Tuesday, June 12, 2007
In the context of Singapore’s multi-racial society, where there is cultural and religious pluralism, which author’s view do you think should be adopted?
In the case of the Singapore, I think that Zsofia Szilagyi’s view should be adopted. Singapore, being a multi-racial state, enjoys racial and religious harmony. This is something that our forefathers have put in so much effort to establish and that it should not be taken for granted. I agree that freedom of expression is important in any democracy but if we allow people to make offensive remarks about other races and religions, is that morally right?
Clearly, the Singapore government does not tolerate any acts which will disrupt the racial and religious harmony in this country. Recently, a person got charged in court because he posted racist remarks on his blog. So why should we tolerate such actions? We may want our freedom of speech as much as everyone but we have to exercise social responsibility and not hurt others. This applies mostly to the media, which is such a powerful and influential body in society.
If the media plainly insists on freedom of expression, aren’t they being very superficial? Freedom of expression may be a right but is it alright if we abuse this right to violate the rights of others? Thus, the media and the people should not be so selfish only to hold on to their own rights and not pay any attention to the feelings of others. This is what I call insensitive. In other words, fervent supporters of “freedom of expression” are self-centred and tactless. We must face the reality that in a world of global information flow, once messages are out in public, they develop a life of their own and become subject to multiple interpretations and often manipulation that serves political agendas. As mentioned in the text, th e press have to understand that they do not alone create the context and lifespan of these message. In this constant changing world, the concept of freedom of expression has to change and the media must be willing to accept this fact. Only by exercising social responsibility, then can we protect the racial and religious harmony in Singapore.
; 10:20 PM
***
Saturday, June 9, 2007
Elitism in societyAs societies everywhere have found, however hard one tries, some people will do better than others, whichever way success is defined. However, having an elitist in itself does not amount to an elitist society. It is when those at the top restrict access to the basis of family, background, wealth, race, religion, etc that makes a society elitist. Elitism in society itself is an elite phenomenon. In this case, meritocracy also has its downfalls. Even though no system or institution promotes elitism, it is already built into the mentality of Singaporeans. Most of it is developed from the environment that these people live in, with parental pressure being the most influential. Brats are bred at home before turning up in school with a superior attitude towards those who do less well than them academically.
An indication of elitism in society is school profiling, which is classifying someone according to the schools that he/she has attended during an introduction.
School-profiling is a very prominent phenomenon in Singapore as Singaporeans still cling to silly stereotypes of schools long after their teenage years. Thus, they tend to discriminate against those from presumably “lousy” schools. I personally think that this is very unfair for those who are trying to apply for jobs and those who are trying to show their talents. Does that mean that if one is from a “lousy” school, one will be condemned forever? Is there no chance that this person can break off from these ugly stereotypes? Also, it does not necessarily mean that one has character or one is a good person because he comes from a good school. The reputation of the school definitely does not depict who you are. After all, even though a school might have had great influence on a student, it does not necessarily depict the person’s character.
However, even though I am from a neighbourhood school, I understand that students from top schools are far more likely than their peers to feel inferior and worry about being excluded from the elite group due to hyper competition over grades and constant competition with their peers. Because of the fact that they come from top schools, other people may avoid being their friends, causing these people to be socially excluded.
; 2:28 PM
***
Friday, June 8, 2007
Drink driving: a social problemDrink driving in Singapore has become a social problem that is nearing epidemic status. The situation is quite ironic as on one hand, the thriving pub-and-club scene is helping to boost Singapore’s night life but on the other hand, it is indirectly contributing to the death and destruction alongside the fun.
However, even though there is much that the government and pubs can do, it all boils down to the fact that drink drivers have to be socially responsible. It is really up to them to decide when to say no more as there is virtually no preventive measure that can completely curb this problem.
Sometimes, drink drivers do not experience the real cost behind their actions. Once an accident occurs, it is not simply about being fined or having one’s driving license suspended. What about the pain brought upon on the victim? What if the victim dies in this accident? The friends and family of the victim will be devastated. By then, no amount of guilt or “I am sorry” can ever replace the victim’s families’ sadness and anger.
Perhaps, it is unintentional, but it brings about such grave consequences. Thus, they should put themselves in other peoples’ shoes and ask themselves if it is really worth it. Therefore, I suggest that drinkers should exercise caution at all times and develop an innate sense of social responsibility towards mates and strangers. Whether or not it is really effective, I think only time will tell.
; 10:52 AM
***
Sunday, May 13, 2007
Do you think we should continue using the death penalty?
Death penalty is the legal execution of a convicted criminal as punishment for committing capital crimes. It is currently implemented in some democratic countries such as United States, Guatemala, and democracies in Asia and Africa and most non-democratic countries. In the past, it was used to punish crime and used as a tool of political oppression.
In many retentionist countries, the death penalty is usually used as punishment for crimes such as premeditated murder, treason, drug trafficking. Certain societies still retain it as the death penalty deters crime. People are more likely to think twice about committing that offence as they only have one chance. If they choose the wrong path, there will be no turning point. They would then have to pay the price for their mistake with their own blood. It also prevent people from repeating that offence. Lastly, it is an appropriate form of punishment for the crime of murder. As the Chinese saying goes, “A tooth for a tooth”, the murderer has to pay back with his own life when he kills the victim.
However, many others such as human rights groups argue that it does not deter criminals more than life imprisonment and that most importantly, it violates human rights. Moreover, it leads to the execution of innocent victims who are wrongly convicted and causes extreme grief and trauma to the criminal’s families. Lastly, they argue that it discriminates against the minorities and those in poverty.
This may seem brutal and inhumane but I think that we should continue with this practice. The death penalty is the price that the criminal has to pay for committing heinous crimes such as murder, drug trafficking. There is no doubt that this is the retribution that these people deserve.
; 2:46 PM
***
Saturday, May 12, 2007
The Problem with Charities
Actually, part of the whole problem with charities in Singapore lies with Singaporeans.
Many Singaporeans expect the pay of those working in the caring profession, or charities to be at a big "discount" on market value. Singaporeans who give to charities expect the organisation to squeeze the maximum from every dollar raised and will nod approvingly when told that such a charity keeps payroll expenses low. Donors do not understand the needs of social workers and are likely to point fingers at such a high pay packet. Many think that charity chiefs drawing high salaries are generally greedy.
The public should be more emphathetic towards them and put ourselves in their shoes. They are also humans and need to raise families. They do not want millions but maybe they want to be able to give their children the perks that their friends' kids have.
Moreover, the model of cheap and good charities may not be the best for the society. After all, many complex problems will crop up with the aging population and the widening income gap. Hence, the scope for non-profit organisations to offer social services will expand.
In order for charities to provide better quality of care and be more compassionate and efficient, Singaporeans should try to change their "cheap and good" mentality of charities and contribute more not only to help the less fortunate but also to allow social workers to earn as much as their peers.
; 9:02 PM
***
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
Hi, I am Janice. This is my first post in this blog. Studying in anderson jc is a whole new experience for me. Firstly, it is the home room system, and then the small class size. However, I like the home room system, as it gives us more freedom. I feel more independent as we are responsible for turning up for classes, especially lectures. My class is 04/07 . Even though I came from the same class during the first intake, it is not the same as before due to new additions to the class. However, I think that we will be able to cultivate the same class spirit as we had in the first intake. I think that my subject combination, which consists of physics, maths, chemistry and economics, is quite common in the school. Nonetheless, I still think that this combination suits me better as I have ample time to play, study and sleep well. I hope that these two years here will be very enjoyable.
; 5:00 PM
***
