Singapore is a country that should be proud of achieving racial integration. Perhaps, no other country with such diversity of races, cultures, languages and religions, lives in such harmony. A success indeed, or is it?
The construction of a dormitory for foreign workers in Serangoon Gardens has fanned the amber of xenophobia. The chore issue does not seem to be economical, but simply emotional. The complaint of Ang Mo Kio residents that foreign workers could go to the park and make them feel “uncomfortable”, should make us question whether Singapore has indeed achieved racial harmony or simply nationalistic harmony. When it comes to foreign workers in Singapore, it seems that some are more equal than others.
But let’s face it. We cannot treat all persons equally. We like some more than others; we feel more comfortable with some than with others. Nothing wrong in that.
It is part of the human condition to be wary of people who look and behave differently, to be more comfortable among people whom we share culture, language, religions and perhaps even physical characteristics with. The question is not whether feeling uncomfortable is wrong, but whether my understandable uneasiness are sufficient grounds for rejecting or shuning people who have just as much right to be around as we have.
Migrants are not beggars or refugees asking for “charity”. They are legally here and they do not owe Singapore anything more than Singapore owes them. If some citizens are intimidated by the amount of foreigners, they should complain to their government for admitting them by first starting to take up the jobs and wages these foreign workers are having.
I have been a foreigner now for about half of my life. I have been discriminated in favour and against, and at times, both ways, unjustly. I know very well that it is not an easy feeling to use public transport and notice how people start sitting away from you, just because you are different.
If the issue about foreign workers is emotional, well, foreign workers have emotions too, and I hope they are not reading the newspapers lately.
The proposed solution to appease the complaints of Serangoon residents was to isolate them from the rest of the population. Make them use different roads, different buildings and hiding them from the public. I suppose if more foreign workers were to come to Singapore, then the government could work out a better solution. What about buses for foreign workers, schools for foreign workers, buildings for foreign workers, and elevators for foreign workers? Perhaps that would put everybody more at ease! Except perhaps the unfortunate educated conscience that remembers that that is how African Americans were treated in USA not so long ago and the world called that racism.
If the first African American woman who dared to challenged the system by riding a bus for whites was considered a hero, then Serangoon residents who would love that system should be considered…er.. what is the opposite of a hero?
It may be natural to feel uneasy with people who are different. It is unreasonable to make public policies based on wrong emotions. And it is xenophobic to ask for public policies to perpetuate our feeling of uneasiness, which brings us to the chore of the problem– Is the fear for the difference justified or even reasonable?
In an interesting article of New Scientist (2171) on Jan 30, 1999, there is a reference to a study done by the ecologist Stephen Hubbell regarding botanic biodiversity in rain forests. In the article Survival of the weakest, (New Scientist 2171, Jan 30, 1999) it is said,
Tropical rain forests are among the most diverse habitats on Earth, with hundreds of tree species often living within a few hectares. For more than two decades, some ecologists have suggested that this diversity was helped by the mosaic of gaps formed as trees die and fall. Different conditions created by temporary gaps in the forest were thought to allow new species to flourish.
(…) To their surprise, the researchers found no evidence that tree falls and other disturbances boosted diversity: the gaps created by fallen trees contained exactly the same mix of species as unbroken forest, and sites that were disturbed more frequently did not contain more species than less disturbed ones.
Instead, the evidence pointed toward seed and seedling shortages as the main cause of the forest’s high diversity. (…)
“Basically, things are so dispersal-limited that the gaps are being occupied largely at random,” says Hubbell. “Many of the sites are occupied not by the best competitor for the site, but just by whoever happened to be there.” This allows weaker species in and promotes diversity, he says.”
In brief, if competition for light makes larger trees fall, it is precisely this fall that fosters biodiversity through the survival of the weakest. That is what makes the rain forest one of the richest ecosystems on earth.
The lesson here is that the survival of the weakest, fosters biodiversity and richness. If we want our society to be rich in human terms, we’d better learn from the rain forests. The more we protect the weakest in our society, the richer and more full of life our society would be.
Historical experience has constantly shown that civilizations that isolate themselves perish while civilizations who open themselves to others, flourish. May our reason correct our emotions and help us to head in the right direction.
