NS not the cornerstone of our national identity
Much has been said recently about what makes us Singaporean. One of the markers that keeps cropping up is National Service (NS).
Much has been said recently about what makes us Singaporean. One of the markers that keeps cropping up is National Service (NS).
To some extent, serving NS does contribute to Singaporean-ness but that is not its quintessential element because NS is more exclusive than inclusive.
Many Singaporeans — men who became citizens after a certain age, as well as women — have not served NS, and they are not lesser Singaporeans.
And while we bandy about the term “NS” as if it is a static monolith in our young history, so much has changed that NS should be many things, and not one.
My uncles served in the army back in the 1960s, and their stories of starched uniforms, spit-polished boots and ultra-tough foreign trainers were alien to me when I served in the early 1990s.
A few years back, I was discombobulated to hear that those in NS were eating professionally cooked food and did not have to wash their own trays.
My days of eating overcooked leather, and having to indignantly wash my tray several times under the gaze of an unrelenting corporal, made me feel like my NS took place 100 years ago.
Moreover, I served two-and-a-half years, while some today may serve less than two.
The memories and realities of NS have been around for generations, but our cross-generational private discussions of NS are increasingly marked by differences, rather than similarities.
NS is evolving, and we should not regard it as the most significant cornerstone in our growing national identity at the expense of other, more inclusive elements, such as our public education system.