A Little India Riot - really little.

A week ago, an incident of "epic" proportion happened in our Little India District: A Riot!

A significant event considering that it is the first riot in over 40 years since the 1969 racial riots.

As usual, for any sort of "mishaps" or "gossip-worthy" piece of news coming out of the little red dot, the netizens rushed in to give their opinions and commentary on the event while it unfolds. Interestingly, this is one event that got people getting emotional and agitated, that evolved into a series verbal skirmishes across the cyber landscape.

• There people berating the foreign workers
• There are people blaming the government for bringing too many foreign workers in
• There are people getting racist, with racist comments about a specific community's lack of "drinking grace"
• There are people blaming Singapore for this instant for being too dependent of foreign workers
• We have people blaming the police force for not acting fast enough (or violent enough)
• We have people being amused (like me)
• We have people defending our Indian and Bangladeshi brothers as they are the ones who tolled to build our nation (literally)
• We have people blaming our government or the system for not providing better for the foreign workers
• We have people deciding that it is because we are treating them like slaves, which is why it sparks off the riots
• We have people blaming Chinese Nationals for whatever its worth
• We have people blaming Little India for being Little India
• We have people blaming alcohol as the cause of the violence
• We have people asking people to stop blaming the world
• We have people asking people to be calm

So what's the problem here?

The problem is that we are all debating at different frequencies and different magnitude of things. Its like the saying, "Ask the right questions and you will get the right answers."

People aren't asking the specific questions and start diving into the sharing their opinions to people who aren't at the same frequency or having the same perspective of things.

Fact:
An Indian National who got drunk, try to board a bus. The bus can no longer accommodate him especially not when he is making a nuisance of himself. He got invited out of the bus, and the bus drives off without him. He, being drunk, chase after the bus (alongside the bus). And when the bus turns, he got drove over and trapped beneath the bus. 

So this is the first part of the drama. Nothing really special. Just another accident.

Fact:

The police and SCDF are notified and arrived at the scene promptly. Police control the crowd (and requested for reinforcement as the crowd is swelling), the SCDF personnels and paramedics tries to extract the body from under the bus. The crowd then starts to get rowdy (perhaps due to misinformation spreading among themselves) and started attacking the police and SCDF personnels.

This is the 2nd part, where the accident escalates into senseless attack on the people who are trying to save a trapped "kin" of the crowd. 

Fact: 

The mob started to riot, overturning police cars and ambulance; setting them on fire. Riot Police (SOC) forms up and disperse the mob. It took an hour plus for the mob to be fully disperse and the area under police's control. They also arrested 27 people during this operation.

The 3rd part, basically the riot itself. On its own, it also aren't very special.

Suggested Fact:

The foreign workers are underpaid, treated badly and living in poor quarters. They are frustrated and it is a because of this underlying issue that resulted in the "explosion" into a riot.

This is where a lot of contention came. There are NGOs fighting for these foreign workers' rights; and many people arguing and linking this perception (may be true, may be not) to the riot itself. 

And if you break it down as above, you may see, it is like a free-for-all for people to make up their own conclusions and stories. 

I can even imagine: "Living like a slave in this prosperous country, the victim had little to smile about but to drown himself with the little money he earn in beer and hard liquor. He cant even be treated like a human being, being kicked out of the bus who he have the money to pay by some Chinese pigs despite there is plenty of space for him to squeeze in. Chasing the injustice, he fell to the rolling wheels of an uncaring society! Fellow kins saw his death, and their pent up frustration boils to the surface awakens the vendetta in them! Down with the Society!!! And they pelt the lackeys of their uncaring society with their fervent anger and fire. We shall make a statement, they cried. And all of Singapore shall be cursed upon these flames...."  

And seriously, the story above sounds really legit. 

But as pragmatic citizens of Singapore, please, look at the facts again. We have one drunk guy, being drunk, making a nuisance and got himself kill trying to run alongside a bus. A handful of people (probably drunk too) got pissed and takes the opportunity to vent and make trouble (which could explain why they attack the very people who are apparently saving their "kin"). 

What is a true riot? What is real boiling issue? A true boiling issue would have triggered a much bigger and objective-focused riot. Even if the accident is a trigger to some underlying problem, its apparently only big enough to trigger a handful of people (which in numbers would not even have been bigger than the gangs we have in our heartlands).

IS A HANDFUL OF MOB = SERIOUS ISSUE?

I have to clarify, I am not turning a blind eye as to the possible plight and definite hard life these people are living (they probably would live just as hard a life back in their home land); but are we looking at this in the correct perspective?

I am absolutely against linking foreign labour's living standard to this riot. This riot is not 400 people strong. Its probably 25-40 people with 300 over people having fun looking at the spectacle. 

If the issue is truly serious (to a boiling point), the riot would be way into the hundreds and thousands. And the riot will be better planned, with a specific objective they would like to achieve at the end of the riot after negotiation with whichever authority that is handling their issues.

The Riot IS significant (as its the first riots in decades); but it is NOT important. 

Fight for the rights of the foreign labours? Go ahead! 

Fight for the rights of the foreign labour and speaking for them because of this riot and the fear that it will spark more riots? Forget it, dun waste your pretentious and self-righteous time.

If you cared, you would have cared way before their riot, whenever you passed by a construction site or their accommodation. 

I personally always wondered how hard their life must be, living in those container-like dorms, working in the mud and the blazing sun; every single time I walked, jogged and passed by their accommodations on the bus. I reflect it upon my army days and decided that these guys are really having a hard life. But its definitely better than stories I have heard of the foreign labours being REALLY treated like slaves and have their wages owed by the rich Arabs whom refused to pay (many of them trapped in foreign lands).

The issue of whether the life provided to these foreign labours are really not good enough or humane enough, is one hell of a complicated and difficult issue to resolve. But this riot? Just forget about it, I doubt it will happen again that easily (if it does, then I will perhaps stand corrected and write another opinion post on it)

Population White Paper : Simply Flawed.

I just going add one last comment on this Population White Paper debate before I going to shut my mouth (or rather my fingers) for good on this (since the white paper going to be passed regardless, no thanks to those who voted PAP in in such majority:

Its not even abt the figure 6.9 million. Its about the concept of using immigration as the resort to replace the ageing workforce and the lack of babies.

It is the hallmark of 1st world developed society that birth rate will drop drastically upon reaching the status of educated and developed society. And its no surprise most of the 1st world countries have less than 2 for 2 replacement for their population.

So what makes you think that immigrants who finally settled in Singapore (lets say that they are all 100% loyal to Singapore and would rather die than to leave Singapore) would do otherwise than what we Singaporeans chose : to have 1 or 2 babies only. Or even not getting married?

Wont the immigrants also have the same cost of living and comfort of life concerns once they settled in Singapore. What makes anyone think that these foreigners would choose having a large family over material comfort, in contrary to us local bred Singaporeans? Do these immigrants can escape the daily traffic congestions and public service failures that we Singaporeans facing today?

So ask yourself, by 2030, when all these artificial population increases completely sets in, and the reality of each individual's personal desires reflected thru their choices in life and their future : isn't PAP going to set about yet another artificial population increase to remedy the yet-another series of ageing and lack of babies issue?

And if PAP decides that in 2030, we should try something different like - NOT artificially pump up the population and try encourage the couples of today to have more babies; why not we simply do it now instead? Rather than when the social fabric of Singapore is already totally torn beyond recognition, and with the Singaporean Identity all in tattles.

Artificial population increase (or you can call it prostituting ourselves) will never solve this 1st world problem, without the genuine allegiance from the people who picks up the pink card and their sincerest desire to fit in to become one of the coolest people on Planet Earth: we, the Singaporeans.

*prostituting ourselves : devalue the value of Singapore Citizenship to the point that its so cheapo and pointless to have it, to give to ppl whom just barely wants it; and deny those people who would truly treasures it*

(p.s: this is a status update i posted on my facebook after debating and sharing a lot on this issue in facebook. I kindda give up on it, so I want to just move on; although not before i final word on this matter.)

The Addiction of the "Cheap Foreign Labour" Drug

The latest hoo-ha for the recent days had been about the 2011 Budget, as well as the fierce debate about the relentless dependant on Foreign Labour in our work force.

On one side of the debate, "supporters" are saying things that are inline with what the PAP is advocating: that we Singaporeans should up one ante and go up the value chain instead on stagnating at our comfort zone.

One example I quote: "If more jobs are going to foreigners, we should reflect on why we are getting less competitive in the job market, compared to complaining about the government policies. The demand comes from the companies as there is a lack of talent almost everywhere. Why is the debate always centered around foreign talent being "cheap"? Closing the door is only going to lead us to death."

"The demand comes from the companies as there is a lack of talent almost everywhere. Why is the debate always centered around foreign talent being "cheap"? Closing the door is only going to lead us to death."

But on the other side (which I'm probably on), people are arguing that the Government's tweaking of the economy is causing things to go haywire and that its just an "easy/lazy" solution to pump up the GDP.

I quote: "If so, all the more PAP should not interfere the labour market. Let the labour market correct on its own based on supply and demand. If local engin supply is low, firms will have to increase wages to a level to attract back the supply, which will also allow Singapore to build its own local talents accordingly in that niche area. Instead of spending efforts to make engineering a more lucrative career, the PAP takes the shortcut, importing cheap labour from China and India, suppressing the local engineering wages. There's a limit to how many ppl u can fill up in this little island and the result is over-reliance on foreigners- a habit once addicted cannot be kick. And, once the foreigners made enough, they move back to their country while there are firms abusing this cheap foreign labour policy. What's the point of having locals in managing role whom only knows how to "talk" but cannot do real work? My view is such economic model may not be sustainable over the long run. What innovation hub can u create out of a labour system like this?

Go take a look at the welders, the technicians, the construction workers in Australia, for example. Why they can gets locals to fill up and why Singapore can't. It's addiction."

"My view is such economic model may not be sustainable over the long run. What innovation hub can u create out of a labour system like this?"

The thing is that, the existence of Cheap Foreign Labour is similar to the use of Drugs. Its an addiction thats difficult to kick, and had been served by the PAP for the past 10 years. Today, many of companies today are addicted and very dependant on Cheap Foreign Labour, and locals whom are doing the same job are relegated to excepting the "inevitable" and had to accept stagnation or even decrease of salary just to keep up.

I'm not too how much "upgrading" can do to actually increase your salary in most of the industry. Take my profession as a designer. I'm competing with foreigners whom are willing to take up lower than market-rate pays, just to secure a job and hopefully gain PR status very soon (many of them graduated in Singapore). And take your imagination on a ride, how different can a designer's job be or "advanced"; as an employer, you are given a chance to hire a cheaper worker - you would do it!

"And take your imagination on a ride, how different can a designer's job be or "advanced"; as an employer, you are given a chance to hire a cheaper worker - you would do it!"

A company or business owner have little incentive to "invest" in human resource when the margins can be increased just by sacrificing local workers and hire foreign ones (despite the increase is very little). The decision to not invest in the people would also mean that the company would not lightly be embarking on a strategy of offering higher value products and services (since they wont have the people to do it, nor the courage to take up such a risk) nor taking a serious look at improving "productivity" - since you cant expect newbies and PR-wannabes to perform extraordinarily.

"The decision to not invest in the people would also mean that the company would not lightly be embarking on a strategy of offering higher value products and services"

Remember, foreign talents, especially those PR-wannabes' focus is to keep their job until that get PR and thats it. Most of them do not have the mindset of excellence or have a look at advancement. The life and death of the company they are working is of the least of their concern. As such, cheap foreign workers and PR-wannabes have little loyalty or pride in their job and given the chance to slack, they would probably take it. (I'm not guessing, its based on conversations with business owners whom hires foreign workers and from observations)

The most disastrous thing now is that, Singapore is already addicted to this drug. We are now hooked by the ready and steady flow of cheap labour; and the government seemed keen and determined to continue on this short-term policy.

----

This reminds me of the story of our water supply in Singapore. Its purely because of our lack of water resources that Singapore decided to invest and develop our own water resources and technologies. Its because that water is in short supply that we innovate for solutions and increase it. If Singapore had taken the easy path of only importing cheap portable water from Malaysia and decided not to develop our own source of water supply like Desalination and NEWater, the future would not be as certain as it is...

And if we had not depend so much on Foreigners for labour, our industries would have innovated to make better use of the increasingly more expensive workers than the current situation of sticking to the same "proven" formulae; and our workers would have increased their productivity purely because of the companies initiatives to make better use of them, and not get criticised and humiliated by our PAP leaders whom thought they knew better.