Showing posts with label patriotism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label patriotism. Show all posts

09 August 2007

Put away the flags

As today is National Day. I put up an article by Howard Zinn, it has as much relevance to us as it does to USA.

Let us remember and rejoice in all the hikes that have happened and the hike that is to come. Let us remember and rejoice that there are people in our population who cannot survive on the the pay they get and our gahmen is not lifting a finger to help them. Let us remember and rejoice in a ruling party that believes it is the best and thus deserve to give itself a huge pay increase.

Most of all, let us remember and rejoice that life in Singapore is getting more and more difficult because it is due to our fault and the ruling party is forever held blameless.

Yes, let us remember and rejoice.
Singapore 42nd National Day Parade
National Day Parade 2007

Put away the flags
by Howard Zinn

On this July 4, we would do well to renounce nationalism and all its symbols: its flags, its pledges of allegiance, its anthems, its insistence in song that God must single out America to be blessed.

Is not nationalism -- that devotion to a flag, an anthem, a boundary so fierce it engenders mass murder -- one of the great evils of our time, along with racism, along with religious hatred?

These ways of thinking -- cultivated, nurtured, indoctrinated from childhood on -- have been useful to those in power, and deadly for those out of power.

National spirit can be benign in a country that is small and lacking both in military power and a hunger for expansion (Switzerland, Norway, Costa Rica and many more). But in a nation like ours -- huge, possessing thousands of weapons of mass destruction -- what might have been harmless pride becomes an arrogant nationalism dangerous to others and to ourselves.

Our citizenry has been brought up to see our nation as different from others, an exception in the world, uniquely moral, expanding into other lands in order to bring civilization, liberty, democracy.

That self-deception started early.

When the first English settlers moved into Indian land in Massachusetts Bay and were resisted, the violence escalated into war with the Pequot Indians. The killing of Indians was seen as approved by God, the taking of land as commanded by the Bible. The Puritans cited one of the Psalms, which says: "Ask of me, and I shall give thee, the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the Earth for thy possession."

When the English set fire to a Pequot village and massacred men, women and children, the Puritan theologian Cotton Mather said: "It was supposed that no less than 600 Pequot souls were brought down to hell that day."

On the eve of the Mexican War, an American journalist declared it our "Manifest Destiny to overspread the continent allotted by Providence." After the invasion of Mexico began, The New York Herald announced: "We believe it is a part of our destiny to civilize that beautiful country."

It was always supposedly for benign purposes that our country went to war.

We invaded Cuba in 1898 to liberate the Cubans, and went to war in the Philippines shortly after, as President McKinley put it, "to civilize and Christianize" the Filipino people.

As our armies were committing massacres in the Philippines (at least 600,000 Filipinos died in a few years of conflict), Elihu Root, our secretary of war, was saying: "The American soldier is different from all other soldiers of all other countries since the war began. He is the advance guard of liberty and justice, of law and order, and of peace and happiness."

We see in Iraq that our soldiers are not different. They have, perhaps against their better nature, killed thousands of Iraq civilians. And some soldiers have shown themselves capable of brutality, of torture.

Yet they are victims, too, of our government's lies.

How many times have we heard President Bush tell the troops that if they die, if they return without arms or legs, or blinded, it is for "liberty," for "democracy"?

One of the effects of nationalist thinking is a loss of a sense of proportion. The killing of 2,300 people at Pearl Harbor becomes the justification for killing 240,000 in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The killing of 3,000 people on Sept. 11 becomes the justification for killing tens of thousands of people in Afghanistan and Iraq.

And nationalism is given a special virulence when it is said to be blessed by Providence. Today we have a president, invading two countries in four years, who announced on the campaign trail in 2004 that God speaks through him.

We need to refute the idea that our nation is different from, morally superior to, the other imperial powers of world history.

We need to assert our allegiance to the human race, and not to any one nation.

Howard Zinn, a World War II bombardier, is the author of the best-
selling "A People's History of the United States" (Perennial Classics, 2003, latest edition). This piece was distributed by the Progressive Media Project in 2006.

15 July 2006

Patriotism

Sometimes I wonder what there is in Singapore to pull me back. Seriously, after working in Melbourne for almost a year and reading about the oppression that the Singapore gahmen has been dishing out recently, I’m having 2 minds about wanting to go back, wanting to remain Singaporean. I’m very tempted to actually take up Australian’s citizenship and return to Singapore as a foreign talent. I don’t know if I will do that and it might be due to the fact that I’ve been so disillusioned by the gahmen and in a not so direct way, the Singapore people.

I have tried very hard to separate Singapore from the gahmen (or during this time the People’s Action Party), tried my best to not equate the PAP with Singapore. And by far I have succeeded but time and time again, the PAP tells us that without them there will be no Singapore. So if by change or by some act of god the PAP is no longer the ruling party, Singapore will immediately fall. The Singapore dollar value will fall and our standard of living will deteriorate. Immediately, there will be more jobless people, the buildings will turn old and start to become ruins.

Impossible you say, but the way the PAP says things and the way majority of Singaporeans believe this, you’d think it is Gospel truth. The amazing part about this is that these people have forgotten that it is not the PAP that makes Singapore, Singapore. Singapore was created by the people, you and me. The ones that earn less than 100k a year. The ones who work 8 to 5 or longer to make ends meet. The ones who pay taxes to keep the country running. Without the PAP, we Singaporeans will still survive because we want to survive and thus we will survive. Whereas without the people, the gahmen is nothing.

Is wanting a check and balance system like the other real democratic countries really bad? Does it mean that just because I vote opposition that I’m not ‘filial’? Does it mean that I voice my opinions about something that I’m not happy about that I’m not patriotic? As much as a lot of people keep saying that we owe the success of Singapore to the PAP, but is that enough to just blindly have them take up almost all seats in parliament again and again? Have anybody thought that the success of the gahmen is due to its people. The people who against all odds have risen and built Singapore. As much as I would like to say that the gahmen has no part in it, I know that isn’t true. Any great country is built by the people with the gahmen. We can see that in all the great countries. One cannot take credit for it all. It is a partnership and thus no one part ‘owes their living to the other’.

So being patriotic, it means “feeling, expressing, or inspired by love for one's country” (taken from dictionary.com:patriotic), since the gahmen is NOT Singapore, voting against them or even having different opinions from them doesn’t make us less patriotic for we as a people are looking at the future of Singapore, NOT the future of a particular political party.

Maybe before I die, I might get to see real debates in Singapore’s parliament. Where policies are created not only for economic gain but also for the betterment of the lives of Singaporeans. Where anyone can be an alternative voice and not be clamped down. Where the gahmen really listens and had dialogues (not just paying lip service). It can only came if Singaporeans start to really take interest in the country. To find out different points of view from what the media is dishing out. To be able to think for themselves about things that are happening to fellow Singaporeans due to some policy or environmental factors. At that time, Singaporeans would really own Singapore.