compare the two types in terms of “impact”, when they are pursuing activities which are inherently different.
To Fargoal:
Cost/Benefit of NS
What I’m saying is that, without the NS policy, Singapore would not have advanced economically to where it is today. Keeping in mind the equation, for example if we have no infrastructure planning or no skilled labour, it amounts to the same thing – zero.
Therefore the benefits of NS are substantial.
Yes, we should not trivialise the costs of the NS policy, at the same time we should not trivialise the benefits. The benefits are far-reaching and not easily measured. For example, good infrastructure benefits a whole lot of people, not just businesses.
By the way, I also wonder… Are we over-exaggerating the costs AND the benefits of the NS policy?
Consider costs of a more “personal” nature (e.g. disruption of one’s education, professional career, etc.). I believe (and have seen) that those who are going to succeed, succeed anyway, with or without NS.
Think. The ladies do not need to serve NS… So, how far are they ahead of the guys?
Ah, your suggestions are good. However, my opinion is that those benefits are quite tiny… What Singaporeans need is a rehauled less disruptive (work, education, etc.) NS policy. Honestly I don’t know how that can be achieved, and I hope some intelligent people (who needs to go through the system to understand it) will work on it.
Additionally, in order to get the point across to the policymakers effectively, we need to engage them in their own “games”. We do not need activists for these. The title of this post http://mathialee.wordpress.com/2009/02/10/recent-comments-not-to-control-but-to-discredit-internet-content/ is what happens when some people chooses not to engage policymakers effectively.
NS
In the larger scheme of things, NS is just two years (2 yr 6 mth during my time) out of many years of one’s adult life. I take your point that from that perspective, its not that big a deal overall. Certainly, its not the be-all and end-all of “injustice”, because there are plenty of areas where Singapore can do better. To quote Obama, its about creating that “more perfect Union”. Singapore should be thought of as a work-in-progress that holds the possibility of improvement.
Activism
Actually, I see no reason why change cannot be pursued concurrently on two tracks, i.e. (a) go within the system, by joining up, engaging policy-makers and understanding the balance of considerations; (b) do it outside the system, via activism, NGOs, civil society organisations and alternative media. Without track (b), some issues like plight of migrant workers, LGBT discrimination, etc. may not get the airing they deserve. Ultimately, it is about giving people a voice. But of course, to bring about real change, at some point both tracks must intersect.
On Fargoal’s point about Activism, and bringing about change through the 2 tracks : within and without the system:
I had an interesting conversation over msn with someone the other day, and here is a snippet of it.
11:24:16 PM mathia dC this whole thing isn’t about morality
8/3/2009 11:24:30 PM mathia dC as a blogger, i’ll vehemently argue one way
8/3/2009 11:24:45 PM mathia dC as an NGO advocate, i’ll write papers pushing for another way
8/3/2009 11:24:59 PM mathia dC as a policy maker, its my job to tell my own self to go to hell
8/3/2009 11:25:11 PM mathia dC its the way the system is set up to reward
8/3/2009 11:25:33 PM mathia dC the govt doesn’t upgrade houses out of kindness
8/3/2009 11:25:43 PM mathia dC its the system that rewards them for doing so
8/3/2009 11:26:06 PM mathia dC so the whole idea is how to tweak the system to align everyone’s interest
It’s why I think Capitalism worked out so well, compared to Communism.
With Capitalism, success is aligned with the most “evil” aspects of being human — being greedy, being selfish etc
While the requirements for a successful COmmunist State was just way out of alignment with being human
I thought capitalism is the source of the financial tsunami that we are facing now?
Whether capitalism or communism, they are simply ideas/models that are part of human behavior/society. Restricting ourselves to ideas/models simply limit our potential to develop further. Afterall, isn’t democracy developed from thinking out of the box?
By the way, I’ve heard that there exist a small town in China where ideal communism is practised… So far, I haven’t heard any place where ideal democracy is in place.
Recently there’s this “propaganda” advertisement on “What are you defending?” (or something to that effect). I’ve noticed that those who disagree with conscription (oppression/depression/brain-washing/injustice/bo-pian/whatever-you-can-think-of) did not seem to take up my proposition of surrending our sovereignty and joining up with a bigger country, of which we have a number to choose from.
Well, I can tell you that it is a trick proposition. Hahaha. There is no country that we can join that is better than what we have now, and keeping our sovereignty and striking it out on our own.
Whether being conquered (and oppressed) or joining up with another big enough country (pick your choice, provided they want you), the outcome for a whole lot of issues (including human rights) is not going to be a good one.
So, how many ideals/things/areas are the conscript army of Singapore actually defending? Is it an injustice if certain human rights are one of the many things the conscript army is defending?
We can always change Singapore from within (slowly), being oppressed or becoming a minority “province” simply mess things up.