TRS vs political apathy in Singapore

Hello again everyone. Okay let's revisit an issue that was a hot topic back in February. The TRS Admin has sent me a long and thoughtful reply which I want to share with you here (given that it was a comment on an old post, I think most of you would not have read it) and then I would like to respond to it. First, here's their statement:

TRS Admin2 April 2014 15:45

Hi Limpeh!  I am afraid we have been busy and completely missed this post. I am left with nothing but a smile as I finished reading your post and also the long comments section here. As I read the start, I felt there were many points to be made but by the time I got to the end, you addressed most of the points that I had initially wanted to rebut. One main point, we are not only 'for' the subaltern, but we want to promote these people to continue voicing out. In this respect, while I agree that catering articles for them may be easier to consume, it does not have the same impact of enticing them to write in as well.

As we try to promote their voices to be heard, we need to draw out the shy people who are afraid to speak up. Part of this is achieved through anonymity, and another contributing factor is the fact that they may see other people writing with poor English and therefore they feel less shy about sending in their poor English articles. It's like making people think "If this guy can write in, I can too!" and this ultimately contributes to our ability to gather more, real sentiments. Personally, I do not believe that this aspect could be achieved without the publication of poorly written articles (some at least). I guess part of our aim is really to be a platform -by- the people rather than just being -for- the people.

But herein lies another conflict: I would like to have the manpower and time to correct each article that is sent in, but if I ever did have the resources to do this, we'd face another dilemma of whether we should still allow some poor English articles to leak through to continue encouraging others to write in. I am happy that we had this exchange and while it may not have really altered our original aim/path/goal... whatever, it has certainly allowed us to be more familiar with the dilemmas we have probably always faced but never truly defined. 

Is any kind of quality control possible for TRS?

Hi, thanks for picking up on this. Allow me to respond to your main point.

Firstly, I think that over history, the subaltern have always turned to figures in their country or community that they can trust, respect and follow. This is why Mao Zedong had such a huge cult following in China when he was in power - he was hardly perfect but he sold them a dream and gave the Chinese people an identity they wanted to buy into. By the same token, you can see why religious people in third world countries often command a lot of respect because the subaltern are looking for a figure to follow in their midst. This is why the PAP is so popular in Singapore, especially when you give the subaltern someone like LKY to trust in and follow. I'm just making an observation about our human society works - I'm not saying this is how things ought to be, I am just telling you what the subaltern mindset is.

Thus I believe the TRS admin team are barking up the wrong tree by imagining that somehow, the subaltern will be interested in reading pieces written by other subalterns. Quite the contrary. I believe that the subaltern would be more interested in reading quality pieces written by well-educated people who will champion the causes and rights of the subaltern. To simply create a collection of badly written letters written by poorly educated subaltern in the name of authenticity is merely intellectual masturbation at best by the TRS team. In this quest to capture the voices of the subaltern, they are actually helping the cause of subaltern in the process - at least someone like Gilbert Goh (who runs the charity Transitioning) is offering a more tangible, practical kind of help. What the subaltern need is a leader who will champion their cause - they do not need to read letters of complaints by others who are in the same boat. The former can provide real solutions, the latter is but a waste of time. You may accuse me of being patronizing - but I think if you really want to help the subaltern, then you must stand up for their rights rather than try to get them to speak up for themselves. If they were capable of the latter, would they be where they are in life today? Time for a reality check.

The subalterns are looking for a leader to believe in.

Let's set this is the context of a factory where you have hundreds of lowly educated unskilled workers working on the assembly line and a small handful of directors at the top of the food chain who earn a lot more than the assembly line workers as the workers are not capable of doing the jobs that the directors do at this factory. Certainly, the bosses at the factory should take care of the welfare of the workers - they should be paid a fair wage which reflects the work they do, they must be paid promptly when wages are due, they should be working in a safe environment where they are not exposed to any undue danger or harm, they should be protected from any form of discrimination or bullying from the bosses or their colleagues in the workplace, they should be given training and support to ensure that they can do their jobs well and most of all, they should be treated with respect and appreciated for what they do.

Certainly, if the assembly line worker has any kind of grievances related to work, these should be listened to. They should have an avenue to turn to - a line manager perhaps or even a dedicated HR department where they can be listened to and ideally, that line manager or HR manager can then take the appropriate actions to do something about the situation and offer a practical solution. What you don't want to have is a situation where the worker feels like he simply cannot approach anyone further up the food chain about his complaint and instead, simply grumbles and complains to his peers (who are in no position to offer any kind of solution or help) - not only is this not constructive, it only drags down the morale on the production line when word gets round that so-and-so has not been treated well and is suffering a miscarriage of justice. Let's try to always choose the more pragmatic option for the subaltern.

How should the subaltern be treated in the workplace?

At this point, I must state that I really, vehemently dislike the PAP. I must stress just how anti-PAP I am, but I am simply taking a very pragmatic stance on the issue. If you were to treat the 'factory' as Singapore and the PAP as the bosses in charge, then I wonder what good will TRS achieve, by encouraging the subaltern to come and vent their frustrations online by writing into the TRS website? So the subaltern get their voices heard via TRS, the TRS admin team feel all noble about having given them a voice and a platform to air their views - but in reality, what has changed? Absolutely nothing. Because the TRS is not interested in offering anything more than a platform for these people to have their voices heard when what they really need are practical solutions to their problems. The subaltern need a lot more than just a platform for them to voice their grievances online (as if that would somehow magically solve their problems). Ultimately, to get a solution, you need to engage the system: not moan about it anonymously online.

Allow me to offer a very practical example which my blog played a fairly big part in documenting: do you remember the curious case of Jerard Lee vs Timetric from April 2013? This guy had a dispute with his management and left his job - instead of going through the proper channels to resolve the dispute (he alleged that he was bullied and was forced to leave), he went online and turned to social media. He shared his side of the story with anyone who cared to listen and got a lot of sympathy from fellow netizens in Singapore because his boss was a foreign expatriate. None of the mainstream media (with the sole exclusion of Wanbao) would touch the story - but sure enough, TRS carried the story with gusto and look at what happened to Jerard Lee next. Was the TRS in part responsible for egging Jerard Lee on?

I watched as Jerard Lee crashed and burned - he had broken so many clauses of the terms of employment that he signed upon taking the job regarding confidentiality and instead of getting any kind of compensation from Timetric, he then found himself facing a huge legal bill from Timetric when they sued him over his actions (and quite rightfully so). Needless to say, Jerard Lee shot himself in the foot by doing the "I'm the subaltern and my voice deserves to be heard!" routine. Sure he should shoulder a lot of the responsibility for making a total mess of his own situation - note that at the end of the story, he is unemployed with a wife and child to support and facing a huge legal bill which he had no means of paying. That is the kind of awful situation the subaltern can get themselves into when you tell them, "hey man, go on, speak up, it is your right to speak up, your voice must be heard, fight the system, yes you can do it!"

Welcome to the real world. May I exchange your unbridled idealism for a cup of strong black coffee as you ponder over Jerard Lee's case. That is the realities of living in Singapore today. I'm not saying that people should just sit back, suffer in silence and let the shit rain down on them. No. I am saying that there are proper channels for people to address their grievances and Jerard Lee's example should serve as a warning to those who think that they can just spout anything they wish on the internet as if it is a consequences-free environment. There is the right way and the wrong way to respond: the TRS team are being patronizing to the subaltern by applauding any action on their part, even when it may be an inappropriate response to their situation that will not yield any pragmatic solutions. This is almost as bad as parents who go out of their way to praise their children for inane crap like eating fruit.

There is a right response and a wrong response...

Let's move beyond the fact that the subaltern will write in poor English - that is a red herring and one associated with snobbery against those who do not use standard English. Let's leave aside the issue of the language altogether for now - I am talking about being pragmatic about the subaltern finding the solutions they need. After all, it boils down to what you can actually achieve by getting the subaltern to write into TRS and voice their grievances online like that. Certainly if they do so anonymously, then even those who have a genuine desire to help cannot find the original writer and offer them solutions - it then becomes an exercise that achieves little apart from giving these people an outlet to vent their anger and frustration but leaves them no closer to finding a solution to their problems.

Is it a bad thing to get the subaltern more involved in politics? Of course not, it can only be a good thing if you were to look at the principal behind it. Political apathy is a problem everywhere, not just in Singapore. It is indeed important to get people interested in politics, so that the electorate will then hold politicians responsible for their actions. That is the only way you can get the kind of government you want, the kind of government who will listen and deliver. Such is how democracy works. Political apathy allows the government to get away with murder if the electorate is just too busy looking the other way - thus of course if I were to put it like that, it must be a good thing to get the subaltern involved in politics, but is writing into TRS anonymously a step in the right direction? Sorry man, I'm just not convinced.

After all, it is only too easy for the government to turn around and say, "We can't take this seriously, this is just anonymous ranting - we don't know who wrote it, we don't know it is true, we can't possibly take any action unless the person behind this comes forward and identifies himself/herself to us." If this is the case, then practically nothing is achieved. However, if writing to TRS is the first step to develop a new attitude whereby the subaltern becomes more politically aware and starts getting involved: joining unions, joining political parties, visiting his MP, standing up for his rights - then yes, TRS can serve as a catalyst for a bigger change. But to evaluate this, we need to look at change in attitudes over a longer term, it would be unfair to expect a few visits to TRS to completely shift a person's mindset.

What do you think? I am prepared to wait and see if this 'social experiment' by TRS can actually achieve any long-term changes in the mindset of the Singaporean subaltern. But frankly, I am somewhat skeptical. Do you share my skepticism? Or are you a fan of TRS?  Please do leave a comment below and let's talk about it. Thanks for reading.