My father left Sri Lanka and arrived in Singapore in 1992. He had heard that Singapore was a land where hard work — good work — would be rewarded. My mother and I joined my father soon after, and I grew up in Singapore.

I am a Singaporean citizen by choice, as is my immediate family, and Singapore is my home.

Ethnically, however, I am a minority amongst minorities, being of Sinhalese descent. My experience growing up was therefore both transformational and simultaneously confusing. 

While it gave me the opportunity to learn from and sharpen my mind against like-minded peers, I also experienced daily micro-aggressions. For instance, I grew used to jokes about how dark the colour of my skin was — of how at night, only my teeth would be visible, even under perfect outdoor lighting. 

As a teenager trying to fit in, I even tried making the joke first, because it felt like that would make me the “comedian” in the group — someone who was able to “take such jokes”. 

All too often, others assumed that I did not eat beef without asking me, even though I did. Once, a student from another class deliberately ate beef in front of me, thinking that it would offend me. Little did he know.

Years later, as I was trying to make sense of how I felt about Singapore, my home, and my own experiences growing up here, I had the opportunity to browse the archives of my alma mater, Raffles Institution (RI). Part of that involved trying to understand how students of the past may have dealt with similar, or possibly more difficult, experiences in their time. 

Surreptitiously, I stumbled upon a speech by Singapore’s first Chief Minister, David Saul Marshall, who attended RI from 1922 to 1924.  

I was struck by some of the parallels between his experiences and mine, in my own formative teenage years. These parallels, together with the wider contemporary significance of race and diversity, led me to reflect upon the state of progress in Singapore today.

RACE RELATIONS IN SINGAPORE, PAST AND PRESENT

The son of Sephardic Jews from Baghdad, David Marshall was born in Singapore and became a prominent and successful criminal lawyer, politician, and diplomat. He served as Singapore’s first Chief Minister and eventually founded the Workers Party, among many other roles he played. 

He addressed RI on Founder’s Day in 1954, and his speech casts us back to a very different past — one where the composition and appearance of our country may have been different, but its ideals, the same. 

So, what can we learn from his speech? And how have race relations changed or stayed the same in modern Singapore?

Then, as now, the idea of diversity is so lauded and permeates the very fabric of our Singaporean society. Our pledge enshrines this value, committing to unite “regardless of race, language or religion”.

Yet, the journey to this ideal has not been easy. The 1950s saw a rise in anticolonial sentiments and persistent ethnic tensions in Singapore. Marshall’s ruminations — and his vision for the future of Singapore — therefore reflected the tensions of his time.

Marshall’s speech raised three issues which continue to merit our consideration. 

First, race relations were always difficult and fragile.

This is seen in his earliest memory of being conscious of race: At the start of his days at a Singapore convent school, he was provoked by an older boy with the jingle “Jaudi Jew, brush my shoe”, which his local Singapore-born classmates chimed in and taunted him with.

Second, racial segregation bore a physical manifestation.

Marshall was utterly shocked to discover that there were two segregated common rooms for teachers at RI; one for Europeans, and another for non-Europeans. This seemed to reflect the social and economic disparity between Europeans and non-Europeans, which created a certain solidarity among the non-Europeans.

Third, Marshall recalled difficulties after graduating from RI — not just seeking employment as an executive at European companies, because he was not European, but also difficulty serving even as a clerk in Chinese companies, because he was not Chinese. 

He worked as a junior “character” at various firms for six years while giving tuition at night to accumulate S$3,000, to then try breaking the barrier of racial discrimination by being a “professional man”. He sought to use his earnings to seek a legal education. 

Even after returning to Singapore as a fully qualified lawyer, he faced similar issues with gaining employment at legal firms.

HONESTY AND FAIRNESS

Ultimately, Marshall aspired towards a Singapore where the “illogical discriminations of race in the commercial and professional fields” no longer existed. While there was merit to the “natural affinity” between peoples born of the same race, traditions, and ways of life, he saw no reason for such distinctions to exist in the commercial field. 

At times, he wondered why he had been subject to such social discrimination — was there no way to compel people to embrace each other? However, he recognised that this was a distant possibility, and acknowledged that individuals had the freedom to decide whether or not to associate with someone else.

Thus, Marshall believed that education was a far more effective remedy to address racism. Studying law at the Temple — a centre for English law in London — he found an opportunity to see this play out first-hand. Marshall realised many were unaware of what they missed out on by not taking up the opportunity to dine with people of different cultures, thus forgoing the chance to understand their very interesting companions. 

Consequently, he urged students not to be bitter as they encountered racial “friction” and “distinction” after graduating from school and to consider such incidents through logical lenses, conducting themselves instead with honesty and fairness, and in the most constructive manner possible.

Since Marshall’s speech in 1954, race relations in Singapore have undoubtedly improved. Even so, racial micro-aggressions occur in schools, public places, and the workplace, which can cause emotional hurt, trauma and grief to individuals. 

Discrimination is also pervasive in Singapore’s rental markets, with racial requirements or specifications being commonplace from landlords. 

Marshall’s speech reminds us that there is a steep price to pay for undermining the humanity of our fellow Singaporeans, a price that is both economic and social. 

So, as Marshall did, we must all have faith in the “basic honesty of all human beings of all races, in the basic goodwill of all human beings, of all races”. 

Because this is what progress looks like.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Duranka Viran Jayasinghe is a lawyer admitted to the Supreme Court of New South Wales. He is a graduate of the University of Sydney, with a double degree in Law and Arts, majoring in Government & International Relations. His interests lie in the intersection between law, policy, technology and philosophy. This piece was written in his own personal capacity, and first appeared in The Birthday Book 2023: Unmasking, a collection of 58 essays on the new individual and collective possibilities for Singapore as we emerge from the throes of Covid-19.