master's narratives

i met up with an acquaintance last week, who had come down from singapore on a work trip. conversations about singapore more of less becomes inevitable, and at times our discussions became debates became heated debates. but j (his name) was somewhat different from my past altercations; while we disagreed on virtually every point and aspect he was able to make me think (and rethink) some of my positions. more importantly, he provided me with an insight into the psyche of how and why singapore works for some.

(the following is a disorganised ramble off the cuff and not a dissertation.)

but for most singaporeans, singapore isnt that rosy and often they swing between despair and resignation (both of which are untenable positions because no matter one's predicament, one has a choice to counteract), the singapore government has provided for everyone a masternarrative for which to justify its doings and existence. i concede that these masternarratives to begin with have a prima facie logic to them - singapore is small and have no resources so citizens have got to work hard and be thankful for such excellent leadership (to name but just one, but one that is overarching) - but are also contingent on playing up the survival instinct and siege mentality (both of which provide the government with more bargaining powers over citizens). but the nub is these masternarratives appear logical and plausible only up to a point - drive any further (supposing it is within the person's will and/or intellect) and the intellectual foundations will start to crumble, and puzzles begin to form. for example, we bemoan our lack of resources - but it is a lack or a bountiful depending on what you include - people are natural resources, so is our deep harbour and strategic location. the natural resource theory also assumes that countries with natural resources will industrialise (japan and malaysia are two contrasting examples to refute this argument). but this is a story for another day: singapore's masternarratives deconstructed. beyond that point, of fuzzy logic and intellectual abstraction, most singaporeans will either be unable to justify government actions or the workings of the singaporean machinery, or refuse to engage in discussion further citing lethargy or distraction or resorting to tantrum behaviour (we have established that singaporeans are infantile and kept so for politico-economic reasons). however one reads those masternarratives - to justify the unjust, unjustified, and the injustices, the parallel/implied reasoning is always the indispensability of the PAP government that is also the best and the brightest that country can offer (i.e. utter bollocks). might i add that no matter what plagues singapore, it is always singaporeans' fault, never the government's. on this point, i cant resist sharing worthington's observation that singapore's elections are events for singaporeans to be held accountable to the PAP rather than the other way round.

if singaporeans compare singapore's tax rates with other supposed high-tax countries in detail, they'd realise that the difference is not at all big. and high taxes in other countries are often paraded as how singapore is not like them. it is true they have higher taxes, though the amount taxed is progressive (ie. not high across the board), that are used to provide for social safety net. comprehensive welfare systems, contrary to what the PAP has been saying, are not crumbling in the west, and the supposed 'crutch' mentality is statistically proven to be a low percentage, and the overall societal benefits far outweighs the supposed disadvantages, for one, building a more caring society (which is what the government has been trying not to do). lax productivity levels as a result of welfare provisions is also a myth - despite high taxes, people do work, and they strive to excel in their occupations (salary is a major, but not the only motivation to work). singaporeans on the other hand, despite minimal welfare, are also among the least productive (total factor productivity output) of the OECD countries. what the singapore system does is to minimise social provision, and ensure that despite low productivity, constant work will occupy the singaporean worker so that economic rent can be continuously be extracted out of him. as the average singaporean worker doesnt earn a lot, there is simply no point in instituting high taxes - instead, singaporeans are taxed on consumption. so any how goes, the winner - i.e. the PAP - takes (after) all. (tax rates for the rich, who already have higher spending power, pay a net tax rate of about 30% less than his average singaporean counterpart on per capita terms). this explains singaporean's mentality that anything deemed un-economic is not worth it - penny-wise, pound foolish, among other aphorisms - which blinds them to the reality that not only are singaporeans actually paying as high a tax as other first world countries, they are denied social security (the money is used for overseas spending sprees in the tens of billions), and instead of a house with a garden and backyard (generally speaking), they have to settle for an HDB flat. before anyone reminds me that because singapore is small and therefore HDB flats are an inevitability, may i proffer that high rises can still be built without them being necessarily built by HDB nor do they have to be 99-year leasehold, and nor do they have to be of the type, look, and size that they currently are (but they are because such facilitate PAP control and profiteering).

but the truth is, singapore works. it's a highly efficient country driving a prosperous economy, low unemployment, high income, high-tech, the people are well-provided for, and live in harmony. but truth is relative - singapore is a different kind of singapore depending on who (e.g. age/social class/gender/sexuality/education level/residential property/physical (dis)abilities) you speak to. roughly speaking, 60% of the population stay on because they cannot leave, and are constantly striving to better their lot, if not crawl out of their rut. the other 20-30%, having succeeded materially, stand to gain from the system, and sees little reason to leave. the ability to flaunt their condos and cars at the less well-off are additional incentives to remain (social feel good factor).

the truth is also only half the story. singapore is a corporation pretending to be a country, run like a corporation, its leaders remunerated accordingly, and its citizens behave accordingly (spend and scoot). thus not every singaporean gets to, and can get to, enjoy the supposed fruits of the country - generally, only people of a certain social class/income level can. while this might be said of any other country, the difference is that those that singapore are emulating (e.g. the first world western liberal democratic countries) are far more transparent and egalitarian and more genuinely provide for their citizens in terms of housing, welfare, medical, education, employment, overall quality of life; and those that are emulating singapore (e.g. the third world developing/underdeveloped countries) do not pretend they care for (put it very crudely) their citizens.

for all that i've written against singapore, my objections to it are actually very simple: singapore is a thriving state whose main beneficiaries are its self-serving leaders and their GLC/civil service minions - i.e. those who benefit from the singapore government scholarship system. we do not have fair and just systems of government, governance, education, legal, housing, employment, welfare provisions, and, as a consequence have bred a mediocre populace (the elite, by definition, remains among the few) and an uncompassionate/heartless/brutal society. and for all that i rail against singaporeans, i see their national complex and psyche as manifest in their thoughts and behaviour predictable consequences of an authoritarian government and intense indoctrination by the state media.

so the average singaporean essentially possesses a minimal vocabulary and thought process that can, in any given discussion on any topic, be reproduced thus:

you: (start a discussion on any topic about singapore)

sgrean: (launches a recycled spiel first narrated by the masters, i.e. singapore small, vulnerable, therefore must this and that, and look, singapore world class here and there what)

you: but ... (interrogates further)

sgrean: yar, i think it's good/bad... lidatt lor... yar ...

and before anyone raises the fact that the successful got there by their own merits and that singapore is a meritocracy, i'll just briefly state here that meritocracy is a form of elitism that in this case is more insidious because it masquerades as a product of fairness (and of nature). there's little that's fair or natural in our education system - graduate mothers are (still) given priority access to good schools, and most of singapore's elite schools are situated in prime locations of districts 9, 10, 11 that are fenced off by the MOE's requirements that parents need to live within 2 km of the school they want to send their children to (now try to work out the percentage of singaporeans who can actually afford to live in those districts). it is unsurprising that the overwhelming majority of PSC scholarship holders live in private estates. getting a head start in life is the single most important factor in one's chances of succeeding in life, (socialization among like circles come next), even if one's not that intelligent to begin with. early and constant streaming takes care of the second part of meritocracy - everyone is useful, but some are more useful than others (but usefulness as (over)determined by a determined government), and myriad of obstacles are in place to ensure most singaporeans stamped with a category remain in those categories - and by the age of 20, you can talk to any singaporean and after a few questions by way of conversation, you can accurately determine where one's station in singaporean life is, how one got there, and where one might go from there, give and take a few exceptions.

that is not to say the average singaporean thus loses out. yes, and no - it's a difference to a degree - sometimes a large degree. the singapore state discriminates against the average singaporean without necessarily depriving him/her of a decent standard of living (relative to third world countries that is) and without him/her actually realising it - why make life so miserable for them as to render them resentful and economically unproductive, when you can add a few sweeteners here and there so as to be able to extract even more from them not least via long-term economic dependence on the government (i.e. that you earn a wage does not mean you are economically indendent - look at where the bulk of your expenses go)? in employment, wages are set by the NWC that are essentially suppressed so as to entice foreign investments as well as ensure GLCs have access to cheap labour. hence a blue collar worker in australia can earn more (after taxes) than a graduate computer programmer in singapore. while it is true that consumer goods are slightly more expensive than singapore (while cars and housing arent necessarily so), an australian blue collar worker fallen into hard times can cut down on spending, and if he falls ill he does not worry about medical expenses. the singaporean worker fallen onto hard times not only have to cut spending but also worry about (potentially) exorbitant medical expenses. (between high taxes and adequate social security and high taxes and no social security, which one would an idiot choose?) the singaporean worker is not protected by trade unions, and retrenchment benefits are miniscule, and that is if the company pays or can afford to pay such. the law that is meant to serve justice is also often used to serve up injustice. and if you're an average singaporean, you subconsciously steer clear of getting involved in any legal proceedings - not just because they are costly (first hurdle), but also because our laws have been laid out in favour of the rich and powerful (insurmountable hurdle). and if you are an average singaporean, not only are the elite schools out of reach (talking in proportionate terms here) for your children, you have to struggle to cough up money to hire tutors (which the rich can easily do).

other mechanisms kick in either to ensure that the average singaporean remains beholden to the state, or is suppressed by it. these mechanisms are primarily manifest in the HDB, COE, CPF - two of any three locks in a Singaporean for a good few decades. and what do they offer? HDB: 99 year leasehold apartment built at artificially suppressed prices (because the singapore government enacted the Land Acquisition Act that enables it to evict landowners and recompensed minimally; and the construction workers are all imported labour at third world wages) then sold to singaporeans at market rates. COE entitles a car owner to drive the car for 10 years but not before having the car owner cough up 150% of the cost of the vehicle to the treasury, while continually paying ERP, parking, fuel (the bulk of which once again flows into the treasury). At the end of 10 years of car ownership, at least S$80,000 (including fuel and taxes and miscellaneous expenses) would have gone down the drain, the singaporean finds himself needing to continue working hard to recoup the losses/re-spend on another car. the CPF forces the singaporean to part with a part of his salary so that the government can hire superfundmanagers (i.e. professional gamblers) to invest globally earning 8-9% returns, while offering 2-4% interest rates (the remaining are pocketed by the treasury).

there are other mechanisms too - national service moulds a compliant male population ready to take orders, while having to remain 'active' for the next two decades. the fact that singapore's army is unnecessarily large and that primarily functions to support the mega scientific/research industries is scantly addressed. a state media indoctrinates a people, subliminally skewing a people's thoughts (or ability to think, or both). and etc, and etc.

so to cut a long story short, after such rigorous sieving and prodding and moulding, the singapore in reality is one that the average singaporean cannot see. not just because they are constantly fed the hogwash that they live in a world class city, earning world class wages, live in world class flats/houses, have a world class education system, and have world class leaders - but because, as the venerable LKY admonished singaporeans in another context, "singaporeans have no sense of perspective".

when our supposed GDP per capita of S$50,000 (rough estimate) is inclusive of imports and exports (as well as million dollar government leaders, MNC executives, superscale civil service), Singapore's real GDP in equitable terms for the average singaporean is more accurately S$25000-35,000. and this is the reality figure - most singaporeans that we know as average, earn a monthly salary of between $1800-3500 (the percentage of the average working population decreases as the figure increases, or working hours incommensurate with salary earned; and this cuts through a spectrum of professions and education level). contrast that to the *main beneficiaries* (as defined earlier) of the singapore system that earn at least 5, 10, 15, 20 times as much, one does need a hard dose of perspectival lenses to see those stratospheric figures and make a comparison. so while the average heartlander, if lucky, gets through the rigorous sieving in the education and graduate from the local university and lands a stable career, he would have been contented, thankful, and generally done quite well in singapore society. (what happens if he does not? in terms of annual factory output - 30% of each cohort make it into university (including 10% government scholarship holders), 40% into the polytechnics, and 30% vocational schools). on the other hand, the elite class (which is a less porous segment of singapore society than we like to think, and the absolute few who make it into the elite fold does not negate the overall privileges the elite gain; in fact the absolute outsider few that manage to break in are essential to enact the charade of meritocracy) and its offsprings leapfrog the masses, get educated at oxbridge and the ivy leagues, return to serve and perpetuate the PAP system of institutionalised corruption and patronage.

so the next time an average singaporean takes pride in singapore's achievements and start spewing off world class statements (in singlish no less), be a kind soul and remind him that not only are those fruits of labour (kept) out of his reach, they come about precisely from his permanent slave labour.