By: Jeraldine Phneah | TheOnlineCitizen.com
Since our second protest of the year is coming soon on 1st May I thought I should touch on this topic of Xenophobia – the irrational hate towards foreigners.
Xenophobia has become the new buzzword associated with the White Paper Policy.
Accusations of xenophobia have been around since the announcement of the Population White Paper was made in the parliament. In one example, Li Yeming, ex-vice-chairman of the Singapore Federation of Chinese Clan Associations (research and publications committee), accused Low Thia Khiang and the Workers Party of fanning anti-foreigner and anti-immigrant sentiments during the White Paper debate.
In our very first major protest in such a long time in February this year, some have also accused Gilbert Goh, the organizer, of being xenophobic.
Many have expressed that the media is labeling those who oppose the White Paper as being xenophobic. They reject this label and see it as dismissing their views and not taking them seriously.
Through the protest, most of the people in their opposition towards the White Paper tend to believe that in the call for “Singaporean First” is not xenophobic in nature, but a timely reminder call to the government to prioritize its citizens.
My stance against the White Paper
Personally, I disagree with the White Paper.
The first and most important problem about the White Paper is that it lets GDP growth dictate population policy. While it is true that an aging, shrinking citizen workforce will mean slower economic growth, still whether we should have more immigrants or not should not be based on economic reasons but also other factors and costs .
As Mr Inderjit Singh said
“I feel the time has come for us to find a better balance between economic growth and social cohesion and yes there will have to be tradeoffs of economic growth but I would rather trade some of these for a cohesive, united nation where people feel taken care of at home and are confident of their future. I am not saying we go for low or no growth. Instead I am willing to adjust my growth expectations for a more comfortable life for all Singaporeans.”
The high influx of immigrants so far have increased our GDP but not standard of living.
Over the past 10 years, Hong Kong’s population has grown by just 6 percent, while Singapore’s has jumped by 29 per cent. Over the same period, Hong Kong’s GDP has grown at a 4.5 per cent on average per annum, as compared to Singapore’s 6.1 per cent.
However if you look at GDP per capita, a measure of standard living… it is very different. Over the past 10 yearsHK’s GDP per capita has risen at an inflation-adjusted average annual rate of 3.9 percent, while Singapore has only managed 3.6 per cent
When you have more foreigners than citizens, it also destroys social cohesion and erodes people’s sense of national identity.
All these makes people question if the country is really theirs.
In 1990, more than 86% of Singapore’s population was made up of citizens. However, by 2011, this had dropped to BELOW 63%.
Given the high number of new citizens from abroad, is the fact that perhaps less than 50% of Singapore’s total population was actually born and bred here.
An article on IPS commons also points out :
“Singapore is possibly the only country in the world where there are more migrants — including temporary workers, permanent residents and foreign-born citizens — than native-born people. Some like to call the US a country of migrants. Singapore is much more — it is a country FOR migrants.”
Furthermore, can we really take so much people and still live comfortably?
Even former MM Lee Kuan Yew seems to disagree with it: He projected for Singapore to have an optimum population size of five to 5.5 million for Singapore.
“’I have not quite been sold on the idea that we should have 6.5 million…I think there’s an optimum size for the land that we have, to preserve the open spaces and the sense of comfort.” – Lee Kuan Yew
Therefore, I do not like the idea of the 6.9 million people in 2030.
I also firmly believe that citizens have every right to expect privileges.
A citizenship is like a commitment to a country. It should come with exclusive privileges – priority in public housing, priority in government education institutions, structuring foreign talent policies to suit the needs of each industry.
The privileges of a citizenship are one of the important reasons for patriotism. As I written before, take Singapore as my boyfriend, if he doesn’t take care of my interests and can give other women the exclusive rights that are supposed to be for me…. why should I take care of him too? And, what is keeping me from being faithful and exclusive?
Don’t give people reasons to label Singaporeans as Xenophobic
As much as I am against the White Paper, I am also highly against what many netizens are doing… playing on the “anti-foreign” sentiment to sensationalize things or just having the “Citizens VS foreigners” mentality.
Just look at the comments on TRS post
When you say things like these online, you are simply giving people an excuse not to take you seriously, to label you as xenophobic and dismiss all your concerns… and this destroys the efforts of other Singaporean activists and concerned citizens who do their best to present their rationales against the White Paper in the most peaceful, rational and evidence-based methods.
Many “citizen journalism” websites are also working against citizen’s interest but stirring up hate and dissension and using foreigners to label post titles to sensationalize things.
Look what Andrew Loh, Chief Editor of Publichouse found from STOMP which he describes as a cesspool of disgrace to citizen journalism. He also criticized SPH for not having the “journalistic integrity” and “credibility” that it should have.
Image from Andrew Loh
From Andrew Loh:
The Government has expressed its concerns of anti-foreigner or xenophobic sentiments expressed online and it has often pointed the fingers at bloggers or netizens.
Yet, in its own backyard – SPH is after all ultimately owned by the Government itself – is this cesspool which it refuses to clean up first.
Therefore, perhaps SPH, the Straits Times, STOMP and the Government should do some soul-searching before they point the finger at “netizens” for promoting anti-foreigner sentiments.
…
Truth is STOMP is no citizen journalism endeavour. It is a voyeuristic site which grabs eyeballs through sensationalism.
In his NDP rally speech in 2012, Prime Minister Mr Lee Hsien Loong gave an example of a Straits Times Forum letter – “Foreign nurse who made a difference” – that did not receive comments about a foreigner doing good. However, when an online video posting of a Singaporean and a non-Singaporean fighting in a bus went viral, many commented on the bad behaviour of the foreigner.
PM Lee urged Singaporeans not to be “one-eyed dragons” (seeing what you want to see).
I agree with his sentiments and urge Singaporeans not to direct your discontent against foreigners. It is incredibly stupid to be biased against them and hate people because of their nationality.
If you want to be taken seriously and for your views to be heard, being irrational and biased in this case will get you nowhere.
Instead, I urge all who oppose the 6.9 million population to target your efforts towards making a positive change and pushing for policies through activism.
Emotionally charged, irrational and baseless comments will work against our opposition to 6.9 million rather than support our common cause.
–
If you have any questions, feel free to ask me or email me at jeraldine.phneah@gmail.com
More articles written by me can be accessed here.
*Article first appeared on http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2013/04/so-you-dont-want-be-called-xenop...