For community spirit to thrive, the Ugly Singaporean must go

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong recently called on all Singaporeans to reflect on their individual attitudes and behaviour in light of an alleged act of collective ungraciousness on board an MRT train. The incident, while apparently traumatic enough for the individual to write about it in a BBC article, seemed unsurprising to many locals.

In fact, many commenters online were unsympathetic to her plight and even criticised her for not asking for help in the first place. Some even defensively remarked that the unhelpful commuters might not have been Singaporeans at all.

Nevertheless, Ugly Singaporeans are more than capable of perpetrating this act of ungraciousness.

We are the ones who fight over Hello Kitty dolls, hog the reserve seats on the MRT, cut queues whenever possible (including while driving), pretend that we do not see someone in need of assistance or feel the need to help someone else. In our defence, we loudly claim: “Not my problem!”, “What’s in it for me?”, “Why should I care?” and so on.

CHANGING ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOUR

It has been suggested that this self-centred attitude (which is the root of ungracious behaviour) stems from a competitive society; work, family and other pressures; impersonal communication behaviour brought about by new technology; agitation due to overcrowding; ultra-competitive ethos; being busy; the hot weather and a host of other psychological and environmental reasons. In addition, self-centredness is an observable trait in many other societies/countries as well and is not necessarily disadvantageous, as it hones one’s survival instinct.

The counterargument is that there are also many other societies/countries that have the same environmental and physical conditions as in Singapore, but do not exhibit the same type of behaviour. Take the Japanese, for instance; “wa” or interpersonal and social harmony is an essential part of their value system. As such, many will consider the needs of others and those of the community before acting on their own personal desires.

In Singapore, the fact that we need to have campaigns to teach us how to behave graciously is an indictment of the poor state of affairs, one that should be rectified.

For those that argue that Singapore fares better than other countries in terms of social graces, you are missing the point. If we aspire to be the best at everything we do, why not aspire to be the most economically-viable country with equally commendable social graces?

I am not calling for a mass attitudinal change overnight; all I am advocating is that we as individuals try to be more gracious. After all, whether one behaves graciously or not is a matter of individual choice.

SOCIAL COHESION AND NATIONAL RESILIENCE

It can be argued that a nation is only as strong as its communities, and these communities are only as strong as its individual members. Hence, at a broader level, graciousness and compassion are not simply about an individual’s personal behaviour. This is because the individual is part of a community, and as such the cohesiveness of that community is highly dependent upon individual members helping each other out. And when those communities help other communities, the cohesiveness of the nation will be naturally enhanced. It is for this reason that PM Lee last year made particular reference to the “gotong royong” or kampung spirit, which, he argued, was integral to Singapore’s well-being.

Looking at the issue from another angle, national cohesiveness has a direct impact on national resilience, particularly in the face of crises. The underlying logic being that, if we band together in times of peace, then we are more likely to band together in times of crises and, as such, would be better prepared to overcome the crises.

As a nation, it is promising that we have managed to negate crises such as the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, H1N1 and, most recently, the haze. But, these crises have affected all of us without prejudice. There could come a time when a major crisis affects only a specific community here. Would we still stand together as one then? The answer is not straightforward as we have not been really tested yet.

There are many ways to erode national cohesiveness and, in turn, national resilience. An indirect and insidious way involves some of our seemingly innocuous activities such as wedding celebrations, burning of joss paper, funeral ceremonies, mahjong sessions, karaoke and so on. These activities are problematic when they are excessive and/or carried out without consideration for others.

As many of us live in compact high-rise flats, we will inevitably be affected by the negative externalities (for example, noise and smoke) that these activities produce. And if such inconsiderate behaviour persists, spats between neighbours can easily escalate into conflicts with ethnic and religious overtones. Several noteworthy cases over the past two years (for instance, the Amy Cheong incident) are testament to this.

I believe that Singaporeans are generally rational and measured, but when it comes to issues of race and religion, emotive sentiments do and can get the better of us. Race and religion are the Achilles heel of many societies and, therefore, appropriate sensitivities are necessary.

The gotong royong spirit revival can only come about with the death of the Ugly Singaporean. His/her demise invariably begins with us.

If we can make small, but positive, contributions in terms of looking out for one another, and be more gracious in our actions, it would be a welcomed start. And over time, hopefully, such behaviour will become second nature to all of us.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Damien Cheong is a Research Fellow at the Centre of Excellence for National Security, a constituent unit of the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University.